Why is it that whenever people on this forum try to cobble together an argument, they always overblow every single flaw? Dragon Age Inquisition was a 100+ hour long game if you did every single thing there was to do. It didn't solely consist of the things you say the game was all about. In fact, shard collecting and inquisition request fulfilling is only a very small part of it, as were the flawed fetch quests. It had a 30ish hour long main campaign with a pretty alright story and story telling. Tons of lore. Things like, I don't know, combat? Dragons? Keep building. All among many other things. And all of those things happened in the open world too. Those things were so much fun to me that I finished the game twice.
Why do you think what I'm saying is overblown? I PLAYED the game. I sunk over 160 hours into DA:I in a single playthrough.
And you know what I spent the vast, VAST majority of my time doing? Running around collecting shards, completing requisitions, completing fetch quests, and mindlessly heading to my destination to trigger something eventful. That and fiddling with my inventory every couple of minutes because I kept running out of space to manage 10 characters.
I enjoyed the story. I liked the characters (even Sera). I had fun fighting dragons. But that was the minority of my time with the game. The rest was in big, giant, open areas doing busy work like collection shards, mosaic pieces, finding ocularas, doing astrariums, collecting Thedas bottles, unlocking landmarks and points of interest, and then raiding the occasional cave or bandit camp. I feel quite confident in saying that 80% of my time in DA:I was spent on fluff rather than anything meaningful or substantial, and the level restrictions in place to prevent me from just sticking to the story (and my OCD) ensured I was doing mundane tasks far more often than any cool character quest or story event.
The game had its flaws, but from reading your post, it's as if the game is entirely without merit to you. How you could hold such an opinion and still seemingly have any hope that Bioware can even make a functional game, let alone one that's fun to you is entirely beyond me.
As I said, I found the story great. I loved the characters. I found the game visually spectacular. I found the music to be worth tracking down and adding to my playlist. I had fun fighting dragons. I had fun building my keep. I enjoyed sitting on my throne and passing judgment in often hilarious ways ("I also pass judgment on the box! End table for orphans!").
I adored 20% of the game and cherish those sections entirely. It's the rest of the game that plodded and dragged and got in its own way during my initial playthrough. Again, any given map maybe had only one or two truly interesting things to do there, and the rest was entirely insubstantial busywork.
Anyway, I refer to the size and scope not to claim that the game will be super fun or whatever. I'm referring to it because your previous post seems to claim that the game is a step back when it comes to the previous games, which it in all objective measures is not. It's a far more technically capable game with many more features, with many of them simply not possible in U3. And even U4 doesn't seem to have many open world games that work in the engine.
Again, I don't really care about the size of the world. It could be the largest world ever, and the most technically complex game ever created. That still doesn't guarantee it'll be fun or enjoyable to play.
I don't ascribe to the belief that "bigger is better" when a razor-sharp, highly focused campaign can be just as easily transcend a bland open-world. There is elegance in simplicity as well. I understand the appeal of emergent gaming for games like Skyrim, but Mass Effect was never a Skyrim experience. Even at its largest and most grandiose, it was still a section of linear stories on modest-sized planets or with character-driven quests that had us there for singular and focused objectives and driven purpose. I understand many want the exploration element, but the things Mass Effect did best on story were often due to how well it was actually structured in bite-sized segments that retained a sharp and clear focus on establishment, build-up, and resolution.
And nothing is saying Andromeda won't have those. I expect it to, in fact, but I am still... concerned... until any worries are allayed. Again, Dragon Age: Inquisition lacked this focus. It's rambling adventure was vast, but it's focus was aimless and sloppy and unbalanced, often having little or no rhyme or reason for where many of its characters or events took place on the smaller scale. There were few places there that had any personal attachment to party members, no "this is my home" or "this is my village" or "these are my people" moments within the world. References, sure, but nobody in the Inquisition has any personal attachment to the Hinterlands or The Fallow Mire or The Hissing Wastes, and thus I don't really either.
Mass Effect did it a bit better. "This is Tuchanka, home planet of Wrex." "This is Palaven, home planet of Garrus." "This is Thessia. Liara grew up here." "This is Rannoch, home for both Geth and Quarians." Etc.
We'll see how Andromeda holds up. DA:I left me empty.