Dragon Age: Inquisition Review

I love video games.  In fact, if not for Neverwinter Nights, I don't know if I'd be playing tabletop roleplaying games right now.  Due to some personal circumstances, I'd taken a video game hiatus for the past 3 or 4 years, and it feels very good to get back into the thick of things.

However, taking that time off has definitely changed my perspective on video games and in what I enjoy about them.  For example, I delighted through Child of Light, hoping for a sequel, and I was very much looking forward to Bioware's Dragon Age: Inquisition.  I'm probably about 70% of the way through the game now and have spent many hours on it.  I will definitely finish it.  But I wanted to share some of my thoughts as to why my enjoyment of the game has decreased as I've played it, as I think they directly relate to tabletop games.

First off, DA:I is a good CRPG.  The cast of characters is good, well-acted and well-written with distinct personalities.  As appropriate for games with an epic scope like this one, each of the side characters go through personal trials and (with the protagonist's assistance) emerge from them in approximately one piece.  The main story is engaging and interesting, and the conceit of the Inquisition is phenomenal - a resurrected organization independent from previous institutions trying to establish order in a world wracked by war (a war precipitated by, hundreds of years ago, the actions of the first Inquisition).

Conceptually, the game is fantastic.  For me, however, the problems begin when the protagonist begins to interact with the game world.  Primarily, you go out and kill things.  And by primarily, I mean that other than talking to your companions at your base, one of the 10 or so main plot missions, chatting with NPCs to acquire or finish quests, or harvesting resources, you are killing things.  And combat is smooth and well-designed (there are a couple of small issues, but combat is a success).  Which is good, since 90% of your time will be spent running into enemy spawns and killing them.

Now, I like games where I run around and kill things - I enjoyed Dark Souls, Dungeon Siege, Diablo II, etc.  But compared with the kind of interaction I saw in Dragon Age: Origins, or (forgive me for comparing the two) Baldur's Gate II, I expect more from a game that advertises itself as a role-playing game.  What's frustrating about DA:I is that the game designers created a level filled with that kind of high-stakes interaction, where saying the wrong thing could totally wreck your objectives, and then chose not to include any of that in the rest of the game.  How hard would it have been to drop two disputing farmers/merchants/etc in the middle of a map or two and required the protagonist to talk with each of them and help them resolve the disagreement?  Would that have been an appreciated change of pace from (actual examples following) collect the 7 letters of dead soldiers, the 10 supply crates, and the 5 sets of blankets all scavenged from areas already explored?

My last problem lies with the level design.  I think I've been spoiled, reading about Jaquayed dungeons and sandbox worlds.  Levels, either in the plot instances or, honestly, in the "open-world" exploration segments is highly linear.  There are, at most, two ways of travelling between any two areas of a map.  Usually, though, there is a single route between two sections.  Your reward for travelling off of the beaten path is usually a single loot container holding standard treasure - a silver ring, dwarven plate (for eating, not for wearing), or something similar.  Due to limitations in the AI (who have no understanding of choke points or defending the mages), or the combat restrictions (no switching from bow to daggers mid-fight), I can exert little tactical control over where the battle is fought, so I fight wherever the level designers have decided to put a fight.

In summary, my character's default action is 'hit it until it dies', and I do this over and over, passing through a series of scripted fights to fight the big bad boss, and then resetting to do it all over again with reskinned opponents.  Sound like something familiar?  It sounds like a railroad to me.  Is it still fun?  Yes.  Would I play it again?  Probably not.  One of the things that makes me happy is doing stuff my own way, and I don't get to play my own way in DA:I.  I have a lot of freedom at the conceptual level - I can romance whomever I wish, ally myself with whomever I wish, etc. - but the majority of my playing time will be spent killing enemies, regardless of what I choose.

Now, DA:I features a mechanic I mostly like called the War Table.  There's a room in your home base with a map of the world, and on that map is a pin for every opportunity for the Inquisition to affect the world.  Missions are unlocked after completing main quests, or talking to people throughout the world.  They range the gamut from assassination, facilitating inheritance disputes, brokering trade deals and treaties, espionage, and exploring ancient ruins.  It's a fantastic list of activities, any one of which could provide the motivation for a session or two of play at my D&D table.  I wish that I could choose whether to go myself or send agents for each of these missions, and collapse the 'open-world' segments into this, so I could choose whether to collect the 5 blankets myself or send a representative to do it for me.  In fact, I'd love to have  the freedom to complete the whole game without stirring from my comfortable fortress.  There'd be repercussions for this, of course (I'd probably not end the game very well).  Ultimately, I want to choose how I play the game.  I don't know when I'll find a CRPG that will let me do that, but I'm hopeful that it will be soon.