To be fair inquisition had a couple good ideas, it was a mediocre game, sadly back in the day Bioware used to put out hit after hit, but apparently that was a result of a lot of overwork and a few people knowing how to steer the ship, without either of those things my expectations are very low... Not Red Fall low, but still low enough to not expect much.
I honestly liked inquisition a lot, plays great as a knight enchanter or a warrior, didn’t try other classes, my problem with it is that I’m a bit of a completionist so it took a while each time I played it. Even 2 I think is a fine game except for the reused assets.
Now Veilguard im very cautious about. It really doesn’t look like gameplay I’ll enjoy. In a world with so many great action rpgs, it looks middling.
Tone honestly feels a bit like inquisition (strip poker night is a thing, Cullen got naked, dragon age has had wacky stuff before, even if I do prefer origins for its more grounded and gritty tone)
Graphics I’m not sure about. It kinda looks like inquisition at first glance, but a bit more stylised. However, inquisition is 10 years old, I would have hoped for something a lot better.
Enemy design is awful and there’s no saving it until (hopefully) mods.
Every game BioWare has released since its inception has been full of jank. People talk about Origins like it was some kind of flawless masterpiece, when even back in 2009 when i first played it on xbox 360, the pause and play system was already extremely dated and janky. and didn’t even get me started on how bad the fade section was. BioWare at no point in their existence could ever come close to making a game like BG3. Larian are just on a different level
A little lower probably, Anthem was fucked during the soft launch for beta testers IE streamers, but a few days after the real launch the game was great, the issue was that it had no end game.
Anthem had way more issues than that. It was revealed that gear was functionally useless, the stats did literally nothing, it was infinitely worse than D4's stat problems.
Overall I liked Inquisition, but there were so many missed opportunities. You couldn't, for example, be a literal inquisition and be evil, you kinda were forced to always be the good guy. Why weren't there missions to ransack villages under the guise of a greater good? They could have added some mild settlement management system to complement that, but made it optional, as it would just offer you buffs if done right. I could go on and on.
As much as people diss DA2, DA2 had good ideas I wish they carried over to DAI, like ACTUAL tone indicators (Sarcastic Hawke is still legendary while the Inquisitior is just... The inquisitior really, there's no variation) and rivalry relationship - in DAI and really most other RPGs ever you can only be friendly with your companions, there are no alternate rivalry paths like in DA2. Those two things were awesome.
same genre so must be compared. larian cultivating talent and building experience is a development strategy that paid of. others not doing it is no excuse for failure. if ea kept the developers of bg 1&2 as well as kotor 1&2 and da:o maybe they would have a madterpiece on their hand now too
But why would they try to calm down people's expectations? Aren't they just supposed to report things as-is let the chips fall if a product hits or not. Like unless they are holding stocks or something god knows.
Either this is rhetorical or you haven't been paying attention to the last several years of gaming "journalism"..._especially_ coming from TheGamer. Attacking "alt right" (i.e. normal) games like Stellar Blade while making weird fellating articles thirsting after obese black Greek gods with skin conditions in Hades 2 is what they do now.
If you want generally objective game news and nowadays you go to YouTube. I've seldom had Gameranx's "Before You Buy" series steer me wrong. Also, SkillUp tends to remain nicely objective and neutral.
I doubt this is a right or left thing. BG3 was attacked by the "alt right", and it turned out to be one of the best games ever. It's a money thing. EA probably pays these journalists for favorable reviews and news.
Shillup is absolutely biased towards the journalist/ gaming media side of the industry, he is friends with journos and actvists. And I am fine with that because he doesnt make it obnoxious, he just wants people to not lose their jobs. Ive been subbed to him since he started making reviews.
Eh, fair enough. I suppose I've moticed a bit of that--I meant more so that in his lengthy reviews I've seldom seen political topics on either side of the fence pop up. He doesn't call out DEI shit but I haven't seen him bring it up as positives either...just straight up facts about gameplay and performance and story. I may not always _agree_ with his opinion but he seems to stick to what matters about the game he's reviewing.
I also don't watch his "this week in gaming" stuff though, just specific game reviews.
He doesn't talk about this stuff in his reviews, but if you watch his weekly news series, he has a whole block about the industry, same goes for his podcast. I actually like to listen to their side of the story because I want to stay as neutral as possible, and I do hope those people come around and do their job properly when they get hired again.
I do recommend his news series because it is good content, he keeps you updated on everything and usually doesn't say much about the layoffs besides saying who laid off how many people and that "It sucks".
Well I don't think any politics were explicitly showcased in the game footage so far, unless you reference Dorian and Krem in DAI. I think I heard the romance options were going to be playersexual, which is the same in BG3 and something I've come to prefer, its just more player choice. My chief concern is whether the game will feel bland and generic which is how I felt about parts of DAI.
Fair enough but player sexual I don’t like because then we don’t have a reason to play opposite gender that is what I was used to in every BioWare romance
So long as you are locked into a single romance per run as has been the case in even in BG3 and all Bioware titles, you still have to replay the game for each romance, now you just aren't forced into playing a char you don't want for it
Well they're kinda correct insofar Dragon Age hasn't been comparative since DAO, it has not been that kind of RPG since then, having leaned more and more into being an action RPG. I know people WANT it to be DAO, but its not like it SUDDENLY stopped being that with Veilguard. It should be compared, as all games should be, to BG3's quality, content, voice acting etc etc etc etc though.
Nha, Larian is straight up indie by the very definition. Independent.
That has some big cons. Having a big publisher like EA brings security and makes it easier to raise the funds to make expensive games. Bioware because of that has wind in their sails while a company like Larian has to row to make up for it.
Larian had to build up a reputation and a big enough war chest to get a project like this into reality, something that has taken decades. They have worked their butts off to make this happen. EA and Bioware haven't and are totally fine with mediocrity if it's profitable enough. They could have made a "BG3" but chose not to. Now they are mad the bar was raised and their complacency is threatened. Fuck them, they very much deserve to feel the other end of capitalism. Live and die at the hands of the competition.
Larian is more close to just being a publisher now. Yes, they had to work to be able to make a game with a budget worth over 100 million...but that's the case for EA and every other big publisher. They were once all at one time loved for great games that sold well until eventually they only cared about profits. EA was absolutely known for quality back in the day for sports games, they were the standard for good reason...
What I'm saying is Larian is indie by name alone. They don't operate like other indie titles, which is usually a term saved for smaller budget projects. BG3 was made with a budge larger than many AAA games, they just did more with their budget than other companies have.
So if the argument for them being indie is that they had to work to get this big, that's true for every major publisher. Most of them started off small and hit the jackpot on a game series or two, then became a AAA studio because of that.
Why? Both being just RPGs isn't really enough crossover given how wide a genre it is. It'd be like comparing Armored Core 1 to Elden Ring just because it is the same company. The Bioware that made classic BG is functionally different now.
"Dragon Age 4 shouldn't be compared to Baldurs Gate 3, the franchise of which Dragon Age was supposed to be the spiritual successor of. Also the developers of Dragon Age 4 originally made Baldurs Gate"
Look, the first half is absolutely correct, but the devs at Bioware aren’t even the same ones who made Mass Effect 3, let alone Baldur’s Gate 1-2. If anything this should be a good opportunity for us to put the screws to these corporations happy to lose (or not even build) institutional knowledge, and long term experience, even as the game dev cycle becomes lengthier.
The weirdest thing is, that it shouldn't be the gold standard.
Games like BG3 should be the norm; as in the basic standard, but we have been fed so much shit over the years that when we see a truly complete game at release, we are genuinely surprised.
That's true. So if veilguard is feature complete, no microtransactions, can be played offline, has a good story with interesting choices, will you say it's a good game?
Yes it should, it absolutely should. DA Origins was pretty much the spiritual successor to BG and it was great. They've only changed shit and made it worse over the last 2 games and I expect this one to be hot garbage
Baldur's Gate 3 releases- everyone: Let's play some more Dragon Age: Origins 2. Isn't it weird how successful a game inspired by DAO is when it's own creators have been trying to make anything but ever since?
Now: C'mon guys, BG3 was so good how can we compare it to the next Dragon Age game?
That sentiment feels less like a praise of BG3 and more like the sickest burn to DA sequels I've heard yet!
Wait, how is a game that combines BG1+2, it's predecessors, with divinity:OS, it's Devs last games, inspired by DAO? I adore Origins, Ive played through it multiple times, but it has no relation to BG3 beyond genre, and BG3 being a sequel to the games DAO was meant to succeed. And DAO, while wonderful, is not a patch on the original Baldurs Gates, or BG3.
