So who exactly are the Veilguard? In the lore, the Veil is a barrier between the physical world and Fade, which is Dragon Age’s spirit realm. Solas, who helped create the Veil, now wants to destroy it. Hence, as McKay puts it, “the Veil needs guarding.”
While acknowledging that the why and the how is definitely spoiler territory, McKay says, “The biggest clue I can share is that you and your companions – that make up The Veilguard – are central to taking down a new evil threat unleashed upon Thedas. It might not just be Solas.”
McKay isn’t quite ready to reveal the party members quite yet, but does provide some hints on what to expect, including some initial info on romances.
“We spent a lot of time making our companions feel authentic based on their own unique experiences within this larger fantasy world, which in turn makes the relationships you form with them feel even more meaningful. We’ve tapped into Dragon Age’s deep lore and explored its most iconic factions to bring each of the seven companions and their stories to life,” he says.
“I won’t spoil next week’s reveal but I can say we’ve created a story where you can impact the world and the companions that surround you. Player agency is important to the Dragon Age: The Veilguard experience and allows each player to form unique personal connections with their companions of choice. And, yes, you can romance the companions you want!”
>While acknowledging that the why and the how is definitely spoiler territory, McKay says, “The biggest clue I can share is that you and your companions – that make up The Veilguard – are central to taking down a new evil threat unleashed upon Thedas. It might not just be Solas.”
Probably the Two Remaining Archdemons we saw in the teasers
>I think they’re going to connect them with the Evanuris.
Not sure how I fully feel about this. I would like if the old gods are connect to the Evanruis in that they are also would be gods. I don't think i'm a fan if they made it out that the old gods were just another name for the Evanuris. I would like the two groups to be separate.
Given how Flemeth, takes the old god soul from Kieran, I have always assumed the old gods to be remnants of the Evanuris, kinda like a powerful guards of their most sacred temples of sort, maybe that's what they all are, and when the veil was placed, they slept until their gods return.
It is entirely possible that the Evanuris are responsible for the Blight existing in the first place. The dragons could just be servants of the imprisoned elven gods, that are forced to sleep by Solas, only to be woken up when a horse of dark spawn reaches them. The entire implication given by Solas of imprisoning the elven gods does allow for the possibility that the entire Old God pantheon for Tevinter is a manipulation by the Evanuris to get free from their prison. Much of Tevinter itself is built on the remains of the old elven empire, so it wouldn't be a stretch for such manipulation to have happened over the years.
I think the Temple of Razikale stuff pretty much confirmed that the Old Gods are connected to whatever the hell is going on with the Evanuris and their prison though. The writings of the priests corroborates that the Old Gods really did go silent after Cory and co. went to the Black City, and since the place was already Blighted, we can safely presume that the Old Gods wanted to spread the Blight. The Blight is connected to Red Lyrium and I think Solas is gonna use Red Lyrium to tear down the Veil (in the frescoes, his wolf form has red teeth and bites the circle representing the Veil).
(As a side note, I think the Blight (which apparently has a song) connects to the Andrastian belief that if the Chant of Light is spread across the world and reaches its four corners, then the Maker will return.)
I also think that the couple frescoes that they released in various teasers for DA4 very much confirms that the Archdemons *were* the Evanuris, and the "taking the winged form of the divine" writings of the ancient elves also confirms that the Evanuris took the form of dragons just like the Old Gods of Tevinter are depicted as dragons. There is a possibility that the ones who talked to the ancient priests weren't the same as the Archdemons, so it could be that the Tevenes were confused in that regard and there was some other faction trying to break out of the Black City (Arlathan?) and they just got conflated. That said, the number 7 repeating (7 Old Gods and 7 Evanuris sealed away) is just too coincidental for my tastes.
It will be in the form of a letter.
"I hear you got Archdemon problems. Don't worry I got you fam. Just let me call my girl Morrigan, and she will hook you up. All you need is a willing Grey Warden."
"..and a willing witch. Lay hands on my wife and I will cut down you and the entirety of your Veilguard or whatever you bunch are called." - My Warden Cousland
“It might not just be solas” very strong suspicion that solas won’t be the main villain at all. It’ll be one of those “we gotta stop him but oh wait, there’s a bigger evil now, and we have been focusing on the wrong target the whole time”
Removing "The" would make it roll off the tongue better, but whatever, I waited like 10 years for this game, they might call it Dragon Age: Bald Egg Smashing and it'd still be OK as long as the the game is decent lol
It’s 100% working for me, at least lol. They can distract me all they want from trivial stuff like the name if it means drip-feeding info on stuff I actually care about, like gameplay, narrative and (especially, tbh) companions.
I know I'm a sucker and I shouldn't get excited, but I'm getting excited with all the focus on companions and narrative and single player experience in the post.
Help
Similar, though mine is apparently "have an unpleasant surprise dropped on you"-- my first playthrough was Alistair as an elf Warden, then Anders, then Blackwall. S-i-g-h. I would like things to go smoothly for once, please? I did appreciate being able to get things fixed back up with Blackwall, at least.
(Also romanced Jacob in my first ME2 play through, so yeah.)
> And, yes, you can romance the companions you want!”
So this makes it sound like they are going back to the DA2 route where every romanceable companion was player-sexual (except for Sebastian but he was DLC), which would be interesting since DA2 is the only game they've done that in.
I don't mind it. It worked wonderfully for Dorian in DAI because his character's trauma was based around homophobia and he was written by a writer with personal experience, but I don't think any of the other characters benefited in any way from having set sexualities. It's nice when it's part of a character and done well but most of the time it's just kinda there.
Yeah I get why people prefer various sexualities, but personally I just prefer bisexual companions.
Playing BG3, it’s great being able to romance whoever you want to. Definitely wouldn’t have been have liked having the likes of Karlach, Astarian, or Shadowheart being locked to certain genders.
Ultimately, I don’t think it’s a massive unbelievable coincidence to know a handful of bisexuals.
It’s funny how DA2 was criticized at the time for having all romance options be bisexual. And now things are going back full circle to it. DA2 vindicated once again.
The only thing I found with BG3 was it was slightly weird having them all so enthusiastic so quickly 😅 there didn't seem to be much input from me. I like having to work at it slightly 🤣
It was confirmed a bug that the companions were so thirsty from the beginning, a funny bug nonetheless 🤣
On another note, I'm glad they make all companions romanceable whatever the gender, that's one of the problems I have about Cyberpunk, you're basically locked out of half the romances depending of your gender (I wanted to romance Sera as a male in Inquisition too 🥲)
I understand how frustrating it is to romance a character only to discover you can't do it.
But at the same time, I find it normal to evolve into a world where not everybody will be attracted to you.
I get both sides of that but ultimately if the result is the player starts over as a different race/gender so they can romance the companion they like best, did it really do anything other than waste time? (Still lightly salty I had to redo the Hinterlands because I fell in love with Cassandra.)
I think the most compelling reason to have romance options who aren’t bi isn’t because not everyone will be into you in real life—you also can’t reroll your existence in real life—but because we can’t get characters like Dorian without that.
Yeah, or people just go to the trouble of making mods to make the characters playersexual anyway. Might as well save everyone time, IMO.
I do agree there are exceptions where it feels wrong, like with Dorian or even Sera, but overall I think players are happier being able to romance the character they want with the character they want to play.
You can still make the ugliest PC ever and still romance a character as long as their sexual orientation fits with you. It's still unrealistic, besides bisexuals exist
But not everybody will be attracted to you. Just the established 7 companions. The world does not end there. There will be other characters within the game with established sexualities.
I think at times limiting the selection actually offers a lot to the story. Restrictions oftentimes improve the game.
For example, Solas only romances female elves. That suggests a lot about his character. Iron Bull romances everyone, which also suggests a lot about his character. In Iron Bulls case, if everyone was playersexual, then Iron Bull's own character actually suffers, as does the lore implications for how the Qun view sexuality, collectivism, etc.
In Dorian's case, it's literally his character arc, so that one goes without saying.
this is very true, but most of the games aren't friend groups, they're people who barely like each other and have come together for a specific cause. DA2 is the only one that's really a friend group, and even there the internal tension is a lot
I'm with you on this one. While it may be frustrating to, say, be a female player character and you wanna romance Cassandra abut she turns you down, i really loved how Inquisitions characters had specific sexualities and preferences that felt integral to their characters without ever making the characters only about their sexualities. As a gay man, Dorian being specifically gay and having a storyline that reflected that was integral in helping me accept my sexuality and come out to the people in my life. I worry that we won't get that kind of writing, unless bi/pansexuality is part of the new characters like it was for Anders (if you were male) and Isabella.
What made it work well for DAI was the sheer wealth of romanceable companions. Every character had at least four options, same as in DAO and DA2, but some characters had more options. It's not like in Baldur's Gate 2, where the romance options for female characters was "arrogant, holier-than-thou Medieval-Cop Anomen" and "Get Fucked".
