I think the biggest offense I take from ME3 is that I can see exactly where and why it diverged so much from the premise of ME2. While the previous game was already making an effort to include more shooter elements as a means of complementing the RPG aspects, you could tell they were trying not to cross an invisible threshold that ME3 most certainly has. The storyline, while adopting a run/gun/cover approach, still allowed for character building, which was accomodated by the leeway of being in Cerberus employment. It's clear that they were going to try and use the precedent established by Shepherd's association with Illusive Man to either keep her as a Cerberus operative or give her a springboard from which to obtain freelance status. This would allow the third game to have a similar approach in terms of story and character building even though it was definitely going to have a faster pace what with the Reapers' arrival.
However, EA steps in and says, "Yeeeeaaahhh--we're gonna have to ask you to make this a much more shooter-centric game with a heavy multiplayer element. So if you could just find the time to do that, that'd be greeeeeat. Okay?"
No. Not okay. In light of this development, Bioware would have to completely defeat the purpose of the second game and make massive retcons to accommodate ME3 "developments." Further, there has to be a more complex hand to hand system that's reminiscent of twitch gameplay--which makes attempting to include RPG elements meaningless.
So yeah. Bioware definitely has blame here. But EA is the biggest contributor to its mediocrity.
November 6th, 2012: Americas new Independence Day.
