I agree with everything you have said just maybe one or two comments I disagreed with. I'd have to go back again to look. It was commenter views I had slight disagreements. Like I never seen a bad comment. If all your videos are really this unbias I'll keep your notifications on. As I stated in my other post this is refreshing in this particular game it is divisive for sure My issues are the little gameplay we have seen. Taking away blood magic, but having nude sex is weird. I mean full on nudity The mass effect combat system I do not like. They are trying to sell this to everybody when there are fans this will turn away. Me personslly I need to see the writing and more gameplay. Bioware is on a cold streak. With anthem and Andromeda even tho I'm just now playing it. It's actually good.minus some facial problems.
@@firepenguin38 again thank you for saying that! I try to make sure I am reasonable and I am glad so many people are reasonable in the comments. I can get that. We have only seen 20 minutes of gameplay and they are just the opening. We haven't seen what the mid game looks like. I don't think taking away blood magic is a huge issue. I can get missing it because it is a cool thing that Dragon Age does. As for the nudity I don't really care. I can leave it or take it. I think the combat will be good in DAV but it does suck that it isn't continuing what DAI did. Bioware does need the game to be successful and I can get the concern with them. I do think Veilguard will be good at the very least.
@@Knight1029 I mean I hope so. I'll probly try it regardless to see how it all ends. I got years invested in the franchise. When I mention the nudity it was not from discontent. I am worried they might be focusing to much on it. From articles I've read. Romancing characters doesn't matter much to me but it does to others Doing your research you probably have seen the articles that I've read as well..I hope they can strike a balance and make it fun for everyone. The one thing about baldurs gate 3 I told someone is someone is gonna try the companion system like this and fail. This is not the same bioware and I just hope it's a good balance is all. Nudity or sex. Idc but companions can outweigh the core of the story imo
@@firepenguin38 I can get the concern that they will focus on romancing companions at the expense of everything else. But I don't think that is going to happen. From what I have seen the story is still very important. Just because in the marketing they focus on the companions doesn't mean it is at the expense of other things. Look at DAO's marketing, it was trying to be seen as a cool dude bro game. Yet that isn't what it actually is. I think Veilguard will be fine.
@@Knight1029 I hope your right man lol, if I hadn't invested tone a d years into this franchise. I dunno if I'd play it or not, but I started playing inquisition again right? Well that games combat was bad but everything else was good. I enjoyed it I think all of us that played origins got kinda spoiled with how everything beaches out into different paths. Shit my bad. Back to inquisition. My point was I played all of that abd the dlc. There's no way this one can be as bad(fetch quests). The hinterlands triggers PTSD 😂. This already is better with exception of party control. I noticed one ginxetning thing on the party tho. They have health bars lol. I don't want babysitters through it but don't want a comojete nightmare difficulty. Got souls games for that lol. Have a good night
Look at the equipment of Dragon Age Origins. It is just generic fantasy armor and weapons. The only unique and recognizable parts of DAO is the demons and the dwarf armor. Which has stayed the same, expect for the demons in DAV. Other than that DAO is just generic fantasy. That isn't bad but it doesn't have a look unto its own.
@@Knight1029 "Look at the equipment of Dragon Age Origins. It is just generic fantasy armor and weapons." It looks functional. Unlike everything that came after. > "The only unique and recognizable parts of DAO is the demons and the dwarf armor." Darkspawn, UI, the font (there's an Inquisition mod to get it back), gameplay, tactical programming of your partymembers, bereskarn and other corrupted animals, architecture (though, to be fair, they did a good job with architecture in Inquisition too), the imperial highways (which were sorely missing in everything after Origins), Morrigan (I played Dragon Age in the first place because of how good Morrigan's character art looked), the maps, bloodspatter travel, and so on and so forth.
@AulisVaara what? My man the armor in newer games are not Final Fantasy armor. They just have a look to them now. DAO was a generic fantasy game. That isn't a diss. Its just an observation. I like how DAO looks but you can't say it looks recognizable. Show anyone without any context for the game and ask them what it looks like. They won't say distinct.
@@Knight1029 "DAO was a generic fantasy game. That isn't a diss. Its just an observation." People are literally dissing DAV for being generic while praising DA:O and missing it. If you call DA:O generic, know that two thirds of people disagree with you, massively.
also can't ignore that they do at least try to throw in little easter eggs even between the two franchises - in dragon age 2 there's a templar named *Conrad Vernhart* that you have to slander after saving an apostate, thought that was cool when I heard you mention Conrad in this video from ME. I do like that in this game they make the demons look more akin to the Profanes we meet in DA2 - which speaks to some consistency and, they were playing around with some models, I love that - it can also mean that the profane/demons are somehow related to the (Old Gods/Pantheon/)Titans.... interesting food for thought. Very interesting, did not know that BioWare had multiple ongoing projects before EA bought them, that speaks to the lack of unity in BioWare previously.
I remember seeing that and going "I know him!" Another one is a Krogan head in the quest Wicked Eyes Wicked Hearts. That's a good point. The Profanes and the demons in Veilguard share similar designs. That does have a lot of lore implications. I wonder if Titans will be involved. I remember a lyrium giant in one of the earlier teasers for Veilguard and wonder if that's still exists in the game. As you said Bioware lacked unity with each other. It seemed like if they didn't do something they would have shut down from to many projects.
In Dragon Age Origins, the fight scene immediately after the slide would have been significantly more intense, with around 10 to 15 enemies, far more than what we saw in the video for Dragon Age: Veilguard. As a mage, I would have started with a repulsion hex and instructed Morrigan to use a paralysis hex. This would create an area-wide paralysis explosion, immobilizing many enemies for a while. Alistair, acting as the tank, would use his chain to pull enemies towards himself, keeping them away from us. Meanwhile, I would prepare a chain lightning spell, and Morrigan would ready another powerful skill. I had made Leliana an archer, and she would focus on picking off any enemy mages from the back.Though it was less complex than games like Pathfinder or BG3, it was still significantly better than what we have today. Bioware should not treat its players as fools or incapable of enjoying complexity. Gamers spend hours figuring out game mechanics and strategizing, creating different builds in BG3 and Elden Ring.
@@atishbhattacharya3473 I don't think the combat in Veilguard is less complex or deep than DAO. It's just a different kind of complex and deep. Now is this me saying that DAV is better? No, I see it more as side grades than anything else. The only reason I want DAO combat back is to have the series being consistent. Because my DAO combat is just on easy. I feel it is better purely because being consistent means it can benefit from all the things I mentioned in the video.
I agree with your point about consistency. But the fight in Veilguard is not complex; it's just moving around a lot, based on what I've seen so far. I guess the mage will have somewhat similar mechanics to what we have in Elden Ring. I certainly hope so.
But thats 2 hard for shippers and cosplayers their new audience thats why they put in a GOD MODE so far the companions are the focal point and they want cosplayers to cosplay their characters who are apparently more superior than the previous games somehow
@@vergillives9890 they put in a god mode for people with disabilities. it’s an optional difficulty setting that just allows more people to be able to play the game so I don’t see how that’s an issue at all.
@@slurpy-f3k they have always had disability support in every bioware game they have always had a pause/tactical menu and every enemy has a delay window plus STORY MODE enemies rarely attack more than once because its for beginners and disabled people to be able to play the game specifically shippers dont play games thats why so they could get to the actual romance places without have waste time learning the game and just get to the hub for romance Because thats what the game is "combat is hindering the story"
I always thought inconsistency was Bioware's style; meaning, they actually always wanted to do it that way. They wanted to give something new to the gamer with each new release, not the exact same thing with a different story. You can only stack on so many new abilities before people get tired of the same old mechanic. It's the light saber problem. Once people get sick of new light saber features and realize it's still the same old light saber, what do you do?
If you look at Bioware's history you can definitely see that with each new game it was different to the previous game. So, there is some validity to what you said.
The inconsistencies may have something to do with each game used a different game engine, Eclipse, Lycium, and Frostbite, respectively. The other inconsistencies may have to do with the developers don't want to do the same thing over again. It takes years to make each game and they don't want to see that over again. They want to do something different. In combination with games taking years to make is they do have to be relevant and chase after trends. They already have a returning audience but they need to grow that audience. Turn based gaming is not trending. Live action is.
You are right that changing engines have lead to a lot of inconsistencies. Though with DAO and DA2 its more that they look different rather than function different. DA2 combat is basically DAO combat just tunned differently. But yeah I do think a big factor to consider is that the developers want to make something different. Which is true for Bioware because all there games in the 2000s were different games. I think there is a niche in turn based combat but it has to look like an action game. BG3 is only big because it is a cinematic presented game.
@@Knight1029 I came across this thought from "Phoenix is Fire - Don't Over Complicate" on "Mark Darrah on Games" channel, in particular "sick of it" @ 0:22.
@@0x8badbeef Dude you're making too much sense for certain idiots 😂 I've been making this same talk point too times changes and people wish to do more over creativity fields they don't wanna stuck to one game formula forever.
@@0x8badbeef It's ❤ so nice to see another person making sense here like come on they want a repeat for Halo and COD franchise level of crap 😅 ruined the perfectly end of Halo 3 even Halo 4 to whatever ruined,retcon,repeated and milked to death to happen reminder old MW3 got so much hate because they used same formula of MW2 but bigger and better or how Halo 4 to Infinitie retelling Mantle of Responsibility so much it becomes a joke to fix that they either need to retcon whole thing since Halo 4 or remake whole franchise 😂 sometimes new direction or ip is better idea and all good things must come to an end before it turned to shit.
The infighting is interesting stuff, so much time wasted. Workplace culture is such a weird concept, I’d be pissed like wdym we have to make our own inventory system because our team leader doesn’t like that other group in the office
@@tidus94 it really does cause so many issues. Like I would also be so mad and upset that we can't just use what is already there just because those at the top don't like the other guys. It destroys any collaboration and makes the games worse.
Yeah, the part about secondary materials is a huge issue I have with Bioware. Obviously Wicked Eyes and Wicked Hearts is the worst example of this in effect, because that was a horrible way to introduce Celene for the first time and did nothing to truly explain the situation in Orlais. There are smaller examples, but they're all incredibly annoying. Nexus Uprising is also a huge one in my opinion. Andromeda functioned as if Nexus Uprising was required reading before playing the game in order to truly get full context of the uprising and the people involved. Especially when you meet Sloane. It does make we worried for the companions in Veilguard whose introductions were in books/comics. They need to do better than Cole. Don't get me wrong, Cole was great, but he had so many references to Asunder that pretty much never got followed up on (treatment that none of the other companions got) and I really don't want them to do that for half the companions in Veilguard. Characters that are new to the games should be considered new. Period. This is a video game series, not a book series. If I need to read one of the books to get the big picture of a plotline or character, someone didn't do their job.
I do agree. Reading Masked Empire changes how you think about Celene as a character, and her relationship with Briala. Which is terrible. Because it leave so much vital, and good, writing off the table. I played Andromeda first before reading Nexus Uprising and I can agree. It does feel very different to the game. And not in a great way. I am worried about that as well. That Bioware might think fans will have had read, or watched someone explain, the books and know what's happening. When they should just introduce the characters like they are knew. Sure for people who read the books they will get repeat information but that's fine. Its better for the game if they introduce them as new.
My problem with Dragon Age is that after Origins they couldn't decide on an identity. DA2 I call Dragon Effect because it tried too much to be more like Mass Effect. Dragon Age Inquisition I called Dragon Scrolls because it felt like they tried too hard to be more like an Elder Scrolls game IE Skyrim. Instead of keeping Dragon Age as it's own type of game established in Origins through the years, they kept trying to copy the most popular franchise with these titles. So for me, despite the writing remaining in Dragon Age, each subsequent game didn't "feel" like Dragon Age. It always felt like something else which is why I can't get excited for this game. BG3 showed that older styles of gameplay are still viable, so I really wanted to see Dragon Age return to its roots, but everything I've seen for Veilguard shows they are again trying to copy another popular franchise.
Just because Dragon Age doesn't have a consistent combat and art style identity doesn't mean it has none. As I said in the video Bioware has been consistent with making Dragon Age a RPG where it enhances story, characters, the world and themes. I would like for their to be a consistent look and combat but I think the newer Dragon Age games are Dragon Age.
@@Knight1029 As someone who was active in the old BSN (if you know what that is then you know), then this discussion was brought up frequently even back then, when Darrah would sometimes go off on the community when the name Dragon Effect was used by more than just me when referencing DA2. It has been a problem for Bioware going on almost 15 years now. I liked the universe Gaider and team created, but the writing is the only thing that has kept them all "Dragon Age" in a literal sense. And now the core writing team is gone as well. I know there is a lot of hopium going on right now, I'm just not one of them. I'm a "wait and see how it comes out" before I jump on any bandwagon. But the DA franchise has not been consistent since the second game no matter how you try to spin it.
