EDIT 2 What the fuck is happening with the Qunari. Origins, 2, Inquisition, and finally Veilguard. This is just sad. In the first 3 games. They were cool, but now they look like shit cosplay.
It’s weird how all of them are saying the same thing.
“Return to form” is just one of those reviewer-isms like “mixed bag” and “fans of the genre”. You’ve probably seen the words “return to form” in dozens of trailers over the years that put the review quotes in their sizzle reels.
The qunari design is the weirdest thing to me. They Bioware spent so much effort solidifying who the Qunari are in 2 and had a great design to reflect that. Then in 3 I feel like they maintained and perhaps even improved the design, but kinda watered down the characterization of the culture. Perhaps I’m misremembering and the group of Qunari present in 2 are a more extreme sect than they are representative of the people as a whole. Now in Veilguard they seem to have really softened everything about the race. I’m just confused about the design direction which is disappointing because I really enjoy the qunari of DA2.
Initial reviews seem remarkably positive given what we saw in the first gameplay reveal a few months ago. My impression at the time was that about half the voice actors sounded like they hadn’t been given enough context about the scenario and some of the cutscenes had questionable direction, which were bad signs for a curated ten minute slice. I still think it’s ultimately not for me—I don’t really want action combat in my Dragon Age—but I’m glad people are enjoying it.
No idea why there are so many people who want this game to fail. Bioware has realistically made two bad games, Andromeda and Anthem, and for me Andromeda has the best gameplay in the entire series, not necessarily the best story and anthem is just not great. It’s crazy the amount of bioware hate that exists that’s completely unwarranted.
I feel like the story has good ideas but ultimately fails, personally. I like the idea of struggling against inevitable tragedy, but when the cause of such tragedy was against always immediately in arms reach of you and caused by a single person it falls flat.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon_Age_II lots of good information in the wiki page, of which none of your claims are accurate except for maybe the polarizing views on reused assets but that’s literally by design, not crunch. It sold more than origins and sold over a million copies in two weeks, that’s pretty damn good. Nice rage baiting though.
Wow knowing the asset reuse was by design makes me feel way less charitable towards DA2. (I don’t know if I’d go as far as the other commenter and say it’s “a bad game,” but I didn’t like it.)
It depends on how you frame it. I don’t see it as “hate” as I don’t hate Bioware, but objectively speaking, the work speaks for itself. Hyperbole such as disaster, catastrophe, etc are embellishments, but to say the game isn’t bad or just so-so isn’t a scathing criticism.
Anthem was treated the way it was due to ME3 and the narrative choices, for better or worse. People wanted to tell off Casey Hudson, and the game suffered unfairly. Granted it wasn’t a good game, it wasn’t as terrible as it was made out to be either.
Now on Andromeda, however, it was fairly criticized. The gameplay was fun and engaging, but the narrative and storytelling were given their fair treatment. That stuff was just bad, and the developer responses didn’t help either. The pathetic rants amounted to “I put mah heart and souuuulll into it”, and just because people worked really hard on something, doesn’t mean it was a good thing. People worked really hard in the sewers of London to get rid of fatbergs, but in the end all they achieved was moving shit around, and that’s more dignified than the trash we got in Andromeda’s writing and character animations.
Looking at the current marketing situation and the “Bioware hate” as you refer to it, I really think there’s more EA hate at this point. EA is blatantly manipulating the review scores by means of review embargos and selectively cherry picking only favorable review outlets, and in some cases we are even spotting reused catchphrases that indicate signs of coaching by EA to say positive things about the game. They do this in light of the consumer sentiment about preorders “Not touching this or preordering, I want reviews first” is a common sentiment amongst their video comments telling their marketing engagement experts to use dirty tricks like review manipulation.
I’d honestly love for Veilguard to be fantastic, but the layoffs and staff turnover tell me they didn’t value their developers, didn’t value the product, and don’t value the art or anything really beyond making some flashy flim-flam with marketable gimmicks. The reviews I’ve read mention that the characters in the game must definitely know what Tiktok is, due to the cringy dialogue, and that’s a review that gave it a favorable score.
Just wait until the objective reviews hit and this game is widely panned. That will draw the line between “hate” and “oh, this is actually shitty”, and make things especially clear.
There have been more positive reviews so far than negative, and not a single post has shown any proof that EA is manipulating reviews and cherry picking. The only thing we’ve seen is one guy at fextralife throwing out conspiracy theories about how EA hates him, another guy who’s apparently a racist and sexist asshat, and that’s pretty much it. Mortismal has even stated he wasn’t paid off or anything by EA and would be fined and his account deleted if he was and didn’t disclose that fact, which he didn’t.
