Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
ive enjoyed the game just fine.
Art looks nothing like fortnite but okay - this one is subjective not objective
i find the fights to be fine - yes the trash is reptitive but when is it not?
i love the story line - the companions have high and low moments but that has been true since origins.
its not replacing any of the lore - expanding on it yes - but i have yet to find something that replaces it.
im on my second play through so... okay.
I think it's as good as Inquisition, and I think Dragon Age 2 is the worst in the series.
Unfortunate that some fans of the series will miss out because of a few lines of dialogue or reviews from complete strangers.
Seems people who have actually played through the game mostly enjoy it or could not stomach the companion gathering portion of the game; totally understand people who couldn't stomach the first part of the game, though. It missed the mark completely.
The whiny doomers pining for Origins and declaring Dragon Age is dead has been a thing since Dragon Age 2.
Hopefully Bioware's takeaway from Veilguard is that they shouldn't have done away with the Renegade system, and companion stories that are detached from the main group and main story don't work.
But in terms of BioWare of the modern era issues, the game has what you'd expect and progresses into more as you'd expect looking at the transition of Dragon Age 2 -> Dragon Age Inquisition and Mass Effect 3 -> Mass Effect: Andromeda.
Games with a quantity over quality approach, games with higher focus on visual and voice acting (which I do enjoy but often the cost of it impedes other things), and games with a great degree of expensive cast and such... but that become weaker when it comes time to include the dialog, dialog options, etc.
ME2 -> ME3 showed a significant decrease in dialog options, investigation options, and even interaction and reactivity. Not to mention that all established canon and lore was nullified in the game by changing pertinent things or just ignoring them. It was never just the endings of RED BLUE GREEN, but more the impact of so many things from start to finish. They even made quests into fetch quests which was unfortunate.
To most people the ME3 inclusion led to stronger combat options, though I personally would disagree the reality remains that it did indeed focus more on combat options.
We then look at ME3 -> MEA and while major issues occured and it became a singleplayer mmo world ala dragon age inquisition, the reality is that MEA fixed most issues of ME3 by focusing again on dialog, interaction, and reactivity. Unfortunately it did this with weaker writing and in a highly repetitive single-player mmo style open world with respawning enemies and the like. Plus a plot that despite its impressive visuals didn't do much to stir and often made no sense.
Of course ME:A again was highly focused on its combat features and many argued it did really well with that.. at the cost of most everything else.
Then we look at DA2 to DA:I with DA2 having reduced investigation options, the inclusion of the ME rule, minimal customization other than personality of your main character and reduced NPC customization to boot. Plus recycled environments and other issues and the entire art style change to a cartoony version of the dark spawn and other enemies, and my least favorite being the changes to combat for more console and action focused engagements. Huge health bars as well as wave-based encounters in combat.
Then we see DA:I and it fixes the issues of DA2... at the cost of it becoming a singleplayer mmo world that is repetitive, has enemies respawning, a real-time round table that people mostly modded out or messed with their clocks to overcome, and a bunch of repetitive elements, in favor of combat, which in my case I don't think improved from DA2 to DAI but it did at least remove most of the junk. It did have some strong plot and developments and dialog options but it was still heavily reduced and I wasn't really happy with where they went with the character interactions and developments. Still had companions we enjoyed tho.
It occurs to me that DA:V also mimics the ME3 and to a degree ME2 detonation and combo explosions and I think that's a bit tedious.
----
So as we can see. It was always expected for the transition to continue as BioWares original staff have been gone for a while and the writers just keep getting less budgets and thus less appealing to focus on.
DA:V's issues aren't anything to do with the troll complaints. They are to do with the consistent degradation of quality in favor of quantity and action-combat that have plagued RPG genres for a long time. Either everything is an RPG but without the substance or the RPGS start to decay. We can see that in Assassin Creed, Destiny, Dragon Age, Mass Effect, probably future Witchers, the newest Fallout and its multiplayer side-quel, and numerous others. We can even see it in some form in Cyberpunk 2077 and other factors.