@ragingcyclone369 Dragon Age is still gonna be consistent with its writing. You miss that fact that a) Patrick Weekes is there and they were on ME1 and were taught by David Gaider. b) You seem to imply that no other writer in Bioware knows how to write other than the originals. Which is dumb. Sure the inconsistencies in combat and art style aren't great but the game will be fine. It still has that core of what makes it a Bioware game and a Dragon Age game.
Yeah well, as we probably discussed before, Bioware's roots are that of a company that more or less adapts Dungeons and Dragons pen and paper mechanics into video games. As time went on and video games evolved into flashier, more cinematic, real-time experiences, Bioware felt more and more self-conscious about its old-school, nerdy dice rolling and cumbersome, western RPG gameplay, so they tried to modernize their games here and there, but they didn't quite do it well enough, and they've never really solved that puzzle. Larian arguably showed that they didn't need to 'modernize' anything at all; that there's still a huge customer base out there that are still interested in minimalistic, old-school RPG gameplay. Then again, Bioware was getting at the heart of a very complex issue: viewer imagination vs cinematic fulfillment. Those 2 things seemingly butt heads, and Bioware got stuck in the middle.
@@CynicalWarlock I can agree on the gameplay side of things that Bioware moving away form the DnD adaptation into a video game is because they became more self-conscious but I don't think the way they do their stories changed that much. They are still a studio who uses RPGs to enhance stories. Mass Effect has less options then BG3 but on the whole is better at delivering its story because it uses RPGs to tell stories.
@@CynicalWarlock in the video I do say that Anthem is their weakest game because it doesn't follow what they normal do. Hopefully Veilguard will get back to that.
Additionally; BioWare isn't super consistent with their lote between games, let alone supplemental material. For example: In Mass Effect 1, Cerberus was a top secret black-ops team that went rogue. In Mass Effect 2, it becomes a "humanity first" organization. BioWare will alter lore and story events to fit the current game. It's annoying from a continuity perspective but doesn't completely ruin the experience. I know there are changes between Dragon Age games, as well, but I'm hard pressed to recall them ar the moment.
@@drewtheunspoken3988 not really. The Cerberus one is the biggest inconsistency of their lore. And also in ME1 they have been "humanity first". But otherwise they have been pretty good. I just don't see how they are inconsistent.
I agree with OP there's a lot of inconsistency. But that's kind of Bioware in general especially, in the latter era. At the end of the day I put it on the managers. Never and I mean NEVER forget how much of anthem was their own fault rather than the easy target being EA.
What I meant by the world's being too small or too big is DA2's repeating level designs or Inquisition's giant open worlds that has alot of stuff that doesn't offer much beyond more xp.
Oh, I get you. Thank you for clarifying. I can understand that. DA2's reused maps was a issue I spoke about in the video and does make it feel pretty bad. And I did the same with DAI's open world. It wasn't great just wandering a giant map.
@@Knight1029 There that's call fair criticism wish more people do it often as much as I love big map of Inquisition going back and forth get tiresome and that first time exploring hype don't live up which becomes an issue of repeating same section in new playthrough unfortunately.
I liked that! I just wish there were more weapons like it. They could introduce a side arm that is supposed to be used when you run out of thermal clips or they give soldiers the overheating guns when going on long operations.
I like your unbiased view of this game but it is divisive.to say the least among fans I think player agency is being taken away with going away from blood magic for example. I can list more gripes, but just wanna keep it yo a minimum Also Im so much on the fence. I realize how tevinter looks reflects it's tone in the trailer but here the past few interviews I've seen have been about romances and nudity which is fine, but no talk of the actual story or gameplay. Romances are fine I guess. I still like my liars or Phoebe(dunno if you can romance her) just started playing Andromeda, anyway that should be the number ,3 or 4 thing behind thecworld, gameplay and story. Not in that order Just stating my thoughts. You all have a great and safe day. Again really great unbiased video
Thank you! I try my best to make my videos reasonable. I don't think taking away blood magic is removing player agency. I don't know how that is removing it causes less player agency. I think that is just natural to do as Bioware game's best parts are their companions. Additionally, I think they have told us plenty about the story. They gave us the basic jist on what we are gonna do and what locations we are going to visit. What would you like them to talk about? Its cool. I love reading what people think about this game.
Maybe I'm weird, but for some reason I don't mind the inconsistency in dragon age and I like that you pointed out the pros and cons of it. It is weirdly refreshing and I was excited to see what Bioware "experimented" with this time, but I also understand why people might find it so jarring. The way I saw it, the combat *was* improving each game, but that's probably because I wasn't very partial to the tactical combat in DA:O. I didn't mind it, but I also didn't favor it. When I play on PC now I actually pause as little as possible unless I absolutely have to, and I think that's what I prefer for combat. Tbh I wish I could replay Inquisition, even tho it is kinda "too big" of a game in terms of a "100% run", yet I'm dying to do so because I loved the combat, the companions, the story... but the EA app is cursed and I can't fathom having to deal with it. I'm SO glad and relieved Veilguard isn't gonna be dependent on it.
I can't remember if it was you but a commentor said that the inconsistency felt like each game was fresh. Which I think was important to add to the discussion. There are some pros to being inconsistent. I think you should give DAI a try. Despite how long it takes I think the highs are pretty high. The companions are really good and make it worth it even if you have to deal with the EA app. But I am happy that DAV is moving away from that. It is so much better to not have to open the EA app in Steam.
@@Knight1029 That's awesome when people can see the pros to things that might kinda "sound" bad like inconsistency. I don't think it was me that brought that up previously, but I have a lot of thoughts that bounce around in my head so it's hard for even me to keep track tbh lol! and ooohh I wish I could play Inquisition again... maybe I'll muster up the courage to tackle the EA app, but it just sounds like it's not worth the trouble... I do miss the game though. So maybe!! But yes it is such a relief that Veilguard won't be weighed down by the app. I kinda hope we get a release date soonish. I don't want them to rush, obviously, but I also don't know if I can take the anticipation much longer!
@@YaddaGrl I think it was you but regardless I enjoy when you comment. It gives me more perspective and its just great to chat with another fan of the series. I am gonna play DAI on PC even with the issues with the EA App. Its not great but its better than nothing. I hope they do a bundle of the first three games and make it separate from the EA App. I also want a release date. I am currently playing through the games again and I want to know how fast or slow I can take it. And the anticipation is strong. Everything I hear about DAV makes it sound great!
Bioware sais that Veilguard is the first game witha truly fun combat and i just can't get over the fact that they setup themselves to fail. Of course it might be the first "fun" combat because you bloody genius never built upon what you created. You always change everything. Doubt it that something like BG3 would be as good if Larian changed the combat between Original sin 1 and 2 then again in BG3. I don't personally love the combat in BG3 becahse of the rules from dnd 5e, but they got the right idea of sticking to one style of combat.
I don't know what you were expecting Bioware to say. What? To say the combat is alright? Larian says there combat is quite good. It just marketing. That is why I said in my video that I wonder how good DAO's combat could have been if it was given the chance to improve itself.
@@alsaiduq4363 in the perception of many Dragon Age fans DAO is a janky, clunky and unfun game. That is what they think. And to them Bioware games were great for their story, characters and world. Not much else.
@@mrflufflebunny4529 I can see what you mean. But I don't think DAO was realistic. Unless you are just stating that it got more stylized and not that it started realistic.
Wow. Wait. Your favourite is DA2? I've never heard anyone say that 😮 I really loved 2. I think it had the best writing, and take a journey through time instead of locations was special. But it can never be my favourite game because everything was poo-brown! All the time! I understood it for story reasons, but damn the colour pallet was miserable!
I love DA2 so much. It is my favorite video game of all time as well. There is just so much that I like that comes together to make an amazing experience. The art style, combat, music (the music!), voice acting, and the writing. It is just such an amazing game. I love it so much. If I could I would make it the basis for the series entirely.
Origins is definitely my favorite one, but let me tell you that DA2 is a very close second, I really love that game, everything on it, except for the dungeon recycling, but after the third replay I stopped caring 😂.
I didn't like micromanaging companions in BG3 i didnt like being forced to, for even easy fights. It was something I suffered for the story and characters. But I appreciate that many players love that detail and control. I really loved what DAI did. I was able to focus mostly on the Inquisitor. But in the harder battles, I could still switch to tactical and micromanage. I wish veilguard had that option for tactical players. But i am persoannly ok with the Mass Effect system.
I didn't like that at all. I so desperately wished for an option to have auto combat. Let the game decide how my companions fight. I would love that. Its nice for other people to have a lot of control but for me it just bogs down the experience. I liked how DAI did it as well. And it would have been great to see that system explored more. I would have liked that a lot. I think Veilguard's combat will be fun and enjoyable but there is something that was lost.
I've never heard somebody who liked DA:2 for something be right about anything, and the trend isn't stopping today it seems. I'll take 10 more "generic dark fantasy" DA:O sequels, the atmosphere was great, the characters felt amazing, the stakes were almost perfectly dialed in, with some refinement for the mechanics it presented it could have become a franchise for the ages, instead if was abandoned for a dumbed-down bastardization of itself. If anything, I'd have loved for the armors to be polished up and made a bit more down-to-earth instead of the over-the-top fantasy "styles" we've got in later iterations. Everything that came after was far too generic, trying to get mass appeal, the wider audience then became the modern audience and now we've gotten so far from what sparked the series that it might as well be "Disney Pixar's Marvel's Guardians of the Veil™". EDIT: This is a trend in a lot of "creatives" nowadays that take the work of their forbearers and think to themselves arrogantly "I can do it better" when in actuality and unfortunately, with observable proof, they can not. The movie industry is a great example of this, with amazon's LoTR, Netflix's handling of the Witcher, etc. It is like they hire people who hate the franchise and expressly put them in charge just for the "lol so random" comedy moment that we never get to witness (it probably isn't funny in all actuality).
What? All I meant by that generic comment about DAO was that it doesn't have a distinct identity to itself. Look at all the fantasy games that released around DAO (not just the big ones but all of them) and you will see DAO will eventually blend into the background. Now I don't think that's bad. Being generic is not a sign of low quality. It is just a statement on what it is. Being generic is something that can be done well and DAO does it well. DA2 and DAI diverted from DAO because they wanted to be more distinct. There art styles are far more unique to themselves. And that's fine for anyone to want. To make it look like something. Also funny of you to ignore me saying I think it would have been better to stick with DAO's art style and combat. But I get you want to just dislike anyone positivity towards the newer games. Its cool being irrational.
My issue with BioWare where’s Kotor 3? If not how about a standalone game for SWTOR also why can’t they make DA game that can stand own it’s own like DA origins that’s not compared to Mass Effect.
@@fliplife67 oh man speak the truth. Where is the single player offline SWTOR. It's basically a single player game already. Why not go the full way? Also yeah Kotor 3 would be cool I think the DA games can stand on there own. There are some issues but I think the games do stand on there own.
I wonder what will happen among the 250 BioWare devs left now that we have Dragon Age using the 'Frostbite-BioWare' engine and Mass Effect using the UnReal 5 one. They can't share resources even if they want to.
I think what's gonna happen is the Mass Effect team is basically gonna force the Dragon Age team to move off of Frostbite and onto Unreal. Which does suck. So, much time and development was spent on making Frostbite work.
I thibk People seem to forget after the rushed release of DA2, which was supposed to be a small standalone title to be the point of a new start, leading to Inquisition, which was supposed to be a real sequel, where EA forced them to make DA2 and be a bigger game than it should've been as if wasn't bad they forced them to work in their in game engine Frostbite, and we know how it goes even Veilguard is Frostbite, but now they are good with it thankfully ME5 will be UE5.
@@MrApoorvaSingh753 I think the bigger issue is that Bioware didn't treat Frostbite with respect. If MEA and Anthem reused what DAI made then the games would have been much better. But yeah, UE5 will be much easier to use than Frostbite.
@@MrApoorvaSingh753 oh yeah. The biggest culprit in all of Bioware's fallings is EA. They are the ones who caused them to shift into multiplayer and microtransactions, and the one who basically forced them to use Frostbite. EA is the biggest issue here.
