I thought Dragon Age: Inquisition was pretty good... until-

Until I played The Witcher 3.

I was one of the few people who liked DA2, but I won't deny that it had many, many, MANY flaws, and most of them were massive ones. Dragon Age: Inquisition, I thought, was a massive step up over Dragon Age 2 and when I first played through it, I thought it was a really good game, albeit with a few rough edges.

However, retrospectively, having spent a great deal of time with the masterpiece that is The Witcher 3 in the last couple of weeks, I've come to realize that Inquisition is actually a lazy excuse for an RPG with more rough edges than it should have. The Witcher 3 just schools DA:I in every department possible, right from the quests, characters and story to the game world, the visuals and the all-round polish of the game. The only area where Inquisition has an upper hand is the lore, and let's be honest, The Witcher 3 does more than enough to overcome that.

I know that saying a game is not as good as I thought it was just because I like a newer game better is not the best piece of reasoning, but The Witcher 3 takes everything that Dragon Age has ever wanted to do and does it so much better than any of those three games did. TW3 is what Dragon Age has always wanted to be.

The Witcher 3 is absolutely a masterpiece, and probably one of the best RPGs ever made. I cannot even fathom what a step down most other popular RPGs are compared to how great The Witcher is. But with that said, I am still pretty enthused about eventually checking out Inquisition. I have a feeling I will enjoy it, warts and all.

I got bored with Dragon Age Inquisition pretty quickly.

Here's an article Kotaku posted on this a while back.

I was starting to get bored after 7-8 hours too, but the attack on Haven made me sit up and pay attention again. I thought that twist lent the game some life.

That is a terrible article.

What did you expect? It's Kotaku

Witcher 3 is a very literal improvement over DAI. They had similar ideas, but Witcher 3 simply did everything better. I will always like DAI as the 9/10 game it was, since I enjoy party-based combat and exploration, but Witcher 3 is the 10/10.

Witcher 3 is by far the best RPG that came out in any generation. I liked DA:I for what it was.

Dragon Age was fun until you fully cleared the first zone, went into the 2nd zone and seen the exact same copy/paste job in the 2nd maps and all other maps. I seriously hope this is not how ME4 is shaping up to be. You cannot even compare DA:I to TW3, its simply not fair to DA.

None of the Dragon Age games were good games. That first one is wildly shittier than people like to pretend it is. Painfully generic, not a tactical turn based rpg battle system, more mmo bullshit than anything with the mind numbing number crunch you'd relate with fucking diablo, horrid level design and dungeon design where the variation is this cave's giant spider is purple where as the last one was magenta, and then there is the supreme work of suck ass that are the deep roads and the fade.

Shit was a bloated mess meant to celebrate the glory days of CRPGs, but only appealed to people who clearly never played the good crpgs because no way does a game that misses the mark on that many fronts was worth that nonsense. The Witcher? As iffy as Witcher 1 is and as lousy as the combat is in the 2nd game (plus some other interface short comings), that studio always flexed more of a creative muscle, so as soon as their success caught up to their ambition they were bound to make something special, ergo Witcher 3.

I loved origins, liked dragon age 2 and didn't care for inquisition... I have not played the witcher 3 though, I tried to play the first two but I never got very far before losing interest.

I thought Inquisition was pretty good until I played Witcher. Now I have no urge to go back to Inquisition. Then I played fallout 4 and remembered how much better Bethesda is at making worlds you want to explore and I have no urge to return to Witcher.

I played and beat DA:I. I enjoyed it. It had it's very rough parts. The story without spoiling it is actually quite small. You could probably beat it in under 15 hours if that was all you were to do. The world is quite beautiful. I enjoyed discovering things on the map. I'll tell you this. Ignore all the markers on the map as they'll burn you out quickly. It's filled with meaningless stuff (the lazy part). Just leave the map down and explore you'll have much more fun that way. If I had played this after Witcher 3 I probably would have been massively disappointed but as it stands I didn't.

Also find dragons. That is all.

Dragon Age Inquisition sucks. It's as if the internet's loneliest people came together and said "Why don't we make a game where we're really important and have sex with pretty people, because that will never happen to us in real life".

Also, Bioware romance is getting really annoying. You can tell CD Projekt knew more or less how that shit goes with the Yennefer/Triss subplots in Witcher 3. The people in Bioware appear to have never been in a real relationship after all these years. They're still all about that awkward virgin flirtation mess.

I played The Witcher 3 and still like Inquisition.

I still think DAI is a great game.. And look forward to replaying it again down the road.. The biggest offense for me for that game was specifically the rushed end of the game which really felt like it made no sense what so ever.. It's like they ran out of ideas or budgeting.

Dragon Age: Inquisition is a beautiful game, and the fluidity of combat is great, but damn does it get repetitive. I tried to hold on, and I played it for a good 80+ hours, but I just couldn't get myself to finish it.

Yeah, I'm looking forward to Witcher 3 being 5 bucks on Steam.

