I saw that it was on sale and was wondering how it is and if its worth buying?

Yes. It's a pretty good RPG with a lot of content. And it looks pretty nice. The combat is solid and fun to look at. I had fun with it for sure. Looking back, the over arching story was pretty bland but it has some fun characters and good quests.

For $20 I think it's an easy recommendation.

It's a decent game. Combat is bland and the story is just bad, but for 20 dollars I'd say it's definitely worth it.

Instead of putting that $20 toward a mediocre half baked RPG you could instead put it toward something good, like the Witcher 3, or Pillars of Eternity. Or even save it to put it toward Fallout 4 in a few weeks.

Basically what I'm saying is that it's a boring game and you shouldn't waste any amount of money on it.

Absolutely, $20 is a steal for this game.

I really liked Inquisition, and I put about 80 or 90 hours into it. It wasn't as good as Dragon Age II, but it was still a pretty good game overall. I paid $40 for it, and would have liked it even more at $20.

I encourage you to read some reviews and maybe watch the Quick Look. And don't forget, Dragon Age enthusiast Matt Rorie reviewed this game and gave it 4 out of 5 stars, so take the above "this game is boring" or "the story is bad" with a grain of salt. I didn't think the the story was bad at all, and I think the game had a lot of really fun, memorable characters and a lot of fun quest lines to do.

@mike: I'm actually surprised there's only been one "this game isn't worth any price" post considering how games get turned on months after release these days haha. This one's easily worth $20.

@dumptruck05: Definitely. It's a great modern RPG with some pretty good writing and a ton of customization. If you like playing dress-up in your video games, mixing and matching armors, getting the colors just right, then Inquisition has that in spades.

Also even on consoles it was at times really striking graphically.

Defend your position, sir. Explain to me how Inquisition is a worthwhile investment when there are other, superior games on the market. One of which at the very least is a landmark for the RPG genre.

No, seriously. If this were 2014 and there were no games out, I'd probably say Inquisition is worth a few dollars, but it's not, and RPG players at this point have their pick of half a dozen or so stellar releases this year alone. If money is a concern for the OP, he could pick up Shadowrun: Dragonfall and Hong Kong for that price, and still get 60 hours of marvelous RPG entertainment. There is just no good excuse for picking a shoddy game when there are much better investments of both time and money.

One of which would be buying a bucket of paint, spraying it all over a wall, and then watching it dry.

I'm being facetious on that last point, if you couldn't tell.

It'd be the second RPG I recommended after the Witcher 3 as far as new stuff is concerned. PIllars and Wasteland 2 just didn't have enough in the story department to make up for their very conservative approach to actual gameplay in my opinion. Decent games but nothing to really build upon. DA:I isn't a great story either, but it was fun to play.

I thought it was a great game. I'd say it was worth $60, and for $20 plus the DLC (I only played "Trespasser," which was solid and answered a lot of questions) it's a steal. As people have mentioned, there's a ton of content, but that also includes a lot of bland side quests. I'd recommend only doing the things that are interesting to you. I loved looking for the constellation puzzles, for example, so I did all of those. Yet there was a ton of side stuff I skipped, too. Pick what you like and don't be afraid to go from area to area on a whim.

The party members are interesting, the main story is just okay, but the combat for me was fantastic. I always enjoy party-based combat over something like The Witcher 3 (which is a superior game overall). It did feel action-y on console but I put it up to Hard and then Nightmare; if you want a challenge and to be actually forced to play tactically, start on Hard. The combat is just gorgeous to look at, as well.

@oldirtybearon: I really don't understand for example how you can hate on this game but hold up PoE, which is Icewind Dale III at best. The companions were almost all so lackluster in that game and the overall plot was just alright. The world is pretty cool but the game didn't really even exploit that a ton and the world building was pretty clumsily delivered to me. And beyond that, hardly anything substantial different gameplay wise from the Infinity Engine games (in fact, some elements missing and some obvious areas of improvement missing, though to be fair a recent patch did fill in some mechanical gaps that really bugged me before).

