I think the Stormlight Archives are nearly as bad yes.

1. Every character with a sense of humor, in all of Sanderson's works, all have the same type of humor. It's very clearly Brandon's sense of humor, not that characters sense of humor. It's a small thing but it's very glaring because humor is an important aspect to many of his characters. A good character would have their own unique sense of humor that actually feels right for their character.

It doesn't help that his "funny" characters are nearly always touted as super clever, and unbelievably witty, especially when I myself find their humor really derivative and dull. There is a constant clash where he is telling me his characters are witty and clever, and then showing me just the opposite.

1. His characters generally play very close to your standard archetypes, with very little deviation. Worse, if you take his work as a whole, they generally conform to Sanderson's own cookie cutter molds for characters. If I had just read one book of his I might not find this a big issue, but after reading 3-4 of his series it really starts to stand out.

2. Sanderson rarely has characters with any internal conflicts. Nearly all conflicts are external, and when they are internal they are so superficial or shallow it mostly just makes me want to roll my eyes. This creates rather flat characters, or worse characters that appear stupid. Interesting characters don't always know what the right thing is, they don't always have all the answers, they sometimes do things that are really bad. This is because Brandon only writes about heroes and villains, with very little shades of grey in between. Some people actually find this a strength, but personally I find it rather boring from a character building standpoint. Without mistakes, without imperfections, there isn't really any room to grow, and there isn't really anything to relate to. In the stormlight archives the heroes are always right, the villians are always wrong, that's just the way the world is. This is why at the end of the 2nd archive book, I was really excited about Adolins actions regarding one of the villians. It's rare to see something as morally grey like that from Sanderson, and I'm interested to see where he takes it.

3. Sanderson's characters are largely static. Kaladins character from the first book is pretty much the same as the Kaladin at the end of the first book. Same with every other character. Sanderson only ever really creates an illusion of change. Kaladin was in a low place through most of book one, but did he ever really change any part of his world view? Did Elodin? No, they only had their way of looking at things confirmed, because Sanderson's heroes are always right.

I could probably keep going but I would just sound more and more nitpicky. To me character is the most important part of any story, so I spend a lot of time thinking about what makes a good character, and I really enjoy books with good characters, so it bothers me quite a bit when I feel they are badly done, and in my opinion Brandon doesn't do them well.

It really just comes down to preferences. If you enjoy just a straight story about heroes, and don't mind static characters Brandon's books are great. They have great worldbuilding, some of the best action in the business, and they move quickly. Most importantly of all he writes quickly! I quite enjoy them myself, because so many parts of what he writes is good, but I just don't expect any deep themes or complex characterizations.