Bioware has made two bad games, Andromeda and Anthem, two. One is objectively not that bad, the other is a game in a genre they’ve never dipped their toes into, and the biggest issue is that those two releases were back to back, so that apparently means they’ve gone to shit now and everything else they’ve created means nothing. It’s really sad how petty and ridiculous some people are over bioware. As for the EA hate that’s been around forever, but God forbid someone say something positive about a bioware game.
Do you have proof that EA is forcing reviewers to use catchphrases as you’ve said? I get it, we all have our hate boners, we all have our pet peeves, but damn son…the conspiracy theories and review embargo nonsense is just stupid at this point. Like you said let’s just wait for the objective reviews but how about we simply don’t write the game off because bioware apparently murdered our puppies.
This sure seems to indicate coaching on catchphrases. As for conspiracy theories, this isn’t a conspiracy, it’s pretty obvious. IGN, Gamespot, Kotaku, and Polygon have a long history of rating games higher based on their budget and publisher influence. Standard review outlets are inconsistent, and since 2010 have been the butt of many jokes. This seven year old video from Dunkey albeit, satire, rather well breaks down the inconsistency between review outlet staff even highlighting their own subjective contradictions from individual reviewers (look at the bit about the Sonic game in this one).
When you look at the first wave of reviews given by those issued pre-release review copies, the trend speaks for itself.
You know, I was honestly going to give you some credit for trying, but then you edited your post and decided to turn the conversation political. Your entire argument has lost all credibility, these are video games, please try not to take them so seriously, have a nice day.
Lol, how is that political? It’s a “water makes wet” kind of thing. I’m sorry you have such fragile feelings about Bioware and don’t like the narrative. If it’s any consolation, it’s not even the same people who made the prior games. Whether the game’s a massive success or financial failure, EA’s just going to fire them all anyway. That’s cool though, we’ll see how it looks on the Steam reviews this weekend. If past experience is any indicator, whenever a publisher resorts to funny business, it’s because they have to. Nobody was needed in the defense of BG, MDK2, BG2, NWN, Kotor, Jade Empire, ME, ME2, DA:O, DA2, SW:TOR, DA:I, etc.
I don’t even really care about the studio anymore to be honest, after the layoffs and turnover, we have no idea whether this crew delivered or not, and judging from the review oddities, it paints a bleak picture. Let them sink or swim based on what EA allowed them to do, then through no true fault of their own, face a studio closure because of the obtuse fuckwads in EA corporate. Either way, the future sucks for the gaming studio called Bioware, in name only.
You don’t want a neural net for your game AI because it’s behavior is unpredictable and therefore cannot be tested.
All of the issues AI companies have now times by a thousand because now the AI have access to a physical presence in the game world. It would cheat and find ways to know things about the game state that it’s not supposed to know, or it would hide in a corner as far away from the player as possible because it’s parameters is to avoid death, or some other unforeseen function of its instructions.
This entirely depends on the quality of the AI and the task at hand. A well made AI can be relatively predictable. However, most tasks that AI excels at are tasks which themselves do not have a predictable solution. For instance, handwriting recognition can be solved by a neural network with much better than human accuracy. That task does not have a perfect solution, and there is not an ideal answer for each possible input (one person’s ‘a’ could look exactly the same as another’s ‘o’). The same can be said for almost all games, especially those involving a human player.
and therefore cannot be tested
Unpredictable things can be tested. That’s pretty much what the entire field of statistics and probability is about. Also, testability is a fundamental requirement for any kind of machine learning. It isn’t just a good practice kind of thing; if you can’t test your model, you don’t even have a model in the first place. The whole point is to create many candidate models and test them to find the best one.
It would cheat and find ways to know things about the game state that it’s not supposed to know
A neural network only knows what you tell it. If you don’t tell it where the player is, it’s not going to magically deduce it from nothing. Also, it’s output has to be interpreted to even be used. The raw output is a vector of numbers. How this is transformed into usable actions is entirely up to the developer. If that transformation allows violating the rules, that’s the developers fault, not the networks. The same can be said of human input; it is the developers responsibility to transform that into permissable actions in game.
it would hide in a corner as far away from the player as possible because it’s parameters is to avoid death
That is possible. Which is why you should make a performance metric that reflects what you actually want it to try to do. This is a very common issue and is just part of the process of making an AI. It is not an insurmountable problem.
