I'm guessing we're using the word balance to mean two different things.
Apparently so - I thought we were talking about the balance of the outcome of choices in a general sense (either mechanical, the progression of story, etc).
If you are talking about pure mechanical balance, then I absolutely, vehemently disagree that it is necessary, or even relevant at all, to single player games. If two mechanical decisions have the same outcome - then there is no choice.
If all choices are equal, then that is the same (functionally) as saying that there is a "right" way to play the game. If that is true then playing the game is no different then "playing" a book where you click to turn the pages rather than to make real decisions about gameplay.
My example with the "imbalance" of Cyseal was to indicate the enjoyment that some people (like me) receive from not playing a game the way it was intended - which should still be a valid method of enjoying the game.
To pointlessly illustrate with intentionally narrow examples:
Example 1:
a) Choose to exclusively use found or dropped items
b) Choose to exclusively use your own crafted items
If choices a) and b) are balanced, either exactly or within what I have seen to be generally regarded as the acceptable range of values, then there is no point in choosing between a) and b), making the entire choice meaningless.
[Slippery Slope] The game might as well automatically increase your stats every time you open a chest, kill an enemy, or visit the correct combination of shops - that would at least save time.
Example 2:
a) Choose to leave Cyseal proper via the NW gate
b) Choose to leave Cyseal via the beach gate
If choices a) and b) are balanced - e.g. you will find the same enemies, loot, and types of encounters, then there is no real choice between the two.
[Slippery Slope] The game might as well be a tunnel from Cyseal to the end of the area. That would at least save time.
Example 1 is a decision with regards to mechanics, while Example 2 is a decision with regards to plot progression. Either can exist in two states in a given game: balanced or unbalanced. The former negates choice, while the latter encourages it. The only "right" or "proper" state of each decision can only be determined by the individual gamer - either is perfectly valid. I obviously favour the latter state, because I am a strong proponent of free will, and would rather read a real book than click my way through a stylized, expensive graphic novel.
I understand that this may come across as a very black-and-white view of a subject that is generally considered to be greyscale. However, this is how I would explain my disappointment of Larian's direction with this game (thank the Seven they haven't patched out modding yet), and my disagreement with the views of others on balance in single player games: long-winded (Edit:) and polarizing.
