Bioware is nothing close to the company it used to be - EA being the destroyer of IP's for the quick buck - but wow was I shocked at how trash the new Dragon Age game looks.
[video:youtube][/video]
I hear most of the team left BioWare from the original DA. The Art alone looks like a mix between Fortnight and Overwatch. Cartoonish, sanitized pablum and nonsense. A bit of a change from the Grimdark realism of the original games - even up to Inquisition - that we all fell in love with.
Boy, imagine what they could have done with the BG IP. Yikes.
While I'm not fond of the artwork and indeed a lot of devs are not with BioWare anymore, I don't think, it's good form to bash a company in another companies forum. Time will tell, if the new DA game is any good or not and I will hold my vote until the final game has released. Just because I don't like the artwork, I won't trash the game based on one trailer I don't like the artwork of nearly all jrpgs, but a lot of them are classics. At least Scout Harding is a companion, so that is good.
"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."
From the trailer alone, the end parts that seemed to be actual in-game footage did look slightly better than the "Not representative of the game" cinematic stuff.
Overall, artstyle is the least of my concerns when it comes to a Bioware game. I'll want to see the writing before I judge anything (My hopes aren't high given Bioware's recent stuff, but I can always be surprised)
fwiw, here are some leaks from last year that show off the Art style and combat: https://imgur.com/a/J2xVQlT (No real spoilers and it just looks like DAI artstyle and it' looks to be more of a aRPG)
I just hope they conclude whatever story they've been building up since DA2/DAI.
BioWare giving a huge middle finger to the folks who have been playing the DA games since 2009. (Much like Larian did with the original BG characters, but admittedly not as badly.)
That having been said, I'll play it once the modders have fixed it. It's on my Steam wishlist, maybe someone will gift it to me like they did BG3 so I won't have to spend any money on it.
I already knew and even said here before that Bioware's dead, but I didn't expect the trailer to be THIS bad. The cartoonish art, the Marvel like humour and the presentation of the characters are a complete turn-off. This doesn't look like a dark fantasy whatsoever. Currently four times more dislikes than likes, lol. RIP.
There's some actual gameplay video out tomorrow apparently (11th June). I'm reserving judgement until then though I wont be holding my breath given the state of gaming these days.
That dragon monster at the end looked pretty cool. After an hour or so of playing any game, the graphics "wow" factor kind of wears off on me. For example, NWN II is just fine, despite its age. It makes me wonder, what if they made a game with graphics like South Park? Maybe then I'd complain, at least for a little while.
Still, Bioware has always been Load/Black album era Meh-tallica. At best, it's a decent introduction to the good stuff, often made by somebody else. At worst, it's that stuff industry-processed into something for people who don't actually quite LIKE that stuff. And some incarnation of Bob Rock had been with them from the very beginning, ensuring that they'd always chase the lowest common deniminator, whatever the price. Remember that even Baldur's Gate only came to be when Interplay suggested doing a party-based D&D game rather than the MMORPG/RTSish game they were pitching to them -- two of the biggest trends you could chase mid 1990s. I mean, Origins was pitched as a "back to the roots" kind of project barely an European Football Championship after BG had shipped. That's their story in a nutshell.
So if gameplay shown makes this the first time that you're confused about a Bioware title -- welcome to the club after twenty odd years. That's been in their DNA all along: "We want Call Of Duty's / Fortnite's / Whatever's Currently Popular audience now!" The reason that BG3 at all exists is precisely, bingo, Bioware. And not in a "good" way.
So if gameplay shown makes this the first time that you're confused about a Bioware title -- welcome to the club after twenty odd years. That's been in their DNA all along: "We want Call Of Duty's / Fortnite's / Whatever's Currently Popular audience now!" The reason that BG3 at all exists is precisely, bingo, Bioware. And not in a "good" way.
This is my read as well. I think they look at a lot of spreadsheets of what's the most popular thing and then they mold whatever they are currently making into an aspect of that. So by that metric this trailer/new art style probably makes sense to them because what's more popular than Fortnight/Overwatch/League of Legends.
Thankfully they skipped Roblox/Minecraft and went to the third most popular game on the list. Ha!
I've heard the actual gameplay is quite a bit better, and darker and that this reveal trailer is the result of a marketing team that is fully up themselves. I guess we find out in the next few days.
Every Dragon Age game is different though. Tone changed from DA:O => DA2 => DA:I.
That’s been the strength and weakness of the series, as if you really liked one, you probably didn’t like the others that much.
The trailer didn’t look appealing to me either, but none of DA trailers did. I am more interested in seeing the game proper… well, curious would be a better word. I am not particularly fond of any of the DA games, and didn’t like BioWare game since Mass Effect2 so I don’t expect for things to change now.
Every Dragon Age game is different though. Tone changed from DA:O => DA2 => DA:I.
That’s been the strength and weakness of the series, as if you really liked one, you probably didn’t like the others that much.
The trailer didn’t look appealing to me either, but none of DA trailers did. I am more interested in seeing the game proper… well, curious would be a better word. I am not particularly fond of any of the DA games, and didn’t like BioWare game since Mass Effect2 so I don’t expect for things to change now.
Not only the tone. Bioware had been band-wagon jumpers all along. But more recent David Gaider shared a bit of additional insights why Origins was bound to be a one-off in terms of mechanics. Even if Bioware themselves had wanted to keep the formula (which was meant to be a throwback to BG) -- contributing to veterans such as Brent Knowles to leave for good earlier on.
In a sense, the only constant they build their company around to bank upon was their writers... Everything else has always been up for completely grabs and kept simple, with the goal of aggressively targeting non-RPG players. Until a few of those writers felt pissed and left as well. Writers are of some importance to any narrative piece of work. But in mechanically lighter games, they carry the bulk of the experience -- see visual novels at that most extreme. https://www.eurogamer.net/david-gaider-claims-bioware-quietly-resented-writers
Probably for the better what's happened ten years ago with initially mainly crowdfunding and the growing indie scene with digital distribution. Oh, and play SKALD, it's cheap and fun!
Varric's hair colour gets darker with each game, it seems.
Honestly, adopting the "hope is the first step on the path to disappointment" mentality is real healthy these days. ~3 years of waiting for BG3 to get what we got was already disappointment enough, and Bioware haven't made a good game since DA2 (yes, I consider ME3 and DA:I bad for many reasons). To be fair, a lot of fault does lie with EA rather than the devs themselves (back then the Zeschuk/Muzyka duo was still around, and the writers haven't gone off the deep end quite yet), and EA is still there, looming, shoving its rotting tendrils up whatever orifice it can get to.
As for the trailer, it's "let's play a 'spot the modern gaming trends' game" to a stupid degree. Yes, Origins' Manson trailer was really... something... back in the day, but you had to appreciate the sheer ridiculousness of it all. And then, since Inquisition, everything and everyone look like they're straight out of a YA novel, glossy and inoffensive. Boring.
I liked the trailer, and I’m excited to discover the game. I enjoyed seeing companions and factions that were in Tevinter Nights (the tone there was dark enough for me) and The Missing. I’ll sure watch the gameplay reveal with interest.
The gameplay trailer today looked a lot better than the trailer yesterday tbh. It migh tactually be a decent game. I don't like the action fighting style, but I think, most people prefer it. And I hope it has a bit more substance than DAI. It certainly has that griettier and darker look again, which is good.
"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."
My longstanding beef with the Dragon Age franchise is that it gave awesome party control in the form of programable decision trees for each character in Origins, and then successively reduced this ability in each subsequent game. DA2 still had the programable decision trees, but the top down control was nerfed to give it a more action oriented feel.
DA:I restricted the top down even more, to make it feel even more actiony, and eliminated the programming altogether. I absolutely hated that. The mmo grind did not help.
If they make it full action game (like ME2 and onward) then I might be able to play it, but if they stick with the pseudo party controls without actually giving me tactical control of the party then I won't play or buy.
(I would certainly prefer the old DA:Origin style party control, but I do not expect that to be on offer).
Finally! Some real RPGs I can play and enjoy! I am stoked!
This explains so much about your tastes.
Well to each their own. The consensus seems to be - and I agree - is that the party control is nonexistent, the combat is a boring and repetitive laser light show, the dialogue is banal, and the Art direction is hilariously cartoonish - like they are courting pre-teens and their parents.
This isn't surprising, BioWare really hasn't made a decent game since ME2.
I am impressed by how they seem to have taken the worst aspects of every Dragon Age game (except Origins which was basically perfect) and really dialed them up.
I have no doubt that it will sell reasonably well, but I don't see any awards in its future. It doesn't really take any risks and it just recycles other games.
Technically, it looks competent. As of the format, it's pretty much like most cinematic scripted triple-A action/adventure/RPG types that have come out since. This makes sense, as the risk averseness is strong in the bigger budget space. Plus Bioware can't afford to take any risk at this point. They're still entering a market with competition though.
I wish DA fans for something to enjoy again. But personally I am glad that the market has massively opened up again for all kinds of games. When just 10-15 years that wasn't at all the case.
Speaking about DA getting the Mass Effect and action treatment: It's interesting to note that DA2 was actionified already DESPITE Origins actually selling better than Mass Effect (at least the first one). But then David Gaider had pretty much argued already that EA wouldn't care, they'd pick what they think is easier to market and sell and run with that.
Finally! Some real RPGs I can play and enjoy! I am stoked!
Thanks so much for the information about Avowed. First person view literally makes me sick so I'm glad that I'll be able to play the game at all.
As far as DA4 goes, after watching the gameplay video, I'm convinced that it will indeed be a Dragon Age game. (The folks who thought that first trailer was a good idea need a stern talking to.) This old lady will not be able to keep up with that jumpy combat, though, so I hope they will have a Story mode and some other control scheme besides WASD. The combat does look like Inquisition's, and man, that was so hard for me even on easy mode. And I'm ten years older now!
Yeah the acrobatic leaping about and hack'n'slash (mashing?) did nothing for me - From what I read you have very limited control over 'party' members, and the number of actions they can perform is less than previous DA incarnations. Still, I quite liked DA:I except for the grindy MMO bits (esp insane respawns) but this seems to have moved away from the kind of party based RPG's I like. Mass Effect 2/3 were fine for what they were - but why must everything morph into that? I'll see how it turns out, but based on the extended footage, I won't get this in a hurry and certainly not at afull price.
Dragon Age is interesting series of games, where first one was so incredible hit ... so the studio decided to never do anything the same way ever again. Why you ask? I have no idea, asking the same question for years ... maybe they just dont like money or sucess.
Looking at trailer OP posted ... i had same feeling as many other people, that this was just some skins upcoming for Fortnite ... zero interest, maybe even worse.
Looking at gameplay reveal we got yesterday ... well, its 100% not Fortnite, thats good i gues ... but it felt like hybryd between DA-II. aka, the worse one of series and DA-Inq. aka, the most annoying of series.
I keep saying this for years and will keep to saying it on ... all 3 Dragon Age games were awesome ... Origins, Awakening, and Witch Hunt!
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
Yay for third person!!!!!! I haven’t been following Avowed because I thought it was first person only. Will check it out and see if it is something I would like!
Finally! Some real RPGs I can play and enjoy! I am stoked!
This explains so much about your tastes.
Well to each their own. The consensus seems to be - and I agree - is that the party control is nonexistent, the combat is a boring and repetitive laser light show, the dialogue is banal, and the Art direction is hilariously cartoonish - like they are courting pre-teens and their parents.
This isn't surprising, BioWare really hasn't made a decent game since ME2.
I am impressed by how they seem to have taken the worst aspects of every Dragon Age game (except Origins which was basically perfect) and really dialed them up.
I have no doubt that it will sell reasonably well, but I don't see any awards in its future. It doesn't really take any risks and it just recycles other games.
Finally! Some real RPGs I can play and enjoy! I am stoked!
Thanks so much for the information about Avowed. First person view literally makes me sick so I'm glad that I'll be able to play the game at all.
As far as DA4 goes, after watching the gameplay video, I'm convinced that it will indeed be a Dragon Age game. (The folks who thought that first trailer was a good idea need a stern talking to.) This old lady will not be able to keep up with that jumpy combat, though, so I hope they will have a Story mode and some other control scheme besides WASD. The combat does look like Inquisition's, and man, that was so hard for me even on easy mode. And I'm ten years older now!
I'm with you on jumping around, as I strictly play with mouse and keyboard and have zero controller experience. But from what I can gather, those are animations. The player simply gives their command to their character, and based on the action chosen the game puts in the appropriate animation. So the player isn't necessarily jumping around. Also, based on interview material, the player does get a lot of control over the party members during combat, and can issue orders to them. Or else, have the AI run them. It's our choice. But they didn't show this feature in the trailer because it's a trailer. Party size though is now down to two companions instead of three, which I'm not happy about.
I'm with you on jumping around, as I strictly play with mouse and keyboard and have zero controller experience. But from what I can gather, those are animations. The player simply gives their command to their character, and based on the action chosen the game puts in the appropriate animation. So the player isn't necessarily jumping around. Also, based on interview material, the player does get a lot of control over the party members during combat, and can issue orders to them. Or else, have the AI run them. It's our choice. But they didn't show this feature in the trailer because it's a trailer. Party size though is now down to two companions instead of three, which I'm not happy about.