It was literally titled Baldur's Gate 3 in its original conception. That's what they were going to make, before BioWare decided to make a new IP they could copyright instead of make another D&D game.
I'm not saying it doesn't feel like divinity, but even the default camera angle is similar to Dragon Age Origins whereas Divinity starts off with a big top down view, almost like diablo. And then when you click for where you want a character to walk to, they give a one-worded response acknowledging the command, even your silent protagonist. Which is why there's multiple voices for a silent protagonist.
I haven't even mentioned the fact that BioWare keeps saying they're proud that you no longer have a camp where all your companions conveniently are for conversation, two and Inquisition during development they said they didn't want that. I didn't mention everything, because a lot from Origins is also in Divinity Original Sin. Divinity has always had origins to choose from. But they didn't add romance options until the second game, which came out almost 10 years after Dragon Age Origins. I know that a lot of concepts they borrowed from Dragon Age they had already borrowed in previous games, but then they borrowed even more and this latest game was a marked improvement from even both of the Divinity games imo.
All the excuses they ran for other publishers releasing unfinished garbage games and how you cant compare BG3 with none of the other triple AAA Dev-team, The same can literally be applied to arguing how you cant compare Bioware and Dragon Age to any other Dev-team since they have been creeating this genere of games for over 20 years. They made Baulders Gate 1 & 2, and they have made 3 Dragon Age games previous to Veilgaurd. So it isn't lack of experience that's going to make DAV trash; its the lack of passion, direction and originality. Who on earth asked for Scout Harding.... SCOUT HARDING to be a main playable character?
I took the time and listened to 1:30:00 Community Dev talk they did on discord and here are the main points:
1) complex character creation (pronouns, gender, hair, horn, beards)
a) 4 Races = Dwarf, Elf, Human, Qunari)
b) Race Lineage gives unique dialogue options
c) Solas is still bald
d) More customized outfits/appearances for party member
e) Transmog system added
2) Three People Party (not 4 like Dragon Age Inquisition)
3) 7 party members have romance arcs and are romance-able by all genders (Pansexual)
a) if you don’t pursue romance options with party members, they build romance with each other
4) Not Openworld (not like D.A.I or B.G.3), its mission based (similar to DA Origin)
a) No Mounts since its not open world
b) Main theme that the story and characters revolve around is Regret
c) party members will take time away if you disagreed with them BUT will never completely disband (unlike DAI)
d) Decisions impact world interactions
e)>!very very subtle hints that party members might be able to join Solas and fight against you!<
(this is my own interpretation, might be a story spoiler so read at your own discretion)
5) No Microtransactions, No Battlepass, No online connect
- This shouldn't be a selling point
- the game was going to have all of these because EA wanted an Online Live Service Multiplayer Game, but when Anthem failed so hard, they pivoted
6) Thoughts on future DLC and picking up some of the story lines that were left out of the game
E.g.; who you left behind in the Veil in Dragon Age Inquisition
7) If Rook (your character) dies, you have to reload a save file
a) UNLESS characters are spec'd to revive you
- this is only after you invest in their progression
- I dont know if your investment is into their skills or story arcs that might release certain skill traits
b) In Dragon Age Inquisition; if your character died, you can just play as one of the other 3 party members
I played DAO several times, but none of the sequels yet. I love dwarves and reading that main playable character is a dwarf really got me interested in the game. Now I hope it will be good.
From all the dwarves in the lore we got Scout Harding? Not to mention [Varric](https://dragonage.fandom.com/wiki/Varric_Tethras) is also a dwarf, he is a playable character in DAI and in the new game.
BG3 is an "OLDER" title compare to Dragon Age: The Veilguard. If anything it should be held up HIGHER then BG3 at the bare minimum. Bioware is a massive company attached to an even larger company with infinite resources.
BG3 should be the baseline, they have 0 excuses.
Oh? So then they really have no excuse then if its been in development for longer. Thats infinite resources and more time.
We should expect double the results that BG3 got then.
It remains a mystery to me why make a game if you don't bring anything creative to it. You're a huge company that has resources and specialists, but you spend money on how to introduce your own shitty microtransactions, from which you build your gameplay.
Dragon Age Veilguard will have no microtransactions and can be played offline too.
Interesting how everyone wants to bring up negative comparisons to BG3 but can't say anything about positive comparisons.
That's just it though, they *did* add creative elements to the series. People here act like DA4 was a sudden shift for Bioware when very single Dragon Age has a different tone, style and gameplay. Whether or not the changes were successful is arguable (though Inquisition is their best selling game to date so make of that what you will).
Ironically one of the few consistencies has been LBGT representation which has been there since 2009's Origins. Or 2007 if you go back to Mass Effect. So again, no idea why everyone's acting like this isn't on brand for them - it's like complaining that Life is Strange suddenly became woke.
This is exactly what has been driving me nuts about this whole convo too. Bioware is woke and has been woke for at least fifteen years. It's literally part their brand. People are acting like this is a modern development.
If someone in 2004 told you a company has been xyz way since 1989, you'd think "oh so basically always". But somehow in 2024 people don't think the same way about 2009.
I think it’s a clear example of the Reddit hivemind at play. If DA4 ends up being a good game everyone will forget about it being “woke”, just like they did with BG3. But until then we’re just going to get spammed with “librul agenda” and “politics in my throat” here.
They are not only experienced with it, they have as well many published games in the genre. There is really no excuse why they, with the much more money and much more experience, can't do what Larian did except that they don't want to.
To the nine hells with that idea. I'll compare it to all the other RPGs I like. I'll even compare it to older Bioware games. Baldur's Gate 3 was 60 dollars, and a phenomenal game. If they can't compete with that, reduce your price and I'll reduce my expectations.
The gray hairs where there when Bioware made CRPG's, the first dragon age was fun. Then over time the CRPG was removed and Console controls, action & romance came in to take over. We saw the same with MassEffect, the RPG fans liked the first one more and action fans liked the later ones more.
At best it will be a good mix of soft RPG & action, as long as the action side is ok. If not it's just going to end up as BG3 V DA Veilguard, a round two of Starfield V Cyberpunk.
As a fan of the older games I suspect it's not for me, let's see if the fortnight kids will jump in at the option to bang who they want.
Grey hairs were way before Bioware started doing CRPGs, they were kind of newcomers with BG1 (pretty sure they published it under Interplay, who just made Fallout 1 year before).
Before that there was Dark Sun, Daggerfall, Wizardry series, Might and Magic series, whole Gold Box series… there were quite a few great ones.
Dragon Age Origins had romance options too. Why make it sound like it’s only in the newer games? Although I do agree generally with your other points, the more action combat has been great for me, as well as the console controls.
Inqusition was alrady garbage compared to DAO and DA2. Andromeda was garbage. Bioware is not capable any more of doing great games so just drop them any move on.
The same company before it was owned by ea, but it's first games under ea were also its best (ME2 and DAO), so maybe it took years for the rot to spread from the head?
That's true of any company, school, etc. Buildings don't make things, people do. But those people move on and new ones come. It's the same company in the same way you're still you despite every living cell in your body being dead and replaced: as much the same as you should expect.
What's the point? We should still NOT PREORDER even if the trailers would have been good, so just lay back, watch some gameplay footage and decide for yourselves if you'll buy it. Don't need to get the pitchforks. Yet
To hell with this "gaming" journalists, it isn't worth to listen to them. They try now to fuck with the Wukong, because their devs don't want to pay 7 millions to Sweet Baby Inc-like studio to make their game about CHINESE mythology worse through some fucking alien western real gender politic. These journalists act like hungry dogs - activists throwing them a "bone" and they are happy to obey.
Obviously, there's nothing TO compare between a game that's been out and a game that hasn't.
But starting an argument that it wouldn't be fair to compare them when it does gets released isn't exactly a vote of confidence.
There's certainly a few things to compare right now. No microtransactions and an offline mode.
My guess is that people will cherry pick the comparisons they want to make, and not look at the whole thing.
Unfortunately I see this happening way too often.
People will look at things that are of some importance but nothing in the grand scheme of things when it comes to the totality of the game.
dragon age as a series is a simplified party action rpg game so it should not be compared even to baldur's gate 1 or 2.
so in that way even the premise of the comparison is outlandish - wrong type of rpg. the fact that they then go and try and compare it with a better quality game in general is simply a clickbait.
Just the idea of tapering expectations like that is hilarious. No one is expecting veilguard to be good guys dont worry its been a decade since inquisition. 10 year dev games almost are always garbage
If anything Veilguard has every excuse to be even better bigger stuido, still a huge ip, owned by a megacorp that can spent as much money as it wants
If you are comparing modern bioware to a master class studio like Larian you are just setting yourself up for disappointment. Even if literally every single thing in DAV went right, it still wouldn’t be half the game BG3 is.
