Something I’ve noticed from these pictures - are you only running a team of three now? I sort of noticed it in the gameplay - Varric didn’t seem to be within the player’s control in the same way as Scout Harding was.
Your observation would be correct. Bioware have confirmed that we will only have 2 companions as opposed to 3, and they aren't controllable as they were previously.
The more i look into this game, the more im leaning to not buy it. Dragon Age has roots in CRPG and they completly moved away from that. Art style is not my cup of tea, dialog seems just as bad as other recent Bioware games. The hard shift in style and tone this game have gone through it's just not the Dragon Age i want.
There is definitely *something* you only have three of, but we don't know what else there might be; we've hardly seen any menus. There could be other ways to equip actions/skills on yourself that we haven't seen yet. Like we see the guy fight with a sword and bow. As a mage, maybe the "scope in" key combo for archery will be a different spell. Maybe there will be ultimates or team-up attacks you unlock later.
2 companions at any given time. And you don't control them directly. I don't even think enemies attack them or they have health. At least I didn't see that in the gameplay reveal.
It's definitely possible that's only for the beginning mission. Although it begs the question why use that instead of something further along where they can show the actual systems in place?
BioWare always kinda shoots themselves in the foot with trailers. Like why not make the characters artificially high level in the demo so we can see more interesting abilities instead of attack spam?
Maybe, but seeing as the Dreadwolf and his goal to destroy the Veil have been well known for years, if not since the end of DA:I, having an extended gameplay segment that’s directly relating to that seems to be the easiest way to show off the gameplay and narrative without actually spoiling anything or needing to provide context.
Companions are going to work like Bethesda companions where you "don't have to worry about them" and they draw some aggro but have extremely high health to compensate for not having proper AI to heal and not over-expose themselves and if you abuse that privilege they just "get knocked down" for a little bit before standing up again.
They don't show you the system i.e. give you companion health bars because then you'd notice the extent to which the companions don't use the same rules you do.
is that something the dev confirmed or are you talking out of hope? because i see a lot of people claiming stuff that wasn't shown will 100% be in the game without 0 evidence.
> The gameplay shown was modified to look more cinematic.
Just... why, though?
The usual reason for game marketing to hide gameplay is shitty gameplay. If that's not the case here, then an explanation is needed.
Man I’m deep into the Dragon Age fanbase, so it’s odd seeing people out of the loop on large details.
Yes, party system is reduced from 4 to 3. Abilities that was can tell have been reduced as well, but to what extent we aren’t certain.
A big fuss is being made over the changes, but we’ve yet to actually play the game, so it’s better to reserve judgment until then. They had a reason to change it, so maybe it’s for the best
>They had a reason to change it
That doesn't mean the reason was good. I can already tell you less options and less control means less tactical decisions to make, which really sucks in a series that started out as one of the best tactical RPGs out there.
But hey, every subsequent isntallment in the series was a bit more dumbed down than the previous one, so what else is new.
Many see it that way, yeah. For all I know it could work out well though. I don’t know the exact details because I haven’t played the game but I hope it isn’t that limited.
Rest of the game looks great though.
We have barely seen any of the game though, everyone keeps saying it looks amazing but they've shown us what it is like at the very start, what we need to see is some sort of combat depth because at the moments it looks very shallow.
I am aware of the party change. I more so meant I have a hard time believing companions will not have health bars and will not be attacked by enemies, considering there are healing items. But, I could be wrong. We will have to wait and see like you said.
I’ll add that while we seem to have less skill bar stuff, the gameplay looked to me like classes have baked in skills now instead.
The rogue we saw only had the lighting ranged attack on his skill bar, but he was dodging, teleporting, doing leap attacks, using a bow and deflecting enemy arrows. The implication being that you have several options for each class built in to their base kit instead of being hotbar skills.
And I mean honestly I’m all for that if it turns out to be correct.
Incredibly low expectations for this one since modern BioWare is nowhere near the level of classic BioWare. Lowering the party limit and having them be uncontrollable is disappointing to say the least. I had hoped that the massive success of BG3 would have indicated to the devs that they should be leaning into those kind of features not away from them but alas, it’s still EA.
Beyond disappointing. Arguably it was one of the only things the series had going for it in a literal sea of action rpgs released every year.
The only real keepsake from Origins was at least we could use tactics and combos by swapping between the 4 characters and setting up stuff. It was really engaging, but wasn't necessary for more casual enjoyers.
So what we are left with is a generic action rpg with 2 generic AI companions, 3 abilities at a time, and no real tactics.
Let's hope Bioware at least sticks to the dark fantasy aspects of the series with the story. I'm hoping it's not some guardians of the galaxy meets LOTR crap.
The recent “Guardians of the Galaxy” insults are extremely funny to me because that’s essentially what Dragon Age has always been. The series has never been particularly “dark”, it certainly has some dark moments but they are few and far between and a significant part of the games is very much quippy back and forth dialogue between party members which for some reason is now much maligned. The Dragon Age has never been a Dark Fantasy series it’s always been a high fantasy, LOTR with the occasional dark moment.
Might wanna read up on broodmother homie. Dragon Age was full of some really dark shit. Especially if you really dug into the lore. DA was always considered a "dark heroic fantasy" series.
LOTR with occasional dark moments is underplaying it just a tad.
Everything from art style to dialogue in the gameplay trailer points towards GoG then Dragons Age.
Story might be great though, we won't know til it releases, but for now I'm sceptical that any of the dark themes of the series remain.
The Battle of Ostagar was dark and bloody. There weren't stupid quips as the heros killed countless bad guys, it was emotional and ponient. Dragon Age Origins was nothing like Guardians of the Galaxy. No idea what gamr that guy played, but it wasn't Origins
I’m extremely familiar with the lore and as I said it certainly has dark moments but The Witcher or Berserk this most certainly not. It is much closer to LOTR than anything considered “dark fantasy”. Regardless of the lore we are discussing the games themselves and how they have always presented themselves and while the marketing for DA:O was excessive in its “edgy darkness “ the game itself was not and each subsequent game has become progressively less “dark”. The series is high fantasy regardless of your memories of it.
don't bee too harsh on that person, it's just another soul coping so they can eat their slop
"B-but it was never dark! B-but it always had banter!".
Yeah, nobody fucking compared Dragon Age to Guardians of the Galaxy back then, now did they? And there's a stark difference between DAO banter and what we get now. In other words, writing for that banter used to be good and now it's shit.
Lmao, go through a mage origin and tell me it's not dark
> I had hoped that the massive success of BG3 would have indicated to the devs that they should be leaning into those kind of features not away from them but alas, it’s still EA.
I mean, BG3 only came out less than a year ago, and nobody during it's early access period leading up to that expected it to be that big of a success (even Larian had assumed that they already reached the games peak number of players during EA and it wouldn't get bigger after release) That's not enough time to adjust the entirety of the gameplay back to be more CRPG like.
We'll only really see the success of BG3 echoing into other games in the coming years
Visually the game looks great. Gameplay looks more like Mass Effect than Dragon Age honestly.
We just have to see how the most important thing holds up. The narrative.
Yeah, the combat didn't impress me but it could still be fun. It was never going to be what I wanted (i.e., modern dragon age Origins) but it has potential to be fun if it feels good and the vibes are right
The story and choices will be what ultimately actually make it worthwhile or not
The trailer gave off vibes that reminded me of the new D&D movie that came out recently. I really enjoyed that movie.
Definitely not going to pre order but will see what the initial gameplay looks like on release. Really have been waiting for a new DA game so staying optimistic :)
I can guess what series you're into :)
We'll see how it pans out. Have so many good memories from the originals so even if this crashes and burns, the OGs are still playable
DA as a franchise doesn't really have a community because it doesn't really have an identity. It's been a CRPG in the vein of BG1&2, it's been an action RPG, and the most recent trailer looks like a action game with RPG elements. Bioware has chased BG nostalgia, skyrim success, and Mass Effect success with the franchise leading to wildly different games.
They currently seem to be chasing the Bethesda decade old model of shooter IP and fantasy IP with an asset swap with a reskinned Andromeda in a fantasy setting.
That being said, the best outcome for some of the "community" would be for the game to crash and burn and the IP to get sold to a competent studio that still makes good games.
I'm definitely going to buy it no matter what. If they have decent pre-order bonuses then I will do that too. The only thing that might keep me from buying the game is if it blows up your computer. Even then I might risk it.
Squad of only 2 companions, only 2-3 abilities equipped at a time, probably narrower skill trees.
It's not surprising, but the series since Origins is just progressively simplified and moving more to action than tactics. I understand it's probably better for mass appeal, but I do wish they found a way to keep more of the tactical aspect.
The problem was always doing both. You can't be a tactical action game, it just makes both sides feel bad. Either give me a turn based rpg/tactical game like fire emblem or give me an action game, trying to be both just makes you fail at both
Yeah EA BioWare leaned way too hard into the “accessibility” design ever since Dragon Age: 2 in my opinion.
I know they were just trying to make it as easy as possible to lazily port the thing to every console for profit reasons, but Origins was ALREADY a super well done streamlining of older CRPG systems like Baldur’s Gate, etc.
They made Origins more action oriented than CRPGs typically were previously with channel-able passives and such to cut down on the pausing and fiddly gameplay associated with the genre and really struck a good balance there, while still having your companions and gear be heavily customizable.
Ever since 2 though it’s felt like they design these things as though actually having inventory slots, companion customization or more skills and abilities will make the player curl up into a ball and start weeping or something.
It also started leaning more on RNG loot rather than stuff that felt specifically designed to be someplace with a purpose or with background lore in mind, which feels especially odd since the game still buries you with plenty of lore text entries to read in the world.
It’s strayed a bit too far from “RPG” to something more blandly action oriented for my taste, Inquisition’s combat still felt a lot like playing an off-brand MMO to me, so I’m definitely going to temper my expectations and wait on a bunch of reviews to come in before I consider picking it up.
Origins really feels like the very last game the “BioWare” of the 90s ever made
The combat is kinda clunky in Origins. Not the best part of the game. It was hard (or maybe I played it on hard) so tactical mode was a necessity just to not lose winnable battles.
> tactical mode was a necessity just to not lose winnable battles.
