Battlefront has it, GTA has it, MGS5 has it and it works well. I know people will be against it but hey, when I get my Handsome Jack on and strangle an alien in Andromeda, I want to see up close.
You mean like your profile pic? XD
On a more relevant note, I don't see the problem with that.
At the risk of comparing apples to oranges, when I play "Fallout: New Vegas" or "Skyrim", I stick with first-person, since that's the view you start with. I occasionally switch to third-person for dramatic/role-playing purposes or if I want a wider field of view, but with any game I prefer to go with the default controller/perspective settings simply for ease of use. If it's all whack I go all "Customization 101" on it, but otherwise I let it be.
But with Mass Effect it was always in third person, and I found the gameplay better suited for it.
So I say let it be. I'm fine with the perspective being switchable, but therein lies the risk of being sub-par.
-------------
Here's a longer post, so feel free to read or ignore at your leisure:
Immersion and Story-telling. Very similar, but not necessarily the same thing.
You don't need to *BE* there to experience a good story. Just like at a movie theater, you're not actually present in the film's setting, but you can still enjoy the film.
Going with that, movies are not "immersive", but are a great medium for "story-telling".
Third-person is like that, you're witness to all the events, but not *INSIDE* the events. The benefit of that is that the audience (or in this case, the player) can be shown events that are elsewhere from what is currently seen; as in, Shepard stops the Cerberus coup on the Citadel, and then we cut to Kai Leng reporting to the Illusive Man.
Because the perspective is in third-person, it's not jarring, because we're seeing it in third-person. If it were in first-person, it could really throw the player through a loop, wondering if some hidden teleporter is at work or worse, a bad glitch.
Immersion works well with first-person, since you can literally see the events from your character's eyes, whether you've made your character an avatar of *you* or someone else. The downside of that is that cutscenes don't mesh well, since the shift in perspective can break that immersion. It has nothing to do with the quality of the cutscene or the relevance thereof, but you are switching from "I am in control" to "the game is in control".
Technically, cutscenes break immersion in this case because the perspective either changes into something else and/or character control is being removed from the player.
Again, it has nothing to do with whether the cutscene is "good" or "bad", it's simply the nature thereof.
Both are good and have their merits, but it's one of those things where one works more depending on what you're going for, Story-telling or Immersion.
As a disclaimer, I don't presume to lecture anyone on "First-Person is better" or "Third-Person is better", and I'm fully aware that I could simply be overthinking this. What I liked about the third-person perspective in Mass Effect was that you were essentially at eye-level with Shepard, much like a first-person view. Additionally, the camera follows Shepard very closely, to the point that at the "default" direction, you couldn't actually see his/her whole body. I feel that allows for both "Immersion" and "Story-telling", since it's overall third-person (which means cutscenes aren't *jarring*) but it's close enough that you get the feel of first-person.
Those are my thoughts on the matter, make of them what you will, and be nice to each other.