I guess it comes down to I don't think some of these RPGs are actually better. PoE, Divinity OS, and Wasteland 2 for example are all interesting games that I am very glad were made, but it was a bummer to me these games came out as a kind of RPG resurgence and none had particularly good stories and/or hardly matched the mechanics of the older games they were inspired by (this is where Divinity excels, but the story is truly trash, no hyperbole for me as I'm not someone to throw that word around). I do like Dragonfall a lot (haven't got to Hong Kong yet) but it's extremely short for an RPG which continues to be a bummer for that series.

I hope these games get sequels that actually deliver more of an evolution. If it would be like the Shadowrun Returns to Dragonfall improvement and then I would be a happy RPG camper.

I see the flaws in Dragon Age Inquisiton for sure. It's a game I played like crazy and for $20 it's super easy to recommend. I had fun with it for like 100 hours. Honestly I think Witcher III makes it look bad more than anything. Totally blows it away. But that doesn't mean DA:I is bad, because I think Witcher 3 might just be the best RPG ever. And DA:I scratches some RPG itches like companion based storytelling and party based combat that Witcher III wasn't going for.

This really sums up my feelings too.

I didn't think the game was that great. The combat isn't fun, the game is poorly paced, but the writing is good enough and it looks real pretty. If you want an overly long game that has an okay story but looks really good then 20 bucks is a good price.

@artisanbreads: Honest question, but did you finish Pillars? If you did, I don't know how you came to the conclusion that the story in that game was somehow bad, or uninteresting, because it took some very cliched D&D Forgotten Realms tropes and completely turned them on their head. Like how Obsidian likes to do. I also don't buy for a second that Cassandra or Dorian are somehow more well written or interesting characters than the Grieving Mother, who has an imaginative and interesting narrative hook that nudges you into exploring her story, her background, without the Bioware dangling carrot of "maybe you'll see tits at the end of this quest chain." In my 40 hours with Pillars I never once found myself in a position where I wasn't engaged with the plot, the characters, or the quests. They were wonderfully written and featured the kind of choice and consequence that are woefully lacking in a game like Inquisition.

True, there may not be as much content in a Shadowrun or a Pillars, but I'm a firm believer that quality > quantity, and that I'd rather take 40 hours of interesting quests with diverse companions (seriously? You thought Durance was boring?) in a reactive world that has the ability to shape itself to your choices over a game that is 100 hours long, is chock full of static one note fetch quests, and a world that feels like as barren and devoid of life as Azeroth. Everything in Inquisition is so static in comparison to Pillars, Witcher 3, or Shadowrun . In order to have an RPG that's any good, you need a story that is at the very least interesting, and even on that front Inquisition is just... not good. It had potential, sure, but when you break it down you're spending 20 hours in a barren field collecting stuff in order to unlock the next big bad ass battle. You can talk to your crew at Skyhold, sure, but they never really have anything to say. Nor do they challenge you. Everything in Inquisition serves the player, right down to a bunch of blind faith yes men who have all the spine of a wet noodle.

I'd take one Durance over a dozen Iron Bulls, any day. Philosophizing about gods, worship, and one's role as a martyr is much more fertile ground to explore, at least compared to "high brow" moralizing on offer in Inquisition. I've never played a game that talked down to its player the way the Inquisition does, and, yeah, that rubs me the wrong way.

It probably sounds like I hate the game, but I don't. I'm indifferent on it. There are much better games that offer a deeper, more rewarding experience for the time you put into them, and Dragon Age 3 just doesn't pass muster in comparison. Let me put it to you like this; would you rather play a game that has interesting, well written, imaginative, and downright morally murky quests and characters, or would you rather save the world with zero stakes in a quick hero's journey?

So much of Inquisition is just filler, and even the stuff that dares to furtively approach something resembling great is often hacked to pieces and set aside for fear of offending the player. Inquisition feels the need to constantly remind you that you are awesome, because you're the Herald of Andraste and you are never wrong.