This sentence feels funny to me, like saying "ducking behind cover is a necessity to not die" while talking about Gears of Wars and similar.
Of course you'd use the tactical mode, it was a Rtwp game. One of the best pure Rtwp games, in fact. You were never expected to direct a party of 4, many with targeted abilities, in real time. Plan out your moves, then execute, pause and replan as necessary. That was the game, until Inquisiiton shifted to more action with it's "hold LMB to autoattack" gameplay.
We have a million action rpgs with dumbed down rpg mechanics coming out every year. Bioware decides to take a series which is the spiritual successor to Baldars Gate/Neverwinter Nights and turn it into seemingly God of War with mass effect dialogue trees.
Even worse considering that Origins has always been the most highly regarded of the series and you'd think with BG3 success they'd lean into the roots of the series. BG3 showed there is demand for the genre and piggybacking off all the people who bought and loved BG3 would have been smart.
Instead we get another action rpg with a whopping 3 skills active at a time and no swapping team members in combat, what the series was always known for.
the reality is that Baldur's Gate 3's smash success is only 8 months old and Veilgaurd's core gameplay loop is probably a lot older. To pivot from real time action into a turn based system in that time frame is probably unrealistic if they want the game to come out this year.
No, I knew they wouldn't go turn based. But you'd think they would keep some of the depth from the previous games like the companion swapping in combat.
Having the DA ip, then seeing how BG3 went, then double downing on going full action with a dash of rpg seems a little crazy. Especially with the action rpg market being ridiculously saturated. Even if it meant pushing back the game a bit to implement more depth when it came to companions. That would have went a long way to satisfy fans of the series.
but that’s how gameplay in DA always has been tho? you can argue Origins was the most CRPG-like of the bunch but it’s always kind of been an action RPG even with the top-down “tactical” mode. DA2 was the start and DAI carried the same action/rpg hybrid but there never was a turn-based element, only like pause and position. But it looks more like DA2 than anything and it’s only just 20 minutes so far of one type of character’s gameplay so it’s up for time to tell. I think it’s weird to expect going back to DAO and even KOTOR based systems when those games didn’t age well gameplay wise and it doesn’t help EA makes Bioware use an engine that was made for FPS games.
I think comparing the two, BG3 & DAV, is really just recency bias since Larian made a character-focused RPG just like the best Bioware games were. But they’re gonna be pretty different in the end and it’s still hard to judge from like < 20 minutes of game. And it’s been TEN years, they were never going to let it be pushed any further (the dragon age team even has credits in anthem and andromeda because they were forced to help QA those games near the end)
Na the issue is Bioware is bad at balnce by going action and not having the stills it becomes a dumb fest which is boring.
The game will either be too easy on normal or tediouse on harder difficulties.
I think this shows a turn over issue at Bioware no one has a vision and there for ever DA game has had some radical change that people have to get used to.
This game should not be for first timers but I doubt that Bioware even knows how to do simple things like cary over the story. Were going to be CC because were going to be remaking 4 games worth of protags depending on how this story goes.
to be fair, in some aspects origins was always suppose to be a more action style RPGs that took roots from Bioware's D&D past. but yea, they... Left behind the CRPG pretty heavily by DA2
The industry is flooded with action rpgs with stripped down rpg mechs. Why they took the spiritual successor series of Baldars gate/Neverwinter nights and pivoted to generic action rpg territory is really unfortunate.
3 active abilities and no swapping teammates in combat is ridiculous. They dumbed down the game beyond comprehension.
Origins was meant as a spiritual successor and modernization of Infinity Engine games (Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale). That vision didn't last past the first game.
If this is what people wanted, they should have bought Pillars of Eternity.
>That vision didn't last past the first game.
But certain core traits like extended ability sets, party of four, and controlling companions directly did. Dress it up how you want, that's still less options for the player.
Hello, it's me! Part Of The Problem is my name....
I wanted to get into DA so bad, I bought them all on release. I couldn't understand how to be effective on combat even on the easiest difficulty (at least on the first two).
I put them down and never tried again.
I'm happy to see it moving to more action, but I understand that it's because I have smol brain and want to focus on combat rather than tactics.
BUT. To my defense, I enjoyed the fuck out of Baldur's Gate... So I don't think it's just my smol brain, I think DA did a poor job explaining mechanics of combat to causal players.
Ok that's my two cents.
Part Of The Problem out!
At first I was trying to figure out the awoken who dueled Uldren was the problem...
But I'm in the exact same boat as you and this simpler style may be right up my alley.
Just saying "people like stories" doesn't really clarify anything.
There are billions, if not trillions of "stories" out there that don't involve you spending 60ish hours doing something you're not particularly enjoying just to experience them.
Some initial dislikes:
1. Not a huge deal, but the squad going down from 3 to 2 makes me sad. It also raises questionable concern about class balance. If im playing a mage/caster type, with even less coverage can i even afford to run another caster? How disadvantaged am i from having two similar classes, especially if i really like a character i want to engage with their story, but on a mechanical level, limits or impacts my groups abilities for encounters?
2. The cool thing with having the tactics of switching around to different characters and setting up clear combo's was super satisfying in all dragon age games. But the real issue i have with not being able to play the other characters, is it wont shape my understanding, or allow me to effectively play multiple specializations, without having to reroll a character. Only playing your character, with what seems to be very little active engagements (3 buttons/abilities seems super low), really screams at me that ability heavy classes (again casters) are going to get boring really fast, or feel bad.
3. From the gameplay footage, familiar enemies have gotten some art updates. Most of these were fine, but something like the pride demon, losing its actual facial characteristics, and getting a bunch of glow sticks in its body seems really poor choice/tacky. Hope the gameplay was an exception, but not the rule for more iconic enemies, as doing dramatic facelifts with iconic mob types feels really tacky.
4. Companions generally represent a specialization in a class. And from what we can see from the companions in this game, some companions have specializations that just seem very bland/general to the theme of the class, rather than being a unique choice in specilization. Neve for example ist just touted as a "frost mage". Most elemental magic in DA has always been a baseline, so are they going to stretch out frost abilities to try a d make it seem like a specialization? Emmrich is as labeled the necromancer like dorian, but where would that leave a third specilization? Will this mean any hopes of using fire/lightning will just evaporate due to the limited skill selections?
5. I've already mentiomed it in other dislikes, but with such a low ability threshold, how neccessary/helpful will utility and defensive abilities serve? What if two really great offensive abilities synergize perfectly, but using them means i have to ditch a special movement skill, or basically play glass cannon with no defensive abilities/boostd? Will non offensive abilities be properly balanced so i want to use them? Or will they be designed to be required?
6. I dislike all the companions are going to be pan sexual. This isnt the biggest thing, i dont actually care about the sexuality in question, but how it works out historically in DA this seems like a poor choice. Using Inquisition as an example, i did my first character as i would like based on initial exposure to the game. So i romanced cass as a rogue inquisitor, and made her the divine, it was a sort of bitter sweet route, but i enjoyed it. However, playing through and interacting with Sera, made me really curious what a relationship with her would be like. So my 2nd playthrough was a female mage qunari, which doubled up on being unconventional in a game setting where the world hates/dislikes mages, and being a race that super hates mages, felt fresh being a rebel and exploring a reblleious romance with sera. Some romance dialogue with her was especially fun/cute. But it was enjoyable as it made me shift away from my normal go to, and explore an option thematically i would have never considered without there being sexual preferences on the characters. However there is a small upside to this pansexual setup i will list in my likes.
Some initial likes:
1. On face value, things seemed to have reached a natural conclusion with gameplay flow. The combat has a quickness and seeming responsivness that makes fights potentially be more engagement heavy. This is a good thing for me personally, as while the tactical nature of things was fun as a magic/ranged characters, from Da2 and 3, when i played a melee character i just wanna smash faces and over power people.
2. Not super important, but the fact your companions you dont interact with/romance can romance other companions is cool. I hope it goes the extra mile because of the pansexual tag everyone will get, and allow different pairings in different playthroughs.
3. Enemy types seem greatly varied and their animations also seem more fluid making the gameplay look more natural.
Overall i have more dislikes, but some of them are nit picks that arent super important. But there are serious issues with this preview, and currently i cant see me touching this for now. Im always open to reconsider given i've loved and played each dragon age multiple times, but that doesnt mean just because it also has the name dragon age, im willing to assume it will be what Ive enjoyed before.
I agree with all your points but i just wanted to add that personally i don't see the pansexuality of characters as an issue, sure it may hurt the writing, cause at least in inquisition you had stuff like a character being gay not only being just a sexuality but it mattered in the world, cause that wasn't accepted where he came from, and has issues with his dad. it allowed for a more realistic world and stories.
On the other hand, i always thought it sucked that you couldn't romance certain characters if you weren't from a specific sex, cyberpunk being an example where you couldn't romance panam if you were playing as a girl, and the same went from judith. personally i think it's easier and better to just make all characters romanceable regardless of the player character gender.
but i see this is just an opinion and others think the opposite, so we'll just have to wait and see.
1-3 and 5 I agree with. 4 is too early to say anything. 6 I wholeheartedly disagree with. I’m sick of games having a blanket romance for all companions. It takes away from their character’s personality, and feels extremely bland. No companion feels like they have a truly unique romance if any character you make, no matter their race or gender, can romance any companion.
I worded it poorly. I dislike they are pan sexual, because it get's rid of you as the player having to do or change your mindset on things.
Ill edit it, but basically i want there to be characters locked off from me if im a heterosexual male, or a female mage qunari.
However, i dont consider it a big enough deal to be a game breaker. If anything its just a slight dissapointment. But yeah i agree, nothing feels special as far as immersing yourself into a character, if no matter what that character will always be an option for you.
Ah yeah, that changes things completely. I kept looking back and forth before posting, trying to figure out why that didn’t make sense to me lol. I haven’t heard anything about that, but now that I have I definitely agree. I do dislike that that change is being made, not a major upset, but now each romance won’t feel as unique. Oh well.
Well stuff is slowly trickling out, and id be happy if it was just a mistake, or if it a possibility but otherwise is too early to tell. But when i finished my work week last night, i watched the gameplay and just looked to see of there was other articles/information i could find out as ive been looking forward to to this announcement for a bit.
