http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/12/24/dragon-age-inquisition-bioware-must-get-these-3-th.aspx

Electronic Arts' (NASDAQ: EA) BioWare studio recently released an update regarding Dragon Age: Inquisition, the eagerly awaited third installment of its popular Dragon Age franchise.

According to the update, a new build of Dragon Age: Inquisition is finished, and the main storyline is now playable from start to finish. BioWare has also started to add music and voiceovers to the game, and is polishing up the combat mechanics for each class.

Inquisition will be released in Fall 2014 in North America for the PC, Sony's (NYSE: SNE) PS3 and PS4, and Microsoft's (NASDAQ: MSFT) Xbox 360 and Xbox One.

Dragon Age: Inquisition. Source: Ign.com

Let's take a look back at sales of the original title, Dragon Age: Origins, its expansion pack,Dragon Age: Origins: Awakening, and Dragon Age II to better understand what Dragon Age: Inquisition means for Electronic Arts.

Sources: Metacritic, Vgchartz.com, excludes sales of DLC.

Dragon Age: Origins was the most critically acclaimed and best-selling title of the series, and for good reason. The first title took over five years to develop, and was started well before BioWare was acquired by EA in 2007.

Dragon Age: Origins. Source: BioWare.

Dragon Age II, by comparison, was developed in less than two years. With a lower critical response and sales totaling less than half the sales of the original game, it's clear that its shorter development cycle took a notable toll.

Now, as gamers get their first glimpse of Dragon Age: Inquisitions, let's consider three key things that BioWare must get right for the franchise to get back on the right track.

1. What's the rush?

If Dragon Age: Inquisition is released on time, it will have spent over three years in development. Hopefully, that suggests that EA and BioWare have learned from the mistakes it made rushingDragon Age II out the door.

The most common complaint about Dragon Age II is the glaring use of recycled environments. Whereas Dragon Age: Origins featured a wide open, Tolkien-inspired world with various towns and cities, gameplay in Dragon Age II was mostly restricted to one large city.

This meant gamers ran back and forth across the same areas repeatedly. To make matters worse, many of the outdoor and indoor stages were reused for different missions, which meant that the map stayed the same while the enemies and NPCs (non-player characters) were simply swapped out. Instead of spending more time creating new areas for gamers to explore, BioWare decided to take the faster, cheaper approach by simply coding in a few more quests.

Dragon Age II. Source: BioWare.

While this might have been expected from other studios, BioWare had built its reputation on polished, painstakingly crafted games like Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire,Mass Effect, and Dragon Age: Origins.

Dragon Age II was the first time that BioWare truly disappointed gamers -- a fact that EA Games Label President Frank Gibeau once acknowledged in an interview with GameRant.com.

"As we think about where we take the franchise next," Gibeau stated, "we're going to take that into consideration and really engage them." Gibeau acknowledged that while Dragon Age IIgained some new fans, it had lost many fans as well.

Let's do the math and analyze the possible cost of rushing Dragon Age: Inquisition to the market. Assuming that Dragon Age: Inquisition retails for $60 and sells 2.2 million to 4.5 million copies, it could generate $132 million to $268 million in revenue for EA in fiscal 2015 (EA's fiscal 2014 ends on June 30, 2013).

Based on EA's 2013 revenue of $3.8 billion, Inquisition could represent up to 7% of the company's top line. Therefore, EA could put BioWare under considerable pressure to get the game to the market as soon as possible.

However, EA should remember that it lost over half of its core audience with Dragon Age II.

2. Retaining the improvements made in Dragon Age II

Although it would be tempting to "go back to the basics" of Dragon Age: Origins and pretend thatDragon Age II never happened, BioWare should also acknowledge the improvements that Dragon Age II brought to the franchise.

Dragon Age II offered a considerably improved user interface, better combat gameplay, a cleaner art style, and a more interesting story than its predecessor.

Dragon Age II's combat system is a vast improvement over its predecessor. Source: BioWare.

By comparison, Dragon Age: Origins'  inventory system was cluttered with unnecessary items, the combat was occasionally clumsy, and the story was a cliche high fantasy tale of uniting multiple races against an ancient evil. Gamers, however, overlooked a lot of these problems thanks to the sub-quests and rich, branching story line possibilities that led to different outcomes at the end of the game.

Another huge improvement that Dragon Age II made came directly from Mass Effect's"conversation wheel," in which the gamer picked a short response and watched his or her character act out the choice through fully voiced lines. The hero or heroine in Dragon Age: Origins, by comparison, remained mute during conversation scenes.

In other words, Dragon Age II was a beautifully produced but ultimately shallow game. Hopefully, BioWare will retain some of these improvements while making Inquisition a longer, deeper game.

3. Choices that matter

Last but not least, BioWare needs to give the player choices that matter in Dragon Age: Inquisition.