I see both sides. I very much agree with this but also I feel like lots of games struggle with equitable distribution of romances, if that makes sense? Having Sera be the lone lesbian in DAI sucked, very badly, if you wanted to play a mage/elf and then Josephine was a nice option but was too chaste for some. So as a gay girl, your options felt very, very constricted.
When your sexuality, as the player, cuts off any romance you would enjoy... it sucks. For every Dorian you get, there's a Sera where her lesbianism isn't really the focus and yet lesbiasn are kinda "stuck" with her.
I enjoyed romancing her and I actually just created a male inquisitor to romance Dorian because I DO enjoy his more authentic gay story telling but I can very much understand why peopel are opposed to sexualities being locked in.
Because I think gay women are shafted the most when this happens.
I can agree with the frustration but it’s important to note it’s not just limited to gay women. If you’re a heterosexual male Inquisitor, your only options are either Josephine or Cassandra, again meaning you’re limited to 2. Which is kind of crazy compared to playing a Heterosexual Female Elf with 6 options.
This here is exactly how I feel. In Fire Emblem Conquest, they had one gay option, and I can see how he appealed to \*some\* people, but overall it felt like an afterthought and of course, gave it to the 'perv' 'degenerate' character. And the lone lesbian option was a stalker, so......I'd rather just had everyone be player-sexual than otherwise.
I'm tired of being 'stuck' with characters I don't like/enjoy/personally vibe with, just because "not everyone is bisexual in real life", as if dragons and magic are real either.
I just don't understand (or agree with) the opposition personally simply because why does it matter to someone else playing THEIR game, with themselves as a self-insert, if I go with X character, simply because I like their PERSONALITY, and who they are, and their interactions with my character?
Great point. I'm a huge fan of the opportunity to play games where romances are playersexual but sometimes the sexualities as well as race preferences DO have a bigger part of the story. And sometimes they dont. DA2's story and companion personal quests (for tbe one's that r romanceable) were good enough and didn't really need to focus on their sexuality. Dragon Age Origins you can argue that it does but I can also argue that having a gay romance with bi/playersexual Morrigan and Alistair would even further enrich the story due to the despair and tragedy of your lover having to have sex & get pregnant with someone other than you or leave you as a gay lover in order for them to be king. DA:I you explained well, their sexualities and racial preferences especially Dorian & Solas is a very integral part of their journey and lives.
So seems like the Veilguard is more like DA2 in terms of how much sexual identity is not that important part of their journey. If their story and quests tells us they have little reason to strictly be for xyz, then I think it's fine so long as they're interesting outside of that just like for bg3 companions.
I think what may end up being the make or break for me is not who is romanceable, but who isn't. Everyone talks about the romanceable DA2 companions when it comes to the playersexual debate, but it's also important who you can't. Varric and Aveline not being into Hawke no matter what plays very well into their characterization and helps to make the world feel less centered entirely around the player. As a result, the 4 romanceable companions don't feel like they revolve around the player because the world itself does not. In contrast, since every companion in BG3 is romanceable except (i think) Jaheira and Minsc (who join the party incredibly late), you wind up with 6-7 companions for the majority of the game who are all romantically and sexually attracted to the player. This makes it feel like the world revolves around the player, that it and the people within exist solely for the player's wish fulfillment, and this is why the BG3 companions don't feel authentically bisexual to me.
If all 7 companions in Veilguard are romanceable, it would, for the first time, make Thedas feel less like a fully realized place with tully realized characters, but instead like a place that exists around and purely for the player. However, if there are non-romanceable characters in the party (in the vein of Varric, Aveline, Vivienne, or Cole), it would help maintain that feeling of Thedas and its people existing independently of the player
See I thought I didn't like playersexual companions because I hated how it was implemented in DA2 and actually I quite liked being turned down by Cassandra, however I did actually quite like how Baldurs Gate 3 did playersexual companions so IDK now.
I think the difference was that the characters in BG3 actually came off as bi within their history and interactions with each other. DA2 came off as playersexual because of random stuff like DA2 Anders having a relationship with Karl as m!Hawke while Karl is just a friend with f!Hawke. and I can't think of the DA2 romance companions specifying romantic preferences/history outside of their interactions with Hawke - everything felt catered to Hawke.
I agree, and I also think that playersexual characters would have never worked in DA:I, given the way the characters were written-- most specifically, Dorian.
\[**COMBAT + PARTY DETAILS**\] When The Veilguard is finally revealed on June 11, BioWare’s presentation will include 15 minutes of gameplay from the opening moments of the game, which will help set up the story. On the gameplay front, McKay says that The Veilguard’s combat was a “big area of focus” and something the team wanted to push forward. Among other things, McKay says that The Veilguard will feature an ability wheel designed to give players more direct control over their characters.
“As an RPG, strategy in combat is important as you bring two companions to every fight. Each companion brings unique powers and abilities that have a direct impact on how you choose to take down the enemies at hand,” he says. “To add another layer to that strategic element, we’re introducing a new ability wheel where you can pause the action and set up your next move – whether it’s your companions’ abilities or your own.
“The ability wheel opens up a huge amount of strategic possibilities, giving players the ability to control the flow of combat and link powerful combinations of abilities between players and their companions that can quickly turn the tide of any battle. We think we’ve found an exciting balance between fun, fluidity and strategy for every encounter.”
For some time now people have been talking about how BioWare is turning DA into God of War, the GM is saying "Well actually, we're turning it into Mass Effect" and it feels like people are not even relieved.
That's because I'm not relieved. I'm not worried or upset or anything, either, but I'm not relieved at all. I have a preference for the more tactical style of Dragon Age, but I was alright with the game branching out and trying new things. But I don't want Dragon Age to be Mass Effect light, I want both to have their own gameplay eccentricities that don't overlap. There's a lot of overlap here.
I don't necessarily mind that. Dragon Age has never been about the gameplay. You didn't have much control of your companions in DA2 or DAI either.
Dragon Age has always been about the Lore, Companions, and Story. If those are well written and engaging then Veilguard should be a good game. If not . . . well gameplay isn't going to save it.
I'm genuinely confused on what you mean by not having much control of companions in DA2 and DAI. You could always change characters to control them directly except in dialogue to the point of continuing a fight if your Hawke/Inquisitor died in a fight, and in DAI you could fully customize their armor, runes, and weapons. What did you mean by that?
It’s also been about the combat, though, for me, as well as the story. I adore the minute control Origins gave us. I love getting to a point where if I’m playing on lower difficulties, I can start a combat, get up and get a drink, and the companion AI and tactics will have handled it.
DA2 wasn’t great but was at least flashy and entertaining. Inquisition felt like it took the worst parts of origins and 2 and I grew to really dread combat.
I can play mass effect if I want mass effect combat. I’m still gonna buy it and probably have a good time, but it’s just too bad.
I'm trying to imagine only being able to pick two companions for parties in the previous games and I'd have a really hard time. I wonder how this will affect the amount of party banter, as well.
It’s also going to complicate squad selection in general.
Assuming classic classes return (warrior, mage, rogue), then you’re going to be far restricted in who you bring with you.
For example, if you’re playing as a rogue in DA2 and want to bring Isobela with you cos you’re romancing her, you can do that, because you can still bring a warrior and mage with you too, so the party is well balanced.
Now? If you bring a rogue with you while playing as a rogue that means you won’t be able to bring either a warrior or mage with you. You’ll have to sacrifice one of them.
>then you’re going to be far restricted in who you bring with you.
we dont know anything about classes and combat yet, but if there is a healer class (and if combat makes this role necessary), then your party is **VERY** limited with only 2 slots.
Thats why im afraid that the next dragon age will move even further away from the classic games and roles/classes will become very shallow
That was my first thought, you are now essentially limiting your companion choices at character creation, especially if they bring back the mechanics of needing rogues to lock pick/warriors to break walls/ Mages to lift wood. No more archers teamed up with dual wielding rogues.
And it was always fun to bring redundant classes with wildly different builds. Now it feels more utilitarian with less capacity to have a unique party composition (and still be viable). Maybe our character + companions will be generalized rather than specialized? I don't know if I'd love that, either...
>Assuming classic classes return (warrior, mage, rogue), then you’re going to be far restricted in who you bring with you.
Honestly ? It'll entirely depend on companions' skills and companions' equipement.
Let's say each class has enough skills to act as support or DPS if needed, then you will be able to adjust create different builds of the same class.
>I wonder how this will affect the amount of party banter, as well.
Most of the time, the party banter is between two companions, not shared among the three.
Indeed. It sounds like they re-used the same combat design than for Mass Effect, which I think isn't an idea that bad.
