I do think DAV is a continuation of some of the bad trends Inquisition accelerated. The shift away from dark to “high” fantasy, Inquisition is about as dark as Lord of the Rings(though maybe a little less actually). To DAV’s cozy wholesome vibe.
The inquisitor is a blank slate character whose background has zero impact on the narrative beyond a few war table missions and some dialogue options.
Where inquisition succeeds is it has a genuinely compelling cast(mostly) an interesting set of political and religious subplots and themes and some damn good DLCs.
But the overall trend from Origins has been away from dark fantasy. dA2 is…sort of less dark than origins. You can still sell a companion into slavery and and be a jackass, and Hawke’s story is a tragedy, but there isn’t the same ambient grimness of Origins. Or at least it’s not as present. Then again DA2’s more limited scope I think makes a comparison a bit harder. Hawke loses at the end. And suffers tragedies galore-but there is still nothing like killing a possessed kid. (Though you can kill a dalish clan-albeit they attack you).
BioWare writers have literally talked about this-how they are proud to have moved away from Origins’ tropes and storytelling.
I don’t know if I’d commit to the argument but I’d tentatively say that DAV is a culmination of the worst trends in the series.
I’d also say that the game took too long. It should have come out in 2018/2019. When hype was at its highest. As opposed to a decade.
Really there are multiple things that could be discussed in the series post mortem.
Just to give a brief listing.
1. Origins not having planned sequels meant that further games basically ignored and evaded actually engaging with any of the choices in Origins-Awakening beyond superficial acknowledgements. This is definitely the case in say Orzammar.
2. The lack of aesthetic consistency. Across all four games-tone and atmosphere do vary wildly. Art styles change every game.
3. The lack of a single protagonist. While multiple protagonists are basically a trademark of the series, it makes creating a single recognizable narrative much harder when you have to keep up with different PCs.
4. As above-DA doesn’t really have a set plot, at best Gaider and co. had the setting’s mythology worked out and a general outline of where the series would go. But even in the best case scenario-five or six games, you’re looking at a series that is just loosely connected which hampers its mainstream appeal.
5. The fandom. Tumblr is a cancer and you see this in DA fan spaces. Everything from Alistair is a POC to “mages are absolutely right and Anders is like John Brown and if you remotely think that maybe mages should be IdK regulated you are like a Nazi”-these attitudes I think did influence the writers, who both felt compelled to pander to this and shifted the game to evade criticism from the tumblr crowd.
6. The series really doesn’t have a clear identity. Like yes all the games deal with political and religious themes, social oppression, prejudice, etc… but none of this is easily summarized. Mass Effect is Shepherd fighting reapers, SW is the Jedi Sith dance, Star Trek new civilizations, DA as a franchise really doesn’t have a “core” the same way. There is no overarching antagonist. The blight, Meredith, Corypheus, Solas/the Evanuris are at best only connected via IDK the blight I guess? Vaguely? Like, who are the main villains in dragon age? The executors? (Ironically the executors strike me as an attempt to try to actually link all the games together into some sort of cohesive story. The problem is-it’s stupid and undercuts the pathos of Loghain, Bartrand, Meredith and others. Something that (rightfully) caused fan outcry.
In short, while I do love DA-I think we can look back at it now that it’s basically dead, and acknowledge there were a lot of structural problems that always existed. In my view anyway-that required basically Origins and DA2’s writers to manage and as that declined-the series was a car sliding off the road without a driver. And you get DAV.