Please, please, PLEASE mainline it. I spent way too much time on sidequests and burned myself out so hard. Not sure I'll ever be able to go back and enjoy it again, even though I surely would have had I just ignored all the side content.

got the game for 30 recently and spent an entire long weekend playing it. never played the games prior but liked mass effect 2.

had a lot of fun. some of the sidequests arent great but its still fun and talking to everyone is great. will go back to it for xmas break

I enjoyed it. It's no origins but it's a fun game if you don't have sky-high expectations. Plenty to do, decent characters, combat can be fun or boring depending on your class and build. Story is alright. Kinda cookie cutter bioware but that's not necessarily bad. For $20 it's a worthwhile pick up unless you don't have the witcher 3 yet.

Buy Pillars of Eternity or The Witcher. Sure DAI has a lot of content, but most of it is boring and tedious.

@oldirtybearon: I did finish the game and liked it's approach over usual RPG stuff about finding a relic to end the world or whatever (which DA:I goes full steam into) but I don't see what was so profoundly good about it. It was pretty good on a straight up plot front but nothing great. And Grieving Mother was great, in how she fit into the themes and how she was presented, but none of the other companions did much for me.

There is a lot of complexity and thematic depth they are going for with elements of PoE, you can tell it was very well thought out, but that doesn't mean it's necessarily very enjoyable or relevant to the game or the story. Simpler characters with snappier dialogue and dynamic feeling interactions can ultimately be way more satisfying to me (it's not like Dandelion or Zoltan in the Witcher are some crazy deep characters with complex pasts and difficult moral dilemmas). I didn't even love Iron Bull, but hell he made me laugh at points which is way more than PoE companions can say personality or entertainment wise. PoE spends a lot of words saying things it could say in way less, which is one of its issues, in addition to focus (which is why I liked Greiving Mother, she tied well into the whole Hollowborn part of the story). "Brevity is the soul of wit" as some guy once said.

I just don't see how you can say PoE is some dynamic game and DA:I is not though (especially with how shallow elements like Caed Nua was, compared to Skyhold which is WAY better and had a ton of cool character interactions which you said weren't there, I saw them). And how DA:I "talks down" to the player, whatever that means (I honestly don't know).

Part of enjoying DA:I is certainly deciding where to not keeping doing the side content. There is a lot of filler there for sure. But I think you can easily spend 80+ hours on fun content.

Anyways, you say "it probably sounds like I hate the game" but then say it's a quick heroes journey with zero stakes and generally just hated on it for your whole post haha. I get you don't like it, that's fine. I just don't see what is so great that you are comparing it against in PoE. Not a bad game by any means! But certainly no classic or anything

Absolutely it is a bargain. There is a lot of game to be had. I bought it at full price and I can say I got my money's worth.

I have played almost every Bioware RPG to completion. I have not been able to finish Dragon Age Inquisition. I might eventually sit down and force myself to play it out of a misplaced sense of completionism, but in a lot of ways it reflects the things I've started to dislike about modern video game design.

I think my ultimate problem with that game is that while the actual story stuff is totally alright and up to the standards of modern (post Mass Effect 3) Bioware, 90% of the open-world stuff is the most generic, faux-MMO filler garbage I've seen in an RPG this side of Kingdoms of Amalur. The combat is also this weird half-assed compromise where it wants to sort of be an action game and sort of be an overhead tactical RPG but isn't good at either. If you want good combat, pick up Divinity Original Sin (the enhanced edition comes out later this month.) If you want a good "AAA" open-world RPG, get The Witcher. If you want Bioware, play Dragon Age Origins.

Do you enjoy picking weeds and gathering rocks? How about bland, pointless writing? Random groups of dudes to fight because hey there's a group of dudes to fight?

I guess it looks nice at least.

It's the first modern BioWare game of theirs that's outright bad - story's bland and piecemeal, combat's all flash and no substance of which there is also too much of it and not enough character interaction and diplomacy, very little armour cosmetic variety, side-stuff encompasses like 2/3's of the game and it's all shitty filler. They've released a number of flawed games over the years, but Inquisition has little to redeem over its innumerable failings. Getting to play as a Qunari is kinda cool at least.

