I don't think that it's necessarily fair to say that Dixon wrote the villains as unsymphatetic, as he did include their backgrounds and gave a good idea why they became what they were and why that made them tragic. Harvey's origin and sense of betrayal do weigh heavily on the scans you provided and, you know, Bane.

I think it's rather that Dixon viewed them as people who made that choice, or for whom the choice was made, and who were now so far gone that even though they were tragic, there was no return for them, they were lost causes. I think that Harvey's popularity and status, in view of that position, there really wasn't any other way to write the character, as it follows from that that if the character is one of the big bads, then he needs to be a monster, he need to be someone to be feared. And the coin allows a too easy pass for that story then, as how can they be always that monster and person to be feared, when they are at the same time defined by the coin toss.

I don't necessarily agree with that position, but I don't view it as an always bad approach to the character, because for instance the cop scene there? Just don't see it going with the other option. Still, I also loved Rucka's approach to the character, which was vastly different.