Good. I wouldn't have bought it. If they make another installment in the series, they better not screw up (not that I'd buy it day one, but I might consider it if word of mouth is good).
However, if it gets another "you are forced to join two factions for no reason, even though both factions are terrible and there's a third faction out there that you SHOULD be allowed to join instead" thing, then better not.
Similarly, they need to decide what they want. Either they want a game about CHOICES - then choices need to matter, and need to allow actually DIFFERENT paths. OR they focus on a cohesive narrative with less choices and the story as the main draw. They evidently cannot manage both (See developer comments on giving players choice and them not wanting to have the results different, because if they don't give the player choice, they can make a more emotional outcome. True, but bites with the choices bit if they keep chickening out on actually giving you those choices.)
I think a big problem, for bioware's writers is carrying things through. They are good at setting things up, but in the end things fall apart. I actually think this was the case in DA:O, too, but it was less annoying.
Was the archdemon REALLY needed? DA:O would have been a much, much better game if the darkspawn had been a nomad horde (ala mongols in medival europe - remember, those guys weren't crazy barbarians, and they even had a pretty scary secret service, allowing for a LOT of interesting plotlines), not a supernatural threat, and the story had focused mostly on the noble infighting. Logain was a good antagonist.
The archdemon was not.
Of course, Dragon Age 2 had it much, much worse, as the ending was pretty much garbage, but you can see it in DA:O.
Bioware would simply need to focus on checking what kind of game they truly want to make, and then stick to that, not pretend they want something different.
