While the argument could be made to make some dialogue checks an easier mark, failing dialogue checks is to me and many others an important part of D&D storytelling. Everyone knows the most interesting stories happen when you fail in D&D. The challenge on larian's end is to make those failures interesting. Sometimes they devolve into combat of course when you fail a dialogue check with a potentially hostile npc. However, I've found many ways to get around failed dialogue checks after the fact. Either you get another chance later as in the case with companion dialogue checks, or you find the information the NPC would have told you a different way, or numerous other things. They did a fantastic job of making the story as open-ended as I could have expected. I think the main thing that is leaving a bad taste in people's mouth is the very high DC persuasion check fairly early in the game when you meet the acting first druid of the grove. I'd challenge people to go with the failures and see where they lead. I understand wanting to be in full control of the story, but just see what the game has in store for you down further along the line of those undesirable failures, you may be pleasantly surprised. Plus it will likely make subsequent playthroughs more engaging if you actually succeed were your last character failed.