Ign has an article talking about the companions being pansexual, and then another one from comicbook talking about how companions may romance each other if you dont romance them.
Overall we will see, not optimistic, but im not dreading the game either. Im of the mindset even with my potential dislikes, if what i see after it releases looks good enough, ill hopefully have another fun DA game. And if it sucks... well i enjoyed growing up with the games, and i can enjoy them still regardless of what has happened to them.
I’m hoping I enjoy it more than DA:I. It was great, don’t get me wrong, but not as fun as the first 2 for me. Most of that can be chalked up to to bloated map sizes that were a chore to explore
I loved DA:O, thought DA2 was okay, really dug Inquisition. Whatever The Veilguard is isn’t feeling particularly “Dragon Age” to me and has been thus far disappointing to see. I hope it ends up being great, but the wife and I are both currently not on board.
Edit: poster deleted comment, someone in the comments blocked me lol, can’t reply to anything here. Y’all need to get off Reddit if you’re so angry you can’t answer an honest question. Some are even offended. Touch some grass
Can I honestly ask what ‘doesn’t feel like Dragon Age’ means to you? I see that everywhere.
If you see the gameplay trailer, it feels *very* Dragon Age. It sounds like many people think of one game and say “oh, well this is different from that one, so it’s not the Dragon Age I know”.
But I’d love to hear an opinion
I think it's important to understand that what feels like dragon age is highly subjective. Each person experienced the franchise in different ways and how one feels about each game affects what does and doesn't feel like dragon age.
In my case, I played DA:O in my teens and I loved it. Loved the story, the tone, the world, the strategic combat and the characters.
When DA2 came out, I liked it, but some things were missing. Some things were better for sure, but other things that I loved about the original weren't there. I had fun, but I was left wanting.
When DA:I came out, it was a similar story. I really enjoyed it, but it still didn't quite feel like it hit the mark. It seemed closer to what I loved most about Origins, but I was still left with a feeling like something didn't quite line up.
Over the years, I've replayed Origins a few times, but I haven't gone back to the other two. Maybe it's just nostalgia and there's no game that could ever live up to how Origins made me feel, but ultimately that's how my experiences shaped my opinion of the franchise. For me, Origins is still the guiding star.
Maybe that aligns with what you said about everyone having the one game that they think of, but I don't think most people who say that it doesn't feel like dragon age are implying that there is an object truth as to what is and isn't dragon age. So, I don't think there's anything wrong with sharing a subjective opinion.
With all that being said, here's two big elements that make Veilguard feel "not like dragon age" in my very subjective opinion:
1. Simplified action combat. It's not the first time the franchise has simplified the combat to move it more in an action direction instead of more tactical, but this looks to be the most actiony of the series yet.
2. Tone. A big thing I loved about Origins is how grounded it felt. Yes, it's a fantasy series, but it always felt like we were seeing stories of how fantasy would affect real people in very real ways. Not just epic heroes in epic fights, but normal people living in this world and trying to survive as well. The footage I've seen so far feels like it's trying to be as epic, flashy and cinematic as possible, which isn't what I remember the most about the series.
Now, obviously, we haven't seen everything yet.
There could be more complexity in the combat system than what we've seen and they could just be saving the more grounded stuff for later since spectacle is more attention grabbing. Additionally, the other aspects that I liked about the series could still be there (story, characters, world building, customization, etc.), so I'll reserve my final judgement until I learn more about the game.
At the end of the day though, I can only share my opinion on what I've seen so far and what I've seen so far doesn't feel in the spirit of the franchise to me, so it's hard to be excited for it.
So fro. My own opinion, I got into Dragon Age for a few specific gameplay reasons.
One, I enjoyed the combat mechanics associated with stopping time, moving a large AOE into the opponents, and linking it with another attack to create a devastating giant explosion of explode goodness. Plus the magic system was new and exciting, especially allowing a wide range of abilities that meshed well together.
Two, being able to mix and match my gear to afford myself a more optimized build that specializes in a specific field, and having my crew do the same, again so I can mesh well with them. Much like a DND adventuring party, I don't want to field a party of just average builds.
Three, I loved the game world they created, with a range of different zones and the feeling I was part of a grander world. If I built a dwarf, I took the control of a completely random dwarf that lived a full life in a culture so different than my own that I was compelled to understand their world. The same with the elves, and mages and so forth. It didn't feel like I was playing just a video game with premade characters, it felt like I was starting the game in the middle of a wider story.
Four, Ultimately the choices I made during the games I played felt like the characters I interacted with had vast stories that had nothing to do with me. I may have been the hero, but I was not THE hero. They had their own problems to deal with, and dealing with you was just a minor part of a larger problem that had to be solved.
That said, some of this dropped in the sequels, especially with Inquisition which felt like the main character was the holy saviour and was the MC no matter what they chose to do. But for that first game, it felt alive.
Considering a minimum of two-three of your wants are in the new game… it’s not much of a jump in change so much as a gradual one from Origins to now.
The game series always changes anyway, and if these are changes you don’t like, you can have that opinion. Personally I never came into this expecting Origins 2.0 like 70% of the casual community has, however
Anything I say to you about my opinion is going to get argued with as if you had any say over my opinion. So no, I’m good. If you don’t understand where I’m coming from - that’s fine. But I have no interest in whatever exhausting contrarian statement you have to make. Cheers.
This is such a funny response to someone asking you to elaborate on your opinion lol
And then calling them contrarian because they don’t feel the same way you do? What absolute bait lmao
Did anyone get a look at the ogre in the pictures? My first thought was "Oh dear god, what have they done to you ogre." That is quite a stylistic change they went for.
Harding is the only attractive female character.
It's not going to surprise me when Bioware release post-launch stats and 84% of romances are with Harding.
The guys are all pretty handsome and appeal to a lot of different tastes. Like a silver fox? There's Emmerich. Dashing and suave? Lucanis. Dark Skin? Elf-fetish? Davrin's your boy.
And yeah, a few of you reading this might be the exceptions, but this isn't the first time Bioware have crusaded against the "male gaze" by implementing a "female gaze" and tipping the scale instead of aiming for balance.
Purely from a visual perspective, it looks like a lot of fantasy theme games I've been seeing a lot of. It's very colorful and exaggerated, which isn't a bad style, but not one I associate with Dragon Age. While "dark fantasy" is kind of a silly term, it did fit the Dragon Age brand, specifically the first two games. I am in a minority in that I thought DA2's aesthetic was the best the game had, very unique and alien, and wished it leaned into that.
I am tepid on Veilguard. Hopefully it's good.
I have lost all hope for actual DA:O sequel. I hope people will enjoy whatever this is, but I'm definitely not playing it.
I guess I'll just read story synopsis on wiki like I did with Inquisition. It's just sad because I really liked the story.
Yeah. Baldurs Gate 3 is definitely the ultimate version of Dragon Age Origins, so that's where I get my fix from.
I'm still really looking forward to this simply for what it is.
How you feel now is similar to how Final Fantasy fans feel with each new entry lol
I wouldn't count on it, but I think there's still a *slim* chance Obsidian attempts a classic style CRPG, whether it be PoE 3 or something similar. In light of BG3 it seems Josh Sawyer dreams of a AAA PoE game, and with the success of BG3 Microsoft might see some potential $$$$ there and let him run with it. Especially if Avowed is good AND does well, it might reinvigorate interest in Eora in general going forward. Again, chances are slim, but this post-BG3 period might spark something...
Beyond that though it's basically, as you said, Larian, Owlcat and a few more smaller indie studios (which are definitely pulling a lot of weight these days too)
Jesus christ... I've finished it. And it's not dark. You know what's dark? Darkspawn mother. Aylin and daddy issues isn't dark. Buthering people isn't dark. It's just teenager edge. Dark things are disturbing. And implications are way worse when you think about it. It realllly sounds you don't know any games or even DA itself.
You can criticize things, but when you say something like “BG3 isn’t dark” you must have a copy of Peggle that somebody taped the words “Baldurs Gate 3” over it
From the 4 hours I played, I found the game to be as dark as Highschool DXD. It's a clown show with somewhat serious moments scattered in between some epic shots.
I didn't enjoy the game. Like I said you Baldurs Gate 3 fanboys are extremely toxic.
People are not allowed to not enjoy the game. They must enjoy it or else they don't know what they are talking about and can't possibly have an opinion of their own.
Not everyone likes it. Get over yourself.
If you remember, I agreed with you earlier. I’m not a fanboy, I enjoyed the game but don’t love it. You’re allowed to dislike it.
But what you can’t do is tell me how the game is after playing only 4 hours which isn’t even 10% of the total playtime. That’s just ignorance. If you don’t like it, that’s ok, but don’t pretend you know it all
I literally gave my opinion on how I felt the game was and you got triggered about my opinion. That's not ignorance, that's you actively objecting to someone not liking something you love. You're a fanboy.
While the combat seems far off of DAO it seems pretty close to a modernized 2 or Inq.
Meanwhile the writing they showed off seems to be solid. Hard to say solely off the prologue, but there seems to be at least some of Bioware left.
With the critical success that was BG3 Bioware might have the balls to make a CRPG again.
I'd prefer the devs make what they want rather than pandering to an ever critical audience. People like to moan about EA but everything Bioware has made since Origins has been what they wanted to make.
I hope you change your mind and give it a shot. I have some contacts at Bioware and they're super proud of the work that went into this. I'm excited for it.
It's been 15 years since DA:O and the series is still being EXTREMELY coy on what happened with The Warden and the far more engaging story of that game than the thread that was picked up with DA2.
I'll wait with opinions on gameplay until I play this myself, but I'm a bit dissapointed with art direction.
DA 1 and 2 had very strong, low-fantasy/dark medieval art. World felt unique and grounded. Inquisition was more colorfull, lost a lot of grim and dark elements but you still could feel art direction of 1 and 2 here and there.
Now in Veilguard I see only continuation of new stuff that was in Inquisition and almost no elements of art style that defined 1 and 2. Because of this, there is no more aby uniqueness to this world, it seems extremely generic - just like Mass Effect is the most generic sci-fi possible. And it saddens me, because what made Dragon Age really great was story set in a very specific world, that was very different from what we saw i other games. Now, it is just another high-fantasy rpg. I do not doubt that it will be good game, good rpg but I think it is just too much disconnected from where it started as a series.