That's good. I hope future gameplay videos will go into more detail about how the combat works.
As far as only having two companions, well, let's just say that none of them really excite me besides possibly Lucanis. And I sure hope he doesn't act as gay as Astarion.
Just watch, I am betting they either totally removed the desire demons or they massively re-designed them to make them more 'sanitized'. Just going by how they re-skinned everything else so far to make it more generic.
I mean you have to know that bare nipples are clearly going to upset the parents of the pre-teen children that this game is marketed towards.
It also looks like they simplified combat to make it more repetitive for players. A max of three skills/spells are available in combat, and you don't have direct control of the rest of your party.
My prediction: Fanboys will buy it, and then it will be forgotten, because it's not anything special. No awards. it won't be a cult classic, and in a year after playing it most people won't even be able to remember what it was about because it's so shallow that it won't leave an impression on anyone.
@Liarie Judging by the appearance he made in one of the short stories of Tevinter Nights, Lucanis doesn't strike me as flamboyant like that, no. The press release describes him as a poised and pragmatic Antivan Crow.
As for the rest, I liked the gameplay reveal. But I play mostly for the story, and what I like the most in the continuation of that franchise is the story, and as long as the rest is nice enough, well. In passing, they confirmed there would be nudity, at least in the romance, so... I played the previous games multiple times, and I enjoyed them all for what they were. Not that I can't understand that some are disappointed or why. I'll still be happy to play it, see what it's like. It doesn't have to appeal to everyone and be held on a pedestal to matter to me specifically. Hell, some things that are supposed to be the pinnacle of whatever elude me completely. But that's the nice thing, we can have different things for different tastes.
@Liarie Judging by the appearance he made in one of the short stories of Tevinter Nights, Lucanis doesn't strike me as flamboyant like that, no. The press release describes him as a poised and pragmatic Antivan Crow.
As for the rest, I liked the gameplay reveal. But I play mostly for the story, and what I like the most in the continuation of that franchise is the story, and as long as the rest is nice enough, well. In passing, they confirmed there would be nudity, at least in the romance, so... I played the previous games multiple times, and I enjoyed them all for what they were. Not that I can't understand that some are disappointed or why. I'll still be happy to play it, see what it's like. It doesn't have to appeal to everyone and be held on a pedestal to matter to me specifically. Hell, some things that are supposed to be the pinnacle of whatever elude me completely. But that's the nice thing, we can have different things for different tastes.
Yeah, I just put that book on my Kindle since for some reason I missed it when it released. Also he's featured in "The Wake", which I'll read after the book.
I also play Dragon Age games just for the stories and characters, even going so far as to turn on AI for every single party member including myself just to get the combat over with. My most complete trilogy playthrough I call "Mages Love Templars", and you can probably figure out who romanced who. Back when Origins came out I played a Dalish archer with a Lae'zellian attitude who romanced Zevran. I may have to play through DA2 and Inquisition just to set up that world state in preparation for Veilguard. (Unlike many, I really like DA2. Sarcastic Garrett Hawke FTW.) I know I can just set it up on the Keep, but it would be nice to have the history fresh in my mind.
Yeah, I just put that book on my Kindle since for some reason I missed it when it released. Also he's featured in "The Wake", which I'll read after the book.
I also play Dragon Age games just for the stories and characters, even going so far as to turn on AI for every single party member including myself just to get the combat over with. My most complete trilogy playthrough I call "Mages Love Templars", and you can probably figure out who romanced who. Back when Origins came out I played a Dalish archer with a Lae'zellian attitude who romanced Zevran. I may have to play through DA2 and Inquisition just to set up that world state in preparation for Veilguard. (Unlike many, I really like DA2. Sarcastic Garrett Hawke FTW.) I know I can just set it up on the Keep, but it would be nice to have the history fresh in my mind.
There's also one short story with Neve in that book, also one with Emmrich.
Yeah, my first trilogy playthrough was along those lines too, mages and templars. I also loved my rogue shenanigans one, and the elven lore one. Which I can see fitting with some of the factions we can choose at the start (among the 6 shared by the companions, minus Harding), to stay in flavour.
I love Dragon Age 2. Sarcastic Hawke, the different setting with the companions, which gives me more friends and family vibes.
Just for info, the Keep won't be used for that one, there will apparently be a way to set everything important at the start within the game.
I'm interested by Emmrich, looking forward to meeting him.
General impressions, even after the gameplay reveal: ehhhh. I'll play it and enjoy it anyway, I'm sure, but the aesthetic of the whole place being some overloaded steampunk overwatch copy doesn't convince me. It, to me, looks ugly. Most if not all of the outfit designs are... a choice. I love V Rising, but the DATV clothes remind me of an even worse version of their armor sets, which I already don't love.
@jinetmoranco Yeah, I guess I can kind of see what you mean, at least understand the steampunk (cyberpunk for others) thing. It starts in Minrathous, the capital of the Tevinter Emperium, though, so I'm willing to see how it goes, given the context. And to see the rest, other places outside Tevinter. Maybe it's just me being too nice, but I don't really mind if well done and incorporated, with the style's specifics.
In general, I also guess it depends of one's references too. I never played Overwatch, Fortnite, V Rising, for example. I'd have to google it all to understand what people saw. Again, not a big fan of Marvel movies (my only foray into related media has been old X-Men comics) and what not, since I saw those mentioned too in places.
When I watched the trailer, I saw a punchy introductions of the companions (factions and places too), some of whom I was already familiar with through other things in the franchise. And the Heroes song, which, yeah, but that still has nuances in lyrics and meaning that worked for me. I love the artwork at the end, and for some reason it reminds me of some others from the movie Dark Crystal, with a tiny pinch of Discworld (mostly for the tone, in Emmrich and is skeletal factotum). Same for Minrathous by night in the gameplay reveal, not that much of a problem for me. But, like I said, I can understand that it's my own take, and it's not the same for everyone. And, of course, Larian's style was better suited to Baldur's Gate than what Bioware has turned to.
I must say, that I do like the premisse and the setting of DAV. I'm also happy, that you can choose your faction and not be forced to play a religious figure like in the last game. I really dig the veil jumpers and the Lords of Fortune. I find some of the companion reveals interesting and no matter if I play the game or not, I will read Tevinter Nights and The Missing. As for the gameplay trailer: I liked the grittier darker look, but disliked what I saw from the combat. I heard, that most devs came from ME and that was a game trilogy, I never finished, because I didn't really like the combat system. I really hope, they don't plan on Varric getting sacrificed in that prologue. If he dies, I'm not buying the game. I had too many books, movies, games, where my favourite character died and I don't want to see it in one of my favourite gaming fandoms. I don't care, if it makes for good storytelling, leave Varric alone.
Baseline is, that back in the days, I would have preordered the game blindly, but sadly, Bioware doesn't have that bonus anymore with me. I wasn't a huge fan of DAI either and was really mad, that the ending was in a DLC, you had to buy. But mostly I disliked the empty world and the fact, you have to team up with the Andraste church, which is too close for comfort with our christian church (nodisrespect, but I'm not a huge fan of religions, but I can get on board with fantasy religions like in DnD or the elven pantheon in DA). So I will wait and see, what reviewers have to say.
"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."
@Liarie and @KlarissA, I agree with you both. I also love the DA franchise (as well the PoE, Pathfinder, and Witcher franchises) for the stories, characters, and world. And no matter what else is said about BioWare, their storytelling and character/world building have always been excellent as far as I am concerned. In all the RPGs I love, combat has always been something I viewed as that thing I had to tolerate in order to enjoy all the other things about RPGs I love so very much. And while turn-based combat is the worst, real-time combat, especially of the hack and slash variety, is not that much better. So with both Avowed and DA4, it is based on my expectations about storytelling, character development, and world building that I am so very excited for those games.
I really hope, they don't plan on Varric getting sacrificed in that prologue. If he dies, I'm not buying the game. I had too many books, movies, games, where my favourite character died and I don't want to see it in one of my favourite gaming fandoms. I don't care, if it makes for good storytelling, leave Varric alone.
Hey I'm so with you on this. I also love the Varric character, and would be seriously pissed if BioWare killed him off.
@Liarie and @KlarissA, I agree with you both. I also love the DA franchise (as well the PoE, Pathfinder, and Witcher franchises) for the stories, characters, and world. And no matter what else is said about BioWare, their storytelling and character/world building have always been excellent as far as I am concerned. In all the RPGs I love, combat has always been something I viewed as that thing I had to tolerate in order to enjoy all the other things about RPGs I love so very much. And while turn-based combat is the worst, real-time combat, especially of the hack and slash variety, is not that much better. So with both Avowed and DA4, it is based on my expectations about storytelling, character development, and world building that I am so very excited for those games.
I would agree with you on the older Bioware games, but DAI did seriously put me off. I couldn't get myself to get engaged in that game. I played it twice (with the other games I have well over 15 playthroughs under my belt) - and that only to really understand the lore behind Fen'Harel and everything. I did like some of the companions, but the world seemed dead. As for Mass Effect: I think there are a lot of elements from Babylon 5 in it (which is good in my book - Babylon 5 is the best scifi show and I die on that hill), but the combat was too shootery for me - and I tried all classes. I finally gave up mid through game 2. I heard terrible things about Anthem, but granted, I have never played it, since the premisse didn't interest me. I will make a decision about DAV, when it was reviewed - I'm a bit on teh fence, similar to you with BG3, well, maybe a bit more positive, since I still hope, the game could be up my alley. But then, it is EA and I don't have faith in them.
Edit: Varric is among my favourite alltime game characters alongside Jaheira, Beckett, Gary Golden (both from Vampire Bloodlines), Isabela and Karlach. SO him dying would be a deal breaker for me.
Last edited by fylimar; 13/06/2403:34 PM.
"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."
And no matter what else is said about BioWare, their storytelling and character/world building have always been excellent as far as I am concerned.
I suppose different strokes...
Personally, I've found Bioware's storytelling quite lacking after DAO and ME1. These initial games did well in building their worlds and telling a story. But sequels never quite performed as well.
ME2 was carried by the characters and honestly I thought ME3's writing to be absolutely garbage, full of plotholes and inconsistencies and inexplicably shallow characters...
DA2 and DAI I found to be pretty forgettable in terms of writing.
With Andromeda being utter trash.
Which is why I have little hope that DAV will be particularly well written.
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by fylimar
I really hope, they don't plan on Varric getting sacrificed in that prologue. If he dies, I'm not buying the game. I had too many books, movies, games, where my favourite character died and I don't want to see it in one of my favourite gaming fandoms. I don't care, if it makes for good storytelling, leave Varric alone.
Hey I'm so with you on this. I also love the Varric character, and would be seriously pissed if BioWare killed him off.
Varric did look fantastic in what we got to see.
Personally I'd be pleased if Varric died. I never particularly liked him as a character and very much disliked his shoehorning into the series as the main character.
But because of that I doubt he'll die. He'll live and continue to be the main character for the next titles in the series too.
I liked the original Dragon Age: Origins but somehow by the end of the game I was sort of burned out on darkspawn. One of the great things about D&D was the variety of monster types, but other than the werewolf clan, a deer, and a few demons, DA:O was dominated by darkspawn monsters. I should also mention it did have the Mad Hermit, which I had asked them for. But by the end of the game, I just felt no desire to replay or to move on to the next release in the series. I went back to NWN II.
BGIII has a good set of monsters: dragons, imps, kobolds, myconids & fungi, spiders, goblins, hobgoblins, redcaps, hags, bullette, wood woads, various devils, eagles, owlbears, oozes, lurker above, one cute frog, cats, ravens, mimics, kuo-toa, various undead, elementals, iron golem types (Grym, Bernard), oxen, gremlkin, dogs, displacer beasts, dryads, harpies, illithids, djinn, dinosaurs, and even ... a clown (shudder).
Bioware *was* top tier when it came to writing, but they haven't written anything good in over a decade. Pretty sure none of the writers for earlier DA's are still around (or at least not many). Maybe they will do a good job with the writing in DA4, but I would not use previous iterations written by different people to predict that.
Odds are pretty good the new people will have corporate riding their buttocks telling them what to do, so I have fairly low hopes for the story. On the plus side this means that it will be easy for my expectations to be exceeded.
@Liarie and @KlarissA, I agree with you both. I also love the DA franchise (as well the PoE, Pathfinder, and Witcher franchises) for the stories, characters, and world. And no matter what else is said about BioWare, their storytelling and character/world building have always been excellent as far as I am concerned. In all the RPGs I love, combat has always been something I viewed as that thing I had to tolerate in order to enjoy all the other things about RPGs I love so very much. And while turn-based combat is the worst, real-time combat, especially of the hack and slash variety, is not that much better. So with both Avowed and DA4, it is based on my expectations about storytelling, character development, and world building that I am so very excited for those games.
I would agree with you on the older Bioware games, but DAI did seriously put me off. I couldn't get myself to get engaged in that game. I played it twice (with the other games I have well over 15 playthroughs under my belt) - and that only to really understand the lore behind Fen'Harel and everything. I did like some of the companions, but the world seemed dead. As for Mass Effect: I think there are a lot of elements from Babylon 5 in it (which is good in my book - Babylon 5 is the best scifi show and I die on that hill), but the combat was too shootery for me - and I tried all classes. I finally gave up mid through game 2. I heard terrible things about Anthem, but granted, I have never played it, since the premisse didn't interest me. I will make a decision about DAV, when it was reviewed - I'm a bit on teh fence, similar to you with BG3, well, maybe a bit more positive, since I still hope, the game could be up my alley. But then, it is EA and I don't have faith in them.