If Bioware didn't gut 2 projects in progress to start a live action project instead of waiting for both to be done people would be less weary instead gutted both reminded both teams working on anthem that they are the problem then fired them leaving DAI and ME:A still short handed thats the current issue for people so is just another make shift product or actually something finished
@@Knight1029 bioware gutted DAI and ME:A teams mid production of both games so they show they could be a better DESTINY thats why DAI has the real time war table while working on the frostbite engine if they weren't in such a rush to show how they could be a better DESTINY they would have 2 complete games a decent live service and people would have less of issue
The art style of each game and the combat never bothered me. I can see why people criticize it but from my perspective, artists - creatives, evolve their art plus technology advances that also help to evolve the art. So for me, the changing of the art style is just the art evolving because that is what art, music, movies, etc, do. With the combat though, that's a bit different. While I could also argue about the evolution of the technology playing a role, I think you or someone in the comments made a point about EA and the shareholders wanting it to be more action-oriented. Not to let Bioware completely off the hook here as they also wanted that to appeal to a larger audience (that is what most game studios do) and that leads to the inconsistency that you're talking about. There are criticisms I have about Bioware myself but the artstyle and combat simply aren't on that list for me. While I love that each Dragon Age game is different, with a different setting and different characters, I do understand why people don't like that. I remember when I started Dragon Age 2 and I was like, "wait, where is my warden?" Plus, the lore does change in some ways. I am no expert on Dragon Age though because I only play the games and I have only read one book. I don't get knee deep in the lore so I could be wrong. However, one of the biggest gripes I had was with DAI when I play a Dalish elf and we get to the temple of Mythal - and my dalish elf can't understand the language so Morrigan has to explain it? And she lies at that but because Bioware didn't make our Dalish elf consistent, we somehow forgot the language. There are other examples of the inconsistency as well, and I can see how Dragon Age: Origins has a lot more consistency just between to the story lines. I also think that (some of this is due to EA and some OG people leaving) Bioware has struggled with some identity issues. Especially as we got to Mass Effect Andromeda, DAI, and Anthem . while I love DAI, the change in direction with the open world, fetch quests and what-not is noticeable. They had a bit of an identity crisis and what I'm hoping with Dragon Age: the Veilguard is that Bioware is finally getting back to re-discovering who they are but also who they want to be. I hope that makes sense. I don't always explain my thoughts in the best way.
@@LadyRav3nGaming I think there are some great reasons to be inconsistent. Like I said in the video sometimes you can make something better or what came before wasn't that great. DAO is generic fantasy. That's not bad but making it look like something is fine. Bioware isn't to inconsistent with their lore but there are some bad examples. Like the one you mentioned. Though in that case Bioware knew about it but couldn't do anything because they added different race options late into development. Originally DAI was gonna only have a human Inquistor. So, explaining elf lore to them isn't that big of an issue. But I do agree with you point in some cases. I can see how some OG Bioware devs leaving can effect development but I really don't think it effected the games that much. The bigger issues are the ones I laid out in the video and EA. The section I made on each games issues could have been so much bigger. Especially with DAI. The way they do open world is not that great. The best open world in DAI is by far Emprise Du Lion. It feels focused but has branching paths. There is a story to it and not wandering aimlessly. After Anthem though I can agree that there was a bit of an identity crisis for Bioware. I like Anthem but Anthem is the least like Bioware game. I think Veilguard will do a good job at having Bioware return to form.
@@Knight1029 I did not know that DAI had originally been human inquisitor only. I'm glad they changed that but I understand now why the elven lore is lost on the dalish elf now. Makes sense. I have a mod I'm using to correct that anyway so it's not a really major deal, just one I had really remembered from the lore part. Emprise Du Lion is a great area. I also like The Emerald Graves even though there really isn't that much story there, it's not huge and there isn't as many fetch quests there. I am looking forward to what Veilguard shows us.
Giving artists freedom to be creative is good, for a new series and even then to an extent and you always have constraints (you're not going to let them create a creature that is not supposed to fly have wings for example). As for making sequels, the art style is expected to remain consistent because the liberty of imagining the creatures and the world for the first time has already passed, fans and viewers of the series expect and imagine a certain world when they think of an already established series. So I disagree with you on that point. Take The Witcher as a franchise for example, now imagine whatever you want from that universe in your head,. Take The Lord of the Rings franchise as another example, now imagine whatever you want from that universe in your head. Now imagine The Elder Scrolls franchise as yet another example, now imagine whatever you want from that universe in your head. Etc. I could go on and on but you get the point. Now try to do the same with Dragon Age. It is probably harder to think of something from DA without associating it with a specific game that isn't different in the other games. Why is that? Why is it that we can all agree what an Orc looks like, or a Nazgul, or a Nekker, or a Wraith, or an Argonian, etc. and not what a darkspawn looks like? or what a demon looks like? And concerning your point about Bioware struggling with identity issues, yes I agree but I don't think that going from a non open world game to an open world game plays a role in that at all. Take The Witcher franchise for example. The devs switched to an open world game with The Witcher 3, and that game is one of the best RPG games of all time (at least for me). And that game remained consistent in all aspects: lore, art style, combat, rich story, dark fantasy, etc. What DA really suffers from when it comes to identity in my opinion, is the change of fantasy genre with every single DA game. They started off with DAO being a dark and epic fantasy RPG with a dark tone, then with DA2 they changed the combat and removed the races, the only reason you can call DA2 as a dark fantasy game was that quest involving your mother (I won't go too deep into that because of spoilers but hopefully you get which quest I am talking about), and the game is no longer an epic fantasy. And in DAI, they completely abandoned the dark aspect and went back to an epic fantasy setting with no dark elements but they changed to a light tone. That is a huge identity issue. I completely agree with your point about the lore inconsistency, and it DRIVES ME INSANE. It's actually one of the reasons that I stopped being a huge fan of the series.
@@eliesaad I disagree with you. As I say in the first sentence of my comment, the art style doesn’t bother me. I like the changes they make in each game. Whether it’s dark fantasy or high fantasy, it’s all good to me. You have your opinion and I have mine so we can just agree to disagree on this.
@@LadyRav3nGaming Dark, high, epic, etc. fantasy are not an "art style", they are full on fantasy subgenres. So I wasn't talking about the art style when I was referring to the genres that the games belong to, I was referring to the story type and setting. The only part where I talked about the art style was solely in the first paragraph. Just wanted to clarify this that's all.
Have heard of the in fighting between the DA and ME dev teams, it's really unfortunate, sounds like they should have one big team work on one game for most of development when you're within that last 3 months of development you take a small percentage of that team to start pre production on the next project. Mass Effect Andromeda's situation is a little more unique because it's was Bioware Montreal that developed that game, and the only thing they had done at Bioware previously was the citadel dlc for ME3. So I think some of it's issues had more to do with lack of experience and potentially lack of leadership to guide that team.
I think the developers have moved on to what you said. Most are working on the next game while a small staff is working on the next project. So, progress is happening. Though it doesn't change the fact that Bioware screwed themselves with needless infighting. You are correct on Bioware Montreal being less experienced but what didn't help was the fact they refused to use any of the tools and technologies developed by the Dragon Age team. Again they made a separate inventory system when DAI already made one. Also I do agree on the lack of leadership. I want to quickly just criticize Mac Walters as when he was brought in to help MEA he tried to make the procedural planet generation thing to work. Which was such a mistake. Mac Walters should have known that wasn't gonna go anywhere but he tried to make it work because of "it was new and innovative".
@@Knight1029 It would have been neat to see the procedural planet generation depending on how they implemented it, but you're right it was mistake since Andromeda had other problems which affected sales and ended up cancelling future dlc. Even No Man's Sky launch was rough and took a few years and more updates to find it's footing and Starfield is just an other example that quantity doesn't mean quality.
@@MrDay53 if they just stopped the procedural planet generation they could have focused on far more important aspects of the game. I don't think it would make a 180 but it would have been so much better.
More people aren't liking it. Gaming has become mainstream. It's the biggest entertainment media on the planet now, and rpgs arent just for nerds anymore.. That wasnt so, when Origins released
@@Knight1029 In the context of how you stated this has become more liked by the players. I would argue thats not accurate.. The market was flooded with more gamers overall. In that same time, Bioware wentnfrom the greatest rpg developer to exist, to one on the verge of closure, because theyre releasing mediocre, or flat out bad games.
@@Knight1029 Originsnis one of the most widely praised games of all time.. Most gamers bought it.. fast forward 6 years, and gaming is much more mainstream, with millions more gamers available to purchase games. Theyre going to appear more popular if you count copies sold, vs percentage of gamers buying each game.. Which is why EA can now consider 7 million copies sold, as a failure
@@jmmywyf4lyf what is the point of saying this? Are you trying to invalidate the popularity of the newer games? Or are you trying to say something else?
Never knew about the infighting but this just makes all the senior guys who left seem incompetent for wasting time and resources. Also, makes sense if this infighting is what led to lost of so many jobs during the layoffs
So, many of the issues on Anthem were because of this in-fighting and the people who caused a lot of it were leaders. Even ME3's ending was caused by Casey Hudson not listen to the developers on the ground. He just thought it was better his way.
You expect a lot from them to understand to know their situation its easier to blame and be envious saying they should do this or that until they fit in their shoes.
@@MrApoorvaSingh753 I just think it is important to know that there are issues and the people who are giving wild criticisms are just nonsense. Instead of giving actual criticism they just say whatever. Because they want to hate Bioware just because.
@@Knight1029 Yup the Worst one I always feel it's identity because "It's not like Origin" argument other shit take is Bioware gone woke like since when they weren't !? 😂 they always were open Pro LGBT.
@@Knight1029 Yup personally this work argument is something I always hated it they did before on MELE by censor Miranda's butt part when she talks about her sister missing is just awkward or how oddly enough it's no issue anymore where game release just fine sell well and you can mod ass scene it was too blown out of proportion.
I also don't completely agree with the Matt Rhodes blog post. I do agree the basic design of the darkspawn in Origins is generic, most likely being inspire by orcs from Lord of the Rings, but I don't think they were successful in DA2 in making them feel unique. The only darkspawn designs in DA2 that felt unique was the emissary and the genlock. The emissary's overall design felt more unique except for the brown leather strapping around it's face, the helmets/head gear the emissaries wore in Origins look more unique. The Ogre's colour was better to match with the rest of the darkspawn but overall design was pretty much the same from Origins so still generic. The Genlock was the biggest design change and is definitely more unique but unfortunately wouldn't have been seen by everyone since it was only in the Legacy dlc. I also feel the redesign of the Genlock contradicts one of Matt's points/goals. His first goal of wanting to show that the taint hadn’t just lead to pointy-teeth monsters, but that it was a sickness affecting people who used to be Human, Elven, Dwarven and Qunari, I think they were successful in Origins. The Hurlock are blighted humans, Genlock are blighted dwarves (the redesign in DA2 isn't stout so doesn't feel dwarven to me which I feel contradicts his goal or just wasn't successful in achieving), Shrieks are blighted elves (also the most unique darkspawn design in Origins, and never made an appearance in DA2), and Ogres are tainted Qunari. So I think they were very successful in the visual story telling of Origins when it came to defining the different darkspawn and what original race they were. I don't think they succeeded in this goal going into DA2 since Shrieks were not in the game and the redesigns of the Genlock don't feel dwarven inspired. His second goal of wanting to show the brain-decay the disease caused by making their armor far less sophisticated. The armor is less sophisticated and shows more of the darkspawns' body than in Origins. His wording in this goal is a little confusing so not completely sure if he meant to say body decay, but if he actually meant brain decay literally, covering the Hurlocks' heads in chainmail and helmets hides the brain decay. I personally feel the the design for the Origins darkspawn looked more decayed than in DA2 except for the ogre. His third goal of wanting to show that it was the same disease effecting all members of the darkspawn I feel he was really just using this as an excuse to justify the changes in design which he doesn't have to do. I never got the impression that the darkspawn in Origins were affected by a different disease that's why I feel this goal was just an excuse to justify the changes.
I think they did succeed in making the dark feel unique. I can't think of anything at the time of DA2's release that looks similar to its darkspawn. I think if you show people DAO's darkspawn without any context of what they are or even their name, I think most people would think orc or zombie orc. While DA2's would invoke corruption. You say DAO was successful in Matt Rhodes first goal but again it is more easier to confuse DAO darkspawn with orcs. While DA2 hones in on that goal. Only the genlock really suffers in this regard. They look a bit too different. Also I think something to point out is that the Ogre's are restricted to the way they are because of DAO. They couldn't stray to far from them. What Matt Rhodes meant by brain-decay was that it makes the darkspawn less intelligent and therefore are not able to make there armor and weapons look sophisticated. Which in DA2 is shown quite clearly. Their armor and weapons look like they didn't take long to make at all. The only point of failure is the chainmail on the hurlock's heads. Chainmail is not easy to make. So, he meant more of a lack of intelligence rather than them looking like they are rotting. Because the darkspawn in lore aren't meant to look like they are rotting or decaying. That wasn't what David Gaider wanted them to be. I think what Matt Rhodes meant by that is they all look different in big and small ways. The genlocks have pointy ears while the hurlocks don't. Genlock's have more flesh on their head while hurlock's look like you can see their skull. The Shrieks don't look like elves at all, which makes them look at odds with the hurlocks and genlocks which are the same size and proportions as their respective race. And they all have differing colors. Sure a greenish color does unite them but it isn't done with that much consistency. Shifting to white colors makes them look all unified and also has them look similar to broodmothers. The only outliers are genlocks and ogres. The emissaries are also different but there is more explanation as to why. My issue with the changes, as I said in the video, isn't the fact that the newer designs are bad. It is just inconsistent. I like the DA2's designs more than DAO's. But, as I said in the video, I think sticking to the DAO's design would be better long term. Even though I prefer DA2's design.
