Dragon Age III: Inquisition

Nintz

King of the Britons
Joined
Jul 16, 2011
Messages
1,748
Location
Seeking the Grail (UTC -8)
Didn't see any thread on this. If there is one, just link please.

------
Dragon Age III is the sequel to 2009 Dragon Age: Origins and 2011 Dragon Age II. It is a fantasy RPG by Bioware.

So, Dragon Age III: Inquisition is supposedly supposed to release sometime this fall, and after playing DA:O again I got really excited. Obviously, DA2 made me hesitant however. So, I strolled over to the forums and began taking a look at general stuff for the past couple weeks or so. A few things jumped out at me in reading stuff. I'll summarize some of it here.

Setting
- Orlais heavily implied, though not outright confirmed. Also been stated somewhere that traveling to other nations (such as the Tevinter Imperium) is a possibility for certain game segments.
- Pseudo-Open World feel. It's been said that Bioware was really impressed by the world building of Skyrim in particular, and is going to be taking some cues from it. One post said that the world is at least 2X as large as Kirkwall from DA2, and 1.5X times the size of Fereldan from DA:O. Quite possibly more. One developer even stated that one DA:III level is as big as all of the DA:2 levels put together.

Gameplay
- Combat being re-worked again. Goal is to require the tactics of Origins while keeping the flow and speed of 2.
- Playing a third new character, presumably the Inquisitor, though I haven't been able to determine if that is the case. Confirmed as being human-only.
- There will be some multiplayer component. The way this is being implemented is unknown as of now.
-Abandoning the old Eclipse engine of DA:O and 2 in favor of Frostbite 3. This is the evolution of the Battlefield engine.
-No re-used environments. :)
- Follower customization returning to some degree. While all followers will have certain outfits (that change over time), equipping them with, for example, a steel breastplate, will alter their look accordingly.
- Save files importable.

Plot
- Focusing on Mage-Templar conflict. Settings in Orlais and Tevinter are expected to contribute to this.
- Protagonist will have a number of non-playable backgrounds, or origins.
- Warden's Story is done.
- Hawke's is mostly done at the very least. Neither former protagonist will play a large role in DA:III.


So...thoughts? I'm most worried about the story and gameplay. The story needs to stay interesting and fulfilling (good ending if apllicable), and the gameplay needs to walk a thin tightrope successfully. We'll see if Bioware does good.
 
- Combat being re-worked again. Goal is to require the tactics of Origins while keeping the flow and speed of 2.

Welp, pretty sure this is going to suck. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the "flow and speed" of the first game. The first game had flaws but they were mostly non combat related, I thought the combat in it worked better than almost anything else in the game. Fixing what ain't broke is a good sign of impending disaster.
 
Meh., who cares. After the largely god awful DLC for DAO that was am assive and regretful waste of money and the rushed, steaming pile of crap DA2 is there is no point to buy this unless it is as good or better than DAO and $5 for all the DLC and any expansions.

Bioware has been steadily going downhill for a while now anyway, and this could make or break their rep even further for a lot of people.
 
Welp, pretty sure this is going to suck. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the "flow and speed" of the first game. The first game had flaws but they were mostly non combat related, I thought the combat in it worked better than almost anything else in the game. Fixing what ain't broke is a good sign of impending disaster.

I agree, but many did not. Namely the console players who had a drastically worse interface. From what I can tell, the DA2 combat was much better on the console than DA:O, but the PC combat took a hit in the transition. It looks as if Bioware is trying to give a good combat system to both parties. This could work, or backfire tremendously.

Meh., who cares. After the largely god awful DLC for DAO that was am assive and regretful waste of money and the rushed, steaming pile of crap DA2 is there is no point to buy this unless it is as good or better than DAO and $5 for all the DLC and any expansions.

If it ends up being as good as DA:O, it will be one of the few games I'll pay full price for. Luckily, I imagine it will be pretty obvious early on whether or not it is any good.

Bioware has been steadily going downhill for a while now anyway, and this could make or break their rep even further for a lot of people.

I've read this sentiment a lot. One thing I do not doubt is that, if this game strays too far from DA:O, many core fans are likely to leave the Dragon Age franchise.
 
Welp, pretty sure this is going to suck. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the "flow and speed" of the first game. The first game had flaws but they were mostly non combat related, I thought the combat in it worked better than almost anything else in the game. Fixing what ain't broke is a good sign of impending disaster.

well there were MANY things wrong with the combat system but yeah i agree it was still one of the best part of the game

there was a huge unbalance at start where assassins were useless, archers were dealing no dmg, all melees coulnt really tank better than a mage, mages were too far superior to anything, and so on
the first camera was really bad and made the game nearly unfun in many situations
there wasnt any synergy between classes they were all just " i do my job and who cares what others are doing"

so since patches and sequel fixed some of this i really wouldnt want to go back to square 1 with all these problems, its way better to have a mix of old and new

ofc depends on what is kept of the origins and what is changed, there is always a way to make a mess :D
 
well there were MANY things wrong with the combat system but yeah i agree it was still one of the best part of the game

there was a huge unbalance at start where assassins were useless, archers were dealing no dmg, all melees coulnt really tank better than a mage, mages were too far superior to anything, and so on
the first camera was really bad and made the game nearly unfun in many situations
there wasnt any synergy between classes they were all just " i do my job and who cares what others are doing"

so since patches and sequel fixed some of this i really wouldnt want to go back to square 1 with all these problems, its way better to have a mix of old and new

ofc depends on what is kept of the origins and what is changed, there is always a way to make a mess :D

Yeah... class balance was whack, but I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about the combat system itself. Class balance is a separate issue, one I agree was messed up.
 