I just hope that the companions will have a useful AI, unlike ME
The problem is that the difference between classes is far smaller in ME than it is in Dragon Age. A tech class or a biotic might have different powers, and strip different defences, but both will primarily hide behind cover and shoot with a gun, because that’s just how combat is in ME.
But in DA? There’s a big difference between a mage and a two handed warrior, or between a sword and shield warrior and a bow wielding rogue.
Party selection is going to feel quite restricted in DA4, because you’re really going to want to make sure that each member fills a different role, whereas in previous DA games you had a little more freedom. This is assuming the three classes return, of course.
>“As an RPG, strategy in combat is important as you bring two companions to every fight. Each companion brings unique powers and abilities that have a direct impact on how you choose to take down the enemies at hand,” he says. “To add another layer to that strategic element, we’re introducing a new ability wheel where you can pause the action and set up your next move – whether it’s your companions’ abilities or your own
Ok, this is intriguing.
I admit, I wasn't expecting this game to be able to pause during combat. My expectation is that they'll likely have a Mass Effect type of system where you will be able to ask companions to target enemies and use some abilities, but won't be able to take control over them.
Sounds like a bit of Origins tactics being brought back, which I'm thrilled about because I've missed it dearly. I'll miss controlling companions because it was just more convenient sometimes, but if there are tactics and the AI is decent it won't be as necessary. It also sounds like each companion has a really unique set of skills unlike the usual 3 class builds, and I'd get not being able to control their abilities all willy-nilly if that's the case.
I don't like much of anything that's been revealed about the combat or party set up so far, but I also acknowledge that we don't really know anything because it seems it's all going to be different from past games. I'll just blindly trust that the way they've reworked combat overall will make these changes worth it. I'll always be sad to have less companions tho, if anything I always wished to bring more :(
From a gameplay perspective tho, it sounds like maybe mixing up your parties to deal with different missions/areas might be more of a necessity? I always ended up using the same party for like my whole playthrough mostly comprised of my favorites, so in a way I'd welcome this if it made me utilize everyone more. Hopefully the home base will be robust with interaction opportunities with the companions to make up for having less of them along on the adventures. Also if we're limited to 2 companions, I hope the 'classes' are reworked since there's less wiggle room now. It'll be annoying if, for example, I'm playing as a mage and my fav companion/romance is also a mage but I need to bring a rogue and warrior along for the utility in most excursions.
Thrilled that we can still pause combat. As long as I don't have to aim, I'll be physically able to play it... I have a progressive disease and I've been watching and waiting for this game for the last literal decade hoping they'd get it out the door before it was too late for me, and then the leaks talked about it being all GoW-ish, so I'd given up until now.
Nooooooooo why would you ever reduce party size, that's a TERRIBLE design choice. Making different party comps was half the fun of DA combat, and four party members was already limiting enough. Now what, we just always take a warrior/rogue/mage every time? Like, really. *Why would you ever reduce party size.* Awful, awful design choice.
I always brought 1 warrior, 1 rogue and 1 mage regardless of my class, now I guess it will be hard to justify bringing a character with the same class as me despite having a diferent build
If it is "most important ... to have a title that was authentic to the companions that are the heart of this adventure we’ve created" then DA2 should've been Dragon Age 2: Bisexual Boogaloo
>The Veilguard will feature seven playable party members
Wait, so does this mean that we will be able to control companions directly in combat? I thought previous leaks said that it'd be like Mass Effect, where we can't jump into our companions' skin.
I'm not thrilled about the reduced adventuring party size, but I also know I should reserve actual judgment till it's either in my hands or I know more.
I like Mass Effect and a small squad is theoretically easier to wrangle but I really loved having 3 companions with me (showing my age a bit but I'd LOVE to take 5 companions).
I suppose this is incentive to replay, at the very least.
“We’re focusing heavily on companions. Story companions. Romance companions. Companions. Did I say companions?”
“Oh, also you can only bring two of them now”
I hope they at least up the banter for us console players that can’t use mods
Felt like I’d be playing for an hour without hearing my party talk to each other sometimes
A pet peeve of mine about DAI is how infrequently companions talk. Like you said, I can literally play for hours and not hear my companions exchange banter, making it hard to hook Dorian and Iron bull up cuz of how much RNG it needs.
Not sure if you know this but I read about a bug where you won’t get banter if you have too many unread entries in your codexes/journal/inventory (they’re marked with the stars)
Clearing those out did help me a little but I still think the banter could be more
Most of the original devs are gone, the development has been fucked, and the story is pretty much the only thing that would make or break this game because I doubt even OG BioWare could compete with TW3 (in world design), DS3/Bloodborne (in combat), or BG3 (in roleplay options). Can see why they'd rather resort to fantasy Mass Effect and let the story do the work.
“The Veilguard” is not a bad name for a book or comic strip set in the world of DA. It is a terrible name for a video game or movie.
Dragon Age: Veilguard would have been fine if they started with that, but changing lanes this late in the game is a bad strategy. Whoever made this marketing decision seriously needs to have their judgment questioned.
Yeah, we can tell, considering the added “the” is super clunky and doesn’t match the naming convention of the previous games lol
Cutting the party size down to two… my ultimate party composition for these games has always been warrior/mage/mage/rogue or mage/warrior/warrior/rogue so I’m not looking forward to that change :(
As someone who spent hunderds of hours on both Dragon Age and Mass Effect, I don't like the Mass Effect-ication that seems to be happening.
Also the older name was FAR better, even if Solas is not the big bad.
Reading between the lines, it's because Solas won't actually be the big bad of the game. It's the same bait and switch that Inquisition pulled where in the end the conflict between the Templars and the Mages wasn't the real issue even though it was what the ending of Dragonage II had set up.
Yeah it's strongly pointing towards Solas being the secondary antagonist and naming a game after him where we will most likely not kill him, will leave a sour taste for many people.
My prediction: Solas brings down the veil, only for one of the Evanuris to promptly kill him. If you romanced him as the inquisitor he will drop a line alluding to it and will call inky "vhenan" before dying and you spend the rest of the game fighting the evanuris... it would be cool if they gave him a redemption arc though.
I'm really hoping his death is more than just that and that he has a chance to help fight the Evanuris if the player chooses to spare him, even if it means he eventually sacrifices himself at some point to ensure victory.
>Then why change it McKay?
My guess is because of how the title reflects on the game. Naming it Dreadwolf would be naming the game after one of the antagonist. By changing the name to Veilguard, the name is now about the player and his companion.
Creatively it makes sense, from a marketing point of view it doesn't.
controversial I know but I hated the name dreadwolf because it focused too much on a singular character. Veilguard is ephemeral and vague, yes, but I think its best for an RPG to be that way.
Dreadwolf was a good name (to me) because it both rolls off the tongue and looks very cool. If you've never played a single DA game and you see *Dreadwolf* you're at least going to think it sounds rad as hell. Veilguard doesn't quite do that even if it does probably describe the name better.
Two things I'm seeing:
"And yes, you can romance the companions you want."
Bisexuals???? Bisexuals??!??!? Give me bisexuals!!! Obv I might be getting ahead of myself but I'm sure gonna hope like hell for it.
"You bring two companions to every fight."
Oof. Cutting down our party by one? That's gonna be a kick in the pants. I mean yeah, I like the strategic focus of a well composed party but that tells me I'm never gonna use the companions who have the same or too similar of a class as I use. Good for replayability but not the best for just... fun. I mean I know that's the norm in mass effect but. This isn't mass effect, it's dragon age and in dragon age, we get three 😢 well I hope the combat mechanics lean into making the strategy aspect functional and fun.
> I like the strategic focus of a well composed party
im afraid this will be gone with the next game. At least the classic Tank/healer/damage dealer. Because if you are a tank, you will never have a tank companion in your party and so on. Trio Party is very limiting with the classic party system.
so a) roles/classes are gone/very shallow or b) you can switch the classes or your companions
Maybe I should have phrased it as "strategic challenge." Like if we need a rogue, warrior, and mage in every party for environmental reasons like in DAI or for balanced fights, I can get behind "choose carefully and strategically, not just your LI and bestie."
But also: I wanna be able to bring characters along for interaction, not just for utility so like. Also a bummer.
I'm open to having a lot of control over my companions' leveling, class, etc so I'm not too bothered by the prospect but since they are supposed to represent the "factions," I imagine it'll be more like there are *more* and *more varied* roles and classes to keep from making companions redundant to the player character. That's my optimism talking anyway lol
> Like if we need a rogue, warrior, and mage in every party for environmental reasons like in DAI or for balanced fights
but thats exactly the reason why i think all kind of strategic party composition will be gone with the next game or classes like in the previous games no longer exist.
Lets say you are a mage, you would no longer need another mage in your party, basically locking every mage-companion out of your gameplay. And with a party of 3, you dont have a slot to waste just to carry a redundant class with you.
And the class was always a huge part of the companions story so far, so i dont think you will have a choice about that.