You can't go wrong for $20. I had a real hard time getting into the game initially, but eventually went back and with a new character and loved every minute of it. It's not perfect, but it's enjoyable.

Yeah, the writing for the companions was great, but it felt to me like you finished their individual stories (told after resting mostly, not triggered by any particular plot point) and then they were just interchangeable sets of skills. It was all very disjointed.

Yeah it depends of how you value your time, what you are looking for and how bored are you. There are better games on the market, arguably Witcher 3, Pillars of Eternity, and of course Witcher and Witcher 2, also Planescape Torment, if you handle going that retro.

As a measure to fight off growing a backlog, I now only buy games that apparently have something worthwhile to contribute to my enjoyment, and I really want to play. Repeats, with lesser quality, I give them a pass.

DA:I is pretty much the poster child of a 3-star game. It isn't particularly good or bad, it just sort of exists. In the same way that Assassins Creed is a distillation of the "UbiSoft formula," Inquisition is essentially a distillation of the "BioWare formula." You have (1) an unknown hero arising from humble origins to (2) confront a world ending evil (3) with a group of colorful companions while (4) making the occasional Moral Choice. In the past, I've defended that formula on the basis that if you're good at something, you should stick with what you know. And in the past, BioWare has done that formula pretty well.

However, DA:I is extremely, almost self-consciously bland in its execution. At times you can almost see the checkboxes that were getting ticked in the design meetings. Semi-open world? Check. Big voice acting talent? Check. Moral Choices? Check. Lot of flashy looking yet easy, explody, and non-threatening combat? Check. Pseudo political elements that highlight how discrimination is Wrong and teamwork and self-belief can accomplish Anything? Check.

So while I don't think DA:I is quite as terrible as @oldirtybearon makes it out to be, and I really don't think it's "outright bad" as @yummylee says it is, I also wouldn't pick it up over any of DA: Origins, The Witcher 3 or Pillars of Eternity. If you have only $20 to spend, I'd try to find one of those three first. If you have more than $20 to spend, I'd also try to find one of those first.

I really really liked this game.

I played it in a very similar fashion to Metal Gear in that it was actually kind of a problem. Like, staying up way too late and forgetting essential life stuff- kind of problem.

It is really pretty (frostbite) and it has a really neat pacing to it. Very much like Metal Gear, when I got to "act II" I was overwhelmingly pumped.

It's not perfect, but I'd say it's a definite yes - even if it sits in your library until the next drought.

Yup, I loved it. But I also love the Bioware formula. It has its flaws but for $20 it's absolutely worth it.

Don't waste your money on it. Save it for a great RPG like the Witcher 3. DAI has a poorly written story, forced characters, uninteresting quests, and a lifeless open world.

It tries to be a grand epic game and falls apart under its own weight...

@oldirtybearon: Dude. Opinions.

Seriously, I never finished Inquisition but I don't put thirty hours into games I don't like. It's not a perfect game but it's definitely worth $20 if only to see if you like it.

It took me 50 hours to figure out that this game is actually pretty terrible.

His doesn't matter anywhoo, what with the One and Only Officially Official Dragon Age Enthusiast Matt Rorie liking it, making everyone else's null and void!

Also, regarding the second part, have you never wanted to see a bad game to its end just so you can be better informed in describing why you dislike it?

@twi: you forgot the awful cool down based mmo combat and complete bullet (arrow?) sponge enemies.

Having beat DA:I, I would suggest that you don't buy it. Twenty dollars is fine value-wise but I regret the time I spent on it. It was really promising at first but the more I played, I came to realize how dry and fetch-quest based all of the content was. The story was really bad, and the combat was fun at first but didn't develop in an interesting way as you got near the end.

Get the Witcher 3 instead, a single sidequest in that game has more character development than the entirety of DA:I. Your choices end up mattering a lot, and it's a very pretty game if you're looking for eye candy.