Edit: Varric is among my favourite alltime game characters alongside Jaheira, Beckett, Gary Golden (both from Vampire Bloodlines), Isabela and Karlach. SO him dying would be a deal breaker for me.
I think the big reason for many people feeling this same way about DA:I was the game becoming open world. At least for me, that's what does it to give me that 'everything is empty/dead' feeling. It is why I did not care for Skyrim, and that game is the only RPG I have played that I never finished and quit half-way through. But with DA:I, if you somehow manage to get through/past the Hinterlands area, then the game becomes much less open world and much more typical RPG. The Hinterlands is what kills the game for many, and why there is now a mod to get rid of the Hinterlands except for any quests therein. And DA:TV is explicitly not open world.
@Liarie and @KlarissA, I agree with you both. I also love the DA franchise (as well the PoE, Pathfinder, and Witcher franchises) for the stories, characters, and world. And no matter what else is said about BioWare, their storytelling and character/world building have always been excellent as far as I am concerned. In all the RPGs I love, combat has always been something I viewed as that thing I had to tolerate in order to enjoy all the other things about RPGs I love so very much. And while turn-based combat is the worst, real-time combat, especially of the hack and slash variety, is not that much better. So with both Avowed and DA4, it is based on my expectations about storytelling, character development, and world building that I am so very excited for those games.
I would agree with you on the older Bioware games, but DAI did seriously put me off. I couldn't get myself to get engaged in that game. I played it twice (with the other games I have well over 15 playthroughs under my belt) - and that only to really understand the lore behind Fen'Harel and everything. I did like some of the companions, but the world seemed dead. As for Mass Effect: I think there are a lot of elements from Babylon 5 in it (which is good in my book - Babylon 5 is the best scifi show and I die on that hill), but the combat was too shootery for me - and I tried all classes. I finally gave up mid through game 2. I heard terrible things about Anthem, but granted, I have never played it, since the premisse didn't interest me. I will make a decision about DAV, when it was reviewed - I'm a bit on teh fence, similar to you with BG3, well, maybe a bit more positive, since I still hope, the game could be up my alley. But then, it is EA and I don't have faith in them.
Edit: Varric is among my favourite alltime game characters alongside Jaheira, Beckett, Gary Golden (both from Vampire Bloodlines), Isabela and Karlach. SO him dying would be a deal breaker for me.
I think the big reason for many people feeling this same way about DA:I was the game becoming open world. At least for me, that's what does it to give me that 'everything is empty/dead' feeling. It is why I did not care for Skyrim, and that game is the only RPG I have played that I never finished and quit half-way through. But with DA:I, if you somehow manage to get through/past the Hinterlands area, then the game becomes much less open world and much more typical RPG. The Hinterlands is what kills the game for many, and why there is now a mod to get rid of the Hinterlands except for any quests therein. And DA:TV is explicitly not open world.
Tbh The Hinterlands was the least problematic. A lot of the maps are pretty empty and you just want to get storyline. There were too many fetch quests and 'Close teh Rift' quests that were pretty boring. I never did finish Skyrim either . Itd didn't hold my interest. Bethesda can make beautiful worlds - I played a lot of Morrowind, with it's alien environments - but they lack in the character and story department for my taste. And the frostbite spiders didn't help either as arachnophobe tbh.
"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."
Things like collecting shards or the puzzle like things with the observatories/constellations, for example, was certainly tedious in my opinion. Same as the rifts, yes. I think my least favourite map was the Hissing Wastes, for some reasons. I liked the main missions and some specific locations more.
I also never finished Skyrim, even if I started it a few times. I had finally finished Oblivion, so I wanted to try. But every time it’s the same, I sort of get lost in a few side quests and a bit of exploration, and it becomes too much of a chore, as well as kind of filling the void my character is to me (I’ve become the boss of all the guilds and such, cool I guess). I tried to role play in different ways, but it’s just not for me. Edit : To add regarding my problem with Bethesda. I loved the two first Fallout. I really enjoyed New Vegas, which was taken care of by Obsidian. But with the third and fourth by Bethesda, it went the same way as with the Elder Scrolls for me.
Beckett, Gary Golden (both from Vampire Bloodlines), .
I adore them too! Gary Golden particularly. He's amazing. Very unrelated, but VTMB2 has misunderstood or ignored what people enjoyed about the original so grossly it's hilarious. DA4 will at least be better than that, guaranteed.
My, I certainly hope so. It’s been a while, but I had a blast with the original game. I was enthusiastic when I saw there was to be another one, then it was like stuck in limbo, and I really don’t know what to make of what I saw about what is supposed to get out late this year.
Beckett, Gary Golden (both from Vampire Bloodlines), .
I adore them too! Gary Golden particularly. He's amazing. Very unrelated, but VTMB2 has misunderstood or ignored what people enjoyed about the original so grossly it's hilarious. DA4 will at least be better than that, guaranteed.
Somebody will go broke this fall. It should at least be entertaining to watch that.
I think the big reason for many people feeling this same way about DA:I was the game becoming open world. At least for me, that's what does it to give me that 'everything is empty/dead' feeling. It is why I did not care for Skyrim, and that game is the only RPG I have played that I never finished and quit half-way through.
Open World in of itself generally isn't a problem. Quite a lot of people enjoyed Skyrim and its open world. Elden Ring is also popular with its open world. Not to mention Breath of the Wild/Tears of the Kingdom.
It's what you do with the open world that matters. In DAI the world is just scattered with a handful of repetitive tasks. With any towns being scarecely interactable (With only like 2-3 people you can properly talk to in order to pick up one of the aforementioned repetitive tasks) which leads to it feeling empty.
Skyrim had a similar problem with its overuse of generic Draugr Tombs. Though it tended to have enough unique dungeons and side quests to keep people occupied (As well as mod support so people could easily add their own content and make a plethora of changes to skills to improve replayability which is how I managed to stay engaged through 29 separate 100% completions of the game)
It's the typical "Ubisoft Syndrome" where an open world is created, but cannot be filled properly, so developers just resort to copy/pasting the same 5 activites over and over and hope people don't get bored (Which is starting to wear thin for Ubisoft themselves, with recent Assassin's Creed and Far Cry games getting less positive reviews as people are tired of this formula). Which not only creates tedium but also makes a world feel dead because unique places aren't unique, since you just go over and do the same thing you've done 100 times before.
I think the big reason for many people feeling this same way about DA:I was the game becoming open world. At least for me, that's what does it to give me that 'everything is empty/dead' feeling. It is why I did not care for Skyrim, and that game is the only RPG I have played that I never finished and quit half-way through.
Open World in of itself generally isn't a problem. Quite a lot of people enjoyed Skyrim and its open world. Elden Ring is also popular with its open world. Not to mention Breath of the Wild/Tears of the Kingdom.
It's what you do with the open world that matters. In DAI the world is just scattered with a handful of repetitive tasks. With any towns being scarecely interactable (With only like 2-3 people you can properly talk to in order to pick up one of the aforementioned repetitive tasks) which leads to it feeling empty.
Skyrim had a similar problem with its overuse of generic Draugr Tombs. Though it tended to have enough unique dungeons and side quests to keep people occupied (As well as mod support so people could easily add their own content and make a plethora of changes to skills to improve replayability which is how I managed to stay engaged through 29 separate 100% completions of the game)
It's the typical "Ubisoft Syndrome" where an open world is created, but cannot be filled properly, so developers just resort to copy/pasting the same 5 activites over and over and hope people don't get bored (Which is starting to wear thin for Ubisoft themselves, with recent Assassin's Creed and Far Cry games getting less positive reviews as people are tired of this formula). Which not only creates tedium but also makes a world feel dead because unique places aren't unique, since you just go over and do the same thing you've done 100 times before.
I never finished Skyrim, but I **DID** spend 1000 hours playing anyway. The story isn't the point with Skyrim (which is to say, I pretty much agree with the point that you are making).
Beckett, Gary Golden (both from Vampire Bloodlines), .
I adore them too! Gary Golden particularly. He's amazing. Very unrelated, but VTMB2 has misunderstood or ignored what people enjoyed about the original so grossly it's hilarious. DA4 will at least be better than that, guaranteed.
The whole Nosferatu map was great. Mitnick and Imalia are two great characters too. Yes, I don't have much hope for 2, especially since they kicked Brian Mitsoda, the mastermind behind 1. I seldom had so many memorable characters in one game. Andrei was great too and the sisters, Jeanette and Therese. Some of the best quests ever, like Ocean House. I don't think, 2 will be able to pull that up plus it was announced, that stuff will be behind a paywall, like clans ( I bet, the Malkavians will be one of them).
Sorry for the ot, but Vampire the Masquerade Bloodlines was just so good.
"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."
Beckett, Gary Golden (both from Vampire Bloodlines), .
I adore them too! Gary Golden particularly. He's amazing. Very unrelated, but VTMB2 has misunderstood or ignored what people enjoyed about the original so grossly it's hilarious. DA4 will at least be better than that, guaranteed.
The whole Nosferatu map was great. Mitnick and Imalia are two great characters too. Yes, I don't have much hope for 2, especially since they kicked Brian Mitsoda, the mastermind behind 1. I seldom had so many memorable characters in one game. Andrei was great too and the sisters, Jeanette and Therese. Some of the best quests ever, like Ocean House. I don't think, 2 will be able to pull that up plus it was announced, that stuff will be behind a paywall, like clans ( I bet, the Malkavians will be one of them).
Sorry for the ot, but Vampire the Masquerade Bloodlines was just so good.
It's my favorite videogame that I've played, I get you. I love Jeanette, Andrei and VV too (even made mods for VV and Jeanette, heh). I don't think Mitsoda was VITAL for VTMB2 to be a successful (as in, good and faithful) sequel, but understanding what people love about the game definitely was. Just the fact that their trailer focuses on (extremely bad looking) combat when... people who enjoyed VTMB didn't care at all about the also bad combat! Already says a lot. The clans you can choose are kind of baffling picks as well. Not to mention the predetermined protagonist and the dialogue wheel... that scene whose dialogue they showcased was also so goofily bad, and that's what they decided to highlight! I will still play, but every time they show more content I doubt more and more I will be able to complete it. I already had to drop VTM Swansong mid-game, and this looks just like it. DA:TV will be a masterpiece in comparison in every regard.
I think the big reason for many people feeling this same way about DA:I was the game becoming open world. At least for me, that's what does it to give me that 'everything is empty/dead' feeling. It is why I did not care for Skyrim, and that game is the only RPG I have played that I never finished and quit half-way through.
Open World in of itself generally isn't a problem. Quite a lot of people enjoyed Skyrim and its open world. Elden Ring is also popular with its open world. Not to mention Breath of the Wild/Tears of the Kingdom.
It's what you do with the open world that matters. In DAI the world is just scattered with a handful of repetitive tasks. With any towns being scarecely interactable (With only like 2-3 people you can properly talk to in order to pick up one of the aforementioned repetitive tasks) which leads to it feeling empty.
Skyrim had a similar problem with its overuse of generic Draugr Tombs. Though it tended to have enough unique dungeons and side quests to keep people occupied (As well as mod support so people could easily add their own content and make a plethora of changes to skills to improve replayability which is how I managed to stay engaged through 29 separate 100% completions of the game)
It's the typical "Ubisoft Syndrome" where an open world is created, but cannot be filled properly, so developers just resort to copy/pasting the same 5 activites over and over and hope people don't get bored (Which is starting to wear thin for Ubisoft themselves, with recent Assassin's Creed and Far Cry games getting less positive reviews as people are tired of this formula). Which not only creates tedium but also makes a world feel dead because unique places aren't unique, since you just go over and do the same thing you've done 100 times before.
Oh sure. I agree. A well done open world game can be really good. But when I said "people," what I meant was people who loved the original DA game, not gamers generally.
Honestly, after DA:O, the series sort of went downhill for me. Was never a fan of the mage/templar conflict, and it seems like that's all the series is now. the trailer look awful, the gameplay clip might as well have been any random 3rd person action game with constant talking/jokes/quips with bland action combat. The only reason people are "waiting and seeing" is because it's Dragon Age. Any other IP attached to it and it'd be a "eh, that's a gamepass release for sure".
The mage/templar conflict was a big plot point in DA:2 (a game I'm a big fan of) But it was pretty inelegantly sidelined in Inquisition. The thing that disappointed me most about the trailer, is how uninteresting Tevinter seems. With the complex political landscape already riven and pigeoned holed into crazy cult like bad guys. It was lame in Inquisition and it looks like it'll be the same here.
Oh sure. I agree. A well done open world game can be really good. But when I said "people," what I meant was people who loved the original DA game, not gamers generally.
You mean the same DA fans who complained about DA2 being too linear?
DAI being open world is likely a direct result of the massive number of complaints about DA2's linearity.
Any dislike from DA fans about DAI as such is not due to them being some sort of linear game afficionados, but from DAI's poor implementation of an open world.