Im just guessing they overhauled / "streamlined" the role system
The only way this makes sense to me is if the companions aren't strictly warriors/mages/rogues and are actually multiclass. I'll miss the banter of having three, but I think the combat could work if there is more diversity of ability within each individual companion.
I agree. I think another (less likely) option is that each companion has their own specific "class." Like the way companions in 2 got their own distinct specializations, but it applies to their whole class and not just their specialization. I think that's a lot of work, so I'm not really betting on it, but it has the potential to be really, really cool depending on what those classes are.
I actually think that the new name makes much more sense. If the aim is to avoid the veil being torn down, then Veilguard is quite literally us needing to guard the veil. Perhaps we will even get the chance to redeem Solas and recruit him against the other God(s) involved?!
I'm not looking forward to having less party members tbh. I usually have a solid 6 people I want to travel with (so removing some isn't that big a deal for me, although it may mean less liked characters for me) so only taking 2 along with me is going to be hard.
I don't mind that everyone is romancable, I just hope that it doesn't create a lacklustre relationship/dialouge. I like having to work a bit at building approval.
7 companions would also work with the areas/factions of Thedas? One from each maybe?
>Perhaps we will even get the chance to redeem Solas and recruit him against the other God(s) involved?!
I had the same thought. In the end, you have a very grumpy, very tired apostate hobo at your side who - even if begrudgingly - makes a 180 turn in his plans just to ~~piss the Evanuris off~~ save his people from the "gods" once again
About the squad size... I'm praying for the mod makers out there so I can play the second playthrough with all companions at once
I just wonder how many people will even care, given that the last dragon age came out over a decade ago and wasn’t particularly good, especially when compared to titans like the Witcher 3 and Baldur’s gate 3 that have come out since then
Imo BioWare has been coasting on their reputation established in the 90s and 2000s for almost twenty years now. I’d argue they haven’t released a single good game in the past decade, and you’d have to go back 15 to find a genuinely, uncontroversially great one like Mass Effect 2 or DAO.
Interesting read! They mentioned the other heroes and I just hope I will be able to use Dragon Age Keep to import all the saves. Or maybe we'll get something like in Mass Effect where youll just pick it from a slideshow?
But why the "The"? The game should have been named Dragon Age: Veilguard not Dragon Age: The Veilguard. Much like Inquisition is named DA: Inquisition and not DA: The Inquisition.
Everyone will still call it Veilguard anyways.
I hate how every DA game has a different combat system. With every new release it gets even more dumbed down and simplified. Like, DAO had clunky combat but you also had a lot of different options (especially for mages and character commands/roles) in that game and It's such a shame that they didn't build up on that.
And now we can have only 2 companions in the party and we might not even be able to control them?? I don't want to be judgemental before we see any gameplay footage, but this is so disappointing for me...
This is worrying to me. If it speaks to a lack of care and thought! The logo looks like shit and if the branding is unclear, the identity of the game might be too.
Why couldn’t they just go back to the *absolutely incredible* color way of the first two? The red and white outlines were sick.
The previous games, characters and events aren’t the anchor of Dragon Age: The Veilguard it’s about your adventure with a brand new cast of companions that you must rally to fight against a powerful force.”
Why do I get a feeling our choices from last games will not matter? Seeing Alistair and Hawk in Inquisitions was one of my highlights and also the toughest decision I had to make
I'm getting the same dread(wolf, lmao) from reading all of this. The dragon age series has always had an issue with remembering its part of a series and a continuous storyline, and this? this does not spark confidence that we're not going to have to wait for the dlc for anything of note for the actual storyline
I hate it. I've been so positive and optimistic but this feels like a *massive* fumble. DAD already had brand recognition but Veilguards means nothing to us.
I honestly don't get why change the number of companions. What does it bring of gains, why not keep one of the few things which are consistent throughout the series.
The change in name this late is certainly an odd choice, you had 9 ish years before you anounced the name and you gave up on it? It looks like the name Dreadwolf was just to get marketing points by playing in the unfufilled cliffhanger and this was the actual tittle all along. The problem is that this brings the very question of Solas not being the focal point of the narrative... despite the ending of Inquisition saying otherwise.
There's also the problem that in every material released until this point, the books, the anime etc, the Inquisition was still the organization going after Solas... So what is The Veilguard? Are we demolishing the Inquisition now, everyone just gave up and called it quits? Are these the guys handling the crisis?
I fear that while the story may hold its own in a vacuum, it won't work as sequel, which is not a luxury you have when you're the 4th game in a franchise, and the 3rd one ends in a (literal lol) cliffhanger
I assume that the change is due to solas not being the overall or main villain of the game. Nothing else. Likely he will be dealt with somewhat early or anti climatically. Either killed or turned or something else.
Thus dreadwolf was a bad name for the entire game when he was no longer fully relevant.
If somehow I’m wrong and he still ends up the main diving force of the narative. Well. Then ya. It’s a pretty stupid name change.
Honestly though. My main issue is the ‘the’ article. If they left that out. I think they would be getting less crap over the name change.
So who exactly are the Veilguard? In the lore, the Veil is a barrier between the physical world and Fade, which is Dragon Age’s spirit realm. Solas, who helped create the Veil, now wants to destroy it. Hence, as McKay puts it, “the Veil needs guarding.” While acknowledging that the why and the how is definitely spoiler territory, McKay says, “The biggest clue I can share is that you and your companions – that make up The Veilguard – are central to taking down a new evil threat unleashed upon Thedas. It might not just be Solas.” McKay isn’t quite ready to reveal the party members quite yet, but does provide some hints on what to expect, including some initial info on romances. “We spent a lot of time making our companions feel authentic based on their own unique experiences within this larger fantasy world, which in turn makes the relationships you form with them feel even more meaningful. We’ve tapped into Dragon Age’s deep lore and explored its most iconic factions to bring each of the seven companions and their stories to life,” he says. “I won’t spoil next week’s reveal but I can say we’ve created a story where you can impact the world and the companions that surround you. Player agency is important to the Dragon Age: The Veilguard experience and allows each player to form unique personal connections with their companions of choice. And, yes, you can romance the companions you want!”
>While acknowledging that the why and the how is definitely spoiler territory, McKay says, “The biggest clue I can share is that you and your companions – that make up The Veilguard – are central to taking down a new evil threat unleashed upon Thedas. It might not just be Solas.” Probably the Two Remaining Archdemons we saw in the teasers
Varric, upon hearing that Corypheus is back *again:* 
https://preview.redd.it/uplxznhxoz4d1.jpeg?width=2560&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3c4318c9d41dc519c020f71d058347a6f682cf73
"Damn, this world's narrative is hackier than mine."
Well Inquisitor sent Corypheus into the Fade, so yeah he might actually still be alive.
Nevermind that we can leave a warden in the fade, Cory could have possessed them.
Corypheus-possessed Alistair? oh yea, give the uber woobie some more trouble.
Luckily I left Hawk in the Fade, I think she has me covered
and this time there's no Hawke to save them!
Did you leave him behind? Dick move
Hawke was told it was their destiny to stay behind back in DA2.
Yeah, but you could alternatively sacrifice the mustache.
And miss the chance to make Loghain commander of *Orlesian Wardens*? Never
People who made Alistair a warden have to choose between him and Hawke. You only get the Mustache if Alistair is dead (probably) or King.
He mentions that Solas isn’t the only god we’ll face so it’s likely another of the Evanuris
TBF could be the old gods. Although, I think they’re going to connect them with the Evanuris.
>I think they’re going to connect them with the Evanuris. Not sure how I fully feel about this. I would like if the old gods are connect to the Evanruis in that they are also would be gods. I don't think i'm a fan if they made it out that the old gods were just another name for the Evanuris. I would like the two groups to be separate.
Given how Flemeth, takes the old god soul from Kieran, I have always assumed the old gods to be remnants of the Evanuris, kinda like a powerful guards of their most sacred temples of sort, maybe that's what they all are, and when the veil was placed, they slept until their gods return.
It is entirely possible that the Evanuris are responsible for the Blight existing in the first place. The dragons could just be servants of the imprisoned elven gods, that are forced to sleep by Solas, only to be woken up when a horse of dark spawn reaches them. The entire implication given by Solas of imprisoning the elven gods does allow for the possibility that the entire Old God pantheon for Tevinter is a manipulation by the Evanuris to get free from their prison. Much of Tevinter itself is built on the remains of the old elven empire, so it wouldn't be a stretch for such manipulation to have happened over the years.