This is the trend. EAware just happens to really be full into it.
Even Baldur's Gate 3 wasn't immune to it. And we can see old high dialog option type game styles with the new Pathfinder games for instance Wrath of the Righteous and Rogue Trader, but let's not ignore that it does this at the cost of voice acting, visual 3d experiences, and other issues... And even then it's not perfect. Those games have their own issues with reactivity, or engagement, or too much combat, etc.
Unless a game developer decides to go against it and spend more on money because they have a personal desire to do the more expensive and time consuming thing, we can expect the rpg genre to continue to be nullified.
This is false. First off Baldur's Gate 3 had a copious amount of early access time and that is why the Act 1 and parts of Act 2 (but only parts) are highly fleshed out. Except that Act 2's core and Act 3 especially suffer from major issues, and as you get closer to the end those issues expand excessively.
Baldur's Gate 3 shows what a game with such a large early access fund plus a large supporting fund behind it can do and yes arguably had its entire Act 2 and Act 3 also been in early access and feedback applied perhaps 2 years more of fleshing out could have been done if money was no object and then on release (which would be likely meaning it came out this year), we might see even higher quality...
But that isn't what happened and that's an unrealistic expectation. Any game could be better if it listened to feedback, had a huge portion of it available to early access, and didn't just use early access as a way to avoid criticism.
Baldur's Gate 3 also sadly was largely shielded from criticism due to "return to quality" even though parts of Act 2 and the vast immensity of Act 3 were in horrific shape at launch and even today maintain series issues of quantity over quality focus and degradation in writing and implementation. So Larien will never really ever be held over the fires for that part and its too late now.
BG3 is a rarity. It will only occur again if a development studio is willing to spend more than necessary and release later than they could at the cost of potential profits and at risk to themselves, to try to flesh out a game a bit more. Don't expect that.
Instead you should expect the consistent quantity over quality focus of games and the constant make everything into an open world with repetitive respawning enemies or reduced dialog options linear play or some mix of that.. to continue. As it has done from DA2, DA:I, ME3, ME:A, Anthem, Destiny, Fallout 4, Fallout 76, Starfield, DA:V, and so many others.
It's not even just an rpg issue. Any game considering itself even adjacent to RPG continues this downward trend. A trend that has been progressive and without interruption.
It's entirely possible to enjoy other games while waiting for those once every decade games to come out.
This whole "hold them to a standard" and pining for the best game in a series every launch mentality has been going on since the early 2000's. It hasn't gotten anyone anywhere, besides maybe leaving the people expecting it to work extremely jaded with the industry.
Oh, so Baldur’s Gate 3 is only good because of early access, huh? That's a fun take! Let's look at a few facts that might not fit into that theory:
First, the player numbers. BG3 hit over 800,000 concurrent players at launch—that’s not 'shielding from criticism'; that’s players flocking to a game they actually wanted. Meanwhile, EA and other studios have poured way more money into games that barely hit a fraction of that. So, yeah, turns out people like complex RPGs when studios actually put effort into them.
And the 'big budget early access' excuse? Larian’s budget was a fraction of what the ‘big names’ like EA and Bethesda spend on games. BG3 didn’t need bloated marketing or empty hype because, you know, it’s actually good. Early access didn’t write the story, build the companions, or craft the gameplay depth. That’s Larian doing what most studios seem to have forgotten how to do: respecting the players.
And 'quantity over quality'? Have you seen recent ‘big budget’ RPGs? If Act 3 has a few rough edges, it’s still miles ahead of half-baked cash grabs that give you nothing to chew on. Face it: BG3 succeeded because it didn’t follow the industry’s lazy, shallow path, and that’s exactly what players wanted.
You replied without actually even addressing or reading what I said. You just wanted to say a bunch of words but none of your response even gave a basic retort or counter point.
The rpg genre is dying for aaa studios and while non aaa studio rpgs do exist they have their own issues. Bg3 had major issues. The parts of the game without major issues were those they had the time to fix due to significant fleshing out from feedback.