Nope. Never.

I'm of the opinion that experiencing things you might not like still has merit. It's a little twisted to think that I powered through Bound By Flame if only to make sure I knew to a full extent how much I hated it, but how can we truly appreciate the sunshine without the occasional cloud?

I'd say absolutely it most definitely is worth $20.00 bucks OP, but the real question is it the best use of your $20.00? Or perhaps even more importantly is it worth your time, but it is massive with tons of sidequest/filler content. YMMV on whether you enjoy those. I did, but I'm easily entertained.

Without knowing your other choices I can't tell you whether you should get this or not.

I liked DA:I , but I also really like the Dragon Age universe and I liked the environments and such, so the flaws of the game didn't bug me much. I will say I don't think the combat is that great, which given how central that is to the game is a problem.

I will also say there are plenty of RPGs I liked better released since then. In this case, you might be better off spending 50 bucks and get the Witcher 3. Or the new Shadowrun:Hong Kong if you must stay within 20 bucks. Or better yet wait a bit longer for a GOTY edition of DA:I with all the DLC since it seems to be falling in price pretty quickly, if you really want DA:I.

I want to see the end of bad games, because I always want to see how the story ends regardless. And I'm too old school to go watch it on youtube. I gotta see it for myself and I gotta feel like I earned it. Just the way I'm wired.

Steam's been a bad thing for me in some ways, since I'm quite willing to play bad-mediocre games if the price is cheap enough. I used to rent games when that was still a thing, Steam sales kinda feel like that to me.

It's amazing how people still get so fired up about how much they dislike this game. At least a couple of you backed up your arguments instead of just saying "it's bad" or "the combat sucks".

Regardless, you should watch videos and find information to decide for yourself if it's worth a buy. If you have $20 to throw around and you think you might like it, then absolutely go for it. If it's a choice of what RPG to spend money on, then 100% save it for The Witcher 3. Unless you have absolutely zero interest in The Witcher, it is the superior game by a mile.

Since I assume the ''couple'' you're referring to is @oldirtybearon & @lawgamer, I did link to my rather comprehensive review in my post.

Also, I assume you share such amazement whenever Jeff himself goes on one of his many rants about things he dislikes?

I played some Daikatana once! I have also finished FEAR 3. More than once.

I have played games that I consider bad before, but I already rarely finish the games I want to play. It doesn't help that many of the games I want to play are really fucking long (I'm finally well into the third act of The Witcher 3, there can't be that much more of the game to go). Besides, you don't need to play an entire bad game to formulate an opinion on why you dislike it.

Back on topic, it's worth reiterating that many great Western RPG's have come out over the past few years and Dragon Age Inquisition, regardless of my seemingly relatively generous opinion, isn't really one of them. I found its story entertaining, but it's also Bioware at their cheesiest. I found its combat entertaining, but it's also pretty simple. I thought its open world was gorgeous to look at, but an overwhelming proportion of the sidequests wouldn't be out of the place in an MMO (plus, The Witcher 3 has an incredible number of well-detailed quests for you to take up. Even the treasure hunts in TW3 often come with books and notes detailing something worth reading about the world).

Regardless of whether you like Dragon Age Inquisition or not, the game pales in the face of its competition. For $20, yeah, I think it's worth buying and playing. At the very least, all of those grind-y sidequests are fantastic for podcast gaming. There are better games for any platform that DA:I is available for, Pillars of Eternity will run on anything, Divinity is coming to consoles, Fallout 4 will be here soon, and Witcher 3 is just so goddamn well-crafted in so many respects (it's worth noting that Witcher 3's combat on the normal difficulty is pretty button mash-y, in the same way that DA:I's normal combat is mostly devoid of tactics - haven't played either on higher difficulties so I couldn't tell you how good the combat is when really put to the test).

I still say buy it and try it for yourself.