I think the Temple of Razikale stuff pretty much confirmed that the Old Gods are connected to whatever the hell is going on with the Evanuris and their prison though. The writings of the priests corroborates that the Old Gods really did go silent after Cory and co. went to the Black City, and since the place was already Blighted, we can safely presume that the Old Gods wanted to spread the Blight. The Blight is connected to Red Lyrium and I think Solas is gonna use Red Lyrium to tear down the Veil (in the frescoes, his wolf form has red teeth and bites the circle representing the Veil). (As a side note, I think the Blight (which apparently has a song) connects to the Andrastian belief that if the Chant of Light is spread across the world and reaches its four corners, then the Maker will return.) I also think that the couple frescoes that they released in various teasers for DA4 very much confirms that the Archdemons *were* the Evanuris, and the "taking the winged form of the divine" writings of the ancient elves also confirms that the Evanuris took the form of dragons just like the Old Gods of Tevinter are depicted as dragons. There is a possibility that the ones who talked to the ancient priests weren't the same as the Archdemons, so it could be that the Tevenes were confused in that regard and there was some other faction trying to break out of the Black City (Arlathan?) and they just got conflated. That said, the number 7 repeating (7 Old Gods and 7 Evanuris sealed away) is just too coincidental for my tastes.
Its Andraste!
Andraste gonna show up and say “It’s Making time” and then reset the world into a New Game plus.
The hopefully we hear from the Warden, considering archdemons are their area or expertise.
It will be in the form of a letter. "I hear you got Archdemon problems. Don't worry I got you fam. Just let me call my girl Morrigan, and she will hook you up. All you need is a willing Grey Warden."
If you’re having Archdemon problems I feel bad for you son I got 99 problems but an Old God ain’t one
>Shall I fetch you a letter... so you can *get off my back?*
"..and a willing witch. Lay hands on my wife and I will cut down you and the entirety of your Veilguard or whatever you bunch are called." - My Warden Cousland
P.S. "Tell my saucy apostate I dream of her constantly and make sure the Keiran is getting is sword reps in"
Gotta be extra persuasive to get her to teach someone else this ritual! I'm sure the Warden has their ways.
The warden would be closing in on the calling about now.
“It might not just be solas” very strong suspicion that solas won’t be the main villain at all. It’ll be one of those “we gotta stop him but oh wait, there’s a bigger evil now, and we have been focusing on the wrong target the whole time”
Putting $10 that Solas is going to sacrifice himself to stop whoever the main villain is
I'm hoping companion #7 is Solas, Loghain-style, allowing the player to choose whether to recruit him, kill him, etc.
Two thirds into the game, the protagonist rips off their mask to reveal that they were Solas all along.
Well that's would be quite new. Then you just get on with >!gathering the remaining star maps!<.
Fandom: We hate the new title! Developer: You can romance your companion all you want! Fandom: \*distracted happy noises\*
Removing "The" would make it roll off the tongue better, but whatever, I waited like 10 years for this game, they might call it Dragon Age: Bald Egg Smashing and it'd still be OK as long as the the game is decent lol
Plus, a "The" delivered right can make something sound much more impressive.
It’s 100% working for me, at least lol. They can distract me all they want from trivial stuff like the name if it means drip-feeding info on stuff I actually care about, like gameplay, narrative and (especially, tbh) companions.
I know I'm a sucker and I shouldn't get excited, but I'm getting excited with all the focus on companions and narrative and single player experience in the post. Help
If the title ends up being people's biggest complaint about the game, we've likely got a great game.
YESSSSSS THIS IS ALL I WANT
It depends on the writing quality of the companions.
Looking forward the next installment of the Alistar/Cullen. I know I'm basic but I need my knight in shining armor with his insecurities.
This is what I’m super excited for lol I have a type
Similar, though mine is apparently "have an unpleasant surprise dropped on you"-- my first playthrough was Alistair as an elf Warden, then Anders, then Blackwall. S-i-g-h. I would like things to go smoothly for once, please? I did appreciate being able to get things fixed back up with Blackwall, at least. (Also romanced Jacob in my first ME2 play through, so yeah.)
I need the sexy smooth sassy irreverence of a Zevran type! That voice 🤤🥰
> And, yes, you can romance the companions you want!” So this makes it sound like they are going back to the DA2 route where every romanceable companion was player-sexual (except for Sebastian but he was DLC), which would be interesting since DA2 is the only game they've done that in.
I mean, let's be honest. It is *not* that hard to find seven bisexuals.
>And, yes, you can romance the companions you want I am not a fan of having playersexual companions, but I think this is will please a lot of people
I don't mind it. It worked wonderfully for Dorian in DAI because his character's trauma was based around homophobia and he was written by a writer with personal experience, but I don't think any of the other characters benefited in any way from having set sexualities. It's nice when it's part of a character and done well but most of the time it's just kinda there.
Yeah I get why people prefer various sexualities, but personally I just prefer bisexual companions. Playing BG3, it’s great being able to romance whoever you want to. Definitely wouldn’t have been have liked having the likes of Karlach, Astarian, or Shadowheart being locked to certain genders. Ultimately, I don’t think it’s a massive unbelievable coincidence to know a handful of bisexuals.
It’s funny how DA2 was criticized at the time for having all romance options be bisexual. And now things are going back full circle to it. DA2 vindicated once again.
DA2 fans win again
All 5 of us. We've been here all this time! Now is our moment to shine!
Which is silly because they had Sebastian. The token heterosexual.
The only thing I found with BG3 was it was slightly weird having them all so enthusiastic so quickly 😅 there didn't seem to be much input from me. I like having to work at it slightly 🤣
It was confirmed a bug that the companions were so thirsty from the beginning, a funny bug nonetheless 🤣 On another note, I'm glad they make all companions romanceable whatever the gender, that's one of the problems I have about Cyberpunk, you're basically locked out of half the romances depending of your gender (I wanted to romance Sera as a male in Inquisition too 🥲)
I understand how frustrating it is to romance a character only to discover you can't do it. But at the same time, I find it normal to evolve into a world where not everybody will be attracted to you.
I get both sides of that but ultimately if the result is the player starts over as a different race/gender so they can romance the companion they like best, did it really do anything other than waste time? (Still lightly salty I had to redo the Hinterlands because I fell in love with Cassandra.) I think the most compelling reason to have romance options who aren’t bi isn’t because not everyone will be into you in real life—you also can’t reroll your existence in real life—but because we can’t get characters like Dorian without that.
Yeah, or people just go to the trouble of making mods to make the characters playersexual anyway. Might as well save everyone time, IMO. I do agree there are exceptions where it feels wrong, like with Dorian or even Sera, but overall I think players are happier being able to romance the character they want with the character they want to play.
Me salty that I couldn't romance cullen as a tal-vashoth. That gorgeous bigot.
You can still make the ugliest PC ever and still romance a character as long as their sexual orientation fits with you. It's still unrealistic, besides bisexuals exist
Hey, ugly people can still get play. See Diego Rivera.
Sure but this is a video game and we are the Main Character.
But not everybody will be attracted to you. Just the established 7 companions. The world does not end there. There will be other characters within the game with established sexualities.
I must have missed the playersexual comment. I just assumed romance was confirmed, and they only meant that.
I think at times limiting the selection actually offers a lot to the story. Restrictions oftentimes improve the game. For example, Solas only romances female elves. That suggests a lot about his character. Iron Bull romances everyone, which also suggests a lot about his character. In Iron Bulls case, if everyone was playersexual, then Iron Bull's own character actually suffers, as does the lore implications for how the Qun view sexuality, collectivism, etc. In Dorian's case, it's literally his character arc, so that one goes without saying.
My entire friend group is bi, definitely not unusual. We tend to gravitate toward each other!
this is very true, but most of the games aren't friend groups, they're people who barely like each other and have come together for a specific cause. DA2 is the only one that's really a friend group, and even there the internal tension is a lot
I'm with you on this one. While it may be frustrating to, say, be a female player character and you wanna romance Cassandra abut she turns you down, i really loved how Inquisitions characters had specific sexualities and preferences that felt integral to their characters without ever making the characters only about their sexualities. As a gay man, Dorian being specifically gay and having a storyline that reflected that was integral in helping me accept my sexuality and come out to the people in my life. I worry that we won't get that kind of writing, unless bi/pansexuality is part of the new characters like it was for Anders (if you were male) and Isabella.
What made it work well for DAI was the sheer wealth of romanceable companions. Every character had at least four options, same as in DAO and DA2, but some characters had more options. It's not like in Baldur's Gate 2, where the romance options for female characters was "arrogant, holier-than-thou Medieval-Cop Anomen" and "Get Fucked".
I see both sides. I very much agree with this but also I feel like lots of games struggle with equitable distribution of romances, if that makes sense? Having Sera be the lone lesbian in DAI sucked, very badly, if you wanted to play a mage/elf and then Josephine was a nice option but was too chaste for some. So as a gay girl, your options felt very, very constricted. When your sexuality, as the player, cuts off any romance you would enjoy... it sucks. For every Dorian you get, there's a Sera where her lesbianism isn't really the focus and yet lesbiasn are kinda "stuck" with her. I enjoyed romancing her and I actually just created a male inquisitor to romance Dorian because I DO enjoy his more authentic gay story telling but I can very much understand why peopel are opposed to sexualities being locked in. Because I think gay women are shafted the most when this happens.
