Interesting, and, if the interpretation and conclusions are correct, very good !
This was far from being my top priority. And certainly not a topic I discussed too often, or gave feedback and suggestions about often.
Although there is some inherent bias here. I (like many players, I suppose) tend to give feedback about aspects I don't like with the current features, or additions I'd like to see. I rarely give feedback on a feature that I'm perfectly happy with. Unless I would have some reason to believe that Larian's plan is to change that feature I'm happy with.
I prefer a mute PC as it allows me to roleplay who I want. With a highly voiced PC, the risk would have been to hear them say things completely incompatible with the character I have in mind.
With lots of hope, and still assuming the conclusion is correct, that could mean that Larian's overall vision for the PC and roleplaying will be to not enforce their ideas (notably about Classes, Races, etc) upon the players. Or at least, perhaps, less than original envisioned.
So, for example, that would hopefully mean fewer things like the Paladin's oath breaking mechanics where Larian basically says "this is how, the GM, see Paladins, this is how I interpret your character's oath, and if you don't agree, well your oath is broken anyway".
That may also, hopefully, mean fewer cinematics where we see the facial reaction of the PC, and it doesn't match our PC's personality at all.
With a bit less hope, it just means that they wanted to provide us with more than 2 voices per sex, and realised that full-voicing would mean a massive ton of voicing. With much of it going very unused in each playthough. I'd still take more than 2 voices per sex.
