By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Machiavellian 5 days ago
Edit Thread
Mnementh said:
Machiavellian said:

Probably because if you do not grow your audience it becomes stagnant.  The old fans complain you doing to much or they complain you are not doing enough and its an ever endless cycle that continues until they all just fade away.  I consider GOD of War as a prime example.  I remember when this GOD of war was shone with 3rd person perspective and just about every GOD of War fan went crazy including myself.  The game appealed to a totally new audience but because the game was good, it also was able to turn over die hards like myself because the game was fun.  Developers hate having to do the same thing over and over again never being allowed to actually try new ideals always being held back by the fans who say they want something new but never really do.  Sometimes creative teams really want to be creative and not held down.  The key of course is that the game they make that moves away from the old must be good.  What I have seen from a number of positive reviews is that the game is good.  So yeah, its going to not appeal to the old guard as much but if its good enough, it might convert a few over and grow its audience. 

Hmm. I saw the description that Dragon Age Veilguard is a mix of God of War and Guardians of the Galaxy. That is something, both are very popular games. But here is the thing: I played neither of them and have no interest to. I was interested in Dragon Age Veilguard, possibly even excited, but my excitement is evaporating by the minute. Veilguard seems to lose everything I love about RPGs.

You talk about stagnant, but what does it mean? I described Baldur's Gate 3 in the greatest game event as a 90s game utilizing modern technology, experience and budget (as gaming as a whole has grown *a lot*). So is BG3 a stagnant game? Probably. It won multiple game of the year awards being that stagnant.

I feel like stagnant is used as a term for: "genre I don't like". So let me declare every real-time game stagnant. BG3 has proven turn-based is the way to go, so every game should be turn-based, otherwise it is being stagnant.

You said about yourself: "I believe this Dragon Age probably more up my ally than previous entries as I never liked the series". So Veilguard is certainly a game, but maybe it is not a Dragon Age game. What is with people who previously liked the series? They have to look elsewhere. Well, another BG3 run for me then.

I personally do not like to read reviews that try to compare a game to another one which is usually the ones I just ignore as lazy.  Instead the reviews I like just talk about the game, how it plays, the story the interaction etc.  The main thing is does the game give you the tools to have fun and enjoy the experience.  One thing I believe is true is that Dragon Age developer wasn't happy or passionate about the previous games and thus doing the same thing again wasn't making them want to continue along that same route.  You either risk it all or do some hybrid mess that never makes anyone happy.  I rather a developer just risk it all for their vision than try to thread the middle.  Yes, the chance is that you miss the target but then again that is always the risk with video games.