You cannot be serious there. And the part about it being because of performance rather than gross incompetence is absurd too.
It's one thing to like playing a game despite it being objectively bad, but you're crossing over into apologist territory here.
Say what...? Almost every single game has some better videos that it's got during development that get toned down later "due to performance". That's not being apologist, that's understanding the industry.
Remember Watch Dogs 1 pre-release vs. final? That was chalked up to "performance issues" forcing them to tone down the graphic fidelity.
I see no reason to not believe the same might not be the case here - RPGs are notorious for stressing engines more - it looked MARKEDLY better than DA:I in the prerelease (the only other FB RPG I think, right?), and now it looks within the ballpark of DA:I (I'd say slightly worse characters - but it's not a drastic difference. The environments however are miles ahead of DA:I)
Seriously, the game looks 2016-17 when it comes to the world design/world art - it's just the character models where it falls flat, which WERE amazing in pre-release videos... which tends to indicate something made them change at the last minute, being that it brought it back in line with the only other Frostbite RPG, it seems pretty logical that they were biting off too much to chew with the PR vids. Sure, it could be some SJW conspiracy theory - but I'm a believer in Occam's Razor.
[And no, you've probably not bought more games than me recently - 4 titles were asked, I answered only for those 4 - among some of those not listed I bought recently were TR20th, Dishonored 2, RE, Berserk, XCOM2 (plus rented Bioshock Collection, WD2) - as well as some digitals I bought for "slow times"]