Just FYI I've already had to delete comments and block people. Like I said I don't tolerate hate on my platform, y'all can disagree but don't attack each other personally. That goes for if you're an Origins fan OR someone who thinks Veilguard is immune to criticism I'll come after ya both 😂 Keep it civil please!
Okay, as an "Origins fan", let me address your combat point very quickly, because I think this needs to be said, and it is one of my two real criticisms so far. Yes, Origins combat was clunky, unpolished, and very narrowly focused in the late game. But, it was tactical, new, and gave a wide variety of options for your party. The problem is that instead of improving and iterating on this system, they completely abandoned it in 2, and gave us an in between for Inquisition. For comparison, let us look at another franchise they own, Mass Effect. Combat in ME was slow, buggy, tedious, and often unpolished. But this combat system was drastically improved in ME2, my favorite in the trilogy storywise. But ME3 had a very streamlined, polished, and worthy upgrade the the ME qnd ME2 combat systems. Personally, that was my favorite in terms of gameplay. They didn't fundamentally change the system. They improved and interated on it with each new installment. Dragon Age has abandoned their groundbreaking combat system completely in favor of going for a more ME style of gameplay. Fans have been asking for a return and improvement on THAT system since the series began. We have told them what we wanted for years, and BIOWARE has completely ignored us, or remained completely out of touch with their fanbase. If you want to see the success of companies that iterate on their gameplay instead of changing it completely, look no further than Larian Studios and From Software. I've been with them since the beginning. They have the same basic mechanics with every game. They just polish the gamplay and add new features to it, and they are now outshining even AAA studios.
@@zachariahmousa7652 I think this is a revisionist understanding of both DA:O and Mass Effect combat. Mass Effect combat before LE meant that aiming down sights didn't matter nearly as much as your weapon stats, and you'd get misses based on that instead of your point investments. Future titles completely undid that and moved from a stat based loot collector and went straight into a skill based cover shooter. That was a huge difference, and not one that every fan loved, but I, and a majority of Mass Effect fans, really felt that it brought Mass Effect from being a really good game to an amazing and legendary game. It's no accident that LE changed the original Mass Effect to more closely resemble its sequels. Acting like they made a slight iteration to combat between ME 1 and ME 2 feels incorrect to me. As for Dragon Age, it has ALWAYS been real time with pause combat. Most of the behavior and tactics systems you have in DA:O are only there because the AI couldn't be trusted to keep themselves alive or target the correct enemies without some player intervention, especially on harder difficulties. Even then, you have to micro a decent amount with health potions just to make sure that works, and sometimes you'll need to move a ranged character out of melee. Controlling other characters wasn't a big feature like it is in BG3 or actual turn based systems, it was just a necessity because the AI wasn't consistent, even with behavior menus. It's ironic that you have asked that Dragon Age just iterate on DA:O systems because guess what...Veilguard is still real time with pause, just like every other game in the series, it has just been updated to make it more player centric, and to include more active elements (different attacks, dodge/parry mechanics, etc) as opposed to holding down a button for autoattacks or just autoattacking. They've given you exactly what you asked for, but what you've really wanted is for them to scrap real time with pause and go to turn based.
@@proteuswest1084 I didn't want turn based combat for Dragon Age. I, like most fans, wanted something similar to FF 11, but more control. That was the direction everyone envisioned for the series after DAO. The big problem with not having full control of a squad is NPC AI is awful. They make counter intuitive decisions, move into dangerous situations that will get them killed, or force you to compensate for their lackluster performance. If a bow using NPC is in melee combat range instead of having higher ground, at a distance, or is drawing too much aggro from your tank, that is a fundamentally bad NPC AI. A pause menu alone does not fix that issue. In this new game, you can't even direct them to hold positions, such as choke points, high ledges, or within range to take advantage of passive area buffs. And now, you can't even customize their tactics to compensate for bad AI. This is the core of the complaints regarding combat. Bioware has taken away so much control from the players, it does not even closely resemble what fans have been asking for. I get that they want to appeal to a broader audience. But in so doing, they are losing a core portion of what made Dragon Age special in the first place. As for your point regarding Mass Effect, put a video of all three games combat loops together and compare them. They only polished, refined, and added to the system with each installment. Mass effect was clunky, tedious because of the overheating, bad hit boxes, and a terrible ADS. ME2 is the same kind of combat, but much smoother, more refined, and has much tighter hitboxes. The lack of overheating doesn't ruin the pacing of the combat loops anymore. ME3 iterated even further removing stamina all together, adding in biotic combos, and further refining the gunplay. The core combat loop was never completely replaced. It was simply improved upon.
@@zachariahmousa7652 It feels like you mostly agreed with my points about what makes a game difficult but ignored the fact that all your biggest complaints about bad AI are largely present in Origins. I always had to move my mages and bow users out of melee range, even with Ranged behavior sets, I often had to adjust my tank's positioning, I often had to manually make them take potions because it was easy to cause conflicts with the behavior system. The only behaviors that seemed to work really well in DA:O were the targeting ones, but a lot of the rest were bugged or unreliable. Manual tactical control wasn't so much a feature, it was, like you said, a way to mitigate bad companion AI. That stuff felt better in DA 2, but that was because the system was a lot more streamlined. That being said, the AI in Mass Effect, especially in later games, is a lot more helpful and useful, and your ability to direct their actions during the trilogy was all I ever needed to get fun combat. I felt like my teammates were helpful and even though they'd sometimes run out and get slapped, I also felt like my own play mattered. I definitely missed that element in Andromeda, but there was a lot more I could do with my builds and my own character there, so I still liked the combat better than any other game in the series. I trust that the AI in Veilguard is probably going to be similar to later Mass Effect games, and not like it was in ME 1 or DA:O. Veilguard looks to me like they allow manual control like ME 2 and 3 while also adding some build diversity like in Andromeda. We will see when we play the game how that functions but I am very encouraged with their design decisions and also how people who have played the game and provided feedback to BioWare are talking about it. Some of those people are primarily narrative players who only do easy difficulty, and they're talking about building Rooks and doing playthroughs based on builds rather than just narrative elements. For those of us who feel the gameplay is important, that should be a huge reason to be encouraged. And again, what you call bad hit boxes weren't bad hit boxes in the original Mass Effect. It was low point investment with the weapons and enforced misses in an RPG system. Your projectiles didn't go flying off into Narnia because of a bug; the game was forcing those misses because you didn't put enough points into the weapons to increase the percentages. This isn't present in LE, only in the original version of the game. That issue becomes less apparent since people often leveled their favorite weapons early on, but it's very present for several levels if you focus conversation skills or electronic/decryption skills instead of relying on companions. They completely scrapped that RNG in future titles and then iterated from there, so even if the outward look is the same, the way they do inventory management, loot collection, and shooting mechanics are completely different from ME 1 to the other games in the trilogy. The main difference between Dragon Age and Mass Effect is that Mass Effect iterated mostly in a single direction, while Dragon Age made concessions in Inquisition to people who complained about the differences in Origins, and ended up with combat that is probably the worst in the series, especially if you're trying to manually control a melee character. Also, that tactical camera they added back in that 99 percent of players didn't use (and only used to look at resistances when they did) meant that the designers pretty much had to make sure that almost every fight took place outside unless that cave had really high ceilings.
@@proteuswest1084 I know Origins combat is far perfect, but the core of my argument is that all of the flaws in the Origins combat system could have been refined, improved, added to, and fixed had they just stuck with it. Instead, not one Dragon Age game has had a consistent combat style. Every one of them has been different. Even the leveling system has been different. These are not issues their other franchises have had. Mass Effect combat and leveling is basically the same, just drastically better and more competently implemented with each installment. They removed what didn't work, and added new features that did. Dragon Age is the complete opposite. It is like every game is a damn experiment. Don't get me wrong, they are all good in their own ways, but there is no consistency in combat, which is literally almost 40 to 50 percent of the games. This is not something a series should be known for. Dragon Age Origins = Assign targets and positions, and activate abilities from there. Repeat for squad Dragon Age 2 = press the attack button repeatedly for basic attacks, and active abilities using the other buttons. Dragon Age Inquisition = Hold the attack button for basic attacks, activate abilities with the other buttons, and issue orders to your group. The power of iteration can be seen in the Souls series. The bones and core combat mechanics have not changed since Demon Souls. The exception is Sekiro, and most of us souls players don't consider that a souls formatted game anyhow. They have continually added new features, taken away bad features, and given their core audience what they have wanted. And now, their most recent title has achieved mainstream success against Triple A games. Is Origins combat niche and flawed, yes. Could it have been improved upon to please a majority of the fan base that has been asking for it? Absolutely. Why they did not improve on what most fans loved about Origins, I will never know.
Totally said what I’ve been thinking - and you put it far better than I could’ve! It seems like what those fans are saying is usually code for something else. The women companions aren’t conventionally attractive = they aren’t designed for the male gaze (and probably for some the issue is that there isn’t a tall and slim WW for them). It isn’t gritty = there isn’t a load of brown and mud everywhere. It’s “too woke” = there are people who aren’t white and hetero (shock, horror). The fact people are saying it’s going to be terrible after just seeing that first trailer? It’s wild. For a long time now, it’s seemed like some folk are just primed to hate anything BioWare does unless it’s remaking Origins. Thanks so much for putting together such a thoughtful set of rebuttals - and for giving me a few laughs at the same time!
I'm glad it was entertaining and made you laugh 😂 These kinda comments keep me going for sure, but tbh I don't blame Origins fans! I too was like oh yeah 2 is such a weak entry in the series and that includes the choices and story overall. Until I recently played it again and I was like holy crap this game is so much better than I remember! Which is why I'm so keen on urging fans to replay these games.
@@minstora Absolute nonsense. VG, even before releasing has made 3 cardinal sins: 1. Tone and story of marketing. Watch any trailer from D1-3 and VG trailer. If you tell me the tone is the same, you are lying. We go from bleak(the world is about to end in vibes) - DAO and Inquisition trailers, to lets go on a epic adventure for VG. DA2 trailer had more epic COD vibes, but the game explored pretty heavy subjects- oppression. Unless, thats just horrendous marketing, the people making this game clearly dont care for its prequels. 2. First DA game ever, you cant control party. Even ME allows you to direct companions to specific location. AKA tactics were at least technically a considerations during develpment. FACT. 3. Solas, who was set up in masterfully in DAI and the DLC has been sidelined by the faceless elven gods and will no longer be the main antagonist of the game after 10 years of waiting. FACT. And i could go on and on. You are still excited, thats fine. Stop misrepresenting legitimate criticism.
These people that are saying "Dragon Age isn't the way it used to be, what happened to the dark fantasy?" clearly haven't played anything past Origins because how on earth are you going to say that when Dragon Age 2 has a quest where you discover your mom's head stiched onto a body created by the corpses of multiple women that a necromancer/blood mage used to recreate his dead wife, who then PROCEEDED, to summon a demon to posses said body, thus forcing you to kill your own parent with your own hands.
The dragonage universe is generally dark and gritty and like you say, they don't hold back on stuff like the dead mom thing. Veilguard in comparison looks very stylized and cartoony just from an art perspective, and that art theme fits games like wildstar which are more quirky by nature ua-cam.com/video/x-NXdWk9sm8/v-deo.html&ab_channel=WildStarOnline
My take is each game has it's ups and downs but the overall experience of each has been fantastic. And I hope Veilguard does amazingly well and sells buckets so we can keep experiencing more Dragon Age for years to come.
combat was incredibly boring in DAI. Spending most of your time holding down R1 and waiting minutes just to down insignificant enemies is really dull (even on the easier settings). Fans are right to be concerned now they are doubling down on that gameplay style.
@@happyjonn9242I think we don't have to worry too much in that regard fam. The bioware devs in an interview said this will be the first time combat is actually fun when talking about veilguard so it means that they at least acknowledge that they don't think combat in Inquisition was fun or perfect (even if I personally liked it) So I think they're going for something different altogether shifting to basically a Mass Effect style for combat.
@@happyjonn9242dunno. DAI battles felt more exciting than Origins battles, where u just hit the attack button & letting it auto attack, while waiting for the abilities to charge
I totally agree with everything you've said! I am so glad there are fans like you (who share similar views as myself) who aren't afraid to vocally defend Dragon Age since Origins. I love Origins, but I've grown to love all the DA games that have come, since. I can't wait for Veilguard and I'm definitely not judging it until I've had the chance to play it myself.
@@happyjonn9242conversely new things are worse in the public opinion. Yes its sought after but you share no memories with it and when experienced for the first time, its fine. The memory of the first time is what you truly cherish
On the topic of diversity; specifically, some fans' complaints; I find it odd that they think some kind of erasure is going on. It comes off as a lack of understanding of the geography of Thedas as we know it. "Southern Thedas" is quite literally southern, as in south of the world's equator, and with Veilguard we will be moving north, or closer to the equator. So it makes sense, that the diversity will shift. The more north you go, the more darker the skin tone and the more tropical the environments are. Nevarra can be considered a buffer zone, but places like Antiva, Rivain, Tevinter, Par Vollen, and Seheron are all more tropical environments the farther you go. Quite literally mimicking the gradual shift of landscapes, biomes, and diversity that we have in the real world.
You are aware that modt locations in Dragon Age are based on the real world right? Orlais: France Antiva: Italy and Spain. Dwarves: South America, and Deutsch. Just off the top of my head.
@@NobodyNothing-f5c Quite aware. Devs have gone on record saying that Thedas is a reflection of the real world but the hemispheres are flipped, biomes wise. What is the northern hemisphere for us is the southern hemisphere for Thedas.
Echoing some sentiment from this video- The thing that drives me insane, as somebody whose favorite game of all time is Origins, is that a lot of these alleged origins superfans don’t remember almost anything about the game they played only once 15 years ago. 3 examples off the top of my head: 1. I saw someone complaining that one of Veilguard’s mage speciality is evoker, an elemental based spec, when DAO:Awakening had that too!-the Battlemage spec. This isn’t new, idk why they’re acting like this is some sort of downgrade. 2. They claimed that Veilguard isn’t going to be immersive because of “American accents”, as if a ton of characters haven’t had American accents since origins. (Sten, Wynne, Shale, Flemeth, etc) 3. “I wish it was turn based like origins” idk what to even say to these people, Origins was never turn based. I have no idea why people are even saying this 😂
They're shocked by the American accents?!😮 I heard even more American accents in Origins than I did in Inquisition, people really are just looking for reasons to hate.
American accents is more like neutral accent, Free Marchers, dwarves, Qunari. I wish there was an option for an Antican accent, but my Antivan's backstory will be having grown up in the Free Marches. Family was undercover, spies and assassins. I love all the voices, so I am gonna have to play tons of times.
@@EmperorDxD there were a few, Varric and Iron Bull (kinda) and the Inquisitor can have an American accent. But yeah, Inquisition feels mostly British and French (Ferelden and Orlesian)
Finally, someone on UA-cam speaking common sense 🤘🏼 Most of these people are just in an echo chamber, This game WILL be very strategic (this comment is 2 weeks after your video)
Remember the hissy fit gamers threw about Zevran (your bisexual promiscuous rouge trope) flirting with their male wardens. Same with needing to turn Anders down. But those games characters where suddenly perfect, right.
Lmao that’s the same shit I bring up every time they say oh Dragon Age is woke now. Like dude Dragon Age has been “woke” since origins. Representation and same sex relationships have always been a major thing in these games and it started with origins.
I'd like to add to this discussion by saying that Asmongold and his community are actively poisioning the well for the upcoming game and the franchise in general. It would be more understandable if Asmon was a long time fan of Dragon Age who had some grievances about how the game looks, but it seems like he just popped out of nowhere and claimed himself to be a fan when I've never heard him mention a single thing about the game and now he's painting the up-coming game as the second coming of the anti-christ.
The same thing happened with the FFXIV community. Asmon's community is poison, he should stay in his lane and stick to WoW, though thankfully even there he and his fans are less and less welcome.
I'm an Asmongold fan, but even for me it was wild to see him randomly decide to bash Dragon Age out of nowhere. Half his critiques felt so random. As soon as that happened, his subreddit went open season on Dragon Age and several times a day people would post meme after meme about it. Usually some kind of rage-bait, and usually the same ones over and over. Even now I bet there's some kind of meme about how character asses aren't big enough. It really sucks. He fully plans on playing it and I imagine it's with the full intention of slagging it off.
As someone who adores the whole series (but Origins especially) I agree with a lot of this. The darkness debate is the most interesting to me. DAO is definitely the edgiest of the bunch. None of the sequels went as hard as the city elf origin or the broodmother lore for example. That stuff was definitely a byproduct of 2000s edginess. (Remember the Marilyn Manson trailer?) I don’t think it’s a negative that the sequels moved on from using sexual violence for quick shock value. Yes, at the time, that stuff established how brutal Thedas was. But I think there are more subtle, nuanced ways that can be portrayed. However, DAI swung too far away from the roots towards more generic high fantasy for me. Yes, there were dark moments, but most of them were in codex entries. The “what if Song of Ice and Fire but with elves and dwarves” approach of DAO was what made Thedas unique. I think Veilguard is actually headed in the right direction. The Tevinter setting and the grotesque horror elements we’re seeing in the latest trailer has me hopeful that maybe the devs have found a good tonal balance.
Thank you so much for making this video. You make so many good points against these DAO fans. Dragon Age has not gotten worse. They just didn't understand what the games were trying to do or didn't understand what DAO was actually doing. And I want to complement you on your critiques of the game. If those fans actually said what you said then their would be no discussion. It makes sense and isn't just hate for hate's sake.
Woah this did not feel like 30 minutes at all! Great video!! It really is a shame that so many fans are unable to accept anything remotely different from this DAO brand of darkness. I mean, I get it. I'm a fan of all 3 games, and DAO has a very specific hopeless underdog tone to it that is just not in DA2 or DA:I. DA2 gets close, but Hawke doesn't have the same stakes as the Wardens do, which is totally fine. And despite that I still remember bawling my eyes out as Leandra passes away. Or messing up the first time and having to fight the Dalish. Or how incredibly melancholic and lonely playing the Inquisitor could be at times, being branded as the Herald. Or how intimate and bittersweet the DA:I banter could get, following a companion's personal quest. I get really really liking something. When I like a game, I replay it-- dozens of times... sometimes all in a row. Yet I personally still wouldn't like the same Wardens story rehashed and resold to me over and over. Change is scary, but stagnation is way worse.
@@minstora Your hard work definitely shows! And props for the emphasis on matters of tastes. Overall I found your take to be level-headed and respectful
I keep seeing comments how DAV doesn't look anything like DAO. DUAH. It looks ways cooler and more epic. New locations, new scenery. Of course it's different. Thedas is in disarray with chaos and mayhem at every turn. People want DAO 2.0, but the story and lore have evolved past that, for better in my opinion.
Omg, how can someone say sequels don't have difficult choices? I mean, I was agonizing if I should take or leave Carver out of expedition, to show him support, since proving himself was so important to him, or protect my baby brother. And no matter what you choose consequences are huge from him dying to standing against you on opposite side of battle later down the line. Or super delicate sequence of choices in Merril's quest, that may lead to her entire clan dying! Or deciding fate of some closest friends, like do you forgive Isabela? Or Anders? Or Blackwall? Send him to wardens? Leave him to die? Who will you leave in the Fade? I once had a world state where I was forced to choose between Alister and Hawke, and than talking with Fiona or Varric later. It was hella brutal conversations, let me tell you. Or will you save band of vagabonds, because they important to your friend, or choose strategic alliance that may benefit the nation? Both can blow up in your face in different ways.
I used to find that a difficult choice until someone pointed out a thing that Flemeth says: "A word of advice, we stand upon the precipice of change. The world fears the inevitable plummet into the abyss. Watch for that moment… and when it comes, do not hesitate to leap." Then that mission in the Fade is called *"HERE LIES THE ABYSS!"* I think Hawke might be the right one to pick for that mission, but I'm so curious why. Maybe it's because there's something about Wardens which makes them unable to survive, whereas Hawke--maybe due to something their father did--will. If so, some of my world states may have sad endings.
@@WynneL I heard this theory, but vague rumblings of half mad demigoddess is not exactly reassuring, at leas for me, and it does not make conversation with Varric any easier.
Conventionally attractive - BioWare gave us Garrus as a romance.... Thane.... Tali.... by conventionally, I think they mean "I want them all to look like Miranda wwwaaaaaa", and if you romanced anyone at all in Origins.... none of them look that good 😂 The people whining about wanting it being dark have not been paying attention. It never lost that. The fact that DA2 had a serial killer who was making a bride of Frankenstein's monster bypasses these people apparently - they can take all the seats. Refreshing video ❤ really enjoyed it.
Bro, origins is my favorite and most played game of all time, and I ain't being a crusty old fart about this, unlike so many I've seen. I can't remember the last time I've been this excited for a game. I can tell I'm going to love vielguard.
I think Origins *Supremacists* are what you're talking about, and I sympathize. I played Origins and enjoyed it, but I've always been frustrated by OSs who act like the Canon of Video Games was CLOSED, boom, directly after Origins came out. I love it for its merits, but it truly wasn't a game of perfect tactical genius. Cone of Cold was basically the win button as long as your targeting was good. If you didn't have Cone of Cold and Group Heal, you were screwed. Each of the DA games has had its flaws, and its strengths. Even DA2 which had a pathetic 14-18 months of development time, which makes it impressive how good it still is.
Thanks for making this video! I had the exact same thoughts while reading all the comments after the release of the Veilguard trailer. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion of course.. but I think it's best to wait until we've played the game before we try to convince others of how bad it is. I get why people wouldn't like the first trailer itself, I wasn't a big fan of it either. But to immediately jump to conclusions and say that the game is going to be bad is just absolute nonsense. After the first gameplay video and the new release trailer I am very much looking forward to playing this game. Whether it's good or bad or how it compares to the other installments... we have yet to find out :D I've also had a look at the first trailers for the previous games and I don't think you can tell how great those games are from those either xD I've loved every single one of these games and I'm sure there will be many things to love about Veilguard as well. Each game has something it does best and that makes it unique as a game on its own in my opinion.. I've always loved them for the lore and characters and think these are the most important part of all of these games. And though I do miss the origin stories as well, would Origins still be such a staple if all the games had this feature? People are still raving about it after all these years because of it being so unique. I think the fact that no Dragon Age game is exactly the same is what collectively makes all of these games so good. But of course that means each game is kind of a hit or miss for some people... That being said, I AM a bit concerned with the party size and I 'm not 100% a fan of the art style (for a DA game specifically), but I'm sure that once I get into the story it won't bother me at all.
The party size scares me a lot and is what I worry might lead to me taking points of a review over anything else really. But we will have to wait and see like you said. I'll try to judge the game as fairly as I can for sure as it's own work.
I've never understood the "dragon age isn't dark anymore" claim. The only thing I think it could mean is just that you don't fight as many darkspawn and the fleshy blight stuff wasn't everywhere🤷♂
I think people mean the overall art style and vibe. DAO is almost dark fantasy, feels more medieval. The nee version looks like a marvel comic (color palette) and much more cartoony.
@@jnyboy28 The bright colored clothing is much similar to an old Hollywood medieval production. But Ferelden is considered rustic compared to more metropolitan Orlais and Tevinter. So I'm willing to give the studio more leverage in depicting more cultural designs.
My biggest worry with the game is the dumbing down of role-play depth and variety. I know you get to make many big and meaningful choices in both 2 and inquisition, but I feel like BioWare has misunderstood what makes role-playing role-playing. It’s not about the occasional big choice about who gets to sit on some throne, the best role-playing is about the little choices, how your specific character handles the little obstacles. This is what BG3 did so masterfully. In all the veilguard gameplay we’ve seen so far, it looks like you just walk up to npcs, and they just give you a quest. You don’t talk with them, there’s no conversation, there is no choice of whether or not you want the quest. Remember the bandits in Lothering? Or the merchant trying to swindle the people? Remember all the options and minute choices you could make during those, having to pass intimidation or persuasion checks? That’s the stuff I miss. I don’t care if the combat is actiony (da2 has my favorite combat in the series fight me), I care that the role play potential is being limited, and it looks like it’s primarily a looter action rpg, not a full blown rpg.
That's a very fair point to bring up, as you're right that's an element we haven't seen. I know they're really hyping up the companions and just how special the relationships we can build with them platonically and romantically will be so I imagine a lot of care will go into roleplaying with them. My hope is that it ends up extending to the other characters as well, essentially extending to what you're talking about here in this comment. I remember those little things from Origins and I agree they for sure helped with leading to the game feeling special! I will say for me I was taken out of roleplaying a bit immersion wise in Origins during dialogue that involved persuasion checks as I felt like the system in that game was lackluster. It was like oh just put 18 points in cunning, take the skills and then you can persuade everyone in the game no rolls or nothing lol. Idk I just didn't like it too much but I didn't hate it either. But with the other stuff you're 100% spot on. Since we've about an hour of gameplay total I'm hopeful that those little moments to make choices are plentiful in the full game so we'll have to wait and see. 🤞 Edit: Also I imagine those small things may not be the most exciting for the advertising team in terms of what to show early, hence we maybe haven't seen much of it yet? I personally think it'd drum up some hype to show that kinda stuff off, but eh what can ya do. Lol Regardless I hope they implemented it!
On the demon redesign, I read/heard somewhere, and I can't find it now, they said it was because the demons can enter Thedas easier now, because of the ritual, that they don't have time to form fully corporeal bodies. What we see is the minimum they need to enter.
At least there's a reasoning for it and it's not just they look different now. I still don't like them but here's hoping we can a reference in game to the reason for the change. Also I been looking back at the footage and I think those are rage demons? The ones that kind of look like final fantasy Ifrit? They look cool at least
I heard both Ghil Dirthalen and Kala Elizabeth say there is an explanation in the game, which they could not share, and it all makes sense when we play. Also, personally, redesigns are fine by me. I love the look of the demons.
A lot of Origin Worshipers plays it with almost 15 years of mods & fix, created by fans for fans. They wouldn't play vanilia nor remember what it trully is or was. They make the companions more interesting than they are in the actual game with their knowlege of them in the universe beyond DAO (that's not bad but what they see is not in the game or not at the extent they see it). And have crippling nostalgia blindfolds.
Origins was the first and only game in the series where you could have huge lasting changes in the story based on your actions/dialogue choices. You can literally get everyone in your party to leave or be killed including the player character. No other game in the series has come close to that level of freedom.
@@happyjonn9242 It's complicated to allow such freedom if you want & to make sequel for you end-up with people in "Quantum state" dead in some play through living in others. It's easy for 2 games but with 3 or more, it's too much branches to keep track of them all, with no harmonisation look how many companion/ennemies are back from the dead in DAI ( Leliana, Coripheus). I don't talk about comics & anime shows/movies Sten, Crimson knight aka Meredith... and so much more. It's also due to an issue in Dragon Age, you change main character every episode. it made some decision mostly in DAI make more sense as a player than as a character. Mass effect doesn't have that issue you are shepard all the road. DA2 to be fair wasn't suppose to be a DA it was a link between DAO and DAI who was suppose to be the second episode. Sure you could kill everyone in DAO, but You Could kill a ton of your crew in DA2. DAO decision had almost no impact except as a kisscool effect in Denerim last battle. Kill or save Connor... meh Werewolves or elves yeah no big deal... Caridans crown or anvil just golems or no golems... Yes the impact on the world should be great but you won't witness it same as DAI, and taking that into account would be you need to do 1 sequel opus per possible playtrough.
Yeah I think that's very much a symptom of it being the first in the series ya know? Like BG3 devs had a hell of a time with this in their game allowing for all the different choices possibilities and as DA went into it's sequels and had to account for so many different world states? Sounds like a developmental nightmare 💀
@@minstora most of the choices are binary character present or the other. One thing or another thing the witcher games did this pretty well. Saying it's hard for the developers is just accepting trash. They decided to make an almost direct sequel as opposed to how the good fallout games did it so they should do it right. Proper rpgs never appeal to a mass audience which is why they always go through changes like this to make them more appealing to people who otherwise just don't like them but i like proper rpgs so it's sad seeing what happened to dragon age.
Yeah, I'm usually not a fan of shoe-horning diversity where it doesn’t make sense, but the Dragon Age series has always been diverse. There have been black and asian elves since Origins, which most people conveniently ignore. Also, Davrin and Bellara might be the hottest companions in the game, so anyone claiming they aren't conventionally attractive is being disingenuous.
As though having gay, lesbian and bi romances in DAO and a Golem whose pronoun was It, and POC companions, was far less diverse than DAV. How was Origins less diverse? You know.