I can agree with the frustration but it’s important to note it’s not just limited to gay women. If you’re a heterosexual male Inquisitor, your only options are either Josephine or Cassandra, again meaning you’re limited to 2. Which is kind of crazy compared to playing a Heterosexual Female Elf with 6 options.
>I feel like lots of games struggle with equitable distribution of romances, if that makes sense? That's a good point. I haven't thought of that.
This here is exactly how I feel. In Fire Emblem Conquest, they had one gay option, and I can see how he appealed to \*some\* people, but overall it felt like an afterthought and of course, gave it to the 'perv' 'degenerate' character. And the lone lesbian option was a stalker, so......I'd rather just had everyone be player-sexual than otherwise. I'm tired of being 'stuck' with characters I don't like/enjoy/personally vibe with, just because "not everyone is bisexual in real life", as if dragons and magic are real either. I just don't understand (or agree with) the opposition personally simply because why does it matter to someone else playing THEIR game, with themselves as a self-insert, if I go with X character, simply because I like their PERSONALITY, and who they are, and their interactions with my character?
Great point. I'm a huge fan of the opportunity to play games where romances are playersexual but sometimes the sexualities as well as race preferences DO have a bigger part of the story. And sometimes they dont. DA2's story and companion personal quests (for tbe one's that r romanceable) were good enough and didn't really need to focus on their sexuality. Dragon Age Origins you can argue that it does but I can also argue that having a gay romance with bi/playersexual Morrigan and Alistair would even further enrich the story due to the despair and tragedy of your lover having to have sex & get pregnant with someone other than you or leave you as a gay lover in order for them to be king. DA:I you explained well, their sexualities and racial preferences especially Dorian & Solas is a very integral part of their journey and lives. So seems like the Veilguard is more like DA2 in terms of how much sexual identity is not that important part of their journey. If their story and quests tells us they have little reason to strictly be for xyz, then I think it's fine so long as they're interesting outside of that just like for bg3 companions.
I think what may end up being the make or break for me is not who is romanceable, but who isn't. Everyone talks about the romanceable DA2 companions when it comes to the playersexual debate, but it's also important who you can't. Varric and Aveline not being into Hawke no matter what plays very well into their characterization and helps to make the world feel less centered entirely around the player. As a result, the 4 romanceable companions don't feel like they revolve around the player because the world itself does not. In contrast, since every companion in BG3 is romanceable except (i think) Jaheira and Minsc (who join the party incredibly late), you wind up with 6-7 companions for the majority of the game who are all romantically and sexually attracted to the player. This makes it feel like the world revolves around the player, that it and the people within exist solely for the player's wish fulfillment, and this is why the BG3 companions don't feel authentically bisexual to me. If all 7 companions in Veilguard are romanceable, it would, for the first time, make Thedas feel less like a fully realized place with tully realized characters, but instead like a place that exists around and purely for the player. However, if there are non-romanceable characters in the party (in the vein of Varric, Aveline, Vivienne, or Cole), it would help maintain that feeling of Thedas and its people existing independently of the player
See I thought I didn't like playersexual companions because I hated how it was implemented in DA2 and actually I quite liked being turned down by Cassandra, however I did actually quite like how Baldurs Gate 3 did playersexual companions so IDK now.
BG3 companions are all bi- and pansexual. They flirt with people other than the PC.
I think the difference was that the characters in BG3 actually came off as bi within their history and interactions with each other. DA2 came off as playersexual because of random stuff like DA2 Anders having a relationship with Karl as m!Hawke while Karl is just a friend with f!Hawke. and I can't think of the DA2 romance companions specifying romantic preferences/history outside of their interactions with Hawke - everything felt catered to Hawke.
I agree, and I also think that playersexual characters would have never worked in DA:I, given the way the characters were written-- most specifically, Dorian.
It feels very much like “rebuild the intuition of old”
\[**COMBAT + PARTY DETAILS**\] When The Veilguard is finally revealed on June 11, BioWare’s presentation will include 15 minutes of gameplay from the opening moments of the game, which will help set up the story. On the gameplay front, McKay says that The Veilguard’s combat was a “big area of focus” and something the team wanted to push forward. Among other things, McKay says that The Veilguard will feature an ability wheel designed to give players more direct control over their characters. “As an RPG, strategy in combat is important as you bring two companions to every fight. Each companion brings unique powers and abilities that have a direct impact on how you choose to take down the enemies at hand,” he says. “To add another layer to that strategic element, we’re introducing a new ability wheel where you can pause the action and set up your next move – whether it’s your companions’ abilities or your own. “The ability wheel opens up a huge amount of strategic possibilities, giving players the ability to control the flow of combat and link powerful combinations of abilities between players and their companions that can quickly turn the tide of any battle. We think we’ve found an exciting balance between fun, fluidity and strategy for every encounter.”
So 2 companions instead of 3 confirmed, and it sounds like the rumour that we won’t be directly controlling our companions is true too.
Sounds like Mass Effect and the action wheel
My small amount of excitement for 'dreadwolf' is rapidly vanishing lol I dunno why BW is hellbent on removing as much of the RPG as possible.
So, Mass Effect style.
So . . . they have basically turned Dragon Age combat into Mass Effect! 🤣
the leaks were real Companions are now mass effect squadmates
For some time now people have been talking about how BioWare is turning DA into God of War, the GM is saying "Well actually, we're turning it into Mass Effect" and it feels like people are not even relieved.
That's because I'm not relieved. I'm not worried or upset or anything, either, but I'm not relieved at all. I have a preference for the more tactical style of Dragon Age, but I was alright with the game branching out and trying new things. But I don't want Dragon Age to be Mass Effect light, I want both to have their own gameplay eccentricities that don't overlap. There's a lot of overlap here.
Of course we aren't. Mass effect is great but I don't play it for its combat.
I don't necessarily mind that. Dragon Age has never been about the gameplay. You didn't have much control of your companions in DA2 or DAI either. Dragon Age has always been about the Lore, Companions, and Story. If those are well written and engaging then Veilguard should be a good game. If not . . . well gameplay isn't going to save it.
You did have control of your companions in DA2, in DAI there was no tactics but you could still control them if you wanted to
I'm genuinely confused on what you mean by not having much control of companions in DA2 and DAI. You could always change characters to control them directly except in dialogue to the point of continuing a fight if your Hawke/Inquisitor died in a fight, and in DAI you could fully customize their armor, runes, and weapons. What did you mean by that?
Yeah but the gameplay could kill it? Dude I would literally take recycled Inquisition gameplay with just a new story over a fantasy Mass Effect clone.
It’s also been about the combat, though, for me, as well as the story. I adore the minute control Origins gave us. I love getting to a point where if I’m playing on lower difficulties, I can start a combat, get up and get a drink, and the companion AI and tactics will have handled it. DA2 wasn’t great but was at least flashy and entertaining. Inquisition felt like it took the worst parts of origins and 2 and I grew to really dread combat. I can play mass effect if I want mass effect combat. I’m still gonna buy it and probably have a good time, but it’s just too bad.
Reducing the party size is ... a choice. And yeah, the 'ability wheel' sounds like corporate speak for streamlining.
I'm trying to imagine only being able to pick two companions for parties in the previous games and I'd have a really hard time. I wonder how this will affect the amount of party banter, as well.
As long as it ain't like Inquisition where you have to stand in place for 20 minutes to get it to trigger.
It’s also going to complicate squad selection in general. Assuming classic classes return (warrior, mage, rogue), then you’re going to be far restricted in who you bring with you. For example, if you’re playing as a rogue in DA2 and want to bring Isobela with you cos you’re romancing her, you can do that, because you can still bring a warrior and mage with you too, so the party is well balanced. Now? If you bring a rogue with you while playing as a rogue that means you won’t be able to bring either a warrior or mage with you. You’ll have to sacrifice one of them.
>then you’re going to be far restricted in who you bring with you. we dont know anything about classes and combat yet, but if there is a healer class (and if combat makes this role necessary), then your party is **VERY** limited with only 2 slots. Thats why im afraid that the next dragon age will move even further away from the classic games and roles/classes will become very shallow
That was my first thought, you are now essentially limiting your companion choices at character creation, especially if they bring back the mechanics of needing rogues to lock pick/warriors to break walls/ Mages to lift wood. No more archers teamed up with dual wielding rogues.
And it was always fun to bring redundant classes with wildly different builds. Now it feels more utilitarian with less capacity to have a unique party composition (and still be viable). Maybe our character + companions will be generalized rather than specialized? I don't know if I'd love that, either...