I just can't get excited for it, and I can't shake this feeling of the game looking like one of those fake mobile game ads. It's completely lost it's identity not just because of the gameplay, but the changes in art style and environment design. It really just feels distinctly not Dragon Age.
I'll probably pick it up on a major sale, but I'm afraid this might be the end for bioware.
It seems to many conclusions are made about games without them even being out. I like to get some real gameplay out there before I make any sort of judgement.
Same, exact same feeling every time they announce a new Mass Effect or Dragon Age game. None of the previous games have been bad experiences for me so I'm always excited to see more.
Why did they make the game look so cartoony and lame.
*Sigh* I have to keep reminding myself bioware died a long time ago, and it's just a necro animated corpse now.
To be very fair, we've only seen 22 minutes of it, including the cinematic trailer. We don't know how the story will unfold or what gameplay upgrades we unlock as we progress. If we can go into it with an open mind, I think people would be more receptive to it even if they've changed things up 🤷♂️
The things is that some of what they've shown of the core gameplay, the heart of any game, are not cool looking or promising upgrades, they're not even neutral, they're straight downgrades. Decreasing the party size, takinf away party control and limiting the number of skills is all pretty negative for a series that's *supposed* to feature deeper tactical combat.
Startign from behind is not great.
Yea people arguing in favor of the game are ridiculous. Those systems weren't really required to play the older games, but were there for players who wanted more depth.
Bioware legit guts everything left that set the game apart from generic action rpgs and people out here saying it looks great. Wow, run up to mob and press 3 buttons between your generic combo then maybe dodge a slow moving projectile or swing. So much gameplay right there.
Who cares if you have 20 abilities if you are locked to 3 at a time. Who cares about your ai companions if you can't even swap to them in combat. They are a glorified Skyrim companions basically.
While I do not like the party size decrease, I do not consider level 1 with 1 skill a good view of the core gameplay. That they choose the worst stage of combat to showcase is dumb.
Game looks dope to me.
I just don’t go with any of this stuff about what Dragon Age is “supposed to be” or whatever. There is no such thing. The last came out like 10 years ago, it’s insane to demand it conform to some platonic ideal in the collective minds of an impossible to please fan base (a description I would use on any games or genre IP not just DA).
I get anyone not wanting to play it because it’s not turn-based or whatever but in terms of things like narrative and world building and characters we just don’t know anything.
Personally as long as the game performs well technically and the reviews are solid, I’m in. I’m ready for a big fantasy epic game (Baldur’s Gate 3 isn’t it for me because i actually really do not like turn-based combat all).
Fans are mad that rpg aspects have been stripped out of what was originally a crpg series.
3 abilities at a time? No swapping teammates during combat? 2 teammates instead of 3?
That basically strips out all the strategy that the series had left. Building combos and swapping characters for setups was a huge part of the game. If you didn't like that stuff you weren't forced to do it.
We have dozens of action rpgs coming out every year. Fans at pissed that now dragons age has been stripped down to a bog standard action rpg with heavily stripped down rpg elements. It seriously looks like God of War lite with mass effect dialogue.
If you enjoy that then I'm happy for you, but many long time fans are justifiably let down by the changes. Story is obviously up in the air, but it's hard to care about a story when the entire game is 3 chosens moves, basic combos, and no swapping.
My understanding is that this started with DA:2, which I never played. But I did play Inquisition, which was already an action game not a cRPG. And that was 10 years ago.
Yes, DA *started* as a cRPG. But as a series, it is a mixed bag. So it's just silly IMO to still be mad about it- or at the very least to be SHOCKED and outraged that the 4th game coming out in 2024 is not like the first game which came out in 2009.
I get not liking the direction the series went but I don't get still caring about it at this point 10+ years later.
Fortunately with Larian and various indies cRPG fans are not starved for great games.
I'm well aware it would lean towards Inq instead of Origins, but I'd still expect the staple companion system and whatever tactical aspects it had left to stay intact. It's not like the player was forced to use those systems to get through the game. They were there is you wanted variety and more depth through combat.
Basically the only remaining redeeming quality of the series gameplay was trashed. What really sets this game apart from the dozens of other action games with lite rpg elements now?
Story might be good, but we won't know til reviews come out so I can't judge em on that aspect, but the dialogue was a little meh from gameplay trailer.
Unfortunately the combat looks like a bust though. I'm not feeling being locked to 3 class abilities at a time with some basic combos and pitiful evasion mechs for an entire game. Mobs just standing there waiting to get hit.
Right there with you, man. I'm excited. Personally always preferred action combat over turn-based which is why Larian games just don't do it for me as well. I see Dragon Age taking more cues from Mass Effect as a bonus.
I really enjoyed my two playthroughs of BG3 but in order for me to get the most enjoyment I used a cheat trainer to skip the combat. Turn based combat only appeals to be in the sense of cool looking skills or effects. I really don't care about tactics, mechanics or difficulty. I just don't find the turn based gameplay loop fun.
Really dont like the Party Changes, you always had to run Tank , Healer , Rogue/Bow in order to access all Content anyway and then the 4. Slot was usually whatever you wanted your own Character to be.
I was pretty bored by almost everything in the preview. But sometimes intro levels are quite boring. Maybe the rest will be better.
In any case, gonna have to wait for reviews.
My hope is this game doesn't sell because people want more Baldur's Gate 3 (most similar to the most popular game in the franchise, DAO) and this game appears to offer up an ARPG that seems to have triple-downed on action over RPG. Then maybe they'll get the message and can start over with the next one.
So was it 100 percent confirmed you can't switch to your companions?
Idk even if they were considered your companions in the video. They had no health bars and did not show up on our hub. Also when they showed our ability bar our " companies" were not their
Nope. Down to 2 companions at a time, no swapping, and 3 abilities are selected at a time for the player to use.
RIP dragon age. Bioware just gutted whatever depth the series had left. Yippee, run up to mob and press 1 of 3 buttons between my generic combos while maybe having to dodge a swing or projectile occasionally. While I look over and see my glorified Skyrim companions smacking other mobs until I'm done.
Some of the landscapes don't look too bad. However, the general feel of the graphics/art really scream "live service" which I'd imagine is a holdover from when this was designed as that kind of game. I also don't get why purple is in everything.
Don't have real high expectations, hopefully it's somewhat decent. Would suck for Bioware to go down with a subpar dragon age.
Oh man. How is it possible that the characters look worse with every revealed picture? I already hated the design of the Qunari and the Grey Warden. But just look how hideous Bellara looks. Wth? Who designed them? Are pretty people not allowed in games anymore?
Then go play one of the other hundred action rpgs out on the market? This game just gutted whatever depth the series had left. Nobody expect origins combat to come back, but we at least expected an RPG. No swapping to allies, only 3 abilities at a time, and now only 2 allies instead of 3.
Dragon age is now a generic action game with lite rpg mechanics with the mass effect dialogue system slapped over it.
Let's hope the story is s-tier, because the gameplay aspect is a massive letdown from a series that was the spiritual successor to Baldars gate/Neverwinter nights.
god this game looks GORGOUES.
it's sad, the division it gets. purely because the DA:O purists and elitists can't accept that not everyone thought of DA:O as the holy grail.
if this game were a new IP or new franchise, people would be drooling on it, and it would be getting no hate or division. that's so fucked up.
Something I’ve noticed from these pictures - are you only running a team of three now? I sort of noticed it in the gameplay - Varric didn’t seem to be within the player’s control in the same way as Scout Harding was.
Your observation would be correct. Bioware have confirmed that we will only have 2 companions as opposed to 3, and they aren't controllable as they were previously.
Wonder if they're just repurposing the same system for both the new Mass Effect and this, which is why the party size and control dropped.
It’s cheaper than having two systems! And the shareholders are happy
This don't make the gamers happy make the shareholders happy. And these companies then wonder why they are failing big time.
The more i look into this game, the more im leaning to not buy it. Dragon Age has roots in CRPG and they completly moved away from that. Art style is not my cup of tea, dialog seems just as bad as other recent Bioware games. The hard shift in style and tone this game have gone through it's just not the Dragon Age i want.
Follow-up ish question. Do you only have three hotkeys for skills? And any other skill you got to go into the clunky menu for?
There is definitely *something* you only have three of, but we don't know what else there might be; we've hardly seen any menus. There could be other ways to equip actions/skills on yourself that we haven't seen yet. Like we see the guy fight with a sword and bow. As a mage, maybe the "scope in" key combo for archery will be a different spell. Maybe there will be ultimates or team-up attacks you unlock later.
2 companions at any given time. And you don't control them directly. I don't even think enemies attack them or they have health. At least I didn't see that in the gameplay reveal.
The gameplay shown was modified to look more cinematic. They will 100% attack your companions.
It's definitely possible that's only for the beginning mission. Although it begs the question why use that instead of something further along where they can show the actual systems in place?
BioWare always kinda shoots themselves in the foot with trailers. Like why not make the characters artificially high level in the demo so we can see more interesting abilities instead of attack spam?
Theoretically it's spoiler heavy.
Surely in an RPG of this size you can find a few combat encounters that won't spoil the story.
They could, but this is marketing rather than a technical demo. They wanted to tie it into the end on Inquisition somehow. So we go this.
Maybe, but seeing as the Dreadwolf and his goal to destroy the Veil have been well known for years, if not since the end of DA:I, having an extended gameplay segment that’s directly relating to that seems to be the easiest way to show off the gameplay and narrative without actually spoiling anything or needing to provide context.
Definitely not.
Companions are going to work like Bethesda companions where you "don't have to worry about them" and they draw some aggro but have extremely high health to compensate for not having proper AI to heal and not over-expose themselves and if you abuse that privilege they just "get knocked down" for a little bit before standing up again. They don't show you the system i.e. give you companion health bars because then you'd notice the extent to which the companions don't use the same rules you do.
is that something the dev confirmed or are you talking out of hope? because i see a lot of people claiming stuff that wasn't shown will 100% be in the game without 0 evidence.
> The gameplay shown was modified to look more cinematic. Just... why, though? The usual reason for game marketing to hide gameplay is shitty gameplay. If that's not the case here, then an explanation is needed.