And bg3 had a huge budget.
I'm not going to just go back and forth if you're not going to even pay attention to what was said. My favorite genre has been dying a death for 15 years slowly and possibly before then. It has consistently gotten worse progressively every new game. And it will be worse with ME5, the new Witchers, the new elder scrolls etc. Because that is how it is. Nothing is ever better than it's predecessors anymore.
Oh, I read what you said—believe me, it’s not exactly groundbreaking insight. You’re lamenting the 'death of RPGs' and pointing at BG3's supposed 'major issues' as if it somehow proves that we’re doomed to subpar games forever. Meanwhile, the rest of us are over here actually enjoying a game that respects RPG mechanics, storytelling, and player choice. So yeah, excuse me if I’m a little skeptical about your doom-and-gloom take.
You keep saying BG3 had a ‘huge budget’ like it’s on the same level as these bloated AAA productions. It wasn’t. Larian didn’t have hundreds of millions to burn like EA or Bethesda. They just spent wisely on a quality game, which is more than we can say for most AAA studios.
And your argument? It boils down to 'things are worse now, so nothing can be good.' How about the simple fact that BG3 brought in huge player numbers, rave reviews, and set a new bar? The reason RPGs are ‘dying’ isn’t because it’s impossible to make a good one—it’s because AAA studios have stopped trying. BG3 is proof that people want better, and when a studio actually delivers, it pays off.
But hey, if you want to keep sulking about ‘the good old days,’ be my guest. The rest of us will be over here enjoying the new standard BG3 just set.
No you didn't read it. Because your replies consistently ignore the content and context of what I pointed out.
Akin to me saying I like the color red and you saying I hate all colors but red just cause you saw the word red and not blue.
You are not replying to what I'm saying which makes a conversation a bit pointless.
You've consistently missed the issue and cause for everything because of the same reason you haven't read what I've said. Because you're trying to rant without thinking.
I will try one more time but I'm not gonna waste time replying after this again.
Here are some definitive statements.
1. Baldurs Gate 3 was a good game. But the quality of its content was so different between the content that had early access fleshing out and the content that didn't act 3 and parts of Act 2 were never in early access. So they never received any feedback. At launch they were in horrific horrible states and not just due to performance and such. They had the weakest dialog options the least character interaction, the most broken quests, and as it got closer to the factory things even poor effort in design and writing quality became apparent act 3 was bad. But like always game critics can't be relied on due to advertising revenue needs and the playerbase ignored the issues because they were so deprived of any quality rpgs akin to yester year that also had 3d visuals and voice acting. BG3 can't be held up as a pillar while ignoring all it's issues.
2. Larien did have hundreds of millions but like most games in the AAA circuit of which Larien is really only just finding itself in now, they maintained the issues of their predecessor. Divinity Original Sin 1 and 2 maintain most of the issues they had in the game BG3 and it goes into others. It's also for too wide at times which leads to more depth issues. Also like most AAA games they divided their budget between advertising and marketing and development. Clearly they needed more time to flesh out but couldn't justify it with the cost and pressures from the owners of Dungeons and Dragons to release as well as their own management. So they released it in the state it was. A game mind you that is not new anymore. So talking about it as if the majority still play it is a bit nonsensical. There won't be dlc and there won't be a sequel from larien. The people that will play it but haven't yet are low. You can't keep acting like it's some savior or bastion while also ignoring its issues and the fact it's popularity has passed. The wider majority is looking for new games now.
BG3 most certainly considers itself an AAA game and it had an AAA budget.
3. You seem to want to blame developers and programmers and such doing their best as if they're not trying. Maybe the poor writing in this game wasn't trying as hard as it could but like always the issues are at the top. It's management and shareholders. For larien. For cd red. For ea. For Activision. For Bethesda etc. Sometimes an arrogant lead designer like in Bethesda are a contributor but it's not that the studios aren't trying. It's that management and their bosses want a profit focus.
