So yes, technically you're right, DA:O was a failure on many levels. But it didnt get out until after Bioware had been bought by EA. And I dont think Dragon Age: Origins would have hurt Bioware too much. As far as I remember, even in the state it came out it was still pretty successful.
My point regarding Origins was that it was initially announced as a "back to the roots" title, initially PC-exlusive too, as far back as 2004. They did this, as at that point Bioware had done Kotor (which whilst entertaining, wasn't quite BG either with its extremely compressed small hub world level design, simplified 3 character combat, and downgraded character options). And Jade Empire, which was more of an action game already to begin with.
And even without any involvement from EA, they still "streamlined". The only major influence EA MAY have had over Origins was that it had to be released on consoles likewise -- and fittingly for that era, the console's combat system is simplified more so (during the early to late 2000s in particular, ALL publishers for some reason were under the impression that console games needed to be this simple, you could play them with your arms tight behind your back... which of course paved the way for the success of FromSoftware, amongst others).
Bioware was well on its way of being afraid with still associated anything resembling D&D/RPG by the early 2000s already, and still market themselves as the "character and story driven game company" for reason. That's why I'd personally rather not want another company walking down that path. In particular one that has shown that you don't need to hide that you're doing RPGs, capital R P G, and still can wrap the package in a way that attracts the crowd you may desire. And for anybody saying OWL BEAR SEX DID IT -- as a reminder: Bioware didn't market Origins on its "indepth" character system or "complex" combat to Average Joe likewise. In various circles, they're known as the "Romance&Sex" company for reason.