@@calcitegem6204yeah that’s kinda fucked up on how they treat Wyll. I mean sure he’s kinda your standard folk hero but damn not everybody needs to have that super duper dark and morally grey backstory like Astarion. Wyll is a hero who made a difficult choice but remained a hero and that’s why he’s probably my favorite companion.
People end up loving it when something new comes out, and they have to use changes from the last entry to complain about. The most recent is always catastrophically bad, and the series/ studio is dead.
As a die hard fan of the entire da series the only thing I've felt like i was missing was the playable origin story of your character leading up to the "beginning" of the game like got in origins and da2
Thank you for talking about this! As a long time fan and also someone who genuinely loves Origins but also every single other game, I feel like some of these hardcore Origins fans are just simply unwilling to accept anything new, even some things are objectively better than before. It´s totally fine if DAO is your favourite game of the series, but discrediting the positive things the sequels and Veilguard will likely do too is just straight up ridiculous. Origins came out 15 years ago, stuff is going to change -- shocker! Doesn´t mean those changes are bad. I think it´s valid for people to be critical given their last two releases (Anthem and Andromeda) but at least give Veilguard a damn chance before it´s even out.
Even Bioware was self aware enough to make fun of the use of the word "Taint" in Origins. Sandal in Origins is literally just a special needs caricature, and not at all as interesting as he is in DA2. Hell he wasn't even in Inquisition directly, and he had a bigger impact on the lore than he did in Origins with just a few journal entries. In Origins he's literally just "The Enchantment Guy". Everyone acting like Origins isn't hilarious really are blinded. Alistair will straight up hit you with "Somebody's been drinking" in the most hilarious fashion. Among my other complaints about Origins fans they gas up the gameplay, which isn't all that great since most enemies can and will kite your character around the arena before you get a single hit in. The attack animations are floaty and have no weight behind them and no sense of impact. And emoting. Why are Alistair and Leliana the only ones who emote very well? Dude outside the chantry in Lothering's emotes are hilariously disproportionate to his bombastic tone of voice. DAO fans really do be wearing rose-tinted glasses. And Origins is the least stable of the games thus far. How is the "Best in the series" the same one that crashes after ten minutes of gameplay without stability and bugfix mods?
"Origins is the least stable of the games thus far. How is the "Best in the series" the same one that crashes after ten minutes of gameplay without stability and bugfix mods?" This is such weak low hanging fruit, you can say this about any older game you are trying to play on a modern PC, I can say this about Fallout 3, Fallout New Vegas, and Morrowind just to name a few. If you were playing Origins on console or on a older PC then you wouldn't have these issues.
@@MrDay53 Funny you should say Fallout 3 and New Vegas as counterpoints. I own both on Steam and regularly play them on the windows 10 pro computer with an i7 processor and have had no crashes with no mods installed, sans their respective sprint mods. It's not low hanging fruit, it's a valid criticism, as valid as when people say how unstable Inquisition is due to the Frostbite engine being in it's infancy in Bioware's use. Origins was terribly optimized on the PS3, it's terribly optimized on PC, and guess what, I'm willing to bet it's the exact same story on the 360.
@@ajdove1823 Funny how I was trying to load my steam version of Fallout 3 game of the year edition save last night and it wouldn't load the save. It would freeze on the loading screen and then go to a black screen. It is low hanging fruit because those games were not designed with todays technology in mind because it didn't exist at the time. So I guess with your logic games that were made for 32bit systems are bad because a lot of them may not work on a 64bit system. Yes Origins was poorly optimized for consoles because it was a modern take on a CRPG which is meant to be played on a PC. Or maybe the PS3 was just shit since Skyrim had way more problems on it than it did the PC and Xbox360.
@@MrDay53 Love how you shift the point. A: try running with the right compatibility settings. B: I've said my piece and I'm not gonna argue in Minstora's comments. It's bad manners. Good day.
@@ajdove1823 I can capture Fallout 3 crashing and uploaded it to my channel if you like. I can tell you it's got nothing to do with my compatibility settings since I switched settings around and the same thing would occur.
Well spoken. Great points as well. My favorite DA game is Inquisition, and i played all of them more than once, so i can objectively compare them. But after Anthem and especially Andromeda, i turned into a Bioware skeptic. The SBI related drama poisoning the gaming landscape hasn't helped either, LOL. But i'm glad that Veilguard looks better and better with each trailer. Looking forward to see reviews for this game, i really want it to be great. :)
That was really well done. A rational assessment ... regretfully rare, but absolutely appreciated. There are some things I don't like about *each* of the games, but the DA series is still my--hands-down--favorite of any game series. As an OG DAO player myself, I will never understand the adamant refusal to embrace any type of change from some DAO players. Seeing the world in such a narrow way would (imho) be a terrible way to live.
Part of me feels bad because like you said it must be a terrible way to live. Like seeing problems where none exist to the point where it prevents them from enjoying such great works. Not without flaw, but still great! Thanks for your kind comment 😁
@@xXFoiXx Just like I think Elden Ring is a dogshit game - we both have the options not to play (as you rightfully mentioned). Does my opinion mean that Elden Ring is objectively bad? -- not at all. It's just not good for me. Likewise, your subjective opinion (which is totally fair) doesn't mean that the DA games are objectively bad. The problem is when *some* (not all) Origins fans try to attack the series as objectively bad with erroneous arguments.
@@xXFoiXxI replayed it recently and the game is not as bad as I remember it. Repetitive in areas? Ofc, but I'm like okay a good amount of this story stuff and combat is better than I remember. To each their own I guess.
@@xXFoiXx Sigh. No need to be rude (I certainly wasn't). What you are devaluing is rational assessment. You may find rational assessment pointless, but it's fallacious to assume that your devaluation is common.
Great video and a lot of valid points. Big fan of Bioware games here, played most of their games since launch starting with original BG series. The only one I did not play is Anthem. Was absolutely enchanted with Origins when it came out, played through all Origins more than once. Loved DA 2 even if it obviously needed a lot more polishing. Loved Inquisition. Read all books and comics, watched all movies and series. Very much look forward to The Veilguard. So far the only changes I've seen I am not a big fan of are the combat ones (I do like controlling party members and I really like the real pause - not the ME style one), but I can live with that. I do not play games like DA for combat, I play for story, lore and companions. As for the latter, I think Neve and Harding are amazingly stunning looking and for the first time in a long while I am considering playing a male hero first just to romance them.
I really appreciate this video. I loved all the DAs. Sure, they had flaws but the stories were fun and dark even when the environment seemed bright in the later games. I actually enjoy that a lot since I don't want to overdose on bleary, dull, dark scenery. There's something to be said about whimsy overlaying a dark sinister underbelly.
Fantastic video, so nuanced and patient, much more that I've been able to. I will try to channel your calm and understanding when replying to Origins fans from now on. Thank you !
Oh trust, I don't ALWAYS have patience lol. Plenty of rewriting went into this to not come off as standoffish to these fans, but hey we're only human 😅
Another youtuber by the name of BigDanGaming has a similar opinion of DA:O combat . I thought I was alone in my opinion of it for a long time. Glad someone has a fair take on all this.
When you said your favorite romances were morrigan and Casandra meant I had to subscribe to another man of the culture. I appreciate the grounded take on all of the things that are making people wary of veilguard. Great video dude I look forward to the game coming out and seeing your take on it
I'm someone who started with origins on ps3 back when it was the only dragon age game. I was terrible at it, had to play easy/casual. Even replaying it now on pc(im at Haven) on normal, i can say im not crazy about the combat. I dont know if id say its good, but it is perhaps iconic to the game and to the series and i more than understand the criticism of veilguard being the farthest departure from that system for people who liked it or at least heavily associate it with the series. The tone criticism is an interesting one. I believe people are afraid of a flanderization of the game like what happened with Saint's Row or huge shift like Suicide Squad. Yes, we havent played Veilguard yet, we do have trailers. Tone is fairly consistent in trailers for the first three games and even the fourth when it was still called Dreadwolf. Then it gets renamed and revealed with a trailer that imo really isnt what older fans would expect. Trying to dismiss criticism of Veilguard by pointing to other games isnt a good look either. It would be best to address the critiques directly than to deflect. I never really thought 2 or Inq were off tonally but I do see it with Veilguard. As for visuals or aesthetics, thats a bit more whatever i guess. I personally thought Cassandra looked better in 2 and her movie vs Inq. I think this is mostly a piggyback critique from the others combined with general trends in AAA gaming. Whatever the case, im not gonna argue it. Interesting video.
I largely agree with most of your points, and I appreciate that you made this video to discuss this with folks who may be fans of the series who have complaints. If I made a video, it'd probably be pretty similar! Some stuff I'll add: 1) Dragon Age is and has always been "real time with pause". Veilguard isn't different in that regard and the major difference I can see between Veilguard combat and previous combat systems is that it is a lot more active and player centric, and relies a lot less on "autoattack" mechanics and more on direct player input. I am generally in favor of this because I feel it's a similar upgrade from ME 1 to ME 2, where you go from relying on how many points you have in assault rifles to whether or not you're actually aiming your assault rifle at the enemy. It's crazy to me that Dragon Age has gone three games without going for a similar improvement, and it's a testament to how good the stories and characters have been that players don't even mind that the combat has been middling at best. 2) When someone says the female companions aren't conventionally attractive, especially from the audience who makes this argument, I am going to assume that 90 percent of the time, their actual complaint is that they don't have big honkers or shapely bodies. I really like how you went into detail on how nice the new character's faces look, and I totally agree that they look beautiful. But there's a certain level of coding that is going on here, because most people know that it's not exactly appropriate to fully objectify women in that way, but it's still a source of disappointment for them that we're not getting proctology exams with Miranda anymore. 3) When someone says that DA:O is darker and grittier, I feel like they're usually referring to broodmothers. The lore on that is one of the more disturbing elements of DA:O, in my opinion, and I've seen a lot of folks who seem to appreciate how courageous the DA writers were with its inclusion. I've seen people who happily explain and brag about the meaning of Hespith's speech to female Let's Players (please don't do this). I am a guy and I'm fortunate that I don't have triggers related to that type of content, but even without it, I think I'm more than fine if Dragon Age avoids going that far again. While I'm definitely not a person who equates a person's media enjoyment with their actual personal morality, I do have to admit that I sincerely worry about some of the people I've seen have conversations about broodmother lore. 4) Very broadly, there are two major groups of people who heavily criticize this game. There are Origins only fans and there are culture warriors. Obviously, there are also people who like and dislike things that don't fall into these two buckets, but people with measured criticism are usually easy to spot because they're also expressing excitement over other stuff. My personal opinion is that the culture warriors tend to outweigh the first group by a lot, especially when it comes to like/dislike ratios or other forms of brigading or just plain botting. Culture warriors have zero interest in the game and have been complaining about BioWare since the original Mass Effect, or they look at any effort from BioWare as a personal attack because of the inclusion of women, people of other races, or worse yet, women of other races. What makes it difficult in all of these conversations is that a lot of culture warriors want people to feel like they're giving valid criticisms instead of saying "DEI" or "Sweet Baby" and exposing themselves for what they really are, so they piggy back off the complaints of the Origins only crowd. They're notably slow to adapt those arguments and any engagement with them shows that they don't really know anything about Dragon Age, but the unfortunate effect here is that a lot of the fanbase feels divided between Origins fans and fans of Dragon Age as a whole, when the real division is being promoted by people who just want the game to fail. In my view, it's really important for folks to understand that dynamic, because it's easy for people who love the game and invest in it to assign certain beliefs towards people who criticize the game that are unfair and may push people away from the fandom, and it's also easy for people to believe that every criticism of the game is somehow made in good faith, which means that Veilguard is destined to fail spectacularly. If you like what you've seen, tell people what you like! Explain the positives and why you're excited. You can disagree with a person's opinion and express that, but it's generally useless to argue with them. It ruins your day and the day of anyone who sees that argument, which is the goal of people who hope that BioWare gets shut down.
Yeah I agree. I’ve gotten into a couple of arguments with these people in other videos mostly because I’m kinda afraid that this game will fail due to this. Mostly I’m afraid that BioWare will get shut down if this game fails due to all the other companies that are shutting down and laying off this year. But yeah arguing this shit just pisses me off because it’s obvious these people don’t care about any of the positives they’re either angry to be angry or they just want to see the game fail. I’ve had a few conversations with disappointed origin fans and I can see their points but people talking about the game being too woke or the girls being ugly is just annoying. I to a degree understand that view point I don’t think there’s anything wrong with wanting to see over sexualized people both men and women because let’s be honest it’s enjoyable to look at. That being said not every game needs this and the women in Veilguard are extremely attractive. A game where I am disappointed doesn’t have extremely sexualized characters for example is Mortal Kombat. That game always had this tone that it was everything that you should feel bad for enjoying like gore, violence, and sex and to see the sexual aspect of that game be reduced that much only for the gore to be even more graphic feels hypocritical in my opinion. But that’s an entirely different conversation. Veilguard is not mortal Kombat it’s not just trying to be violent and sexy it’s trying to tell impactful stories and the major violence and sexiness can take away from that and I think Veilguard will balance that well based on the trailers.
Every Dragon Age game has been great because of the writing and characters. DA2 was poorly received, but the writing there was my favourite of the three games. DAI was bashed for having fetch quests, and yeah those were dumb, but being able to run around that gorgeous world was such a treat. DA4 will be great. Why? The writers are skilled veterans from BG, DA, ME2+3. The writing will be solid. And I dont think anyone ever bought bioware for the combat 😂😂😂 This combat looks aright though.
Thanks for making this video. I don’t make videos but the discourse around this game made me tempted to make something because damn people are going insane over the dumbest shit right now due to this game
I would say DAO was highly strategic and tactical, but only for mages. Depending how you build them, the mages can be walking nukes, and their sheer versatility was astounding. I wish a bit more of the DAO magic schools and spell options made it to the later games, honestly. I, however, am a rogue player through and through, and DAO melee combat is... not great. It's very clunky, and I think the only reason I can still play it now is the main campaign is just THAT strong. I'm actually very excited that the Veilguard combat looks so fun! I do kinda wish a version of the tactics system from Inquisition made it to the new game because I'm disabled so I liked being able to really slow down combat. It's the only reason I could even attempt to play on nightmare.
@@KtheSongbird aw man that's a actual bummer about the action combat causing accessibility issues. It's for sure a negative to the change and I hope there's some features that still help but allow you to get the full challenge you're craving
@@minstora I think I should be fine at lower difficulties if I take frequent breaks, but yeah, I'll miss the accessibility of inquisition. But then again, it sounds like there will be quite a bit of options for combat customizations in Veilguard, so they might have some options that could lessen the strain. Fingers crossed 🤞
@@KtheSongbird I know the customizable difficulty (which was somewhat present in Inquisition) is still there, based on the GI articles, and they've said they'll fully detail accessibility options later. Kala, a UA-camr who was a member of the council who played the game and provided internal feedback, has said that a lot of her feedback related to accessibility was listened to and implemented, so I feel like there is a lot of reason for optimism that they'll address as many of those issues as possible, and that they're willing to address stuff they miss post launch.
I played Dragon Age 2 because I wanted to try out the dual wielding style. So far no game lives up to my expectations of how dual wielding combat should be like. But I love Dragon Age nonetheless.
DA2 has always been my favorite and I've played them all multiple times and started the series when Origins first released. I wish it wasn't so rushed because I really enjoyed the more personal story vs the other two games. Hawke's story was very dark and in many ways downright tragic. And, sarcastic Hawke is the best thing to ever exist! The rant you get when you leave the chantry after taking sarcastic Hawke there without companions to find Seamus after he joins the qunari is priceless. I'm super excited for DAV. I'm trying not to make any judgement before release with the exception of party size and for some reason I feel like we are a little light on the amount of available companions, although I guess one of those problems takes care of the other... For now, I'll reserve judgement and keep replaying through the past series another time until DAV releases.
i feel like veil guard less about needed to have one per class and its more about who can you combo with and synergize with i feel like it won't punish you if you only bring mages for most quests at least as much
@Gungrave123 So... like Neve, Bellara and Harding? What even is your point here? Veilguard is literally the DA game with the most female romance options who are available to male characters. Or do they not count as "real women" because one has dark skin, another is asian and the last one a dwarf? Pathetic.
@@Gungrave123So... like Neve, Bellara and Harding? I really don't see your point here. Veilguard is literally the Dragon Age game with the most female romances available to male characters. Or so they not count as "real women" because two aren't white and the third a dwarf? Or because they one has a prosthetic leg? Or just because women can also romance them? You are making yourself sound pathetic, dude.
@@Gungrave123DAV female companions look the closest to real women ever in the franchise, both in their physical appearance and in the design of their armor/casual clothing. if you really think anything other than maybe her conveniently tied hair was realistic about Morrigan's design in DAO, you haven't seen any real women, outside of maybe instagram models or cosplayers, who always have the perfect lighting, makeup, and poses to look their best. and it's not like the female characters have to be attractive and fit the beauty standards, but like Minstora said, they all still fit it - thin, narrow shoulders (narrower than the average woman, btw, most likely so that male gamers like you don't cry into their pillows even more), small, proportional facial features, clear, smooth skin, as if they all have time for a modern 20-step skincare routine.
Everyone just has to understand that this series has had a bunch of pitfalls, and they survived all the way up to this point. I was hoping For a evolved Inquisition gameplay But I understand the need for getting as many people involved With the gameplay For the sake of continuing the story and the series as a whole.😑
I love Origins, but the combat is easily the worst part of it. I'm a combat fiend and Veilguard looks awesome. I don't really swap to party members with character creators, it's my story and I like to control me. Like FF12, I juat set tactics/gambits for my party members.
This was perfect. I’ve said so much of this…almost verbatim actually. Origins is a great game but it’s got flaws that some Origins purists just don’t seem to remember at all.
Bellara and Neve are both very attractive, what those guys mean is they aren't white women. That's the issue, it's not attractive to them. Harding is a dwarf, so...its obvious what's the issue there.
Well, we have the combat spotlight out now, and it's 3 abilities and an ultimate. Considering that some stuff that you need abilities for will now be just actions you do with controlls, it's not that bad
I'm very glad to see a video like this. All the people hating on the game because the "strategic" combat went away. Bro, I just finished playing Origins and Awakening (fucking awesome), and i am working through DA2 (doing the whole series before Veilguard comes out), and the "strategy" they're referring to boiled down to "Crushing Prison the mage, make sure it dies, kill everything else." Yes, there was some nuance. Some good usage of auras and stuns and AoE, etc. But by and large, I let my party members go and I (dualwielding Assassin/Duelist rogue) obliterated everything, even on Hard. I love these games, but Baldur's Gate it is not. They have changed the combat structure with EVERY game. Let's just wait and see! (I will see, making the characters' heads too big and the UI Glowfest are all stupid choices that I hope they backpedal on. At least the UI. We can mod the heads to normal size later.
@@minstora That was my hope! Though some things are I imagine rather fixed, like the ability screen with all of the excess lines. Loreworx did an excellent video talking about making the UI more streamlined. I recommend it! Was that trailer the State of Play one? I have been kind of keeping my eyes off of stuff as I want to experience as much of it as I can fresh.
Dragon Age 2 and Dragon Age Inquisition can be good on their own terms. Dragon Age 2 might have been rushed to meet a deadline, which was why a lot of the story was a mess. But the gameplay is an improvement from the first game, the characters are entertaining and there are some quests that can be well written. Hawke is a well written character who has a good Hero Rising story, who also been through a lot of hardships in this story such as being betrayed and losing a lot of people close to him/her. Dragon Age Inquisition may be a slog to get through due to the open world, but the story is like a movie experience. The characters are also interesting and relatable and there's a lot of expansion on the game's lore, most of it interesting like the Elven Gods being a group of Elven Mages who got drunk with power and started oppressing their own people. I know that there will be a lot of people who will hate Dragon Age Veilguard upon release, but I'm sure that there will be a lot of people who love Veilguard, as long as it's able to stand on it's own terms.
So Origins was my first big RPG that I ever played. It got me back into gaming and is the reason I actively game today. My memories of Origins are super fond, and at the time, for me, there was so much about Origins that was intense, because it was the first time I was experiencing (1) an in-depth RPG and (2) a story quite like it. I think that's the issue with a lot of people who are stuck on Origins being the grittiest, sexiest, most hard core thing to ever exist in the world. Origins is a gem of a game. I wouldn't have gotten into Bioware games--or other games for that matter--without its existence. But I think when people have such fond memories of what it was like to experience Origins for the first time, they cling to those feelings of their past self and are totally blind to the fact that the other games in the series are also the thing Origins was in terms of sexiness, grit, and difficult moral choices. All of the games have ups and downs in terms of their execution of any of these elements (like, I can be a blood mage in Origins, despite a good chunk of the game explicitly showing me it's a bad thing, and none of my companions nor other people in the world... care? From a game design stand point that's such a disjointed choice to make.) Edit: Also the "it's less risque" point. In DAV you literally enter into a BDSM relationship with The Iron Bull. How is that worse than anything in Origins lol.
This, 100% like Origins got me into the fantastical world of RPGs in general. I can trace my love of DnD, getting to play awesome games like BG3, all back to Origins. So I definitely understand the fondness for that game, but I also understand how said fondness can become extreme and hold me back from enjoying other experiences for sure. And recent replays have shown me in what ways Origins shows its cracks and limitations, like what you said about Blood Mages. How awesome would it be if as a result of your good deeds that certain people in the game acknowledged that Blood Magic can be capable of good. Its why I wish BW did actually include it in Inquistion and Veilguard
@@minstora Blood magic having a significant impact on how your companions and the characters around you see you would be amazing. I felt the same way about the presence of red lyrium in DAI. We've been told (and shown in DA2/DAV) just how badly it effects people who come into contact with it. But my party can just... fight all these red templars and consistently be exposed to it with no issues? A lot of people will be comparing DAV to BG3 in terms of "BG3 good, DAV bad." But I think we should be looking at it like "How can BG3's design improve Dragon Age?" Because in a game like BG3, those choices and encounters would have definitely impacted the game. And even with BG3, there's issues in that game too! And it's largely accepted at this point as a standard for fantasy RPG. Ultimately, I think a lot of game "crit" at this point is ascribing a good or bad label onto the whole without looking at the parts. Will DAV be a GOTY, era-defining game? Who knows. But I do think it has decent potential to be enjoyable and get Bioware back on its feet for more games to come. I'm at least holding out for it. I'm not ready to let Thedas go just yet.
I love Origins as well- but it's combat really doesn't hold up to modern standards. If they went back, more people would have hated it than not. (BG3 and DAO are no where close to being the same combat system- whoever says so needs to play them back to back.) I'm way happier that they picked a direction to go in and stuck with it, rather than try and suck at doing half and half. (Which was the complaint of Inquisition.) That being said, I do wish we had kept the bigger party and combat control could have been achieved like they did in FFVII Remake. But overall, I'm super excited as well- don't let anyone damper your fun. (Embrace the Malicious Enjoyment!)
As a fan of the whole series I don't think DA has EVER got combat right. It's the choices matter that really separates Origins from the later games though. And when the gameplay is only average/sub par the story and interactiveness is even more important.
You're right Neve is showing a fair bit of chest...but she has no boobs, Morrigan also appears to have had her boobs reduced. Also Taash in early concept art was MUCH more feminine looking and attractive. But now she appears to be super androgynous and unattractive. Honestly after seeing Neve in casual clothes she looks much more attractive than in previous trailers, but there IS a trend in the industry of them attempting to over-correct by de-sexifying female characters.
I appreciate that you make some good points arguing the validity of 2 and 3. But there is a toxicity in gaming that's just there right now. It seems people will make a big deal of buying a game they consider anti woke to prove a point. Or try to cancel one. And also people are entitled to not like a game for their own reasons. I would say the programmable combat tactics are one thing that might be mega important to some people and it's a personal thing. I personally enjoyed combat in 3 because 3 had great audio and visual effects and it felt energising. I just hate to see a good game talked into the ground before anyone has tried it. It's so unfair
I’m late to this video, but glad that the algo gods served it up. You’re right about DAO’s combat. If you use a properly optimized build, it is ridiculously easy, even on nightmare. Encounter design and enemy variation are mediocre at best. If people love RTWP combat, there are games with better combat like Pillars or Owlcat’s games, or even the older Infinity Engine games like BG1 and 2. I love DAO for its story and characters. Combat is serviceable, but everyone who talks about it as like the pinnacle of CRPG combat played a different game than I did.
Why would you say something so controversial and yet so brave? lol Glad to see someone else say that. To think DAO is the best of the series is a very fair opinion (that's not how I think, but I love DAO enough to respect it); but the reasons usually offered to disregard the sequels are too often nonsensical or unfair.
In my opinion, if you don't think you're going to like it, then don't buy it. If you are SO OPPOSED to the series coming into the future of gaming, (It's been a decade since we had a Dragon Age game) then just don't play it. This is a direct sequel to Inquisition AND Tevinter Nights.
I didn't hate it but it didn't do anything for my excitement essentially I was at the same level of hype before and after it. Now it's a different story tho 😂
I really appreciate your nuanced and well-worded take on all this! It's nice when I stumble across someone who isn't strictly black-and-white about it (it's either total garbage or it'll unquestionably be the game of the year). Since you asked for thoughts on these subjects: In terms of combat, I agree with everything you're saying. The combat in Origins wasn't mindblowing (and I say that as someone who's favourite game was Origins). What I loved about it was, as you said, the options. The thing that absolutely drives me up the wall about all the sequels is that they keep taking away those options, and I can't for the life of me fathom why they're limiting it instead of expanding on what was already there (I honestly can't think of any other sequels to games that have done this). I loved the magic categorizations of Creation, Spirit, Primal, and Entropy. I loved that I could be a mage who could wear any armour or wield any weapon as long as I had the stats for it. But in the later games they've taken away most of the spells, done away with the magic categorization, I now CAN'T use any equipment that isn't for my class, taken away the ability to "program" your how your companions behave in combat, and even limited the abilities you can use at a given time as well as the amount of potions you can hold (which drives me crazy!). And now we're even down to 2 party members rather than 3 (I don't personally mind that we can't control them, but still that's yet another option taken away). I also agree on the continuations of the lore. Dragon Age is my favourite franchise because of the deep lore and revelations as time goes on, so I am extremely interested to find out the answers to all my burning questions, even when those answers just lead to an eruption of more questions. As for the dark and gritty part, I think that has alot to do with what someone's definition of "dark" is. For me, that's having moments that are effed up enough to shock me. Origins had alot of those moments for me, 2 was somewhat similar (though to be fair it was also a shorter game), but Inquisition only had one or two of those moments. Maybe my bar is high for what shocks me in that way but Inquisition just didn't reach it most of the time. So far, they haven't shown anything for Veilguard that gives me that feeling yet but it's way too early to tell. The ones complaining about diversity and not being attracted to any of the new companions typically seem to be mostly the "anti woke" crowd. Though I have seen a couple stating they have difficulty taking the companions seriously and not really wanting to romance them because of how stylized they look, which I can understand. I HEAVILY agree about disliking the demon redesigns (I'm also sad to see they're continuing to be combat fodder rather than how dangerous the lore makes them out to be). I'm not personally a fan of the new darkspawn designs but then I haven't liked any of them since Origins. Since I know they'll probably never have another backstory setup like Origins, being able to set your backstory in Veilguard is the next best thing so I'm pretty happy about it! I agree that's a huge improvement over Inquisition.
@@skylerjayceysylvan6238 in terms of taking away options I think it was just an unfortunate circumstance. They had like 1 year for DA 2 and then issues with the Frostbite engine probably limited them with options in inquisition. Seemingly they just couldn't catch a break in that regard 😂
@@minstora That's entirely fair. DA 2 I don't blame whatsoever when it comes to limitations. Inquisition I have more of an issue with (especially with changing the magic categorization; mainly just 3/4ths of Primal and mixing Spirit with a couple of Creation spells, with a few Entropy and other Spirit spells thrown into the Specializations for some reason), but I'm certain Frostbite didn't make things easy which I blame EA for. Though I do think they could have still at least made the weapons/armour available to all classes based on level (that probably would've taken less programing than locking them to classes).
Man I remember when I played Dragon Age 2 for the first time I honestly paused the game during the reveal of Hawke’s mother being killed and immediately looking up how to prevent that from happening. I was trying to find out if I fucked up somehow or if I missed a quest that would stop this from happening but no this was part of the story. At first I was pissed I thought where is the choice to stop this from happening but eventually I understood that this had to happen because it was such a big moment and just like in real life you can’t always prevent tragedy from happening. That was probably the darkest thing BioWare has done in my opinion and that didn’t happen in origins.
Definitely some fair criticisms for the game. Big one for me are facial animations. But at the same time, I play these games for the story and companions.
