What do you mean "same combat", like Amalur made some novel innovation? They're both just 3D, third-person action combat; it's a mechanic. This is like knocking Fallout New Vegas because it still had you shooting guns, and we already shot guns in Fallout 3.
The game looks disappointing for plenty of legitimate reasons, so let's stick to those.
I think you misunderstood me, Amalur has a bland combat without much depth and that what I'm comparing to. The new combat looks like a generic third-person combat, they got rid of the tactical combat and didn't offer anything substantial.
The boss fight with the pride demon looks okay, but the normal enemies are like smashing the button 3 times to kill them.
The opinions are all over the place right now. As someone who loved DA2, I have no problem with actiony combat and linear world, as long as the storytelling and companions stay the same quality.
I've played only Origins but this trailer is not doing a whole lot for me. Even visually I don't like it (which is bizarre because I think Origins looks like shit and still I somehow prefer it). Don't really like this art direction, personally.
If you've only played the most tactical of all of the Dragon Age games and not the Action based variations that are literally the other 2 games, please stop talking
Thank you! People forget that this hasn't been a tactical series since the first game. It's like people complaining that Zelda BOTW wasn't a top down 2D puzzler.
Don't listen to the whiners. There are 3 games in the Dragon Age series and only one of them can be considered a "Tactical" game. Hell, I remember all of the fallout and whining from fans when Dragon Age 2 became more of an arcade hack and slash. And then Inquisition was just a combo of the two styles that leaned towards Action over Tactics.