BTW, I want to play the others before I start it, so I'm in the middle of the first Witcher game. I'm just having a hard time following through, because it's losing my interest. The fighting isn't very good, the missions aren't entirely clear, the world feels a little stiff.

Suggestions? Should I watch a highlights video and start Witcher 2?

DA: Origins got me into the series. While I prefer Origins and Awakenings, Inquisition was still a splendid 70 hour experience.

I'd say you'd have a hard time trying to get into The Witcher 2 so long after its release, let alone the first one. Neither of those two hold up very well now (2 is significantly better than 1 in that regard though). But still, TW2 is a much more polished game than the first one, and the story itself is good enough, according to me at least, to play through the entire game. My suggestion, skip Witcher 1, and if you can't get into the second one either (it might happen), skip it too (but give it some time first).

TW3, though, that's the one game in the Witcher series that I'd recommend without any reservations.

I really liked the characters and a lot of the story stuff in Inquisition, it also had some really nice environments. But the combat was just not fun in tactical or real-time mode, and most of the side quests were straight MMO shite. I also hated how you needed to do a bunch of side stuff in order to get those token or whatever to finish the main story/unlock new areas. That really messed up the pacing. I am curious to see what Bioware does with a new Mass Effect game though after playing DAI. I feel like a similar design but with tweaks would be way more palatable with ME's combat.

I enjoyed the game at the time but in retrospect it was pretty heavily flawed.

Oh god, those Power points. They just felt like a cheap trick to buff up the game's time counter. So fucking annoying.

Woof, was Dragon Age Inquisition a slog. I liked parts of it, but damn if that wasn't the final straw to turn me away from the series.

I did jump back into The Witcher 3 this weekend though. It's just too good. Can't wait to jump back in but with Destiny: The Taken King and Halo 5, my gaming is split a lot.

I liked both games in their own way. I never really thought they were trying to compete with each other in any way. Both games, like any open world game can seem to drag out if you try to do every side mission out there. I'll be honest it took me a few months to get around to finishing TW3 for this reason. I'm glad I got back into it because the game is great, but there is just way too much filler in it.

It's a good game but I got bored of it after a while and was looking forward to finishing it. I don't think I'll replay it. Origins still remains my favorite DA game(haven't played DA2).

I liked DAI a lot but the endless filler content was a bit of a turn off. Mindless stuff to do everywhere. The main story wasn't great either. It beats Witcher 3 hands down with its environments though, the game just looks amazing in places. Witcher 3 looks great too but there's no sense of awe at any of the places you visit outside of 'yeah that's pretty' it all begins to look the same after a while in W3.

What bothered me about both games is they punish you by playing the content. If you don't just stick to the main quests and ignore everything else you will outlevel ALL content in the game about a third of the way through. For this reason I wish they both were more linear with areas levelled higher as you went further into the story and blocked off till you are ready to face them. Yes, I think Witcher 3 should stop you hopping from one continent to the other till you are high enough level and they should make it tough if you choose to go there early so you have incentive to play through the content and prepare.

All this freedom for the sake of it is destroying open world games IMO. Anyway, both games are great, Witcher 3 overall is just better; side quests, main quests, dialogue etc but outlevelling everything just by playing the game really sucks in both cases. Also, got to say for two huge AAA RPG's what passes for loot in both games is hugely underwhelming, moreso DAI but they both could have been a lot better.

The quest were less detailed than the W3

@blueinheaven: I have so far not yet once felt that I am too overleveled in The Witcher 3 (outside of some early game quests that I avoided right until the very end, when I needed to get them done), really. I may be a level or two higher than the suggested level, but I have never felt the challenge is trivialized. Can't speak for Inquisition, however, I have never played it.

I would also disagree that there is no sense of wonder in TW3's world- whereas that may hold true for Velen or Novigrad, Skellige and Kaer Morhen are just jaw dropping beautiful.

I recently bought DA:I, I'm not enjoying it very much. I may need to spend more time with it.

Witcher 3 is obviously leagues better, but I liked Inquisition more because of the character creation. It is much easier to tolerate fluff content when the character is distinctly mine.

This is why I don't put games into this hierarchy. Like, what do you do after you see a great film? Compare Schindler's List to Raging Bull? It just serves no positive purpose for my habit of playing games.

@blueinheaven:

I haven't really encountered that problem of being over-levelled in Witcher 3, so far, and I've been playing it for plenty of time now. I guess it all depends on the chronology you tackle your quests in. I usually do one or two main quests before doing three or four side quests (secondary and contracts). Makes for a perfect balance (or it has so far, in my experience). And I think the open world in Witcher 3 is absolutely beautiful, and miles, miles ahead of Inquisition in every way possible. Not just the size and the content, but also the content in it isn't meaningless filler crap like most of the content in Inquisition is. Inquisition's open world starts becoming more of a chore the more you play through it. Witcher 3 just gives you so much freedom, it's always up to you want to do. Inquisition's Power points made sure that side quests were more or less compulsory, and that just felt like a cheap trick. Also, some of the locales in TW3 are jaw-droppingly astounding, downright beautiful, and that is not just because of the graphics. It just feels like a much more authentic world to me, while Inquisition feels like it's been made just for the shock and awe value.