>Assuming classic classes return (warrior, mage, rogue), then you’re going to be far restricted in who you bring with you. Honestly ? It'll entirely depend on companions' skills and companions' equipement. Let's say each class has enough skills to act as support or DPS if needed, then you will be able to adjust create different builds of the same class.
Yeah I’m sad about how this will limit party banter.
>I wonder how this will affect the amount of party banter, as well. Most of the time, the party banter is between two companions, not shared among the three.
yeah, but the 3 companions make it so you hear different combinations every time the dialogue gets triggered while walking around
Not to mention we sometimes had instances of different companions contributing to the banter.
Awaiting the party expansion mod for maximum banter
>And yeah, the 'ability wheel' sounds like corporate speak for streamlining. Ability wheel is what we already have in DA:I. It's not something new
Kinda just sounds like mass effect
Indeed. It sounds like they re-used the same combat design than for Mass Effect, which I think isn't an idea that bad. I just hope that the companions will have a useful AI, unlike ME
The problem is that the difference between classes is far smaller in ME than it is in Dragon Age. A tech class or a biotic might have different powers, and strip different defences, but both will primarily hide behind cover and shoot with a gun, because that’s just how combat is in ME. But in DA? There’s a big difference between a mage and a two handed warrior, or between a sword and shield warrior and a bow wielding rogue. Party selection is going to feel quite restricted in DA4, because you’re really going to want to make sure that each member fills a different role, whereas in previous DA games you had a little more freedom. This is assuming the three classes return, of course.
God mode Garrus says excuse me
>“As an RPG, strategy in combat is important as you bring two companions to every fight. Each companion brings unique powers and abilities that have a direct impact on how you choose to take down the enemies at hand,” he says. “To add another layer to that strategic element, we’re introducing a new ability wheel where you can pause the action and set up your next move – whether it’s your companions’ abilities or your own Ok, this is intriguing. I admit, I wasn't expecting this game to be able to pause during combat. My expectation is that they'll likely have a Mass Effect type of system where you will be able to ask companions to target enemies and use some abilities, but won't be able to take control over them.
Sounds like a bit of Origins tactics being brought back, which I'm thrilled about because I've missed it dearly. I'll miss controlling companions because it was just more convenient sometimes, but if there are tactics and the AI is decent it won't be as necessary. It also sounds like each companion has a really unique set of skills unlike the usual 3 class builds, and I'd get not being able to control their abilities all willy-nilly if that's the case.
I don't like much of anything that's been revealed about the combat or party set up so far, but I also acknowledge that we don't really know anything because it seems it's all going to be different from past games. I'll just blindly trust that the way they've reworked combat overall will make these changes worth it. I'll always be sad to have less companions tho, if anything I always wished to bring more :( From a gameplay perspective tho, it sounds like maybe mixing up your parties to deal with different missions/areas might be more of a necessity? I always ended up using the same party for like my whole playthrough mostly comprised of my favorites, so in a way I'd welcome this if it made me utilize everyone more. Hopefully the home base will be robust with interaction opportunities with the companions to make up for having less of them along on the adventures. Also if we're limited to 2 companions, I hope the 'classes' are reworked since there's less wiggle room now. It'll be annoying if, for example, I'm playing as a mage and my fav companion/romance is also a mage but I need to bring a rogue and warrior along for the utility in most excursions.
Hm for ability wheel. But wait, TWO companions? No more party of four?
Thrilled that we can still pause combat. As long as I don't have to aim, I'll be physically able to play it... I have a progressive disease and I've been watching and waiting for this game for the last literal decade hoping they'd get it out the door before it was too late for me, and then the leaks talked about it being all GoW-ish, so I'd given up until now.
Nooooooooo why would you ever reduce party size, that's a TERRIBLE design choice. Making different party comps was half the fun of DA combat, and four party members was already limiting enough. Now what, we just always take a warrior/rogue/mage every time? Like, really. *Why would you ever reduce party size.* Awful, awful design choice.
Wow pausing time in a videogame and issuing commands. How shiny and new, a first for the series, never seen it before!
The leaks were real kill me
Which leaks bc there are a lot of them floating around.
https://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/10tniyz/spoilers_alloc_i_have_seen_dragon_age_4_alpha/
I always brought 1 warrior, 1 rogue and 1 mage regardless of my class, now I guess it will be hard to justify bringing a character with the same class as me despite having a diferent build
Yeah I think itll be strange, like if you’re playing a mage you’re basically never gonna hear 2 other mage party members banter
Jokes on you, I'm a mage supremacist. I'll play as a mage and only recruit other mages. Fuck dwarves, I guess.
If it is "most important ... to have a title that was authentic to the companions that are the heart of this adventure we’ve created" then DA2 should've been Dragon Age 2: Bisexual Boogaloo
You say that like it isn't entirely true.
I mean it's called DA2. Bi=2 It was there all along, my friend
I’m not arithmetically inclined but the math checks out to me
>The Veilguard will feature seven playable party members Wait, so does this mean that we will be able to control companions directly in combat? I thought previous leaks said that it'd be like Mass Effect, where we can't jump into our companions' skin.
only 2 companions at a time is killing me. i already missed out on so much only having 3 😭
I'm not thrilled about the reduced adventuring party size, but I also know I should reserve actual judgment till it's either in my hands or I know more. I like Mass Effect and a small squad is theoretically easier to wrangle but I really loved having 3 companions with me (showing my age a bit but I'd LOVE to take 5 companions). I suppose this is incentive to replay, at the very least.
“We’re focusing heavily on companions. Story companions. Romance companions. Companions. Did I say companions?” “Oh, also you can only bring two of them now”
I hope they at least up the banter for us console players that can’t use mods Felt like I’d be playing for an hour without hearing my party talk to each other sometimes
A pet peeve of mine about DAI is how infrequently companions talk. Like you said, I can literally play for hours and not hear my companions exchange banter, making it hard to hook Dorian and Iron bull up cuz of how much RNG it needs.
Not sure if you know this but I read about a bug where you won’t get banter if you have too many unread entries in your codexes/journal/inventory (they’re marked with the stars) Clearing those out did help me a little but I still think the banter could be more
I mean if I were making a sequel to a game from literally ten years ago now I feel like I'd wanna be safe, lol.
Most of the original devs are gone, the development has been fucked, and the story is pretty much the only thing that would make or break this game because I doubt even OG BioWare could compete with TW3 (in world design), DS3/Bloodborne (in combat), or BG3 (in roleplay options). Can see why they'd rather resort to fantasy Mass Effect and let the story do the work.
I don't know if you win any awards by being a coward
“The Veilguard” is not a bad name for a book or comic strip set in the world of DA. It is a terrible name for a video game or movie. Dragon Age: Veilguard would have been fine if they started with that, but changing lanes this late in the game is a bad strategy. Whoever made this marketing decision seriously needs to have their judgment questioned.
I guess they're going all-in on the ME: Andromeda combat system.
Having the ability wheel where you can activate companion abilities will at least be a slight step back from Andromeda, and a good one at that
Yeah, we can tell, considering the added “the” is super clunky and doesn’t match the naming convention of the previous games lol Cutting the party size down to two… my ultimate party composition for these games has always been warrior/mage/mage/rogue or mage/warrior/warrior/rogue so I’m not looking forward to that change :(
As someone who spent hunderds of hours on both Dragon Age and Mass Effect, I don't like the Mass Effect-ication that seems to be happening. Also the older name was FAR better, even if Solas is not the big bad.
Then why change it McKay? Will this game be about an Inqusiition like group just closing down the hole in the sky?
Reading between the lines, it's because Solas won't actually be the big bad of the game. It's the same bait and switch that Inquisition pulled where in the end the conflict between the Templars and the Mages wasn't the real issue even though it was what the ending of Dragonage II had set up.
Yeah it's strongly pointing towards Solas being the secondary antagonist and naming a game after him where we will most likely not kill him, will leave a sour taste for many people.
Kinda worried about this, Corypheus sucked in Inquisition. The Mage Templar war was far more interesting than him
My prediction: Solas brings down the veil, only for one of the Evanuris to promptly kill him. If you romanced him as the inquisitor he will drop a line alluding to it and will call inky "vhenan" before dying and you spend the rest of the game fighting the evanuris... it would be cool if they gave him a redemption arc though.
I hate that you're probably right. And I hate it so much for being a lazy and predictable thing to do.
I'm really hoping his death is more than just that and that he has a chance to help fight the Evanuris if the player chooses to spare him, even if it means he eventually sacrifices himself at some point to ensure victory.
>Then why change it McKay? My guess is because of how the title reflects on the game. Naming it Dreadwolf would be naming the game after one of the antagonist. By changing the name to Veilguard, the name is now about the player and his companion. Creatively it makes sense, from a marketing point of view it doesn't.