@@Knight1029 The Hurlocks in DA2 look very similar to Red Skull just a white version. For Origins yes with no context people would assume orc or goblins, though for people who play the game and learn about the world through the game but don't get deep in the lore would understand that Hurlocks are tainted Humans, Genlocks are tainted dwarves, Ogres are tainted Qunari, and Shrieks are tainted elves. The Shrieks are the most different looking but they do have pointed ears and thinner arms and legs, so a few similarities, but yes not a one for one. Okay that makes sense for what he meant by brain decay and agree the armor is less sophisticated in DA2. Still wish they'd have a bit of variety in the armor though since some people become tainted from darkspawn blood like a dwarf from the legion of the dead as apposed to being born from a brood mother. That's a shame the look in Origins wasn't what they wanted, I personally really liked the look and their appearance made the blight look more serious for how it affected the body, I don't really get that as much from the Hurlocks in DA2 but that may because I'm pasty white and see that in the mirror almost everyday.
@@MrDay53 I have no idea how you see Red Skull in the DA2 hurlocks. I just don't see that at all. They have way to much flesh on them. They seem more to a gaunt look to me. But that is why the changed it. People just looking without context will just think orcs. If someone with no context looks at the DA2 version they will not think orcs. Sure with context you can get why DAO darkspawn look like the way they do but their goal was to have people to have a general idea on what they are without context. That was an issue with DAO as well. Ghouls exist in DAO and we did see Tamlen as a ghoul but not anything outside that really. Not in the way of regular enemies at least. But I do agree with you. It would have been cool to see ghouls alongside the darkspawn. Even if they function the same in combat the flavor of them being there is quite cool. If you look really deep into the darkspawn development David Gaider didn't want them to exist at all. He hated the idea of a generic evil fantasy horde that causes a lot of the worlds problems. The only reason they exist is because Jame Ohlen (who was above him in the company) basically forced him to do. David Gaider wanted Dragon Age to be more about politics. Which you can see with DAO to an extent. David Gaider now though doesn't dislike the darkspawn as much as he used to. He believes he integrated them into the world fairly well. But you can tell he that he would have liked them to not be in Dragon Age. There are also a lot of other art style changes that David Gaider says is more representative in what he sees in his head. Like the Fade in DAI. But yeah sometimes what we think looks spot on isn't what the developers envisioned. Which does suck. Overall I still think DAO's art style is what the series should have looked like going forward. But mostly for consistency reasons then the newer art styles looking bad. Okay you got me with the pasty white bit. Nice meme.
@@Knight1029 Interesting didn't know David didn't like the darkspawn. It's probably good they included them for more casual players since political fantasy didn't seem to interest the masses until a couple years later when Game of Thrones started, and they even had the White Walkers.
@MrDay53 yeah its definitely easier for casuals to get invested in something when its a trailer about a cool good guy fighting monsters. The whole politics stuff would be very interesting but it isn't as readily appealing.
I know that BioWare still has a number of veterans working there, but I'm guessing the changes are due to a number of newer employees. They probably had their own ideas about what BioWare games and what they should be. If the newer employees think tactical combat was boring, then they might pursue a more action focused game. It's not actual verification, of course, but recent comments from the devs suggests that reason. I'm guessing that the new aesthetics are a byproduct of attracting a new, younger audience. Dragon Age Inquisition was 10 years ago, and the first game was 15 years ago. It could make for an ideal starting point, and the new visuals might be more appealing to that audience. BioWare started out as a developer that catered to the hardcore RPG audience. As they've grown they've tried to make their games more appealing to a larger audience. We can see this in the "dumbing down" of their RPG and combat systems. The thinking among most publishers seems to be that "true" RPGs are unappealing to the general audience. Of course, these assumptions came before the success of Baldur's Gate III. At the end of the day, BioWare really isn't all that different from other studios. They have budgets, deadlines, and a parent company's shareholders to please. This means altering trajectory when the market changes. Not because they're guaranteed failure otherwise, but because the investors don't trust the individual devs to make a game that will appeal to a large audience.
@@drewtheunspoken3988 I don't see that at all. As I said in the video the reason for the change is EA. And even then DA2 is DAO under the hood. The change is not due to younger people. That's a weird thing to say. In the video I clearly talked about how the art style change was due to making the art style more true to the developers intentions and have the series look like something. You have to admit that DAO does look like a generic fantasy game. What kind of RPGs do you think Bioware is making? Bioware has never made a RPG where player freedom was the point. Bioware has always made RPGs to enhance stories, characters, world, and themes. What was "hardcore" about Bioware's older games?
@Knight1029 We've actually discussed this before, and I completely agree with you about the kind of games Bioware makes. I'm also in agreement about graphic styles, for the most part. DA:O is definitely genetic and drab in its graphical presentation. The "hardcore" elements were the gameplay systems. The mote tactical combat and deeper RPG elements, such as building and modifying stats and skills And "younger" was probably a poor choice, I should have said "newer." And I do acknowledge that EA (probably) mandated some of the changes. I pretty much agreed when I was talking about the parent company shareholders. Just based on dev statements, it sounds like it's a mix of both publisher and developer decisions that made Veilguard what it is. I'm really looking forward to playing it and I hope this one knocks it out of the park. BioWare needs a win after Anthem.
@@drewtheunspoken3988 we have? Sorry then for not remembering. But to your reply; as I did say in the video there is a issue with Bioware being inconsistent with their art style and combat. It does make for a weaker series. Even if there are other consistent elements I do think the DA series would be better if it stuck with DAO's combat and art style. Newer is a better word. I can see from that perspective but I do think the newer games, beside Anthem, that are true to Bioware's core ideas. I think what the devs have said have been pretty alright. I am looking forward to the game to. Bioware does need a win.
@Knight1029 It's all good. You talk to a lot of different people on here, and I wouldn't really expect you to remember every interaction. I would, I fact, be surprised if you did remember. When I mentioned "dev statements," I was thinking of Corrine saying that "Combat was 'fun' for the first time." This is what I meant when I suggested that newer devs had an idea of what Bioware games "should be." I love the cultivated experiences that Bioware creates over "true" open RPG experiences that Bethesda and Larian are known for. In that regard, Bioware is, largely, very consistent. At the end of the day, I agree that people misunderstand the kinds of experiences Bioware creates. Or purposely misrepresent it. They also don't get enough credit for what they have accomplished. I don't know of any other studio that has created a series of games where choices in one will have any kind of effect in later games. They've invested a lot into that dynamic, creating scenarios and hiring voice actors that may never be experienced just so the choices made have real consequences. Maybe most end up being minor differences, but that doesn't detract at all from what they have accomplished
@@drewtheunspoken3988 I do remember most people it's just that those people have a unique icon. So, it easier for me. I think the statements about the combat being fun and similar comments are more marketing speak then anything. Like the developers are gon a say its good and why it is improved over the previous games. That is why I love Bioware games so much. It's the cultivated RPG that brings so much life to the game. I just don't connect to the character, story or world as much with Bethesda or Larian. Yeah, I honestly don't get why so many people misunderstand or misrepresent what Bioware is doing. It is frustrating because we get bogged down on things that don't really matter. We could instead actually talk about the game itself. And also that is a good point. Bioware is the only studio who tries to carry player's choices over their games.
That is what I said in the video. That BG1 and 2 benefit for being so similar to each other. BG2 is a better game because it improved upon what BG1 was.
You said that NO ONE understands Bioware but YOU the Chosen One do! Honestly I admire people without a hint of humility like you on some level at least.
@@Knight1029 You said that NO ONE understands Biioware and everyone that disagrees with you is wrong and whilst you are right about BW always being progressive their characters were not always ugly. Look at the original BG2 women for example or DAO, you can call it inconsistent, sure but they are noticeably uglier now.
ME Andromeda, combat system is pretty bad actually. It is unnoticeable, unless u are stuck on the higher difficulty with the wrong companions. And no way to restart cause of a bad auto save and saving system.
In my opinion, BioWare's downfall over nearly the past decade has simply been down to greed. Anthem was the worst decision they ever made, and it was one they clearly made because they were chasing Destiny money. I played Anthem's open demo back in the day and was disappointed that it felt like Destiny with flying mechanics. It was every bit as soulless and boring as my experience with Destiny had been. And because BioWare's main Edmonton team was working on Anthem, they handed their flagship franchise over to their inexperienced Montreal team. It should have been the other way around with BioWare Edmonton working on Mass Effect: Andromeda and BioWare Montreal working on the more experimental Anthem. I get the impression that BioWare is making a genuine effort to go back to being the studio we loved all the way up through Inquisition, but they may only have one shot at it. If The Veilguard flops, EA might decide to close BioWare. And if they did, I wouldn't really blame them since the closure would come after three high-profile failures in a row over the course of a decade. At that point, the next Mass Effect game would likely be put on ice for a while, eventually reemerging in the care of another EA studio. I can easily envision a scenario where a full two decades have passed between the release of Mass Effect 3 and the release of its direct sequel.
No, Bioware's downfall is not greed. Looking at any of the behind the scenes or interviews down with Mark Darrah shows it isn't greed. What was the actual issue was internal in-fighting and not sharing resources. That is why Andromeda and Anthem were buggy. As I said in the video. If it was greed you will have to prove it. You can't just vaguely gesture at it. Bioware, and any developers for that matter, care about making games. And care about making it good. If that wasn't the case no one would be in the game's industry. The amount of crunch and burnout would have all them leave in droves. But they don't because they care. I am a bit more cynical then most because I think if DAV does well EA will shut down Bioware regardless because it didn't make as much as FIFA. If anything destroys Bioware it will be because of EA and nothing else.
Ima come back to this video and laugh when this sht game fails like I did the ones that ignored the DEI changes with suicide squad…that’s what really kills games now a days
wow, I hope the head at bioware just get lay-off, fight between teams IN THE SAME COMPANY is a huge red flag, hope the best for DATV but the mobilezation and lack of consistency tell me the problems(or PROBLEM) is still there.
As I have said in the video I heard that there is less in-fighting recently but we will have to wait and see what behind-the-scenes articles and videos say. I am looking forward to DAV though.
Bioware ended somewhere around the end of Mass Effect trilogy... Perhaps even the EA aquisition.. This doesnt resemble DA in the least! This is some awful action adventure game, with a DA paint job.. Every release geta simpler, and simpler, to now not even being an rpg
@@Knight1029 You dont control teammates, You have no more tactics combat, there wasnt even 25% of the abilities remaining in Inquisition so Id expect even less here. Theyve reduced the options for roleplaying. You cant choose weapon types or armor its all class specific They seem heavily focused on diversity and romance Suddenly griffins are alive again Theyve retconned a ton of lore Theyve modernized the setting This is Dragon Age in name only
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 83 วันนี้!! คู่เอก "พันฤทธิ์ vs ซุปเปอร์บอล วันของโอม MBK"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1b4pkKHa_Fk/mqdefault.jpg)
Do you agree with what I have said? Do you think there are other actual issues with Bioware? Please do tell me.
I agree with everything you have said just maybe one or two comments I disagreed with. I'd have to go back again to look. It was commenter views I had slight disagreements. Like I never seen a bad comment. If all your videos are really this unbias I'll keep your notifications on. As I stated in my other post this is refreshing in this particular game it is divisive for sure
My issues are the little gameplay we have seen.
Taking away blood magic, but having nude sex is weird. I mean full on nudity
The mass effect combat system I do not like.
They are trying to sell this to everybody when there are fans this will turn away. Me personslly I need to see the writing and more gameplay. Bioware is on a cold streak. With anthem and Andromeda even tho I'm just now playing it. It's actually good.minus some facial problems.
@@firepenguin38 again thank you for saying that! I try to make sure I am reasonable and I am glad so many people are reasonable in the comments.
I can get that. We have only seen 20 minutes of gameplay and they are just the opening. We haven't seen what the mid game looks like.
I don't think taking away blood magic is a huge issue. I can get missing it because it is a cool thing that Dragon Age does. As for the nudity I don't really care. I can leave it or take it.
I think the combat will be good in DAV but it does suck that it isn't continuing what DAI did.
Bioware does need the game to be successful and I can get the concern with them. I do think Veilguard will be good at the very least.
@@Knight1029 I mean I hope so. I'll probly try it regardless to see how it all ends. I got years invested in the franchise. When I mention the nudity it was not from discontent. I am worried they might be focusing to much on it. From articles I've read. Romancing characters doesn't matter much to me but it does to others
Doing your research you probably have seen the articles that I've read as well..I hope they can strike a balance and make it fun for everyone. The one thing about baldurs gate 3 I told someone is someone is gonna try the companion system like this and fail. This is not the same bioware and I just hope it's a good balance is all. Nudity or sex. Idc but companions can outweigh the core of the story imo
@@firepenguin38 I can get the concern that they will focus on romancing companions at the expense of everything else. But I don't think that is going to happen. From what I have seen the story is still very important. Just because in the marketing they focus on the companions doesn't mean it is at the expense of other things. Look at DAO's marketing, it was trying to be seen as a cool dude bro game. Yet that isn't what it actually is.
