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
Why are people making up stuff to be concerned/mad about now lol
Relax, it was a genuine question not another identity war.
Just curious as they are already ok with adding new things to change the outlook of darkspawn. They could very well make a change to how darkspawn eventually get created.
Besides alot of discussions start from curious questions to genuine comparisons.
For those who never started at origins or speed through without reading notes and such, they might have missed out the dark fantasy lore of this.
I'm aware the new darkspawn are changed instead of produced, which unless there are going to be like farming chambers where the moment broodmothers spawn new ones and get changed, it will be illogical for there to be a swarm of these constant new darkspawns
I think everyone here despite which side agrees the scooby doo skeleton faced darkspawn are the worst redesign.
A retcon would not surprise me in the least.
They could also add new lore..."wow, the darkspawn have gained the ability to split like amoebas thanks to the dark elven gods! Broodmothers aren't needed anymore.
A small part of me could also see them just getting the original lore wrong entirely. I suspect it's mostly, if not all new people working on this game. They've clearly taken this game into some different directions with the overall tone and aesthetic. If they don't really respect their predecessor's work, they could have not done their research properly and got stuff wrong. Wouldn't be the first time we have seen that from a developer.
What I think is most likely though, is that they go out of their way to avoid bringing up any of the "uncomfortable" stuff. They won't have to worry about pissing people off with lore retcons and rewrites, but they can avoid dealing with topics that "trigger" people.
The ogre so far is the worst one. Some of the others looked...fine.
Every single change they make is a deliberate creative decision that they retroactively justify narratively.
>hey wouldn't it be cool if we did X
>yeah that looks good but how do we explain it?
>oh let's just give [character] the ability to [do it] and imply that he/she has the desire to do that
That is what writers, across all fiction, do all the time. Maybe they wrote something in the past that they don't like anymore, boom - something happens that changes it. Maybe they take over the IP from someone who wrote something in the past that the current team doesn't like anymore, boom - it was an ureliable narrator who was exaggerating. Or it was an isolated splinter faction of the whole tribe that gave it a bad name and the actual rules of the main tribe are totally different. See kossith vs. qunari.
That is why having a lore bible with facts and unchangable events, tone and characters is so damn important. But writers usually hate that because they all want to write "their" story with "their" spin and the more untouchable lore an IP has the less room for creativity writers have.
The creation of the Blight was discussed in Inquisition as far as I remember. The rest is Veilguard spoiler probably taken from the trailers and articles.
Yup this.
BioWare was definitely questioned about the new design of the goofy darkspawns and they replied with how these new changes are lore-friendly
Ya there's been some stuff dropped in trailers, articles and so on. So don't look it up unless you don't mind spoilers.