Oh my god thank you! I have been thinking exactly this about the naysayers, like, what games did you play?! Hard tactical combat?! I was playing on hard and got bored so I set my tv control on x during a fight and came back and it was over. No casualties. Lol. Oh, but you're wrong about the hardest boss fights in Origins, that was 100% the harvester from GoA, I could not get that little f***er on nightmare. It was hell.
Nice video. After the trailer I was concerned with the tone, Inquisition was my favourite game ever, and I was much more emotionally invested in all my companions than in Origins. I don't know, I hope Veilguard is good but I'm cautious
@@RionCousland Appreciate it! I tried hard in that aspect 😅 Like I want this game to be good, but at the same time Biowares 2 most recent games are Anthem and Andromeda so uh... While hype is there it's still a wait and see kind of situation 😅 Here hoping tho 🤞
Origins fans are out of touch when it comes to these games. Dragon age hasn't been what they want in almost twenty years, yet they cling to something that most likely will never happen again.
I wouldn't completely agree with it being almost twenty years more like 10-15 years because DA2 has a lot more similarities to Origins than a lot of fans let on and also I think that bringing back the tactical camera mode for Inquisition maybe gave some of those fans hope that they would take the future games back to the more tactical and strategic direction.
@MrDay53 That tactical camera in Inquisition is terrible and is universally hated. the tone in Origins and DA 2 is about the only thing that is close to being similar between those two games. Saying that most Origins fans wont admit that so that isn't a factor. 5 years from now will be the 20th anniversary of Origins thats almost 2 decades bro
I wouldn't say that's a fair assessment. You could argue Tomb Raider fans who want Tomb Raider to go back to raiding tombs and just being about a complete powerhouse of a woman are out of touch for example or people who prefer Assassins Creed 2 or don't like the way Star Wars has gone or saying you don't want another ME Andromeda are out of touch ect. If you genuinely love something and you feel it's not been living up to its potential or has been mismanaged then I believe your opinion is as valid and relevant as anyone else's, if not more so because it's powered by loyalty and a passion for what you love to live up to it's true potential. Things don't always change for the better and pointing that out certainly isn't being out of touch. It's just being observant and honest. The problem is that the people kicking off don't seem to be fans of any Dragon Age game because a lot of the arguments are based around things that a Dragon Age fan would understand. So the kick off over the pansexuality or whatever the term is. I'm unfamiliar with all these labels. You like who you like as far as I'm concerned. What group to put you in isn't relevant but basically when people were moaning that any character could be romanced but apparently love BG3. Or people moaning about diversity. Now I'm not a woke man but if it's always been the games identity then it should continue and the likes of Dragon Age, Fable TES ect have always been like that. That's the problem. People pretending to be fans to rage some culture war that's embarrassing for both sides not fans who have a preference on a favourite game in the series.
@@therapyquantified987 The combat in DA2 is similar to Origins just sped up, they both have the tactics system where you can make presets to how you and your companions respond in combat, you can still take direct control of your companions in combat, and there is choices to make through dialogue, and your companions have banter. So again there are more similarities between Origins and DA2 so I used the years from DA2 and Inquisition.
In reality most people wouldn’t care at all but they trust impression with the botched trailer destroyed any good thoughts they had with the game Also something I find funny is people think the game was confirmed dead when they changed the name but if you pay attention to the trailers from 3 years ago the game still had the exact same locations and characters
I LOVE Dragon Age, and I love ALL three games currently out today. However, I do not find DAO as tactical. I love turn-based tactical combat, like what Larian does with their games, but I do not like real time with pause. I hate it in all games, so my least favorite part of DAO is the combat, while I play it over and over because of the story. But, let's be honest, I'm one of those fans here for the story and the lore vs. the combat and art styles lol.
I haven't heard the complaints about white erasure so far, but I HAVE seen objections to every companion character being canonically pan. I actually get that; *IF* it's brought up in the game in a weird distracting way (but we won't know if it's like that until it's out obviously.) In BG3, every companion is "available" for any type of Tav. The general consensus seems to be that the only thing that makes it "not woke" in BG3 is that it's not brought up unless it's relevant. I think it being "canon" spoils the immersion for some people. I only won't like it if it feels forced but maybe that's just me. 🤷🏻♀
So I’m one of those origin is the best of the series and for me inquisition was the weakest but not for reasons you listed. Diversity etc doesn’t bother me but I do find it funny that Carrie and mortigan keep coming back as morrigan for a lot is a fan favorite. Inquisition was mostly filled with nameless npcs/enemies and mostly horrible side quests compared to dao and da2. I remember how much in dao I hated rendon Howe etc. yes combat is clunky etc but it’s the most immersive of all 3 games. The actual character origins especially dwarf noble are fantastic. So much has been lost from game to game and the improvements are really only in graphics and gameplay. I have hope for veilguard but once again origin is barely anything. I remember running into my dwarf sister or going back to pay respects to Duncan. Da2 had some of it but dai had none.
I'm replaying the trilogy rn before Veilguard comes out. I've played DAO on Nightmare in hopes that the game will force me to use extra mechanics, like traps and poisons, maybe new strategies, because the battle mechanics are too boring for me after playing the game so many times in the last 15 years. And no, the game is in no way more "strategic and tactical". DAO is great, but it's not the best game, and even not the best Dragon age game. People complaining about darkness never played DA2 in seems and listened to the background banter on the streets of Kirkwall. And this is not even the obvious ones like Hawke's family. Inquisition might not show as much, but if you *listen* to the game, it's no less dark. The games are just not brown anymore, and have more distinct art style(thank gods), and not the generic late 2000s dirt.
We wanted Origins 2, instead we got Inquisition 2. Oh well can't say I'm surprised. P.S. Desire demon in Origins is the hottest thing on 2 legs. The Veilguard could never XD
Okay, as an "Origins fan", let me address your combat point very quickly, because I think this needs to be said, and it is one of my two real criticisms so far. Yes, Origins combat was clunky, unpolished, and very narrowly focused in the late game. But, it was tactical, new, and gave a wide variety of options for your party. The problem is that instead of improving and iterating on this system, they completely abandoned it in 2, and gave us an in between for Inquisition. For comparison, let us look at another franchise they own, Mass Effect. Combat in ME was slow, buggy, tedious, and often unpolished. But this combat system was drastically improved in ME2, my favorite in the trilogy storywise. But ME3 had a very streamlined, polished, and worthy upgrade the the ME qnd ME2 combat systems. Personally, that was my favorite in terms of gameplay. They didn't fundamentally change the system. They improved and interated on it with each new installment. Dragon Age has abandoned their groundbreaking combat system completely in favor of going for a more ME style of gameplay. Fans have been asking for a return and improvement on THAT system since the series began. We have told them what we wanted for years, and BIOWARE has completely ignored us, or remained completely out of touch with their fanbase. If you want to see the success of companies that iterate on their gameplay instead of changing it completely, look no further than Larian Studios and From Software. I've been with them since the beginning. They have the same basic mechanics with every game. They just polish the gamplay and add new features to it, and they are now outshining even AAA studios. All in all, Dragon Age's gameplay loop has no identity.
I'd argue that the gameplay loop does have an identity ya know. Fight, loot, finish quest objectives, return to base, converse with companions, progress story, and then repeat the cycle. I feel like that loop is there in each game (with 2 being the weakest in terms of a base and conversing with allies) But where I agree is that there is no set combat system identity in this series for sure, but tbh I can totally see why it happened. Dragon Age 2 was very likely an experiment for Bioware. They had a year to crank out the game, so they likely felt uncertain about making a competent successor to Origins tactical combat and iterate on it, like you described with the transition from DOS 1 to DOS 2 then BG3. So they experimented and used the bones of Origins to make something slightly more actiony, and then 2 despite it being rushed sold very well. I don't think we have numbers but it did sell faster than Origins. And then Inquisition with its more action orientated combat outsold both previous games, so by all means, money was pointing them to innovate on their action-RPG combat rather than their roots in Origins, especially considering that when you look at their other RPGs in mass effect they have experience with the action side of things I mean it does make sense. Now would I like to see what they could have come up with if they stayed down the Origins path in terms of combat, oh absolutely, but I'm happy with what we got as I did have a lot of fun with the combat in each of the games even if they never hit that amazing level for me personally. Still the combat reveal came out today for high level gameplay and imo it does look incredible.
@@minstora I do agree with your points regarding DA 2, very strongly, in fact. Games need to have a clear vision and direction, and DA 2 suffered from time constraints and limited ideas and development. This is actually my second biggest complaint. The turbulent dev cycle has many fans worried they will be receiving a botched product just like Anthem, Andromeda, and DA 2. I want this game to succeed, I really do. But not having a consistent combat identity, the turbulent dev cycle, practically none of the original devs on board, and not listening to what their fans have been begging for has me worried sick. Each game looks and feels completely different from each other. Stick a video of each installment's combat and gameplay side by side and look at the stark differences between them. That is an insane issue to have. Your franchise plays nothing like it's sequels. As a standalone game, it could be absolutely amazing, and I really hope it is. But Veilguard doesn't look, play, or feel like Dragon Age Origins, the game that put this franchise on the map. Don't get me wrong, I liked all of them very much, but for vastly different reasons.
@@minstora I think the other thing people forget is that BioWare's previous games were more turn based than Origins was, so BioWare saw how well Origins did moving away from that formula, and just continued down that path. Origins itself was a departure from conventional formula, so heading back towards tactical turn based systems wouldn't have been an evolution for BioWare, it would have been a step backwards from how they were evolving those systems already. It's funny to look back at older conversations on forums where people argue about whether even Baldur's Gate 2 was turn based because BioWare was trying to hide the turn based system behind animations and action elements.
@@zachariahmousa7652 I sympathize with your worry fam. While I DESPISE EA I do genuinely want the best for Bioware even tho their last two games have been disappointing I don't want that to be the case for Veilguard as I feel like this really is their last chance. I'm scared if this game fails they'll cease to exist and I don't want that as I feel like they still have it in them to make good games that they were just misguided by EA's leadership. Listening to fans is a key part of that so lacking that centralization in the dev process is worrying for sure, and yeah missing out on key OG devs is a big hit for sure. I'm hopefully optimistic that the apparent switching from this game supposed to having been a live service to a single player game now, means good decisions are being made in abundance but I guess we will just have to see 🫠
@@minstora If Veilguard fails, Bioware is finished. Most companies don't get to fail 3 times in a row and continue existing, especially under a parent company like EA. I don't want them to fail. Bioware has produced many games that I hold in such high regard. Baldur's Gate, Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, Mass Effect, and Dragon Age are all among some of my favorite games ever made. I am hesitantly optimistic about this game. Everything is looking good so far. But the aspects that determine a franchise game's success are missing. Lack of improved iteration, ignoring fan requests, unsteady dev cycle, no franchise developers, a completely new team, and being under EA are all red flags to many fans. I suppose this is the true crux of my complaints regarding Veilguard so far. Nothing I have seen so far is going to bring back that very vocal and significant portion of the fan base because they feel like they have been ignored so Bioware can chase a more broad audience. I guess you could say I am more critical of their business decisions which point to failure rather than the game itself. Companies like CD Project Red have learned that lesson the hard way. I really hope I am wrong.
"Resistant to almost any change?" 1. The artstyle 2. The entire setting (from dark/grimdark fantasy to high or even PG/light fantasy). 3. The gameplay (from tactics/rpg to 'action rpg') from controlling a party of 4 down to controlling only one character with one AI sidekick. These are not small changes.
I'm not saying you can't be upset about change lol. I'm obviously implying that being hyper critical or hyper resistant to change (that's why I specifically said almost any change) are negative qualities. But I point out plenty of changes in my critique section that I too am not a fan of, it's okay to dislike some changes and I'm not trying to imply otherwise. 1. If you dislike the art style that okay, it just makes the game not for you, which is a preference thing and that's valid. It doesn't make the game outright bad tho, and that's where I take issue when people use that to claim as such. But again, perfectly fine to say the art style makes the game a no for you! 2. Judging by this most recent trailer I'd argue the game is PLENTY dark, but hey we do have to wait and see. But I'd say to me after replaying Origins it didn't come across as Dark fantasy. It came across as High or Epic Fantasy with dark themes/plot, but 2 and Inquisition also fit that bill for me. But especially not grimdark lol other creators also disagree with the grimdark sentiment. But hey again if you disagree that's fine, and it's again a perfectly valid reason to dislike a game and say it's not for you, it just doesn't make it outright bad. A script that doesn't land or a story that falls flat or drags would be things that attribute something to being bad (like how inquisition has the open world padding that can super streeeetch the story out) 3. If you don't like the combat it's also fine, I'll just say that as a fan who recently played all 3 and thinks that none of their systems are really outright amazing I look at videos of Veilguard combat and go okay this looks really damn promising in terms of fun 😂 Like I say in the video I'm hope it feels tactical still because the mass effect games were able to pull it off, but fingers crossed 🤞. The controlling 4 party members isn't a big deal to me as I rarely ended up doing so even on hard difficulty BUT I agree. Going down from 4 to 3 party members wasn't a good look 😞 Still tho it's fine to not like these change. There's a difference between not liking and being resistant to I feel. I see being resistant as not wanting change to even be attempted. Where as not liking a change implies you're okay with them trying a change, you just didn't like the execution of it! Hope that clears things up from my perspective
@@minstora Sure, thats why both Andromeda and Anthem got such a negative responce. Because, they changed to much, not because of lack of content, a trouble development, a rushed and unpolsihed final product. VG has had a huge turnover, most of the people responsible for the series success are gone and the previews show it clearly. The whole point of a sequel is to take whats there and organically expand on it. Otherwise just make a new series. A sequel comes with expectations and a preexisting customers and fan-base. If you tear down the pizza palace and replace it with the best damn taco stand ever, those that are there for pizza will still be disappointed, Hell maybe tacos give the indigestion. If your point, is we just need to accept, that the series is no longer for you. Then fair enough, but its a problem for the business when a huge amount of consumers feel that way.
@@raynortownly7098 I genuinely don't understand why you're talking about Andromeda and Anthem rn 😆 I never said they were good games? Andromeda has good combat but failed because the story wasn't very good, and was ABSOLUTELY bug ridden, just an awful technical state that it shouldn't have released in and a lot of the promise it could have had was never realized such as there being only 1 new alien race, and Anthem just was way too repetitive and over monetized for a paid game, not enough content. And yes VG did have a lot of turn over, but I imagine that was reflective of it's early plans to be a live service that they've verrrrryy thankfully now turned away from in order to make it single player. "The preview shows it clearly" What does that even mean? I'm sorry I'm just confused because if you just make a blanket statement but don't provide any examples it just seems as if you simply don't like it, which again doesn't make something bad, unlike Andromeda's bugs we mentioned earlier. I at several points in the video point to how the sequels keep the DNA of Origins, and as you say organically expand it. The templars vs mages has been at the heart for 3 games, darkspawn, spirits, grey wardens, elves, and many other staples are still present and used to tell interesting stories. The only changes that even remotely fit what you're talking about are mechanics which of course change dramatically Origins is 15 years old, and like I said, no where near as good in terms of its mechanics as people remember. And I mean if you're talking business while Bioware has fumbled with its recent games, with Dragon Age it has not. With each title in the series selling more than the previous one lol. So they're doing just fine business wise and maybe Origins fans that cannot accept these changes no matter what do need to move on or just stick to enjoying that game, as clearly the whole: "a huge amount of consumers feel that way" is just false, I'm sorry. Because each game is doing better than the last. I mean Inquisition won the first game of the year at the game awards. I wish there was a way to make a single game that checks all the boxes for this small part of the community that seems to be so resistant to change and one that at the same time checks the boxes for all other facets of the community but that just doesn't seem to be the case.
@@minstora Artstyle alone isn't a gamebreaking problem even if it's 'bad'. Best example of this is Final Fantasy 9. Despite putting many people off (me included) in the beginning it's now highly regarded and I think it's the best FF game they made because every other element is so well done.
@@minstora I kind of agree with your points though but if we look at it like this 1. Artstyle (i'll give it a pass if everything else is good). 2. game may or may not be dark enough setting, we simply don't know. 3. combat has always been just ok at best in the series. Not expecting much different here. This means we will probably have 2 or 3 just ok's on every point. Maybe the combat will be amazing so we have 1 good point 2 oks. see why people are nervous?
Personally i believe origins actually dint give you any choices the game always fkowes the exact same with ot without your decision you always get your army and you always lead the army at th end they eld either becomes free and so on
Combat was definitely flawed in DAO, but i wouldn't say the whole designe wasn't any good. I know you didn't say that, but i also don't quite get what you were trying to say. I see the combat designe of DA1 and 2 as the same, it was just less polished in the first game. On the other hand, you had more individual spells and talents in Origins, but many had no impact or were bugged. But i certainly don't agree with your take on blood magic. It absolutely had an impact. Turning health into a resource, sustaining yourself by taking it from allies and getting access to the strongest crowd control spells. How is that not impactful? I think inquisition gameplay/combat was a step down, despite completing it to 95% on nightmare. I hated the fact that it was all about keeping your barrier/guard bar up. It was like playing a new expansion of world of warcraft where you'll never die as long as you stay within your questing/level range. I mostly played warrior, so i'll only talk about those experiences, but they were absolutely boring. Using abilities like charge or taunt to generate guard and not for utility was such a stupid idea. It felt like no matter what, those have to be on cooldown. Rolling into enemies to deal the best weapon damage was also complete bullshit. And once i got the Berserker spec, it literally removed the need to attack with a weapon, all i had to do was pressing dragon rage and devour to win. In Origins and DA2 i use utility talents for exactly that, utility. Having abilities that do multiple things can be nice, but if every single one of them is like that, it takes away the fun. Especially when it gets to the point where you literally become permanently invincible, without doing much to achieve that. I'm not a fan of the arcane warrior, but even that spec required gear and a setup which took a while to get to. The point is, the first 2 games had a good chunk of gameplay where you react to whatever the game throws at you, but in inquisition you only care about your guard/barrier. I hope veilguard is going to be good, but it's not looking good right now. If combat is ass, i'll not even care about anything else, i'll use the refund button immediately.
What I was trying to say is that while "good enough" I don't think that the combat in Origins was so successful and well done that committing hard to refining it for future games is valid either. Like I'm trying to justify their move away from that style of combat essentially. Especially moreso because for me I had more fun with combat with each new game, so IMO the move away from Origins combat got better and better. BG3 is still my favorite RPG and its combat is a big reason why but it seems to me Bioware just had more success chasing action RPG combat instead and their increased sales with each game seems to agree?? And while I did have the most fun with Inquisition I do think it centers its combat too heavily around barrier. When did you last play btw? I remember feeling like a god with my Knight Enchanter build as well and basically being unkillable, but Knight Enchanter was nerfed which made for a more challenging experience so I'm wondering if the same was true for Berserker.
@@minstora I bought the game back in 2015 for the ps4, around the time when Bloodborne came out. Back then, i was very exicted because i loved both previous games and played them a ton. I think you get access to specializations once you reach skyhold, so up to that point, warrior wasn't invincible, but still quite tanky. But yeah as soon as you were able to spec deeper into reaver, it changed the whole style of combat, which sounds awesome, but trust me after beating 2 dragons basically solo, it got old very fast. What pissed me off the most was that i wanted to play a hack and slashing kind of warrior with a big sword, not glowing claws that replace everything else.
@@kenzovich9225 Yeah I think when the option came to pick a specialization a little tutorial video shoulda popped up showing you potentially what all the of the classes LOOKED like in how they fight
@@minstora Oh, you're saying i wouldn't have had the same issue with other specs? I think i would have, because obviously i got to play those too through my companions. Knight Enchanter was also strong, but what made it strong was the new auto attack that generates barrier. If compare KE with the AW in origins, there was a lot more going on to become invincible. You had to offset the mana regeneration penalty with gear and despite being invincible, your damage output was garbage. This is my issue, in DAI any class turns into an arcane warrior with actual good damade, but what i enjoyed more was that you didn't in Origins and 2. Those games were about bringing a rogue to nuke dangerous targets, tanking and cleaving trash mobs with warrior and being a CC and support god as a mage. I wanted more of that, not everyone can do everything.
@@minstorai revisited Inquisition and i have to say that despite major flaws, it's still a great game. At the end of the day, if Veilguard improved on those, then i could definitely see it becoming the best in the series.
I personally believe Inquisition is the best 1 when you look at overall story and impact i really like rhe fisrt game but i dont think your decision has ant reall impact in rhat game
1. Veilguard isn't out yet: Here's a problem there are certain Origin fans who are just bashing the game, but there are fans on the opposite side who saying this looks like it the best game in the series and they are not accepting any form of criticism, while just throwing out lines "oh you're just a hater" or "you're not a real fan", or "you're wrong it's going to be game of the year" which is just as an unfair assessment to make when the game isn't out yet. 2. Combat Criticism: Yes we played the same game. 🤦♂ Does Origins have the most in depth strategy, no but it does have a level of tactics and strategy to it's combat, which at the time of release is what a lot of rpg fans wanted. To your point about getting to a certain point in your Warden's build and that your strategy is pretty much the same isn't 100% accurate, because a lot of the strategy is dependent on how you create your warden's build as well as your companions build. Yes if say you build your Warden just as a two handed sword warrior your warden's strategy will relatively be the same, but if you spec out in both two handed and sword and shield then that gives your warden more options on how you approach combat scenarios. The strategy is also dependent on which companions you bring with you. You are going to approach combat differently if you bring Wynne in your party as opposed to Morrigan, and you would have a different strategy for combat if you didn't bring a mage in your party at all. Yes by todays standards Origins isn't god tier but it isn't fair to hold it to today's standards because it's wasn't made with today's standards in mind because a lot of those standards didn't exist at Origins initial release. For people who refer to DA2 and Inquisition as button mashy, I would agree isn't an accurate statement, but I would say that Bioware/EA partially brought this on themselves due to how they marketed DA2 "you push a button and something awesome happens, you push another button and something else awesome happens." The more accurate way to refer to it would be simplified and consolefied combat. Yes I agree that none of the Dragon Age games have had amazing combat but I think most fans can agree that Origins is the one that has the most depth to it's combat and that's the biggest issue Origin fans have is the removal of that depth to the combat. 3. Companions Aren't Conventionally Attractive: This is an argument that people will argue about until they are blue in the face because yes beauty is subjective. Now this is going to come of as an bit of an assumption on my part but my issue with Neve has more to do with her personality. From some of the lines we have heard her say she kind of comes off as stuck up similar to Vivienne which is a personality trait I don't find attractive. Where I don't agree with you is I don't think that Harding with her more pronounced freckles is conventionally attractive because those real life models will have freckles removed in photoshop. 4. The Spirit of Dragon Age: Most of the complaints are directed at the first trailer which doesn't tonally doesn't match the spirit of Dragon Age's dark fantasy world. 5. The Sequels Aren't Dark and Gritty: I do agree that DA2 is quite dark and unnecessarily gets piled on probably due to the issues it does have. I feel for DA2 where the dark tone doesn't feel as good if you are playing solely as sarcastic Hawke because there are times where it just comes off as unrealistic or tonally off for Hawke to be either cracking jokes or being sarcastic in those dark moments. For Inquisition its definitely more High Fantasy than Dark Fantasy, with the brighter colour pallet, the main music theme gives off a more epic adventure vibe than it does dark fantasy, having a character like Sera and her personality feels tonally off for dark fantasy. Yes there are dark moments in Inquisition but don't occur as frequently as in the previous games because of how much busy work and fetch quests there are in between those moments. The other issue fans have is you can't be a blood mage and no matter how bad or evil you are certain companions in the Inquisition won't leave or try to kill you for making those evil decisions. 6. Too Much Diversity: I don't think people are looking at all characters just the companions and they are correct to say that the ratio of euro centric companions is higher in all other Dragon Age games and the ratio is lower when it comes to the Veil Guard companions. 7. The Old Companions Were Better: The characters from Origins are better. That's not to say they're aren't great characters that followed there definitely are but if you go and look at best Dragon Age companions most lists are going to have Alistair, Leliana, Morrigan, Shale, and Zevran in their top 10 and three of those are probably in the top 5. The only really one note character from Origins is Oghren since he was more their for comic relief and dog as well. I love to romance Cassandra as well but she's a stereotype, she's not the first female character that's tough on the exterior but a delicate flower on the inside.