BioWare's seminal RPG, Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, was a major hit because it gave the player a choice to either embrace the dark side or resist it. The Mass Effect trilogy ended with the player deciding to help synthetic beings or to wipe them out. Dragon Age: Originsconcluded with the player either deciding to sacrifice himself or another character to kill the Archdemon.

Meanwhile, Dragon Age II gave the player a choice to side with the freedom-seeking mages or the mage-watching Templars. Unfortunately, the end of Dragon Age II completely nullified any pro-mage or pro-Templar choices made throughout the game by forcing the player to kill the leaders of both factions in the end. In other words, none of the subtle choices the player was asked to make throughout the game really mattered.

"Choice? What choice?": Dragon Age II's controversial endgame. Source: Dragonage.wikia.com

In other words, Dragon Age II was a digital Choose Your Own Adventure Book, where all the pages led to a single identical ending.

Hopefully, BioWare realizes that the freedom of choice leads to higher replay value -- one of the main reasons that gamers love their games.

A final thought

In closing, the future of the Dragon Age franchise hinges on the success of Dragon Age: Inquisition.

If BioWare drops the ball again as it did with Dragon Age II, this once promising franchise could come to an abrupt, premature end. But if BioWare draws upon the strengths of the first game and rectifies the mistakes made in the second, Inquisition could represent a rebirth for Dragon Age.

The only thing that bothers me about this article is the suggestion dragon age 2 gad a better combat and inventory system. I simply disagree with this, rpg's are about details, we like an inventory system that requires some management and maintaining, and we like a combat system that is as detailed as possible. This wasnt just the mistake made in dragon age 2 but also mass effect 2. Gamers were not as forgiving on da:2 as they were with me:2 but rpg gamers will be relentless if da:3 does not meet their expectations.

"2. Retaining the improvements made in Dragon Age II

Although it would be tempting to "go back to the basics" of Dragon Age: Origins and pretend thatDragon Age II never happened, BioWare should also acknowledge the improvements that Dragon Age II brought to the franchise.

Dragon Age II offered a considerably improved user interface, better combat gameplay, a cleaner art style, and a more interesting story than its predecessor.

By comparison, Dragon Age: Origins' inventory system was cluttered with unnecessary items, the combat was occasionally clumsy, and the story was a cliche high fantasy tale of uniting multiple races against an ancient evil. Gamers, however, overlooked a lot of these problems thanks to the sub-quests and rich, branching story line possibilities that led to different outcomes at the end of the game."

I'm very happy this part is included.  The honest truth is that, had Dragon Age 2 come before Dragon Age: Origins, DA:O would also have been slammed critically because the elements listed above are so much better in DA2.  The many improvements from DA2 cannot be discarded.  DA:O was a fantastic game but it was also extremely flawed.

DA2 had two glaring problems: the reuse of environments, which was a foolish shortcut, and that it took away the function of using found/bought armor for your companions.  Personally, I found the first problem annoying, though it didn't really bother me all that much--for me, the combat is a lot more important than where it takes place.  As for the second, I found it to be a slight improvement, as the task of outfiting all your characters in DA:O was an absolute pain in the ass, especially since the inventory management system was garbage.  Still, it was a shallow effort and they clearly could have done better.  The real mistake was putting it in DA:O, as you can never take something away without people complaining.  I know it's back in DA:I but I can only hope management is much improved from DA:O.

As far as story goes, I thought DA2 was much more immersive and personal than DA:O.  I've been reading fantasy novels since I was a child and I found the main story in DA:O to be so generic and derivative that I was a bit shocked at times.  I was sure that it would be a major area of complaint.  I thought that the underlining story with the Mages and the Church, and with Morigan, were much more interesting.  As it turns out, that was on purpose, as BioWare wanted Origins to be kind of an introduction.  The problem, unfortunately, is that a lot of people seem to want generic.

What I want, as someone who loved both games, is basically DA2 but with a varied overworld like DA:O, with lots of different places to go and things to do.  I want the improvements to stay.

As for player choice, that needs to go, at least relative to important decisions.  Developers cannot maintain branching storylines through an entire franchise.  They'd end up developing multiple games within each title.

I liked the combat in 2 better, but I do agree on the inventory system.  However, my biggest complaint with the article is where is says the story was better.  Origins had a much better story, with way more compelling characters.  2 was basically just 4 small stories packed together.  

I personally do not agree that the story in DA 2 was better than the first, for two main reasons:

- While the story in DA:O might be considered your typical generic fantasy plot, it had a sense of urgency and scale that the DA 2 simply did not have (nice to see that DA:I seems to realize that and returned to basics)

- I have to disagree with pokoko here, DA:O was "my story" while DA:2 was Bioware's. It's especially in the important decisions that the player's choices have to matter and quite possibly that was the biggest flaw in DA 2. Although I agree that to some extent it does limit what can be taken to the next game, if they nullify player's decisions in the endgame, they will lose track of what makes their games different from most.

