All three of the DA games are flawed in different aspects. Basically your choices in DAO have no consequences (as far as the warden is concerned). For example the warden can let Redcliffe be destroyed, do the Urn of Scared Ashes quest save the arl and still get an army. The warden can decide to go to the Circle tower to save Connor and nothing happens while the party is gone.
It really does not matter who sits on the dwarven throne. The warden still gets an army. The warden is required by the game to go and collect all the armies. There is no option to go with just one or two. It really does not matter if you side with the elves or werewolves. The warden still gets an army.
In all three games certain party members will not leave no matter how badly they are treated. The party members in DAO could greatly disapproval and all that is required is to butter them up with gifts. I found DA2's Friendship/Rivalry system better. DAI comes a close second, because you actually have to figure out the personality of the companion.
Yes, there is missed opportunities in DAI, the same can be said for DAO and DA2. Why is the warden doing the Blackstone Irregulars quests, Chantry board quests, Quests for Interested parties?
Why is the party pursuing Gaxkang? In DA2 why did Orinso go bat crazy even when Hawke sided with the mages?
Also let's not forget that a lot of (for lack of a better word) silliness started with DAO. Such as Scattershot, Superiority. DAA was even more egregious in that regard. That dlc overpowered all the classes especially archer.
Every crpg I have played has flaws. Some gamers overlook those flaws because for them it does distract from the overall quality of the game. Others do not overlook them.
YMMV