Really?...From what I have seen I thought the complete opposite. The dialogue choices are limited, with barely any difference in the options you get, the main character has an even more rigidly defined character than Shepard did, you don't get to choose what the character says(in fact it looks even more vague than ME3!), and it looks like everyone will end up with pretty much the same bland character. Combat-wise it looks like with there not being properly defined classes, again everyone will just end up playing the game in pretty much the same way.
Sorry I was a little vague. I was really referring to the micromanagement aspects, more akin to ME1. I always missed the inventory and squad management from that game. ME2 and ME3 were far too dumbed down. I love games like STALKER and Fallout where you actually carry items and scrap or sell what you don't need etc. It seems like ME:A has gone back to a sort of mixture of ME1 and ME3, whilst adding new. You now have an inventory to manage and you can loot bodies which is nice. What I really hate, as you said, the implementation of importantant NPCs. I have zero connection with characters like I did in ME1-3; thus far anyway. The new Angaaran dude, who is blatently meant to be the new Garrus, is just stupid. I'm really not a fan of the Angaara. I also know what you mean about classes, but then I guess it makes sense. IRL, especially being civilian based this time around, you wouldn't be bound by classes as such; you'd learn what you want. SAM's explanation of profiles sort of makes sense and is implemented quite well, even though it just feels like a copy of the Cryo suit from Crysis. Also, the profiles/favourites menu is really clunky; I'm forever hitting the wrong button.
It barely looks like an RPG at all!