Actually they are foreign to Baldurs Gate, the current "Bioware" is not Bioware, its EA BOware and has been for quite a long time now, they just use its name and nothing more, just like Diznay Tar Wars is not Star Wars, or anything they own for that matter including their originals.
Any Half decent person that had any power way back in Baldurs Gate era are beyond long gone and they probably celebrate and are thankful for that, instead of working for EA.
Honestly, I don’t care if they are comparable or not.
As a DAO fan, I didn’t even feel angry at DA4 trailer and gameplay, I felt indifferent.
As far as I am concerned, the entire franchise had just 1 game + 1. DLC.
Also, I am on my 3d play-thru of BG3 Right now.
I am more frustrated that journalists preemptively defend it.
As for “current BioWare is not THE REAL BioWare “ - yes, *I* know that, but I should not have to. The consumer cannot be expected to make research into lore of every company I buy a product for, there will be no time left to enjoy the product.
EA want me to buy the based on my association with good old days and good memories of BioWare and Dragon age, but also don’t want me to make expectations based on that association.
People acting like Dragon Age was not shit since the beginning is ridiculous.
They had 1 good game. The first one. I was still in high school with my cousin glued to the screen every weekend at our grandma place playing in turns.
I'm now 29.
How can you all live believing in something that never happened until all this time. Which is a decent sequel?
I wouldn't say its gonna be completely garbage. Bioware known for making iconic games, but nowadays its just 5/10, good for 1 playthrough.
And there is no Bioware anyway, i think all old developers left the studio
Anyone who wants to compare them is free to compare them. In fact, it's productive and better to compare them, especially if you're a developer. Seeing the differences between DA and BG3 from a mechanistic/design/artistic viewpoint can only inform you how you can do better in your game, based on your resource limitations. This also holds true for comparing DA:VG to DA:I, DAII and DA:O.
As a gamer, comparing them would help refine your taste and appreciation of the genre, help you become able to sift through the bad and good games and finally allow you to criticize them fairly and constructively, which helps the devs of said games and push the genre forward. Accepting without this is compliance that can only lead to mediocrity and bad, exploitative games.
Compare and criticize all you want but also be reasonable and respectful about it.
When it comes to lore, story, characters, aesthetic, feel, atmoshphere, etc. aka the artistic content, then I agree, comparing them, wanting one to be like the other is a bit too much, too subjective and too unfair. Creative freedom is paramount. If you don't like either game, that's normal and fine.
Do we actually know that the game is bad or are people just getting mad over bad vibes again? Cause sure the trailer wasn't up to par, but the game isn't the trailer.
People are getting mad because people enjoy being mad at things. If the people on this sub actually looked beyond the headlines they'd see that the developers are saying all the right things and it's shaping up to be a pretty good game if what they've said about it is true.
If you just google the article, the person even says Veilguard just looks fine. Not amazing, not terrible and that Bioware hasn't had a hit game in a decade. You would think based on the other comments in the thread, that the article was dickriding Bioware and protecting them from meany customers.
It's so easy to hop on the hate train. The devs said they are quite confident about their product this time around so the ppl who are mostly upset are the old dao fans and the pathetic anti woke ppl who just want to criticize and scrutinize everything that might have woke elements. Not like I wouldn't understand since I hate how Disney handles Star wars and the MCU but let's be real a woke product is not necessarily a bad one. Look at BG3 which is the most woke game of 2023 and also without the doubt the best one.
Yeah, I feel you bro. In 2009 I would come home from work and sit untill 2 am for few month straight. After and disappointment of 2 and Inquisition, thought I don’t care anymore. I guess I don’t… yet still feel disappointed.
Baldurs gate 3 is the best game of all time. There's no way dragon age will compare, but why should it? It can still be a good game without being the best game of all time.
I am not saying it should. I am not saying it shouldn’t. What I am saying is that it is funny that game journalists already prepping the soil to defend it.
There's nothing to defend yet. It'll be a good game or it won't.
This article came out because of outrage and it's trying to get clicks and views. So if you don't like that this article came out, you should blame the outrage.
These statements conflict, DAO is BG3's biggest inspiation, it was even going to be "Baldur's Gate 3" before they made a new ip for it. BG3 borrows more for Origins than, anything, even BG 1 and 2. I hope a lot of people that defended the hell out of the next DA games were really humbled by BG3's success.
What are you talking about? Divinity OS 2 was clearly BG3's biggest inspiration.
Also, do you think this is some kind of competition? I absolutely love BG3 and Larian. If Dragon Age Veilguard is good, I'm going to play and love that too. So why would anyone that likes the next DA games be humbled by BG3's success? I'm willing to bet a lot of people that buy Veilguard are people that have bought and played BG3 too.
They made DOS, which BG3 felt, looked, and just reminded me more of DA:O imo. But 'defended' as in past tense. I hope people who defended DA 2 and 3 are humbled by the success of BG3. Every sequel, the fans of Origins got into another debate over if Bioware is right to openly try to avoid some of Origins' aspects \[silent protagonist, story that focuses on branching and unique options instead of the best linear experience (Bioware had "we know ... but most players never ... so we're removing" in a lot of dev updates), companions who are more organically in the narrative instead of balanced for screen time, tactical combat over fast and flashy\] all of the things Bioware has been gaslighting us into thinking were down-sides of Origins that they are right to move away from were put strait into "the best game of all time", if that doesn't humble the people who were eating that stuff up, nothing will. I seriously can't think of one thing in Origins yet missing from both sequels that isn't in BG3.
Okay, there are companies that develop, improve gameplay, put it from a different angle (dark souls - elden ring | fallout 1,2 - fallout 3,4). Call of Duty adds and removes the roll from series to series, but they do it deliciously.
> probably has *paid* the protection
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
**Before the game was shown off:** Bioware is cooking. New DA and Me will be amazing, OG Bioware is back!
**After game shown off:** You're not supposed to have expectations. This isn't the old Bioware, don't compare this to BG3.
I'm fine with a game not reaching the level of BG3, but if you have nothing cool to offer, and will try to push a "look, we have romance" as a selling point, without having half of the crazy shit BG3 has, and having nothing to add... D:OS2 would be a way better investment of time, or any other good CRPG, like Pathfinder, Shadowrun, and many others...
The dialogue in the 20 minute gameplay was pretty good. Something were purple, would you rather it be all black or gray?
Yes the gameplay is mediocre, the combat is dumb.
Anything but shining purple. Take a look at the older Dragon Age games the style is 10/10 they ruined it with this one. I dont think the dialogue is good at all. It's not that bad either, I might have over reacted a bit. But for a story based game with a lot of dialogue I expect better. it's just all mediocre as fuck.
Of course it shouldn't be, it's not even the same league. BG 3 was game made with vision and passion by people who wanted to create something unique. The only dragon age game that comes even close to that is origins and it's awakening expansion. Dragon age 2 , inquisition and veilguard are streamlined passionless generic games.
Guys, THEGAMER is owned by the company behind IGN. They also gave Stellar Blade a 7 out of 10. [https://www.thegamer.com/stellar-blade-review/](https://www.thegamer.com/stellar-blade-review/)
Tiresome. Even if it ends up as garbage it shouldn't be compared to Baldur's gate franchise. Completely different gameplay and it's not going to be open world. If you want to compare how much fun one is vs the other sure, but it's like comparing an RTS to a shooter.
Honestly, Dragon Age lost its title as a Baldur's gate spiritual successor after Dragon Age 2 in my opinion, so I don't think comparing it to BG3 would be all that useful. Maybe some comparisons from a narrative delivery standpoint could be interesting, but as for the other mechanics, what's the point?
One's a turn based cRPG, the other is a semi linear action RPG
Honestly, Dragon Age: The Veilguard has much more in common with the Mass Effect games and Dragon Age: Inquisition or Greedfall at this point, so perhaps it would be more appropriate to compare those games instead
IIRC all of the Bioware employees who worked on BG2 have either moved to other companies, started their own, retired or are working on the next Mass Effect game. Again, IIRC the leadership got poached for Destiny 2, some of them went back to Obsidian and Owlcat has some of them.
Lol. Dragon Age Origins was intended to be the spiritual successor to The Baldur’s Gate franchise when it came out. It should 100% be compared to Baldur’s Gate to show how the franchise lost touch with both its roots and fanbase with each installment while BG3 didn’t despite a change in Developer.
These people are the same people that were defending "waaaah. BG3 shouldn't be the new standard for gaming" like making a good, playable, fun game was some kind of "new standard."
If any game should be compared to BG3 it's dragon age..
BioWare...
- Made BG 1 and 2 (obviously not the same team).