Thanks for taking the time to comment and leaving such a detailed reply to the points in the video. I'll try to address your comment with equal level of thought and introspection. (Sorry for using caps so much, cant use italics on youtube comments.) 1. Not gonna address this much as the players you're hypothesizing about on the other side of the extreme don't describe me or the tone of my video as while yes, the pre-release material has successfully hyped me up for the game, I do believe what I stated in the video clears me of being in proximity to the kind of fans you're describing Because within the first few minutes I state: @2:57 "...the goal of this video isn't to say that Veilguard is going to be fantastic, a for sure 10/10 and that it's a game beyond critique and that if you dislike it, you're bad or wrong or whatever, in fact towards the end of this video I'm gonna get into my own critiques surrounding what we've seen of Veilguard so far, some of which many of you may also agree with. No, instead the goal is to simply point out some of the flaws in commonly voiced critcisms and to reiterate that we should wait until the game releases and play it ourselves before passing some of these wide sweeping judgements..." Extremes on both sides are bad and I believe that not allowing any criticism for Veilguard only serves to make it a worse game at launch and as it inevitably gets updates and patches. I hope the game is good, but I'm not saying it already is good as we have to get the game in our hands first. 2. The first few sentences pretty much cover what I meant when I said the combat is good enough as I'm not really comparing it to modern games. I said I had more fun with combat in 2 than I did Origins, and I'm comparing it further by saying it's more difficult and I had to pause it more times. 2 by the way I described it has better combat the one (low difficulty, same approach to each encounter, lack of weight, several reasons) 2 came out only a year and half later than Origins so by no means am I using modern games as a measure. I'm comparing it within it's own series. Inquisition came out 10 years ago btw and 5 years apart from Origins, so again the comparisons hold up and there is no modern Dragon Age game until Veilguard releases. I understand that you CAN have several approaches to combat, but what I'm saying is the game doesn't necessarily incentivize you to. And yes, the game will play differently if you have different party members but that doesn't refute the sameness of lack of variety in combat. It's just that if you roll with the same party throughout most of the game (which most people do. The Dragon Age subreddit asks this question and most people do play with the same party throughout a playthrough save for bringing certain companions on certain missions that it seems important for them to be there which I also do) then combat isn't gonna change much. Yes it could be in theory, but in practice no. I disagree with you on Origins having the most depth but perhaps we may have to agree to disagree. As I said in 2 I paused more, died more, and overall had to THINK my way through encounters more. The same applies with Inquisition (which now isn't unfair to bring up since we are talking about most depth a combat has in the series) and then some as it's actually the first game in the series where I had to actually switch to other party members pretty often (to drink potions but also for like for brief moments at a time to use certain key abilities) particularly in bosses or when fighting dragons, but still it's more than Origins ever put me through. And for one more thing on this subject let me offer an anecdote: as I said in the video I've been getting my wife into the game, and she VERY early on, like ever since post Lothering has been using almost the exact same rotation and tactics in combat pending new abilities as she levels. And by this point in the game she has about 8-ish or more spells iirc. I didn't even tell her to, it's just something she naturally did as the game does not incentivize, or reward her for doing otherwise, nor does it punish her for continuing to do so. Again we may not be able to come to an agreement on this one, but I state my case, nonetheless. 3. @ 14:45 "I understand why having romance options you aren't attracted to in a game like this would suck, I can sympathize with that. As romance options are something I enjoy a lot in RPGs myself, so if you genuinely don't find em attractive that is a bummer and is definitely subjective. But. to call them not conventionally attractive is just outright wrong." I'm not trying to argue that the companions are undeniably INDIVIDUALLY attractive to each player as that'd be impossible. I state and agree with you that attraction is subjective. I'm not gonna dispute with you on the stuff you mention about Neve because those are subjective traits that comprise how you personally feel about her so far, pre-release. This section of the video argues instead that denying these characters are CONVENTIONALLY attractive is wrong objectively and I use that point to highlight how the "Origins fans" I refer to in this video use misremembered or outright wrong info when making these points that don't hold up. What we colloquially define as conventional attractiveness are set features that can't be refuted and can be pointed to and recognized based on eyesight or feel such as again: the sharp cheekbones or angled jawlines/facial structure, some other words besides captivating for eyes could be: piercing, vivid, or deep-set/wide-set, flawless eyebrows in terms of arch, shape, and grooming, and the full lip volume. If a person has some or many of those traits, colloquially they would be considered and defined as conventionally attractive just perhaps not considered attractive to a specific individual based on their own judgement and what they look for in a person. When I google: "redhead women with freckles instagram model" I come across some with VERY high follower counts and lots of interaction and they do not photoshop their freckles. I think another aspect of conventional attractiveness is popularity, or perhaps an ability to monetize the look, which those women do (as they should, use what ya got I say). 4. I agree, the first trailer they chose was a massive mistake, they should have led with the release date trailer, perhaps without the release date, if it wasn't ready to show back around the time we got the first trailer. 5. I'm glad we agree on 2! However as for what you said about sarcastic Hawke, there are plenty of times in Origins where you could also choose to say something witty, sarcastic, or funny, out of place in a very serious moment. So if its a players choice then I don't necessarily think it refutes something ya know? But, for Inquisition I'll point to what I said @ 20:07 "Just because the art style is stylized and brighter in some areas it doesn't mean that the games themselves aren't dark in theme and plot." regarding what you said about it's brighter color pallet and music choice I also don't think you pointing to Sera checks out for not vibing with a dark fantasy and she is similarly unserious and jokey as Alistair, there's several compilations minutes long of him refusing to take almost anything seriously lol and, that's why we love him, and why some people love Sera. I'd argue that the dark moments and calls to dark or gritty themes are about equal in amount, but you are right in that it doesn't feel as such because of Inquisition's poor use of open world busy work (which I also call out in this video btw). Either way it'd take both of us a lot of time and cooperation to put an exact number in terms of "how much darkness" is in one game as opposed to the other like do we measure it based on screentime that stuff appears in hours, minutes, and seconds. I for sure ain't doing that lol. I imagine the whole not being able to be a blood mage in every game thing derives from the devs not wanting to have the same specializations in every game as it's more fun to come up with new exciting specializations from a developmental standpoint? I have no way of knowing that for sure, but if blood mage was a spec in every game I could see people getting just as tired of it and asking for something new. Although we do have templar in like every game, but finally it won't be appearing in Veilguard, still I'd personally be down for blood mage in every game as I love the specialization but thats a personal preference what can ya do. To your last point about companions not leaving you regardless of how evil you are or how much bad you do, I'd say that maybe the companions decide to stick with you in Inquisition no matter what because still the Inquisition is setting out to save the world and regardless of how you set about achieving that as the Inquisitor they see it as worth it to stick around and help? Idk I think it would be cool if you could make them angry enough to leave, but I understand why given the plot and set up of the game maybe they don't. It was cool to be able to miss out or have companions leave you in BG3. 1/2
6. Erasure in this social context refers to "the practice of collective indifference that renders certain people and groups invisible" or acts that make such a practice more likely, for example: casting Scarlett Johanson as a character is canonically meant to be Japanese. And considering what you state about well the ratio of Eurocentric characters being higher in previous game, less does not constitute erasure necessarily ESPECIALLY when they still almost hold the majority (Neve, Harding, and Lucanis, if we are talking just companions you can have in your party). However, I still think for this talking point it's fair to include characters like Solas, Varric and Morrigan as given their importance they are going to be around VERY much and still a part of your group that sets out to save the world given what we were told in interviews, so we will interact with them very often. Essentially if having a few less party members that may resemble people of my ethnicity means there's a chance someone else gets a companion that potentially represents someone that resembles people of their ethnicity and that makes them happy? Well I'm happy for them. 7. As I stated in this section of the video, this point is much more subjective than others. So I won't argue with you on you thinking they're better, I'll only say that you saying simply that: "The characters from Origins are better" doesn't serve this conversation much as hey you think they're better and I don't think of them as necessarily higher quality than the other ensembles, or that they exhibit heart, wit, and depth that the other ensembles don't. As far as those list, I find and it's a common sentiment in the community that your first Dragon Age game typically tends to be what resonates with you most, and most people's top 10 or top 5 list of companions will reflect that and hey it can't be helped. Even mine might? Idk. Even the whole one note thing is hard to argue as that's how they seem to me given that I've beaten this game recently again within the past month so they're still very fresh in my head. Also I never said Cassandra was the first character to be tough on the exterior but a softie on the inside, it's just that's what I chose to use as an example of her having heart, wit, and depth. And, that I personally like how that cliche was executed with her character, writing, and voice acting. Cliches are used widely for a reason: they work. They are popular, but what makes them bad is if they are utilized or written/disguised well. Anyways those are just my takes on what you've written for me. I thank you again for taking out the time to write such a length response as it shows that you've at least watched my video to more completion than most who leave comments in disagreement. You're welcome to leave another round of back and forths, but this reply took more time than I'd thought to get back to you so I don't think I'd be replying in such a capacity again if you chose to do so lol, at least not in the method of youtube comment lol, I'm sure you understand. Take care! - Minstora 2/2
@@minstora Thanks for your response back. (I too wish that we could use Italics in the comments section) 1. Dude you didn't have to type out your goal for the video, the main reason I watched your video to the end was because you said "the goal of this video isn't to say that Veilguard is going to be fantastic, a for sure 10/10 and that it's a game beyond critique" which was appreciated. My point was that not you specifically but there are a section of the fan base who think the game is already a 10 and game of the year when the game isn't even out yet. I just personally feel these fans should be called out just as much as the fans hating on Veil Guard with no constructive criticism. 2. Okay good to hear you weren't comparing Origins to modern games, but feel there are section of fans who are doing that or like @ajdove1823 have a certain expectation on how a older game should run on a modern PC. I think Origins does incentivize players to create different builds due to the fact that it gives you a secondary weapon slot. Now does the game reward you for doing so no, but it's a slight encouragement or little nudge to do so. I agree that DA2's combat has more impact than Origins but I think some of the problems that people have with Origins combat comes from how they approached combat. I feel that some players who didn't enjoy Origins combat were trying to approach it like an ARPG as apposed to a CRPG not saying you approached then game that way but I feel some did. Which was more my point that Origins has more depth to its combat due to the depth of the tactics system. I agree that the animation of your attacks can have a feeling of sameness but splitting your combat skills between to different skill trees helps alleviate some of the sameness feeling. We're the opposite when it comes to Origins and DA2. I feel DA2 is a breeze to get through combat wise except for some of the boss fights. I pause way more in Origins than DA2 and Inquisition. Though with Origins it's probably partially how I approach the combat personally. I approach Origins like I do Xcom. I literally talk to my screen and the characters like they can hear me for Xcom it's "Soldiers! It doesn't matter if we take all the aliens out! If we lose one man or woman we have failed", with Origins its "Alistair, if I have to use one injury kit on you, I'll leave you in camp for the rest of the journey and I'll make Loghain a Grey Warden." So I'm a very micro manager when it comes to Origins more so than I am for DA2 and Inquisition. 3. Again people can argue till their blue in the face about beauty. Again I did admit with Neve it's an assumption on my point from what we have heard, just for me someone who has an ugly personality I find it very difficult then to see their physical attractiveness. For the girls on instagram if they aren't photoshopping out their freckles and doing well then good for them but I don't think them being able to monetize their look means they are conventionally attractive it could just mean that the people who are supporting them find them subjectively attractive. If one of those instagram models were to become an actress and well known then they get the opportunity for a photoshoot for a magazine like Vogue or something similar there freckles would be photoshoped out because freckles aren't considered conventionally attractive. 4. Yes you can be sarcastic in Origins in those dark moments but it comes off as more out of place in DA2 because Hawke is voiced and comes off as more out of place at times depending how the line of dialogue was delivered. When it comes to Alistair yeah there was a lot of things he didn't take seriously but he could be serious, like if you talked babdly about Duncan, or he'd be serious about the decision you'd make around Connor, where Sera I don't think has a serious bone in her body, she's just way too over the top for a dark fantasy story. Again for Inquisition I'm not saying there are not dark moments and themes in it, I feel fans biggest issue with Inquisition and Veil Guard is the lack of consistency in the visual dark tone. For example if Peter Jackson designed Minas Tirith with a bunch of neon lights and a brighter and wider colour pallet, that wouldn't match the visual tone of the previous films. That's how I think fans feel about Veil Guard and Inquisition the visual tone doesn't match the previous games and lack a consistent dark fantasy grit that Origins and DA2 have. When it come to blood magic for Veil Guard, Patrick Weekes said they didn't want Rook to be able to do the nasty stuff you could do with blood magic, which upset a lot of fans who like to roleplay as an evil character or roleplay as a flawed hero. 5. I think Veil Guard at least matches the part of your definition where "acts that make such a practice more likely" when it comes to caucasian characters compared to the previous games. Origins (Alistair, Leliana, Morrigan, Ogrhen, Wynne, and Loghain), DA2 (Carver, Bethany, Aveline, Varric, Anders, Merrill, Fenris, and Sebastian), Inquisition (Sera, Cassandra, Varric, Solas, Blackwall, and Cole), and Veil Guard (Scout Harding and Emmrich). Also I think people who have brought up erasure are also referring to the sexual orientation of the companions which is why I don't think it's fair to bring up Varric, Solas, and Morrigan since they most likely won't be romanceable in Veil Guard. I personally think that making all the companions pan is a form of erasure of sexual identity is it not? 6. I agree that the preferred companions is subjective but instead of a ranked list lets call a pyramid tier list then I think you could agree that most fans would have Morrigan, Leliana, and Alistair in the top tier and I think Bioware feels the same particularly because they seem to use Morrigan as the face of the franchise (except for DA2 but that's okay because Kate Mulgrew was great as Flemeth).
That's a fair critique and something I should keep in mind for next video regarding those overly positive fans too, I could have made it a point to call them out in the video as well. I'm also committed to policing my comments against any hostility from that group of fans just like I am from the group this video is about.
Yeah, I feel the exact same way, Inquisition feels much better as a ranged character, but it's absolute pain if you're melee. I'd much rather have either DA:O or DA 2, but leaning towards 2. I feel like the new combat we've seen is way more like what DA 2 could have been if they had time to fully develop it, and especially after what they learned designing systems across three Mass Effect games, so I am genuinely excited to play it and experiment with some builds like I did in Andromeda. :)
while dragon age might still be gritty and dark it lacks moral complexity of origins and 2 where facing such great odds necessitates or justifies reprehensible deeds for greater good, so while its still dark and gritty (atleast up to inquisition) it points those as clearly in the morally wrong whitout player input making inquisition shallower and watered down game Secondly even if origins lacks in encounter design where to use tactical tools or fully equitable and controllable party its still objectivly best from tactical standpoint.
First game: Breadth and depth of role-playing options, classic tactical slow-paced gameplay, grounded yet vibrant visual style, complex and interesting moral dilemas, developed and well-explored themes. - I will skip DA2, because it would be unfair, rather compare to actually solid third game Third game: Limited role-playing options, NO ORIGINS SYSTEM??? a more modern and streamlined twist on the classic gameplay with some interesting additions, a more vibrant and "modern" visual style, but still somewhat grounded, there is literally zero complex dilemmas and while the game seemingly presents some "hard" choices they are all shallow or present no real ethical conflicts, underdeveloped story and messy underexplored themes, although what the game seemingly set out to explore was definitly interesting. 4th game so far: Same old limited role-playing options, NO ORIGINS SYSTEM ONCE AGAIN??? although you can choose factions that's something, big shift in gameplay which is now a kitchen sink attempt at emulating other action-RPG titles, big shift in visual design and style now takes a far more stylized approach and while appealing looking, at least to me it seems rather bland ( Check out the game "Flintlock" it looks almost identical to DAVe), too early to say anything about the story, but some commentary from the devs and gameplay suggest that your role-playing will be even more limited than in DAI. One of the devs said that they don't want PCs to use blood magic, because you are heroes and that's just not what heroes do. An approach you can take, but it's still limiting. So as you can see there is a huge difference and an obvious trend of changes in the series. A desire to streamline the series and appeal to mass audience. The 4th game literally switched genre from RPG to action-RPG. With so many things that they have changed it is no wonder fans of older games don't like the new one. The game might not be bad at all, but fans of old games are totally right when they say "it's not Dragon Age", because they got invested into one thing, only for that thing to become something different. It's not Dragon Age TO THEM. Facts aside, opinion: combat looks extremely boring to me, if that's your vibe that is cool, but this is just the same thing all the modern action-RPG have done a thousand times, as I said it's a kitchen sink of stuff from other games. Visually it looks nice for what it is ... And what it is, is extremely generic modern fantasy design. Honestly, If I didn't know any better, I'd think it was AI generated, but I know that it's not! This is a game made by committee and it shows. But even with all that said, I think it's probably gonna be fine. Not as good as DAI, but not as bad as DA2. Hell, I even liked DA2 despite hating every second of gameplay. Companions feel uninspired for the most part, only Neve seems interesting to me so far, Harding maybe. Otherwise, they seem to be stereotypes, It feels like I have seen them all in those MCU films or something, I don't need to hear them speak, I can already hear their voices and lines playing out in my head.
I'll go from top to bottom. Yes Origins has a load of great options in role play that do feel like they matter. When I said combat isn't why the game was phenomenal, that is part of the reason why. Not the tons of role-playing options in terms of building a character combat wise I feel like doesn't matter as much because again, combat is severely undercooked in Origins, but outside of combat, yes the options are stellar. Tactical gameplay where? Said tactics go out of the window once you're in your 50th combat, with the same enemies that they themselves haven't changed what they do in combat, as you yourself use the exact same talents, in the exact same rotation. The art style was grounded, absolutely and its part of the games charm, however: vibrant? Absolutely not 😂. Vibrant meaning: full of energy and enthusiasm or of color, bright and striking? You'll have to miss me with that one friend haha. I feel confident in saying as such in big part because I completed the game again last month on nightmare, but your comment reinforces for me that far too many Origins fans too fondly misremember the game. I'm not trying to come off as rude, but myself as well as many others struggle to understand what game you're talking about, because if it's Origins, it doesn't exist as you describe it. If you actually watched the entire video (maybe ya did), you'd see that I lead to several examples where both 2 and Inquisition in fact DO have complex moral dilemmas, and well explored themes. You can't just say: "nuh uh" when several examples are provided 😅. I mean you can, but it doesn't help your case lol. At it's core Inquisition deals with the Mage vs Templar threat while exploring things of freedom of an oppressed group, with said group being a massive danger, nonetheless. It CONSTANTLY challenges the notion of should mages truly be free, while shoving multiple examples in our faces of mages doing awful things, but the challenge is do we judge all mages with that brush? While at the same time, showing us an awful side to templars we haven't seen yet. (They knew this WHOLE TIME how to reverse tranquility?) Even whole characters are dedicated to this in your party, as while the notion that mages should just be free like everyone else is common (I myself am in that camp), Vivienne will constantly challenge that position. It also is awesome in how it shoes the darkness of organized religion, particularly the Chantry. We get to see all these awful things they do behind the scenes (we've been seeing them, but it continues in Inq.) Lelianna as a spymaster gets into some dark shit, the templars again, and the lies that they've sold to the entirety of Thedas? "Beg that I succeed. For I have seen the Throne of the Gods, and it was empty!" - Corypheus. And you the Inquisitor are the "Herald of Andraste" selling people a comfortable lie to unite them against a foe much too important to let religious division get in the way of. Where are these shallow choices? We gotta pick the divine, decide the fates of several people upon a throne as essentially their judge, jury, and executioner (similar to how we did in Awakening), we pick who to allow more power amongst two imperfect groups being the mages and templars, we condemn a hero either Stroud, Hawke, or Loghain to their death in the fade. Like I said dude there's so many examples haha. Now of course there ARE themes that Origins no doubt explores better. While we got tons of Elf stuff in Inquisition, I feel like Origins due to spending time in alienages and just seeing more of the poor treatment of mages there versus inquisition. It explores their oppression much better in that game and it's somewhere I wished Inquisition was better for sure. I mean Origins is the first games namesake, so while I also am bummed that we didn't get an Origins system in 2 or Inquisition, I can see them not including it in every game, even if I myself personally think it could work and would be a good idea. What I'm not okay with is like you said just an almost COMPLETE omission of determining who your character was prior to the game... HOWEVER Baldur's Gate 3 is my favorite game of all time, and a considered a phenomenal RPG far and wide it also does not have something close to the Origin system. Essentially only background and class choices matter in that regard, BUT both BG3 and Inquisition do give you the option a bit, to determine who your character was prior to the games events via choices you make in dialogue when talking to people. Origins did the same thing when giving you the chance to talk about your mom with Morrigan iirc. So while I wish all the games had an Origins system, I'd argue an RPG, even a Dragon Age game doesn't need one to be.. AND Veilguard at least is better than it's predecessor in that regard, since we have a faction system in character creation that determines what our character was all about and what kinda shenanigans they got into prior to Veilguard's events. It's not perfect, and doesn't compare to the Origins system, BUT it is at least seemingly on par with BG3 (and by extention DnDs) background system. That being it'll be brought up in dialogue apparently and will allow you to interact with the world in meaningful ways (hopefully BioWare delivers on that promise as we don't have the game yet.) My whole point behind all of this, was to point out that there is more similarities in quality than old fans may at first realized, and when combined with what I feel is a misremembering of Origins, leads me to urge fans to replay all of these games if they can because the whole it's not the same Dragon Age really holds up (at least to me after a LOT of examination, because as a content creator I've spent way too many hours analyzing all of this stuff) in the gameplay department because they play differently. The combat of Veilguard kinda just comes across as an advancement of Inquisition, technically still 6 abilities if you count runes and just a closer camera, leading to feeling like a combo of DA and ME. By you proclaiming oh it'll probably end up being somewhere between 2 and DAI, you've already judged how the game will be in your hands. We've seen 40 minutes of gameplay of a MULTI hour RPG so getting that close to deciding how the game will be is insane to me. It is fine to say a game is not for you, I'm not saying you have to like it. I'm saying many of the reasons you and others presented, don't qualify for calling it BAD when it isn't even here yet. Even for all of my hype across all my videos I've said many times that we will still have to wait and see when it comes to this game. Like you're full on judging companions you haven't heard deliver more than a line or two, such as Lucanis, Emmrich, and Bellara? MCU characters? We know damn near nothing about those characters 😂. And if anything Origins companions are WAY more closer to stereotypical characters. Lelianna presents as the typical oblivious religious stereotype, Alistair is your textbook jokester, Wynne is your wizened mage, Zevran is your overly promiscuous Rogue. Like come on? Obviously they get deeper than that as companions, but on the surface level those companions present as stereotypes? That same surface level that YOU are using to judge Veilguards companions? Like idk what else to tell you dude.
@@minstora PART 2: DAO thematically delves extremely deeply into the topic of war, sacrifices, and compromises people have to make to win or even just survive these wars. The duplicitous nature of human beings, it's good vs greater good and what is the best example of that if not the Grey Wardens and their order? I mean, I can go on about this for ages, but it's not just the themes that the game explores, but how almost every interaction, every quest and every dialogue plays into those themes. It's extremely well-done. I think DAI being my 2nd favorite DA game, had a lot of potential with it's religious themes, but I feel like they got sabotages with all the shallow side content and new "gameplay features" like war table and stuff. I don't know, I just didn't feel like DAI had such a strong thematic throughline as DAO did, but it definitly had potential and some good moments. It's close, maybe even on par, but the hassle of all the side content and war table takes away from the experience IMO. These ofc not the only themes the game tackles, but I feel like these are the main ones. Obviously there are strong themes of faith in the game too, but most of them are there to compliment and explore what I mentioned above. Why I am so obsessed with Origins system is because literally no one else does it, it's an amazing feature and people often forget that in Origins your story was woven into the main plot of the game, some Origins were more involved than other, obviously human noble get's the most out of his Origin, but it's just so rewarding to be a person that actually exists in the world, whom people know and have a place that you can call home, it's like your character is actually part of the world and not some blank slate. It's an amazing system, unique to Dragon Age and I am baffled as to WHY you would not include it in the game? As much as I enjoyed BG3, the blank slate protagonist was not doing it for me, I played Dark Urge and it worked for all the same reasons I mentioned above. Like, people say BioWare is afraid to compete with BG3 and it's understandable, but this is one area where you can really stand out lmao. I am glad to see they at least allow us to choose a faction, but something tells that outside of some unique dialogue, equipment etc. we won't get much else and while that's something, it's definitly not even close to the Origins in Origins where you almost had your personal quest on par with companions unless you were a mage. The only place where mage's actually suck compared to the rest ... I feel like Dragon Age fans are not very demanding, you as a customer have a right to expect more and demand more specially from BioWare a supposed RPG pioneer with one of the biggest publishers behind them, I am really tired of hearing "Oh, it's okay if there are LITERALLY NO MECHANICS OR GAMEPLAY OR NOTHING IN THEGAME, I will buy it ...". An exaggeration, but you get my point.
@@minstora ENDINGS SLIDES: idk, combat in Veilguard looks more akin to Hogwarts Legacy, latest AC games etc. It has some similarities to DAI, but only because DAI already was trying to mimic Witcher and that AAA action-RPG open-world style of gameplay. All these AAA titles are the same. They even visually look the same, just google the UI and character stat screen ... Shame I can't share screenshots. It's just a shame that instead of doing something unique, taking risks or expanding, instead of changing previous mechanics, they chose a safe option of AAA action-RPG bog standard gameplay. But I guess BioWare can't allow to take any more risks theses days, because of their past failures with Anthem and Andromeda. In conclusion, I would like to point out that in the last part of my post I mention how it's just my opinion, It is totally valid for me to make an assessment of the game before it comes out based on what I have seen and the information available. When the game comes out, I will play it and change my opinion if it manages to sway me. It's a pretty simple concept. It's also very ironic how people have no problem glazing and hyping the game up before it comes out, saying that it's GOTY, but if you are critical or don't like what you see "You gotta play the game! Wait till it comes out!". I can already see that I dislike this style of combat, I don't need to play it to know that, because I already played it in other games, I don't like the visuals and how overwhelming and saturated they are, neither do I like the overall visual design - I don't need to play the game to make these judgments, especially the ones about visual style. Again ... This is based on what I have seen and what has been shown so far. Information updates? Opinion updates. It's really that simple. Coming back to my main point, the series has changed A LOT, wether for better or worse I'd say it's MOSTLY subjective. And because it's mostly subjective it's totally valid when DAO fans say "This is not Dragon Age", because ... Yeah, it's not Dragon Age FOR THEM. If you order a chicken soup, you don't expect to get sushi, it's understandable people are upset after waiting for the soup for so long only to find out it's not on the menu anymore. BioWare decided to shift to a different genre, different type of gameplay, different audience, that's well within their right, just as it's well within players right to voice their opinions. You are simply wrong about DAO fans being wrong and why they are wrong. Because they are not wrong, a subjective taste and preference cannot be wrong. ... Unless you are a DAVe fan, than you are objectively incorrect about everything, because uh ... All those purple lights must've damaged your brain. This will be my video: "Dragon Age 4 fans ARE WRONG!!! They are literally BRAINDAMAGED by purple light!" lmao.
The main reason they are doing this is the Success of BG3 & wish they had that in Bioware Games. Like a Guy that made Fallout New Vegas & Iceandell could not make a Game in todays world. Because both todays players & old fans screaming at rhe improvements of the Games. Like they say you can't go home again.
Keep deleting comments, that argue your points. That's not creating an echo chamber at all. I personally can't wait for this game to release and actually see how it compares against Black Myth Wukong number wise.
I left a 12000 character rebuttal to someone who politely attempted to refute the points my video made so you have no idea what you're talking about. I welcome discussion and even enjoy sharing of opinions as long as it's done cordially between all parties, but if someone's a jerk, I'm simply gonna block them from channel as I don't have the time to care dealing with them 😂
No one is ever going to compare to the numbers of a game that is released and promoted in China as opposed to all the games that the government over there just bans. Black Myth Wukong seems like its a perfectly good game, but there are a ton of gacha mobile games coming out of China that do far better numbers than anything you'll ever see anywhere else, including the most beloved games of all time. If you want to argue popularity over quality, feel free, but then that means you also probably have to argue for Taylor Swift (nothing wrong with that) and admit that Minecraft is way better than Black Myth Wukong (also, valid).
To me baldergate 3 character are very empty and boring also the comabt of that game made me hate it I can't stand turb base combat it so unrealistic to me i hate it
uh no you are wrong.The sequels ranged from so so to just bad. Really bad. You are just showing you are fanboy by claiming otherwise. DA2 was made in 2 years. You can't make a good rpg in just 2 years. Inquisition the game we got was a severely cut down version of what director Mike Laidlaw tried to make. The frostbite 3 engine caused a lot of their work to just not work and so he salvaged the game as best he could. Similar problems with frostbite 3 caused Anthem to outright fail. So if you did not know this you did not do your homework and just relied on your gut feelings for the series.
How am I a fanboy if I say Origins is my favorite in the series? 🤣 I'm aware DA2 was rushed I say as such here, but after recently replaying it, even I admit I was wrong about the game and it was better than I remember. Not amazing ofc but definitely much better. I'm aware of Frostbite 3s shortcomings but what does that have to do with this video? I'm not arguing that these games are perfect, I admit to them all having flaws so I don't understand. The game is still quite enjoyable even with the engines flaws, BUT they do still cause some hiccups, doesn't mean a great game isn't there to be had underneath. Your name fits in that it seems you're just angry 😅
so after watching i heard mostly strawman arguments in favor of the newer games and subjective opinions ... i mean just because you didnt use the companion control, it doesnt mean others didnt use it much... and on the woke part, it does get woke, but atleast in the last 2 games it were acceptable, because not every fkin char is pansexual or shit like that , now in veilguard nobody got preferences and most likely will be f...able after 3 charming words... Gameplay in the veilguard just looks big time boring and designed for a smartphone ... probably the reason why you only get 3 spells
@@xheroexskiller ... Did you even play DA2?? Like seriously? All companions are Player Sexual in DA2 the EXACT SAME as DAV will be. Swing and a miss with that one. Also, Zevran and Liliana are Bisexual in DAO. So, wanna try again?? BioWare games have always been "woke", you lot just haven't been paying attention before now.
Just FYI I've already had to delete comments and block people.
Like I said I don't tolerate hate on my platform, y'all can disagree but don't attack each other personally.
That goes for if you're an Origins fan OR someone who thinks Veilguard is immune to criticism I'll come after ya both 😂
Keep it civil please!
Okay, as an "Origins fan", let me address your combat point very quickly, because I think this needs to be said, and it is one of my two real criticisms so far. Yes, Origins combat was clunky, unpolished, and very narrowly focused in the late game. But, it was tactical, new, and gave a wide variety of options for your party. The problem is that instead of improving and iterating on this system, they completely abandoned it in 2, and gave us an in between for Inquisition.
For comparison, let us look at another franchise they own, Mass Effect. Combat in ME was slow, buggy, tedious, and often unpolished. But this combat system was drastically improved in ME2, my favorite in the trilogy storywise. But ME3 had a very streamlined, polished, and worthy upgrade the the ME qnd ME2 combat systems. Personally, that was my favorite in terms of gameplay. They didn't fundamentally change the system. They improved and interated on it with each new installment.
Dragon Age has abandoned their groundbreaking combat system completely in favor of going for a more ME style of gameplay. Fans have been asking for a return and improvement on THAT system since the series began. We have told them what we wanted for years, and BIOWARE has completely ignored us, or remained completely out of touch with their fanbase.
If you want to see the success of companies that iterate on their gameplay instead of changing it completely, look no further than Larian Studios and From Software. I've been with them since the beginning. They have the same basic mechanics with every game. They just polish the gamplay and add new features to it, and they are now outshining even AAA studios.
@@zachariahmousa7652 I think this is a revisionist understanding of both DA:O and Mass Effect combat. Mass Effect combat before LE meant that aiming down sights didn't matter nearly as much as your weapon stats, and you'd get misses based on that instead of your point investments. Future titles completely undid that and moved from a stat based loot collector and went straight into a skill based cover shooter. That was a huge difference, and not one that every fan loved, but I, and a majority of Mass Effect fans, really felt that it brought Mass Effect from being a really good game to an amazing and legendary game. It's no accident that LE changed the original Mass Effect to more closely resemble its sequels. Acting like they made a slight iteration to combat between ME 1 and ME 2 feels incorrect to me.
As for Dragon Age, it has ALWAYS been real time with pause combat. Most of the behavior and tactics systems you have in DA:O are only there because the AI couldn't be trusted to keep themselves alive or target the correct enemies without some player intervention, especially on harder difficulties. Even then, you have to micro a decent amount with health potions just to make sure that works, and sometimes you'll need to move a ranged character out of melee. Controlling other characters wasn't a big feature like it is in BG3 or actual turn based systems, it was just a necessity because the AI wasn't consistent, even with behavior menus. It's ironic that you have asked that Dragon Age just iterate on DA:O systems because guess what...Veilguard is still real time with pause, just like every other game in the series, it has just been updated to make it more player centric, and to include more active elements (different attacks, dodge/parry mechanics, etc) as opposed to holding down a button for autoattacks or just autoattacking. They've given you exactly what you asked for, but what you've really wanted is for them to scrap real time with pause and go to turn based.