Honestly, after DA:O, the series sort of went downhill for me. Was never a fan of the mage/templar conflict, and it seems like that's all the series is now. the trailer look awful, the gameplay clip might as well have been any random 3rd person action game with constant talking/jokes/quips with bland action combat. The only reason people are "waiting and seeing" is because it's Dragon Age. Any other IP attached to it and it'd be a "eh, that's a gamepass release for sure".
I've never been exceedingly in love with the original, either, if I have to be honest.
While I was glad of its existence since it was the only moment in the entire Bioware's downward trajectory that they attempted to recapture the "Baldur's Gate- style" of RPG, even that game had countless mechanical flaws, like a shallow ruleset that didn't differentiate its bestiary anywhere near enough and made the same exact strategies work without flaw regardless of who you were facing (i.e. it was a game where fear and other mental status effects worked on Undead too, for instance). In its favor, unlike the console version, the PC version also had a very competent use of the isometric camera/UI during tactical combat. And while the game's visuals were... uneven in general, when it worked it was a looker from the top down perspective for a RPG of its genre. A bit less flattering watched in third person, but you can't have everything...
Putting that aside, I do think most of the games in the series so far have had some redeeming qualities, but it's always been a matter of finding them in the middle of a lot of mediocrity. For example even Dragon Age 2 (aka "Revenge of the shit mountain") despise its notorious recycle of assets and locations and overall incredibly scarce variety had some decent parts, like some likable character arcs (and a couple of stinkers too, but hey...) and the idea to fragment the adventure over the arc of several years with occasional time skips in the middle was at least interesting, even if it could have been executed better. The combat system also wasn't too bad on a mechanical level and it was mostly the scarce variety of enemy types and the constant use of "spawning waves" that harmed it. The ending on the other hand was aggressively mediocre, and that's being charitable.
Inquisition is a game that attempted to over-correct some of the flaws of DA2 (great production value, better overall art and character design, a large variety of assets and some stunning scenarios) but conversely it's also the one that fell short the most when it comes to its pure gameplay. The combat system was ATROCIOUS (spam-centric, confusing in the least flattering way, deeply unsatisfying, poorly balanced, etc... and the quest design in general felt like something out of a MMO forced in "offline mode". Even some of the major companion quests in practical terms resolved as "wander through a few regions and click on these four spots to read a pop-up text and progress the story".
___
When it comes to this last upcoming one, it's been a rollercoaster between lows and lowers so far. The first trailer released few days ago was tonally deaf and a source of vicarious embarrassment. Then the gameplay demonstration came and for few minutes I was tentatively forgiving toward it ("The art style isn't really my thing, but watching the whole thing in movement it doesn't look too bad"). All my optimism died the moment the combat started, though.
It's not just that it's action combat with hardly any resemblance of tactics (not my preference, I'll tell you that) but it doesn't really seem to be the GOOD TYPE of action combat. Everything about it seems off. I don't like these floaty animations, I don't like its "button mashing" vibe, I don't like the hyperbolic/hyperkinetic feel of these movements nor the color-coded enemies. I can tell you that even if you are into action combat (and while not my first preference I'm absolutely open to it, for the record) this is not going to be this year's Sekiro, that's for sure.
Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
The melee action in the gameplay trailer actually looks pretty neat. A bit sluggish, but otherwise it might be similarly dynamic as god of war. The comments by companions are annoying, though. Overconfidently throwing insults.
The melee action in the gameplay trailer actually looks pretty neat.
It looks passable.
Though, the key question is always how's the skill trees going to be like. They've never been particularly good in Dragon Age games in terms of either customization or options (Especially for non-mages where you got far less "Combo" skills... Or skills at all)
Since the trailer only shows early game footage, we only see the bare bones combat (Spamming attack and having 1 skill available). We don't know much like, could we spec this Rogue into melee or ranged? Poisons and stealth? Any cool Prestige classes to unlock? etc. With also how does this compare with companions? (All the companions in this game have unique titles, does that mean they'll have unique skill trees? Or will they all have the same generic ones the player has?)
To say nothing about other classes, like the Warrior and Mage archetypes (Will there be any others?) as well as how overall combat will feel like when it comes to making a party, especially with the 2 companion limitation (Used to be you could bring a Warrior, Rogue and Mage with you to create a balanced team and then your PC will be a second of one of the archetypes. Now will you be forced to get the 3 different archetypes with your 2 party members and your own character to create a balanced team? What's the difficulty like? Will you need a Tank built Warrior and a heal focused Mage like in prior titles?)
Also, what will the non-combat gameplay be like? Is there much to explore? Is there reasons to explore? Can you talk to people? Are people worth talking to? What is equipment like? Is there much variety? Enchantment? etc.
There's a lot of concerns I have about gameplay. But I guess time will tell once more information is released.
I posted a couple of pages ago a link about an interview where the director talked a bit about the skills and the way it is supposed to work. Another link where they talk more about the mission based aspect. They elaborated a bit on some things in a Discord Q&A yesterday.
There are still the three archetypes/classes. Warrior, rogue, and mage. The companions will have things that pertain to the archetype/class that is theirs, but they will have their specific skills too. In the Q&A they explained that they wanted to reflect their history and personality in that way too. To maybe add to that, I don't know exactly how it works, but, for example, Bellara (the Veil Jumper) is in fact a mage, yet in the trailer we saw her using a bow. Neve (the detective from the Shadow Dragons) is also a mage, but she appears much more classic, and she's really specialized in ice magic.
For the protagonist rogue and the melee or ranged thing. Well, in the gameplay reveal we can already see that the rogue is sometimes able to use a bow here and there, while primarily using daggers. Rogue specializations are supposedly Duelist, Saboteur, and Veil Ranger. I'd say that Duelist might maybe go well for melee, and Veil Ranger for ranged. I don't know about poisons or stealth, or what Saboteur might entail. Edit : Yeah, after taking another look at some notes from the Q&A, there was a question about being an archer, and they answered that there was one skill tree for ranged combat for rogues, and that it would be totally viable.
For the two companions thing, they said they had tested a lot of things, and just concluded that, to them, it was the right number. So the companions could also have more visibility and presence, and so that it was not too overwhelming. There's supposed to be synergies possible in between the protagonist and the companions at certain moments too (edit : they gave an example where Bellara would cast her ability Gravity Well, with another mage’s Time Stop, and your character going for damages, possibly with something that works well on the weaknesses of the enemies).
Again, it's supposed to be mission based. They explained a bit more, that the start is pretty linear, and then it opens up more. It starts in Minrathous, in the Tevinter Imperium, but it expands to Northern Thedas more generally. From a hub, called The Lighthouse, a little bit like Skyhold in Inquisition. In the Q&A they repeated that they wanted things to be really tied to the story, even when you can explore more, return somewhere, or get to some side content. I think I remember that they also joked along the lines of "no more shards in the Hinterlands". And, from what I've heard, they have taken feedback and inputs from a lot of people while working on the game. Edit : To add that they mentioned that some locations might see changes depending on choices.
I don't remember everything. But I think they intend to divulge more (character creator, more about combat, and a few other things) in the future.
The whole premise of this thread makes no sense to me. The Bioware that made BG1 and BG2 simply doesnt exist anymore. Thus it couldnt have made BG3 either way. Or any other game.
More specifically the Bioware that made BG1 and BG2, or for that matter Knights of the Old Republic and the original Mass Effect triology, was sold to EA, and really only exist in name ever since. So, sure, EA could have made BG3 and put the "Bioware" label on it, because they own that name. But its not the same people, its not in any way the same kind or even just a related kind of company.
Just one example, the original Bioware's motto was "its done when its done". They would make great games because they would make games they themselves would like to play, and they would finish them properly. And especially in BG1 and BG2 there is some storytelling of a quality that is hard to find in games.
EA has no official motto but their maxime is clearly just capitalist profit maximization. Thats why they published money grabs like Dragon Age 2 or worse absolute trash like Mass Effect Andromeda. They arent Bioware and they destroyed what that company was. Many of the people that actually worked at Bioware left pretty quickly, especially also the founders of Bioware. The company is gone, and so is its spirit.
---
About Dragon Age, even the original game was finished only a good while after EA had already acquired Bioware, and even this original game was already deeply tainted by EA. Bioware originally wanted to make it a game that would be PC only and offered multiplayer, and certainly they didnt want to have a "free" DLC that would force you to give your private data to EA either.
Pretty much the same things happened to Mass Effect, by the way. Even if those games still turned out relatively okay, for whatever reason.
---
But I cant say that I care too much about Dragon Age either way, even if Bioware would have finished their original vision.
I havent played any other game but the original DA:O. I havent gotten the addon for DA:O, and I didnt bothered about the later games. So I dont know if it got worse after. I think I saw that the third game was supposed to be sort of okay. It still looked very much like they used the same bad rulesystem, though.
Still even the first game was already really bad.
The rulesystem designed for Dragon Age is frankly one of the competitiors for the worst rulesystem ever, with absolutely riddiculous design failures in really every area. How they designed classes was horrible. The subclass concept is nothing short retarded. The skills are godawful. The only area in which I actually liked the rulesystem was Mages. You actually got a nice variability in how to build those. So whoever designed this mess clearly had not spent much thought on how to design good rulesystems. It only doesnt get my price for worst rulesystem ever because other people have fucked up even worse.
And I also didnt like the world setting much. This whole Darkspawn thing, the other countries, none of this had much appeal. Dwarves cant be mages, oh how original. Yada yada nothing actually interesting. And dont even get me started on the weird stance on magic, was that even supposed to make any sense ?
I wasnt fan of the characters either. More tiresome stereotypes.
---
Would the original Bioware have made BG3 in the quality we've seen from Larian ? I dont think so. The passion Larian showed about BG2 is really only possible if you have great financial independence. Bioware was great, but they never became have been this great. For some reason they never archieved the degree of liberty that Larian seems to have archieved now.
Either way yes I'd love to see a BG3 from the original Bioware. Or a BG4 now. For example I'm sure they would have given us levels beyond 12 no problem. But thats of the past.
DAI being open world is likely a direct result of the massive number of complaints about DA2's linearity.
Origins also wasn't open world. Didn't hurt it much. Bioware adjusting for Inquisition is mainly the result of Bioware checking what's most popular, and adjusting accordingly. E.g. chasing market trends. As it's always been (even before EA). The only ever exception from that was arguably Origins -- meant to be a throwback and "back to the roots" to Baldur's Gate, including it's more tactical form of party-based combat.
Quote
BioWare hasn't turned a deaf ear to the criticisms players had for Dragon Age II. In a recent interview, BioWare's CEO Dr. Ray Muzyka stated that in addition to addressing those problems in the next Dragon Age, the studio is also drawing inspiration from other popular titles on the market, including Bethesda's dominating RPG, Skyrim.
No. It didn't. It also wasn't as linear as DA2. So what's your point?
Originally Posted by Sven_
Bioware adjusting for Inquisition is mainly the result of Bioware checking what's most popular, and adjusting accordingly. E.g. chasing market trends. As it's always been (even before EA).
I'm sure literally the most common complaint about DA2 being it is "Too linear" had zero impact on their decision...
Originally Posted by Sven_
Skyrim was the biggest kid on the gaming block when they sat down for Inquisition. That's it.
I mean, in the quote you mention it literally states "Bioware hasn't turned a deaf ear to the criticisms players had for Dragon Age 2"
Seemingly, they wanted to get away from the linearity of DA2 because that's what all the criticisms was about and they did so by looking at Skyrim and seeing how well received an open world game was and figured "Hey lets make an open world" because that's literally the furthest thing you can get from a linear game.
I posted a couple of pages ago a link about an interview where the director talked a bit about the skills and the way it is supposed to work. Another link where they talk more about the mission based aspect. They elaborated a bit on some things in a Discord Q&A yesterday.
There are still the three archetypes/classes. Warrior, rogue, and mage. The companions will have things that pertain to the archetype/class that is theirs, but they will have their specific skills too. In the Q&A they explained that they wanted to reflect their history and personality in that way too. To maybe add to that, I don't know exactly how it works, but, for example, Bellara (the Veil Jumper) is in fact a mage, yet in the trailer we saw her using a bow. Neve (the detective from the Shadow Dragons) is also a mage, but she appears much more classic, and she's really specialized in ice magic.
For the protagonist rogue and the melee or ranged thing. Well, in the gameplay reveal we can already see that the rogue is sometimes able to use a bow here and there, while primarily using daggers. Rogue specializations are supposedly Duelist, Saboteur, and Veil Ranger. I'd say that Duelist might maybe go well for melee, and Veil Ranger for ranged. I don't know about poisons or stealth, or what Saboteur might entail. Edit : Yeah, after taking another look at some notes from the Q&A, there was a question about being an archer, and they answered that there was one skill tree for ranged combat for rogues, and that it would be totally viable.
For the two companions thing, they said they had tested a lot of things, and just concluded that, to them, it was the right number. So the companions could also have more visibility and presence, and so that it was not too overwhelming. There's supposed to be synergies possible in between the protagonist and the companions at certain moments too (edit : they gave an example where Bellara would cast her ability Gravity Well, with another mage’s Time Stop, and your character going for damages, possibly with something that works well on the weaknesses of the enemies).