I'm not taking anything away from DA:I, I think it's actually a decent game, worth at least half a playthrough for anyone who claims to like RPGs. But Witcher 3 tries everything DA:I wanted to do and does it so perfectly, so much better than the latter. It outclasses DA:I so badly it isn't even a competition anymore.

@khoofia_pika: is the combat better?

The Witcher 3 doesn't even have competent combat.

I got bored quickly by the first Dragon Age, and the series has just been worse with every release after it, from what I've heard. So Witcher 3 better be better..

Yes. Much better. I know people like to bash on TW3's combat, but it's actually pretty decent. Nothing too special, but still pretty good.

And Dragon Age: Inquisition does?

Anyway, Witcher 3's combat is not half as bad as it's made out to be.

To be fair, DA:I is much better than DA2.

It isn't even debatable that Witcher 3 is the higher quality game. It trounces DA:I in story, themes, dialog, characterization, and of course GRAPHICS! Seriously this game is breath taking. And it really shows how to do an M rated game right, with context that feels genuinely adult in a fashion that can be taken seriously with it's thematic material. Even the sexuality feels more authentic.

That all said with Witcher 3 being the superior game, DA:I is still on it's own merits a great game as well, even if not as good as. It still has pleasant visuals, good enviornment diversity, large spaces that reward exploration, good roster of characters, good party interaction, good weapon and gear variety, and awesome customization, especially after that update allowing you to custom color your armor.

The edge I think DA:I has is in better personalization; like being able to create your own custom character for that self expression to interact with the world. And the more diverse class builds to tailor your experience to your desired play style, whether you want to be a sword and shield fighter, 2 handed fighter, archer, and the nice diversity in mage styles.

Again as far more polished as W3 is, I still say Dragon Age Inquisition is a game not to be missed out on.

Doesn't mean that DA cant be a good game or fun to play.

Sadly, one game being mediocre doesn't excuse another.

Both, firmly mediocre titles.

So CDPR > Bioware is what you're saying?

@khoofia_pika: DA1 was pretty good at its time. DA2 was ok. DAI is not upto expectations. Witcher 3 sits on top.

Open world games begin to suck after some time. Watch dogs I left midway. Gta 5 left at 80%. Far cry 4 midway. Thief midway.

I pumped max time in dark souls 2 recently.

After it all other games combat looks shit.

I'm one of those plebs who have had this game since it's release and I have 2 hrs in it. Until recently I haven't had time to game but it's winter so that's changing soon Bought mgsv fo4 elite dangerous and halo and getting starwars today so I'll be set for quite awhile.

I dunno what it is about W3's flavour of fantasy that seems to never win me over 100%. All the elements just dont gel all that well in terms of tone IMO. At least so far anyway.

DA does one VERY IMPORTANT thing better than the W3; character movement. Christ Geralt is a pain to control. Its just not fun to move him around even with the alternative movement option. How can they **** up something so basic and dedicate so much attention to everything else?? They want to make fluid/realistic movement so bad you end up with unresponsive/laggy feeling controls because there are way to many worthless frames of animation in between changes of direction and actions.

But yeah I got bored of DA: I too so. The issue with Inquisition is that it failed to hide the structure/systems and numbers behind more engaging dressings.

I just bought Fallout 4 and say whatever you want about Bethesda RPGs, they are fun to just walk around and explore. I'm already more invested, and dare I say immersed (?), in that game and I wasnt even in the mood for a post-apoc setting with guns and rusted assets.

Cool opinion, bro (not really).

Actually, no, I firmly believe BioWare is better as a development team (BioWare are my favourite devs on the market, ME2 and 3 are my favourite games of all time). :P

I just think The Witcher 3 outclasses DA:I in every way possible.

Of course it doesn't, I'm just trying to say that TW3 does everything DA:I wanted to do and does it a hundred times better, retroactively making it look much worse than it seemed at the time of its release. I enjoyed Inquisition when I first played through it, I just don't think I can ever go back to it and enjoy it even half as much because of how wonderfully polished TW3 was.

Read the books (you will love them), watch highlights from Witcher 1 & 2 and then play the Witcher 3, because it is one of if not the best RPG ever made.

Says a guy who plays CRPGs since late 1980s.

I enjoyed DA:I but it can't compare The Witcher 3, even the lore is better and does have the original novels and the other 2 games to back it up and give it a lot more flavour. If you haven't played 1 and 2 and/or read the books then the background information is pretty shallow. Having said that Fallout 4 has hooked me harder than either of them.

Hated Origins... Boring schlog of a game

Inquisition was amazing fun... Really enjoyed that game to its fullest, including its wholly average dlc's.

Witcher 2 bored me to tears and I've been hesitating on getting the Witcher 3.... Nice to read folks comparing the two without bashing either.