@@proteuswest1084
I didn't want turn based combat for Dragon Age. I, like most fans, wanted something similar to FF 11, but more control. That was the direction everyone envisioned for the series after DAO. The big problem with not having full control of a squad is NPC AI is awful. They make counter intuitive decisions, move into dangerous situations that will get them killed, or force you to compensate for their lackluster performance.
If a bow using NPC is in melee combat range instead of having higher ground, at a distance, or is drawing too much aggro from your tank, that is a fundamentally bad NPC AI. A pause menu alone does not fix that issue. In this new game, you can't even direct them to hold positions, such as choke points, high ledges, or within range to take advantage of passive area buffs.
And now, you can't even customize their tactics to compensate for bad AI. This is the core of the complaints regarding combat. Bioware has taken away so much control from the players, it does not even closely resemble what fans have been asking for. I get that they want to appeal to a broader audience. But in so doing, they are losing a core portion of what made Dragon Age special in the first place.
As for your point regarding Mass Effect, put a video of all three games combat loops together and compare them. They only polished, refined, and added to the system with each installment. Mass effect was clunky, tedious because of the overheating, bad hit boxes, and a terrible ADS. ME2 is the same kind of combat, but much smoother, more refined, and has much tighter hitboxes. The lack of overheating doesn't ruin the pacing of the combat loops anymore.
ME3 iterated even further removing stamina all together, adding in biotic combos, and further refining the gunplay. The core combat loop was never completely replaced. It was simply improved upon.
@@zachariahmousa7652 It feels like you mostly agreed with my points about what makes a game difficult but ignored the fact that all your biggest complaints about bad AI are largely present in Origins. I always had to move my mages and bow users out of melee range, even with Ranged behavior sets, I often had to adjust my tank's positioning, I often had to manually make them take potions because it was easy to cause conflicts with the behavior system. The only behaviors that seemed to work really well in DA:O were the targeting ones, but a lot of the rest were bugged or unreliable. Manual tactical control wasn't so much a feature, it was, like you said, a way to mitigate bad companion AI. That stuff felt better in DA 2, but that was because the system was a lot more streamlined.
That being said, the AI in Mass Effect, especially in later games, is a lot more helpful and useful, and your ability to direct their actions during the trilogy was all I ever needed to get fun combat. I felt like my teammates were helpful and even though they'd sometimes run out and get slapped, I also felt like my own play mattered. I definitely missed that element in Andromeda, but there was a lot more I could do with my builds and my own character there, so I still liked the combat better than any other game in the series. I trust that the AI in Veilguard is probably going to be similar to later Mass Effect games, and not like it was in ME 1 or DA:O.
Veilguard looks to me like they allow manual control like ME 2 and 3 while also adding some build diversity like in Andromeda. We will see when we play the game how that functions but I am very encouraged with their design decisions and also how people who have played the game and provided feedback to BioWare are talking about it. Some of those people are primarily narrative players who only do easy difficulty, and they're talking about building Rooks and doing playthroughs based on builds rather than just narrative elements. For those of us who feel the gameplay is important, that should be a huge reason to be encouraged.
And again, what you call bad hit boxes weren't bad hit boxes in the original Mass Effect. It was low point investment with the weapons and enforced misses in an RPG system. Your projectiles didn't go flying off into Narnia because of a bug; the game was forcing those misses because you didn't put enough points into the weapons to increase the percentages. This isn't present in LE, only in the original version of the game. That issue becomes less apparent since people often leveled their favorite weapons early on, but it's very present for several levels if you focus conversation skills or electronic/decryption skills instead of relying on companions. They completely scrapped that RNG in future titles and then iterated from there, so even if the outward look is the same, the way they do inventory management, loot collection, and shooting mechanics are completely different from ME 1 to the other games in the trilogy.
The main difference between Dragon Age and Mass Effect is that Mass Effect iterated mostly in a single direction, while Dragon Age made concessions in Inquisition to people who complained about the differences in Origins, and ended up with combat that is probably the worst in the series, especially if you're trying to manually control a melee character. Also, that tactical camera they added back in that 99 percent of players didn't use (and only used to look at resistances when they did) meant that the designers pretty much had to make sure that almost every fight took place outside unless that cave had really high ceilings.
@@proteuswest1084
I know Origins combat is far perfect, but the core of my argument is that all of the flaws in the Origins combat system could have been refined, improved, added to, and fixed had they just stuck with it. Instead, not one Dragon Age game has had a consistent combat style. Every one of them has been different. Even the leveling system has been different. These are not issues their other franchises have had.
Mass Effect combat and leveling is basically the same, just drastically better and more competently implemented with each installment. They removed what didn't work, and added new features that did. Dragon Age is the complete opposite. It is like every game is a damn experiment. Don't get me wrong, they are all good in their own ways, but there is no consistency in combat, which is literally almost 40 to 50 percent of the games. This is not something a series should be known for.
Dragon Age Origins = Assign targets and positions, and activate abilities from there. Repeat for squad
Dragon Age 2 = press the attack button repeatedly for basic attacks, and active abilities using the other buttons.
Dragon Age Inquisition = Hold the attack button for basic attacks, activate abilities with the other buttons, and issue orders to your group.
The power of iteration can be seen in the Souls series. The bones and core combat mechanics have not changed since Demon Souls. The exception is Sekiro, and most of us souls players don't consider that a souls formatted game anyhow. They have continually added new features, taken away bad features, and given their core audience what they have wanted. And now, their most recent title has achieved mainstream success against Triple A games.
Is Origins combat niche and flawed, yes. Could it have been improved upon to please a majority of the fan base that has been asking for it? Absolutely. Why they did not improve on what most fans loved about Origins, I will never know.
Totally said what I’ve been thinking - and you put it far better than I could’ve!
It seems like what those fans are saying is usually code for something else. The women companions aren’t conventionally attractive = they aren’t designed for the male gaze (and probably for some the issue is that there isn’t a tall and slim WW for them). It isn’t gritty = there isn’t a load of brown and mud everywhere. It’s “too woke” = there are people who aren’t white and hetero (shock, horror).
The fact people are saying it’s going to be terrible after just seeing that first trailer? It’s wild. For a long time now, it’s seemed like some folk are just primed to hate anything BioWare does unless it’s remaking Origins.
Thanks so much for putting together such a thoughtful set of rebuttals - and for giving me a few laughs at the same time!
I imagine if bioware announced an origins remake that the origin fanboys would still hate it and call it woke, even tho it's the exact same game...
I'm glad it was entertaining and made you laugh 😂
These kinda comments keep me going for sure, but tbh I don't blame Origins fans!
I too was like oh yeah 2 is such a weak entry in the series and that includes the choices and story overall.
Until I recently played it again and I was like holy crap this game is so much better than I remember! Which is why I'm so keen on urging fans to replay these games.
@@minstora Absolute nonsense. VG, even before releasing has made 3 cardinal sins:
1. Tone and story of marketing. Watch any trailer from D1-3 and VG trailer. If you tell me the tone is the same, you are lying. We go from bleak(the world is about to end in vibes) - DAO and Inquisition trailers, to lets go on a epic adventure for VG. DA2 trailer had more epic COD vibes, but the game explored pretty heavy subjects- oppression. Unless, thats just horrendous marketing, the people making this game clearly dont care for its prequels.
2. First DA game ever, you cant control party. Even ME allows you to direct companions to specific location. AKA tactics were at least technically a considerations during develpment. FACT.
3. Solas, who was set up in masterfully in DAI and the DLC has been sidelined by the faceless elven gods and will no longer be the main antagonist of the game after 10 years of waiting. FACT.
And i could go on and on.
You are still excited, thats fine. Stop misrepresenting legitimate criticism.
@@raynortownly7098 you do realise that DAV will allow to direct companions exactly like ME does right?
@@MammothMorals Source? Ive only heard, that you can use their 3 abilities, in witch case, thats still less than me allowed.
These people that are saying "Dragon Age isn't the way it used to be, what happened to the dark fantasy?" clearly haven't played anything past Origins because how on earth are you going to say that when Dragon Age 2 has a quest where you discover your mom's head stiched onto a body created by the corpses of multiple women that a necromancer/blood mage used to recreate his dead wife, who then PROCEEDED, to summon a demon to posses said body, thus forcing you to kill your own parent with your own hands.
What does that have to do with Veilguard looking like shit
The dragonage universe is generally dark and gritty and like you say, they don't hold back on stuff like the dead mom thing. Veilguard in comparison looks very stylized and cartoony just from an art perspective, and that art theme fits games like wildstar which are more quirky by nature ua-cam.com/video/x-NXdWk9sm8/v-deo.html&ab_channel=WildStarOnline
My take is each game has it's ups and downs but the overall experience of each has been fantastic. And I hope Veilguard does amazingly well and sells buckets so we can keep experiencing more Dragon Age for years to come.
combat was incredibly boring in DAI. Spending most of your time holding down R1 and waiting minutes just to down insignificant enemies is really dull (even on the easier settings). Fans are right to be concerned now they are doubling down on that gameplay style.
@@happyjonn9242I think we don't have to worry too much in that regard fam.
The bioware devs in an interview said this will be the first time combat is actually fun when talking about veilguard so it means that they at least acknowledge that they don't think combat in Inquisition was fun or perfect (even if I personally liked it)
So I think they're going for something different altogether shifting to basically a Mass Effect style for combat.
@@happyjonn9242new high level combat gameplay came out I recommend watching that you'll change your mind then
@@happyjonn9242that littrally orginis combat
@@happyjonn9242dunno. DAI battles felt more exciting than Origins battles, where u just hit the attack button & letting it auto attack, while waiting for the abilities to charge
I totally agree with everything you've said! I am so glad there are fans like you (who share similar views as myself) who aren't afraid to vocally defend Dragon Age since Origins.
I love Origins, but I've grown to love all the DA games that have come, since. I can't wait for Veilguard and I'm definitely not judging it until I've had the chance to play it myself.
I subscribed🎉. Simply because there is no toxicity on this canal and content is amazing.
Nostalgia is a hell of a drug.
Just because something is newer doesn't make it better either.
@@happyjonn9242conversely new things are worse in the public opinion. Yes its sought after but you share no memories with it and when experienced for the first time, its fine. The memory of the first time is what you truly cherish
Riiight? It's as though they are discarding the story and lore evolution. If DA games were always like Origins, it would get boring real fast.
Nostalgia + fantastic game = origins
On the topic of diversity; specifically, some fans' complaints; I find it odd that they think some kind of erasure is going on. It comes off as a lack of understanding of the geography of Thedas as we know it. "Southern Thedas" is quite literally southern, as in south of the world's equator, and with Veilguard we will be moving north, or closer to the equator. So it makes sense, that the diversity will shift. The more north you go, the more darker the skin tone and the more tropical the environments are. Nevarra can be considered a buffer zone, but places like Antiva, Rivain, Tevinter, Par Vollen, and Seheron are all more tropical environments the farther you go. Quite literally mimicking the gradual shift of landscapes, biomes, and diversity that we have in the real world.
You are aware that modt locations in Dragon Age are based on the real world right?
Orlais: France
Antiva: Italy and Spain.
Dwarves: South America, and Deutsch.
Just off the top of my head.
@@NobodyNothing-f5c Quite aware. Devs have gone on record saying that Thedas is a reflection of the real world but the hemispheres are flipped, biomes wise. What is the northern hemisphere for us is the southern hemisphere for Thedas.
That's a meme. You have a link to a forum post, etc?
@@NobodyNothing-f5c There's no need. The devs actually re-confirmed the environmental makeup of thedas in the latest dev q&a. You can find it on yt
Echoing some sentiment from this video- The thing that drives me insane, as somebody whose favorite game of all time is Origins, is that a lot of these alleged origins superfans don’t remember almost anything about the game they played only once 15 years ago.
3 examples off the top of my head:
1. I saw someone complaining that one of Veilguard’s mage speciality is evoker, an elemental based spec, when DAO:Awakening had that too!-the Battlemage spec. This isn’t new, idk why they’re acting like this is some sort of downgrade.
2. They claimed that Veilguard isn’t going to be immersive because of “American accents”, as if a ton of characters haven’t had American accents since origins. (Sten, Wynne, Shale, Flemeth, etc)
3. “I wish it was turn based like origins” idk what to even say to these people, Origins was never turn based. I have no idea why people are even saying this 😂
I find that a lot of these fans could really do with going back and replaying all of those games in vanilla form. A lot has been misremembered 😅
They're shocked by the American accents?!😮 I heard even more American accents in Origins than I did in Inquisition, people really are just looking for reasons to hate.
American accents is more like neutral accent, Free Marchers, dwarves, Qunari. I wish there was an option for an Antican accent, but my Antivan's backstory will be having grown up in the Free Marches. Family was undercover, spies and assassins. I love all the voices, so I am gonna have to play tons of times.
@@team151i don't think inquisition has American accent
@@EmperorDxD there were a few, Varric and Iron Bull (kinda) and the Inquisitor can have an American accent. But yeah, Inquisition feels mostly British and French (Ferelden and Orlesian)
Finally, someone on UA-cam speaking common sense 🤘🏼
Most of these people are just in an echo chamber,
This game WILL be very strategic (this comment is 2 weeks after your video)
yeah you were wrong on that one
Remember the hissy fit gamers threw about Zevran (your bisexual promiscuous rouge trope) flirting with their male wardens. Same with needing to turn Anders down. But those games characters where suddenly perfect, right.
Lmao that’s the same shit I bring up every time they say oh Dragon Age is woke now. Like dude Dragon Age has been “woke” since origins. Representation and same sex relationships have always been a major thing in these games and it started with origins.
OMG, he used rouge? I never noticed...
Again, what does that have to do with Veilguard looking like shit?
@@lokhaxz803 it means you got shit taste and we were just looking to bitch.
@@lokhaxz803 it means you have shit taste and are just looking to complain.
I'd like to add to this discussion by saying that Asmongold and his community are actively poisioning the well for the upcoming game and the franchise in general. It would be more understandable if Asmon was a long time fan of Dragon Age who had some grievances about how the game looks, but it seems like he just popped out of nowhere and claimed himself to be a fan when I've never heard him mention a single thing about the game and now he's painting the up-coming game as the second coming of the anti-christ.
The same thing happened with the FFXIV community. Asmon's community is poison, he should stay in his lane and stick to WoW, though thankfully even there he and his fans are less and less welcome.
I'm an Asmongold fan, but even for me it was wild to see him randomly decide to bash Dragon Age out of nowhere. Half his critiques felt so random. As soon as that happened, his subreddit went open season on Dragon Age and several times a day people would post meme after meme about it. Usually some kind of rage-bait, and usually the same ones over and over. Even now I bet there's some kind of meme about how character asses aren't big enough. It really sucks. He fully plans on playing it and I imagine it's with the full intention of slagging it off.
As someone who adores the whole series (but Origins especially) I agree with a lot of this. The darkness debate is the most interesting to me. DAO is definitely the edgiest of the bunch. None of the sequels went as hard as the city elf origin or the broodmother lore for example. That stuff was definitely a byproduct of 2000s edginess. (Remember the Marilyn Manson trailer?) I don’t think it’s a negative that the sequels moved on from using sexual violence for quick shock value. Yes, at the time, that stuff established how brutal Thedas was. But I think there are more subtle, nuanced ways that can be portrayed.
However, DAI swung too far away from the roots towards more generic high fantasy for me. Yes, there were dark moments, but most of them were in codex entries. The “what if Song of Ice and Fire but with elves and dwarves” approach of DAO was what made Thedas unique. I think Veilguard is actually headed in the right direction. The Tevinter setting and the grotesque horror elements we’re seeing in the latest trailer has me hopeful that maybe the devs have found a good tonal balance.
DA2 was very edgy. It had really heavy stuff in it. Plus, you can be a blood mage and own a slave.
Thank you so much for making this video. You make so many good points against these DAO fans. Dragon Age has not gotten worse. They just didn't understand what the games were trying to do or didn't understand what DAO was actually doing. And I want to complement you on your critiques of the game. If those fans actually said what you said then their would be no discussion. It makes sense and isn't just hate for hate's sake.
Woah this did not feel like 30 minutes at all! Great video!!
It really is a shame that so many fans are unable to accept anything remotely different from this DAO brand of darkness. I mean, I get it. I'm a fan of all 3 games, and DAO has a very specific hopeless underdog tone to it that is just not in DA2 or DA:I. DA2 gets close, but Hawke doesn't have the same stakes as the Wardens do, which is totally fine.
And despite that I still remember bawling my eyes out as Leandra passes away. Or messing up the first time and having to fight the Dalish. Or how incredibly melancholic and lonely playing the Inquisitor could be at times, being branded as the Herald. Or how intimate and bittersweet the DA:I banter could get, following a companion's personal quest.
I get really really liking something. When I like a game, I replay it-- dozens of times... sometimes all in a row. Yet I personally still wouldn't like the same Wardens story rehashed and resold to me over and over. Change is scary, but stagnation is way worse.
Wow that's such a compliment thank you so much. I put days into this script and video so it means a lot to have it pay off! I appreciate you! 🙏
@@minstora Your hard work definitely shows! And props for the emphasis on matters of tastes. Overall I found your take to be level-headed and respectful
I keep seeing comments how DAV doesn't look anything like DAO. DUAH. It looks ways cooler and more epic. New locations, new scenery. Of course it's different. Thedas is in disarray with chaos and mayhem at every turn. People want DAO 2.0, but the story and lore have evolved past that, for better in my opinion.
Omg, how can someone say sequels don't have difficult choices? I mean, I was agonizing if I should take or leave Carver out of expedition, to show him support, since proving himself was so important to him, or protect my baby brother. And no matter what you choose consequences are huge from him dying to standing against you on opposite side of battle later down the line. Or super delicate sequence of choices in Merril's quest, that may lead to her entire clan dying! Or deciding fate of some closest friends, like do you forgive Isabela? Or Anders? Or Blackwall? Send him to wardens? Leave him to die? Who will you leave in the Fade? I once had a world state where I was forced to choose between Alister and Hawke, and than talking with Fiona or Varric later. It was hella brutal conversations, let me tell you. Or will you save band of vagabonds, because they important to your friend, or choose strategic alliance that may benefit the nation? Both can blow up in your face in different ways.
I used to find that a difficult choice until someone pointed out a thing that Flemeth says: "A word of advice, we stand upon the precipice of change. The world fears the inevitable plummet into the abyss. Watch for that moment… and when it comes, do not hesitate to leap." Then that mission in the Fade is called *"HERE LIES THE ABYSS!"* I think Hawke might be the right one to pick for that mission, but I'm so curious why. Maybe it's because there's something about Wardens which makes them unable to survive, whereas Hawke--maybe due to something their father did--will. If so, some of my world states may have sad endings.
@@WynneL I heard this theory, but vague rumblings of half mad demigoddess is not exactly reassuring, at leas for me, and it does not make conversation with Varric any easier.
Conventionally attractive - BioWare gave us Garrus as a romance.... Thane.... Tali.... by conventionally, I think they mean "I want them all to look like Miranda wwwaaaaaa", and if you romanced anyone at all in Origins.... none of them look that good 😂
The people whining about wanting it being dark have not been paying attention. It never lost that. The fact that DA2 had a serial killer who was making a bride of Frankenstein's monster bypasses these people apparently - they can take all the seats.
Refreshing video ❤ really enjoyed it.
Bro, origins is my favorite and most played game of all time, and I ain't being a crusty old fart about this, unlike so many I've seen. I can't remember the last time I've been this excited for a game. I can tell I'm going to love vielguard.
I think Origins *Supremacists* are what you're talking about, and I sympathize. I played Origins and enjoyed it, but I've always been frustrated by OSs who act like the Canon of Video Games was CLOSED, boom, directly after Origins came out. I love it for its merits, but it truly wasn't a game of perfect tactical genius. Cone of Cold was basically the win button as long as your targeting was good. If you didn't have Cone of Cold and Group Heal, you were screwed.
Each of the DA games has had its flaws, and its strengths. Even DA2 which had a pathetic 14-18 months of development time, which makes it impressive how good it still is.
Thanks for making this video!
I had the exact same thoughts while reading all the comments after the release of the Veilguard trailer.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion of course.. but I think it's best to wait until we've played the game before we try to convince others of how bad it is.
I get why people wouldn't like the first trailer itself, I wasn't a big fan of it either. But to immediately jump to conclusions and say that the game is going to be bad is just absolute nonsense. After the first gameplay video and the new release trailer I am very much looking forward to playing this game. Whether it's good or bad or how it compares to the other installments... we have yet to find out :D
I've also had a look at the first trailers for the previous games and I don't think you can tell how great those games are from those either xD
I've loved every single one of these games and I'm sure there will be many things to love about Veilguard as well. Each game has something it does best and that makes it unique as a game on its own in my opinion.. I've always loved them for the lore and characters and think these are the most important part of all of these games. And though I do miss the origin stories as well, would Origins still be such a staple if all the games had this feature? People are still raving about it after all these years because of it being so unique. I think the fact that no Dragon Age game is exactly the same is what collectively makes all of these games so good. But of course that means each game is kind of a hit or miss for some people...
That being said, I AM a bit concerned with the party size and I 'm not 100% a fan of the art style (for a DA game specifically), but I'm sure that once I get into the story it won't bother me at all.
The party size scares me a lot and is what I worry might lead to me taking points of a review over anything else really.
But we will have to wait and see like you said. I'll try to judge the game as fairly as I can for sure as it's own work.
I've never understood the "dragon age isn't dark anymore" claim. The only thing I think it could mean is just that you don't fight as many darkspawn and the fleshy blight stuff wasn't everywhere🤷♂
I think people mean the overall art style and vibe. DAO is almost dark fantasy, feels more medieval. The nee version looks like a marvel comic (color palette) and much more cartoony.
@@jnyboy28 The bright colored clothing is much similar to an old Hollywood medieval production. But Ferelden is considered rustic compared to more metropolitan Orlais and Tevinter. So I'm willing to give the studio more leverage in depicting more cultural designs.
But isnt only Freeladen like that most Land in DA is pretty colorful @@jnyboy28
My biggest worry with the game is the dumbing down of role-play depth and variety. I know you get to make many big and meaningful choices in both 2 and inquisition, but I feel like BioWare has misunderstood what makes role-playing role-playing. It’s not about the occasional big choice about who gets to sit on some throne, the best role-playing is about the little choices, how your specific character handles the little obstacles. This is what BG3 did so masterfully. In all the veilguard gameplay we’ve seen so far, it looks like you just walk up to npcs, and they just give you a quest. You don’t talk with them, there’s no conversation, there is no choice of whether or not you want the quest. Remember the bandits in Lothering? Or the merchant trying to swindle the people? Remember all the options and minute choices you could make during those, having to pass intimidation or persuasion checks? That’s the stuff I miss. I don’t care if the combat is actiony (da2 has my favorite combat in the series fight me), I care that the role play potential is being limited, and it looks like it’s primarily a looter action rpg, not a full blown rpg.
That's a very fair point to bring up, as you're right that's an element we haven't seen.
I know they're really hyping up the companions and just how special the relationships we can build with them platonically and romantically will be so I imagine a lot of care will go into roleplaying with them.
My hope is that it ends up extending to the other characters as well, essentially extending to what you're talking about here in this comment.
I remember those little things from Origins and I agree they for sure helped with leading to the game feeling special!
I will say for me I was taken out of roleplaying a bit immersion wise in Origins during dialogue that involved persuasion checks as I felt like the system in that game was lackluster. It was like oh just put 18 points in cunning, take the skills and then you can persuade everyone in the game no rolls or nothing lol. Idk I just didn't like it too much but I didn't hate it either.
But with the other stuff you're 100% spot on.
Since we've about an hour of gameplay total I'm hopeful that those little moments to make choices are plentiful in the full game so we'll have to wait and see.
🤞
Edit:
Also I imagine those small things may not be the most exciting for the advertising team in terms of what to show early, hence we maybe haven't seen much of it yet?
I personally think it'd drum up some hype to show that kinda stuff off, but eh what can ya do. Lol
Regardless I hope they implemented it!
On the demon redesign, I read/heard somewhere, and I can't find it now, they said it was because the demons can enter Thedas easier now, because of the ritual, that they don't have time to form fully corporeal bodies. What we see is the minimum they need to enter.
At least there's a reasoning for it and it's not just they look different now.
I still don't like them but here's hoping we can a reference in game to the reason for the change.
Also I been looking back at the footage and I think those are rage demons? The ones that kind of look like final fantasy Ifrit? They look cool at least
I heard both Ghil Dirthalen and Kala Elizabeth say there is an explanation in the game, which they could not share, and it all makes sense when we play. Also, personally, redesigns are fine by me. I love the look of the demons.
A lot of Origin Worshipers plays it with almost 15 years of mods & fix, created by fans for fans.
They wouldn't play vanilia nor remember what it trully is or was.
They make the companions more interesting than they are in the actual game with their knowlege of them in the universe beyond DAO (that's not bad but what they see is not in the game or not at the extent they see it).
And have crippling nostalgia blindfolds.
Origins was the first and only game in the series where you could have huge lasting changes in the story based on your actions/dialogue choices. You can literally get everyone in your party to leave or be killed including the player character. No other game in the series has come close to that level of freedom.
@@happyjonn9242. I totally agree with this.
@@happyjonn9242 It's complicated to allow such freedom if you want & to make sequel for you end-up with people in "Quantum state" dead in some play through living in others.
It's easy for 2 games but with 3 or more, it's too much branches to keep track of them all, with no harmonisation look how many companion/ennemies are back from the dead in DAI ( Leliana, Coripheus).
I don't talk about comics & anime shows/movies Sten, Crimson knight aka Meredith... and so much more.
It's also due to an issue in Dragon Age, you change main character every episode.
it made some decision mostly in DAI make more sense as a player than as a character.
Mass effect doesn't have that issue you are shepard all the road.
DA2 to be fair wasn't suppose to be a DA it was a link between DAO and DAI who was suppose to be the second episode.
Sure you could kill everyone in DAO, but You Could kill a ton of your crew in DA2.
DAO decision had almost no impact except as a kisscool effect in Denerim last battle.
Kill or save Connor... meh
Werewolves or elves yeah no big deal...
Caridans crown or anvil just golems or no golems...
Yes the impact on the world should be great but you won't witness it same as DAI, and taking that into account would be you need to do 1 sequel opus per possible playtrough.
Yeah I think that's very much a symptom of it being the first in the series ya know? Like BG3 devs had a hell of a time with this in their game allowing for all the different choices possibilities and as DA went into it's sequels and had to account for so many different world states? Sounds like a developmental nightmare 💀
@@minstora most of the choices are binary character present or the other. One thing or another thing the witcher games did this pretty well. Saying it's hard for the developers is just accepting trash. They decided to make an almost direct sequel as opposed to how the good fallout games did it so they should do it right. Proper rpgs never appeal to a mass audience which is why they always go through changes like this to make them more appealing to people who otherwise just don't like them but i like proper rpgs so it's sad seeing what happened to dragon age.
Saying that the characters aren’t conventionally attractive, and that there’s forced diversity…. Maybe it’s just me but it’s giving slightly ✨racist✨
Yeah, I'm usually not a fan of shoe-horning diversity where it doesn’t make sense, but the Dragon Age series has always been diverse. There have been black and asian elves since Origins, which most people conveniently ignore. Also, Davrin and Bellara might be the hottest companions in the game, so anyone claiming they aren't conventionally attractive is being disingenuous.
As though having gay, lesbian and bi romances in DAO and a Golem whose pronoun was It, and POC companions, was far less diverse than DAV. How was Origins less diverse? You know.
@@prodtetch Dude there even exist TRANS Qunari, like what the fuck do those people mean
Just look at the BG3 fans treatment of Wyll fans of games like this they are extremely discriminatory and disrespectful towards POC
@@calcitegem6204yeah that’s kinda fucked up on how they treat Wyll. I mean sure he’s kinda your standard folk hero but damn not everybody needs to have that super duper dark and morally grey backstory like Astarion. Wyll is a hero who made a difficult choice but remained a hero and that’s why he’s probably my favorite companion.
These complaints happen every dang game and people end up loving the end product faults and all
People end up loving it when something new comes out, and they have to use changes from the last entry to complain about. The most recent is always catastrophically bad, and the series/ studio is dead.
As a die hard fan of the entire da series the only thing I've felt like i was missing was the playable origin story of your character leading up to the "beginning" of the game like got in origins and da2
I enjoy how calm you went about it and how you gave both pro and con, nice one!
