Having played all three games several times now I can confidentely say that Origins is still the best and 2 is still the worst. As much as I love Inquisition it's missing a lot of the variety that Origin has. Inquisition is so much about mages and there's so much about elves going on, but dwarves have pretty much gotten the boot from the game. Orzammar, Kal-Sharok, Deep Roads and dwarven customs are only briefly mentioned in dialogue and on war table missions, and as much as I hate the Deep Roads they are a given part of a Dragon Age game, and I rather wish they would've kept the Deep Roads and kicked the Fade. The tiny bit in Valammar hardly counts. Even 2 has more dwarven stuff than Inquisition, tbf despite the lack of variety in areas in 2 that game still has more variety of people and customs than Inquisition does. Though I do appreciate the fact that the Avvar are finally in a game in Inquisition.
As much as I got tired of being stuck in Kirkwall in 2, I absolutely adore the time spent in Denerim in Origins and I miss cities so much in Inquisition. Val Royeux and Redcliffe don't count. Redcliffe is bigger in Origins than in Inquisition. In Inquisition Redcliffe is barely bigger than master Dennet's farm. Heck, even Lothering and Honnleath in Origins are bigger than Redcliffe in Inquisition! Val Royeux in Inquisition seemed cool at first but it's basically just a glorified village. There's no city atmosphere there. That said, Inquisition has some amazing areas to explore, my favourites being Hinterlands, Crestwood, Emerald Graves and Emprise du Lion. But just as much as I loved Denerim, Ostagar and Redcliffe in Origins, I hated Orzammar and the Circle Tower. And likewise I was so bored and/or annoyed going through the desert areas (Forbidden Oasis, Western Approach, Hissing Wastes) and Fallow Mire in Inquisition. Fallow Mire mostly because I always want to explore the entire region and to do that I have to enter the water and when I do that I get attacked by hordes of undead. It's so annoying.
Hinterlands, Crestwood, Emerald Graves, Emprise du Lion
I loved the story in Origins, but despite all the choices you can make in there, it doesn't seem to affect the world as much as one pivotal choice in Inquisition - the choice whether you should side with the mages or the templars. I have always felt that the mages were right in their rebellion so out of my four playthroughs of Inquisition I only sided with the templars once, in my latest one, just to see if it would make any difference. And actually it did! I feel like there's suddenly more substance to the storyline, but not only that - there are no red templars (thus far, I haven't completed that playthrough yet) every area that was previously occupied by red templars in my other playthroughs (like their camp in Crestwood) are no occupied solely by Venatori. The presence of Venatori when you side with the mages is never fully explained, it's only assumed that some vints still remain on the Elder One's side. But the fact that red templars just don't show when you've sided with them is strangely satisfying. It feels like you've saved an entire group of people just by taking them in. So which side you choose has an actual and prominent impact on the world. In Origins it doesn't matter. It's just a matter on what sort of army you get in the final onslaught. Side with mages, get mages in army. Side with templars, get templars in army. Side with elves, get elves in army. Side with werewolves, get werewolves in army. But there's no tangible difference in the world. In 2 even if you sided with the mages Orsino still turned into a monster, while it would've made more sense to have had him by my side and help me fight Meredith. There's virtually no difference what happens in 2 either.
It's my theory that 2 was so bad (although I did enjoy playing it) because it mostly worked as a prologue to Inquisition. Everything that happens in 2 leads up to what Inquisition is all about. It's also bad because Hawke has basically nothing to do with anything that happens in the game. Stuff would happen even if Hawke wasn't there, while in Origins the Warden makes things happen, and the Inquisitor is the reason things happen in Inquisition.
Something I missed both in 2 and Inquisition is the ability to just turn around whenever and wherever and have a dialogue with that specific companion. Why can't I do that?! It makes no sense! Also, in Inquisition there's a lot of party banter involving the Inquisitor, but there are no speech options for the Inquisitor. Like why can't I participate in a conversation concerning myself? I also miss gifts. I want gifts for my companions in Inquisition. I also want an approval bar so I can physically see how much someone likes me.
All of them have amazing companions and characters overall, But Origins win because of the quests. Sure, there are a few fetch quests and a few annoying quests that involve running back and forth between places and getting attacked on the way (because I can never travel from one place to another without getting attacked), but the major quests are amazing. As much as it scared me shitless the first time I played the game (and that's an accomplishment) Paragon of her Kind is an amazing quest, and there hasn't been a single one like it since. I hate the Deep Roads but that quest has me scared and excited at the same time. The quest with the Dalish is also amazing, and the whole mission to find the Urn of Sacred Ashes is incredible. There's already so much content in Origins, but when the Landsmeet draws close and thereby the end of the game I always wish for more. 2 doesn't have that and although In Your Heart Shall Burn has some amazing story sequences, and In Hushed Whispers is a really cool quest none of them manage to give me the same feeling Origins' quests do. Except for the scene where the Elder One walks through the fire. That scene along with The Dawn Will Come still give me chills.
Now I'm so tempted to start another playthrough of Origins... Maybe I should? I probably shouldn't... But I probably will.