Again, it's supposed to be mission based. They explained a bit more, that the start is pretty linear, and then it opens up more. It starts in Minrathous, in the Tevinter Imperium, but it expands to Northern Thedas more generally. From a hub, called The Lighthouse, a little bit like Skyhold in Inquisition. In the Q&A they repeated that they wanted things to be really tied to the story, even when you can explore more, return somewhere, or get to some side content. I think I remember that they also joked along the lines of "no more shards in the Hinterlands". And, from what I've heard, they have taken feedback and inputs from a lot of people while working on the game. Edit : To add that they mentioned that some locations might see changes depending on choices.
I don't remember everything. But I think they intend to divulge more (character creator, more about combat, and a few other things) in the future.
Thanks for this summation. Very informative, and personally interesting.
The gameplay trailer today looked a lot better than the trailer yesterday tbh. It migh tactually be a decent game. I don't like the action fighting style, but I think, most people prefer it. And I hope it has a bit more substance than DAI. It certainly has that griettier and darker look again, which is good.
This, Dark and gritty?? I mean...sure if your under 12 years old. Take a look at Path of Exile 2, Bloodborn... I was thinking the total opposite. It now has a more Disney, Larian, purple everywhere, flashing eyes, comedy comic Overwatch look to it. Plus I think the game looks REALLY bad for a latest AAA offering. Like mobile phone blend and bad. Very blurry details and effects.
And gone is the argument...but, wait till the game release!! 99% of games nowdays you get a good idea of what your getting with their trailers/ first gameplay videos.
Last edited by Count Turnipsome; 17/06/2412:55 AM.
It just reminded me of the bowl of goat's milk that old Winthrop used to put outside his door every evening for the dust demons. He said the dust demons could never resist goat's milk, and that they would always drink themselves into a stupor and then be too tired to enter his room..
The gameplay trailer today looked a lot better than the trailer yesterday tbh. It migh tactually be a decent game. I don't like the action fighting style, but I think, most people prefer it. And I hope it has a bit more substance than DAI. It certainly has that griettier and darker look again, which is good.
This, Dark and gritty?? I mean...sure if your under 12 years old. Take a look at Path of Exile 2, Bloodborn... I was thinking the total opposite. It now has a more Disney, Larian, purple everywhere, flashing eyes, comedy comic Overwatch look to it. Plus I think the game looks REALLY bad for a latest AAA offering. Like mobile phone blend and bad. Very blurry details and effects.
And gone is the argument...but, wait till the game release!! 99% of games nowdays you get a good idea of what your getting with their trailers/ first gameplay videos.
Try to read again what I wrote: darker and grittier than DAI, which for me was pretty Disney. Plus I said, that it looked better than that first trailer, not that it looks great. I said it a few times already: I will only play that game, if reviews are good. Right now , I'm still sceptical.
"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."
Maybe that's me that's just plain stupid, but, again, I don't mind the art style I saw in the trailer and/or the gameplay reveal. What matters to me is that the dark fantasy elements were still there. And, to me, knowing that there seems to be a real continuity with Tevinter Nights (published in 2020), that was more important too. Maybe I'll be disappointed, a risk with many things, but it makes me think that they might have had a rather cohesive story in mind for a while. The snippets from all over Northern Thedas and that start to the game certainly have me curious.
Maybe that's me that's just plain stupid, but, again, I don't mind the art style I saw in the trailer and/or the gameplay reveal.
There's nothing stupid about feeling a certain way about a subjective artstyle! Personally I think the art style itself in its most technical form is fine, I don't see the problem there. I think it could age pretty quickly, though. In my case, like I've said before, it's the whole aesthetic/costume and exterior design they've gone with that I don't really vibe with.
There's nothing stupid about feeling a certain way about a subjective artstyle! Personally I think the art style itself in its most technical form is fine, I don't see the problem there. I think it could age pretty quickly, though. In my case, like I've said before, it's the whole aesthetic/costume and exterior design they've gone with that I don't really vibe with.
Yes, you're very right. I guess it's just that I feel a bit at a loss in that department, games and their art styles. First, because that's not necessarily what I focus on the most. Second, because I don't play a lot of games, I just play them a lot, so I lack a lot of references sometimes.
I had feeling that rogue were runing around like Chihuahua on cocaine. O_o
I’m comparing it against God of War and genuine beat'm'ups, and compared to those many movements in the gameplay example seem delayed, as if they had to gather strength before moving. There is a lot of jumping (which could feel great to play), but the blade movements feel like they have to cut through thick honey in the beginning.
I very rarely ever use any more than a few of the active abilities provided in games. I'd rather have a few that are really fun to use than a whole bunch that I'll never use. You also get passive abilities and abilities to use outside of combat, and all the abilities get multiple upgrades. Seems entirely reasonable.
A lot of good details on how combat can work, especially that it is entirely up to the player to decide how tactical they want to be and how much they want to get out of the combat system:
Yeah... It really sounds like this has all the hallmarks of a garbage combat system.
"Here's a nice wishy-washy and half baked solution, the worsto of both words". Well suited for people who hate tactical combat AND couldn't spot a good action combat to save their lives, probably.
Last edited by Tuco; 20/06/2404:05 PM.
Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Personally I couldn't care less about the graphics as long as the gameplay and story are good.
One thing that kind of disappointed me, even though I expected it, is how they're dealing with what happened in previous games. Sounds like they're doing away with the Keep or whatever it's called that kept track of what you did.
It probably would've been too difficult to keep track of the minute details but I and probably others will wonder what happened to so and so from previous games.
A lot of good details on how combat can work, especially that it is entirely up to the player to decide how tactical they want to be and how much they want to get out of the combat system:
Yeah... It really sounds like this has all the hallmarks of a garbage combat system.
"Here's a nice wishy-washy and half baked solution, the worsto of both words". Well suited for people who hate tactical combat AND couldn't spot a good action combat to save their lives, probably.
I do agree. I didn't like the DAI system and it gave you 8 skills at least - and it was still not enough for me. I hate it, that they simplified it even more. I'm pretty afraid this will become a ME clone combat wise - and that is not, what I want in a game like DA.
"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."
Personally I couldn't care less about the graphics as long as the gameplay and story are good.
One thing that kind of disappointed me, even though I expected it, is how they're dealing with what happened in previous games. Sounds like they're doing away with the Keep or whatever it's called that kept track of what you did.
It probably would've been too difficult to keep track of the minute details but I and probably others will wonder what happened to so and so from previous games.
I agree completely. It was so fun to randomly come across the results of your past actions in a new game.
Now there won't be any surprises because we're pretty much filling out a form first.
That really looks like garbage. They said the same thing about DA:I (just as tactical as you want it to be) but that game gave me a migraine whenever I tried to position my team tactically.
Not gonna say never... but I won't be pre-ordering this, and I will probably not be buying it at all until 2025 or 2026, after enough people have played it that I can get a sense of it that isn't tainted by hype.
I dunno about that. There seems to be 3 quickslot skills, but in the gameplay reveal they opened up their skill wheel during combat and it had room for far more than 3 skills.
How that actually plays out... I don't know. But it at least looked like you could swap in skills on the fly (If not directly use additional skills from the wheel)
I'm sure I won't care for the combat, but eh, I already feel like so many games don't need a combat system since it just feels (to me) like a drag inbetween the interesting bits. BG3 is an exception since I do actually enjoy the combat there, but generally, I separate games I value for its gameplay and games I value for its story and for the latter I usually just wish there was a way to skip combat entirely. I don't play DMC5 for its story and I don't play VTMB for its combat.
DA2's combat actually felt worse than DAO's to me. What a miserable experience to go through. It felt like they were adding filler by spamming the same enemies every night, it was horrible. It doesn't help that I hated the rest of that game. DAI's was much more comfortable than its predecessors if only because it was pretty straightforward, to me.
A lot of good details on how combat can work, especially that it is entirely up to the player to decide how tactical they want to be and how much they want to get out of the combat system:
Yeah... It really sounds like this has all the hallmarks of a garbage combat system.
"Here's a nice wishy-washy and half baked solution, the worsto of both words". Well suited for people who hate tactical combat AND couldn't spot a good action combat to save their lives, probably.
Well, I'll just say this and leave it at that: as far as I am concerned, Bioware (or any other RPG developer) couldn't possibly create a combat system worse than the BG3 combat system, and as such if BG3's combat system can be tolerated then so can DA4's system.
Personally I couldn't care less about the graphics as long as the gameplay and story are good.
One thing that kind of disappointed me, even though I expected it, is how they're dealing with what happened in previous games. Sounds like they're doing away with the Keep or whatever it's called that kept track of what you did.
It probably would've been too difficult to keep track of the minute details but I and probably others will wonder what happened to so and so from previous games.
I agree completely. It was so fun to randomly come across the results of your past actions in a new game.
Now there won't be any surprises because we're pretty much filling out a form first.
They explained this by noting that because the game release time gaps between the games is so large it is very difficult to create a system to accurately read data from saves that old, created on very different game systems and engines. And furthermore, most people won't still have old saves anyway (I don't, for example). Seems reasonable to me.
Like I said I understand why they didn't do it. But it's not about having saves. They have a website Dragon Age Keep that kept track of your choices back to the first game.
And seeing how Varric is still in it and has been since the second game it would've been natural for me and others to ask about the characters from that game.
A lot of good details on how combat can work, especially that it is entirely up to the player to decide how tactical they want to be and how much they want to get out of the combat system:
Yeah... It really sounds like this has all the hallmarks of a garbage combat system.
"Here's a nice wishy-washy and half baked solution, the worsto of both words". Well suited for people who hate tactical combat AND couldn't spot a good action combat to save their lives, probably.
Well, I'll just say this and leave it at that: as far as I am concerned, Bioware (or any other RPG developer) couldn't possibly create a combat system worse than the BG3 combat system, and as such if BG3's combat system can be tolerated then so can DA4's system.
You are of course welcome to your opinion, but IMO Bioware has repeatedly created combat systems that are inferior to BG3, and its not even close. Even their best games had mediocre combat. I loved BG1 and 2, but the combat was not great. Kotor was awesome, but the combat was mostly just an exercise in face rolling. Jade Empire: awesome game, terrible combat (this was Bioware combat at its nadir imo). Dragon Age Origins had combat that I enjoyed, but even there it had flaws (and I like BG3 better). After DA:O party based combat has experienced strict decline.
I get that you really hate BG3, but I am struggling to relate to your claim here.
DA:I was the first Bioware game that I was unable to finish, primarily due to the degree to which I loathed the combat.
I get that you really hate BG3, but I am struggling to relate to your claim here.
It's pretty easy to see actually:
Originally Posted by kanisatha
And while turn-based combat is the worst
They simply dislike turn based combat (And apparently real-time combat... So seemingly they hate all combat?)
As BG3's combat is turn based, it's natural they would dislike it.
Personally, the only kind of combat I dislike is RTwP, I think it's an abhorrent design that simply takes the worst aspects of turn based and real time and mashes them together into a terrible and frustrating experience (Though, this happens to be the "Classic" CRPG combat which leaves my desire to replay classics like BG1 and BG2 very much lacking)
Outside of that, TB or Real Time (In various forms) is mostly fine. Depending on how it's done. Most games don't particularly do either spectacularly (Though some modern games have been improving on turn based and mitigating one of the main complaints about the format by having all enemy characters act at the same time thus speeding up combat as a whole)
There were quite a few cRPG's prior to BG1 and BG2 that used turn based combat, so I do not think it is correct to call RTwP "classic" crpg combat. RTwP was more like a chapter in the story of cRPG rather than a full volume.
Examples: Wizardy (all of them), Might and Magic (all of them), Ultima I through V.
EDIT: actually, might and magic 6 through 8 had a hybrid turn base and real time system, but you could run it mostly turn based if so inclined.
There were quite a few cRPG's prior to BG1 and BG2 that used turn based combat, so I do not think it is correct to call RTwP "classic" crpg combat. RTwP was more like a chapter in the story of cRPG rather than a full volume.
Hence the quotations around "Classic"
It was used for some popular old titles and is what's used by more modern titles that attempt to be throwbacks to "Classic" CRPG's (With titles like Tyranny, Pillars of Eternity, DA:O etc)
They tend to look at the BG1/2 and NWN era where there was more RTwP and use that as their basis for their systems. Even if there was TB before and after it's usually an afterthought for their design... (PoE2 did eventually add in TB mode for example. But was initially only RTwP and PoE1 remains entirely RTwP)
Regarding the combat, I'm eager to give it a try and see for myself. But, since combat is not my priority in games, I only care that it's not too hard to handle or tedious/boring. Still subjective goals, though. I've tried various types, and it mostly has been fine, so we'll see with that game.
Regarding the keep, I understand the concerns. For the most part, I've seen people bothered by a restriction in the number of things to choose for, or for the spoilers it could provide when recapitulating in the beginning. Yet, I can understand that they went with that, I guess. It's set in Northern Thedas, 10 years or so after Inquisition. I don't expect that a great many choices in previous games are really relevant here. And there are maybe other technical aspects. For example, I'm not really sad to not have to use an online intermediary linked to an EA account (my personal preference).
As for the Keep as I said I didn't really expect them to include much or anything.
But they didn't have to put past characters in the game at all. They could've just mentioned them like they did in Inquisition. As I said Varric is still there so you could've asked about Merrill or Aveline for example.