Thank you for talking about this! As a long time fan and also someone who genuinely loves Origins but also every single other game, I feel like some of these hardcore Origins fans are just simply unwilling to accept anything new, even some things are objectively better than before. It´s totally fine if DAO is your favourite game of the series, but discrediting the positive things the sequels and Veilguard will likely do too is just straight up ridiculous. Origins came out 15 years ago, stuff is going to change -- shocker! Doesn´t mean those changes are bad.
I think it´s valid for people to be critical given their last two releases (Anthem and Andromeda) but at least give Veilguard a damn chance before it´s even out.
Even Bioware was self aware enough to make fun of the use of the word "Taint" in Origins. Sandal in Origins is literally just a special needs caricature, and not at all as interesting as he is in DA2. Hell he wasn't even in Inquisition directly, and he had a bigger impact on the lore than he did in Origins with just a few journal entries. In Origins he's literally just "The Enchantment Guy". Everyone acting like Origins isn't hilarious really are blinded. Alistair will straight up hit you with "Somebody's been drinking" in the most hilarious fashion. Among my other complaints about Origins fans they gas up the gameplay, which isn't all that great since most enemies can and will kite your character around the arena before you get a single hit in. The attack animations are floaty and have no weight behind them and no sense of impact. And emoting. Why are Alistair and Leliana the only ones who emote very well? Dude outside the chantry in Lothering's emotes are hilariously disproportionate to his bombastic tone of voice. DAO fans really do be wearing rose-tinted glasses. And Origins is the least stable of the games thus far. How is the "Best in the series" the same one that crashes after ten minutes of gameplay without stability and bugfix mods?
"Origins is the least stable of the games thus far. How is the "Best in the series" the same one that crashes after ten minutes of gameplay without stability and bugfix mods?" This is such weak low hanging fruit, you can say this about any older game you are trying to play on a modern PC, I can say this about Fallout 3, Fallout New Vegas, and Morrowind just to name a few. If you were playing Origins on console or on a older PC then you wouldn't have these issues.
@@MrDay53 Funny you should say Fallout 3 and New Vegas as counterpoints. I own both on Steam and regularly play them on the windows 10 pro computer with an i7 processor and have had no crashes with no mods installed, sans their respective sprint mods. It's not low hanging fruit, it's a valid criticism, as valid as when people say how unstable Inquisition is due to the Frostbite engine being in it's infancy in Bioware's use. Origins was terribly optimized on the PS3, it's terribly optimized on PC, and guess what, I'm willing to bet it's the exact same story on the 360.
@@ajdove1823 Funny how I was trying to load my steam version of Fallout 3 game of the year edition save last night and it wouldn't load the save. It would freeze on the loading screen and then go to a black screen. It is low hanging fruit because those games were not designed with todays technology in mind because it didn't exist at the time. So I guess with your logic games that were made for 32bit systems are bad because a lot of them may not work on a 64bit system. Yes Origins was poorly optimized for consoles because it was a modern take on a CRPG which is meant to be played on a PC. Or maybe the PS3 was just shit since Skyrim had way more problems on it than it did the PC and Xbox360.
@@MrDay53 Love how you shift the point. A: try running with the right compatibility settings. B: I've said my piece and I'm not gonna argue in Minstora's comments. It's bad manners. Good day.
@@ajdove1823 I can capture Fallout 3 crashing and uploaded it to my channel if you like. I can tell you it's got nothing to do with my compatibility settings since I switched settings around and the same thing would occur.
Well spoken. Great points as well. My favorite DA game is Inquisition, and i played all of them more than once, so i can objectively compare them. But after Anthem and especially Andromeda, i turned into a Bioware skeptic. The SBI related drama poisoning the gaming landscape hasn't helped either, LOL.
But i'm glad that Veilguard looks better and better with each trailer. Looking forward to see reviews for this game, i really want it to be great. :)
That was really well done. A rational assessment ... regretfully rare, but absolutely appreciated. There are some things I don't like about *each* of the games, but the DA series is still my--hands-down--favorite of any game series. As an OG DAO player myself, I will never understand the adamant refusal to embrace any type of change from some DAO players. Seeing the world in such a narrow way would (imho) be a terrible way to live.
Part of me feels bad because like you said it must be a terrible way to live. Like seeing problems where none exist to the point where it prevents them from enjoying such great works. Not without flaw, but still great!
Thanks for your kind comment 😁
@@xXFoiXx Just like I think Elden Ring is a dogshit game - we both have the options not to play (as you rightfully mentioned). Does my opinion mean that Elden Ring is objectively bad? -- not at all. It's just not good for me. Likewise, your subjective opinion (which is totally fair) doesn't mean that the DA games are objectively bad. The problem is when *some* (not all) Origins fans try to attack the series as objectively bad with erroneous arguments.
@@xXFoiXxI replayed it recently and the game is not as bad as I remember it. Repetitive in areas? Ofc, but I'm like okay a good amount of this story stuff and combat is better than I remember.
To each their own I guess.
@@xXFoiXx Sigh. No need to be rude (I certainly wasn't). What you are devaluing is rational assessment. You may find rational assessment pointless, but it's fallacious to assume that your devaluation is common.
@@virginiamurr3703 I've removed that person's comments and blocked them from my channel as I don't tolerate hate on my videos. Have a good day!
Great video and a lot of valid points. Big fan of Bioware games here, played most of their games since launch starting with original BG series. The only one I did not play is Anthem. Was absolutely enchanted with Origins when it came out, played through all Origins more than once. Loved DA 2 even if it obviously needed a lot more polishing. Loved Inquisition. Read all books and comics, watched all movies and series. Very much look forward to The Veilguard. So far the only changes I've seen I am not a big fan of are the combat ones (I do like controlling party members and I really like the real pause - not the ME style one), but I can live with that. I do not play games like DA for combat, I play for story, lore and companions. As for the latter, I think Neve and Harding are amazingly stunning looking and for the first time in a long while I am considering playing a male hero first just to romance them.
I believe it was confirmed that all of the companions will be pansexual so play whatever gender you want!
You don't need to play a male Rook to romance them. Companions in DAV are like DA2 companions when it comes to romance availability.
I really appreciate this video. I loved all the DAs. Sure, they had flaws but the stories were fun and dark even when the environment seemed bright in the later games. I actually enjoy that a lot since I don't want to overdose on bleary, dull, dark scenery. There's something to be said about whimsy overlaying a dark sinister underbelly.
Fantastic video, so nuanced and patient, much more that I've been able to. I will try to channel your calm and understanding when replying to Origins fans from now on. Thank you !
Oh trust, I don't ALWAYS have patience lol. Plenty of rewriting went into this to not come off as standoffish to these fans, but hey we're only human 😅
Another youtuber by the name of BigDanGaming has a similar opinion of DA:O combat . I thought I was alone in my opinion of it for a long time. Glad someone has a fair take on all this.
When you said your favorite romances were morrigan and Casandra meant I had to subscribe to another man of the culture. I appreciate the grounded take on all of the things that are making people wary of veilguard. Great video dude I look forward to the game coming out and seeing your take on it
Thank you friend! 🫡
I appreciate the kind words, I'll try to make it a good one and I'll be giving my thoughts on the combat spotlight
I'm someone who started with origins on ps3 back when it was the only dragon age game. I was terrible at it, had to play easy/casual. Even replaying it now on pc(im at Haven) on normal, i can say im not crazy about the combat. I dont know if id say its good, but it is perhaps iconic to the game and to the series and i more than understand the criticism of veilguard being the farthest departure from that system for people who liked it or at least heavily associate it with the series.
The tone criticism is an interesting one. I believe people are afraid of a flanderization of the game like what happened with Saint's Row or huge shift like Suicide Squad. Yes, we havent played Veilguard yet, we do have trailers. Tone is fairly consistent in trailers for the first three games and even the fourth when it was still called Dreadwolf. Then it gets renamed and revealed with a trailer that imo really isnt what older fans would expect.
Trying to dismiss criticism of Veilguard by pointing to other games isnt a good look either. It would be best to address the critiques directly than to deflect. I never really thought 2 or Inq were off tonally but I do see it with Veilguard.
As for visuals or aesthetics, thats a bit more whatever i guess. I personally thought Cassandra looked better in 2 and her movie vs Inq. I think this is mostly a piggyback critique from the others combined with general trends in AAA gaming. Whatever the case, im not gonna argue it.
Interesting video.
I largely agree with most of your points, and I appreciate that you made this video to discuss this with folks who may be fans of the series who have complaints. If I made a video, it'd probably be pretty similar!
Some stuff I'll add:
1) Dragon Age is and has always been "real time with pause". Veilguard isn't different in that regard and the major difference I can see between Veilguard combat and previous combat systems is that it is a lot more active and player centric, and relies a lot less on "autoattack" mechanics and more on direct player input. I am generally in favor of this because I feel it's a similar upgrade from ME 1 to ME 2, where you go from relying on how many points you have in assault rifles to whether or not you're actually aiming your assault rifle at the enemy. It's crazy to me that Dragon Age has gone three games without going for a similar improvement, and it's a testament to how good the stories and characters have been that players don't even mind that the combat has been middling at best.
2) When someone says the female companions aren't conventionally attractive, especially from the audience who makes this argument, I am going to assume that 90 percent of the time, their actual complaint is that they don't have big honkers or shapely bodies. I really like how you went into detail on how nice the new character's faces look, and I totally agree that they look beautiful. But there's a certain level of coding that is going on here, because most people know that it's not exactly appropriate to fully objectify women in that way, but it's still a source of disappointment for them that we're not getting proctology exams with Miranda anymore.
3) When someone says that DA:O is darker and grittier, I feel like they're usually referring to broodmothers. The lore on that is one of the more disturbing elements of DA:O, in my opinion, and I've seen a lot of folks who seem to appreciate how courageous the DA writers were with its inclusion. I've seen people who happily explain and brag about the meaning of Hespith's speech to female Let's Players (please don't do this). I am a guy and I'm fortunate that I don't have triggers related to that type of content, but even without it, I think I'm more than fine if Dragon Age avoids going that far again. While I'm definitely not a person who equates a person's media enjoyment with their actual personal morality, I do have to admit that I sincerely worry about some of the people I've seen have conversations about broodmother lore.
4) Very broadly, there are two major groups of people who heavily criticize this game. There are Origins only fans and there are culture warriors. Obviously, there are also people who like and dislike things that don't fall into these two buckets, but people with measured criticism are usually easy to spot because they're also expressing excitement over other stuff. My personal opinion is that the culture warriors tend to outweigh the first group by a lot, especially when it comes to like/dislike ratios or other forms of brigading or just plain botting. Culture warriors have zero interest in the game and have been complaining about BioWare since the original Mass Effect, or they look at any effort from BioWare as a personal attack because of the inclusion of women, people of other races, or worse yet, women of other races. What makes it difficult in all of these conversations is that a lot of culture warriors want people to feel like they're giving valid criticisms instead of saying "DEI" or "Sweet Baby" and exposing themselves for what they really are, so they piggy back off the complaints of the Origins only crowd. They're notably slow to adapt those arguments and any engagement with them shows that they don't really know anything about Dragon Age, but the unfortunate effect here is that a lot of the fanbase feels divided between Origins fans and fans of Dragon Age as a whole, when the real division is being promoted by people who just want the game to fail.
In my view, it's really important for folks to understand that dynamic, because it's easy for people who love the game and invest in it to assign certain beliefs towards people who criticize the game that are unfair and may push people away from the fandom, and it's also easy for people to believe that every criticism of the game is somehow made in good faith, which means that Veilguard is destined to fail spectacularly.
If you like what you've seen, tell people what you like! Explain the positives and why you're excited. You can disagree with a person's opinion and express that, but it's generally useless to argue with them. It ruins your day and the day of anyone who sees that argument, which is the goal of people who hope that BioWare gets shut down.
Yeah I agree. I’ve gotten into a couple of arguments with these people in other videos mostly because I’m kinda afraid that this game will fail due to this. Mostly I’m afraid that BioWare will get shut down if this game fails due to all the other companies that are shutting down and laying off this year. But yeah arguing this shit just pisses me off because it’s obvious these people don’t care about any of the positives they’re either angry to be angry or they just want to see the game fail. I’ve had a few conversations with disappointed origin fans and I can see their points but people talking about the game being too woke or the girls being ugly is just annoying. I to a degree understand that view point I don’t think there’s anything wrong with wanting to see over sexualized people both men and women because let’s be honest it’s enjoyable to look at. That being said not every game needs this and the women in Veilguard are extremely attractive. A game where I am disappointed doesn’t have extremely sexualized characters for example is Mortal Kombat. That game always had this tone that it was everything that you should feel bad for enjoying like gore, violence, and sex and to see the sexual aspect of that game be reduced that much only for the gore to be even more graphic feels hypocritical in my opinion. But that’s an entirely different conversation. Veilguard is not mortal Kombat it’s not just trying to be violent and sexy it’s trying to tell impactful stories and the major violence and sexiness can take away from that and I think Veilguard will balance that well based on the trailers.
Every Dragon Age game has been great because of the writing and characters. DA2 was poorly received, but the writing there was my favourite of the three games.
DAI was bashed for having fetch quests, and yeah those were dumb, but being able to run around that gorgeous world was such a treat.
DA4 will be great. Why? The writers are skilled veterans from BG, DA, ME2+3. The writing will be solid. And I dont think anyone ever bought bioware for the combat 😂😂😂 This combat looks aright though.
Thanks for making this video. I don’t make videos but the discourse around this game made me tempted to make something because damn people are going insane over the dumbest shit right now due to this game
I'd highly recommend making videos yourself too if you got the time. There's always gonna be someone out there that appreciates your take on things!
@@minstora yeah I just might would be nice to show that not every dragon age fan is thinking this game is going to bomb.
I would say DAO was highly strategic and tactical, but only for mages. Depending how you build them, the mages can be walking nukes, and their sheer versatility was astounding. I wish a bit more of the DAO magic schools and spell options made it to the later games, honestly. I, however, am a rogue player through and through, and DAO melee combat is... not great. It's very clunky, and I think the only reason I can still play it now is the main campaign is just THAT strong. I'm actually very excited that the Veilguard combat looks so fun! I do kinda wish a version of the tactics system from Inquisition made it to the new game because I'm disabled so I liked being able to really slow down combat. It's the only reason I could even attempt to play on nightmare.
@@KtheSongbird aw man that's a actual bummer about the action combat causing accessibility issues. It's for sure a negative to the change and I hope there's some features that still help but allow you to get the full challenge you're craving
@@minstora I think I should be fine at lower difficulties if I take frequent breaks, but yeah, I'll miss the accessibility of inquisition. But then again, it sounds like there will be quite a bit of options for combat customizations in Veilguard, so they might have some options that could lessen the strain. Fingers crossed 🤞
@@KtheSongbird I know the customizable difficulty (which was somewhat present in Inquisition) is still there, based on the GI articles, and they've said they'll fully detail accessibility options later. Kala, a UA-camr who was a member of the council who played the game and provided internal feedback, has said that a lot of her feedback related to accessibility was listened to and implemented, so I feel like there is a lot of reason for optimism that they'll address as many of those issues as possible, and that they're willing to address stuff they miss post launch.
@proteuswest1084 That's wonderful! Thanks for telling me, that makes me feel a lot better 😁
I played Dragon Age 2 because I wanted to try out the dual wielding style. So far no game lives up to my expectations of how dual wielding combat should be like. But I love Dragon Age nonetheless.
DA2 has always been my favorite and I've played them all multiple times and started the series when Origins first released. I wish it wasn't so rushed because I really enjoyed the more personal story vs the other two games. Hawke's story was very dark and in many ways downright tragic. And, sarcastic Hawke is the best thing to ever exist! The rant you get when you leave the chantry after taking sarcastic Hawke there without companions to find Seamus after he joins the qunari is priceless.
I'm super excited for DAV. I'm trying not to make any judgement before release with the exception of party size and for some reason I feel like we are a little light on the amount of available companions, although I guess one of those problems takes care of the other...
For now, I'll reserve judgement and keep replaying through the past series another time until DAV releases.
i feel like veil guard less about needed to have one per class and its more about who can you combo with and synergize with i feel like it won't punish you if you only bring mages for most quests at least as much
Inquisition has the best companions nonstop im. Sorry they have more personality and more ranges
When they complain about "conventially attractive female characters" they mean breast size.
(and skin color)
@@Gungrave123 sounds like a you-problem
@Gungrave123 So... like Neve, Bellara and Harding? What even is your point here? Veilguard is literally the DA game with the most female romance options who are available to male characters.
Or do they not count as "real women" because one has dark skin, another is asian and the last one a dwarf? Pathetic.
@@Gungrave123So... like Neve, Bellara and Harding? I really don't see your point here. Veilguard is literally the Dragon Age game with the most female romances available to male characters.
Or so they not count as "real women" because two aren't white and the third a dwarf? Or because they one has a prosthetic leg? Or just because women can also romance them? You are making yourself sound pathetic, dude.
@@Gungrave123DAV female companions look the closest to real women ever in the franchise, both in their physical appearance and in the design of their armor/casual clothing. if you really think anything other than maybe her conveniently tied hair was realistic about Morrigan's design in DAO, you haven't seen any real women, outside of maybe instagram models or cosplayers, who always have the perfect lighting, makeup, and poses to look their best. and it's not like the female characters have to be attractive and fit the beauty standards, but like Minstora said, they all still fit it - thin, narrow shoulders (narrower than the average woman, btw, most likely so that male gamers like you don't cry into their pillows even more), small, proportional facial features, clear, smooth skin, as if they all have time for a modern 20-step skincare routine.
Everyone just has to understand that this series has had a bunch of pitfalls, and they survived all the way up to this point. I was hoping For a evolved Inquisition gameplay But I understand the need for getting as many people involved With the gameplay For the sake of continuing the story and the series as a whole.😑
I love Origins, but the combat is easily the worst part of it. I'm a combat fiend and Veilguard looks awesome. I don't really swap to party members with character creators, it's my story and I like to control me. Like FF12, I juat set tactics/gambits for my party members.
This was perfect. I’ve said so much of this…almost verbatim actually. Origins is a great game but it’s got flaws that some Origins purists just don’t seem to remember at all.
Bellara and Neve are both very attractive, what those guys mean is they aren't white women. That's the issue, it's not attractive to them. Harding is a dwarf, so...its obvious what's the issue there.
Yeah, I've seen a not-small number of guys say that explicitly. Full-on, loud and proud racism. So vile.
Well, we have the combat spotlight out now, and it's 3 abilities and an ultimate. Considering that some stuff that you need abilities for will now be just actions you do with controlls, it's not that bad
I'm very glad to see a video like this. All the people hating on the game because the "strategic" combat went away. Bro, I just finished playing Origins and Awakening (fucking awesome), and i am working through DA2 (doing the whole series before Veilguard comes out), and the "strategy" they're referring to boiled down to "Crushing Prison the mage, make sure it dies, kill everything else." Yes, there was some nuance. Some good usage of auras and stuns and AoE, etc. But by and large, I let my party members go and I (dualwielding Assassin/Duelist rogue) obliterated everything, even on Hard. I love these games, but Baldur's Gate it is not.
They have changed the combat structure with EVERY game. Let's just wait and see!
(I will see, making the characters' heads too big and the UI Glowfest are all stupid choices that I hope they backpedal on. At least the UI. We can mod the heads to normal size later.
@@xleaselife at lot of stuff is toggleable for UI actually, and a recent trailer showed off very minimal UI in combat. It looked clean!
@@minstora That was my hope! Though some things are I imagine rather fixed, like the ability screen with all of the excess lines. Loreworx did an excellent video talking about making the UI more streamlined. I recommend it!
Was that trailer the State of Play one? I have been kind of keeping my eyes off of stuff as I want to experience as much of it as I can fresh.
Dragon Age 2 and Dragon Age Inquisition can be good on their own terms.
Dragon Age 2 might have been rushed to meet a deadline, which was why a lot of the story was a mess. But the gameplay is an improvement from the first game, the characters are entertaining and there are some quests that can be well written. Hawke is a well written character who has a good Hero Rising story, who also been through a lot of hardships in this story such as being betrayed and losing a lot of people close to him/her.
Dragon Age Inquisition may be a slog to get through due to the open world, but the story is like a movie experience. The characters are also interesting and relatable and there's a lot of expansion on the game's lore, most of it interesting like the Elven Gods being a group of Elven Mages who got drunk with power and started oppressing their own people.
I know that there will be a lot of people who will hate Dragon Age Veilguard upon release, but I'm sure that there will be a lot of people who love Veilguard, as long as it's able to stand on it's own terms.
All of your takes are based and well worded! Subscribed!
So Origins was my first big RPG that I ever played. It got me back into gaming and is the reason I actively game today. My memories of Origins are super fond, and at the time, for me, there was so much about Origins that was intense, because it was the first time I was experiencing (1) an in-depth RPG and (2) a story quite like it.
I think that's the issue with a lot of people who are stuck on Origins being the grittiest, sexiest, most hard core thing to ever exist in the world. Origins is a gem of a game. I wouldn't have gotten into Bioware games--or other games for that matter--without its existence. But I think when people have such fond memories of what it was like to experience Origins for the first time, they cling to those feelings of their past self and are totally blind to the fact that the other games in the series are also the thing Origins was in terms of sexiness, grit, and difficult moral choices. All of the games have ups and downs in terms of their execution of any of these elements (like, I can be a blood mage in Origins, despite a good chunk of the game explicitly showing me it's a bad thing, and none of my companions nor other people in the world... care? From a game design stand point that's such a disjointed choice to make.)
Edit: Also the "it's less risque" point. In DAV you literally enter into a BDSM relationship with The Iron Bull. How is that worse than anything in Origins lol.
This, 100% like Origins got me into the fantastical world of RPGs in general. I can trace my love of DnD, getting to play awesome games like BG3, all back to Origins.
So I definitely understand the fondness for that game, but I also understand how said fondness can become extreme and hold me back from enjoying other experiences for sure.
And recent replays have shown me in what ways Origins shows its cracks and limitations, like what you said about Blood Mages.
How awesome would it be if as a result of your good deeds that certain people in the game acknowledged that Blood Magic can be capable of good.
Its why I wish BW did actually include it in Inquistion and Veilguard
@@minstora Blood magic having a significant impact on how your companions and the characters around you see you would be amazing. I felt the same way about the presence of red lyrium in DAI. We've been told (and shown in DA2/DAV) just how badly it effects people who come into contact with it. But my party can just... fight all these red templars and consistently be exposed to it with no issues?
A lot of people will be comparing DAV to BG3 in terms of "BG3 good, DAV bad." But I think we should be looking at it like "How can BG3's design improve Dragon Age?" Because in a game like BG3, those choices and encounters would have definitely impacted the game. And even with BG3, there's issues in that game too! And it's largely accepted at this point as a standard for fantasy RPG.
Ultimately, I think a lot of game "crit" at this point is ascribing a good or bad label onto the whole without looking at the parts. Will DAV be a GOTY, era-defining game? Who knows. But I do think it has decent potential to be enjoyable and get Bioware back on its feet for more games to come. I'm at least holding out for it. I'm not ready to let Thedas go just yet.
Did anybody notice the Venaturi wielding Red Lyrium weapons in the trailer? I hope we get some background on that.
I love Origins as well- but it's combat really doesn't hold up to modern standards. If they went back, more people would have hated it than not. (BG3 and DAO are no where close to being the same combat system- whoever says so needs to play them back to back.)
I'm way happier that they picked a direction to go in and stuck with it, rather than try and suck at doing half and half. (Which was the complaint of Inquisition.)
That being said, I do wish we had kept the bigger party and combat control could have been achieved like they did in FFVII Remake.
But overall, I'm super excited as well- don't let anyone damper your fun. (Embrace the Malicious Enjoyment!)
As a fan of the whole series I don't think DA has EVER got combat right. It's the choices matter that really separates Origins from the later games though. And when the gameplay is only average/sub par the story and interactiveness is even more important.
You're right Neve is showing a fair bit of chest...but she has no boobs, Morrigan also appears to have had her boobs reduced. Also Taash in early concept art was MUCH more feminine looking and attractive. But now she appears to be super androgynous and unattractive. Honestly after seeing Neve in casual clothes she looks much more attractive than in previous trailers, but there IS a trend in the industry of them attempting to over-correct by de-sexifying female characters.
I appreciate that you make some good points arguing the validity of 2 and 3. But there is a toxicity in gaming that's just there right now. It seems people will make a big deal of buying a game they consider anti woke to prove a point. Or try to cancel one. And also people are entitled to not like a game for their own reasons. I would say the programmable combat tactics are one thing that might be mega important to some people and it's a personal thing. I personally enjoyed combat in 3 because 3 had great audio and visual effects and it felt energising. I just hate to see a good game talked into the ground before anyone has tried it. It's so unfair
I’m late to this video, but glad that the algo gods served it up. You’re right about DAO’s combat. If you use a properly optimized build, it is ridiculously easy, even on nightmare. Encounter design and enemy variation are mediocre at best. If people love RTWP combat, there are games with better combat like Pillars or Owlcat’s games, or even the older Infinity Engine games like BG1 and 2. I love DAO for its story and characters. Combat is serviceable, but everyone who talks about it as like the pinnacle of CRPG combat played a different game than I did.
I'm saying like you want good combat in a cRPG owlcat is the way to go!
Why would you say something so controversial and yet so brave? lol
Glad to see someone else say that. To think DAO is the best of the series is a very fair opinion (that's not how I think, but I love DAO enough to respect it); but the reasons usually offered to disregard the sequels are too often nonsensical or unfair.
In my opinion, if you don't think you're going to like it, then don't buy it. If you are SO OPPOSED to the series coming into the future of gaming, (It's been a decade since we had a Dragon Age game) then just don't play it. This is a direct sequel to Inquisition AND Tevinter Nights.
I may be one of the very few that actually didnt hate the reveal trailer for Vail Guard, tbh the DA community completely over reacted
I didn't hate it but it didn't do anything for my excitement essentially I was at the same level of hype before and after it. Now it's a different story tho 😂
I really appreciate your nuanced and well-worded take on all this! It's nice when I stumble across someone who isn't strictly black-and-white about it (it's either total garbage or it'll unquestionably be the game of the year).
Since you asked for thoughts on these subjects:
In terms of combat, I agree with everything you're saying. The combat in Origins wasn't mindblowing (and I say that as someone who's favourite game was Origins). What I loved about it was, as you said, the options. The thing that absolutely drives me up the wall about all the sequels is that they keep taking away those options, and I can't for the life of me fathom why they're limiting it instead of expanding on what was already there (I honestly can't think of any other sequels to games that have done this). I loved the magic categorizations of Creation, Spirit, Primal, and Entropy. I loved that I could be a mage who could wear any armour or wield any weapon as long as I had the stats for it. But in the later games they've taken away most of the spells, done away with the magic categorization, I now CAN'T use any equipment that isn't for my class, taken away the ability to "program" your how your companions behave in combat, and even limited the abilities you can use at a given time as well as the amount of potions you can hold (which drives me crazy!). And now we're even down to 2 party members rather than 3 (I don't personally mind that we can't control them, but still that's yet another option taken away).
I also agree on the continuations of the lore. Dragon Age is my favourite franchise because of the deep lore and revelations as time goes on, so I am extremely interested to find out the answers to all my burning questions, even when those answers just lead to an eruption of more questions.
As for the dark and gritty part, I think that has alot to do with what someone's definition of "dark" is. For me, that's having moments that are effed up enough to shock me. Origins had alot of those moments for me, 2 was somewhat similar (though to be fair it was also a shorter game), but Inquisition only had one or two of those moments. Maybe my bar is high for what shocks me in that way but Inquisition just didn't reach it most of the time. So far, they haven't shown anything for Veilguard that gives me that feeling yet but it's way too early to tell.
The ones complaining about diversity and not being attracted to any of the new companions typically seem to be mostly the "anti woke" crowd. Though I have seen a couple stating they have difficulty taking the companions seriously and not really wanting to romance them because of how stylized they look, which I can understand.
I HEAVILY agree about disliking the demon redesigns (I'm also sad to see they're continuing to be combat fodder rather than how dangerous the lore makes them out to be). I'm not personally a fan of the new darkspawn designs but then I haven't liked any of them since Origins.
Since I know they'll probably never have another backstory setup like Origins, being able to set your backstory in Veilguard is the next best thing so I'm pretty happy about it! I agree that's a huge improvement over Inquisition.
