This game is NOT an RPG. It is IMPOSSIBLE to rolepay

RPG is a very vague, wide genre of games. It just means role playing. For me personally, I consider a game an RPG if there is a detailed leveling system with choices and skill trees. It adds more and more RPGs elements with character creator, dialogue trees, mission choices and freedom to not follow a concrete path. The end goal should always be the same as it is for Ryder. You are a pathfinder finding homes for people and defeating the Kett. There's not much difference to how you play Geralt's story except you can't change Geralt's face.

I will say one improvement that I think would go with the OP's arguement is they should have actually dived more into the factions they kind of set up in Mass Effect Andromeda. In Skyrim or Fallout 4, you start out the same but can very clearly deviate from the path and join a certain faction. I will say Mass Effect Andromeda could have improved by allowing the player to side with the exiles or strictly the collective or Krogan colony and achieved some deviation of the same ended goal for the game. You could have defeated the Archon and Established a world for humanity and still have been a ruthless rogue pathfinder who joined a group of murderous exiles

The narrative was set in ME1-3 as well. You played Shepherd, you could how to say things but ultimately you played who they wanted.

Plenty of western RPGs did the same, notably the Ultima series from which JRPGs were initially inspired from.

The system is there in Andromeda. Some autodialog and tone-agnostic choices change to fit your dominant personality. 

If you really believe that ask yourself this: why are there no J-platformers, J-sports, J-action, J-puzzle?  Why was there a fundamental need to distinguish between RPGs and JRPGs?

It is my experience that the Habitat 7 auto dialogue is more the exception in the game than the rule.

Once we build our team it switches over more to banter between the squadmates than what we experience in the prologue.

I see that as the starting point for my character. Now I have to mold him from the snarky 20 something recon specialist into The Pathfinder.

While it's true that the personality choices are limiting to an extent I don't look at role playing under the microscope of dialogue.

The game still gives me a lot of opportunities to react to situations and make narrative choices to further define Ryder's character.

To me role-playing is about more than just picking choices on a dialogue wheel. It's watching the character develop over the course of the game or trilogy.

I agree the auto dialogue can be immersion breaking but personally I still get enough control over the characters reaction and choices to classify this as an action role playing game.

Nonsense. One Hawke could be an understanding and very patient brother to his bratty sibling or leave him behind to die by the Taint without a second thought, a caring and tender lover or a cold heart bastard who could sell his/her companion to the slaver for a few gold coins. Someone who is a defender of mages all the way to the end or could started as a pro-mage who gradually moved to a pro-circle or even a pro-templar zealot.

Is Ryder who gave me the constant feeling that I was playing as a NPC in someone else's game. 

Except it didn't lower it, in any aspect.  I can't believe anyone could say that with a straight face.  But it's how many people post.  

1) They'll acknowledge Andromeda's flaws, but then attack previous entries or other games in an attempt to make Andromeda look better than it is.

2) The'll acknowledge how other games did something better, but then add an aside that snidely puts those games down in an attempt to make Andromeda look better.

3) It's pathetic.

You can't be pathfinder and be the leader of the exiles.  Both groups are at odds with each other and you would lose your ship and most of your crew if you left the Nexus for the exiles. 

You can roleplay your class, bye