I think Veilguard will be fine.
@@Knight1029 I hope your right man lol, if I hadn't invested tone a d years into this franchise. I dunno if I'd play it or not, but I started playing inquisition again right? Well that games combat was bad but everything else was good. I enjoyed it
I think all of us that played origins got kinda spoiled with how everything beaches out into different paths. Shit my bad. Back to inquisition. My point was I played all of that abd the dlc. There's no way this one can be as bad(fetch quests). The hinterlands triggers PTSD 😂. This already is better with exception of party control. I noticed one ginxetning thing on the party tho. They have health bars lol. I don't want babysitters through it but don't want a comojete nightmare difficulty. Got souls games for that lol.
Have a good night
Dragon Age: Origins is more recognizable as Dragon Age than any game after it. It's not generic at all.
Look at the equipment of Dragon Age Origins. It is just generic fantasy armor and weapons. The only unique and recognizable parts of DAO is the demons and the dwarf armor. Which has stayed the same, expect for the demons in DAV. Other than that DAO is just generic fantasy. That isn't bad but it doesn't have a look unto its own.
@@Knight1029 "Look at the equipment of Dragon Age Origins. It is just generic fantasy armor and weapons."
It looks functional. Unlike everything that came after.
> "The only unique and recognizable parts of DAO is the demons and the dwarf armor."
Darkspawn, UI, the font (there's an Inquisition mod to get it back), gameplay, tactical programming of your partymembers, bereskarn and other corrupted animals, architecture (though, to be fair, they did a good job with architecture in Inquisition too), the imperial highways (which were sorely missing in everything after Origins), Morrigan (I played Dragon Age in the first place because of how good Morrigan's character art looked), the maps, bloodspatter travel, and so on and so forth.
@AulisVaara what? My man the armor in newer games are not Final Fantasy armor. They just have a look to them now.
DAO was a generic fantasy game. That isn't a diss. Its just an observation. I like how DAO looks but you can't say it looks recognizable. Show anyone without any context for the game and ask them what it looks like. They won't say distinct.
@@Knight1029 "DAO was a generic fantasy game. That isn't a diss. Its just an observation."
People are literally dissing DAV for being generic while praising DA:O and missing it. If you call DA:O generic, know that two thirds of people disagree with you, massively.
Absolutely! The best game ever! ❤
also can't ignore that they do at least try to throw in little easter eggs even between the two franchises - in dragon age 2 there's a templar named *Conrad Vernhart* that you have to slander after saving an apostate, thought that was cool when I heard you mention Conrad in this video from ME. I do like that in this game they make the demons look more akin to the Profanes we meet in DA2 - which speaks to some consistency and, they were playing around with some models, I love that - it can also mean that the profane/demons are somehow related to the (Old Gods/Pantheon/)Titans.... interesting food for thought. Very interesting, did not know that BioWare had multiple ongoing projects before EA bought them, that speaks to the lack of unity in BioWare previously.
I remember seeing that and going "I know him!" Another one is a Krogan head in the quest Wicked Eyes Wicked Hearts.
That's a good point. The Profanes and the demons in Veilguard share similar designs. That does have a lot of lore implications. I wonder if Titans will be involved. I remember a lyrium giant in one of the earlier teasers for Veilguard and wonder if that's still exists in the game.
As you said Bioware lacked unity with each other. It seemed like if they didn't do something they would have shut down from to many projects.
In Dragon Age Origins, the fight scene immediately after the slide would have been significantly more intense, with around 10 to 15 enemies, far more than what we saw in the video for Dragon Age: Veilguard. As a mage, I would have started with a repulsion hex and instructed Morrigan to use a paralysis hex. This would create an area-wide paralysis explosion, immobilizing many enemies for a while. Alistair, acting as the tank, would use his chain to pull enemies towards himself, keeping them away from us. Meanwhile, I would prepare a chain lightning spell, and Morrigan would ready another powerful skill. I had made Leliana an archer, and she would focus on picking off any enemy mages from the back.Though it was less complex than games like Pathfinder or BG3, it was still significantly better than what we have today. Bioware should not treat its players as fools or incapable of enjoying complexity. Gamers spend hours figuring out game mechanics and strategizing, creating different builds in BG3 and Elden Ring.
@@atishbhattacharya3473 I don't think the combat in Veilguard is less complex or deep than DAO. It's just a different kind of complex and deep. Now is this me saying that DAV is better? No, I see it more as side grades than anything else. The only reason I want DAO combat back is to have the series being consistent. Because my DAO combat is just on easy. I feel it is better purely because being consistent means it can benefit from all the things I mentioned in the video.
I agree with your point about consistency. But the fight in Veilguard is not complex; it's just moving around a lot, based on what I've seen so far. I guess the mage will have somewhat similar mechanics to what we have in Elden Ring. I certainly hope so.
But thats 2 hard for shippers and cosplayers their new audience thats why they put in a GOD MODE so far the companions are the focal point and they want cosplayers to cosplay their characters who are apparently more superior than the previous games somehow
@@vergillives9890 they put in a god mode for people with disabilities. it’s an optional difficulty setting that just allows more people to be able to play the game so I don’t see how that’s an issue at all.
@@slurpy-f3k they have always had disability support in every bioware game they have always had a pause/tactical menu and every enemy has a delay window plus STORY MODE enemies rarely attack more than once because its for beginners and disabled people to be able to play the game specifically shippers dont play games thats why so they could get to the actual romance places without have waste time learning the game and just get to the hub for romance Because thats what the game is "combat is hindering the story"
I always thought inconsistency was Bioware's style; meaning, they actually always wanted to do it that way. They wanted to give something new to the gamer with each new release, not the exact same thing with a different story. You can only stack on so many new abilities before people get tired of the same old mechanic. It's the light saber problem. Once people get sick of new light saber features and realize it's still the same old light saber, what do you do?
If you look at Bioware's history you can definitely see that with each new game it was different to the previous game. So, there is some validity to what you said.
The inconsistencies may have something to do with each game used a different game engine, Eclipse, Lycium, and Frostbite, respectively. The other inconsistencies may have to do with the developers don't want to do the same thing over again. It takes years to make each game and they don't want to see that over again. They want to do something different. In combination with games taking years to make is they do have to be relevant and chase after trends. They already have a returning audience but they need to grow that audience. Turn based gaming is not trending. Live action is.
You are right that changing engines have lead to a lot of inconsistencies. Though with DAO and DA2 its more that they look different rather than function different. DA2 combat is basically DAO combat just tunned differently.
But yeah I do think a big factor to consider is that the developers want to make something different. Which is true for Bioware because all there games in the 2000s were different games.
I think there is a niche in turn based combat but it has to look like an action game. BG3 is only big because it is a cinematic presented game.
@@Knight1029 I came across this thought from "Phoenix is Fire - Don't Over Complicate" on "Mark Darrah on Games" channel, in particular "sick of it" @ 0:22.
@@0x8badbeef Mark Darrah really does have some great and insightful videos.
@@0x8badbeef Dude you're making too much sense for certain idiots 😂 I've been making this same talk point too times changes and people wish to do more over creativity fields they don't wanna stuck to one game formula forever.
@@0x8badbeef It's ❤ so nice to see another person making sense here like come on they want a repeat for Halo and COD franchise level of crap 😅 ruined the perfectly end of Halo 3 even Halo 4 to whatever ruined,retcon,repeated and milked to death to happen reminder old MW3 got so much hate because they used same formula of MW2 but bigger and better or how Halo 4 to Infinitie retelling Mantle of Responsibility so much it becomes a joke to fix that they either need to retcon whole thing since Halo 4 or remake whole franchise 😂 sometimes new direction or ip is better idea and all good things must come to an end before it turned to shit.
The infighting is interesting stuff, so much time wasted. Workplace culture is such a weird concept, I’d be pissed like wdym we have to make our own inventory system because our team leader doesn’t like that other group in the office
@@tidus94 it really does cause so many issues. Like I would also be so mad and upset that we can't just use what is already there just because those at the top don't like the other guys. It destroys any collaboration and makes the games worse.
Yeah, the part about secondary materials is a huge issue I have with Bioware. Obviously Wicked Eyes and Wicked Hearts is the worst example of this in effect, because that was a horrible way to introduce Celene for the first time and did nothing to truly explain the situation in Orlais. There are smaller examples, but they're all incredibly annoying. Nexus Uprising is also a huge one in my opinion. Andromeda functioned as if Nexus Uprising was required reading before playing the game in order to truly get full context of the uprising and the people involved. Especially when you meet Sloane.
It does make we worried for the companions in Veilguard whose introductions were in books/comics. They need to do better than Cole. Don't get me wrong, Cole was great, but he had so many references to Asunder that pretty much never got followed up on (treatment that none of the other companions got) and I really don't want them to do that for half the companions in Veilguard. Characters that are new to the games should be considered new. Period. This is a video game series, not a book series. If I need to read one of the books to get the big picture of a plotline or character, someone didn't do their job.
I do agree. Reading Masked Empire changes how you think about Celene as a character, and her relationship with Briala. Which is terrible. Because it leave so much vital, and good, writing off the table.
I played Andromeda first before reading Nexus Uprising and I can agree. It does feel very different to the game. And not in a great way.
I am worried about that as well. That Bioware might think fans will have had read, or watched someone explain, the books and know what's happening. When they should just introduce the characters like they are knew. Sure for people who read the books they will get repeat information but that's fine. Its better for the game if they introduce them as new.
they said at comic con that the vailguard has more dialogoue option of all bioware game, sorry my french
@@alaricsam7672 your French is pretty good. Glad to hear about all the dialogue for the game.
My problem with Dragon Age is that after Origins they couldn't decide on an identity. DA2 I call Dragon Effect because it tried too much to be more like Mass Effect. Dragon Age Inquisition I called Dragon Scrolls because it felt like they tried too hard to be more like an Elder Scrolls game IE Skyrim. Instead of keeping Dragon Age as it's own type of game established in Origins through the years, they kept trying to copy the most popular franchise with these titles. So for me, despite the writing remaining in Dragon Age, each subsequent game didn't "feel" like Dragon Age. It always felt like something else which is why I can't get excited for this game. BG3 showed that older styles of gameplay are still viable, so I really wanted to see Dragon Age return to its roots, but everything I've seen for Veilguard shows they are again trying to copy another popular franchise.
Just because Dragon Age doesn't have a consistent combat and art style identity doesn't mean it has none. As I said in the video Bioware has been consistent with making Dragon Age a RPG where it enhances story, characters, the world and themes. I would like for their to be a consistent look and combat but I think the newer Dragon Age games are Dragon Age.
@@Knight1029 As someone who was active in the old BSN (if you know what that is then you know), then this discussion was brought up frequently even back then, when Darrah would sometimes go off on the community when the name Dragon Effect was used by more than just me when referencing DA2. It has been a problem for Bioware going on almost 15 years now. I liked the universe Gaider and team created, but the writing is the only thing that has kept them all "Dragon Age" in a literal sense. And now the core writing team is gone as well. I know there is a lot of hopium going on right now, I'm just not one of them. I'm a "wait and see how it comes out" before I jump on any bandwagon. But the DA franchise has not been consistent since the second game no matter how you try to spin it.
@ragingcyclone369 Dragon Age is still gonna be consistent with its writing. You miss that fact that a) Patrick Weekes is there and they were on ME1 and were taught by David Gaider. b) You seem to imply that no other writer in Bioware knows how to write other than the originals. Which is dumb.
Sure the inconsistencies in combat and art style aren't great but the game will be fine. It still has that core of what makes it a Bioware game and a Dragon Age game.
Yeah well, as we probably discussed before, Bioware's roots are that of a company that more or less adapts Dungeons and Dragons pen and paper mechanics into video games. As time went on and video games evolved into flashier, more cinematic, real-time experiences, Bioware felt more and more self-conscious about its old-school, nerdy dice rolling and cumbersome, western RPG gameplay, so they tried to modernize their games here and there, but they didn't quite do it well enough, and they've never really solved that puzzle.
Larian arguably showed that they didn't need to 'modernize' anything at all; that there's still a huge customer base out there that are still interested in minimalistic, old-school RPG gameplay.
Then again, Bioware was getting at the heart of a very complex issue: viewer imagination vs cinematic fulfillment. Those 2 things seemingly butt heads, and Bioware got stuck in the middle.
@@CynicalWarlock I can agree on the gameplay side of things that Bioware moving away form the DnD adaptation into a video game is because they became more self-conscious but I don't think the way they do their stories changed that much. They are still a studio who uses RPGs to enhance stories. Mass Effect has less options then BG3 but on the whole is better at delivering its story because it uses RPGs to tell stories.
@@Knight1029 Yeah, for sure, the storytelling didn't really suffer until they started making crap like Anthem.
@@CynicalWarlock in the video I do say that Anthem is their weakest game because it doesn't follow what they normal do. Hopefully Veilguard will get back to that.