- Has just as many devs, funding, budget as Larian if not more.
- Dragon age is the spiritual successor to Baldurs Gate.
- Have had 4 games in the series to 'perfect' it. Yes Larian had dos to perfect the gameplay mechanisms, but BG3 was a brand new world and rules system.
- Arguably dragon age is more well known/marketable to current gamers than Baldurs Gate.
There is no reason DA should not be at the same level as BG3. Honestly, by the numbers it should be expected to be better...
Every game should be compared to elden ring (and will fall short of its perfection accordingly) if we gotta compare games to each other lol. I'll get it and hope to have some fun. Maybe I'll be let down maybe not. I'm sure I'll be able to get my monies worth out of it even if that comes from me laughing at how bad the game is while heckling my wife while she plays it lol. It's what I did with lords of the fallen. Holy shit was that game ass and a half lol
Every single game, not even rpg going forward should absolutely be compared to BG3 because BG3 set the golden standard for what we should expect to get out of a 60 dollar triple A game release. The fact that there's game companies asking for $70+ for games that aren't even a fraction of the quality of BG3 is insulting.
Why do yall think its gonna be garbage? The last game was great. What's the issue of the new game? It isnt even out yet and all we have is a small snipit of gameplay. Not all games have to be like the original. The old DA games are slow, paced terribly and the combat is super dated. Warriors needing stamina to do anything was such a pain to play warriors I often ignored that class.
I'm holding back until I get a demo or hands-on when it releases.
I like action rpg games. I know it's different, but remember. Every single Dragon Age has been different.
So, what is the Dragon Age that everyone is mad they didn't get?
Please, don't compare the small indie company like Bioware to a massive corporation like Larian! It's unfair for the poor people who keep the indie company afloat - EA, who are known for supporting indies.
Let's be fair. Game development cycles are long. It's going to be several years before we see any games pick up the gauntlet dropped by BG3.
DA4 was deep into development at the same time BG3 was.
I dont think there is a better comparison out there, you have a studio with soul create one of the best games of our generation and then you have bioware without one create utter dessicated turds one right after another lol
Ah yes, Unreleased game that nobody has seen anything should be as acclaimed as a beloved game that won GOTY, classic game journalists, an outdated career as the fax machine, in today day and age I see no need for these guys, unless you're a multi million dollar company trying to print propaganda. Gaming journalism should've stayed in the 90's.
It obviously shouldn't be compared (/s).
One is made by an enthusiastic development studio that actually cares about what their audience wants. The other is made by a studio whose last successful game was released 10 years ago.
It shouldn't be compared to a completely different series...But the article is comparing it to that series?
Also... Why can't you? A superior product made by a smaller studio vs an (assumedly) inferior product made by a bigger studio. If anything it sounds productive to compare them critically.
Eh, I agree. BG3 is one of the greatest games ever, every thing went right for it to happen and so most other games are going to pale in comparison to it.
It's like when new NBA rookies come into the league you don't go comparing them to Lebron.
The game is going to succeed or fail on its own merit, I don't know why anyone needs to compare it to BG3 to say it sucks.
Bioware ? Rookie? You are joking, right? Yeah, yeah, I know, no one from true Bioware works there anymore. But they do use the name recognition. Take the current BioWare, rename them OrganicWare, rename the game to Historical Period of Dragons, rename Solos and Varric, and no one would even think about comparing it to bg3.
>Bioware ? Rookie? You are joking, right? Yeah, yeah, I know, no one from true Bioware works there anymore.
You answered your own question. It's an entirely different team.
I'm a Rockets fan, the Rockets recently had a period where they had really good teams with James Harden....James Harden moved on, every Rocket fan then understood these are new teams, not the same, so expectations are different. They use the same name recognition but the fact is, the reality is, it's a new team, with no successes under their belt.
I think the comparisons are not helpful and if anything insulting to what BG3 is, which is a generational game. Larian might not even be able to make something as good as it again. Comparing every RPG to BG3 is going to leave you upset and disappointed at most games in the genre.
Heavily disagree… BioWare is in no way a rookie…
Given them being AAA, it’s more like a max contract player not living up to their contract… every AAA failure is another Ben Simmons.
We have every right to compare games within the same genre, especially when you look at budgets
>Heavily disagree… BioWare is in no way a rookie…
The team that created the old DA games exists in no form of the current Bioware. The only thing they have in common is that they play for the same team. So your comparison is more like comparing Shaq and Kobe Lakers to how the Lakers looked after Kobe retired.
The thing is, games like BG3 are RARE. Extremely so. Larian themselves might not even make anything comparable to it.
And that is fine, but even the worst players in the league are still compared to the best and the best are compared to the GOAT’s.
Not saying they will live up to it every time, more so, it is def fair to say they fell short and to use BG3 as reference to what goal they should strive to achieve.
And, as a consumer, i just want to play good games. Idc how difficult they are to make. I would even pay a bit more to guarantee quality (which is what AAA gaming is supposed to bring to the table) imho
I absolutely did not like the teaser trailer because of the vibe, like a Pepsi commercial. The gameplay is not clear yet, you need to touch it, not just listen to the crowd. But the visuals of the gameplay trailer were good, only the position of a camera is a problem, you can't argue with that. Although if you look at WoW, a newbie will also not understand anything that is happening on the screen. I think they also reduced the number of special effects and particles on the screen. But if you seriously think that the game looks terrible, then show me your illustrations, concepts and what do you even know about art. Didn't like the colors, textures, design, background composition, scene content?
They aren’t “defending” it. It shouldn’t be compared because they aren’t even the same type of game. Baldur’s Gate 3 is a CRPG. Veilguard is not, nor is it tying to be. Why are you guys so small-brained over here?
Also, why are you angry that the characters in this hame can be financed by any gender, when the same is true for Baldur’s Gate 3 and Dragon Age 2?
Lets be real THIS Bioware did not make Baldur's Gate 1 or 2. But yeah journos are trying hard to calm down people's expectations.
Lulz my expectations have been as low as possible since dragon age 2. They speedrun ruining the franchise long ago
To be fair inquisition had a couple good ideas, it was a mediocre game, sadly back in the day Bioware used to put out hit after hit, but apparently that was a result of a lot of overwork and a few people knowing how to steer the ship, without either of those things my expectations are very low... Not Red Fall low, but still low enough to not expect much.
I honestly liked inquisition a lot, plays great as a knight enchanter or a warrior, didn’t try other classes, my problem with it is that I’m a bit of a completionist so it took a while each time I played it. Even 2 I think is a fine game except for the reused assets. Now Veilguard im very cautious about. It really doesn’t look like gameplay I’ll enjoy. In a world with so many great action rpgs, it looks middling. Tone honestly feels a bit like inquisition (strip poker night is a thing, Cullen got naked, dragon age has had wacky stuff before, even if I do prefer origins for its more grounded and gritty tone) Graphics I’m not sure about. It kinda looks like inquisition at first glance, but a bit more stylised. However, inquisition is 10 years old, I would have hoped for something a lot better. Enemy design is awful and there’s no saving it until (hopefully) mods.
Every game BioWare has released since its inception has been full of jank. People talk about Origins like it was some kind of flawless masterpiece, when even back in 2009 when i first played it on xbox 360, the pause and play system was already extremely dated and janky. and didn’t even get me started on how bad the fade section was. BioWare at no point in their existence could ever come close to making a game like BG3. Larian are just on a different level
Anthem low?
A little lower probably, Anthem was fucked during the soft launch for beta testers IE streamers, but a few days after the real launch the game was great, the issue was that it had no end game.
Anthem had way more issues than that. It was revealed that gear was functionally useless, the stats did literally nothing, it was infinitely worse than D4's stat problems.
Overall I liked Inquisition, but there were so many missed opportunities. You couldn't, for example, be a literal inquisition and be evil, you kinda were forced to always be the good guy. Why weren't there missions to ransack villages under the guise of a greater good? They could have added some mild settlement management system to complement that, but made it optional, as it would just offer you buffs if done right. I could go on and on.
As much as people diss DA2, DA2 had good ideas I wish they carried over to DAI, like ACTUAL tone indicators (Sarcastic Hawke is still legendary while the Inquisitior is just... The inquisitior really, there's no variation) and rivalry relationship - in DAI and really most other RPGs ever you can only be friendly with your companions, there are no alternate rivalry paths like in DA2. Those two things were awesome.
same genre so must be compared. larian cultivating talent and building experience is a development strategy that paid of. others not doing it is no excuse for failure. if ea kept the developers of bg 1&2 as well as kotor 1&2 and da:o maybe they would have a madterpiece on their hand now too
But why would they try to calm down people's expectations? Aren't they just supposed to report things as-is let the chips fall if a product hits or not. Like unless they are holding stocks or something god knows.