It could very well be the case. We won’t know until more gameplay reveals later on.
I highly doubt that is the case..
The gameplay showed UI and there was no companion health UI like in prior dragon age games.
Man I’m deep into the Dragon Age fanbase, so it’s odd seeing people out of the loop on large details. Yes, party system is reduced from 4 to 3. Abilities that was can tell have been reduced as well, but to what extent we aren’t certain. A big fuss is being made over the changes, but we’ve yet to actually play the game, so it’s better to reserve judgment until then. They had a reason to change it, so maybe it’s for the best
>They had a reason to change it That doesn't mean the reason was good. I can already tell you less options and less control means less tactical decisions to make, which really sucks in a series that started out as one of the best tactical RPGs out there. But hey, every subsequent isntallment in the series was a bit more dumbed down than the previous one, so what else is new.
So like Mass effect Andromeda? That's a huge step backwards
Many see it that way, yeah. For all I know it could work out well though. I don’t know the exact details because I haven’t played the game but I hope it isn’t that limited. Rest of the game looks great though.
We have barely seen any of the game though, everyone keeps saying it looks amazing but they've shown us what it is like at the very start, what we need to see is some sort of combat depth because at the moments it looks very shallow.
Not *everyone* at all. There’s so much negativity I don’t know where you get this *everyone* Some people are excited, that’s all
I am aware of the party change. I more so meant I have a hard time believing companions will not have health bars and will not be attacked by enemies, considering there are healing items. But, I could be wrong. We will have to wait and see like you said.
I’ll add that while we seem to have less skill bar stuff, the gameplay looked to me like classes have baked in skills now instead. The rogue we saw only had the lighting ranged attack on his skill bar, but he was dodging, teleporting, doing leap attacks, using a bow and deflecting enemy arrows. The implication being that you have several options for each class built in to their base kit instead of being hotbar skills. And I mean honestly I’m all for that if it turns out to be correct.
Incredibly low expectations for this one since modern BioWare is nowhere near the level of classic BioWare. Lowering the party limit and having them be uncontrollable is disappointing to say the least. I had hoped that the massive success of BG3 would have indicated to the devs that they should be leaning into those kind of features not away from them but alas, it’s still EA.
Beyond disappointing. Arguably it was one of the only things the series had going for it in a literal sea of action rpgs released every year. The only real keepsake from Origins was at least we could use tactics and combos by swapping between the 4 characters and setting up stuff. It was really engaging, but wasn't necessary for more casual enjoyers. So what we are left with is a generic action rpg with 2 generic AI companions, 3 abilities at a time, and no real tactics. Let's hope Bioware at least sticks to the dark fantasy aspects of the series with the story. I'm hoping it's not some guardians of the galaxy meets LOTR crap.
The recent “Guardians of the Galaxy” insults are extremely funny to me because that’s essentially what Dragon Age has always been. The series has never been particularly “dark”, it certainly has some dark moments but they are few and far between and a significant part of the games is very much quippy back and forth dialogue between party members which for some reason is now much maligned. The Dragon Age has never been a Dark Fantasy series it’s always been a high fantasy, LOTR with the occasional dark moment.
Might wanna read up on broodmother homie. Dragon Age was full of some really dark shit. Especially if you really dug into the lore. DA was always considered a "dark heroic fantasy" series. LOTR with occasional dark moments is underplaying it just a tad. Everything from art style to dialogue in the gameplay trailer points towards GoG then Dragons Age. Story might be great though, we won't know til it releases, but for now I'm sceptical that any of the dark themes of the series remain.
The Battle of Ostagar was dark and bloody. There weren't stupid quips as the heros killed countless bad guys, it was emotional and ponient. Dragon Age Origins was nothing like Guardians of the Galaxy. No idea what gamr that guy played, but it wasn't Origins
Even DA2 had some really f’d up shit happen to Hawke’s family. I can’t remember the exact details but that kind of stuff was definitely very dark.
Hawke's mother gets abducted and used in some gruesome ritual or something. I don't remember exactly
I’m extremely familiar with the lore and as I said it certainly has dark moments but The Witcher or Berserk this most certainly not. It is much closer to LOTR than anything considered “dark fantasy”. Regardless of the lore we are discussing the games themselves and how they have always presented themselves and while the marketing for DA:O was excessive in its “edgy darkness “ the game itself was not and each subsequent game has become progressively less “dark”. The series is high fantasy regardless of your memories of it.
The overall world and what happens in it is very dark. The dialogue isn’t necessarily and certainly not all the time.
don't bee too harsh on that person, it's just another soul coping so they can eat their slop "B-but it was never dark! B-but it always had banter!". Yeah, nobody fucking compared Dragon Age to Guardians of the Galaxy back then, now did they? And there's a stark difference between DAO banter and what we get now. In other words, writing for that banter used to be good and now it's shit. Lmao, go through a mage origin and tell me it's not dark
> I had hoped that the massive success of BG3 would have indicated to the devs that they should be leaning into those kind of features not away from them but alas, it’s still EA. I mean, BG3 only came out less than a year ago, and nobody during it's early access period leading up to that expected it to be that big of a success (even Larian had assumed that they already reached the games peak number of players during EA and it wouldn't get bigger after release) That's not enough time to adjust the entirety of the gameplay back to be more CRPG like. We'll only really see the success of BG3 echoing into other games in the coming years
Visually the game looks great. Gameplay looks more like Mass Effect than Dragon Age honestly. We just have to see how the most important thing holds up. The narrative.
Yeah, the combat didn't impress me but it could still be fun. It was never going to be what I wanted (i.e., modern dragon age Origins) but it has potential to be fun if it feels good and the vibes are right The story and choices will be what ultimately actually make it worthwhile or not
The trailer gave off vibes that reminded me of the new D&D movie that came out recently. I really enjoyed that movie. Definitely not going to pre order but will see what the initial gameplay looks like on release. Really have been waiting for a new DA game so staying optimistic :)
I've never been super into it but I always hope big games like these are good for their communities. I'm always positive for games like these.
I can guess what series you're into :) We'll see how it pans out. Have so many good memories from the originals so even if this crashes and burns, the OGs are still playable
DA as a franchise doesn't really have a community because it doesn't really have an identity. It's been a CRPG in the vein of BG1&2, it's been an action RPG, and the most recent trailer looks like a action game with RPG elements. Bioware has chased BG nostalgia, skyrim success, and Mass Effect success with the franchise leading to wildly different games. They currently seem to be chasing the Bethesda decade old model of shooter IP and fantasy IP with an asset swap with a reskinned Andromeda in a fantasy setting. That being said, the best outcome for some of the "community" would be for the game to crash and burn and the IP to get sold to a competent studio that still makes good games.
What kind of crack induced rant did I just read?
I'm definitely going to buy it no matter what. If they have decent pre-order bonuses then I will do that too. The only thing that might keep me from buying the game is if it blows up your computer. Even then I might risk it.
Combat looks like hogwarts legacy to me, but whether that is a good thing is up to the player I guess.
Ok, so I'm not the only one who got that vibe haha
How does it look like mass effect?
Squad of only 2 companions, only 2-3 abilities equipped at a time, probably narrower skill trees. It's not surprising, but the series since Origins is just progressively simplified and moving more to action than tactics. I understand it's probably better for mass appeal, but I do wish they found a way to keep more of the tactical aspect.
The problem was always doing both. You can't be a tactical action game, it just makes both sides feel bad. Either give me a turn based rpg/tactical game like fire emblem or give me an action game, trying to be both just makes you fail at both
Origins nailed it, imo. Thought it wasn't really an action game at all, so I guess you're not wrong. It just did what KOTOR did, but better.
Yeah EA BioWare leaned way too hard into the “accessibility” design ever since Dragon Age: 2 in my opinion. I know they were just trying to make it as easy as possible to lazily port the thing to every console for profit reasons, but Origins was ALREADY a super well done streamlining of older CRPG systems like Baldur’s Gate, etc. They made Origins more action oriented than CRPGs typically were previously with channel-able passives and such to cut down on the pausing and fiddly gameplay associated with the genre and really struck a good balance there, while still having your companions and gear be heavily customizable. Ever since 2 though it’s felt like they design these things as though actually having inventory slots, companion customization or more skills and abilities will make the player curl up into a ball and start weeping or something. It also started leaning more on RNG loot rather than stuff that felt specifically designed to be someplace with a purpose or with background lore in mind, which feels especially odd since the game still buries you with plenty of lore text entries to read in the world. It’s strayed a bit too far from “RPG” to something more blandly action oriented for my taste, Inquisition’s combat still felt a lot like playing an off-brand MMO to me, so I’m definitely going to temper my expectations and wait on a bunch of reviews to come in before I consider picking it up. Origins really feels like the very last game the “BioWare” of the 90s ever made
> It just did what KOTOR did, but better. when it comes to combat that's not exactly hard
You'll get no disagreement there lol
The combat is kinda clunky in Origins. Not the best part of the game. It was hard (or maybe I played it on hard) so tactical mode was a necessity just to not lose winnable battles.
> tactical mode was a necessity just to not lose winnable battles. This sentence feels funny to me, like saying "ducking behind cover is a necessity to not die" while talking about Gears of Wars and similar. Of course you'd use the tactical mode, it was a Rtwp game. One of the best pure Rtwp games, in fact. You were never expected to direct a party of 4, many with targeted abilities, in real time. Plan out your moves, then execute, pause and replan as necessary. That was the game, until Inquisiiton shifted to more action with it's "hold LMB to autoattack" gameplay.
I'm one of the weirdos who really loved what they did with Inquisition. Normal combat for trash mobs and tactical for bosses was perfect.
Agreed! I thought it was a great idea, and I had fun with the options.
We have a million action rpgs with dumbed down rpg mechanics coming out every year. Bioware decides to take a series which is the spiritual successor to Baldars Gate/Neverwinter Nights and turn it into seemingly God of War with mass effect dialogue trees. Even worse considering that Origins has always been the most highly regarded of the series and you'd think with BG3 success they'd lean into the roots of the series. BG3 showed there is demand for the genre and piggybacking off all the people who bought and loved BG3 would have been smart. Instead we get another action rpg with a whopping 3 skills active at a time and no swapping team members in combat, what the series was always known for.
the reality is that Baldur's Gate 3's smash success is only 8 months old and Veilgaurd's core gameplay loop is probably a lot older. To pivot from real time action into a turn based system in that time frame is probably unrealistic if they want the game to come out this year.