Neural networks have been used to play countless games before. It’s probably one of the most studied use cases simply because it is so easy to do.
I’m still gonna wait and see, I think user reviews might turn out very mixed in contrast to the critics reviews. Not that I value user reviews all that much, but I’d like to see a bit more from the game before deciding anyway.
What really put me off from this game was the insanely boring dragon fight they recently showed in the PlayStation presentation, it dragged out so long too and nothing really interesting seemed to happen, it felt like a really outdated kind of boss battle, especially after games like God of War and Horizon. It just did not look that fun honestly, but perhaps story and other parts of the game are more entertaining.
Yeah I just watched Skill Up’s video and then was surprised to see so many positive reviews on this roundup. What gives? Are folks so keen for more Dragon Age that they turn a blind eye to such deficiencies? Or is it just a difference of opinion.
Yeah, I don’t get it either. What I’ve seen doesn’t look anywhere close to an 8+ out of ten rating. Will be interesting to see the player ratings on this one…
Access journalism. If you agree to say whatever EA wants EA gives you first access to the next game, which increases your views. Idk the exact process for this game, but big publishers often bribe these reviewers with expensive vacations too (it’s why they fly journalists out to demo the game instead of sending the outlets a digital demo), Bethesda did it with 76 for instance.
Just watched the first part of his video. It seems to line up perfectly with what I was expecting based on the gameplay we were shown so far, it’s just outright boring. The amount of criticism and the footage in his review does not line up with the high ratings this game got.
Looks llike it’s gonna be a skip. Shame, because visually it looks nice to me and I kinda dig the art style (except for the Qunari), but if story, animations and gameplay are bad and boring it’s gonna be a no from me.
I don’t dislike that art style in general, but to my mind it seems like a poor fit for a Dragon Age game. I guess they’re pivotinf strongly away from the series dark and gritty roots, which is unfortunate because I think that was one of its strong points.
Just heard of this guy for the first time in the chatter around reviews for this game (which has been…interesting, to say the least). Similar tastes to mine, so that’s promising for me for Veilguard. Speaking of which, sounds like I should be trying Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous.
I wait for a Digital Foundry tech review before making a purchase on AAA game these days. They tackle what’s quantifiable and add their thoughts on the game in general which is about as much as I need from a professional outlet.
Part of the issue is that modern games are usually getting fixes right up to release. Pre-release reviews tend to focus on things that aren’t likely to ever change significantly, like design and writing.
It would be nice if they gave a summary of issues they saw with a disclaimer that they may get fixed instead of omitting that information entirely.
These are so reassuring, dear god I hope it’s good. I really really feel like this is the make it or break it for Bioware. If Veilguard does well we could see a new era of Bioware games, refreshing Dragon Age and Mass Effect.
Please god let these positive reviews be paid off. I don’t want this game succeed, it has nothing to do with the series - complete tonal shift, choices barely carry over and not being able to control companions is just… I wish they made a new series, this isn’t the Dragon age I know. Hope it fails
People have guessed that a game that reviewed well, that they didn’t want to review well, has been because of paid reviews for decades. It’s not a thing. If it was, EA wouldn’t have “forgotten” to pay for Anthem reviews, for instance. I get that this may not be what you want, but that happens sometimes. Rainbow Six is now GI Joe for some reason. The best thing you can do is enjoy the ones you enjoyed and then play the next great game that comes out that was inspired by the ones you like. Getting too invested in a given franchise is what allows them to mutate into things you don’t want. At least this game finally did away with the usual EA DRM, so part of voting with our wallets is working.
You don’t have to pay people to generate good reviews. You can also just only choose to give review keys to friendly media outlets you’ve already built a relationship and know will treat you uncritically.
God this, this right here is what I’m sick of in gaming. The negativity and hoping that things fail. Gaming has always been negative but ffs lately it’s just been awful. There used to be a time where people would say “Eh, it’s not for me”, now it’s “I hate the style and everything about it one star bandwagon folks let’s all talk about how terrible and awful this game is and shit it down and out” And I say this as a dragon age fan.
I’m willing to give it a fair shot - and I think real fans are willing to give the benefit of the doubt before shooting it down. Am I fan of the art style? No, not really. The gameplay? How could I I haven’t played it yet. Controlling companions? Personally I never used it much anyway. I would never hope for a franchise I love to fail, that’s such a weird thing to me. I’ll see how it is when it releases, and I hope I have fun.
