Calling this an interaction is pretty generous. The only contribution made by the player character is, "Tell me X". Then, after asking him to tell you about how he survived a shipwreck, he suddenly segueways so he can interject:
I was referring to NPC-NPC interactions.
The problem with D:OS is that very little is shown to us at all. In fact, one pet peeve of mine is that no matter how much time I spent talking to Arhu, I never really properly understood that he actually looks like this, even though it's easy to see. Honestly, I just heard his voice, made my own mental picture and this just overruled his actual appearance. There's really no reason for me to be looking at his tiny portrait or his tiny 3D model. These things are only peripheral, and most of the 3D models look very different from their portraits. I want to see him up close when I'm talking to him. I don't even care if his mouth moves.
But what does evoking an imagination by visuals (animated 3D model) make more preferable to other techniques of showing (that seem to work and even overrule his visual appearance, as you said)? Yes, they are peripheral and my own picture of Arhu is also very different from his model or his portrait. My point was that your own imagination would be quite determined if such techniques would be used (to a higher extend). As you said in one post above: they would catch your attention, and direct it to Arhu's 3D model, to his animations, and be more restrictive to what picture your imagination will create - or at least it's a very different way to make the player imagine the character (since writing can be very directive too, but actually not determine the imagined visual appearance of a character as much as those pictures can). It's a matter of taste here, of course.
How could you do it differently? Well, you could have him ask the player about Maxine (it doesn't really matter if you've never met her, because that leads to a natural segueway). As it is, he's far more interested in talking about his own backstory than he is in talking about Maxine. And he's far more interested in telling you about his history with Maxine than he is about trying to find a solution. His problem is that he doesn't know what to do next, so the obvious question for him to ask would be, "What should I do?" As it is, he never asks you anything, and he never asks for your help. Your only contribution is to encourage more monologue. This happens too much.
Yes, I can see the point, although I have no problems with this style. But you don't necessarily have to use more cinematics to change that, and in your example you also didn't - and I liked that.
I could arrange with a different presentation of dialogs, although - in my opinion - a more 'binding' and close visual picture shown in game wouldn't add anything to the character what a freer imagination couldn't also achieve or maybe even better for it's relatively freedom. But switching camera in combat as XCOM 2 does, finishing moves like Witcher 3 or Risen 3 or Skyrim or similar things would be very unpleasant for players who don't want their attention to be directed like this and liked the style of D:OS. It would also mean adding more 'action' and 'effect' to the game. Appealing for certain types of players, but another step away from original D:OS.