@@skylerjayceysylvan6238 in terms of taking away options I think it was just an unfortunate circumstance. They had like 1 year for DA 2 and then issues with the Frostbite engine probably limited them with options in inquisition. Seemingly they just couldn't catch a break in that regard 😂
@@minstora That's entirely fair. DA 2 I don't blame whatsoever when it comes to limitations. Inquisition I have more of an issue with (especially with changing the magic categorization; mainly just 3/4ths of Primal and mixing Spirit with a couple of Creation spells, with a few Entropy and other Spirit spells thrown into the Specializations for some reason), but I'm certain Frostbite didn't make things easy which I blame EA for.
Though I do think they could have still at least made the weapons/armour available to all classes based on level (that probably would've taken less programing than locking them to classes).
Man I remember when I played Dragon Age 2 for the first time I honestly paused the game during the reveal of Hawke’s mother being killed and immediately looking up how to prevent that from happening. I was trying to find out if I fucked up somehow or if I missed a quest that would stop this from happening but no this was part of the story. At first I was pissed I thought where is the choice to stop this from happening but eventually I understood that this had to happen because it was such a big moment and just like in real life you can’t always prevent tragedy from happening. That was probably the darkest thing BioWare has done in my opinion and that didn’t happen in origins.
I did the same thing 😫 I remember being heartbroken at the realization that there simply is no saving her
Definitely some fair criticisms for the game. Big one for me are facial animations. But at the same time, I play these games for the story and companions.
Yeah I'm thankful that a lot of people have complained about it so hopefully it gets ironed out prior to release 🤞😅
I can't wait to copy and pasta this video link every time someone brings up one of these points LOL
Oh my god thank you! I have been thinking exactly this about the naysayers, like, what games did you play?! Hard tactical combat?! I was playing on hard and got bored so I set my tv control on x during a fight and came back and it was over. No casualties. Lol. Oh, but you're wrong about the hardest boss fights in Origins, that was 100% the harvester from GoA, I could not get that little f***er on nightmare. It was hell.
Nice video. After the trailer I was concerned with the tone, Inquisition was my favourite game ever, and I was much more emotionally invested in all my companions than in Origins. I don't know, I hope Veilguard is good but I'm cautious
while i disagree with the darkspawn look, i like how balanced the vid was, not too kissassy and not too jaded
@@RionCousland Appreciate it! I tried hard in that aspect 😅
Like I want this game to be good, but at the same time Biowares 2 most recent games are Anthem and Andromeda so uh... While hype is there it's still a wait and see kind of situation 😅
Here hoping tho 🤞
Amazing video :) I've been waiting for this game for 10 years, I preoreded it and I can't wait to play it. ❤
I'm curious about some of the story seeming a bit silly, but it's a fantasy game. Just don't jump the shark and we'll be good.
Origins fans are out of touch when it comes to these games. Dragon age hasn't been what they want in almost twenty years, yet they cling to something that most likely will never happen again.
I wouldn't completely agree with it being almost twenty years more like 10-15 years because DA2 has a lot more similarities to Origins than a lot of fans let on and also I think that bringing back the tactical camera mode for Inquisition maybe gave some of those fans hope that they would take the future games back to the more tactical and strategic direction.
@MrDay53 That tactical camera in Inquisition is terrible and is universally hated. the tone in Origins and DA 2 is about the only thing that is close to being similar between those two games. Saying that most Origins fans wont admit that so that isn't a factor. 5 years from now will be the 20th anniversary of Origins thats almost 2 decades bro
I wouldn't say that's a fair assessment. You could argue Tomb Raider fans who want Tomb Raider to go back to raiding tombs and just being about a complete powerhouse of a woman are out of touch for example or people who prefer Assassins Creed 2 or don't like the way Star Wars has gone or saying you don't want another ME Andromeda are out of touch ect. If you genuinely love something and you feel it's not been living up to its potential or has been mismanaged then I believe your opinion is as valid and relevant as anyone else's, if not more so because it's powered by loyalty and a passion for what you love to live up to it's true potential. Things don't always change for the better and pointing that out certainly isn't being out of touch. It's just being observant and honest.
The problem is that the people kicking off don't seem to be fans of any Dragon Age game because a lot of the arguments are based around things that a Dragon Age fan would understand. So the kick off over the pansexuality or whatever the term is. I'm unfamiliar with all these labels. You like who you like as far as I'm concerned. What group to put you in isn't relevant but basically when people were moaning that any character could be romanced but apparently love BG3. Or people moaning about diversity. Now I'm not a woke man but if it's always been the games identity then it should continue and the likes of Dragon Age, Fable TES ect have always been like that. That's the problem. People pretending to be fans to rage some culture war that's embarrassing for both sides not fans who have a preference on a favourite game in the series.
@@therapyquantified987 The combat in DA2 is similar to Origins just sped up, they both have the tactics system where you can make presets to how you and your companions respond in combat, you can still take direct control of your companions in combat, and there is choices to make through dialogue, and your companions have banter. So again there are more similarities between Origins and DA2 so I used the years from DA2 and Inquisition.
In reality most people wouldn’t care at all but they trust impression with the botched trailer destroyed any good thoughts they had with the game
Also something I find funny is people think the game was confirmed dead when they changed the name but if you pay attention to the trailers from 3 years ago the game still had the exact same locations and characters
I'm tempted to do a fact check of Solas to show how shady he is now. 🤣
I LOVE Dragon Age, and I love ALL three games currently out today. However, I do not find DAO as tactical. I love turn-based tactical combat, like what Larian does with their games, but I do not like real time with pause. I hate it in all games, so my least favorite part of DAO is the combat, while I play it over and over because of the story. But, let's be honest, I'm one of those fans here for the story and the lore vs. the combat and art styles lol.
I haven't heard the complaints about white erasure so far, but I HAVE seen objections to every companion character being canonically pan. I actually get that; *IF* it's brought up in the game in a weird distracting way (but we won't know if it's like that until it's out obviously.) In BG3, every companion is "available" for any type of Tav. The general consensus seems to be that the only thing that makes it "not woke" in BG3 is that it's not brought up unless it's relevant. I think it being "canon" spoils the immersion for some people. I only won't like it if it feels forced but maybe that's just me. 🤷🏻♀
So I’m one of those origin is the best of the series and for me inquisition was the weakest but not for reasons you listed. Diversity etc doesn’t bother me but I do find it funny that Carrie and mortigan keep coming back as morrigan for a lot is a fan favorite. Inquisition was mostly filled with nameless npcs/enemies and mostly horrible side quests compared to dao and da2. I remember how much in dao I hated rendon Howe etc. yes combat is clunky etc but it’s the most immersive of all 3 games. The actual character origins especially dwarf noble are fantastic. So much has been lost from game to game and the improvements are really only in graphics and gameplay. I have hope for veilguard but once again origin is barely anything. I remember running into my dwarf sister or going back to pay respects to Duncan. Da2 had some of it but dai had none.
I'm replaying the trilogy rn before Veilguard comes out. I've played DAO on Nightmare in hopes that the game will force me to use extra mechanics, like traps and poisons, maybe new strategies, because the battle mechanics are too boring for me after playing the game so many times in the last 15 years. And no, the game is in no way more "strategic and tactical". DAO is great, but it's not the best game, and even not the best Dragon age game.
People complaining about darkness never played DA2 in seems and listened to the background banter on the streets of Kirkwall. And this is not even the obvious ones like Hawke's family.
Inquisition might not show as much, but if you *listen* to the game, it's no less dark. The games are just not brown anymore, and have more distinct art style(thank gods), and not the generic late 2000s dirt.
We wanted Origins 2, instead we got Inquisition 2. Oh well can't say I'm surprised.
P.S. Desire demon in Origins is the hottest thing on 2 legs. The Veilguard could never XD
Well for your sake I hope they bring them back lol
Okay, as an "Origins fan", let me address your combat point very quickly, because I think this needs to be said, and it is one of my two real criticisms so far. Yes, Origins combat was clunky, unpolished, and very narrowly focused in the late game. But, it was tactical, new, and gave a wide variety of options for your party. The problem is that instead of improving and iterating on this system, they completely abandoned it in 2, and gave us an in between for Inquisition.
For comparison, let us look at another franchise they own, Mass Effect. Combat in ME was slow, buggy, tedious, and often unpolished. But this combat system was drastically improved in ME2, my favorite in the trilogy storywise. But ME3 had a very streamlined, polished, and worthy upgrade the the ME qnd ME2 combat systems. Personally, that was my favorite in terms of gameplay. They didn't fundamentally change the system. They improved and interated on it with each new installment.
Dragon Age has abandoned their groundbreaking combat system completely in favor of going for a more ME style of gameplay. Fans have been asking for a return and improvement on THAT system since the series began. We have told them what we wanted for years, and BIOWARE has completely ignored us, or remained completely out of touch with their fanbase.
If you want to see the success of companies that iterate on their gameplay instead of changing it completely, look no further than Larian Studios and From Software. I've been with them since the beginning. They have the same basic mechanics with every game. They just polish the gamplay and add new features to it, and they are now outshining even AAA studios. All in all, Dragon Age's gameplay loop has no identity.
I'd argue that the gameplay loop does have an identity ya know.
Fight, loot, finish quest objectives, return to base, converse with companions, progress story, and then repeat the cycle. I feel like that loop is there in each game (with 2 being the weakest in terms of a base and conversing with allies)
But where I agree is that there is no set combat system identity in this series for sure, but tbh I can totally see why it happened.
Dragon Age 2 was very likely an experiment for Bioware. They had a year to crank out the game, so they likely felt uncertain about making a competent successor to Origins tactical combat and iterate on it, like you described with the transition from DOS 1 to DOS 2 then BG3. So they experimented and used the bones of Origins to make something slightly more actiony, and then 2 despite it being rushed sold very well.
I don't think we have numbers but it did sell faster than Origins.
And then Inquisition with its more action orientated combat outsold both previous games, so by all means, money was pointing them to innovate on their action-RPG combat rather than their roots in Origins, especially considering that when you look at their other RPGs in mass effect they have experience with the action side of things I mean it does make sense.
Now would I like to see what they could have come up with if they stayed down the Origins path in terms of combat, oh absolutely, but I'm happy with what we got as I did have a lot of fun with the combat in each of the games even if they never hit that amazing level for me personally.
Still the combat reveal came out today for high level gameplay and imo it does look incredible.
@@minstora
I do agree with your points regarding DA 2, very strongly, in fact. Games need to have a clear vision and direction, and DA 2 suffered from time constraints and limited ideas and development. This is actually my second biggest complaint. The turbulent dev cycle has many fans worried they will be receiving a botched product just like Anthem, Andromeda, and DA 2.
I want this game to succeed, I really do. But not having a consistent combat identity, the turbulent dev cycle, practically none of the original devs on board, and not listening to what their fans have been begging for has me worried sick.
Each game looks and feels completely different from each other. Stick a video of each installment's combat and gameplay side by side and look at the stark differences between them. That is an insane issue to have. Your franchise plays nothing like it's sequels.
As a standalone game, it could be absolutely amazing, and I really hope it is. But Veilguard doesn't look, play, or feel like Dragon Age Origins, the game that put this franchise on the map. Don't get me wrong, I liked all of them very much, but for vastly different reasons.
@@minstora I think the other thing people forget is that BioWare's previous games were more turn based than Origins was, so BioWare saw how well Origins did moving away from that formula, and just continued down that path. Origins itself was a departure from conventional formula, so heading back towards tactical turn based systems wouldn't have been an evolution for BioWare, it would have been a step backwards from how they were evolving those systems already.
It's funny to look back at older conversations on forums where people argue about whether even Baldur's Gate 2 was turn based because BioWare was trying to hide the turn based system behind animations and action elements.
@@zachariahmousa7652 I sympathize with your worry fam. While I DESPISE EA I do genuinely want the best for Bioware even tho their last two games have been disappointing I don't want that to be the case for Veilguard as I feel like this really is their last chance. I'm scared if this game fails they'll cease to exist and I don't want that as I feel like they still have it in them to make good games that they were just misguided by EA's leadership.
Listening to fans is a key part of that so lacking that centralization in the dev process is worrying for sure, and yeah missing out on key OG devs is a big hit for sure.
I'm hopefully optimistic that the apparent switching from this game supposed to having been a live service to a single player game now, means good decisions are being made in abundance but I guess we will just have to see 🫠
@@minstora
If Veilguard fails, Bioware is finished. Most companies don't get to fail 3 times in a row and continue existing, especially under a parent company like EA. I don't want them to fail. Bioware has produced many games that I hold in such high regard. Baldur's Gate, Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, Mass Effect, and Dragon Age are all among some of my favorite games ever made.
I am hesitantly optimistic about this game. Everything is looking good so far. But the aspects that determine a franchise game's success are missing. Lack of improved iteration, ignoring fan requests, unsteady dev cycle, no franchise developers, a completely new team, and being under EA are all red flags to many fans.
I suppose this is the true crux of my complaints regarding Veilguard so far. Nothing I have seen so far is going to bring back that very vocal and significant portion of the fan base because they feel like they have been ignored so Bioware can chase a more broad audience. I guess you could say I am more critical of their business decisions which point to failure rather than the game itself. Companies like CD Project Red have learned that lesson the hard way.
I really hope I am wrong.
"Resistant to almost any change?"
1. The artstyle
2. The entire setting (from dark/grimdark fantasy to high or even PG/light fantasy).
3. The gameplay (from tactics/rpg to 'action rpg') from controlling a party of 4 down to controlling only one character with one AI sidekick.
These are not small changes.
I'm not saying you can't be upset about change lol.
I'm obviously implying that being hyper critical or hyper resistant to change (that's why I specifically said almost any change) are negative qualities.
But I point out plenty of changes in my critique section that I too am not a fan of, it's okay to dislike some changes and I'm not trying to imply otherwise.
1. If you dislike the art style that okay, it just makes the game not for you, which is a preference thing and that's valid. It doesn't make the game outright bad tho, and that's where I take issue when people use that to claim as such. But again, perfectly fine to say the art style makes the game a no for you!
2. Judging by this most recent trailer I'd argue the game is PLENTY dark, but hey we do have to wait and see. But I'd say to me after replaying Origins it didn't come across as Dark fantasy. It came across as High or Epic Fantasy with dark themes/plot, but 2 and Inquisition also fit that bill for me. But especially not grimdark lol other creators also disagree with the grimdark sentiment.
But hey again if you disagree that's fine, and it's again a perfectly valid reason to dislike a game and say it's not for you, it just doesn't make it outright bad. A script that doesn't land or a story that falls flat or drags would be things that attribute something to being bad (like how inquisition has the open world padding that can super streeeetch the story out)
3. If you don't like the combat it's also fine, I'll just say that as a fan who recently played all 3 and thinks that none of their systems are really outright amazing I look at videos of Veilguard combat and go okay this looks really damn promising in terms of fun 😂
Like I say in the video I'm hope it feels tactical still because the mass effect games were able to pull it off, but fingers crossed 🤞.
The controlling 4 party members isn't a big deal to me as I rarely ended up doing so even on hard difficulty BUT I agree. Going down from 4 to 3 party members wasn't a good look 😞
Still tho it's fine to not like these change.
There's a difference between not liking and being resistant to I feel.
I see being resistant as not wanting change to even be attempted. Where as not liking a change implies you're okay with them trying a change, you just didn't like the execution of it!
Hope that clears things up from my perspective
@@minstora Sure, thats why both Andromeda and Anthem got such a negative responce. Because, they changed to much, not because of lack of content, a trouble development, a rushed and unpolsihed final product. VG has had a huge turnover, most of the people responsible for the series success are gone and the previews show it clearly.
The whole point of a sequel is to take whats there and organically expand on it.
Otherwise just make a new series. A sequel comes with expectations and a preexisting customers and fan-base. If you tear down the pizza palace and replace it with the best damn taco stand ever, those that are there for pizza will still be disappointed, Hell maybe tacos give the indigestion.
If your point, is we just need to accept, that the series is no longer for you. Then fair enough, but its a problem for the business when a huge amount of consumers feel that way.
@@raynortownly7098 I genuinely don't understand why you're talking about Andromeda and Anthem rn 😆
I never said they were good games? Andromeda has good combat but failed because the story wasn't very good, and was ABSOLUTELY bug ridden, just an awful technical state that it shouldn't have released in and a lot of the promise it could have had was never realized such as there being only 1 new alien race, and Anthem just was way too repetitive and over monetized for a paid game, not enough content.
And yes VG did have a lot of turn over, but I imagine that was reflective of it's early plans to be a live service that they've verrrrryy thankfully now turned away from in order to make it single player.
"The preview shows it clearly" What does that even mean? I'm sorry I'm just confused because if you just make a blanket statement but don't provide any examples it just seems as if you simply don't like it, which again doesn't make something bad, unlike Andromeda's bugs we mentioned earlier.
I at several points in the video point to how the sequels keep the DNA of Origins, and as you say organically expand it. The templars vs mages has been at the heart for 3 games, darkspawn, spirits, grey wardens, elves, and many other staples are still present and used to tell interesting stories.
The only changes that even remotely fit what you're talking about are mechanics which of course change dramatically Origins is 15 years old, and like I said, no where near as good in terms of its mechanics as people remember.
And I mean if you're talking business while Bioware has fumbled with its recent games, with Dragon Age it has not. With each title in the series selling more than the previous one lol.
So they're doing just fine business wise and maybe Origins fans that cannot accept these changes no matter what do need to move on or just stick to enjoying that game, as clearly the whole: "a huge amount of consumers feel that way" is just false, I'm sorry. Because each game is doing better than the last. I mean Inquisition won the first game of the year at the game awards.
I wish there was a way to make a single game that checks all the boxes for this small part of the community that seems to be so resistant to change and one that at the same time checks the boxes for all other facets of the community but that just doesn't seem to be the case.
@@minstora Artstyle alone isn't a gamebreaking problem even if it's 'bad'. Best example of this is Final Fantasy 9. Despite putting many people off (me included) in the beginning it's now highly regarded and I think it's the best FF game they made because every other element is so well done.
@@minstora I kind of agree with your points though but if we look at it like this
1. Artstyle (i'll give it a pass if everything else is good).
2. game may or may not be dark enough setting, we simply don't know.
3. combat has always been just ok at best in the series. Not expecting much different here.
This means we will probably have 2 or 3 just ok's on every point. Maybe the combat will be amazing so we have 1 good point 2 oks. see why people are nervous?
Personally i believe origins actually dint give you any choices the game always fkowes the exact same with ot without your decision you always get your army and you always lead the army at th end they eld either becomes free and so on
This automatic negativity has been earned by EA. There’s a reason they were called one of the worst companies in America.
Combat was definitely flawed in DAO, but i wouldn't say the whole designe wasn't any good. I know you didn't say that, but i also don't quite get what you were trying to say. I see the combat designe of DA1 and 2 as the same, it was just less polished in the first game. On the other hand, you had more individual spells and talents in Origins, but many had no impact or were bugged.
But i certainly don't agree with your take on blood magic. It absolutely had an impact. Turning health into a resource, sustaining yourself by taking it from allies and getting access to the strongest crowd control spells. How is that not impactful?
I think inquisition gameplay/combat was a step down, despite completing it to 95% on nightmare. I hated the fact that it was all about keeping your barrier/guard bar up.
It was like playing a new expansion of world of warcraft where you'll never die as long as you stay within your questing/level range.
I mostly played warrior, so i'll only talk about those experiences, but they were absolutely boring. Using abilities like charge or taunt to generate guard and not for utility was such a stupid idea.
It felt like no matter what, those have to be on cooldown. Rolling into enemies to deal the best weapon damage was also complete bullshit.
And once i got the Berserker spec, it literally removed the need to attack with a weapon, all i had to do was pressing dragon rage and devour to win.
In Origins and DA2 i use utility talents for exactly that, utility. Having abilities that do multiple things can be nice, but if every single one of them is like that, it takes away the fun.
Especially when it gets to the point where you literally become permanently invincible, without doing much to achieve that. I'm not a fan of the arcane warrior, but even that spec required gear and a setup which took a while to get to.
The point is, the first 2 games had a good chunk of gameplay where you react to whatever the game throws at you, but in inquisition you only care about your guard/barrier.
I hope veilguard is going to be good, but it's not looking good right now. If combat is ass, i'll not even care about anything else, i'll use the refund button immediately.
What I was trying to say is that while "good enough" I don't think that the combat in Origins was so successful and well done that committing hard to refining it for future games is valid either.
Like I'm trying to justify their move away from that style of combat essentially. Especially moreso because for me I had more fun with combat with each new game, so IMO the move away from Origins combat got better and better.
BG3 is still my favorite RPG and its combat is a big reason why but it seems to me Bioware just had more success chasing action RPG combat instead and their increased sales with each game seems to agree??
And while I did have the most fun with Inquisition I do think it centers its combat too heavily around barrier. When did you last play btw? I remember feeling like a god with my Knight Enchanter build as well and basically being unkillable, but Knight Enchanter was nerfed which made for a more challenging experience so I'm wondering if the same was true for Berserker.
@@minstora I bought the game back in 2015 for the ps4, around the time when Bloodborne came out. Back then, i was very exicted because i loved both previous games and played them a ton. I think you get access to specializations once you reach skyhold, so up to that point, warrior wasn't invincible, but still quite tanky. But yeah as soon as you were able to spec deeper into reaver, it changed the whole style of combat, which sounds awesome, but trust me after beating 2 dragons basically solo, it got old very fast. What pissed me off the most was that i wanted to play a hack and slashing kind of warrior with a big sword, not glowing claws that replace everything else.
@@kenzovich9225 Yeah I think when the option came to pick a specialization a little tutorial video shoulda popped up showing you potentially what all the of the classes LOOKED like in how they fight
@@minstora Oh, you're saying i wouldn't have had the same issue with other specs? I think i would have, because obviously i got to play those too through my companions.
Knight Enchanter was also strong, but what made it strong was the new auto attack that generates barrier. If compare KE with the AW in origins, there was a lot more going on to become invincible. You had to offset the mana regeneration penalty with gear and despite being invincible, your damage output was garbage. This is my issue, in DAI any class turns into an arcane warrior with actual good damade, but what i enjoyed more was that you didn't in Origins and 2. Those games were about bringing a rogue to nuke dangerous targets, tanking and cleaving trash mobs with warrior and being a CC and support god as a mage. I wanted more of that, not everyone can do everything.
@@minstorai revisited Inquisition and i have to say that despite major flaws, it's still a great game. At the end of the day, if Veilguard improved on those, then i could definitely see it becoming the best in the series.
I just want to know when the original warden is lol and his kid he is the king after all lol prince consort whatever
I personally believe Inquisition is the best 1 when you look at overall story and impact i really like rhe fisrt game but i dont think your decision has ant reall impact in rhat game
1. Veilguard isn't out yet: Here's a problem there are certain Origin fans who are just bashing the game, but there are fans on the opposite side who saying this looks like it the best game in the series and they are not accepting any form of criticism, while just throwing out lines "oh you're just a hater" or "you're not a real fan", or "you're wrong it's going to be game of the year" which is just as an unfair assessment to make when the game isn't out yet.
2. Combat Criticism: Yes we played the same game. 🤦♂ Does Origins have the most in depth strategy, no but it does have a level of tactics and strategy to it's combat, which at the time of release is what a lot of rpg fans wanted. To your point about getting to a certain point in your Warden's build and that your strategy is pretty much the same isn't 100% accurate, because a lot of the strategy is dependent on how you create your warden's build as well as your companions build. Yes if say you build your Warden just as a two handed sword warrior your warden's strategy will relatively be the same, but if you spec out in both two handed and sword and shield then that gives your warden more options on how you approach combat scenarios. The strategy is also dependent on which companions you bring with you. You are going to approach combat differently if you bring Wynne in your party as opposed to Morrigan, and you would have a different strategy for combat if you didn't bring a mage in your party at all. Yes by todays standards Origins isn't god tier but it isn't fair to hold it to today's standards because it's wasn't made with today's standards in mind because a lot of those standards didn't exist at Origins initial release. For people who refer to DA2 and Inquisition as button mashy, I would agree isn't an accurate statement, but I would say that Bioware/EA partially brought this on themselves due to how they marketed DA2 "you push a button and something awesome happens, you push another button and something else awesome happens." The more accurate way to refer to it would be simplified and consolefied combat. Yes I agree that none of the Dragon Age games have had amazing combat but I think most fans can agree that Origins is the one that has the most depth to it's combat and that's the biggest issue Origin fans have is the removal of that depth to the combat.
3. Companions Aren't Conventionally Attractive: This is an argument that people will argue about until they are blue in the face because yes beauty is subjective. Now this is going to come of as an bit of an assumption on my part but my issue with Neve has more to do with her personality. From some of the lines we have heard her say she kind of comes off as stuck up similar to Vivienne which is a personality trait I don't find attractive. Where I don't agree with you is I don't think that Harding with her more pronounced freckles is conventionally attractive because those real life models will have freckles removed in photoshop.
4. The Spirit of Dragon Age: Most of the complaints are directed at the first trailer which doesn't tonally doesn't match the spirit of Dragon Age's dark fantasy world.
5. The Sequels Aren't Dark and Gritty: I do agree that DA2 is quite dark and unnecessarily gets piled on probably due to the issues it does have. I feel for DA2 where the dark tone doesn't feel as good if you are playing solely as sarcastic Hawke because there are times where it just comes off as unrealistic or tonally off for Hawke to be either cracking jokes or being sarcastic in those dark moments. For Inquisition its definitely more High Fantasy than Dark Fantasy, with the brighter colour pallet, the main music theme gives off a more epic adventure vibe than it does dark fantasy, having a character like Sera and her personality feels tonally off for dark fantasy. Yes there are dark moments in Inquisition but don't occur as frequently as in the previous games because of how much busy work and fetch quests there are in between those moments. The other issue fans have is you can't be a blood mage and no matter how bad or evil you are certain companions in the Inquisition won't leave or try to kill you for making those evil decisions.
6. Too Much Diversity: I don't think people are looking at all characters just the companions and they are correct to say that the ratio of euro centric companions is higher in all other Dragon Age games and the ratio is lower when it comes to the Veil Guard companions.
7. The Old Companions Were Better: The characters from Origins are better. That's not to say they're aren't great characters that followed there definitely are but if you go and look at best Dragon Age companions most lists are going to have Alistair, Leliana, Morrigan, Shale, and Zevran in their top 10 and three of those are probably in the top 5. The only really one note character from Origins is Oghren since he was more their for comic relief and dog as well. I love to romance Cassandra as well but she's a stereotype, she's not the first female character that's tough on the exterior but a delicate flower on the inside.
Thanks for taking the time to comment and leaving such a detailed reply to the points in the video. I'll try to address your comment with equal level of thought and introspection.
(Sorry for using caps so much, cant use italics on youtube comments.)
1. Not gonna address this much as the players you're hypothesizing about on the other side of the extreme don't describe me or the tone of my video as while yes, the pre-release material has successfully hyped me up for the game, I do believe what I stated in the video clears me of being in proximity to the kind of fans you're describing
Because within the first few minutes I state:
@2:57 "...the goal of this video isn't to say that Veilguard is going to be fantastic, a for sure 10/10 and that it's a game beyond critique and that if you dislike it, you're bad or wrong or whatever, in fact towards the end of this video I'm gonna get into my own critiques surrounding what we've seen of Veilguard so far, some of which many of you may also agree with.
No, instead the goal is to simply point out some of the flaws in commonly voiced critcisms and to reiterate that we should wait until the game releases and play it ourselves before passing some of these wide sweeping judgements..."
Extremes on both sides are bad and I believe that not allowing any criticism for Veilguard only serves to make it a worse game at launch and as it inevitably gets updates and patches. I hope the game is good, but I'm not saying it already is good as we have to get the game in our hands first.
2. The first few sentences pretty much cover what I meant when I said the combat is good enough as I'm not really comparing it to modern games. I said I had more fun with combat in 2 than I did Origins, and I'm comparing it further by saying it's more difficult and I had to pause it more times. 2 by the way I described it has better combat the one (low difficulty, same approach to each encounter, lack of weight, several reasons) 2 came out only a year and half later than Origins so by no means am I using modern games as a measure. I'm comparing it within it's own series. Inquisition came out 10 years ago btw and 5 years apart from Origins, so again the comparisons hold up and there is no modern Dragon Age game until Veilguard releases.
I understand that you CAN have several approaches to combat, but what I'm saying is the game doesn't necessarily incentivize you to. And yes, the game will play differently if you have different party members but that doesn't refute the sameness of lack of variety in combat. It's just that if you roll with the same party throughout most of the game (which most people do. The Dragon Age subreddit asks this question and most people do play with the same party throughout a playthrough save for bringing certain companions on certain missions that it seems important for them to be there which I also do) then combat isn't gonna change much. Yes it could be in theory, but in practice no.