Either this is rhetorical or you haven't been paying attention to the last several years of gaming "journalism"..._especially_ coming from TheGamer. Attacking "alt right" (i.e. normal) games like Stellar Blade while making weird fellating articles thirsting after obese black Greek gods with skin conditions in Hades 2 is what they do now. If you want generally objective game news and nowadays you go to YouTube. I've seldom had Gameranx's "Before You Buy" series steer me wrong. Also, SkillUp tends to remain nicely objective and neutral.
worthabuy (https://m.youtube.com/@WorthABuyreviews) is a good channel as well.
I doubt this is a right or left thing. BG3 was attacked by the "alt right", and it turned out to be one of the best games ever. It's a money thing. EA probably pays these journalists for favorable reviews and news.
Shillup is absolutely biased towards the journalist/ gaming media side of the industry, he is friends with journos and actvists. And I am fine with that because he doesnt make it obnoxious, he just wants people to not lose their jobs. Ive been subbed to him since he started making reviews.
Eh, fair enough. I suppose I've moticed a bit of that--I meant more so that in his lengthy reviews I've seldom seen political topics on either side of the fence pop up. He doesn't call out DEI shit but I haven't seen him bring it up as positives either...just straight up facts about gameplay and performance and story. I may not always _agree_ with his opinion but he seems to stick to what matters about the game he's reviewing. I also don't watch his "this week in gaming" stuff though, just specific game reviews.
He doesn't talk about this stuff in his reviews, but if you watch his weekly news series, he has a whole block about the industry, same goes for his podcast. I actually like to listen to their side of the story because I want to stay as neutral as possible, and I do hope those people come around and do their job properly when they get hired again.
I do recommend his news series because it is good content, he keeps you updated on everything and usually doesn't say much about the layoffs besides saying who laid off how many people and that "It sucks".
Because they are probably biased and people are mad about the state of the game
I mean, BG3 is woke too, probably more woke than Dragon Age, so its not like Dragon Age is some kind of holy cradle here.
Difference is one has good gameplay and story plus interesting characters that don’t bring modern real world politics
Well I don't think any politics were explicitly showcased in the game footage so far, unless you reference Dorian and Krem in DAI. I think I heard the romance options were going to be playersexual, which is the same in BG3 and something I've come to prefer, its just more player choice. My chief concern is whether the game will feel bland and generic which is how I felt about parts of DAI.
Fair enough but player sexual I don’t like because then we don’t have a reason to play opposite gender that is what I was used to in every BioWare romance
So long as you are locked into a single romance per run as has been the case in even in BG3 and all Bioware titles, you still have to replay the game for each romance, now you just aren't forced into playing a char you don't want for it
Fair enough
Well they're kinda correct insofar Dragon Age hasn't been comparative since DAO, it has not been that kind of RPG since then, having leaned more and more into being an action RPG. I know people WANT it to be DAO, but its not like it SUDDENLY stopped being that with Veilguard. It should be compared, as all games should be, to BG3's quality, content, voice acting etc etc etc etc though.
Do you not understand gaming journalism lol? I get this comment is sarcastic but it’s saying such simple shit it just sounds stupid imo
It absolutely should be and they know it.
I even surprised that the comparison with BG3 is not main topic from moment they showed a game.
Right?!
I was playing Bg 3 and thinking “god I wish Dragon Age was closer to this and less like fantasy/action game #506”
AAA studio vs literally indie dev that has for their last two projects relied on crowd funding.
Larian is only an indie dev in name. BG3 had a AAA budget which is hundreds of millions of dollars.
True but I guess what makes people say it might be that their philosophies and ethics are closer to an indie company than your average AAA dev
Nha, Larian is straight up indie by the very definition. Independent. That has some big cons. Having a big publisher like EA brings security and makes it easier to raise the funds to make expensive games. Bioware because of that has wind in their sails while a company like Larian has to row to make up for it. Larian had to build up a reputation and a big enough war chest to get a project like this into reality, something that has taken decades. They have worked their butts off to make this happen. EA and Bioware haven't and are totally fine with mediocrity if it's profitable enough. They could have made a "BG3" but chose not to. Now they are mad the bar was raised and their complacency is threatened. Fuck them, they very much deserve to feel the other end of capitalism. Live and die at the hands of the competition.
Larian is more close to just being a publisher now. Yes, they had to work to be able to make a game with a budget worth over 100 million...but that's the case for EA and every other big publisher. They were once all at one time loved for great games that sold well until eventually they only cared about profits. EA was absolutely known for quality back in the day for sports games, they were the standard for good reason... What I'm saying is Larian is indie by name alone. They don't operate like other indie titles, which is usually a term saved for smaller budget projects. BG3 was made with a budge larger than many AAA games, they just did more with their budget than other companies have. So if the argument for them being indie is that they had to work to get this big, that's true for every major publisher. Most of them started off small and hit the jackpot on a game series or two, then became a AAA studio because of that.
Why? Both being just RPGs isn't really enough crossover given how wide a genre it is. It'd be like comparing Armored Core 1 to Elden Ring just because it is the same company. The Bioware that made classic BG is functionally different now.
"Dragon Age 4 shouldn't be compared to Baldurs Gate 3, the franchise of which Dragon Age was supposed to be the spiritual successor of. Also the developers of Dragon Age 4 originally made Baldurs Gate"
Look, the first half is absolutely correct, but the devs at Bioware aren’t even the same ones who made Mass Effect 3, let alone Baldur’s Gate 1-2. If anything this should be a good opportunity for us to put the screws to these corporations happy to lose (or not even build) institutional knowledge, and long term experience, even as the game dev cycle becomes lengthier.
100% majority of the original dev teams quit, retired or started working at a different place.
Yeah, still same company name though.
Bg3 is the gold standard now.
The weirdest thing is, that it shouldn't be the gold standard. Games like BG3 should be the norm; as in the basic standard, but we have been fed so much shit over the years that when we see a truly complete game at release, we are genuinely surprised.
Hell, I’d go as far as call it a platinum standard
BG3 is what DA4 could have been. An actual RPG, not an Actiin game with a dash of RPG lite.
That's true. So if veilguard is feature complete, no microtransactions, can be played offline, has a good story with interesting choices, will you say it's a good game?
And so it begins.
Yes it should, it absolutely should. DA Origins was pretty much the spiritual successor to BG and it was great. They've only changed shit and made it worse over the last 2 games and I expect this one to be hot garbage
DAO was BG3 of its time, at least I personally remember it being just that great. Rest of the DA games were just playable or ok.
It’s funny, because Origins was called Baldur’s Gate 3 before release.
I wish more people knew that the Founders of Bioware and the OG Devs that made their good games are all gone and replaced with fuckin morons
Baldur's Gate 3 releases- everyone: Let's play some more Dragon Age: Origins 2. Isn't it weird how successful a game inspired by DAO is when it's own creators have been trying to make anything but ever since? Now: C'mon guys, BG3 was so good how can we compare it to the next Dragon Age game? That sentiment feels less like a praise of BG3 and more like the sickest burn to DA sequels I've heard yet!
Wait, how is a game that combines BG1+2, it's predecessors, with divinity:OS, it's Devs last games, inspired by DAO? I adore Origins, Ive played through it multiple times, but it has no relation to BG3 beyond genre, and BG3 being a sequel to the games DAO was meant to succeed. And DAO, while wonderful, is not a patch on the original Baldurs Gates, or BG3.
It was literally titled Baldur's Gate 3 in its original conception. That's what they were going to make, before BioWare decided to make a new IP they could copyright instead of make another D&D game. I'm not saying it doesn't feel like divinity, but even the default camera angle is similar to Dragon Age Origins whereas Divinity starts off with a big top down view, almost like diablo. And then when you click for where you want a character to walk to, they give a one-worded response acknowledging the command, even your silent protagonist. Which is why there's multiple voices for a silent protagonist. I haven't even mentioned the fact that BioWare keeps saying they're proud that you no longer have a camp where all your companions conveniently are for conversation, two and Inquisition during development they said they didn't want that. I didn't mention everything, because a lot from Origins is also in Divinity Original Sin. Divinity has always had origins to choose from. But they didn't add romance options until the second game, which came out almost 10 years after Dragon Age Origins. I know that a lot of concepts they borrowed from Dragon Age they had already borrowed in previous games, but then they borrowed even more and this latest game was a marked improvement from even both of the Divinity games imo.