Considering that Dragon Age: Inquisition was pushed back to 2014 (I think it was originally scheduled to be released during Fall 2013), it seems like Bioware and EA are genuinely not trying to rush this game like they did with Dragon Age 2. I'm personally not a fan of reused environments, and I disliked them in Dragon Age: Origins (e.g., the random encounters, several environments in Awakening, etc.), Dragon Age 2, and the original Mass Effect, so I'm hoping that the longer development cycle will limit their need to reuse environments.  Additionally, I recall a post by David Gaider saying that their ability to implement multiple races for the protagonist as being a product of the delay, so it seems like Bioware is really taking its time to make the next game as good as it can be.

As for the second point, I think that my favorite part of Dragon Age 2's combat was that it was much more responsive than Dragon Age: Origins. For example, playing as a melee character in DA:O often required you to press attack or an ability, slowly walk to the target, and then finally be able to perform your action. Furthermore, often if your target was moving, you would have to repeat the same action again, which was pretty painful at times. In contrast, when you select a target to attack in Dragon Age 2, if your melee character is at a particular distance, he or she would lunge or charge at the target, dramatically reducing the time between selecting an action and performing it (thus, more responsive). While I haven't seen too many gameplay videos yet of DA:I, the gameplay I have seen does seem to suggest that the sequel is retaining the responsiveness of the second game.

For the final point, I can agree that the ending of Dragon Age 2 had fewer plot branches and ultimately resulted in similar endings, and it would be nice to see a return of a much more branching ending. However, I'm of the understanding that DA 2 was originally supposed to get an expansion called the Exalted March, which was scrapped in order to start working on DA:I instead, which I assume was originally supposed to bring more closure to Hawke's story and possibly offer branching outcomes.  With that said, I liked Bioware's effort to create a more atypical RPG story with Dragon Age 2, where the protagonist isn't able to always succeed (which was likely necessary to transition the Dragon Age world from the Blight to the new conflict).  Had Dragon Age 2 received more development time, I think it's smaller-in-scope tale would have been much more fleshed out and successful.

At least for now, it seems like Dragon Age: Inquisition is turning out to be a great game. With the return of DA:O elements like racial choice for the protagonist, the tactical overhead/detached camera view, and customizable armor for companions, as well as aspects from DA 2 like the voiced protagonist and more responsive combat, and finally new elements like a bigger, explorable world, I personally have high hopes for the next game.

Agree, and also why are people still posting they're opinnions as facts? Give the opinion of the vast majority that played the game, that matters to EA, Bioware and most players. Dont post your personal taste as objective opinion.

* I loved the conversation wheel in da2, but only because of the humorous/sarcastic option, so while i want more of that i'm not going to say it was better just because i liked it.

I agree with you in that I felt Dragon Age 2 was more immersive and personal than Dragon Age: Origins.  From its much more humbler beginning (i.e., surviving the Blight in the prologue and forging a new life for your family in the first act), to how the companions were involved in the story both in the main narrative (e.g., Varric and the Deep Roads Expedition in Act 1, Isabela and the Qunari conflict in Act 2, and Anders and the Chantry in Act 3) and outside of it (with numerous quests for each companion), DA 2 felt like much more of a personal tale, in comparison to DA:O's much more grandiose story.

I can see how people would prefer DA:O's tale, because it allowed the protagonist to succeed in most of his or her endeavors, whereas Hawke was ultimately swept along with the times, succeeding in some areas, but more of a witness to events.  Of course, I think Dragon Age 2 had the unfortunate task of telling a tale of transition in the Dragon Age world, from the Blight in Origins to the Mage Rebellion, which is likely why Hawke was written more as a witness (in essense, the perspective through which the player sees the change in Thedas), but I imagine many players didn't see that, and understandly wanted a more typical, heroic tale where the protagonist succeeds.

I haven't beat Dragon Age 2. I finished the Deep Roads which I thought was the best part in the game, played a little bit longer and then quit.

I thought the gameplay was better than the original because it seemed you could customize your characters better and I liked the faster gameplay.  Also, magic users weren't extremely overpowered like they were in the first game.  The reason I didn't like it is what everyone else says about the game and the reason I quit playing the game. The constant reuse of areas paired with the long loading times makes the game feel nothing more like going through a series of fetch quests rather than an actual story. The story in the game also wasn't nearly as good as the first game. I didn't buy it day one though, I waited until it was cheap only because I was waiting on a ultimate edition which it never received.

Hopefully Dragon Age Inquisition takes the best parts of each game.  Well designed world, great story, and good gameplay.  Also one thing I really hope happens.  Please make a damn game with AI that actually works.  Dragon Age Origins on the PC is fine because the available overhead view and it's easy to just have characters do what you want, but on the consoles the AI is horrible.  You can customize the AI anyway you like in the tactics screen, but it doesn't cover all situations and the AI doesn't work properly even when you have it set up perfectly.  Bioware has some of the shittiest AI I've ever seen in their games.