I don’t care if it’s the dragon age I knew. I want it to be a fun game. I don’t care if it’s spongy, or the fighting is a little off, if they can get me to have fun - that’s my metric. More importantly, I know others do care about those things. What I won’t do is rage online or hope it fails because it doesn’t cater to me.
It’s not just gaming - people had a similar reaction on the trailer for the Megamind animated TV series. I think it’s a difference in mindset, some people don’t care while others see it as disrespect to their beloved franchise.
I’m willing to give it a fair shot
Personally I’m going to trust what the studio behind the game chose to showcase in the official reveal trailer. They’re selling the game as a lighthearted, cartoony, high fantasy romp where a band of constantly quipping misfits save the world, all without a hint of seriousness anywhere. I don’t care whether the game is good, it’s not Dragon Age.
I am not hoping for a franchise I love to fail. What I am hoping for is that this imposter, which wears the series’ skin purely for brand recognition, fails.
It’s not what you think Dragon Age should be. I personally am excited for that. I loved Inquisition and hated Origins, I loved the high fantasy romp with Sera and Varric making quips all day. To me, that was the best story and characters in the entire franchise, and my opinions are just as valid as yours. If you didn’t like it, fine, but I think it’s weird to judge a game negatively because it changed.
To give a reverse example for me. I don’t like where Halo went, but I have a lot of friends who love Infinite’s multiplayer. Now, I could go online and tell people that they shouldn’t play it because 2 and 3 were the best ones - or I could say nothing and let people enjoy things.
I went and checked my copy of Dragon Age Origins, and thankfully I’m not misremembering nor is it “just what I think”, as on the back it says “A Dark Fantasy epic”. That’s what the series was, directly quoted from the creators behind it. Same thing with Inquisition, it was bleak, had tough choices, things were at stake. This new game couldn’t be further from the previous titles - it doesn’t belong.
I don’t think it’s right to keep your head down and say nothing when something you like is being taken in a direction you don’t enjoy. Saying something critical against it doesn’t hurt anyone, worst thing that could happen is not enough people agree and nothing changes.
Would it be better to become a darkspawn or die? Generally I’d prefer a series cater to the heart of the series instead of fuck off into an unwanted and disconnected direction.
Im pretty sure we could make AI in games smarter and/or better than humans for a long time. They are just not fun to play against. You need to have AI that you can win against. What i think should be happening instead of neural networks is the ai should gamble a bit more . The good example is eu4 where on hard difficulty ai will not attack you until its sure it can win… which makes it more predictable than normal ai beacuse you can reasonably guess whetewer it will attack you and try to outmanouver it. Wheras on normal sometimes it will just attack you if there is a reasonable ( or sometimes even unreasonable ) chance to win which makes normal sometimes( very very very very rarely ) harder difficulty. Now hard difficulty is stil generaly ( 99,9% of time ) much harder due to ai cheats but what i said is a thing. Total war Warhammer 3 could use that in particular to spice things up. Currently attacking army will always attack and defending will defend which makes attacking more advantagous , and the army will always wait for reinforcment . They could for example make it so depending on the army composition ( or even just rng ) the defending army will sometimes attack ( for example when there are only melee combatants ) so that you dont have time to deal damage with mage . Or the opposite. Make it so the attacking army will just stay still and protect the artilery and bombard you with canons it it has lots of artilery . Like you know just some basic strategies so the fights arent always so similar at the begining.
Yeah, the easiest thing to implement is omnipotent AI. The code for the AI is executed within the game engine, so you have complete access to any information you want.
You can just query the player position at any point in time, even if there’s a wall between the NPC and the player. It requires extra logic to not use the player position in such a case, or to only use the rough player position after the player made a noise, for example.
Of course, the decision-making is a whole separate story. Even an omnipotent AI won’t know how to use this information, unless you provide it with rules.
I’m guessing, what OP wants is:
limiting the knowledge of the AI by just feeding it a rendered image like humans see it, and
somehow train AI on this input, so it figures out such rules on its own.
The most advanced AI I’ve seen is in Hitman WoA, and Zelda: Breath of the Wild.
Both games don’t have “learning” AI. They just have tons of rules that the player can reasonably expect and interact with, that make them seem lifelike. If a guard sees you throw a coin twice in Hitman, he doesn’t get suspicious and investigate - he goes and picks it up just like the first one. Same for reactions to finding guns, briefcases, or your exploding rubber duck.
bin.pol.social
Najnowsze