Additionally; BioWare isn't super consistent with their lote between games, let alone supplemental material.
For example: In Mass Effect 1, Cerberus was a top secret black-ops team that went rogue. In Mass Effect 2, it becomes a "humanity first" organization.
BioWare will alter lore and story events to fit the current game. It's annoying from a continuity perspective but doesn't completely ruin the experience. I know there are changes between Dragon Age games, as well, but I'm hard pressed to recall them ar the moment.
@@drewtheunspoken3988 not really. The Cerberus one is the biggest inconsistency of their lore. And also in ME1 they have been "humanity first". But otherwise they have been pretty good. I just don't see how they are inconsistent.
That's a problem I noticed with Veilguard, having a rouge who's able to cast a lighting spells pretty much diminishes apostates and templars.
I think it diminishes magic in general.
I agree with OP there's a lot of inconsistency. But that's kind of Bioware in general especially, in the latter era. At the end of the day I put it on the managers. Never and I mean NEVER forget how much of anthem was their own fault rather than the easy target being EA.
@@odst123451 Agreed
What I meant by the world's being too small or too big is DA2's repeating level designs or Inquisition's giant open worlds that has alot of stuff that doesn't offer much beyond more xp.
Oh, I get you. Thank you for clarifying.
I can understand that. DA2's reused maps was a issue I spoke about in the video and does make it feel pretty bad. And I did the same with DAI's open world. It wasn't great just wandering a giant map.
@@Knight1029 There that's call fair criticism wish more people do it often as much as I love big map of Inquisition going back and forth get tiresome and that first time exploring hype don't live up which becomes an issue of repeating same section in new playthrough unfortunately.
@@MrApoorvaSingh753 there are definitely a lot of issues with the maps but it is fair to say that.
That's why you get the Lancer in ME 3, it's a throwback.
I liked that! I just wish there were more weapons like it. They could introduce a side arm that is supposed to be used when you run out of thermal clips or they give soldiers the overheating guns when going on long operations.
Bro I wanted to liked this video just because of the title. Thank you for talking about actually problems
Oh, thank you! I really wanted to give actual criticisms of Bioware instead of the nonsense we normal see.
I like your unbiased view of this game but it is divisive.to say the least among fans
I think player agency is being taken away with going away from blood magic for example. I can list more gripes, but just wanna keep it yo a minimum
Also Im so much on the fence. I realize how tevinter looks reflects it's tone in the trailer but here the past few interviews I've seen have been about romances and nudity which is fine, but no talk of the actual story or gameplay. Romances are fine I guess. I still like my liars or Phoebe(dunno if you can romance her) just started playing Andromeda, anyway that should be the number ,3 or 4 thing behind thecworld, gameplay and story. Not in that order
Just stating my thoughts. You all have a great and safe day. Again really great unbiased video
Thank you! I try my best to make my videos reasonable.
I don't think taking away blood magic is removing player agency. I don't know how that is removing it causes less player agency.
I think that is just natural to do as Bioware game's best parts are their companions. Additionally, I think they have told us plenty about the story. They gave us the basic jist on what we are gonna do and what locations we are going to visit. What would you like them to talk about?
Its cool. I love reading what people think about this game.
Maybe I'm weird, but for some reason I don't mind the inconsistency in dragon age and I like that you pointed out the pros and cons of it. It is weirdly refreshing and I was excited to see what Bioware "experimented" with this time, but I also understand why people might find it so jarring. The way I saw it, the combat *was* improving each game, but that's probably because I wasn't very partial to the tactical combat in DA:O. I didn't mind it, but I also didn't favor it. When I play on PC now I actually pause as little as possible unless I absolutely have to, and I think that's what I prefer for combat. Tbh I wish I could replay Inquisition, even tho it is kinda "too big" of a game in terms of a "100% run", yet I'm dying to do so because I loved the combat, the companions, the story... but the EA app is cursed and I can't fathom having to deal with it. I'm SO glad and relieved Veilguard isn't gonna be dependent on it.
I can't remember if it was you but a commentor said that the inconsistency felt like each game was fresh. Which I think was important to add to the discussion. There are some pros to being inconsistent.
I think you should give DAI a try. Despite how long it takes I think the highs are pretty high. The companions are really good and make it worth it even if you have to deal with the EA app.
But I am happy that DAV is moving away from that. It is so much better to not have to open the EA app in Steam.
@@Knight1029 That's awesome when people can see the pros to things that might kinda "sound" bad like inconsistency. I don't think it was me that brought that up previously, but I have a lot of thoughts that bounce around in my head so it's hard for even me to keep track tbh lol!
and ooohh I wish I could play Inquisition again... maybe I'll muster up the courage to tackle the EA app, but it just sounds like it's not worth the trouble... I do miss the game though. So maybe!! But yes it is such a relief that Veilguard won't be weighed down by the app. I kinda hope we get a release date soonish. I don't want them to rush, obviously, but I also don't know if I can take the anticipation much longer!
@@YaddaGrl I think it was you but regardless I enjoy when you comment. It gives me more perspective and its just great to chat with another fan of the series.
I am gonna play DAI on PC even with the issues with the EA App. Its not great but its better than nothing. I hope they do a bundle of the first three games and make it separate from the EA App.
I also want a release date. I am currently playing through the games again and I want to know how fast or slow I can take it. And the anticipation is strong. Everything I hear about DAV makes it sound great!
Bioware sais that Veilguard is the first game witha truly fun combat and i just can't get over the fact that they setup themselves to fail.
Of course it might be the first "fun" combat because you bloody genius never built upon what you created. You always change everything. Doubt it that something like BG3 would be as good if Larian changed the combat between Original sin 1 and 2 then again in BG3. I don't personally love the combat in BG3 becahse of the rules from dnd 5e, but they got the right idea of sticking to one style of combat.
I don't know what you were expecting Bioware to say. What? To say the combat is alright? Larian says there combat is quite good. It just marketing.
That is why I said in my video that I wonder how good DAO's combat could have been if it was given the chance to improve itself.
@@Knight1029 I expected them to say that combat is good , no need to say that was their first fun combat.
@@alsaiduq4363 in the perception of many Dragon Age fans DAO is a janky, clunky and unfun game. That is what they think. And to them Bioware games were great for their story, characters and world. Not much else.
I think what youre getting at with the art style is the aesthetics getting more and more hyperstylized
I mean wasn't Orlais and Tevinter always has been fancy one out there outstanding than average Ferelden ?
@@mrflufflebunny4529 I can see what you mean. But I don't think DAO was realistic. Unless you are just stating that it got more stylized and not that it started realistic.
@@Knight1029 yeah thats pretty much what im saying
@@mrflufflebunny4529 oh, I get you then.
4:40 - "Advances in graphics technology"
Yeah, but there is a difference beyond "Advances in graphics technology". There are art style changes as well.
Wow. Wait. Your favourite is DA2? I've never heard anyone say that 😮
I really loved 2. I think it had the best writing, and take a journey through time instead of locations was special.
But it can never be my favourite game because everything was poo-brown! All the time! I understood it for story reasons, but damn the colour pallet was miserable!
I love DA2 so much. It is my favorite video game of all time as well. There is just so much that I like that comes together to make an amazing experience. The art style, combat, music (the music!), voice acting, and the writing. It is just such an amazing game. I love it so much. If I could I would make it the basis for the series entirely.
Origins is definitely my favorite one, but let me tell you that DA2 is a very close second, I really love that game, everything on it, except for the dungeon recycling, but after the third replay I stopped caring 😂.
@@SeventhheavenDK I also like DA2. I think its such a good game.
I didn't like micromanaging companions in BG3 i didnt like being forced to, for even easy fights. It was something I suffered for the story and characters.
But I appreciate that many players love that detail and control.
I really loved what DAI did. I was able to focus mostly on the Inquisitor. But in the harder battles, I could still switch to tactical and micromanage.
I wish veilguard had that option for tactical players.
But i am persoannly ok with the Mass Effect system.
I didn't like that at all. I so desperately wished for an option to have auto combat. Let the game decide how my companions fight. I would love that. Its nice for other people to have a lot of control but for me it just bogs down the experience.
I liked how DAI did it as well. And it would have been great to see that system explored more. I would have liked that a lot.
I think Veilguard's combat will be fun and enjoyable but there is something that was lost.
I've never heard somebody who liked DA:2 for something be right about anything, and the trend isn't stopping today it seems.
I'll take 10 more "generic dark fantasy" DA:O sequels, the atmosphere was great, the characters felt amazing, the stakes were almost perfectly dialed in, with some refinement for the mechanics it presented it could have become a franchise for the ages, instead if was abandoned for a dumbed-down bastardization of itself. If anything, I'd have loved for the armors to be polished up and made a bit more down-to-earth instead of the over-the-top fantasy "styles" we've got in later iterations.
Everything that came after was far too generic, trying to get mass appeal, the wider audience then became the modern audience and now we've gotten so far from what sparked the series that it might as well be "Disney Pixar's Marvel's Guardians of the Veil™".
EDIT: This is a trend in a lot of "creatives" nowadays that take the work of their forbearers and think to themselves arrogantly "I can do it better" when in actuality and unfortunately, with observable proof, they can not. The movie industry is a great example of this, with amazon's LoTR, Netflix's handling of the Witcher, etc.
It is like they hire people who hate the franchise and expressly put them in charge just for the "lol so random" comedy moment that we never get to witness (it probably isn't funny in all actuality).
What? All I meant by that generic comment about DAO was that it doesn't have a distinct identity to itself. Look at all the fantasy games that released around DAO (not just the big ones but all of them) and you will see DAO will eventually blend into the background. Now I don't think that's bad. Being generic is not a sign of low quality. It is just a statement on what it is. Being generic is something that can be done well and DAO does it well. DA2 and DAI diverted from DAO because they wanted to be more distinct. There art styles are far more unique to themselves. And that's fine for anyone to want. To make it look like something.
Also funny of you to ignore me saying I think it would have been better to stick with DAO's art style and combat. But I get you want to just dislike anyone positivity towards the newer games. Its cool being irrational.
My issue with BioWare where’s Kotor 3? If not how about a standalone game for SWTOR also why can’t they make DA game that can stand own it’s own like DA origins that’s not compared to Mass Effect.
They gonna need to make their own in game engine and build time also new blood who can dare to make big shift.
@@fliplife67 oh man speak the truth. Where is the single player offline SWTOR. It's basically a single player game already. Why not go the full way? Also yeah Kotor 3 would be cool
I think the DA games can stand on there own. There are some issues but I think the games do stand on there own.
Bioware considers Swtor to be KOTOR 3-5 so that's a "not gonna happen" on any single player KOTOR games ever again I'm afraid @Knight1029
I want more Kotor :'(
@@Supadrumma441 I can dream. I hope for Kotor 3 or a single player offline Swtor.
I wonder what will happen among the 250 BioWare devs left now that we have Dragon Age using the 'Frostbite-BioWare' engine and Mass Effect using the UnReal 5 one. They can't share resources even if they want to.
I think what's gonna happen is the Mass Effect team is basically gonna force the Dragon Age team to move off of Frostbite and onto Unreal. Which does suck. So, much time and development was spent on making Frostbite work.
I thibk People seem to forget after the rushed release of DA2, which was supposed to be a small standalone title to be the point of a new start, leading to Inquisition, which was supposed to be a real sequel, where EA forced them to make DA2 and be a bigger game than it should've been as if wasn't bad they forced them to work in their in game engine Frostbite, and we know how it goes even Veilguard is Frostbite, but now they are good with it thankfully ME5 will be UE5.
@@MrApoorvaSingh753 I think the bigger issue is that Bioware didn't treat Frostbite with respect. If MEA and Anthem reused what DAI made then the games would have been much better. But yeah, UE5 will be much easier to use than Frostbite.
@@Knight1029 True tho I dunno it was challenging and new to them they were forced to use.
@@MrApoorvaSingh753 no yeah. There were so many issues partly EA and partly Bioware to blame. It is an interesting subject overall.
@@Knight1029 True with all that "Bioware Magic" BS but I blame EA more to push them to their breaking point where a lot changes come from it.
@@MrApoorvaSingh753 oh yeah. The biggest culprit in all of Bioware's fallings is EA. They are the ones who caused them to shift into multiplayer and microtransactions, and the one who basically forced them to use Frostbite. EA is the biggest issue here.
If Bioware didn't gut 2 projects in progress to start a live action project instead of waiting for both to be done people would be less weary instead gutted both reminded both teams working on anthem that they are the problem then fired them leaving DAI and ME:A still short handed thats the current issue for people so is just another make shift product or actually something finished
@@vergillives9890 what do you mean but gutting to projects to work on a live action project? What are you trying to say?
@@Knight1029 bioware gutted DAI and ME:A teams mid production of both games so they show they could be a better DESTINY thats why DAI has the real time war table while working on the frostbite engine if they weren't in such a rush to show how they could be a better DESTINY they would have 2 complete games a decent live service and people would have less of issue
@@vergillives9890 oh, then I completely agree. Yeah so much of MEA and DAI were just made worse because of the Anthem team.