I disagree with you on Origins having the most depth but perhaps we may have to agree to disagree. As I said in 2 I paused more, died more, and overall had to THINK my way through encounters more. The same applies with Inquisition (which now isn't unfair to bring up since we are talking about most depth a combat has in the series) and then some as it's actually the first game in the series where I had to actually switch to other party members pretty often (to drink potions but also for like for brief moments at a time to use certain key abilities) particularly in bosses or when fighting dragons, but still it's more than Origins ever put me through.
And for one more thing on this subject let me offer an anecdote: as I said in the video I've been getting my wife into the game, and she VERY early on, like ever since post Lothering has been using almost the exact same rotation and tactics in combat pending new abilities as she levels. And by this point in the game she has about 8-ish or more spells iirc. I didn't even tell her to, it's just something she naturally did as the game does not incentivize, or reward her for doing otherwise, nor does it punish her for continuing to do so.
Again we may not be able to come to an agreement on this one, but I state my case, nonetheless.
3. @ 14:45 "I understand why having romance options you aren't attracted to in a game like this would suck, I can sympathize with that. As romance options are something I enjoy a lot in RPGs myself, so if you genuinely don't find em attractive that is a bummer and is definitely subjective. But. to call them not conventionally attractive is just outright wrong."
I'm not trying to argue that the companions are undeniably INDIVIDUALLY attractive to each player as that'd be impossible. I state and agree with you that attraction is subjective. I'm not gonna dispute with you on the stuff you mention about Neve because those are subjective traits that comprise how you personally feel about her so far, pre-release.
This section of the video argues instead that denying these characters are CONVENTIONALLY attractive is wrong objectively and I use that point to highlight how the "Origins fans" I refer to in this video use misremembered or outright wrong info when making these points that don't hold up.
What we colloquially define as conventional attractiveness are set features that can't be refuted and can be pointed to and recognized based on eyesight or feel such as again: the sharp cheekbones or angled jawlines/facial structure, some other words besides captivating for eyes could be: piercing, vivid, or deep-set/wide-set, flawless eyebrows in terms of arch, shape, and grooming, and the full lip volume.
If a person has some or many of those traits, colloquially they would be considered and defined as conventionally attractive just perhaps not considered attractive to a specific individual based on their own judgement and what they look for in a person.
When I google: "redhead women with freckles instagram model" I come across some with VERY high follower counts and lots of interaction and they do not photoshop their freckles. I think another aspect of conventional attractiveness is popularity, or perhaps an ability to monetize the look, which those women do (as they should, use what ya got I say).
4. I agree, the first trailer they chose was a massive mistake, they should have led with the release date trailer, perhaps without the release date, if it wasn't ready to show back around the time we got the first trailer.
5. I'm glad we agree on 2! However as for what you said about sarcastic Hawke, there are plenty of times in Origins where you could also choose to say something witty, sarcastic, or funny, out of place in a very serious moment. So if its a players choice then I don't necessarily think it refutes something ya know?
But, for Inquisition I'll point to what I said @ 20:07 "Just because the art style is stylized and brighter in some areas it doesn't mean that the games themselves aren't dark in theme and plot." regarding what you said about it's brighter color pallet and music choice
I also don't think you pointing to Sera checks out for not vibing with a dark fantasy and she is similarly unserious and jokey as Alistair, there's several compilations minutes long of him refusing to take almost anything seriously lol and, that's why we love him, and why some people love Sera.
I'd argue that the dark moments and calls to dark or gritty themes are about equal in amount, but you are right in that it doesn't feel as such because of Inquisition's poor use of open world busy work (which I also call out in this video btw). Either way it'd take both of us a lot of time and cooperation to put an exact number in terms of "how much darkness" is in one game as opposed to the other like do we measure it based on screentime that stuff appears in hours, minutes, and seconds. I for sure ain't doing that lol.
I imagine the whole not being able to be a blood mage in every game thing derives from the devs not wanting to have the same specializations in every game as it's more fun to come up with new exciting specializations from a developmental standpoint? I have no way of knowing that for sure, but if blood mage was a spec in every game I could see people getting just as tired of it and asking for something new. Although we do have templar in like every game, but finally it won't be appearing in Veilguard, still I'd personally be down for blood mage in every game as I love the specialization but thats a personal preference what can ya do.
To your last point about companions not leaving you regardless of how evil you are or how much bad you do, I'd say that maybe the companions decide to stick with you in Inquisition no matter what because still the Inquisition is setting out to save the world and regardless of how you set about achieving that as the Inquisitor they see it as worth it to stick around and help? Idk I think it would be cool if you could make them angry enough to leave, but I understand why given the plot and set up of the game maybe they don't. It was cool to be able to miss out or have companions leave you in BG3.
1/2
6. Erasure in this social context refers to "the practice of collective indifference that renders certain people and groups invisible" or acts that make such a practice more likely, for example: casting Scarlett Johanson as a character is canonically meant to be Japanese. And considering what you state about well the ratio of Eurocentric characters being higher in previous game, less does not constitute erasure necessarily ESPECIALLY when they still almost hold the majority (Neve, Harding, and Lucanis, if we are talking just companions you can have in your party).
However, I still think for this talking point it's fair to include characters like Solas, Varric and Morrigan as given their importance they are going to be around VERY much and still a part of your group that sets out to save the world given what we were told in interviews, so we will interact with them very often.
Essentially if having a few less party members that may resemble people of my ethnicity means there's a chance someone else gets a companion that potentially represents someone that resembles people of their ethnicity and that makes them happy? Well I'm happy for them.
7. As I stated in this section of the video, this point is much more subjective than others. So I won't argue with you on you thinking they're better, I'll only say that you saying simply that: "The characters from Origins are better" doesn't serve this conversation much as hey you think they're better and I don't think of them as necessarily higher quality than the other ensembles, or that they exhibit heart, wit, and depth that the other ensembles don't.
As far as those list, I find and it's a common sentiment in the community that your first Dragon Age game typically tends to be what resonates with you most, and most people's top 10 or top 5 list of companions will reflect that and hey it can't be helped. Even mine might? Idk.
Even the whole one note thing is hard to argue as that's how they seem to me given that I've beaten this game recently again within the past month so they're still very fresh in my head.
Also I never said Cassandra was the first character to be tough on the exterior but a softie on the inside, it's just that's what I chose to use as an example of her having heart, wit, and depth. And, that I personally like how that cliche was executed with her character, writing, and voice acting.
Cliches are used widely for a reason: they work. They are popular, but what makes them bad is if they are utilized or written/disguised well.
Anyways those are just my takes on what you've written for me. I thank you again for taking out the time to write such a length response as it shows that you've at least watched my video to more completion than most who leave comments in disagreement.
You're welcome to leave another round of back and forths, but this reply took more time than I'd thought to get back to you so I don't think I'd be replying in such a capacity again if you chose to do so lol, at least not in the method of youtube comment lol, I'm sure you understand.
Take care!
- Minstora
2/2
@@minstora Thanks for your response back. (I too wish that we could use Italics in the comments section)
1. Dude you didn't have to type out your goal for the video, the main reason I watched your video to the end was because you said "the goal of this video isn't to say that Veilguard is going to be fantastic, a for sure 10/10 and that it's a game beyond critique" which was appreciated. My point was that not you specifically but there are a section of the fan base who think the game is already a 10 and game of the year when the game isn't even out yet. I just personally feel these fans should be called out just as much as the fans hating on Veil Guard with no constructive criticism.
2. Okay good to hear you weren't comparing Origins to modern games, but feel there are section of fans who are doing that or like @ajdove1823 have a certain expectation on how a older game should run on a modern PC. I think Origins does incentivize players to create different builds due to the fact that it gives you a secondary weapon slot. Now does the game reward you for doing so no, but it's a slight encouragement or little nudge to do so. I agree that DA2's combat has more impact than Origins but I think some of the problems that people have with Origins combat comes from how they approached combat. I feel that some players who didn't enjoy Origins combat were trying to approach it like an ARPG as apposed to a CRPG not saying you approached then game that way but I feel some did. Which was more my point that Origins has more depth to its combat due to the depth of the tactics system. I agree that the animation of your attacks can have a feeling of sameness but splitting your combat skills between to different skill trees helps alleviate some of the sameness feeling.
We're the opposite when it comes to Origins and DA2. I feel DA2 is a breeze to get through combat wise except for some of the boss fights. I pause way more in Origins than DA2 and Inquisition. Though with Origins it's probably partially how I approach the combat personally. I approach Origins like I do Xcom. I literally talk to my screen and the characters like they can hear me for Xcom it's "Soldiers! It doesn't matter if we take all the aliens out! If we lose one man or woman we have failed", with Origins its "Alistair, if I have to use one injury kit on you, I'll leave you in camp for the rest of the journey and I'll make Loghain a Grey Warden." So I'm a very micro manager when it comes to Origins more so than I am for DA2 and Inquisition.
3. Again people can argue till their blue in the face about beauty. Again I did admit with Neve it's an assumption on my point from what we have heard, just for me someone who has an ugly personality I find it very difficult then to see their physical attractiveness. For the girls on instagram if they aren't photoshopping out their freckles and doing well then good for them but I don't think them being able to monetize their look means they are conventionally attractive it could just mean that the people who are supporting them find them subjectively attractive. If one of those instagram models were to become an actress and well known then they get the opportunity for a photoshoot for a magazine like Vogue or something similar there freckles would be photoshoped out because freckles aren't considered conventionally attractive.
4. Yes you can be sarcastic in Origins in those dark moments but it comes off as more out of place in DA2 because Hawke is voiced and comes off as more out of place at times depending how the line of dialogue was delivered. When it comes to Alistair yeah there was a lot of things he didn't take seriously but he could be serious, like if you talked babdly about Duncan, or he'd be serious about the decision you'd make around Connor, where Sera I don't think has a serious bone in her body, she's just way too over the top for a dark fantasy story.
Again for Inquisition I'm not saying there are not dark moments and themes in it, I feel fans biggest issue with Inquisition and Veil Guard is the lack of consistency in the visual dark tone. For example if Peter Jackson designed Minas Tirith with a bunch of neon lights and a brighter and wider colour pallet, that wouldn't match the visual tone of the previous films. That's how I think fans feel about Veil Guard and Inquisition the visual tone doesn't match the previous games and lack a consistent dark fantasy grit that Origins and DA2 have. When it come to blood magic for Veil Guard, Patrick Weekes said they didn't want Rook to be able to do the nasty stuff you could do with blood magic, which upset a lot of fans who like to roleplay as an evil character or roleplay as a flawed hero.
5. I think Veil Guard at least matches the part of your definition where "acts that make such a practice more likely" when it comes to caucasian characters compared to the previous games. Origins (Alistair, Leliana, Morrigan, Ogrhen, Wynne, and Loghain), DA2 (Carver, Bethany, Aveline, Varric, Anders, Merrill, Fenris, and Sebastian), Inquisition (Sera, Cassandra, Varric, Solas, Blackwall, and Cole), and Veil Guard (Scout Harding and Emmrich). Also I think people who have brought up erasure are also referring to the sexual orientation of the companions which is why I don't think it's fair to bring up Varric, Solas, and Morrigan since they most likely won't be romanceable in Veil Guard. I personally think that making all the companions pan is a form of erasure of sexual identity is it not?
6. I agree that the preferred companions is subjective but instead of a ranked list lets call a pyramid tier list then I think you could agree that most fans would have Morrigan, Leliana, and Alistair in the top tier and I think Bioware feels the same particularly because they seem to use Morrigan as the face of the franchise (except for DA2 but that's okay because Kate Mulgrew was great as Flemeth).
That's a fair critique and something I should keep in mind for next video regarding those overly positive fans too, I could have made it a point to call them out in the video as well.
I'm also committed to policing my comments against any hostility from that group of fans just like I am from the group this video is about.
@@minstora Cool, thanks for the back and forth.
Personally i think people say rhey arent attractive enough tegy mean thye are nkt white
i love the combat in 2, but I HATE the combat in inquisition, is a weird mix of 2 and origins, feels awful to me
Yeah, I feel the exact same way, Inquisition feels much better as a ranged character, but it's absolute pain if you're melee. I'd much rather have either DA:O or DA 2, but leaning towards 2. I feel like the new combat we've seen is way more like what DA 2 could have been if they had time to fully develop it, and especially after what they learned designing systems across three Mass Effect games, so I am genuinely excited to play it and experiment with some builds like I did in Andromeda. :)
while dragon age might still be gritty and dark it lacks moral complexity of origins and 2 where facing such great odds necessitates or justifies reprehensible deeds for greater good, so while its still dark and gritty (atleast up to inquisition) it points those as clearly in the morally wrong whitout player input making inquisition shallower and watered down game
Secondly even if origins lacks in encounter design where to use tactical tools or fully equitable and controllable party its still objectivly best from tactical standpoint.
First game: Breadth and depth of role-playing options, classic tactical slow-paced gameplay, grounded yet vibrant visual style, complex and interesting moral dilemas, developed and well-explored themes.
- I will skip DA2, because it would be unfair, rather compare to actually solid third game
Third game: Limited role-playing options, NO ORIGINS SYSTEM??? a more modern and streamlined twist on the classic gameplay with some interesting additions, a more vibrant and "modern" visual style, but still somewhat grounded, there is literally zero complex dilemmas and while the game seemingly presents some "hard" choices they are all shallow or present no real ethical conflicts, underdeveloped story and messy underexplored themes, although what the game seemingly set out to explore was definitly interesting.
4th game so far: Same old limited role-playing options, NO ORIGINS SYSTEM ONCE AGAIN??? although you can choose factions that's something, big shift in gameplay which is now a kitchen sink attempt at emulating other action-RPG titles, big shift in visual design and style now takes a far more stylized approach and while appealing looking, at least to me it seems rather bland ( Check out the game "Flintlock" it looks almost identical to DAVe), too early to say anything about the story, but some commentary from the devs and gameplay suggest that your role-playing will be even more limited than in DAI. One of the devs said that they don't want PCs to use blood magic, because you are heroes and that's just not what heroes do. An approach you can take, but it's still limiting.
So as you can see there is a huge difference and an obvious trend of changes in the series. A desire to streamline the series and appeal to mass audience. The 4th game literally switched genre from RPG to action-RPG. With so many things that they have changed it is no wonder fans of older games don't like the new one. The game might not be bad at all, but fans of old games are totally right when they say "it's not Dragon Age", because they got invested into one thing, only for that thing to become something different. It's not Dragon Age TO THEM.
Facts aside, opinion: combat looks extremely boring to me, if that's your vibe that is cool, but this is just the same thing all the modern action-RPG have done a thousand times, as I said it's a kitchen sink of stuff from other games. Visually it looks nice for what it is ... And what it is, is extremely generic modern fantasy design. Honestly, If I didn't know any better, I'd think it was AI generated, but I know that it's not! This is a game made by committee and it shows. But even with all that said, I think it's probably gonna be fine. Not as good as DAI, but not as bad as DA2. Hell, I even liked DA2 despite hating every second of gameplay. Companions feel uninspired for the most part, only Neve seems interesting to me so far, Harding maybe. Otherwise, they seem to be stereotypes, It feels like I have seen them all in those MCU films or something, I don't need to hear them speak, I can already hear their voices and lines playing out in my head.
I'll go from top to bottom.
Yes Origins has a load of great options in role play that do feel like they matter. When I said combat isn't why the game was phenomenal, that is part of the reason why. Not the tons of role-playing options in terms of building a character combat wise I feel like doesn't matter as much because again, combat is severely undercooked in Origins, but outside of combat, yes the options are stellar.
Tactical gameplay where? Said tactics go out of the window once you're in your 50th combat, with the same enemies that they themselves haven't changed what they do in combat, as you yourself use the exact same talents, in the exact same rotation.
The art style was grounded, absolutely and its part of the games charm, however: vibrant? Absolutely not 😂.
Vibrant meaning: full of energy and enthusiasm or of color, bright and striking? You'll have to miss me with that one friend haha. I feel confident in saying as such in big part because I completed the game again last month on nightmare, but your comment reinforces for me that far too many Origins fans too fondly misremember the game. I'm not trying to come off as rude, but myself as well as many others struggle to understand what game you're talking about, because if it's Origins, it doesn't exist as you describe it.
If you actually watched the entire video (maybe ya did), you'd see that I lead to several examples where both 2 and Inquisition in fact DO have complex moral dilemmas, and well explored themes. You can't just say: "nuh uh" when several examples are provided 😅. I mean you can, but it doesn't help your case lol. At it's core Inquisition deals with the Mage vs Templar threat while exploring things of freedom of an oppressed group, with said group being a massive danger, nonetheless. It CONSTANTLY challenges the notion of should mages truly be free, while shoving multiple examples in our faces of mages doing awful things, but the challenge is do we judge all mages with that brush? While at the same time, showing us an awful side to templars we haven't seen yet. (They knew this WHOLE TIME how to reverse tranquility?) Even whole characters are dedicated to this in your party, as while the notion that mages should just be free like everyone else is common (I myself am in that camp), Vivienne will constantly challenge that position.
It also is awesome in how it shoes the darkness of organized religion, particularly the Chantry. We get to see all these awful things they do behind the scenes (we've been seeing them, but it continues in Inq.) Lelianna as a spymaster gets into some dark shit, the templars again, and the lies that they've sold to the entirety of Thedas? "Beg that I succeed. For I have seen the Throne of the Gods, and it was empty!" - Corypheus.
And you the Inquisitor are the "Herald of Andraste" selling people a comfortable lie to unite them against a foe much too important to let religious division get in the way of.
Where are these shallow choices? We gotta pick the divine, decide the fates of several people upon a throne as essentially their judge, jury, and executioner (similar to how we did in Awakening), we pick who to allow more power amongst two imperfect groups being the mages and templars, we condemn a hero either Stroud, Hawke, or Loghain to their death in the fade. Like I said dude there's so many examples haha.
Now of course there ARE themes that Origins no doubt explores better. While we got tons of Elf stuff in Inquisition, I feel like Origins due to spending time in alienages and just seeing more of the poor treatment of mages there versus inquisition. It explores their oppression much better in that game and it's somewhere I wished Inquisition was better for sure.
I mean Origins is the first games namesake, so while I also am bummed that we didn't get an Origins system in 2 or Inquisition, I can see them not including it in every game, even if I myself personally think it could work and would be a good idea.
What I'm not okay with is like you said just an almost COMPLETE omission of determining who your character was prior to the game... HOWEVER Baldur's Gate 3 is my favorite game of all time, and a considered a phenomenal RPG far and wide it also does not have something close to the Origin system. Essentially only background and class choices matter in that regard, BUT both BG3 and Inquisition do give you the option a bit, to determine who your character was prior to the games events via choices you make in dialogue when talking to people. Origins did the same thing when giving you the chance to talk about your mom with Morrigan iirc.
So while I wish all the games had an Origins system, I'd argue an RPG, even a Dragon Age game doesn't need one to be.. AND Veilguard at least is better than it's predecessor in that regard, since we have a faction system in character creation that determines what our character was all about and what kinda shenanigans they got into prior to Veilguard's events. It's not perfect, and doesn't compare to the Origins system, BUT it is at least seemingly on par with BG3 (and by extention DnDs) background system. That being it'll be brought up in dialogue apparently and will allow you to interact with the world in meaningful ways (hopefully BioWare delivers on that promise as we don't have the game yet.)
My whole point behind all of this, was to point out that there is more similarities in quality than old fans may at first realized, and when combined with what I feel is a misremembering of Origins, leads me to urge fans to replay all of these games if they can because the whole it's not the same Dragon Age really holds up (at least to me after a LOT of examination, because as a content creator I've spent way too many hours analyzing all of this stuff) in the gameplay department because they play differently.
The combat of Veilguard kinda just comes across as an advancement of Inquisition, technically still 6 abilities if you count runes and just a closer camera, leading to feeling like a combo of DA and ME.
By you proclaiming oh it'll probably end up being somewhere between 2 and DAI, you've already judged how the game will be in your hands. We've seen 40 minutes of gameplay of a MULTI hour RPG so getting that close to deciding how the game will be is insane to me.
It is fine to say a game is not for you, I'm not saying you have to like it. I'm saying many of the reasons you and others presented, don't qualify for calling it BAD when it isn't even here yet.
Even for all of my hype across all my videos I've said many times that we will still have to wait and see when it comes to this game.
Like you're full on judging companions you haven't heard deliver more than a line or two, such as Lucanis, Emmrich, and Bellara? MCU characters? We know damn near nothing about those characters 😂. And if anything Origins companions are WAY more closer to stereotypical characters. Lelianna presents as the typical oblivious religious stereotype, Alistair is your textbook jokester, Wynne is your wizened mage, Zevran is your overly promiscuous Rogue. Like come on?
Obviously they get deeper than that as companions, but on the surface level those companions present as stereotypes? That same surface level that YOU are using to judge Veilguards companions?
Like idk what else to tell you dude.
@@minstora PART 2:
DAO thematically delves extremely deeply into the topic of war, sacrifices, and compromises people have to make to win or even just survive these wars. The duplicitous nature of human beings, it's good vs greater good and what is the best example of that if not the Grey Wardens and their order? I mean, I can go on about this for ages, but it's not just the themes that the game explores, but how almost every interaction, every quest and every dialogue plays into those themes. It's extremely well-done. I think DAI being my 2nd favorite DA game, had a lot of potential with it's religious themes, but I feel like they got sabotages with all the shallow side content and new "gameplay features" like war table and stuff. I don't know, I just didn't feel like DAI had such a strong thematic throughline as DAO did, but it definitly had potential and some good moments. It's close, maybe even on par, but the hassle of all the side content and war table takes away from the experience IMO. These ofc not the only themes the game tackles, but I feel like these are the main ones. Obviously there are strong themes of faith in the game too, but most of them are there to compliment and explore what I mentioned above.
Why I am so obsessed with Origins system is because literally no one else does it, it's an amazing feature and people often forget that in Origins your story was woven into the main plot of the game, some Origins were more involved than other, obviously human noble get's the most out of his Origin, but it's just so rewarding to be a person that actually exists in the world, whom people know and have a place that you can call home, it's like your character is actually part of the world and not some blank slate. It's an amazing system, unique to Dragon Age and I am baffled as to WHY you would not include it in the game? As much as I enjoyed BG3, the blank slate protagonist was not doing it for me, I played Dark Urge and it worked for all the same reasons I mentioned above. Like, people say BioWare is afraid to compete with BG3 and it's understandable, but this is one area where you can really stand out lmao. I am glad to see they at least allow us to choose a faction, but something tells that outside of some unique dialogue, equipment etc. we won't get much else and while that's something, it's definitly not even close to the Origins in Origins where you almost had your personal quest on par with companions unless you were a mage. The only place where mage's actually suck compared to the rest ... I feel like Dragon Age fans are not very demanding, you as a customer have a right to expect more and demand more specially from BioWare a supposed RPG pioneer with one of the biggest publishers behind them, I am really tired of hearing "Oh, it's okay if there are LITERALLY NO MECHANICS OR GAMEPLAY OR NOTHING IN THEGAME, I will buy it ...". An exaggeration, but you get my point.
@@minstora ENDINGS SLIDES:
idk, combat in Veilguard looks more akin to Hogwarts Legacy, latest AC games etc. It has some similarities to DAI, but only because DAI already was trying to mimic Witcher and that AAA action-RPG open-world style of gameplay. All these AAA titles are the same. They even visually look the same, just google the UI and character stat screen ... Shame I can't share screenshots. It's just a shame that instead of doing something unique, taking risks or expanding, instead of changing previous mechanics, they chose a safe option of AAA action-RPG bog standard gameplay. But I guess BioWare can't allow to take any more risks theses days, because of their past failures with Anthem and Andromeda.
In conclusion, I would like to point out that in the last part of my post I mention how it's just my opinion, It is totally valid for me to make an assessment of the game before it comes out based on what I have seen and the information available. When the game comes out, I will play it and change my opinion if it manages to sway me. It's a pretty simple concept. It's also very ironic how people have no problem glazing and hyping the game up before it comes out, saying that it's GOTY, but if you are critical or don't like what you see "You gotta play the game! Wait till it comes out!". I can already see that I dislike this style of combat, I don't need to play it to know that, because I already played it in other games, I don't like the visuals and how overwhelming and saturated they are, neither do I like the overall visual design - I don't need to play the game to make these judgments, especially the ones about visual style. Again ... This is based on what I have seen and what has been shown so far. Information updates? Opinion updates. It's really that simple.
Coming back to my main point, the series has changed A LOT, wether for better or worse I'd say it's MOSTLY subjective. And because it's mostly subjective it's totally valid when DAO fans say "This is not Dragon Age", because ... Yeah, it's not Dragon Age FOR THEM. If you order a chicken soup, you don't expect to get sushi, it's understandable people are upset after waiting for the soup for so long only to find out it's not on the menu anymore. BioWare decided to shift to a different genre, different type of gameplay, different audience, that's well within their right, just as it's well within players right to voice their opinions. You are simply wrong about DAO fans being wrong and why they are wrong. Because they are not wrong, a subjective taste and preference cannot be wrong.
... Unless you are a DAVe fan, than you are objectively incorrect about everything, because uh ... All those purple lights must've damaged your brain. This will be my video: "Dragon Age 4 fans ARE WRONG!!! They are literally BRAINDAMAGED by purple light!" lmao.
The main reason they are doing this is the Success of BG3 & wish they had that in Bioware Games. Like a Guy that made Fallout New Vegas & Iceandell could not make a Game in todays world. Because both todays players & old fans screaming at rhe improvements of the Games. Like they say you can't go home again.
Keep deleting comments, that argue your points. That's not creating an echo chamber at all. I personally can't wait for this game to release and actually see how it compares against Black Myth Wukong number wise.
I left a 12000 character rebuttal to someone who politely attempted to refute the points my video made so you have no idea what you're talking about.
I welcome discussion and even enjoy sharing of opinions as long as it's done cordially between all parties, but if someone's a jerk, I'm simply gonna block them from channel as I don't have the time to care dealing with them 😂
No one is ever going to compare to the numbers of a game that is released and promoted in China as opposed to all the games that the government over there just bans. Black Myth Wukong seems like its a perfectly good game, but there are a ton of gacha mobile games coming out of China that do far better numbers than anything you'll ever see anywhere else, including the most beloved games of all time.
If you want to argue popularity over quality, feel free, but then that means you also probably have to argue for Taylor Swift (nothing wrong with that) and admit that Minecraft is way better than Black Myth Wukong (also, valid).
To me baldergate 3 character are very empty and boring also the comabt of that game made me hate it
I can't stand turb base combat it so unrealistic to me i hate it
uh no you are wrong.The sequels ranged from so so to just bad. Really bad. You are just showing you are fanboy by claiming otherwise. DA2 was made in 2 years. You can't make a good rpg in just 2 years. Inquisition the game we got was a severely cut down version of what director Mike Laidlaw tried to make. The frostbite 3 engine caused a lot of their work to just not work and so he salvaged the game as best he could. Similar problems with frostbite 3 caused Anthem to outright fail.
So if you did not know this you did not do your homework and just relied on your gut feelings for the series.
How am I a fanboy if I say Origins is my favorite in the series? 🤣
I'm aware DA2 was rushed I say as such here, but after recently replaying it, even I admit I was wrong about the game and it was better than I remember. Not amazing ofc but definitely much better.
I'm aware of Frostbite 3s shortcomings but what does that have to do with this video? I'm not arguing that these games are perfect, I admit to them all having flaws so I don't understand. The game is still quite enjoyable even with the engines flaws, BUT they do still cause some hiccups, doesn't mean a great game isn't there to be had underneath.
Your name fits in that it seems you're just angry 😅
the title gotta be a bait honestly nobody sane can have that opinion. well lets give you your chance
so after watching i heard mostly strawman arguments in favor of the newer games and subjective opinions ... i mean just because you didnt use the companion control, it doesnt mean others didnt use it much...
and on the woke part, it does get woke, but atleast in the last 2 games it were acceptable, because not every fkin char is pansexual or shit like that , now in veilguard nobody got preferences and most likely will be f...able after 3 charming words...
Gameplay in the veilguard just looks big time boring and designed for a smartphone ... probably the reason why you only get 3 spells
@@xheroexskiller ... Did you even play DA2?? Like seriously? All companions are Player Sexual in DA2 the EXACT SAME as DAV will be. Swing and a miss with that one.
Also, Zevran and Liliana are Bisexual in DAO. So, wanna try again??
BioWare games have always been "woke", you lot just haven't been paying attention before now.
@@WraithReaper09 may be true for the da2 part, just makes it more shit. And 2 characters is fine as I said dude
No, they are not wrong. The sequels are pretty bad.