@ Veilburner I'm going to precise one thing, because it seems to me you think that they didn't replace the keep with anything, so sorry if I misunderstood you. We won't be able to use the keep for this one, yes. But we will be able to choose certain things regarding past games at the start (Corinne Busche calls it a sort of "previously on Dragon Age"). We just don't know right now what those choices will be related to.
Regarding the keep, I understand the concerns. For the most part, I've seen people bothered by a restriction in the number of things to choose for, or for the spoilers it could provide when recapitulating in the beginning. Yet, I can understand that they went with that, I guess. It's set in Northern Thedas, 10 years or so after Inquisition. I don't expect that a great many choices in previous games are really relevant here. And there are maybe other technical aspects. For example, I'm not really sad to not have to use an online intermediary linked to an EA account (my personal preference).
I also think this system is much more convenient, I was relieved to hear the news, and I'm not exactly a DA superfan so I've got no reason to be (maybe THAT'S why I'm relieved). Yeah, it spoils that it'll need that info for the game so you can assume you'll see consequences to those choices specifically, and the fact that you have to make your inquisitor means you will see them, but that's par for the course. That it appears in the game doesn't necessarily mean it's important, though. See how Leliana in DAI would speak differently about the Warden depending on if she was romanced by them or not. I loved that detail but I wouldn't call it vital. With many of the choices we will have to specify, I'll try to go in thinking they will be minor details just to try and be surprised if they're not.
@ Veilburner I'm going to precise one thing, because it seems to me you think that they didn't replace the keep with anything, so sorry if I misunderstood you. We won't be able to use the keep for this one, yes. But we will be able to choose certain things regarding past games at the start (Corinne Busche calls it a sort of "previously on Dragon Age"). We just don't know right now what those choices will be related to.
Oh I know they have something else to take its place. It's just not as in depth or detailed. Maybe I'm wrong.
Well, I'll just say this and leave it at that: as far as I am concerned, Bioware (or any other RPG developer) couldn't possibly create a combat system worse than the BG3 combat system, and as such if BG3's combat system can be tolerated then so can DA4's system.
Yeah, as far as I'm concerned, they never made one even remotely as good, on the other hand. An even their best efforts (BG2) have been outside of the Dragon Age franchise, anyway.
And I say this even as someone who had PLENTY to criticize about BG3 (and Larian's way to design some aspects of their games in general) during three years of EA, as half of my forum history here proves.
Just because you have a hate-boner for turn-based tactics it doesn't mean it's objectively bad.
Last edited by Tuco; 22/06/2412:18 PM.
Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Yeah, I don't think, combat is Biowares strong suite. It was ok in BG and maaaybe in DAO, but the rest is not very good. I don't care too much, if the story is good, but after DAI, I stay sceptic tbh.
"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."
I get that you really hate BG3, but I am struggling to relate to your claim here.
It's pretty easy to see actually:
Originally Posted by kanisatha
And while turn-based combat is the worst
They simply dislike turn based combat (And apparently real-time combat... So seemingly they hate all combat?)
As BG3's combat is turn based, it's natural they would dislike it.
Yes this, mostly. I generally dislike combat in RPGs, but do not hate it. But I do very strongly dislike TB combat, and do consider BG3's combat to be mediocre. And I will even say that I consider TB combat systems to be objectively bad. The worst RT(wP) systems are still way better than the best TB systems.
I also need to set the record straight here on something else. I don't "hate" BG3. Yes it's possible I may have phrased it that way in a post here or there, but that's purely rhetorical and figurative. I strongly dislike certain aspects of BG3, but don't hate the game as a whole. That word "hate" is used far too loosely in today's society, and that bothers me greatly. "Hate" is a very powerful word, and should be used sparingly so that it doesn't lose its impact when used in appropriate contexts.
This also means I most certainly do not hate Larian (or their devs). I definitely consider their writing to be poor/lame, but in general I do believe Larian is a game studio that genuinely strives for innovation, and I like that about them very much. And I continue to hold out the hope that some day they will make a game that I like and which I will thoroughly enjoy playing.
I also need to set the record straight here on something else. I don't "hate" BG3. Yes it's possible I may have phrased it that way in a post here or there, but that's purely rhetorical and figurative. I strongly dislike certain aspects of BG3, but don't hate the game as a whole. That word "hate" is used far too loosely in today's society, and that bothers me greatly. "Hate" is a very powerful word, and should be used sparingly so that it doesn't lose its impact when used in appropriate contexts.
This also means I most certainly do not hate Larian (or their devs). I definitely consider their writing to be poor/lame, but in general I do believe Larian is a game studio that genuinely strives for innovation, and I like that about them very much. And I continue to hold out the hope that some day they will make a game that I like and which I will thoroughly enjoy playing.
I think, people like different things. In general, there is no right or wrong. Either a story or a character speaks to you or not. My favourite DA game is actually 2, because I liked Hawke, I liked the general story and the npcs were pretty strong, even the unlikeable. Many people would not see it that way and that is absolutely ok.
I like, that smaller studios like Larian or the Elden Ring studio are successful and getting more attention and that they use that to put the fingers on the problems of the modern gaming industry.
"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."
For those of you who like the DA games, all three are on 90% off sale on Steam. I picked up all three for $10 so I can have them in my Steam library and not have to care about the Origin app anymore.
For those of you who like the DA games, all three are on 90% off sale on Steam. I picked up all three for $10 so I can have them in my Steam library and not have to care about the Origin app anymore.
I was thinking to do that and thanks for reminding me. Though I might go through GOG, because then I don't have to use the EA apps. I wasn't able to play a game outside of DA2 the last years, since that stupid app just won't work and the support is less than helpful. ANd GOG has them on sale too and according to a friend, you don't have to use the app, at least not for DAO and DA2.
"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."
For those of you who like the DA games, all three are on 90% off sale on Steam. I picked up all three for $10 so I can have them in my Steam library and not have to care about the Origin app anymore.
Thanks so much for the heads up! I would have to forego my preorder elk mount for Inquisition, but I hate the EA app so much that this makes up for it.
I get that you really hate BG3, but I am struggling to relate to your claim here.
It's pretty easy to see actually:
Originally Posted by kanisatha
And while turn-based combat is the worst
They simply dislike turn based combat (And apparently real-time combat... So seemingly they hate all combat?)
As BG3's combat is turn based, it's natural they would dislike it.
Yes this, mostly. I generally dislike combat in RPGs, but do not hate it. But I do very strongly dislike TB combat, and do consider BG3's combat to be mediocre. And I will even say that I consider TB combat systems to be objectively bad. The worst RT(wP) systems are still way better than the best TB systems.
Bg3 is the best in turn-based combat - but if you don't like TB combat so be it.
Elden Ring (Dark Souls) is the best in Real time combat. But if you don't like RT combat so be it.
So that leaves Disco Elysium then? Detroit: Become Human? Those two would be the best in no combat, pure RPG.
Honestly, I don't think that ethnically, BG3 is all hat amazing as a turn based game. I find Solasta to be way more satisfying as a gameplay experience. Wrath of the Righteous is pretty good but not the best as turn based. But I like it a lot, still.
Yeah, I wouldn't call either BG3 nor Elden Ring the epitome of their respective genres...
BG3 is pretty non-standout as far as TB goes. It doesn't do anything noteworthy, it is simply just a generic TB system with a rough DnD 5e basis. Not much different to the likes of Kingmaker, Wrath of the Righteous or Solasta.
Personally, I found PoE2 to be a more mechanically interesting TB system (With the caveat of spell casting times).
To say nothing of JRPG style TB systems like FFX, Octopath Traveler, Eiyuden Chronicles or even Pokemon.
Then in regards to Elden Ring... Honestly out of the Souls series I'd put Demon's Souls and Dark Souls 2 above Elden Ring mechanically. All ER has for an edge is its open world gameplay wise.
But then in terms of Soulslikes you have things like Nioh and Sekiro which are simply more mechanically interesting than the Souls series.
Again, with other styles of RT combat such as Monster Hunter, Shadow of the Colossus, God of War, Devil May Cry, the Arkham games, that recent Spider-Man game that was a huge hit (I forget what it was called).
Honestly, I don't think that ethnically, BG3 is all hat amazing as a turn based game. I find Solasta to be way more satisfying as a gameplay experience. Wrath of the Righteous is pretty good but not the best as turn based. But I like it a lot, still.
Wrath and Kingmaker have tons of atmosphere and interesting characters while BG3 has neither of that.
And yes, Solasta>>>BG3 for turn based combat (extra comparable because of the same rules). I haven't tried Rogue Trader yet for another comparison
Origin App is another reason to be wary of the new DA.
The only good thing I can say about it is that it isn't Ubisoft Connect.
They’ve announced that the game will be entirely playable offline, with no need to link to the EA account. They apparently had a lot of feedback from people who were not interested in such a thing. And that’s in part why the keep we could connect to, to register choices from previous games, will not function here. They opted for a built in solution at the start of the game so that we can precise aspects of our world state.
Honestly, I don't think that ethnically, BG3 is all hat amazing as a turn based game. I find Solasta to be way more satisfying as a gameplay experience. Wrath of the Righteous is pretty good but not the best as turn based. But I like it a lot, still.
Yeah, I've played Solasta, it's petty good. It has a fairly long list of problems. No Replay-ability, bad multiplayer, bad voice and graphics, the story is pretty sub-par. It's very expensive with all the DLC (which I get, they need to fund operations and have a much smaller player base)
My biggest problem with BG3 is that the only module they have for it is BG3 and it's pretty bad for multiplayer. We don't have cross play or modding yet, and Act 3 is undercooked, and ACT 2 feels claustrophobic and is incredibly hostile to multiplayer.
ACT 1 is great though, almost perfect. I like EA Bg3 more than full release BG3.
ACT 1 is great though, almost perfect. I like EA Bg3 more than full release BG3.
I'm biased but because of the burnout I got from playing EA so many times I kind of hate Act 1 now because I know it like the back of my hand. Plus the plot is at its most uninteresting there IMO.
I'm biased but because of the burnout I got from playing EA so many times I kind of hate Act 1 now because I know it like the back of my hand. Plus the plot is at its most uninteresting there IMO.
I'd honestly disagree.
Act 1 is the only time in the game where the plot is actually remotely decent.
The whole "Tadpole in brain is bad. Lets find a way to remove it" is simple, but effective. It provides good reason to get involved with things and you're not bogged down the terrible knowledge that the whole tadpole/artifact fiasco is a literary landfill full of poorly written characters and badly realized plot points...
For those of you who like the DA games, all three are on 90% off sale on Steam. I picked up all three for $10 so I can have them in my Steam library and not have to care about the Origin app anymore.
I was thinking to do that and thanks for reminding me. Though I might go through GOG, because then I don't have to use the EA apps. I wasn't able to play a game outside of DA2 the last years, since that stupid app just won't work and the support is less than helpful. ANd GOG has them on sale too and according to a friend, you don't have to use the app, at least not for DAO and DA2.
Yes needing to go through the Origin app even when playing from Steam is ridiculous. But at least this way, if EA ever goes away, I'll still have the games in my Steam library, alongside all my other games. If all my games were in GOG, then yeah I too would go with GOG.
Also, it's my understanding that you can play DA:O without needing the EA app because it predates EA creating Origin. And yes, it's been confirmed that DA4 will be playable offline.
They simply dislike turn based combat (And apparently real-time combat... So seemingly they hate all combat?)
As BG3's combat is turn based, it's natural they would dislike it.
Yes this, mostly. I generally dislike combat in RPGs, but do not hate it. But I do very strongly dislike TB combat, and do consider BG3's combat to be mediocre. And I will even say that I consider TB combat systems to be objectively bad. The worst RT(wP) systems are still way better than the best TB systems.
Bg3 is the best in turn-based combat - but if you don't like TB combat so be it.
Elden Ring (Dark Souls) is the best in Real time combat. But if you don't like RT combat so be it.
So that leaves Disco Elysium then? Detroit: Become Human? Those two would be the best in no combat, pure RPG.
I've been okay with the combat in the old BG games, the IwD and NwN games, the PoE games, the Pathfinder games, and yes even the DA games. I also was okay with the TB combat of T:ToN and especially Solasta. Seems you just can't (or refuse to) get my nuanced point about combat in RPGs, which to repeat for the millionth time is that it is something I am willing to tolerate for the sake of enjoying all the other aspects of RPGs. In most games I simply dial down the difficulty setting so that I can breeze through combat encounters. This works just fine for me (assuming the game allows for dialing down combat difficulty) since my sense of my self-worth is not even in the slightest tied to masochistic combat difficulty in a game.
I'm biased but because of the burnout I got from playing EA so many times I kind of hate Act 1 now because I know it like the back of my hand. Plus the plot is at its most uninteresting there IMO.
I'd honestly disagree.
Act 1 is the only time in the game where the plot is actually remotely decent.
The whole "Tadpole in brain is bad. Lets find a way to remove it" is simple, but effective.
