Oh, so your issue is that you perceive specialization as being too effective. While I'm not in a position to comment on game mechanics at all, and IIRC there was some sort of power gauntlet that could hit people with Exo, do an uncon grappling hook shot, and shoot people with Con (also no one's ever really brought up the idea of having one thing do multiple things with different stats. There's probably a way to tinker something up.), I can say that ... well, teams of specialists working together's a perfectly valid tactic. Like this:
The specialist character isn't alone.. there's another bunch of specialists along for the party, and between them, they can already do everything, so there's nothing for a generalist to do.
That's basically the description of your average DnD party. The warrior/barbarian's specialized towards fighting and tanking. The wizard's specialized towards control of the environment and illusions and blasting things and magic stuff. Cleric heals and buffs. Assassin/rogue assassins people with a bow or knives and stuff. None of them can do what the others can do, but by covering each other's weaknesses they can act as a coherent unit and take down enemies none of them could on their own.
So while I won't argue with you on how exactly ER's system may or may not favour this sort of thing, I don't really know, I will dispute what you seem to be saying in that it's OP for a bunch of specialized people acting together to be able to do things by compensating for each other's weaknesses. That's how character classes work in general, and have for ... quite a while.
It's more that since everyone's got a thing, you need to get a thing of your own to compete. Especially if the world is going to be 'weird', because that means everyone, not just PCs, has a thing.
Hell, this could easily be interpreted as a good thing for generalists. If everything has a thing, then a generalist character is more likely to have some skill or item that counters the thing of an enemy or targets their weakness or whatever.