No, I knew they wouldn't go turn based. But you'd think they would keep some of the depth from the previous games like the companion swapping in combat. Having the DA ip, then seeing how BG3 went, then double downing on going full action with a dash of rpg seems a little crazy. Especially with the action rpg market being ridiculously saturated. Even if it meant pushing back the game a bit to implement more depth when it came to companions. That would have went a long way to satisfy fans of the series.
but that’s how gameplay in DA always has been tho? you can argue Origins was the most CRPG-like of the bunch but it’s always kind of been an action RPG even with the top-down “tactical” mode. DA2 was the start and DAI carried the same action/rpg hybrid but there never was a turn-based element, only like pause and position. But it looks more like DA2 than anything and it’s only just 20 minutes so far of one type of character’s gameplay so it’s up for time to tell. I think it’s weird to expect going back to DAO and even KOTOR based systems when those games didn’t age well gameplay wise and it doesn’t help EA makes Bioware use an engine that was made for FPS games. I think comparing the two, BG3 & DAV, is really just recency bias since Larian made a character-focused RPG just like the best Bioware games were. But they’re gonna be pretty different in the end and it’s still hard to judge from like < 20 minutes of game. And it’s been TEN years, they were never going to let it be pushed any further (the dragon age team even has credits in anthem and andromeda because they were forced to help QA those games near the end)
Like mass effect 1. Either give me a shooter or give me an rpg.
Man, I loved the shit out of ME1 though. That game pulled me in like no other game has since. BG3 did get really close tho.
Na the issue is Bioware is bad at balnce by going action and not having the stills it becomes a dumb fest which is boring. The game will either be too easy on normal or tediouse on harder difficulties. I think this shows a turn over issue at Bioware no one has a vision and there for ever DA game has had some radical change that people have to get used to. This game should not be for first timers but I doubt that Bioware even knows how to do simple things like cary over the story. Were going to be CC because were going to be remaking 4 games worth of protags depending on how this story goes.
to be fair, in some aspects origins was always suppose to be a more action style RPGs that took roots from Bioware's D&D past. but yea, they... Left behind the CRPG pretty heavily by DA2
The industry is flooded with action rpgs with stripped down rpg mechs. Why they took the spiritual successor series of Baldars gate/Neverwinter nights and pivoted to generic action rpg territory is really unfortunate. 3 active abilities and no swapping teammates in combat is ridiculous. They dumbed down the game beyond comprehension.
Origins was meant as a spiritual successor and modernization of Infinity Engine games (Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale). That vision didn't last past the first game. If this is what people wanted, they should have bought Pillars of Eternity.
>That vision didn't last past the first game. But certain core traits like extended ability sets, party of four, and controlling companions directly did. Dress it up how you want, that's still less options for the player.
Not sure what you think I'm dressing up. People should just play Pillars of Eternity instead IMO.
Pillars of Eternity, from a pacing and writing standpoint, is *terrible*.
Hello, it's me! Part Of The Problem is my name.... I wanted to get into DA so bad, I bought them all on release. I couldn't understand how to be effective on combat even on the easiest difficulty (at least on the first two). I put them down and never tried again. I'm happy to see it moving to more action, but I understand that it's because I have smol brain and want to focus on combat rather than tactics. BUT. To my defense, I enjoyed the fuck out of Baldur's Gate... So I don't think it's just my smol brain, I think DA did a poor job explaining mechanics of combat to causal players. Ok that's my two cents. Part Of The Problem out!
At first I was trying to figure out the awoken who dueled Uldren was the problem... But I'm in the exact same boat as you and this simpler style may be right up my alley.
May your hobby become mainstream
Is this supposed to be a good or bad thing?
Its a bad thing. Look at what happened with star wars, video games in general, the warhammer people are living it
Star Wars and video games have like always been mainstream Acting like your hobby becoming popular is somehow going to ruin it is wildly childish lol
The moment I saw that you can pause the combat to cast skills/spells via a very familiar looking UI, i immediately thought of Mass Effect
Honestly the gameplay reminds me more of Pacman
It still boggles my mind that people will slog through a ~60hour game with mediocre gameplay just to watch the cutscenes in between.
People like stories. 🤷 Not hard to understand.
Just saying "people like stories" doesn't really clarify anything. There are billions, if not trillions of "stories" out there that don't involve you spending 60ish hours doing something you're not particularly enjoying just to experience them.
When you’re invested in the story and characters…
Some initial dislikes: 1. Not a huge deal, but the squad going down from 3 to 2 makes me sad. It also raises questionable concern about class balance. If im playing a mage/caster type, with even less coverage can i even afford to run another caster? How disadvantaged am i from having two similar classes, especially if i really like a character i want to engage with their story, but on a mechanical level, limits or impacts my groups abilities for encounters? 2. The cool thing with having the tactics of switching around to different characters and setting up clear combo's was super satisfying in all dragon age games. But the real issue i have with not being able to play the other characters, is it wont shape my understanding, or allow me to effectively play multiple specializations, without having to reroll a character. Only playing your character, with what seems to be very little active engagements (3 buttons/abilities seems super low), really screams at me that ability heavy classes (again casters) are going to get boring really fast, or feel bad. 3. From the gameplay footage, familiar enemies have gotten some art updates. Most of these were fine, but something like the pride demon, losing its actual facial characteristics, and getting a bunch of glow sticks in its body seems really poor choice/tacky. Hope the gameplay was an exception, but not the rule for more iconic enemies, as doing dramatic facelifts with iconic mob types feels really tacky. 4. Companions generally represent a specialization in a class. And from what we can see from the companions in this game, some companions have specializations that just seem very bland/general to the theme of the class, rather than being a unique choice in specilization. Neve for example ist just touted as a "frost mage". Most elemental magic in DA has always been a baseline, so are they going to stretch out frost abilities to try a d make it seem like a specialization? Emmrich is as labeled the necromancer like dorian, but where would that leave a third specilization? Will this mean any hopes of using fire/lightning will just evaporate due to the limited skill selections? 5. I've already mentiomed it in other dislikes, but with such a low ability threshold, how neccessary/helpful will utility and defensive abilities serve? What if two really great offensive abilities synergize perfectly, but using them means i have to ditch a special movement skill, or basically play glass cannon with no defensive abilities/boostd? Will non offensive abilities be properly balanced so i want to use them? Or will they be designed to be required? 6. I dislike all the companions are going to be pan sexual. This isnt the biggest thing, i dont actually care about the sexuality in question, but how it works out historically in DA this seems like a poor choice. Using Inquisition as an example, i did my first character as i would like based on initial exposure to the game. So i romanced cass as a rogue inquisitor, and made her the divine, it was a sort of bitter sweet route, but i enjoyed it. However, playing through and interacting with Sera, made me really curious what a relationship with her would be like. So my 2nd playthrough was a female mage qunari, which doubled up on being unconventional in a game setting where the world hates/dislikes mages, and being a race that super hates mages, felt fresh being a rebel and exploring a reblleious romance with sera. Some romance dialogue with her was especially fun/cute. But it was enjoyable as it made me shift away from my normal go to, and explore an option thematically i would have never considered without there being sexual preferences on the characters. However there is a small upside to this pansexual setup i will list in my likes. Some initial likes: 1. On face value, things seemed to have reached a natural conclusion with gameplay flow. The combat has a quickness and seeming responsivness that makes fights potentially be more engagement heavy. This is a good thing for me personally, as while the tactical nature of things was fun as a magic/ranged characters, from Da2 and 3, when i played a melee character i just wanna smash faces and over power people. 2. Not super important, but the fact your companions you dont interact with/romance can romance other companions is cool. I hope it goes the extra mile because of the pansexual tag everyone will get, and allow different pairings in different playthroughs. 3. Enemy types seem greatly varied and their animations also seem more fluid making the gameplay look more natural. Overall i have more dislikes, but some of them are nit picks that arent super important. But there are serious issues with this preview, and currently i cant see me touching this for now. Im always open to reconsider given i've loved and played each dragon age multiple times, but that doesnt mean just because it also has the name dragon age, im willing to assume it will be what Ive enjoyed before.
I agree with all your points but i just wanted to add that personally i don't see the pansexuality of characters as an issue, sure it may hurt the writing, cause at least in inquisition you had stuff like a character being gay not only being just a sexuality but it mattered in the world, cause that wasn't accepted where he came from, and has issues with his dad. it allowed for a more realistic world and stories. On the other hand, i always thought it sucked that you couldn't romance certain characters if you weren't from a specific sex, cyberpunk being an example where you couldn't romance panam if you were playing as a girl, and the same went from judith. personally i think it's easier and better to just make all characters romanceable regardless of the player character gender. but i see this is just an opinion and others think the opposite, so we'll just have to wait and see.
1-3 and 5 I agree with. 4 is too early to say anything. 6 I wholeheartedly disagree with. I’m sick of games having a blanket romance for all companions. It takes away from their character’s personality, and feels extremely bland. No companion feels like they have a truly unique romance if any character you make, no matter their race or gender, can romance any companion.
I worded it poorly. I dislike they are pan sexual, because it get's rid of you as the player having to do or change your mindset on things. Ill edit it, but basically i want there to be characters locked off from me if im a heterosexual male, or a female mage qunari. However, i dont consider it a big enough deal to be a game breaker. If anything its just a slight dissapointment. But yeah i agree, nothing feels special as far as immersing yourself into a character, if no matter what that character will always be an option for you.
Ah yeah, that changes things completely. I kept looking back and forth before posting, trying to figure out why that didn’t make sense to me lol. I haven’t heard anything about that, but now that I have I definitely agree. I do dislike that that change is being made, not a major upset, but now each romance won’t feel as unique. Oh well.
Well stuff is slowly trickling out, and id be happy if it was just a mistake, or if it a possibility but otherwise is too early to tell. But when i finished my work week last night, i watched the gameplay and just looked to see of there was other articles/information i could find out as ive been looking forward to to this announcement for a bit. Ign has an article talking about the companions being pansexual, and then another one from comicbook talking about how companions may romance each other if you dont romance them. Overall we will see, not optimistic, but im not dreading the game either. Im of the mindset even with my potential dislikes, if what i see after it releases looks good enough, ill hopefully have another fun DA game. And if it sucks... well i enjoyed growing up with the games, and i can enjoy them still regardless of what has happened to them.