No, but for a game like an RPG in particular, there's still a need for closure, to see how the story wraps up. I wanted to at least see Inquisition's narrative to the end and I'm glad I did, because the ending sucked and fitted in pretty well with everything else I strongly grew to dislike about it. And as you yourself said, you sometimes can't quite bring yourself to finish games you do enjoy, so you and I definitely manage our time differently. I have the time (and not much else) to invest in huge games, and even if I happen to dislike it, if it's from a series I'm invested in, then I feel I owe it to myself to see it to the end. And a large part of that is so I can articulate as accurately as I can why I hold such a passionately negative stance towards it.

This is the only game I've regretted buying this gen. I just hated the gameplay so much.

$20 is not that much, though. Worth alone for seeing the worlds I guess (which are beautifully rendered).

I've never felt allegiance to a certain series or franchise or world, though. I tend to pick one or two games, books, movies, albums by an artist, etc., and then the rest I can take or leave. That's weird, I know.

I won't lie, part of my problem with finishing games is bad time management (something I'm working on), but I still can't imagine finishing a fifty hour game in anything less than two months.

@bocckob: That stuff wouldn't even be that bad if it wasn't for that obnoxious animation every time you loot something. What were they thinking with that? It seems like such a non-issue at first, maybe even a cool little detail, but God did it grate on me by the end.

@yummylee: I wasn't referring to anyone in particular, nor would it matter if I did, and I did notice your rather comprehensive review. I was simply making an observation, not targeting you or anyone else.

And to answer your other question, no.

Man, all these people comparing DA:I to Witcher 3 made me think, in all honestly the only things from Witcher 3 I'd take over DA:I are the breadth/quality of side content and core world design (gameplay area, not fiction). Everything else, be it character interaction, world building, player choice, class development, combat design, customization etc etc etc I'd much rather play DA:I. Huh. Yeah. Now that I'm a bit more separated from Witcher 3 I think that I actually enjoyed DA:I more.

Also yeah it's totally worth $20 but like @slag said, what really matters is whether it's the smartest $20 for you to spend.

as others have said: DA:I is done with the typical Bioware formula, except they added the open world, which in my opinion hurt the game in the end because most of the side content is really mediocre, like the stuff you would expect in an MMO. If you are a bioware fan i'd say 20$ is fine, and you'll enjoy it.

My own expectations crushed Inquisition. I've got 60 increasingly despondent hours in the game and it's still hanging in there on my hard drive.

I wanted Bioware to return to being the Bioware of DA Origins, completely neglecting that these days they make story driven action games. It's like expecting MG to still be making quirky little sports cars.

Inquisition's a good game, just not the game I wanted. Certainly worth a $20 punt.

I enjoyed Inquisition when it came out. The visuals were nice but too static, not even day and night cycle, every area felt like just a zone with different theme not a cohesive world. The combat is quite alright, very flashy but not as engaging. The characters are nice , different archetypes but the interactions feel a bit robotic. The overall narrative started strong but was a letdown. There are some really nice sceney and DRAGONS!!!! The sidequests are pretty bad and overall game feels very mellow, tame bit I enjoyed it in 2014 because it was a bad year for games. I say for 20 bucks why not.

When The Witcher 3 came out it put things in to perspective. I won't bash Dragon Age, but maaaan what a overwhelming difference in quality. Just god damn. I cannot stress enough how good this game is compared to Inquisition, compared to rpgs, heck compared to any game.

@oldirtybearon: I would rather play through Inquisition twice back to back rather than play Shadowrun, which is neither a very good RPG nor turn based tactical game. Of course that is all a matter of opinion so arguing the point is ultimately a waste of time. Tried as hard as I might I could not enjoy Dragonfall at all, and I loved the old Fallout games so it should be right up my alley. The writing is childishly melodramatic and overly verbose, the combat is ultimately simplistic and the game itself feels a bit clunky and at times dare I say, amateurish.

Yet a ton of people still swear by it, and thats fine.

You can like different things, and not everything is for everyone, but you can't just come in here stating how Inquisition was never worth a damn like it's a fact simply because you personally didn't enjoy that particular flavor of RPG.