I was just answering another person's question with my view on that matter; whatever the expected justifications or explanations, it doesn't alter the facts - and they are facts - that she behaves towards you as I described, and that is the source of my dislike.
Aside from those factual details, my reading of her from that is, of course, all just personal opinion.
Sure, maybe she does tell you more later, if you pass a half a dozen checks over the course of several events... but that doesn't *change* the fact that she is the sort of person who will eagerly press *You* for information, get huffy, snide or agitated at you when you *Don't* spill everything to her, but in the same breath and at the same point in her development, will *Not* consider it fair for you to ask the same questions of her, and will get angry and condescending at you for doing so.
It doesn't *matter* what the justification for that is. It IS what it is, and it's atrocious behaviour.
It's about her characterisation, yes, but it's also about the writing - because obviously they want to write her in a way that will make people want to unpack her story and find out - and from my perspective, they fail at doing so abysmally. If I show interest, the game punishes me, and she's just generally an unpleasant person to be around the vast majority of the time; NO, I'm not interested in devoting time and energy to someone whose primary reaction to anything is to insult, belittle, condescend or act superior towards - with almost no exception, for the first chunk of your interactions, even when angling more positive. Even when you DO learn more, and she *Invites* you to talk to her about it later - her next response is to snap waspishly at you for daring to have the impertinence to follow her up on that invitation. I'm sorry, I play this game to have fun - not to be treated like dirt for even trying.
Like I said; I don't KNOW if I've hit her 'new' dialogue or not yet, because I hadn't seen the old on its own before this playthough... I'm up to the point where she's told me what I think is more or less everything (I know she likes a certain type of flower, and cannot, apparently swim). It's been less than pleasant a journey, and I've had to frequently swallow any objection I would otherwise take to her trash-talking of other people's beliefs and views, just because I'm trying to actually get her dialogue unpacked, and any wrong word at any point cuts it short, or seems to. Certainly, if I have seen any of the 'new' dialogue, I could not distinguish it from what was there before just by listening. As I said, I don't know.
Everything Niara said about Shadowheart is 100% my experience with her. In BG2 I liked the romances with Jaheira or VIcona. DAO - Morrigan. Isabella in DA2, the evil Thiefling in Pathfinder. And naturally Yen in Witcher 3. It's not that I can't handle strong female characters, I actually prefer them and can't stand princess-/save-me-type females. So in theory Shadowheart should be in my lane, but she is horribly written. The only reason I tried talking to her after the first couple of comments was that I wanted to see if I can unlock the content and if somehow she would surprise me - but those rolls prevented it and I simply didn't care at all about her enough to keep trying. She acts like you desparately need her and she is in possession of power that you need or that you are completely enthralled by her wit... well she doesn't and I ain't.
Lae'zel... yeah, if you want to play evil maybe you can find some connection to her. I think she is ok when it comes to writing, but I simply don't care about an alien rassist that proves to be pretty clueless about her own faction or anything else you encounter. So yeah, well written, but completely uninteresting for me if I don't want to play something along her lines. Combined with SH though you get 2 out of 2 female characters that think highly of themselves while acting quite dumb and constantly belittering you - surprisingly that doesn't connect with a part of the audience.