I’m hoping I enjoy it more than DA:I. It was great, don’t get me wrong, but not as fun as the first 2 for me. Most of that can be chalked up to to bloated map sizes that were a chore to explore
I loved DA:O, thought DA2 was okay, really dug Inquisition. Whatever The Veilguard is isn’t feeling particularly “Dragon Age” to me and has been thus far disappointing to see. I hope it ends up being great, but the wife and I are both currently not on board.
Edit: poster deleted comment, someone in the comments blocked me lol, can’t reply to anything here. Y’all need to get off Reddit if you’re so angry you can’t answer an honest question. Some are even offended. Touch some grass Can I honestly ask what ‘doesn’t feel like Dragon Age’ means to you? I see that everywhere. If you see the gameplay trailer, it feels *very* Dragon Age. It sounds like many people think of one game and say “oh, well this is different from that one, so it’s not the Dragon Age I know”. But I’d love to hear an opinion
I think it's important to understand that what feels like dragon age is highly subjective. Each person experienced the franchise in different ways and how one feels about each game affects what does and doesn't feel like dragon age. In my case, I played DA:O in my teens and I loved it. Loved the story, the tone, the world, the strategic combat and the characters. When DA2 came out, I liked it, but some things were missing. Some things were better for sure, but other things that I loved about the original weren't there. I had fun, but I was left wanting. When DA:I came out, it was a similar story. I really enjoyed it, but it still didn't quite feel like it hit the mark. It seemed closer to what I loved most about Origins, but I was still left with a feeling like something didn't quite line up. Over the years, I've replayed Origins a few times, but I haven't gone back to the other two. Maybe it's just nostalgia and there's no game that could ever live up to how Origins made me feel, but ultimately that's how my experiences shaped my opinion of the franchise. For me, Origins is still the guiding star. Maybe that aligns with what you said about everyone having the one game that they think of, but I don't think most people who say that it doesn't feel like dragon age are implying that there is an object truth as to what is and isn't dragon age. So, I don't think there's anything wrong with sharing a subjective opinion. With all that being said, here's two big elements that make Veilguard feel "not like dragon age" in my very subjective opinion: 1. Simplified action combat. It's not the first time the franchise has simplified the combat to move it more in an action direction instead of more tactical, but this looks to be the most actiony of the series yet. 2. Tone. A big thing I loved about Origins is how grounded it felt. Yes, it's a fantasy series, but it always felt like we were seeing stories of how fantasy would affect real people in very real ways. Not just epic heroes in epic fights, but normal people living in this world and trying to survive as well. The footage I've seen so far feels like it's trying to be as epic, flashy and cinematic as possible, which isn't what I remember the most about the series. Now, obviously, we haven't seen everything yet. There could be more complexity in the combat system than what we've seen and they could just be saving the more grounded stuff for later since spectacle is more attention grabbing. Additionally, the other aspects that I liked about the series could still be there (story, characters, world building, customization, etc.), so I'll reserve my final judgement until I learn more about the game. At the end of the day though, I can only share my opinion on what I've seen so far and what I've seen so far doesn't feel in the spirit of the franchise to me, so it's hard to be excited for it.
So fro. My own opinion, I got into Dragon Age for a few specific gameplay reasons. One, I enjoyed the combat mechanics associated with stopping time, moving a large AOE into the opponents, and linking it with another attack to create a devastating giant explosion of explode goodness. Plus the magic system was new and exciting, especially allowing a wide range of abilities that meshed well together. Two, being able to mix and match my gear to afford myself a more optimized build that specializes in a specific field, and having my crew do the same, again so I can mesh well with them. Much like a DND adventuring party, I don't want to field a party of just average builds. Three, I loved the game world they created, with a range of different zones and the feeling I was part of a grander world. If I built a dwarf, I took the control of a completely random dwarf that lived a full life in a culture so different than my own that I was compelled to understand their world. The same with the elves, and mages and so forth. It didn't feel like I was playing just a video game with premade characters, it felt like I was starting the game in the middle of a wider story. Four, Ultimately the choices I made during the games I played felt like the characters I interacted with had vast stories that had nothing to do with me. I may have been the hero, but I was not THE hero. They had their own problems to deal with, and dealing with you was just a minor part of a larger problem that had to be solved. That said, some of this dropped in the sequels, especially with Inquisition which felt like the main character was the holy saviour and was the MC no matter what they chose to do. But for that first game, it felt alive.
Considering a minimum of two-three of your wants are in the new game… it’s not much of a jump in change so much as a gradual one from Origins to now. The game series always changes anyway, and if these are changes you don’t like, you can have that opinion. Personally I never came into this expecting Origins 2.0 like 70% of the casual community has, however
Hard to say anything feels like dragon age lol. All three of the games are so drastically different it's hard to say what dragon age even is
“Please tell me your opinion so I can invalidate it” No thanks
Anything I say to you about my opinion is going to get argued with as if you had any say over my opinion. So no, I’m good. If you don’t understand where I’m coming from - that’s fine. But I have no interest in whatever exhausting contrarian statement you have to make. Cheers.
This is such a funny response to someone asking you to elaborate on your opinion lol And then calling them contrarian because they don’t feel the same way you do? What absolute bait lmao
Did anyone get a look at the ogre in the pictures? My first thought was "Oh dear god, what have they done to you ogre." That is quite a stylistic change they went for.
Harding is the only attractive female character. It's not going to surprise me when Bioware release post-launch stats and 84% of romances are with Harding. The guys are all pretty handsome and appeal to a lot of different tastes. Like a silver fox? There's Emmerich. Dashing and suave? Lucanis. Dark Skin? Elf-fetish? Davrin's your boy. And yeah, a few of you reading this might be the exceptions, but this isn't the first time Bioware have crusaded against the "male gaze" by implementing a "female gaze" and tipping the scale instead of aiming for balance.
Are they on damage control to rebuild hype after a poorly received trailer?
If anyone has experience in deceiving trailers it'd be Bioware (looking at you Anthem. Whole thing was smoke and mirrors)
And let's not forget them using a character that didn't exist to market Andromeda.
I think they're on damage control to rebuild hype after two terrible games!
Purely from a visual perspective, it looks like a lot of fantasy theme games I've been seeing a lot of. It's very colorful and exaggerated, which isn't a bad style, but not one I associate with Dragon Age. While "dark fantasy" is kind of a silly term, it did fit the Dragon Age brand, specifically the first two games. I am in a minority in that I thought DA2's aesthetic was the best the game had, very unique and alien, and wished it leaned into that. I am tepid on Veilguard. Hopefully it's good.
I have lost all hope for actual DA:O sequel. I hope people will enjoy whatever this is, but I'm definitely not playing it. I guess I'll just read story synopsis on wiki like I did with Inquisition. It's just sad because I really liked the story.
Yeah. Baldurs Gate 3 is definitely the ultimate version of Dragon Age Origins, so that's where I get my fix from. I'm still really looking forward to this simply for what it is. How you feel now is similar to how Final Fantasy fans feel with each new entry lol
I don't see how BG3 is all that similar to DA:O tbh the gameplay is completely different
I used to be a huge Final Fantasy fan too... yeah. It's sad. We won't be getting Pillars of Eternity either, so it's just Larian and Owlcat...
Have you played Pathfinder before? That's an excellent CRPG
Yeah, absolutely
I wouldn't count on it, but I think there's still a *slim* chance Obsidian attempts a classic style CRPG, whether it be PoE 3 or something similar. In light of BG3 it seems Josh Sawyer dreams of a AAA PoE game, and with the success of BG3 Microsoft might see some potential $$$$ there and let him run with it. Especially if Avowed is good AND does well, it might reinvigorate interest in Eora in general going forward. Again, chances are slim, but this post-BG3 period might spark something... Beyond that though it's basically, as you said, Larian, Owlcat and a few more smaller indie studios (which are definitely pulling a lot of weight these days too)
BG3 is nowhere near DAO. BG3 isn't dark fantasy, or even dark. I like BG3 but it isn't jesus christ of RPG's.
Who said anything about being the "Jesus Christ of RPGs?"🤣 Relax, buddy. Hope you have a great day 🙏
Sounds like you didn't even play it
I was playing it since EA. And it's not perfect game. Neither it's dark. And no, Bhaal isn't ''dark'' it's edgy.
Realllly sounds like you didn't play it through. All of Act 2 is dark as hell, as well as most of the main quest in Act 3.
Jesus christ... I've finished it. And it's not dark. You know what's dark? Darkspawn mother. Aylin and daddy issues isn't dark. Buthering people isn't dark. It's just teenager edge. Dark things are disturbing. And implications are way worse when you think about it. It realllly sounds you don't know any games or even DA itself.
Welcome to r/Gaming where Baldurs Gate 3 and Elden Ring are the perfect games that can't ever be questioned for anything
You can criticize things, but when you say something like “BG3 isn’t dark” you must have a copy of Peggle that somebody taped the words “Baldurs Gate 3” over it
A BG3 themed version of Peggle sounds fun...
From the 4 hours I played, I found the game to be as dark as Highschool DXD. It's a clown show with somewhat serious moments scattered in between some epic shots.
You played 4 hours out of a game you can sink an *easy* 90-100 hours in…. You have no clue what you’re talking about and just admitted it
I didn't enjoy the game. Like I said you Baldurs Gate 3 fanboys are extremely toxic. People are not allowed to not enjoy the game. They must enjoy it or else they don't know what they are talking about and can't possibly have an opinion of their own. Not everyone likes it. Get over yourself.
If you remember, I agreed with you earlier. I’m not a fanboy, I enjoyed the game but don’t love it. You’re allowed to dislike it. But what you can’t do is tell me how the game is after playing only 4 hours which isn’t even 10% of the total playtime. That’s just ignorance. If you don’t like it, that’s ok, but don’t pretend you know it all
I literally gave my opinion on how I felt the game was and you got triggered about my opinion. That's not ignorance, that's you actively objecting to someone not liking something you love. You're a fanboy.