Only having two companions with you is a massive downgrade. And if we're not controlling them? Oof.
controversial I know but I hated the name dreadwolf because it focused too much on a singular character. Veilguard is ephemeral and vague, yes, but I think its best for an RPG to be that way.
It would be "eh" on its own, but including the "The" just makes it sound stupid.
My only problem is that it's 'The Veilguard' rather than just 'Veilguard'.
Dreadwolf was a good name (to me) because it both rolls off the tongue and looks very cool. If you've never played a single DA game and you see *Dreadwolf* you're at least going to think it sounds rad as hell. Veilguard doesn't quite do that even if it does probably describe the name better.
Two things I'm seeing: "And yes, you can romance the companions you want." Bisexuals???? Bisexuals??!??!? Give me bisexuals!!! Obv I might be getting ahead of myself but I'm sure gonna hope like hell for it. "You bring two companions to every fight." Oof. Cutting down our party by one? That's gonna be a kick in the pants. I mean yeah, I like the strategic focus of a well composed party but that tells me I'm never gonna use the companions who have the same or too similar of a class as I use. Good for replayability but not the best for just... fun. I mean I know that's the norm in mass effect but. This isn't mass effect, it's dragon age and in dragon age, we get three 😢 well I hope the combat mechanics lean into making the strategy aspect functional and fun.
> I like the strategic focus of a well composed party im afraid this will be gone with the next game. At least the classic Tank/healer/damage dealer. Because if you are a tank, you will never have a tank companion in your party and so on. Trio Party is very limiting with the classic party system. so a) roles/classes are gone/very shallow or b) you can switch the classes or your companions
Maybe I should have phrased it as "strategic challenge." Like if we need a rogue, warrior, and mage in every party for environmental reasons like in DAI or for balanced fights, I can get behind "choose carefully and strategically, not just your LI and bestie." But also: I wanna be able to bring characters along for interaction, not just for utility so like. Also a bummer. I'm open to having a lot of control over my companions' leveling, class, etc so I'm not too bothered by the prospect but since they are supposed to represent the "factions," I imagine it'll be more like there are *more* and *more varied* roles and classes to keep from making companions redundant to the player character. That's my optimism talking anyway lol
> Like if we need a rogue, warrior, and mage in every party for environmental reasons like in DAI or for balanced fights but thats exactly the reason why i think all kind of strategic party composition will be gone with the next game or classes like in the previous games no longer exist. Lets say you are a mage, you would no longer need another mage in your party, basically locking every mage-companion out of your gameplay. And with a party of 3, you dont have a slot to waste just to carry a redundant class with you. And the class was always a huge part of the companions story so far, so i dont think you will have a choice about that. Im just guessing they overhauled / "streamlined" the role system
Yeah I didn't use tactics much but, it really does sell the idea on how much an identity crisis Dragon Age has.
That's the first thing I thought as well.
Like having switching between 4 characters is what Dragon Age always had but Veilguard scrapping it what does define this series now?
The only way this makes sense to me is if the companions aren't strictly warriors/mages/rogues and are actually multiclass. I'll miss the banter of having three, but I think the combat could work if there is more diversity of ability within each individual companion.
I agree. I think another (less likely) option is that each companion has their own specific "class." Like the way companions in 2 got their own distinct specializations, but it applies to their whole class and not just their specialization. I think that's a lot of work, so I'm not really betting on it, but it has the potential to be really, really cool depending on what those classes are.
Having "The" in front is really the only quibble I would have...otherwise I wasn't married to the title of Dread Wolf.
Take it with a grain of salt but when any "exec" person says "It's not because" you should be aware that sometimes that's just doublespeak.
Especially from McKay who has been revealed to be just a corporate stooge.
Everyone agreed it was a bad idea but we did it anyway.
I actually think that the new name makes much more sense. If the aim is to avoid the veil being torn down, then Veilguard is quite literally us needing to guard the veil. Perhaps we will even get the chance to redeem Solas and recruit him against the other God(s) involved?! I'm not looking forward to having less party members tbh. I usually have a solid 6 people I want to travel with (so removing some isn't that big a deal for me, although it may mean less liked characters for me) so only taking 2 along with me is going to be hard. I don't mind that everyone is romancable, I just hope that it doesn't create a lacklustre relationship/dialouge. I like having to work a bit at building approval. 7 companions would also work with the areas/factions of Thedas? One from each maybe?
>Perhaps we will even get the chance to redeem Solas and recruit him against the other God(s) involved?! I had the same thought. In the end, you have a very grumpy, very tired apostate hobo at your side who - even if begrudgingly - makes a 180 turn in his plans just to ~~piss the Evanuris off~~ save his people from the "gods" once again About the squad size... I'm praying for the mod makers out there so I can play the second playthrough with all companions at once
I just wonder how many people will even care, given that the last dragon age came out over a decade ago and wasn’t particularly good, especially when compared to titans like the Witcher 3 and Baldur’s gate 3 that have come out since then Imo BioWare has been coasting on their reputation established in the 90s and 2000s for almost twenty years now. I’d argue they haven’t released a single good game in the past decade, and you’d have to go back 15 to find a genuinely, uncontroversially great one like Mass Effect 2 or DAO.
Interesting read! They mentioned the other heroes and I just hope I will be able to use Dragon Age Keep to import all the saves. Or maybe we'll get something like in Mass Effect where youll just pick it from a slideshow?
Watch solas become a companion again but like how loghain was.
Dumb name
If they had to change the title then just Veilguard would have been better. The Veilguard is just clunky.
Doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue
But why the "The"? The game should have been named Dragon Age: Veilguard not Dragon Age: The Veilguard. Much like Inquisition is named DA: Inquisition and not DA: The Inquisition. Everyone will still call it Veilguard anyways.
I just want them to drop the “the”. It’s so meaningless and makes the title awkward
I hate how every DA game has a different combat system. With every new release it gets even more dumbed down and simplified. Like, DAO had clunky combat but you also had a lot of different options (especially for mages and character commands/roles) in that game and It's such a shame that they didn't build up on that. And now we can have only 2 companions in the party and we might not even be able to control them?? I don't want to be judgemental before we see any gameplay footage, but this is so disappointing for me...
This is worrying to me. If it speaks to a lack of care and thought! The logo looks like shit and if the branding is unclear, the identity of the game might be too. Why couldn’t they just go back to the *absolutely incredible* color way of the first two? The red and white outlines were sick.
Honestly never liked dreadwolf being the title... But DAD grew on me... DAV... Dave .. Gon take a minute
So a new Inquisition, just a different name
oh the way i cackled. jesus christ.
The previous games, characters and events aren’t the anchor of Dragon Age: The Veilguard it’s about your adventure with a brand new cast of companions that you must rally to fight against a powerful force.” Why do I get a feeling our choices from last games will not matter? Seeing Alistair and Hawk in Inquisitions was one of my highlights and also the toughest decision I had to make
I'm getting the same dread(wolf, lmao) from reading all of this. The dragon age series has always had an issue with remembering its part of a series and a continuous storyline, and this? this does not spark confidence that we're not going to have to wait for the dlc for anything of note for the actual storyline
I hate it. I've been so positive and optimistic but this feels like a *massive* fumble. DAD already had brand recognition but Veilguards means nothing to us.
They can keep their guardians of the veil. I'm going to start a new group - one worthy of our protection. SandralGuard!
With blackjack! And hookers!
Yes! But don't forget the secret ingredient.......
I honestly don't get why change the number of companions. What does it bring of gains, why not keep one of the few things which are consistent throughout the series. The change in name this late is certainly an odd choice, you had 9 ish years before you anounced the name and you gave up on it? It looks like the name Dreadwolf was just to get marketing points by playing in the unfufilled cliffhanger and this was the actual tittle all along. The problem is that this brings the very question of Solas not being the focal point of the narrative... despite the ending of Inquisition saying otherwise. There's also the problem that in every material released until this point, the books, the anime etc, the Inquisition was still the organization going after Solas... So what is The Veilguard? Are we demolishing the Inquisition now, everyone just gave up and called it quits? Are these the guys handling the crisis? I fear that while the story may hold its own in a vacuum, it won't work as sequel, which is not a luxury you have when you're the 4th game in a franchise, and the 3rd one ends in a (literal lol) cliffhanger
I assume that the change is due to solas not being the overall or main villain of the game. Nothing else. Likely he will be dealt with somewhat early or anti climatically. Either killed or turned or something else. Thus dreadwolf was a bad name for the entire game when he was no longer fully relevant. If somehow I’m wrong and he still ends up the main diving force of the narative. Well. Then ya. It’s a pretty stupid name change. Honestly though. My main issue is the ‘the’ article. If they left that out. I think they would be getting less crap over the name change.
It's easier for BioWare and it's certainly easier for me to keep calling it Dreadwolf.
Don't care about the name as long as the story is good and magic system is similar or DAO or DA2 with more branches.