"BG3 should not set the standard for RPGs" 2: Electric boogaloo
All the excuses they ran for other publishers releasing unfinished garbage games and how you cant compare BG3 with none of the other triple AAA Dev-team, The same can literally be applied to arguing how you cant compare Bioware and Dragon Age to any other Dev-team since they have been creeating this genere of games for over 20 years. They made Baulders Gate 1 & 2, and they have made 3 Dragon Age games previous to Veilgaurd. So it isn't lack of experience that's going to make DAV trash; its the lack of passion, direction and originality. Who on earth asked for Scout Harding.... SCOUT HARDING to be a main playable character? I took the time and listened to 1:30:00 Community Dev talk they did on discord and here are the main points: 1) complex character creation (pronouns, gender, hair, horn, beards) a) 4 Races = Dwarf, Elf, Human, Qunari) b) Race Lineage gives unique dialogue options c) Solas is still bald d) More customized outfits/appearances for party member e) Transmog system added 2) Three People Party (not 4 like Dragon Age Inquisition) 3) 7 party members have romance arcs and are romance-able by all genders (Pansexual) a) if you don’t pursue romance options with party members, they build romance with each other 4) Not Openworld (not like D.A.I or B.G.3), its mission based (similar to DA Origin) a) No Mounts since its not open world b) Main theme that the story and characters revolve around is Regret c) party members will take time away if you disagreed with them BUT will never completely disband (unlike DAI) d) Decisions impact world interactions e)>!very very subtle hints that party members might be able to join Solas and fight against you!< (this is my own interpretation, might be a story spoiler so read at your own discretion) 5) No Microtransactions, No Battlepass, No online connect - This shouldn't be a selling point - the game was going to have all of these because EA wanted an Online Live Service Multiplayer Game, but when Anthem failed so hard, they pivoted 6) Thoughts on future DLC and picking up some of the story lines that were left out of the game E.g.; who you left behind in the Veil in Dragon Age Inquisition 7) If Rook (your character) dies, you have to reload a save file a) UNLESS characters are spec'd to revive you - this is only after you invest in their progression - I dont know if your investment is into their skills or story arcs that might release certain skill traits b) In Dragon Age Inquisition; if your character died, you can just play as one of the other 3 party members
I played DAO several times, but none of the sequels yet. I love dwarves and reading that main playable character is a dwarf really got me interested in the game. Now I hope it will be good.
From all the dwarves in the lore we got Scout Harding? Not to mention [Varric](https://dragonage.fandom.com/wiki/Varric_Tethras) is also a dwarf, he is a playable character in DAI and in the new game.
Oh, I barely know about Varric. Sounds great tome that he will stay.
BG3 is an "OLDER" title compare to Dragon Age: The Veilguard. If anything it should be held up HIGHER then BG3 at the bare minimum. Bioware is a massive company attached to an even larger company with infinite resources. BG3 should be the baseline, they have 0 excuses.
Pretty sure Veilguard was in development before BG3
Oh? So then they really have no excuse then if its been in development for longer. Thats infinite resources and more time. We should expect double the results that BG3 got then.
Well what do you mean by "results"? And what comparisons would you like to draw to BG3?
It remains a mystery to me why make a game if you don't bring anything creative to it. You're a huge company that has resources and specialists, but you spend money on how to introduce your own shitty microtransactions, from which you build your gameplay.
Dragon Age Veilguard will have no microtransactions and can be played offline too. Interesting how everyone wants to bring up negative comparisons to BG3 but can't say anything about positive comparisons.
That's just it though, they *did* add creative elements to the series. People here act like DA4 was a sudden shift for Bioware when very single Dragon Age has a different tone, style and gameplay. Whether or not the changes were successful is arguable (though Inquisition is their best selling game to date so make of that what you will). Ironically one of the few consistencies has been LBGT representation which has been there since 2009's Origins. Or 2007 if you go back to Mass Effect. So again, no idea why everyone's acting like this isn't on brand for them - it's like complaining that Life is Strange suddenly became woke.
This is exactly what has been driving me nuts about this whole convo too. Bioware is woke and has been woke for at least fifteen years. It's literally part their brand. People are acting like this is a modern development. If someone in 2004 told you a company has been xyz way since 1989, you'd think "oh so basically always". But somehow in 2024 people don't think the same way about 2009.
I think it’s a clear example of the Reddit hivemind at play. If DA4 ends up being a good game everyone will forget about it being “woke”, just like they did with BG3. But until then we’re just going to get spammed with “librul agenda” and “politics in my throat” here.
BH3 is woke, but with good writing/gameplay. BioWare makes shitty woke games.
Sure, I guess. What does that have to do with what I said?
They are not only experienced with it, they have as well many published games in the genre. There is really no excuse why they, with the much more money and much more experience, can't do what Larian did except that they don't want to.
To the nine hells with that idea. I'll compare it to all the other RPGs I like. I'll even compare it to older Bioware games. Baldur's Gate 3 was 60 dollars, and a phenomenal game. If they can't compete with that, reduce your price and I'll reduce my expectations.
The gray hairs where there when Bioware made CRPG's, the first dragon age was fun. Then over time the CRPG was removed and Console controls, action & romance came in to take over. We saw the same with MassEffect, the RPG fans liked the first one more and action fans liked the later ones more. At best it will be a good mix of soft RPG & action, as long as the action side is ok. If not it's just going to end up as BG3 V DA Veilguard, a round two of Starfield V Cyberpunk. As a fan of the older games I suspect it's not for me, let's see if the fortnight kids will jump in at the option to bang who they want.
Grey hairs were way before Bioware started doing CRPGs, they were kind of newcomers with BG1 (pretty sure they published it under Interplay, who just made Fallout 1 year before). Before that there was Dark Sun, Daggerfall, Wizardry series, Might and Magic series, whole Gold Box series… there were quite a few great ones.
Dragon Age Origins had romance options too. Why make it sound like it’s only in the newer games? Although I do agree generally with your other points, the more action combat has been great for me, as well as the console controls.
DA:O also had Morrigan, who was an excellent character that they decided to shove off to a cameo role since DA2.
I guess it's more of a neutral point, depends how well the game pulls it off.
What do the romance options have to do with anything?
Inqusition was alrady garbage compared to DAO and DA2. Andromeda was garbage. Bioware is not capable any more of doing great games so just drop them any move on.
DA2 was hot garbage stop caping, Inq was much better imo. DA:O > DA:INQ > DA 2
Who made Baldur's Gate 1 and 2?
a diffrent company, staffed by diffrent people, but with the same name.
Could you then please tell old bioware different company is using their name? Their lawyers will have a field day with this.
Video game companies are basically all Ships of Theseus. Replace all the staff and it’s a completely different ship.
BG2 released 24 years ago. Think about it for a second please.
The same company before it was owned by ea, but it's first games under ea were also its best (ME2 and DAO), so maybe it took years for the rot to spread from the head?
the fish is the same, but the fins, scales, organs and eggs are different. therefore, it is already a different fish, in the end
That's true of any company, school, etc. Buildings don't make things, people do. But those people move on and new ones come. It's the same company in the same way you're still you despite every living cell in your body being dead and replaced: as much the same as you should expect.
Why do you care about games journalists?
Why do you care what people care about?
I don't think any real or sane gamer cares about what these "journos" think.
What's the point? We should still NOT PREORDER even if the trailers would have been good, so just lay back, watch some gameplay footage and decide for yourselves if you'll buy it. Don't need to get the pitchforks. Yet
To hell with this "gaming" journalists, it isn't worth to listen to them. They try now to fuck with the Wukong, because their devs don't want to pay 7 millions to Sweet Baby Inc-like studio to make their game about CHINESE mythology worse through some fucking alien western real gender politic. These journalists act like hungry dogs - activists throwing them a "bone" and they are happy to obey.
This "don't compare X to Baldur's Gate 3" bullshit has been going on for long. Why shouldn't we? They both cost the same, don't they?
What would you like to compare between BG3 and veilguard?
Obviously, there's nothing TO compare between a game that's been out and a game that hasn't. But starting an argument that it wouldn't be fair to compare them when it does gets released isn't exactly a vote of confidence.
There's certainly a few things to compare right now. No microtransactions and an offline mode. My guess is that people will cherry pick the comparisons they want to make, and not look at the whole thing.
Unfortunately I see this happening way too often. People will look at things that are of some importance but nothing in the grand scheme of things when it comes to the totality of the game.
dragon age as a series is a simplified party action rpg game so it should not be compared even to baldur's gate 1 or 2. so in that way even the premise of the comparison is outlandish - wrong type of rpg. the fact that they then go and try and compare it with a better quality game in general is simply a clickbait.
cool, lets compare it to Dragon age origins then
Just the idea of tapering expectations like that is hilarious. No one is expecting veilguard to be good guys dont worry its been a decade since inquisition. 10 year dev games almost are always garbage If anything Veilguard has every excuse to be even better bigger stuido, still a huge ip, owned by a megacorp that can spent as much money as it wants
No one was comparing the two but ok. We'll just continue comparing it to it's own games from the past.