DAO's combat animations could be a little slow, especially the two handed ones, and it was slightly awkward at times, but overall it was far better than the more MMO-like abilities and attacks they gave you in DA2, especially all these magical and nonsensical crossbow and bow attacks like one arrow splitting up into dozens.
 
It sounds like it's just going to be a bigger 2 with some combat improvements (more tactics, less arcade style). Probably will disappoint if you didn't like 2.
 
The combat in 2 wasn't great but it wasn't the worst part. Hopefully the lack of information and reveals this time around is a GOOD sign since they are taking lots of time to develop it.
 
One developer mentioned there was drastically more time devoted to general polish then in 2. That makes me hopeful at least.
 
2 lacked a lot of polish but what killed it was, for lack of a better term, scope. It was so constrained, limited dialogue options, limited places to explore, reused environments, linear path. They can polish it all they want, if the scope isn't better it won't be any better of a game. Hopefully polish means more.
 
2 lacked a lot of polish but what killed it was, for lack of a better term, scope. It was so constrained, limited dialogue options, limited places to explore, reused environments, linear path. They can polish it all they want, if the scope isn't better it won't be any better of a game. Hopefully polish means more.

I didn't even finish it.
At the beginning of Act 3 I read a quest entry that began with "Go to the Wounded Coast and..." and at that point I said to myself 'no, not the f-ing Wounded Coast again' and simply stopped playing.
A good Dragon Age sequel would be cool but I'm not holding my breath. I won't bother with DA 3 unless I hear a lot of praise (and not from professional reviewers).
 
I never played DA2. I loved DA:O and pre-ordered the sequel, which I duly downloaded and installed and never got around to playing before seeing a friend playing it extensively on 360, whereupon I fell in hate, so to speak, with the game.
 
Oddly enough, both myself and one of the guys in my class feel like the combat in DA:O is completely horrible. I haven't played DA2, but he did and likes it far more than the first.

Personally, I couldn't stand how it seemed like I had to micro-manage the entire party, which is not something I want to do. I was also having to chug potions and running out because I didn't get far enough to get a healer. It just felt horrible to me.
 
I think DA is probably the most significant example of how I became disenfranchised with a game series in such a short space of time. I thought DAO was brilliant, an utter delight to play. There were a few issues with it: Alastairs awful voice acting, some slightly buggy combat etc, but on the whole it was very well done. I got the sequel with its original in a bundle, and im thankful that i did because it meant i didnt waste any money on DA2. I played it for about 2 hours and gave up. In fairness i think it suffered from the story being so epic and final in DAO.

Having said that im not totally against DA3. I liked the combat in DAO better than skyrims. If they can get a blend of the open world system with DAO combat then i think that ought to be pretty decent.
 
I bought them both in a bundle a while back and have been playing them. Currently in Act 3 of DA2.

Personally, I feel that DAO is clearly superior. I like its combat pacing more, I like how its combat is more tactical, I like how there's more than five areas to explore, I like how you can customize your companions' armor, I like how the story is a lot more coherent, and I like how I can walk from one end of one part of town to the other end of that same part without being attacked four times.

That being said I do like DA2's companions; Merrill and Varric are great, I like Aveline, Anders was one of my favorite companions in Awakening, etc. (although I don't much like Fenris). DA2 also loads faster and looks and runs better on my PC. Overall, I don't hate DA2. I haven't finished the game though (and I was pretty frustrated at DAO's ending).

I think DAO was a great game; DA2 is merely okay.


Spoiler :
I just wanted to be queen, but I couldn't unless I accepted Morrigan's offer.

I don't want the king's firstborn to be a bastard, especially when Alistair is one himself! :(
 
Oddly enough, both myself and one of the guys in my class feel like the combat in DA:O is completely horrible. I haven't played DA2, but he did and likes it far more than the first.

Personally, I couldn't stand how it seemed like I had to micro-manage the entire party, which is not something I want to do. I was also having to chug potions and running out because I didn't get far enough to get a healer. It just felt horrible to me.

You don't have to manage your party at all in origins if you put the difficulty on normal (or even hard in many cases). Sometimes you have to make them use a pot but that's it. Just setup the tactics right to have your tanks tank and your dps escape and you can pretty much just play your guy.
 
Heh. I always liked micromanaging my party in DA:O, though I only play on normal. Maybe it's more annoying on harder difficulties.
 
Top Bottom