Editor's note: Dragon Age: Origins proved to be a bit too much of a Western-role-playing heavy hitter for me. I grew up on Squaresoft games, so I'm a pansy when it comes to hardcore role-playing. Personally, I felt more at home with Mass Effect's glossy, cinematic approach, and I think moving Dragon Age in that direction will only up my chances of playing it. David, however, is much more apprehensive. -James

News about a forthcoming Dragon Age: Origins sequel is awesome, and most of the new, slowly emerging details are only increasing my excitement. But three nagging worries plague me. The question is whether BioWare will address my concerns before or after Dragon Age 2's release.

1) Just how different will PC and console gameplay be?

Will streamlining the gameplay further ruin the experience?

The implication at this point is that the console version will be more immediate and in your face, whereas the PC experience sounds paced for more strategic gameplay and slightly removed from battle.

But GamePro's write up of the Gamescom build indicates that BioWare may be looking to have it both ways:

"The combat in Dragon Age 2 looks to cater to the visceral combat lusted by the action-loving gamers currently buying up shooters and slaughter-fests on consoles, while still keeping true to the slow-paced strategy that drives many of the PC's top titles. During combat, you can take on real-time approach, hacking at enemies. Silverman said BioWare's refined the combat so that 'any button will do something awesome.' If you're more about real role-playing, you can pause the game and plan out your attacks more diligently. The strategic command wheel is still around, but pausing the battle allows you to take stock of the entire battlefield, setting up attacks for enemies who may currently be out of close range"

Maybe the issue is the wording of this particular article, but here's my take: I like the emphasis on the immediacy of combat. The delay various characters create when moving into range annoys me -- especially during repeated playthroughs. Also, many attacks and abilities simply take too long to activate.

But managing the battlefield in previous BioWare games -- even on the console -- involves pausing frequently and constantly reassessing the situation -- a staple of the developer I've enjoyed since Knights of the Old Republic. As someone who owns both the console and PC versions of the first game -- and will probably own both versions of the sequel -- I worry that unnecessary revisions will water down the Xbox and PlayStation 3 builds. The last thing I want is a mindless hack-and-slash game.

2) Is Mass Effect's conversation system really an improvement?

While I enjoy BioWare's other current RPG franchise, the paraphrased reactions used in conversation frequently result in Shepard saying something I didn't quite intend. I get that they're going for a smoother, more cinematic feel with less time spent reading text, but both Mass Effect and Dragon Age are RPGs first and foremost. That means I should be able to have control over my own character -- without the game getting in my way!

The recent news that GamePro dropped in the above preview gives me some hope for its implementation in Dragon Age 2:

"Moral choices have been refined in that visual icons of your character's dialog choices (like showing an olive branch for peaceful replies) will create less confusion for the context of a reply."

I'm still skeptical. Even though Mass Effect 2 consistently puts Paragon options on the top of the wheel and Renegade on the bottom, my Shepard ended up saying things he wouldn't have said if I'd have seen the text in full.

Moreover, my experience with the awesome downloadable game DeathSpank (you can find my review here) suggests that full-text dialogue choices don't diminish vocal delivery. Sure, it may result in a few tedious sequences, but a game can feature voiced characters without resorting to the conversation wheel.

3) How will a magic-using Hawke work?

I imagine Hawke with a sword, but what about a staff?

This is something I'm sure they'll pull off splendidly, but it is also the question nagging me the most. Something about the title "Champion of Kirkwall" suggests that Hawke is a warrior -- possibly a rogue -- and certainly not a mage.

Coverage of the Gamescom build hasn't allayed my worries. Most of it emphasizes Hawke as a warrior. Check out this write up by IGN:

"I sliced through Darkspawn effortlessly, my blade sliding through the ugly creatures as if they were made of butter. Meanwhile, my mage partner eloquently set the remaining foes aflame. After obliterating enemies with such ease, I realized that this was a much different Dragon Age than I was used to, but it was exactly what I was hoping for."

Plus, look at it in terms of the fiction. Hawke starts out in Lothering, but if he's a mage, wouldn't he have to be an apostate? But, if he's an apostate, why would the narrators (according to IGN) talk about Hawke rebuilding the Chantry -- apparently on organization that is now in ruins.

Does anyone out there have an answer for my Hawke/mage dilemma? How about other concerns? Share in the comments!

For my more random observations and thoughts, follow me on Twitter @MKEGameDesign.