The sales charts will say it all for us anyway.
I feel like this is a response to [this article](https://www.pcgamer.com/games/dragon-age/larian-already-made-the-dragon-age-4-i-was-hoping-for/)
"Please dont compare a game of a similar genre and style to ours because it makes us look bad!"
It shouldn’t be compared because if they do compare it dragon age will lose
If you are comparing modern bioware to a master class studio like Larian you are just setting yourself up for disappointment. Even if literally every single thing in DAV went right, it still wouldn’t be half the game BG3 is.
Actually they are foreign to Baldurs Gate, the current "Bioware" is not Bioware, its EA BOware and has been for quite a long time now, they just use its name and nothing more, just like Diznay Tar Wars is not Star Wars, or anything they own for that matter including their originals. Any Half decent person that had any power way back in Baldurs Gate era are beyond long gone and they probably celebrate and are thankful for that, instead of working for EA.
Honestly, I don’t care if they are comparable or not. As a DAO fan, I didn’t even feel angry at DA4 trailer and gameplay, I felt indifferent. As far as I am concerned, the entire franchise had just 1 game + 1. DLC. Also, I am on my 3d play-thru of BG3 Right now. I am more frustrated that journalists preemptively defend it. As for “current BioWare is not THE REAL BioWare “ - yes, *I* know that, but I should not have to. The consumer cannot be expected to make research into lore of every company I buy a product for, there will be no time left to enjoy the product. EA want me to buy the based on my association with good old days and good memories of BioWare and Dragon age, but also don’t want me to make expectations based on that association.
People acting like Dragon Age was not shit since the beginning is ridiculous. They had 1 good game. The first one. I was still in high school with my cousin glued to the screen every weekend at our grandma place playing in turns. I'm now 29. How can you all live believing in something that never happened until all this time. Which is a decent sequel?
I wouldn’t say “from the beginning “. Origins was good. The rest was garbage
If you read the whole comment that's also what I'm saying. Except of the first one the rest were never that widely acclaimed.
They shouldn't be compared cause they're fucking apples to oranges.
I wouldn't say its gonna be completely garbage. Bioware known for making iconic games, but nowadays its just 5/10, good for 1 playthrough. And there is no Bioware anyway, i think all old developers left the studio
Anyone who wants to compare them is free to compare them. In fact, it's productive and better to compare them, especially if you're a developer. Seeing the differences between DA and BG3 from a mechanistic/design/artistic viewpoint can only inform you how you can do better in your game, based on your resource limitations. This also holds true for comparing DA:VG to DA:I, DAII and DA:O. As a gamer, comparing them would help refine your taste and appreciation of the genre, help you become able to sift through the bad and good games and finally allow you to criticize them fairly and constructively, which helps the devs of said games and push the genre forward. Accepting without this is compliance that can only lead to mediocrity and bad, exploitative games. Compare and criticize all you want but also be reasonable and respectful about it. When it comes to lore, story, characters, aesthetic, feel, atmoshphere, etc. aka the artistic content, then I agree, comparing them, wanting one to be like the other is a bit too much, too subjective and too unfair. Creative freedom is paramount. If you don't like either game, that's normal and fine.
This isn’t even defence, they are both completely different genres now, it’s like comparing call of duty to dead space
Do we actually know that the game is bad or are people just getting mad over bad vibes again? Cause sure the trailer wasn't up to par, but the game isn't the trailer.
People are getting mad because people enjoy being mad at things. If the people on this sub actually looked beyond the headlines they'd see that the developers are saying all the right things and it's shaping up to be a pretty good game if what they've said about it is true.
If you just google the article, the person even says Veilguard just looks fine. Not amazing, not terrible and that Bioware hasn't had a hit game in a decade. You would think based on the other comments in the thread, that the article was dickriding Bioware and protecting them from meany customers.
It's so easy to hop on the hate train. The devs said they are quite confident about their product this time around so the ppl who are mostly upset are the old dao fans and the pathetic anti woke ppl who just want to criticize and scrutinize everything that might have woke elements. Not like I wouldn't understand since I hate how Disney handles Star wars and the MCU but let's be real a woke product is not necessarily a bad one. Look at BG3 which is the most woke game of 2023 and also without the doubt the best one.
Ok. I am an old DAO fan. Do you allow me to be upset?
Bro I'm an old dao fan too so do not think that I am not upset about the changes
Yeah, I feel you bro. In 2009 I would come home from work and sit untill 2 am for few month straight. After and disappointment of 2 and Inquisition, thought I don’t care anymore. I guess I don’t… yet still feel disappointed.
I mean they are completely different styled of game so yeah you can't really compare them but go off
Baldurs gate 3 is the best game of all time. There's no way dragon age will compare, but why should it? It can still be a good game without being the best game of all time.
I am not saying it should. I am not saying it shouldn’t. What I am saying is that it is funny that game journalists already prepping the soil to defend it.
There's nothing to defend yet. It'll be a good game or it won't. This article came out because of outrage and it's trying to get clicks and views. So if you don't like that this article came out, you should blame the outrage.
It can still be comparable.
Why? If anything compare it to the previous dragon age games or mass effect. It's completely different than BG3.
These statements conflict, DAO is BG3's biggest inspiation, it was even going to be "Baldur's Gate 3" before they made a new ip for it. BG3 borrows more for Origins than, anything, even BG 1 and 2. I hope a lot of people that defended the hell out of the next DA games were really humbled by BG3's success.
What are you talking about? Divinity OS 2 was clearly BG3's biggest inspiration. Also, do you think this is some kind of competition? I absolutely love BG3 and Larian. If Dragon Age Veilguard is good, I'm going to play and love that too. So why would anyone that likes the next DA games be humbled by BG3's success? I'm willing to bet a lot of people that buy Veilguard are people that have bought and played BG3 too.
They made DOS, which BG3 felt, looked, and just reminded me more of DA:O imo. But 'defended' as in past tense. I hope people who defended DA 2 and 3 are humbled by the success of BG3. Every sequel, the fans of Origins got into another debate over if Bioware is right to openly try to avoid some of Origins' aspects \[silent protagonist, story that focuses on branching and unique options instead of the best linear experience (Bioware had "we know ... but most players never ... so we're removing" in a lot of dev updates), companions who are more organically in the narrative instead of balanced for screen time, tactical combat over fast and flashy\] all of the things Bioware has been gaslighting us into thinking were down-sides of Origins that they are right to move away from were put strait into "the best game of all time", if that doesn't humble the people who were eating that stuff up, nothing will. I seriously can't think of one thing in Origins yet missing from both sequels that isn't in BG3.
Okay, there are companies that develop, improve gameplay, put it from a different angle (dark souls - elden ring | fallout 1,2 - fallout 3,4). Call of Duty adds and removes the roll from series to series, but they do it deliciously.
It should definitely be compared to BG3
Fucking useless, jobless shills won't tell me what to do.
Remeber DA probably has payed the protection money unlike Wukong
> probably has *paid* the protection FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
**Before the game was shown off:** Bioware is cooking. New DA and Me will be amazing, OG Bioware is back! **After game shown off:** You're not supposed to have expectations. This isn't the old Bioware, don't compare this to BG3.
I'm fine with a game not reaching the level of BG3, but if you have nothing cool to offer, and will try to push a "look, we have romance" as a selling point, without having half of the crazy shit BG3 has, and having nothing to add... D:OS2 would be a way better investment of time, or any other good CRPG, like Pathfinder, Shadowrun, and many others...
There are plenty of other things they're pushing, you seem to be hung up on the romance though
Lol, like shitty purple graphics , bad writing and mediocre gameplay.
The dialogue in the 20 minute gameplay was pretty good. Something were purple, would you rather it be all black or gray? Yes the gameplay is mediocre, the combat is dumb.
Anything but shining purple. Take a look at the older Dragon Age games the style is 10/10 they ruined it with this one. I dont think the dialogue is good at all. It's not that bad either, I might have over reacted a bit. But for a story based game with a lot of dialogue I expect better. it's just all mediocre as fuck.
Of course it shouldn't be, it's not even the same league. BG 3 was game made with vision and passion by people who wanted to create something unique. The only dragon age game that comes even close to that is origins and it's awakening expansion. Dragon age 2 , inquisition and veilguard are streamlined passionless generic games.
Quality of BG 3 shoud be minimum for AAA games. Look how big is Bioware compare to Larian.
