The problem in your argument is that more abilities for each class, more character interaction, more writing and more character customization do not imply automatically in popamolization and are not bad things per se. In the end, it all amounts to the way they are implemented. And by the way, both melee combat and reactivity in DA:O are miles ahead of those in BG2.
That's the tricky bit. Those things don't lead to popamolization. But they lead to unbalanced, broken combat. And if people would say, hey, I want choice and don't care if it breaks the combat. Then, okay, you got no beef with me.
The issue is, long ago people demanded choice, and when told that it would break combat said: "It's doesn't matter, as long as it's fun." (They even said it on this very forum, which is what sparked this whole thing.) And now rpgs all have broken combat, and people are suddenly saying, "Hey, where did all the quality combat go?"
Everyone here is a little older now than when you were a starry-eyed rugrat playing your first rpg, and it's time to make an adult decision. What is important to you? Combat balance, which leads to quality combat, or lots of character customization mixed with lots of story interaction for your choiced character, which doesn't (it can lead to having a lot of choice in combat, but not a lot of balance). Pick one. But if you pick story interaction and customization, and then ask where the quality combat went, I and anyone else from the old days is going to say, We told you so.
EDIT: what does lead to popamolization is mixing story interaction and character customization with super power-style movesets, the power fantasy, and Joseph Campbell heroic myth.