To be fair, I think the difference might be that to me the setting/landscape? matters a lot. (I've seen that most people dislike the Sharran trials but the place is really awesome so I'm just happy to be there. Reminds me of how happy I was to be in the Dimitrescu castle in RE8. I extended that a lot just to do nothing and look at the place.)And standard nature mumbojumbo bores me. The hatred I hold for the Tieflings and the Druids is insurmountable, especially after playing through that whole ordeal so many times. I found out so late you're supposed to tell Rolan to stay, because I just avoided talking to the tieflings altogether. I dislike the approach that I can talk to anyone because that means I don't know who has actually relevant stuff to say, and when 90% of them just say things like "Huh nice weather eh?" I just decide to ignore everyone instead of wasting my time.
I think Act 2 is the best act. It's got more striking aesthetics and is more contained, and doesn't seem rushed. I think Act 3 has very good moments, but suffers from rushing, particularly during the last battle, which is in its entirety fundamentally a mess. I feel like Raphael's fight would make for a better final battle. The way the 2 main villains (Orin, Gortash) are dealt with and explored as characters is also fundamentally flawed at its very base. A good example to me of them working with the time restraints in Act 3 without failing is Astarion's quest: it's clearly been rushed, there are inconsistencies, and content has very obviously been chopped, but despite that the execution still works really well and comes across. Could it have been better? Sure, but we'll never know, and this version still works really well. Despite me knowing about the extent of the datamined content of his original quest, I remember not even remembering about it for a couple days and just being impressed. Can't say the same for Wyll or Gale's quest.
I'm biased but because of the burnout I got from playing EA so many times I kind of hate Act 1 now because I know it like the back of my hand. Plus the plot is at its most uninteresting there IMO.
I'd honestly disagree.
Act 1 is the only time in the game where the plot is actually remotely decent.
The whole "Tadpole in brain is bad. Lets find a way to remove it" is simple, but effective. It provides good reason to get involved with things and you're not bogged down the terrible knowledge that the whole tadpole/artifact fiasco is a literary landfill full of poorly written characters and badly realized plot points...
Exactly, you can explore, there isn't really any time limit unless you start a sequence of events. It's an open world, with lots of secrets and hidden bits of information. You have lots of paths to choose and ways forward. There are decent challenges, and you can do some really insane stuff. I love Act 1.
Originally Posted by jinetemoranco
Originally Posted by Blackheifer
ACT 1 is great though, almost perfect. I like EA Bg3 more than full release BG3.
I'm biased but because of the burnout I got from playing EA so many times I kind of hate Act 1 now because I know it like the back of my hand. Plus the plot is at its most uninteresting there IMO.
Pfft, of my 4,000 hours in this game about 3,000 is in Act 1. Still love it.
Given the modding tools Act 1 is a template for how an adventure should be built and I hope we get the chance to do that. Because as predicted Bg3 is dying off - people in single player land have moved on to the next shiny thing. But since Larian didn't invest in multiplayer properly it doesn't have the longevity of Neverwinter Nights - so no community is being built around long term multiplayer modding and modules.
It's fine, I don't think they had a lot of good choices here but Patch 7 and the handful of modding tools may be too little too late.
Veering between BG3 and DA4: BG3-I wonder if everything (whole game) had been included in the EA, the quality of all three acts would have improved, not just Act I (which I enjoy most)? DA4-I watched the gameplay trailer yesterday. It didn't feel like a game, it felt more like a Make Your Own Adventure book translated into a movie instead of a book. Was that just me?
People call crpg's Choose Your Own Adventure because of the way the narrative branches apart and then is twisted back together, often inelegantly. The few minutes of gameplay we've seen from DA4, reveals almost nothing about what the narrative will be like. The combat seems to be a more streamlined rendition of the already hyper-streamlined version of the last game. But for anything else, we'd be extrapolating about the game a lot of things from essentially the Nautiloid tutorial level.
I think BG3 was in development for too long, long enough that the scope of the game was expanded, then had to be cut back in order to ship the game. They rewrote Wyll from scratch, a whole section of Baldur's Gate was left on the cutting room floor, and we can see the artifacts of older narrative choices throughout the game, but especially where the narrative hits rough patches. The reason the EA was so big is probably the same reason for this mission creep. Covid. They'd already made so much money from the EA alone, they probably felt safer working on the game for as long as they did, on the whole it made a terrific game, but I'm not sure giving more of it for us to bugtest would have addressed the problems in the later Acts. I could be wrong, I am curious to know what this forum would have been like if we'd gone through the second act with the same fine toothed comb as we did Act I.
Veering between BG3 and DA4: BG3-I wonder if everything (whole game) had been included in the EA, the quality of all three acts would have improved, not just Act I (which I enjoy most)? DA4-I watched the gameplay trailer yesterday. It didn't feel like a game, it felt more like a Make Your Own Adventure book translated into a movie instead of a book. Was that just me?
For your first question, about BG3, I don't know. I tend to like act 1 and 2 more than act 3. I consider the EA alone a good spending of my money, no matter the criticisms I might have had in mind with the full game. I imagine that, yes, having been able to work like that for act 1 in EA, with feedback, might have helped a lot. But it was also the start of the game, the story, a narrower scope. I find act 2 very good too, maybe because it's still very focused, on Ketheric and Moonrise. Same for the revelations and objectives, I think. And the totally different atmosphere is nice. Would the rest have benefited from the same EA treatment, maybe. Would it have been possible, don't know. The writing and the ideas for how to bring things in motion and to conclusion are important. I find act 3 more all over the place, and I don't know exactly to what extent feedback could have helped there.
For DA4, I don't know what to say to you (it's very subjective ?), but no, I didn't have the same impression. I mean, I kind of understand what you're saying, but not that much in fact. Different tone, visual style, and choice of point of focus to expose, but I, for example, don't find it too dissimilar to the trailers for BG3 I've seen. In that it felt movie like with its editing from scenes from the game. Emphasis on you as the hero (like the one with Jaheira talking), and cue to funny moments (I think it's in the same one that there's a poor flying Barcus with an Astarion comment). As for the Make Your Own Adventure book reference, well, at least it's on brand ? I really didn't mind it, honestly. And I like that they focused on Rook and his companions for the Veilguard. It allows to take a look at various places we'll travel to, at various factions we'll meet, and to recall some lore, through them and their segment. While emphasizing on something that many people enjoy in a DA game, the group of people you're facing things with. At the same time, it doesn't go too in depth regarding the plot, which is not a bad thing in my opinion. But, at the same time, I've played the previous games, enjoyed them, and read the short stories and comics in between. So that might influence my perception of things, and it might be difficult to get something out of the trailer otherwise.
No problem there, a lot of people apparently thought the same. I was just trying to acknowledge my own bias (it was totally fine with my own expectations and personal tastes). I know that many found the gameplay trailer better.
They talked about the presence of nudity in the interviews and articles I read at the time the trailer dropped. But yes, Game Informer talked a bit more about it (among other things) recently.
I will say, their CC sounds great from what they teased. The characters they've showcased made in the CC finally look good (ahem... DAI had um... issues)
I'm copypasting the info from a twitter that keeps reporting on DATV:
New Dragon Age Veilguard Character Creator details 🺠▫ï¸Vitiligo slider â–«ï¸A TON of long hair options â–«ï¸4 different lighting options - purple hue, bright tropical day, and gothic night â–«ï¸40 different complexions - smooth, rugged, youthful, and freckled skin tones â–«ï¸Cool and warm skin tone options Melanin slider â–«ï¸Undergarments with or w/o nudity â–«ï¸Cataracts options â–«ï¸Several ear options even including cauliflower â–«ï¸30+ make up options, there's even glitter â–«ï¸Tattoos can go anywhere on Rook's body â–«ï¸40+ options for qunari horns â–«ï¸4 voices with voice pitches â–«ï¸she/her he/him they/them options separate from gender â–«ï¸sliders for just about everything
Yes, it seems pretty solid. They hinted that we might have a little presentation at some point, if I remember correctly. I also like the fact that we might be able to adjust height and body shape. And I personally find the possibility to have different lighting options very useful. I have bad memories of DAI (with the green light from the fade right at the start), and other games.
I will say, their CC sounds great from what they teased. The characters they've showcased made in the CC finally look good (ahem... DAI had um... issues)
I'm copypasting the info from a twitter that keeps reporting on DATV:
New Dragon Age Veilguard Character Creator details 🺠▫ï¸Vitiligo slider â–«ï¸A TON of long hair options â–«ï¸4 different lighting options - purple hue, bright tropical day, and gothic night â–«ï¸40 different complexions - smooth, rugged, youthful, and freckled skin tones â–«ï¸Cool and warm skin tone options Melanin slider â–«ï¸Undergarments with or w/o nudity â–«ï¸Cataracts options â–«ï¸Several ear options even including cauliflower â–«ï¸30+ make up options, there's even glitter â–«ï¸Tattoos can go anywhere on Rook's body â–«ï¸40+ options for qunari horns â–«ï¸4 voices with voice pitches â–«ï¸she/her he/him they/them options separate from gender â–«ï¸sliders for just about everything
Ah yes, the essentials for an RPG. What about story and plot, party-size, number of available companions, races, classes, skills, meaningful choices? Most of that CC is common fodder these days there is nothing really new. Hell, many games have mods which can do all that. For me DA4 was always facing an uphill battle just for featuring that pompous, baldy-bap arsehole Solas.
As you can see with BG3, as long as you get the shippers on board you do not need story, choices or mechanics. You just need a bunch of naked people the players can stare at while writing nsfw fanfiction.
You guys make it sound like we have to hate everything all the time. I don't even think DATV is going to be good, and I've said as much on this thread. Sometimes it's okay to preemptively say "this specific feature sounds good on paper!" without going "but what about everything else? That's probably going to be terrible."
Yeah… Honestly I find it quite amusing to try to have a conversation when people seem to focus on one thing in one or two last posts, and do as if the rest of the conversation had never happened.
I don’t think it’s bad, or has to be described in a certain way, if people positively notice one aspect of a game. And in previous messages I talked about story, choices and what not, because they’ve also started elaborating on other things. I also talked about forays on other media in between games. And that’s why I put the “among other things†when answering about the nudity thing in the coverage by Game Informer.
I get being cautious, critical, not liking something in part or totality, not being enthusiastic, whatever. Yet, I’ll admit I’m a bit perplexed here, regarding what it is that you’re in fact trying to convey.
Anyway, I’m still enthusiastic about DA4’s release, and discovering more about all its aspects for myself (since it’s a bit more difficult as long as it’s not out). And I’ll repeat that I think it’s cool there are lots of things on offer for various people and various tastes.
Well, Dragons Dogma 2 had a very robust character creation system... and look what happened there (Atleast the combat was mostly good).
I guess the negativitiy has to do with how DAVs marketing is mostly focused on Romances/Nudity/CC/etc, and abit of combat rather than, say, more info on classes and how high level combat looks/works, how does companion dynamics work out if they only get skill points based on your ?good? relationship with them, are there branching narratives and choices? Perhaps they can't or I've missed something.
One thing I found interesting is it's indepth difficulty settings which includes a no Death option, which sounds like an odd choice tbh.
---- Otherwise, personally, it's hard to care when the "important" aspects they have shown off just don't look that interesting, which includes:
How the combat looks like a rather boring left click spam, with occasional use of 5? abilities (3 on MC, 1 per companion) on a set cooldown of upwards of 2 minutes.
The pivot from a focus on stopping Solas to a companion focused narrative doesn't look super appealing, mostly given that I've only liked a few Bioware companions, although theres always atleast 1 per Bioware game. Companion interaction, dialogue choices and leveling might also be abit hamstrung if they only get skill points if you choose the options they like.
Maybe it won't be as bad as I've read/heard and hopefully the consequences seen in the gameplay trailer and soundtrack make up for whatever shortcomings it might have. ----
Also, completely unrelated, but I just have to say:
Originally Posted by fylimar
Babylon 5 is the best scifi show and I die on that hill
I guess the negativitiy has to do with how DAVs marketing is mostly focused on Romances/Nudity/CC/etc, and abit of combat rather than, say, more info on classes and how high level combat looks/works, how does companion dynamics work out if they only get skill points based on your ?good? relationship with them, are there branching narratives and choices? Perhaps they can't or I've missed something.
Thats sadly the BG3 effect. Larian made money by delivering a broken game and instead catering exclusively to fanfiction writer and shippers by sexualizing everything. So now other companies copy that as its easier to render vaginas than make interesting combat systems.
I honestly don't know if they mostly focus on romances, nudity, or the character creator. Most of the infos at the moment seem to come from the articles in Game Informers and a few interviews here and there. It seems to me that a few things got more traction because of people buzzing about them (recently I've seen an interest on the difficulty settings and the nudity).
I know kanisatha posted a link regarding the combat, there was something else about the classes and factions. I don't know if it's useful or anything, but I'll still put the links here :
Regarding the difficulty settings, including the no death option, I only see it as a welcome attempt at being inclusive. Certain people can have disabilities and such that prevent them from playing as effectively as others. Some are just in for the story and do not like combats that much. If it helps people experiencing something in good conditions from their perspective, while not bothering other players, I think it can be a fine tool.
They should apparently show more before release (I think they talked about the character creator, but also more about combat).
I do not mind that stopping Solas is not so much important at the moment. I think that, most of all with the 10 years delay in between games, it makes sense to take care of more pressing bad guys (since Solas put the veil in place for a reason in the first place). And I like the focus on companions because they also represent the places and factions, with their respective lore, we're going to interact with. But again, like I said, I was personally satisfied with the things revealed for the moment, so.