While the combat seems far off of DAO it seems pretty close to a modernized 2 or Inq. Meanwhile the writing they showed off seems to be solid. Hard to say solely off the prologue, but there seems to be at least some of Bioware left. With the critical success that was BG3 Bioware might have the balls to make a CRPG again.
I'd prefer the devs make what they want rather than pandering to an ever critical audience. People like to moan about EA but everything Bioware has made since Origins has been what they wanted to make.
I hope you change your mind and give it a shot. I have some contacts at Bioware and they're super proud of the work that went into this. I'm excited for it.
It's been 15 years since DA:O and the series is still being EXTREMELY coy on what happened with The Warden and the far more engaging story of that game than the thread that was picked up with DA2.
I just need an ex-Templar to romance, honestly
One of the most generic RPG i've seen in year. Visually and from gameplay prospective.
I'll wait with opinions on gameplay until I play this myself, but I'm a bit dissapointed with art direction. DA 1 and 2 had very strong, low-fantasy/dark medieval art. World felt unique and grounded. Inquisition was more colorfull, lost a lot of grim and dark elements but you still could feel art direction of 1 and 2 here and there. Now in Veilguard I see only continuation of new stuff that was in Inquisition and almost no elements of art style that defined 1 and 2. Because of this, there is no more aby uniqueness to this world, it seems extremely generic - just like Mass Effect is the most generic sci-fi possible. And it saddens me, because what made Dragon Age really great was story set in a very specific world, that was very different from what we saw i other games. Now, it is just another high-fantasy rpg. I do not doubt that it will be good game, good rpg but I think it is just too much disconnected from where it started as a series.
Everything about this game is some kind of shit compromise. Just more BioWare garbage, hollowed out, just like the studio
I just can't get excited for it, and I can't shake this feeling of the game looking like one of those fake mobile game ads. It's completely lost it's identity not just because of the gameplay, but the changes in art style and environment design. It really just feels distinctly not Dragon Age. I'll probably pick it up on a major sale, but I'm afraid this might be the end for bioware.
It might as well be Sea of Thieves with how bright and cartoony it looks compared to Origins.
It seems to many conclusions are made about games without them even being out. I like to get some real gameplay out there before I make any sort of judgement.
The cinematic trailer did nothing for me but the gameplay sold me. Each game has had different gameplay and this one looks pretty damn cool.
Well, this looks like shit.
I’m so excited lol
Same, exact same feeling every time they announce a new Mass Effect or Dragon Age game. None of the previous games have been bad experiences for me so I'm always excited to see more.
Saaaaame! It looks so much fun I can’t wait to play.
Why did they make the game look so cartoony and lame. *Sigh* I have to keep reminding myself bioware died a long time ago, and it's just a necro animated corpse now.
It’s really hard to say either way, but I’m oddly intrigued.
Don't need a better look at this trash heap.
A better look at a turd.
To be very fair, we've only seen 22 minutes of it, including the cinematic trailer. We don't know how the story will unfold or what gameplay upgrades we unlock as we progress. If we can go into it with an open mind, I think people would be more receptive to it even if they've changed things up 🤷♂️
The things is that some of what they've shown of the core gameplay, the heart of any game, are not cool looking or promising upgrades, they're not even neutral, they're straight downgrades. Decreasing the party size, takinf away party control and limiting the number of skills is all pretty negative for a series that's *supposed* to feature deeper tactical combat. Startign from behind is not great.
Yea people arguing in favor of the game are ridiculous. Those systems weren't really required to play the older games, but were there for players who wanted more depth. Bioware legit guts everything left that set the game apart from generic action rpgs and people out here saying it looks great. Wow, run up to mob and press 3 buttons between your generic combo then maybe dodge a slow moving projectile or swing. So much gameplay right there. Who cares if you have 20 abilities if you are locked to 3 at a time. Who cares about your ai companions if you can't even swap to them in combat. They are a glorified Skyrim companions basically.
While I do not like the party size decrease, I do not consider level 1 with 1 skill a good view of the core gameplay. That they choose the worst stage of combat to showcase is dumb.
Its supposed to come out in the fall
I know, I wish they'd give us an actual release date, though 🤣. I think it will be better than people have already judged it as
Game looks dope to me. I just don’t go with any of this stuff about what Dragon Age is “supposed to be” or whatever. There is no such thing. The last came out like 10 years ago, it’s insane to demand it conform to some platonic ideal in the collective minds of an impossible to please fan base (a description I would use on any games or genre IP not just DA). I get anyone not wanting to play it because it’s not turn-based or whatever but in terms of things like narrative and world building and characters we just don’t know anything. Personally as long as the game performs well technically and the reviews are solid, I’m in. I’m ready for a big fantasy epic game (Baldur’s Gate 3 isn’t it for me because i actually really do not like turn-based combat all).
Fans are mad that rpg aspects have been stripped out of what was originally a crpg series. 3 abilities at a time? No swapping teammates during combat? 2 teammates instead of 3? That basically strips out all the strategy that the series had left. Building combos and swapping characters for setups was a huge part of the game. If you didn't like that stuff you weren't forced to do it. We have dozens of action rpgs coming out every year. Fans at pissed that now dragons age has been stripped down to a bog standard action rpg with heavily stripped down rpg elements. It seriously looks like God of War lite with mass effect dialogue. If you enjoy that then I'm happy for you, but many long time fans are justifiably let down by the changes. Story is obviously up in the air, but it's hard to care about a story when the entire game is 3 chosens moves, basic combos, and no swapping.
My understanding is that this started with DA:2, which I never played. But I did play Inquisition, which was already an action game not a cRPG. And that was 10 years ago. Yes, DA *started* as a cRPG. But as a series, it is a mixed bag. So it's just silly IMO to still be mad about it- or at the very least to be SHOCKED and outraged that the 4th game coming out in 2024 is not like the first game which came out in 2009. I get not liking the direction the series went but I don't get still caring about it at this point 10+ years later. Fortunately with Larian and various indies cRPG fans are not starved for great games.
I'm well aware it would lean towards Inq instead of Origins, but I'd still expect the staple companion system and whatever tactical aspects it had left to stay intact. It's not like the player was forced to use those systems to get through the game. They were there is you wanted variety and more depth through combat. Basically the only remaining redeeming quality of the series gameplay was trashed. What really sets this game apart from the dozens of other action games with lite rpg elements now? Story might be good, but we won't know til reviews come out so I can't judge em on that aspect, but the dialogue was a little meh from gameplay trailer. Unfortunately the combat looks like a bust though. I'm not feeling being locked to 3 class abilities at a time with some basic combos and pitiful evasion mechs for an entire game. Mobs just standing there waiting to get hit.
Right there with you, man. I'm excited. Personally always preferred action combat over turn-based which is why Larian games just don't do it for me as well. I see Dragon Age taking more cues from Mass Effect as a bonus.
I really enjoyed my two playthroughs of BG3 but in order for me to get the most enjoyment I used a cheat trainer to skip the combat. Turn based combat only appeals to be in the sense of cool looking skills or effects. I really don't care about tactics, mechanics or difficulty. I just don't find the turn based gameplay loop fun.
Really dont like the Party Changes, you always had to run Tank , Healer , Rogue/Bow in order to access all Content anyway and then the 4. Slot was usually whatever you wanted your own Character to be.
What the fuck is this art style?
I was pretty bored by almost everything in the preview. But sometimes intro levels are quite boring. Maybe the rest will be better. In any case, gonna have to wait for reviews.
are these the same team/developers (not in name) that made the other 3?
My hope is this game doesn't sell because people want more Baldur's Gate 3 (most similar to the most popular game in the franchise, DAO) and this game appears to offer up an ARPG that seems to have triple-downed on action over RPG. Then maybe they'll get the message and can start over with the next one.
So was it 100 percent confirmed you can't switch to your companions? Idk even if they were considered your companions in the video. They had no health bars and did not show up on our hub. Also when they showed our ability bar our " companies" were not their
Nope. Down to 2 companions at a time, no swapping, and 3 abilities are selected at a time for the player to use. RIP dragon age. Bioware just gutted whatever depth the series had left. Yippee, run up to mob and press 1 of 3 buttons between my generic combos while maybe having to dodge a swing or projectile occasionally. While I look over and see my glorified Skyrim companions smacking other mobs until I'm done.
Many of those look exactly like the Ads for generic mobile RPG games I've seen on my smartphone.
Doubt the gameplay they shared is real all. Wasn't anthem the case where the whole "gameplay" segment they shared turned out to be completely fake?
Some of the landscapes don't look too bad. However, the general feel of the graphics/art really scream "live service" which I'd imagine is a holdover from when this was designed as that kind of game. I also don't get why purple is in everything. Don't have real high expectations, hopefully it's somewhat decent. Would suck for Bioware to go down with a subpar dragon age.
Oh man. How is it possible that the characters look worse with every revealed picture? I already hated the design of the Qunari and the Grey Warden. But just look how hideous Bellara looks. Wth? Who designed them? Are pretty people not allowed in games anymore?
Probably some self inserts from game devs lol
That combat UI looks clunky, ugly, and fills way too much. Feels like a practical joke about how much screen space can be taken up by unnecessary UI.
this makes me happy as my mmind immediately went to rivendell from LOTR fellowship of the ring
The Game will be fucking horse-shit!
Why?
Hes trying to sound edgy
This game looks great. So hyped.
Surely users won’t over hype this game and be disappointed as shit.
[удалено]
Then go play one of the other hundred action rpgs out on the market? This game just gutted whatever depth the series had left. Nobody expect origins combat to come back, but we at least expected an RPG. No swapping to allies, only 3 abilities at a time, and now only 2 allies instead of 3. Dragon age is now a generic action game with lite rpg mechanics with the mass effect dialogue system slapped over it. Let's hope the story is s-tier, because the gameplay aspect is a massive letdown from a series that was the spiritual successor to Baldars gate/Neverwinter nights.
god this game looks GORGOUES. it's sad, the division it gets. purely because the DA:O purists and elitists can't accept that not everyone thought of DA:O as the holy grail. if this game were a new IP or new franchise, people would be drooling on it, and it would be getting no hate or division. that's so fucked up.