It seems the new Dragon Age game takes a step further away from the old pseudo-turn based gameplay of Origins, moving towards more action oriented gameplay in the vein of the Witcher or the Elder Scrolls.
However, also a new for the series, it seems they're settling for a more open ended world than Origins or its sequel, allowing the player to move about almost seamlessly in large areas, organize battles, upgrade fortresses, and explore for treasures.
The new engine looks gorgeous as well, especially the lighting and particle effects.
Assuming Bioware doesn't screw this up, I think Inquisition could be a very good sequel, even though it doesn't carry the Dragon Age III tag.
I didn't really like the combat in Dragon Age: Origins, it feels a bit clumsy and pointless to be pausing - because it's not like you have to change any equipment, only to switch between the special abilities. If you did an attack command on an enemy, the character wouldn't choose another target after killing him, but it would incase the character was attacking them automatically. Maybe I just didn't hone my skills or tactics, but even in the early game in some fights I had all my characters killed, then when replaying but not really changing anything I killed them all without losing anyone.
But I did like the more close-world of Dragon Age: Origins, the thing that will be changed in Inquisition. Open worlds fit some games, but changing environment too can have a nice flow to it, feels like it's a film with different settings and the characters are actually progressing somewhere.
Origins' combat was lifted from the roots of Bioware, back in the Infinity days with Baldur's Gate and later Neverwinter Nights. It's why it was so popular on release. It catered to a niché that remembered the good ol' days when you had to think out and plan strategies.
It's also the primary reason Dragon Age II flopped as badly as it did, since it brought the combat up to date when it wasn't necessary. Still, I personally liked the change of pace, even if the RPG elements did suffer for it. I'd also much prefer Bioware trying out new things, even reinventing the entire game if necessary, rather than just releasing a rehashed game every few years(Mass Effect, anyone?)
Inquisition seems to be an interesting escalation, storywise.
Spoiler:
Origins focuses almost entirely on the Fifth Blight, neglecting the obvious growing concerns in regards to the mages. Dragon Age II carries this on, focusing on Kirkwall in general with the mages themselves playing a seemingly smaller part. Inquisition, however, seems to escalate the conflict so that the mages and abominations are the main elements of the entire story.
They probably took the third person gameplay out of Mass Effect, just like the "dialogue" system. The latter will probably be a big problem with what they are trying to do. You usually get your "do the good thing" and "do the bad thing" options as well as something like "ask for more details". Back in the day you used to be able to select one from several lines of text where the number of options was modified by your experiences of character attributes. Like that you got a better understanding of what you were about to do.
I like the more open world-like approach though. A big problem with DA2 was that they kept reusing the same few maps over and over.
As for the graphics - it looks nice, but doesn't really impress. It has a bit of that Asian F2P MMO anime kind of look, which I can't stand. Take a look at the gameplay of Deep Down (some fantasy game for the PS4 I don't know much about), that looks much better: clunky highly detailed and animated armor as well as more direct weapon control.
I wouldn't mind a trade off in graphics if the game is really immersive given that it will be as interactive as they are claiming. Beyond that though if they're not working on that mindset it'll look really, really outdated once it drops, especially when newer, snazzier games released after it will end up looking.
But I'm willing to keep an open mind, this won't be a day one buy for me though. Haven't done that in awhile anyways.
I wouldn't mind a trade off in graphics if the game is really immersive given that it will be as interactive as they are claiming. Beyond that though if they're not working on that mindset it'll look really, really outdated once it drops, especially when newer, snazzier games released after it will end up looking.
But I'm willing to keep an open mind, this won't be a day one buy for me though. Haven't done that in awhile anyways.
The problem is that the competition isn't sleeping and they are starting to be outmatched as far as content and appearance goes. Just look at Witcher 2 - a RPG that looked vastly better than Dragon Age 2 (which appeared around the same time) and delivered better content (story, characters).
The only thing Bioware has going for themselves right now is the party interaction and the interesting fantasy world. Hopefully they know this and will work hard to compete instead of just cashing in on the established brand name.
Hopefully. I think maybe after the reaction they got from Mass Effect 3 and the admittedly lukewarm reception to SWTOR (to put it lightly), Bioware should be more aggressive in having a game that can be sold on its own merits rather than on the reputation of the developer.
Dragon Age could never really pay for itself. They spent years in development, and arguably it was outdated graphically the day it was released. Much though I enjoyed the game, and sunk many hours into it, I can't shake the feeling that they goofed up internally and it was pushed out the door in the state it was because they had to make money on it.
Dragon Age 2 was, to me, an attempt to reuse a lot of that work to try to ... well, you know, make the thing pay for itself.
I don't think the problem was that they tried to add modern elements to the combat - that's doable while retaining complexity. They didn't retain that complexity - which is the first strike against them. But even if they had, the combat seemed... poorly implemented I guess would be the way of saying it. In the initial encounter you just totally decimated the opposition, then the second wave spawned and you waited for the timers on your abilities to tick down.
It's fighting, by the strict definition, but is it balanced or entertaining?
Granted, my friend liked the combat in the second one a lot more than the combat in the first one. I have to wonder how many people who enjoy that sort of combat weren't better served by something a bit more visceral from the hack and slash genre.
And the story was... well, attrocious. Continually I had the 'And I give a fuck why?' feeling about it. By the end I was feeling, 'You lot deserve each other. I wash my hands of you.'
There were so many potential delicious moments that came to nothing. Like, imagine if you'd been able to walk into the hall during the rebellion and agree with the Arishok.
"He's right, you're all awful people and I won't save you from yourselves."
'cause that was certainly my feeling at the time.
Why were you staying in the city? Why weren't you able to address it's glaring problems? Why...?
You were largely incidental to the story.
And there's certainly an argument that most people are incidental IRL, and that most games are more to generate the illusion of agency than its actuality. But games are different, insofar as people are willing to accept much greater risk-reward ratios. If people were like their characters in games they wouldn't be incidental in real life.
Real life is balanced in a way that games aren't. It's easy to accept that a housewife is incidental to the events going on around her, it's harder to accept that Powergirl is.
So, yeah. I honestly think that Dragon Age 2 failed on a lot of levels. What I think it got right was that you didn't largely have to buy your way into your party member's back stories. That's something the first game got wrong, IMO.
Learning from it going forwards? The combat and encounter design seems to be significantly better for the third game. The story I can't really comment upon until it's out. But in any case, I'm prepared to give them a pass on DA2 under the 'We kinda needed MONEY' license.
Their other recent works? They're a lot harder to explain away IMO. You only get to use the plank of Carnaedes so many times.
This site is part of the Defy Media Gaming network
The best serving of video game culture, since 2001. Whether you're looking for news, reviews, walkthroughs, or the biggest collection of PC gaming files on the planet, Game Front has you covered. We also make no illusions about gaming: it's supposed to be fun. Browse gaming galleries, humor lists, and honest, short-form reporting. Game on!
General Gaming 
Dragon Age: Inquisition 
Linear Mode