A game that releases. A game that is quick to release and a game that has huge advertising and visual and repetitive and addicting combat focuses that get players to have a time sink enough to justify 60 now 70 dollars and possibly more for pointless collector edition costs. And they'd prefer it have dlc too to keep that going but not fleshed out stuff.
And the staff of developers and such most of which are on contracts and not full time salary have to deliver while being unemployed later, overworked and crunched, and having no real say for themselves. With attempts at unionizing not doing too much just yet.
And it doesn't help that the majority of gamers tend to fall for it claim them as good games and move on while critics too beholden to advertising revenue and good relations in the game reviewer circuit with companies, give highly inflated scores while player reception is skewed on places like steam because it has no ability to rate other than positive or negative thus most things get considered positive.
And it doesn't help when you ignore the criticisms as you've done likely for well over a decade. Because your enjoyment matters more than the core and components of the game.
And since the community has not successfully in two decades held their feet to the fire by refusing to buy or using the power of the consumer by any majority... the trend continues.
Of course it is important to recognize that there are issues with voice acting costs and other such too.
If you want to look at an rpg thst is still an rpg then look at pathfinder wrath of the righteous and rogue trader. They for all their faults maintain significant dialog options. But even they are weaker than they used to be.
Baldur's Gate 3 isn't a matter of trying. It was a matter that they listened to feedback and had some time to implement. But when hat time ran out they didn't listen to feedback anymore and thus the second half of the game is in a much less polished and weaker writing state.
Its not about trying. It's about money and time and the craving of demographics. Consumers do not require much to be appeased hence they get what they ask for.
No IP series has stopped the downward path of degradation of quality in two decades. It's just each IP and studio team had different starting points and structures on that path.
Pathfinder has been degrading in its impact from decisions and major bugs and such.
Larien games have been having major issues with the impact and reactivity plus the disparate voice acting likewise found in pathfinder games has become less and less over time.
BioWare in its now 5 recent games potentially six has consistently regressed it's dialog options, reactivity, quest design, and even companion development in favor of of combat and quantity over quality.
Bethesda has pushed for combat and reduced dialog options and reactivity as well as weaker quest structures.
Cd red has had less interactivity, less level design with variation in access, and most npcs not having much reactivity or interaction with dialog. And their recent world was very lifeless in regards to interaction and reactivity outside the main quest and some side quests. Areas just feel like they're dead.
And these and others all have issues focusing more on open world and at times singleplayer mmo type worlds. More voice acting and 3d visuals and heavy degrees of combat in the form of action adventure focuses.
Everything is becoming more like assassin creed 3. Every IP is progressing towards less of what it used to have.
And it's because management and shareholders and their focus on profit over quality. And it's on the consumers for allowing it. But people are simple.
The TL;DR of the matter as much as I hate that phrase is that rpg genre is dying due to focus on open world, reduced dialog and reactivity options, and more and more action based combat. And that is what people are apparently okay with.
Selling The Veilguard as Dragon Age is like selling Pepsi as Coca-Cola. People buy Coke, taste Pepsi, and complain. Even though Pepsi is a great product.
Only three things keep Dragon Age The Veilguard from getting a 10.
1) You can't use the name you created for your character, "rook" is not a name;
2) There's really too much stupid dialogue;
3) The game's marketing is horrible.
The Veilguard is basically a Baldur's Gate 3 with gameplay similar to Hogwarts.
In short, the marketing mistake: it's not Dragon Age, but it's an excellent game (ARPG - Action Role-Playing Game), 8 out of 10 for those who have never played Dragon Age before.
Bad marketing misses the target audience, emphasizes the game's weaknesses (as if they were strengths), and allows trolls to complain about not receiving a (free) game key, so you either don't buy the game, or play a pirated version for half an hour, or don't even play it and still help to run a campaign badmouthing the game on social media using fake news.
The grading of games has become so pointless as everyone wants to mark everything as a ten. This game is at best a 7 and that's overly generous. But Inquisition was at beat a 7.5 and that's mildly generous. 6 for this and 7 for dai might be better.