Dragon Age - Origins vs Inquisition

I would take it as a totally irrelevant insulting comment that only someone like celtic could dream up ...

Couchpotato said:

Thank you I'll take that as a compliment.

Click to expand...

Couchpotato said:

My opinion as well Dragon Age Origins was the best, Dragon Age II tried to do something different but was rushed out, and Inquisition just had to much filler content.

Still enjoyed all three despite there differences though.

Click to expand...

Personally i like DA2 for the way that they've dealt with the companions. They were a lot more interesting than they were in DA:O or DA:I.

Personal top:

1.DA:O
2.DA2
3.DA:I

Valid point with DA:I: too many filler quests, poorly thought and designed. It felt like an old MMORPG and not like a modern RPG game. Plus, most of the companions were more than forgettable. At least for me.

I liked the idea of DA2 as the best of the bunch but the implementation had issues (mostly the reuse of very small boring maps). DA:O was ok i guess and DA:I was a fun romp but less of what I would expect from an rpg.

I believe all suffered from boring underwhelming money grabbing dlc.

For me, it's complicated:

Disliked:
- the story in both - typical late Bioware stuff: supposedly "epic", but ultimately a boring, pompous turd with tackled-on, laughable "romances"
- the gameplay in both - DA:O tried to recapture the tactical gameplay (and failed), DA:I tried to be a skill/cooldown-driven action-RPG (and failed)

Indifferent:
- the presentation: both games missed the point of creating interesting fantasy visuals. DA:O has a generic medieval look and feel (booooring), DA:I has occasional brilliance in the landscape, but still too many generic medieval tropes (Morrowind this ain't)

Liked:
- the exploration in DA:I. Yup, as a hiking simulator, this one is brilliant (no sarcasm, I really enjoyed exploring the maps, even the dreaded Hinterlands area)

Bottom line:
I't complicated, because, despite all of their numerous faults, I cannot really hate these games. I admire the scope and vision they wanted to achieve and the stubborn worksmanship (NOT craftsmanship!) in the production.
Kinda like a missed opportunity.

PS: For the record, I think DA2 is brilliant for what it is. Aside the usual Bioware overbloated plot, this is an eminently playable lightweight action-RPG, best consumed in small doses. Plus points for Varric, the first truly interesting characters in a Bioware game since BG2's Irenicus.

They all had a parts that I liked, others not so easy to get through.
DAO had the most effort put into lore, character backgrounds were great ( probably best part of series all together), and pretty good depth/variety of builds/mechanics/itemization. Later on catches NWN syndrome ( go gather 3 x, long period of non stop combat), kind of lose interest every time. It also had it's share of filler: chanter board/mage bag/mercenary chest quests…but it was "spread better".
DA2 had the best second act, companion interaction, stronger characterization..lack of polish, has a rushed feel ( environment design, recycled/sounds, UI, visuals, character design, etc)…but it's somehow easiest to get through. Well until, the third act at least ( when it kind of loses charm and focus).
Imo, DAI was the weakest…kind of weird hybrid between action and RtwP, without really settling in either. Best crafting though, worst loot though.Environments did look beautiful, but lore kind of has that Blizzard "we'll-come-up-with-whatever-the-hell-we-want" feel to it, at this point. Some good points like Solas.

They should make up their mind about gameplay: tbh, something like Dragon's Dogma would be better or go full back to DAO ( with better animation/actions sync).

DAO I played 5 times completely through. DA2 I did 3 times. DAI I did once. That pretty much sums up how I felt about each. I did enjoy them all though just some more than others.

Nothing really to add here, I agree with most of what has already been said. Key points for me:
Best: DAO - enjoyed it beginning to end, fully replayed a second time (very rare for me)
2nd: DAI - loved the maps, hated Dragon Keep import bollocks, Divine Election.
3rd: DA2 - loved the concept but crappy combat and re-used assets. Oh and I wanted Sebastian Vael to reject the church and help him claim his inheritence...

DAO was one of my favorite games of all times. I didn't have a big problem with DA2, but it definitely wasn't as good. DAI kind of lost me though with the combat system. It was too fast paced and chaotic and I didn't feel like I had any real control over my companions. I felt more like I was playing an action game and really missed the tactics system of the previous games.

Origins was great, DA2 was a mess (but it was fun) and Inquisition was better than DA2 but hardly great. Too much filler.

The only Dragon Age game versus one that doesn't exist for me. Obviously the only one wins!!

Although not in the article, because everyone mentioned it… DA2 was overrated by critics. It was not a disaster really, but it felt like a decent indie game sold for AAA price.

Origins vs Inquisition is IMO impossible to compare.
4 members party vs 3 members party?
Paid DLC containing NPCs and storage vs full content game?
Seemingly no respawns anywhere vs instarespawning bears?
Saving anywhere vs no saving during main quests?
Great k+m controls vs horror of tactical mode?
No story c&c outside of romances vs possibly the best c&c quest ever made in games (wicked eyes and wicked hearts)?
Logical looting system vs sonar atrocity?
etc vs etc

Although can't compare two different approaches in the same setting, if I had to choose which one of the two is better that's DA:O. Although DA:I did some things better, I hate forced grinding through instarespawns that much.

I enjoyed Origins a fair bit. A lot of the characters were fantastically written, many of them memorable as well. Alistair is one of my favorites.

But I do think it suffered in a few areas of the game. I couldn't willingly go back through the Deep Roads ever again. Perhaps I recall it being worse than it actually is, though.

I never played Inquisition, but it seems to be mixed among places I frequent. I wasn't keen on DAII, which is a common sentiment apparently.

"Chantry! Mages! Darkspawn! Chantry! Mages! Darkspawn! Chantry! Mages! Darkspawn! Chantry! Mages! Darkspawn! Chantry! Mages! Darkspawn! Chantry! Mages! Darkspawn! Chantry! Mages! Darkspawn! Chantry! Mages! Darkspawn! Chantry! Mages! Darkspawn!"

- my overall impression of DA1, 2 & 3

Origins was fantastic!

The second Dragon Age game was the first computer game that I almost demanded a refund for. I should have, but I always thought it might get better as I went along. I was very wrong.

Didn't read the article and just came here to say that the only Dragon Age that was good is the DA: Origins. The rest is just crap.

I also would like to add something: To tell the truth, ME1 and DA:O were the last good games that BioWare made. From this point forward the quality of the games only went downhill. Interestingly, as the quality of the games decreased, the RPG elements also started to vanish from the games.

Couchpotato said:

My opinion as well Dragon Age Origins was the best, Dragon Age II tried to do something different but was rushed out, and Inquisition just had to much filler content.

Still enjoyed all three despite there differences though.

Click to expand...

Completely agree with this summary. DA: O is a great game, and both DA2 and 3 could have been if:

- DA2 had been given more development time, and had skipped the silly "wave" combat style. The concept of seeing the city and its people evolve is an interesting one.
- DA3 had cut the filler crap. It's not even needed. The game would be huge even without it.

I preferred DA:I, with caveats.

That said, Pathfinder: Kingmaker really reminds me just how much I missed an in-depth, complex character creation system that Dragon Age just didn't have in any game.

Unfortunately the trend toward action-oriented "RPGs" seems to be paying off financially, so expect more of the same.

I wouldn't mind seeing a DA game that uses the overland map approach, combined with the more detailed tactical areas of DA:O and DA2. They are graphics pimps though, so it's not likely.