The art style of each game and the combat never bothered me. I can see why people criticize it but from my perspective, artists - creatives, evolve their art plus technology advances that also help to evolve the art. So for me, the changing of the art style is just the art evolving because that is what art, music, movies, etc, do. With the combat though, that's a bit different. While I could also argue about the evolution of the technology playing a role, I think you or someone in the comments made a point about EA and the shareholders wanting it to be more action-oriented. Not to let Bioware completely off the hook here as they also wanted that to appeal to a larger audience (that is what most game studios do) and that leads to the inconsistency that you're talking about. There are criticisms I have about Bioware myself but the artstyle and combat simply aren't on that list for me.
While I love that each Dragon Age game is different, with a different setting and different characters, I do understand why people don't like that. I remember when I started Dragon Age 2 and I was like, "wait, where is my warden?" Plus, the lore does change in some ways. I am no expert on Dragon Age though because I only play the games and I have only read one book. I don't get knee deep in the lore so I could be wrong. However, one of the biggest gripes I had was with DAI when I play a Dalish elf and we get to the temple of Mythal - and my dalish elf can't understand the language so Morrigan has to explain it? And she lies at that but because Bioware didn't make our Dalish elf consistent, we somehow forgot the language. There are other examples of the inconsistency as well, and I can see how Dragon Age: Origins has a lot more consistency just between to the story lines.
I also think that (some of this is due to EA and some OG people leaving) Bioware has struggled with some identity issues. Especially as we got to Mass Effect Andromeda, DAI, and Anthem . while I love DAI, the change in direction with the open world, fetch quests and what-not is noticeable. They had a bit of an identity crisis and what I'm hoping with Dragon Age: the Veilguard is that Bioware is finally getting back to re-discovering who they are but also who they want to be. I hope that makes sense. I don't always explain my thoughts in the best way.
@@LadyRav3nGaming I think there are some great reasons to be inconsistent. Like I said in the video sometimes you can make something better or what came before wasn't that great. DAO is generic fantasy. That's not bad but making it look like something is fine.
Bioware isn't to inconsistent with their lore but there are some bad examples. Like the one you mentioned. Though in that case Bioware knew about it but couldn't do anything because they added different race options late into development. Originally DAI was gonna only have a human Inquistor. So, explaining elf lore to them isn't that big of an issue. But I do agree with you point in some cases.
I can see how some OG Bioware devs leaving can effect development but I really don't think it effected the games that much. The bigger issues are the ones I laid out in the video and EA.
The section I made on each games issues could have been so much bigger. Especially with DAI. The way they do open world is not that great. The best open world in DAI is by far Emprise Du Lion. It feels focused but has branching paths. There is a story to it and not wandering aimlessly.
After Anthem though I can agree that there was a bit of an identity crisis for Bioware. I like Anthem but Anthem is the least like Bioware game. I think Veilguard will do a good job at having Bioware return to form.
@@Knight1029 I did not know that DAI had originally been human inquisitor only. I'm glad they changed that but I understand now why the elven lore is lost on the dalish elf now. Makes sense. I have a mod I'm using to correct that anyway so it's not a really major deal, just one I had really remembered from the lore part. Emprise Du Lion is a great area. I also like The Emerald Graves even though there really isn't that much story there, it's not huge and there isn't as many fetch quests there. I am looking forward to what Veilguard shows us.
Giving artists freedom to be creative is good, for a new series and even then to an extent and you always have constraints (you're not going to let them create a creature that is not supposed to fly have wings for example). As for making sequels, the art style is expected to remain consistent because the liberty of imagining the creatures and the world for the first time has already passed, fans and viewers of the series expect and imagine a certain world when they think of an already established series. So I disagree with you on that point. Take The Witcher as a franchise for example, now imagine whatever you want from that universe in your head,. Take The Lord of the Rings franchise as another example, now imagine whatever you want from that universe in your head. Now imagine The Elder Scrolls franchise as yet another example, now imagine whatever you want from that universe in your head. Etc. I could go on and on but you get the point. Now try to do the same with Dragon Age. It is probably harder to think of something from DA without associating it with a specific game that isn't different in the other games. Why is that? Why is it that we can all agree what an Orc looks like, or a Nazgul, or a Nekker, or a Wraith, or an Argonian, etc. and not what a darkspawn looks like? or what a demon looks like?
And concerning your point about Bioware struggling with identity issues, yes I agree but I don't think that going from a non open world game to an open world game plays a role in that at all. Take The Witcher franchise for example. The devs switched to an open world game with The Witcher 3, and that game is one of the best RPG games of all time (at least for me). And that game remained consistent in all aspects: lore, art style, combat, rich story, dark fantasy, etc. What DA really suffers from when it comes to identity in my opinion, is the change of fantasy genre with every single DA game. They started off with DAO being a dark and epic fantasy RPG with a dark tone, then with DA2 they changed the combat and removed the races, the only reason you can call DA2 as a dark fantasy game was that quest involving your mother (I won't go too deep into that because of spoilers but hopefully you get which quest I am talking about), and the game is no longer an epic fantasy. And in DAI, they completely abandoned the dark aspect and went back to an epic fantasy setting with no dark elements but they changed to a light tone. That is a huge identity issue.
I completely agree with your point about the lore inconsistency, and it DRIVES ME INSANE. It's actually one of the reasons that I stopped being a huge fan of the series.
@@eliesaad I disagree with you. As I say in the first sentence of my comment, the art style doesn’t bother me. I like the changes they make in each game. Whether it’s dark fantasy or high fantasy, it’s all good to me. You have your opinion and I have mine so we can just agree to disagree on this.
@@LadyRav3nGaming Dark, high, epic, etc. fantasy are not an "art style", they are full on fantasy subgenres. So I wasn't talking about the art style when I was referring to the genres that the games belong to, I was referring to the story type and setting. The only part where I talked about the art style was solely in the first paragraph. Just wanted to clarify this that's all.
Have heard of the in fighting between the DA and ME dev teams, it's really unfortunate, sounds like they should have one big team work on one game for most of development when you're within that last 3 months of development you take a small percentage of that team to start pre production on the next project. Mass Effect Andromeda's situation is a little more unique because it's was Bioware Montreal that developed that game, and the only thing they had done at Bioware previously was the citadel dlc for ME3. So I think some of it's issues had more to do with lack of experience and potentially lack of leadership to guide that team.
I think the developers have moved on to what you said. Most are working on the next game while a small staff is working on the next project. So, progress is happening. Though it doesn't change the fact that Bioware screwed themselves with needless infighting.
You are correct on Bioware Montreal being less experienced but what didn't help was the fact they refused to use any of the tools and technologies developed by the Dragon Age team. Again they made a separate inventory system when DAI already made one. Also I do agree on the lack of leadership. I want to quickly just criticize Mac Walters as when he was brought in to help MEA he tried to make the procedural planet generation thing to work. Which was such a mistake. Mac Walters should have known that wasn't gonna go anywhere but he tried to make it work because of "it was new and innovative".
@@Knight1029 It would have been neat to see the procedural planet generation depending on how they implemented it, but you're right it was mistake since Andromeda had other problems which affected sales and ended up cancelling future dlc. Even No Man's Sky launch was rough and took a few years and more updates to find it's footing and Starfield is just an other example that quantity doesn't mean quality.
@@MrDay53 if they just stopped the procedural planet generation they could have focused on far more important aspects of the game. I don't think it would make a 180 but it would have been so much better.
“Actual” issues, eh? Thanks for that very important qualifier.
Yeah, so, many people don't talk about actual issues with Bioware but made up things like pretending they are trying to be like Larian.
More people aren't liking it. Gaming has become mainstream. It's the biggest entertainment media on the planet now, and rpgs arent just for nerds anymore.. That wasnt so, when Origins released
What? If there are more people now wouldn't that mean more people like it?
@@Knight1029 In the context of how you stated this has become more liked by the players. I would argue thats not accurate.. The market was flooded with more gamers overall. In that same time, Bioware wentnfrom the greatest rpg developer to exist, to one on the verge of closure, because theyre releasing mediocre, or flat out bad games.
@@jmmywyf4lyf I still don't get what you mean. What are you trying to say by talking about people liking the game?
@@Knight1029 Originsnis one of the most widely praised games of all time.. Most gamers bought it.. fast forward 6 years, and gaming is much more mainstream, with millions more gamers available to purchase games. Theyre going to appear more popular if you count copies sold, vs percentage of gamers buying each game.. Which is why EA can now consider 7 million copies sold, as a failure
@@jmmywyf4lyf what is the point of saying this? Are you trying to invalidate the popularity of the newer games? Or are you trying to say something else?
Never knew about the infighting but this just makes all the senior guys who left seem incompetent for wasting time and resources. Also, makes sense if this infighting is what led to lost of so many jobs during the layoffs
So, many of the issues on Anthem were because of this in-fighting and the people who caused a lot of it were leaders. Even ME3's ending was caused by Casey Hudson not listen to the developers on the ground. He just thought it was better his way.
You expect a lot from them to understand to know their situation its easier to blame and be envious saying they should do this or that until they fit in their shoes.
@@MrApoorvaSingh753 I just think it is important to know that there are issues and the people who are giving wild criticisms are just nonsense. Instead of giving actual criticism they just say whatever. Because they want to hate Bioware just because.
@@Knight1029 Yup the Worst one I always feel it's identity because "It's not like Origin" argument other shit take is Bioware gone woke like since when they weren't !? 😂 they always were open Pro LGBT.
@@MrApoorvaSingh753 yeah man. Like Dragon Age ends and begins with DAO. And the woke stuff is just so dumb.
@@Knight1029 Yup personally this work argument is something I always hated it they did before on MELE by censor Miranda's butt part when she talks about her sister missing is just awkward or how oddly enough it's no issue anymore where game release just fine sell well and you can mod ass scene it was too blown out of proportion.
Being in support of LGBT (I noticed you left out the Q, hmm…) isn’t inherently woke.
I also don't completely agree with the Matt Rhodes blog post. I do agree the basic design of the darkspawn in Origins is generic, most likely being inspire by orcs from Lord of the Rings, but I don't think they were successful in DA2 in making them feel unique. The only darkspawn designs in DA2 that felt unique was the emissary and the genlock. The emissary's overall design felt more unique except for the brown leather strapping around it's face, the helmets/head gear the emissaries wore in Origins look more unique. The Ogre's colour was better to match with the rest of the darkspawn but overall design was pretty much the same from Origins so still generic. The Genlock was the biggest design change and is definitely more unique but unfortunately wouldn't have been seen by everyone since it was only in the Legacy dlc. I also feel the redesign of the Genlock contradicts one of Matt's points/goals.
His first goal of wanting to show that the taint hadn’t just lead to pointy-teeth monsters, but that it was a sickness affecting people who used to be Human, Elven, Dwarven and Qunari, I think they were successful in Origins. The Hurlock are blighted humans, Genlock are blighted dwarves (the redesign in DA2 isn't stout so doesn't feel dwarven to me which I feel contradicts his goal or just wasn't successful in achieving), Shrieks are blighted elves (also the most unique darkspawn design in Origins, and never made an appearance in DA2), and Ogres are tainted Qunari. So I think they were very successful in the visual story telling of Origins when it came to defining the different darkspawn and what original race they were. I don't think they succeeded in this goal going into DA2 since Shrieks were not in the game and the redesigns of the Genlock don't feel dwarven inspired.
His second goal of wanting to show the brain-decay the disease caused by making their armor far less sophisticated. The armor is less sophisticated and shows more of the darkspawns' body than in Origins. His wording in this goal is a little confusing so not completely sure if he meant to say body decay, but if he actually meant brain decay literally, covering the Hurlocks' heads in chainmail and helmets hides the brain decay. I personally feel the the design for the Origins darkspawn looked more decayed than in DA2 except for the ogre.
His third goal of wanting to show that it was the same disease effecting all members of the darkspawn I feel he was really just using this as an excuse to justify the changes in design which he doesn't have to do. I never got the impression that the darkspawn in Origins were affected by a different disease that's why I feel this goal was just an excuse to justify the changes.
I think they did succeed in making the dark feel unique. I can't think of anything at the time of DA2's release that looks similar to its darkspawn. I think if you show people DAO's darkspawn without any context of what they are or even their name, I think most people would think orc or zombie orc. While DA2's would invoke corruption.
You say DAO was successful in Matt Rhodes first goal but again it is more easier to confuse DAO darkspawn with orcs. While DA2 hones in on that goal. Only the genlock really suffers in this regard. They look a bit too different. Also I think something to point out is that the Ogre's are restricted to the way they are because of DAO. They couldn't stray to far from them.
What Matt Rhodes meant by brain-decay was that it makes the darkspawn less intelligent and therefore are not able to make there armor and weapons look sophisticated. Which in DA2 is shown quite clearly. Their armor and weapons look like they didn't take long to make at all. The only point of failure is the chainmail on the hurlock's heads. Chainmail is not easy to make. So, he meant more of a lack of intelligence rather than them looking like they are rotting. Because the darkspawn in lore aren't meant to look like they are rotting or decaying. That wasn't what David Gaider wanted them to be.