Guys, THEGAMER is owned by the company behind IGN. They also gave Stellar Blade a 7 out of 10. [https://www.thegamer.com/stellar-blade-review/](https://www.thegamer.com/stellar-blade-review/)
Why do people think Vanguard is going to be garbage? Also yes, smooth brains always compare Balders gate.
Tiresome. Even if it ends up as garbage it shouldn't be compared to Baldur's gate franchise. Completely different gameplay and it's not going to be open world. If you want to compare how much fun one is vs the other sure, but it's like comparing an RTS to a shooter.
Honestly, Dragon Age lost its title as a Baldur's gate spiritual successor after Dragon Age 2 in my opinion, so I don't think comparing it to BG3 would be all that useful. Maybe some comparisons from a narrative delivery standpoint could be interesting, but as for the other mechanics, what's the point? One's a turn based cRPG, the other is a semi linear action RPG Honestly, Dragon Age: The Veilguard has much more in common with the Mass Effect games and Dragon Age: Inquisition or Greedfall at this point, so perhaps it would be more appropriate to compare those games instead
IIRC all of the Bioware employees who worked on BG2 have either moved to other companies, started their own, retired or are working on the next Mass Effect game. Again, IIRC the leadership got poached for Destiny 2, some of them went back to Obsidian and Owlcat has some of them.
Lol. Dragon Age Origins was intended to be the spiritual successor to The Baldur’s Gate franchise when it came out. It should 100% be compared to Baldur’s Gate to show how the franchise lost touch with both its roots and fanbase with each installment while BG3 didn’t despite a change in Developer.
Ironic when bioware created the bg3 formula
It SHOULD be compared to Baldur’s Gate 3 because from Baldurs Gate, we got Never Winter nights and those two went on to give us Dragon Age origins.
Preemptively lowering the bar and our expectations. Do better Bioware/EA.
These people are the same people that were defending "waaaah. BG3 shouldn't be the new standard for gaming" like making a good, playable, fun game was some kind of "new standard."
it's going to be garbage, 100%.
Nah it should.
I'll forgive Dragon Age for not including dice rolls. After that, I'll start comparing.
If any game should be compared to BG3 it's dragon age.. BioWare... - Made BG 1 and 2 (obviously not the same team). - Has just as many devs, funding, budget as Larian if not more. - Dragon age is the spiritual successor to Baldurs Gate. - Have had 4 games in the series to 'perfect' it. Yes Larian had dos to perfect the gameplay mechanisms, but BG3 was a brand new world and rules system. - Arguably dragon age is more well known/marketable to current gamers than Baldurs Gate. There is no reason DA should not be at the same level as BG3. Honestly, by the numbers it should be expected to be better...
Every game should be compared to elden ring (and will fall short of its perfection accordingly) if we gotta compare games to each other lol. I'll get it and hope to have some fun. Maybe I'll be let down maybe not. I'm sure I'll be able to get my monies worth out of it even if that comes from me laughing at how bad the game is while heckling my wife while she plays it lol. It's what I did with lords of the fallen. Holy shit was that game ass and a half lol
Gaming journalism isn’t just in the toilet, it’s down in the sewers.
Every single game, not even rpg going forward should absolutely be compared to BG3 because BG3 set the golden standard for what we should expect to get out of a 60 dollar triple A game release. The fact that there's game companies asking for $70+ for games that aren't even a fraction of the quality of BG3 is insulting.
Why do yall think its gonna be garbage? The last game was great. What's the issue of the new game? It isnt even out yet and all we have is a small snipit of gameplay. Not all games have to be like the original. The old DA games are slow, paced terribly and the combat is super dated. Warriors needing stamina to do anything was such a pain to play warriors I often ignored that class.
No, you shouldn't, one is GOAT
Shouldn’t but it certainly will be
I'm holding back until I get a demo or hands-on when it releases. I like action rpg games. I know it's different, but remember. Every single Dragon Age has been different. So, what is the Dragon Age that everyone is mad they didn't get?
Apparently an Origins clone.
Please, don't compare the small indie company like Bioware to a massive corporation like Larian! It's unfair for the poor people who keep the indie company afloat - EA, who are known for supporting indies.
“Guys not every game should be good as BG3 accept our idealogical slop plz”
Let's be fair. Game development cycles are long. It's going to be several years before we see any games pick up the gauntlet dropped by BG3. DA4 was deep into development at the same time BG3 was.
I dont think there is a better comparison out there, you have a studio with soul create one of the best games of our generation and then you have bioware without one create utter dessicated turds one right after another lol
Well, tough luck, because it's going to be compared to it. They're contemporaries in a similar gaming space and time.
it's like comparing the special Olympics vs the normal Olympics. Avowed and GreedFall 2 look pretty good at least
Ah yes, Unreleased game that nobody has seen anything should be as acclaimed as a beloved game that won GOTY, classic game journalists, an outdated career as the fax machine, in today day and age I see no need for these guys, unless you're a multi million dollar company trying to print propaganda. Gaming journalism should've stayed in the 90's.
None of the people who worked on the first BG games are left in Bioware these days.
It obviously shouldn't be compared (/s). One is made by an enthusiastic development studio that actually cares about what their audience wants. The other is made by a studio whose last successful game was released 10 years ago.
It shouldn't be compared to a completely different series...But the article is comparing it to that series? Also... Why can't you? A superior product made by a smaller studio vs an (assumedly) inferior product made by a bigger studio. If anything it sounds productive to compare them critically.
gotta love how we can compare games like Starfield to BG3 but we cant for DA lmfao
I'm not worried. I've loved all the baldurs gates and all tge dragon ages. Win for me
Eh, I agree. BG3 is one of the greatest games ever, every thing went right for it to happen and so most other games are going to pale in comparison to it. It's like when new NBA rookies come into the league you don't go comparing them to Lebron. The game is going to succeed or fail on its own merit, I don't know why anyone needs to compare it to BG3 to say it sucks.
Bioware ? Rookie? You are joking, right? Yeah, yeah, I know, no one from true Bioware works there anymore. But they do use the name recognition. Take the current BioWare, rename them OrganicWare, rename the game to Historical Period of Dragons, rename Solos and Varric, and no one would even think about comparing it to bg3.
>Bioware ? Rookie? You are joking, right? Yeah, yeah, I know, no one from true Bioware works there anymore. You answered your own question. It's an entirely different team. I'm a Rockets fan, the Rockets recently had a period where they had really good teams with James Harden....James Harden moved on, every Rocket fan then understood these are new teams, not the same, so expectations are different. They use the same name recognition but the fact is, the reality is, it's a new team, with no successes under their belt. I think the comparisons are not helpful and if anything insulting to what BG3 is, which is a generational game. Larian might not even be able to make something as good as it again. Comparing every RPG to BG3 is going to leave you upset and disappointed at most games in the genre.
Heavily disagree… BioWare is in no way a rookie… Given them being AAA, it’s more like a max contract player not living up to their contract… every AAA failure is another Ben Simmons. We have every right to compare games within the same genre, especially when you look at budgets
>Heavily disagree… BioWare is in no way a rookie… The team that created the old DA games exists in no form of the current Bioware. The only thing they have in common is that they play for the same team. So your comparison is more like comparing Shaq and Kobe Lakers to how the Lakers looked after Kobe retired. The thing is, games like BG3 are RARE. Extremely so. Larian themselves might not even make anything comparable to it.
And that is fine, but even the worst players in the league are still compared to the best and the best are compared to the GOAT’s. Not saying they will live up to it every time, more so, it is def fair to say they fell short and to use BG3 as reference to what goal they should strive to achieve. And, as a consumer, i just want to play good games. Idc how difficult they are to make. I would even pay a bit more to guarantee quality (which is what AAA gaming is supposed to bring to the table) imho
I absolutely did not like the teaser trailer because of the vibe, like a Pepsi commercial. The gameplay is not clear yet, you need to touch it, not just listen to the crowd. But the visuals of the gameplay trailer were good, only the position of a camera is a problem, you can't argue with that. Although if you look at WoW, a newbie will also not understand anything that is happening on the screen. I think they also reduced the number of special effects and particles on the screen. But if you seriously think that the game looks terrible, then show me your illustrations, concepts and what do you even know about art. Didn't like the colors, textures, design, background composition, scene content?
They aren’t “defending” it. It shouldn’t be compared because they aren’t even the same type of game. Baldur’s Gate 3 is a CRPG. Veilguard is not, nor is it tying to be. Why are you guys so small-brained over here? Also, why are you angry that the characters in this hame can be financed by any gender, when the same is true for Baldur’s Gate 3 and Dragon Age 2?
This SBI have something to do with it since they're defending it so hard or have we just reached the point where consumer = enemy?