From their marketing approach in following BG3's footsteps, yeah. Although, combat was probably always going to be this from before BG3 released, given the leaks were from atleast Feb last year. Most likely, lots of this game is made from salvaged elements from their live service attempt. ----
@KlarissA Didn't see your post till after, so I'll edit this.
Yeah, I've read through them abit and I only missed that it's 3 abilities per companion, so 9-10 tops? and some being rather long cooldowns still too, so it does still seem abit spammy, idk, I'm sure we'll find out more later, probably... hopefully.
For No Death, I have no issue with the option, I'm mostly just thinking, and being blunt, as to what's the point of combat for those the choose it, as all your going to be doing is wailing on the enemy until they die, which might get a bit boring after awhile. Ofcourse, thats my take on it the combat from what I've seen and maybe they'll include a instant kill feature as apart of the setting.
I also had no expectations, except my hope that this'll be the last Dragon Age game, or atleast one without a cliffhanger. Even then, I guess it just feels abit anti-climatic from the build up from DA:I -> Tresspasser -> Dreadwolf, although I suppose it's not the first time, what with the Templar vs Mage conflict. So if we skipped a game to get to here, then good.
For it being a "companion focused narrative", maybe it's just using BG3's buzzwords for marketing because I can't think of another RPG that focuses on companions over main story outside of BG3 (...maybe DA:I or PoE2?) but every (c)RPG kinda does that for their companions, being the mouthpiece for their respective faction (perhaps too much that they become sterotypes sometimes), without the narrative being left behind.
Yes, I can understand that for the no death setting. In my own experience, I usually always start on the easiest setting and do a first play through to get accustomed to the mechanics. I adjust later. So, given I see no big difference in between no death or easily save/load, I can imagine it could make things a bit simpler and less frustrating for those who try it. There are also apparently a lot of parameters to play with in the settings, which might alleviate the boring effect (which can also happen with death). Edit : And, maybe, while you keep fighting without dying you can actually try things and get better, with potentially no frustrating effect. Maybe it could allow a smoother progressing curve for some people. So, I don’t know, I guess it will depend on what everything actually amounts to once released. I also hope that it means there are nice options for progression (even during one play through, maybe), and for those with a taste for challenge.
Edit : Regarding the focus on the companions (and the change from Dreadwolf to The Veilguard). I think it’s just to put the player character and the people with them at the forefront, rather than the problem or a third party. And also do something that many people liked in previous games. For example, I’ve seen many say that they actually enjoyed the way it was with companions in DA2, other problems non withstanding. And, personally, it’s an opinion I tend to share. It seems to me that they think about it in a sort of potential found family way (at least the way I thought about it).
Very late to this party, but finally managed to find time to watch the DATV gameplay reveal and read what’s known about it. The Dragon Age games (especially DAO) are some of my favourite in addition to BG3 but I’ve not been keeping up with development. I’ve been waiting until there was something to get excited about!
I’m not quite sure why folks earlier in the thread thought the trailer looked awful, it looked good to me, as do companions old and new. And while good character creation certainly isn’t enough by itself, in games like the DA ones for me it is important to be able to create a character that I’ll find it cool to play, so happy to hear there’s been attention given to this. Though frankly I’ll be happy enough if there’s decent hair, which has been a significant and bewildering gap in many recent BioWare games to my mind. Surely it can’t be that hard!
I’m sure I’ll enjoy the characters and the story: I always do with BioWare games, even ones that others are disappointed by (not that I’m saying all their games are equally good). But like others it’s the combat that makes me most nervous as that’s what I found most disappointing about DAI, plus I’m generally pretty rubbish at games that require good reactions and coordination. And DATV seems to have gone even further down the action RPG route that’s not usually my bag. I’m sure I saw people mention earlier in this thread the automated combat tactics that could be set up in DAO and DA2. I loved those and spent ages tinkering with the rules, particularly with DA2. They seemed the best possible approach to a party-based RPG with real-time combat, allowing for characters to make use of a wide range of abilities in a way that I defined while still letting battles flow freely.
That said, I also love the ME games, and really enjoyed the combat in MEA once I got the hang of it, and in some ways DAVG gameplay is giving me more ME than DA vibes. Perhaps I just need to think of it as an ME game set in Thedas.
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
You guys make it sound like we have to hate everything all the time.
Has anyone used the word 'hate'? Dislike is not synonymous with hate.
Originally Posted by KlarissA
Yeah… Honestly I find it quite amusing to try to have a conversation when people seem to focus on one thing in one or two last posts, and do as if the rest of the conversation had never happened.
Or perhaps people read through the content of the thread until and until they find a post that they decide to comment on.
Originally Posted by KlarissA
I get being cautious, critical, not liking something in part or totality, not being enthusiastic, whatever. Yet, I’ll admit I’m a bit perplexed here, regarding what it is that you’re in fact trying to convey.
If you are referring to me then I was responding to jinetemoranco using commonplace CC features as evidence of the great things we can expect from DA4. I was also trying to make the point that it was info about CC that was released rather than anything which I would consider the core features of an RPG - plot, combat, companions etc.
Originally Posted by Thunderbolt
I guess the negativitiy has to do with how DAVs marketing is mostly focused on Romances/Nudity/CC/etc, and abit of combat rather than, say, more info on classes and how high level combat looks/works, how does companion dynamics work out if they only get skill points based on your ?good? relationship with them, are there branching narratives and choices?
Just so.
Originally Posted by Thunderbolt
Otherwise, personally, it's hard to care when the "important" aspects they have shown off just don't look that interesting, which includes:
How the combat looks like a rather boring left click spam, with occasional use of 5? abilities (3 on MC, 1 per companion) on a set cooldown of upwards of 2 minutes.
Agreed.
Originally Posted by Thunderbolt
Also, completely unrelated, but I just have to say:
Originally Posted by fylimar
Babylon 5 is the best scifi show and I die on that hill
you have to team up with the Andraste church, which is too close for comfort with our christian church (nodisrespect, but I'm not a huge fan of religions
Originally Posted by KlarissA
In all honesty, I'm not a big fan of religion either, for myself. And I quite agree with the Herald thing and those other things about Inquisition.
I read a lot of philosophy and theology and I can tell you that there were some very interesting philosophical and theological issues woven into the dialogue and goings on in DA:I.
I was also trying to make the point that it was info about CC that was released rather than anything which I would consider the core features of an RPG - plot, combat, companions etc.
Admittedly I’ve only just started reading about DA4 today, so I’m not sure what info was released when, but GameInformer (linked already in this thread but with the DA4 overview page at https://www.gameinformer.com/DragonAgeTheVeilguard) seems to have a decent range of info albeit as yet quite light on details. Yes, there’s stuff about character creation and nudity, but also about combat, companions, classes and even a bit about the plot or at least Solas’s role in it, though personally I’m very happy for plot details to remain under wraps until I play.
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
If you are referring to me then I was responding to jinetemoranco using commonplace CC features as evidence of the great things we can expect from DA4.
That is not what I said at all. Big difference between "Their CC sounds great from what they teased (posts CC details)" and "Their game sounds great from what they teased (posts CC details)". Like the point I was making earlier, it feels like it's too uncool to say anything positive on here if saying "this specific thing sounds good from the info we have" is conflated with the much more ambitious, and from the conditions the game is surrounded in, unlikely, "this game is going to be good".
Okay, folks, let’s draw a line and not get further drawn into complaining about other forum members’ attitudes whether we see them as too positive or too negative. It’s fine to be pessimistic about the game, fine to be optimistic and fine to be anywhere between the two poles.
Can we start from that position and just be careful when we’re disagreeing about our impressions of the game, as we inevitably will, or clarifying our points, as we’re entitled to do if someone has misinterpreted, that we’re not being drawn into more personal comments or criticisms.
Also, I’m just moving this thread to the chat forum as it’s more about BioWare and DA4 than Larian and BG3, and though I know it was started partly to consider what BG3 might have been like had it been made by BioWare, that also seems more like chat as it’s about a counterfactual other game we might have had rather than the one we do.
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
@Jordaker My bad then. I saw the questions/the list about other things than character creation, and the fact that I didn't think it was presented as a very good omen regarding other aspects, and my read was probably lacking. Hence why I voiced perplexity, thank you for elaborating. Regarding the topic of philosophy and theology in DAI, I do not necessarily disagree. It's more, to me, an immersion difficulty (hard to really nicely go with a faithful Inquisitor). Just as, personally, it was difficult for me in terms of immersion in Fallout 4 to play as a female character looking for her baby. Yet, it doesn't take anything from the rest, or seeing the way other characters talked or lived their faith. It also gave interesting role play opportunities sometimes as a Dalish Elf (their history and faith in relation to Andrastian religion, or even within the relationship with Sera and Solas).
In general though, I tried to keep posted with news about DA4, more so since the release of the trailer and of the gameplay bit. They've talked about varied subjects, even if not at great length, like combat and classes, why the change of name. The character creator seems to be talked about much because it was something fans were really looking forward, and something the team behind the game seems to be proud of (they mentioned the fact that they were now mastering the Frost engine, for the technical part for example). Honestly, until recently, the matter of nudity was mentioned in passing (I even reported it here, because someone seemed to question the mature aspects of the game, what with the "it's for kids" sentiment when the trailer got out). Now there have been other articles/focuses in Game Informer, nudity being one lately. My impression is that there's a big difference in between what reporting and discussions tend to focus on, and what is actually communicated and how.
Edit : Sorry, error on the keyboard, and my message was posted half finished. Just to also add the article that just got out in relation to companions, since we were in part talking about that yesterday.
And, along with other things that should be elaborated on before release, there could be a bit more at the end of this month, since they will be present at the San Diego Comic-Con (25-28). With focus on the voice over (featuring Neve, Harding, Lucanis & Emmrich).
Larian made money by delivering a broken game and instead catering exclusively to fanfiction writer and shippers by sexualizing everything. So now other companies copy that as its easier to render vaginas than make interesting combat systems.
Before any BG3 effect, there was the #AssEffect. And Bioware faithfuls demanding to have a little #AssEffect in every game, no matter the type and focus. Some resisted the demand (and occasionally still do). Others.. not so much. BG being a sequel of a Bioware game, no dice. Full circle, man.
That said: There aren't many blockbusting games that are pitched to a blockbuster game trailer audience via indepth systems. Not that Bioware could have ever done that with any of their games, Dragon Age in particular, mind. Even when their games still received near universal acclaim, they built their games primarily around what their (then) authors cooked up. Everything else was light weight. Something that their former proteges CD Projekt seem to have picked up from them.
I play games for the stories and adventures they can give me, so I can’t judge the gameplay itself, but I want to share my personal opinion. I became acquainted with DAO relatively recently, but was fascinated by the universe and how well the writers wrote the world and individual characters. The world is DA cruel and dangerous, it does not give concessions. The weak die and to survive you must be strong. Qunari who divide the world into black and white. Magicians walking on the edge of a knife. Insidious politics. Сhauvinisme. The threat to all living things comes from the creatures of darkness! In DA1 and DA2 you had to face bad things, insults and even threats, but you learned to make choices, make decisions and face consequences. The player felt fully responsible for his actions. Nowadays it is fashionable to create safe spaces and people tend to avoid and not notice bad things. In DA3, I saw how the writers began to relieve the player of responsibility for their actions. He no longer participated in the events and was simply an observer. The mark on the hand was just an excuse not to miss the event. I'm sad about what they did to the universe. How companions were depersonalized by turning them into empty sets of templates. How they disfigured their appearance for fear of seeming offensive to someone. The trailer for the new DA showed that they are no longer a unique game with a rich history, but just another annual online service. Very sad. It's unlikely that anything can convince me to buy this.
you have to team up with the Andraste church, which is too close for comfort with our christian church (nodisrespect, but I'm not a huge fan of religions
Originally Posted by KlarissA
In all honesty, I'm not a big fan of religion either, for myself. And I quite agree with the Herald thing and those other things about Inquisition.
I read a lot of philosophy and theology and I can tell you that there were some very interesting philosophical and theological issues woven into the dialogue and goings on in DA:I.
Oh, I absolutely agree, I just don't like, being Chantry Jesus here. There are quite some interesting discussions about religion going on otherwise.
"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."
Roleplaying a devout believer was one of the more interesting things available to you in that game I thought. I was disappointed when they pulled back from that within the story. It was interesting considering we the player aren't totally sure how literally we're supposed to read the church, so it was interesting to me to play with that in the narrative. Another thing I'm a little leery of in the next game is how uninteresting the starting factions seem to be. I was really interested in navigating Tevinter politics, but from the starting choices for Rook, it seems the game already assumes which side of things we'll be.
Dragon age: Origins was their "lightning in a bottle," it had some bugs but at the time the game was amazing, it felt like the natural progression of a kotor-like game. Then they turned the IP into a braindead DMC style action game with absolutely none of the charm of DMC. Every Dragon Age game they've made since has been progressively worse. It's honestly sad to see because the DAO had so much potential had they handled it right.
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/YZH73hk.png)
I haven’t been following Avowed because I thought it was first person only. Will check it out and see if it is something I would like!