I think what Matt Rhodes meant by that is they all look different in big and small ways. The genlocks have pointy ears while the hurlocks don't. Genlock's have more flesh on their head while hurlock's look like you can see their skull. The Shrieks don't look like elves at all, which makes them look at odds with the hurlocks and genlocks which are the same size and proportions as their respective race. And they all have differing colors. Sure a greenish color does unite them but it isn't done with that much consistency. Shifting to white colors makes them look all unified and also has them look similar to broodmothers. The only outliers are genlocks and ogres. The emissaries are also different but there is more explanation as to why.
My issue with the changes, as I said in the video, isn't the fact that the newer designs are bad. It is just inconsistent. I like the DA2's designs more than DAO's. But, as I said in the video, I think sticking to the DAO's design would be better long term. Even though I prefer DA2's design.
@@Knight1029 The Hurlocks in DA2 look very similar to Red Skull just a white version. For Origins yes with no context people would assume orc or goblins, though for people who play the game and learn about the world through the game but don't get deep in the lore would understand that Hurlocks are tainted Humans, Genlocks are tainted dwarves, Ogres are tainted Qunari, and Shrieks are tainted elves. The Shrieks are the most different looking but they do have pointed ears and thinner arms and legs, so a few similarities, but yes not a one for one.
Okay that makes sense for what he meant by brain decay and agree the armor is less sophisticated in DA2. Still wish they'd have a bit of variety in the armor though since some people become tainted from darkspawn blood like a dwarf from the legion of the dead as apposed to being born from a brood mother. That's a shame the look in Origins wasn't what they wanted, I personally really liked the look and their appearance made the blight look more serious for how it affected the body, I don't really get that as much from the Hurlocks in DA2 but that may because I'm pasty white and see that in the mirror almost everyday.
@@MrDay53 I have no idea how you see Red Skull in the DA2 hurlocks. I just don't see that at all. They have way to much flesh on them. They seem more to a gaunt look to me.
But that is why the changed it. People just looking without context will just think orcs. If someone with no context looks at the DA2 version they will not think orcs. Sure with context you can get why DAO darkspawn look like the way they do but their goal was to have people to have a general idea on what they are without context.
That was an issue with DAO as well. Ghouls exist in DAO and we did see Tamlen as a ghoul but not anything outside that really. Not in the way of regular enemies at least. But I do agree with you. It would have been cool to see ghouls alongside the darkspawn. Even if they function the same in combat the flavor of them being there is quite cool.
If you look really deep into the darkspawn development David Gaider didn't want them to exist at all. He hated the idea of a generic evil fantasy horde that causes a lot of the worlds problems. The only reason they exist is because Jame Ohlen (who was above him in the company) basically forced him to do. David Gaider wanted Dragon Age to be more about politics. Which you can see with DAO to an extent. David Gaider now though doesn't dislike the darkspawn as much as he used to. He believes he integrated them into the world fairly well. But you can tell he that he would have liked them to not be in Dragon Age.
There are also a lot of other art style changes that David Gaider says is more representative in what he sees in his head. Like the Fade in DAI.
But yeah sometimes what we think looks spot on isn't what the developers envisioned. Which does suck.
Overall I still think DAO's art style is what the series should have looked like going forward. But mostly for consistency reasons then the newer art styles looking bad.
Okay you got me with the pasty white bit. Nice meme.
@@Knight1029 Interesting didn't know David didn't like the darkspawn. It's probably good they included them for more casual players since political fantasy didn't seem to interest the masses until a couple years later when Game of Thrones started, and they even had the White Walkers.
@MrDay53 yeah its definitely easier for casuals to get invested in something when its a trailer about a cool good guy fighting monsters. The whole politics stuff would be very interesting but it isn't as readily appealing.
I know that BioWare still has a number of veterans working there, but I'm guessing the changes are due to a number of newer employees. They probably had their own ideas about what BioWare games and what they should be. If the newer employees think tactical combat was boring, then they might pursue a more action focused game. It's not actual verification, of course, but recent comments from the devs suggests that reason.
I'm guessing that the new aesthetics are a byproduct of attracting a new, younger audience. Dragon Age Inquisition was 10 years ago, and the first game was 15 years ago. It could make for an ideal starting point, and the new visuals might be more appealing to that audience.
BioWare started out as a developer that catered to the hardcore RPG audience. As they've grown they've tried to make their games more appealing to a larger audience. We can see this in the "dumbing down" of their RPG and combat systems. The thinking among most publishers seems to be that "true" RPGs are unappealing to the general audience. Of course, these assumptions came before the success of Baldur's Gate III.
At the end of the day, BioWare really isn't all that different from other studios. They have budgets, deadlines, and a parent company's shareholders to please. This means altering trajectory when the market changes. Not because they're guaranteed failure otherwise, but because the investors don't trust the individual devs to make a game that will appeal to a large audience.
@@drewtheunspoken3988 I don't see that at all. As I said in the video the reason for the change is EA. And even then DA2 is DAO under the hood. The change is not due to younger people. That's a weird thing to say.
In the video I clearly talked about how the art style change was due to making the art style more true to the developers intentions and have the series look like something. You have to admit that DAO does look like a generic fantasy game.
What kind of RPGs do you think Bioware is making? Bioware has never made a RPG where player freedom was the point. Bioware has always made RPGs to enhance stories, characters, world, and themes. What was "hardcore" about Bioware's older games?
@Knight1029 We've actually discussed this before, and I completely agree with you about the kind of games Bioware makes. I'm also in agreement about graphic styles, for the most part. DA:O is definitely genetic and drab in its graphical presentation. The "hardcore" elements were the gameplay systems. The mote tactical combat and deeper RPG elements, such as building and modifying stats and skills
And "younger" was probably a poor choice, I should have said "newer." And I do acknowledge that EA (probably) mandated some of the changes. I pretty much agreed when I was talking about the parent company shareholders.
Just based on dev statements, it sounds like it's a mix of both publisher and developer decisions that made Veilguard what it is.
I'm really looking forward to playing it and I hope this one knocks it out of the park. BioWare needs a win after Anthem.
@@drewtheunspoken3988 we have? Sorry then for not remembering.
But to your reply; as I did say in the video there is a issue with Bioware being inconsistent with their art style and combat. It does make for a weaker series. Even if there are other consistent elements I do think the DA series would be better if it stuck with DAO's combat and art style.
Newer is a better word. I can see from that perspective but I do think the newer games, beside Anthem, that are true to Bioware's core ideas.
I think what the devs have said have been pretty alright.
I am looking forward to the game to. Bioware does need a win.
@Knight1029 It's all good. You talk to a lot of different people on here, and I wouldn't really expect you to remember every interaction. I would, I fact, be surprised if you did remember.
When I mentioned "dev statements," I was thinking of Corrine saying that "Combat was 'fun' for the first time." This is what I meant when I suggested that newer devs had an idea of what Bioware games "should be."
I love the cultivated experiences that Bioware creates over "true" open RPG experiences that Bethesda and Larian are known for. In that regard, Bioware is, largely, very consistent.
At the end of the day, I agree that people misunderstand the kinds of experiences Bioware creates. Or purposely misrepresent it. They also don't get enough credit for what they have accomplished. I don't know of any other studio that has created a series of games where choices in one will have any kind of effect in later games. They've invested a lot into that dynamic, creating scenarios and hiring voice actors that may never be experienced just so the choices made have real consequences. Maybe most end up being minor differences, but that doesn't detract at all from what they have accomplished
@@drewtheunspoken3988 I do remember most people it's just that those people have a unique icon. So, it easier for me.
I think the statements about the combat being fun and similar comments are more marketing speak then anything. Like the developers are gon a say its good and why it is improved over the previous games.
That is why I love Bioware games so much. It's the cultivated RPG that brings so much life to the game. I just don't connect to the character, story or world as much with Bethesda or Larian.
Yeah, I honestly don't get why so many people misunderstand or misrepresent what Bioware is doing. It is frustrating because we get bogged down on things that don't really matter. We could instead actually talk about the game itself.
And also that is a good point. Bioware is the only studio who tries to carry player's choices over their games.
Bg and bg2 played and looked similar to me.
That is what I said in the video. That BG1 and 2 benefit for being so similar to each other. BG2 is a better game because it improved upon what BG1 was.
You said that NO ONE understands Bioware but YOU the Chosen One do! Honestly I admire people without a hint of humility like you on some level at least.
Okay then. What did I say wrong then?
@@Knight1029 You said that NO ONE understands Biioware and everyone that disagrees with you is wrong and whilst you are right about BW always being progressive their characters were not always ugly. Look at the original BG2 women for example or DAO, you can call it inconsistent, sure but they are noticeably uglier now.
if a real woman would look like morrigan looks in DAO you guys would probably lynch her for plastic surgery.
@@mcstotti8691 what? What are you on about?
@apres-lachute8718 what did I say that was wrong in my video? Please tell me exactly what was wrong.
ME Andromeda, combat system is pretty bad actually. It is unnoticeable, unless u are stuck on the higher difficulty with the wrong companions. And no way to restart cause of a bad auto save and saving system.
How can it be bad if the issue comes from higher difficulties? Isn't that a balancing issue rather than a combat issue?
In my opinion, BioWare's downfall over nearly the past decade has simply been down to greed. Anthem was the worst decision they ever made, and it was one they clearly made because they were chasing Destiny money. I played Anthem's open demo back in the day and was disappointed that it felt like Destiny with flying mechanics. It was every bit as soulless and boring as my experience with Destiny had been.
And because BioWare's main Edmonton team was working on Anthem, they handed their flagship franchise over to their inexperienced Montreal team. It should have been the other way around with BioWare Edmonton working on Mass Effect: Andromeda and BioWare Montreal working on the more experimental Anthem.
I get the impression that BioWare is making a genuine effort to go back to being the studio we loved all the way up through Inquisition, but they may only have one shot at it. If The Veilguard flops, EA might decide to close BioWare. And if they did, I wouldn't really blame them since the closure would come after three high-profile failures in a row over the course of a decade. At that point, the next Mass Effect game would likely be put on ice for a while, eventually reemerging in the care of another EA studio. I can easily envision a scenario where a full two decades have passed between the release of Mass Effect 3 and the release of its direct sequel.
No, Bioware's downfall is not greed. Looking at any of the behind the scenes or interviews down with Mark Darrah shows it isn't greed. What was the actual issue was internal in-fighting and not sharing resources. That is why Andromeda and Anthem were buggy. As I said in the video. If it was greed you will have to prove it. You can't just vaguely gesture at it.
Bioware, and any developers for that matter, care about making games. And care about making it good. If that wasn't the case no one would be in the game's industry. The amount of crunch and burnout would have all them leave in droves. But they don't because they care.
I am a bit more cynical then most because I think if DAV does well EA will shut down Bioware regardless because it didn't make as much as FIFA. If anything destroys Bioware it will be because of EA and nothing else.
The combat changed because it had to be on console.
Oh yeah. I should have mentioned that.
Ima come back to this video and laugh when this sht game fails like I did the ones that ignored the DEI changes with suicide squad…that’s what really kills games now a days
What a thing to say.
wow, I hope the head at bioware just get lay-off, fight between teams IN THE SAME COMPANY is a huge red flag, hope the best for DATV but the mobilezation and lack of consistency tell me the problems(or PROBLEM) is still there.
As I have said in the video I heard that there is less in-fighting recently but we will have to wait and see what behind-the-scenes articles and videos say.
I am looking forward to DAV though.
Origins is the best
I also like DAO.
cant wait to mod old models back into the game lol modders boutta put in that ot lol
I guess. I won't be doing that though. I don't like changing how a game looks or feels. I want to play the version that released.
@@Knight1029 i always do a vanilla playthrough before modding a game
@@jessesenpai6473 no shame for modding a game. I just don't like it to much. Happy to hear you like though.
Bioware ended somewhere around the end of Mass Effect trilogy... Perhaps even the EA aquisition.. This doesnt resemble DA in the least! This is some awful action adventure game, with a DA paint job.. Every release geta simpler, and simpler, to now not even being an rpg
I think DAV looks pretty cool and feels like Dragon Age.
@@Knight1029
You dont control teammates,
You have no more tactics combat,
there wasnt even 25% of the abilities remaining in Inquisition so Id expect even less here.
Theyve reduced the options for roleplaying.
You cant choose weapon types or armor its all class specific
They seem heavily focused on diversity and romance
Suddenly griffins are alive again
Theyve retconned a ton of lore
Theyve modernized the setting
This is Dragon Age in name only
@jmmywyf4lyf sure my guy. In name only.
If you actually look at it, it is pretty cool and still a Dragon Age game.
@@Knight1029 You cant refute any of my points..
@@jmmywyf4lyf you miss the point.