I don't see how level scaling affects choice and consequences. The vast majority of choices (should I steal this thing? What should I do for this quest?) have little to do with levels at all. Are you going to decide not to fight something just because it leveled up a level or two? Do you feel jipped when you run into a hard fight, and decide to do some other quests and level up so that fight is easy? Maybe you feel your agency is being interfered with since the computer is "cheating," but I personally feel my agency is much more limited by the linear game design that comes with static levels.
Tell me, how would you design something like a city where the developer can't predict the order the player will go remotely at all? With static levels, you more or less have to make the quests near the starting point a bit easier, and just sort of randomly have harder ones deeper in the city in other districts. Or you can just distribute the levels of enemies fairly randomly through the city. So the player has to wander around finding the easier quests, and then build up to the harder ones. To alleviate frustration, developers will often be generous with XP and then you'll find after a few easy quests, the rest of those easy ones will become trivial. So level scaling not only helps deal with your choice of order, but also the number of them you complete.
Level scaling can be horribly implemented, yes. But I also find it hard to imagine an open world game without it at all. It wouldn't really be an open world if all the enemies outside of the starting area would wreck you. But having a few enemies which are quite hard in an easier area is okay as well. D:OS isn't an open world game, but it might benefit from limited level scaling to allow a bit more choice in how the player goes about completing the game.
