Dragon Age The Veilguard Criticism Thread (formerly Skepticism Thread) [Spoilers]

The sad part about the quarian showing off her diving skills over the cliff is there wasn't an interrupt for my Shepard to push her  

I could ignore or accept a lot of things but the dialogue is a deal breaker to me. I find Purple Hawke insufferable but at least that was a choice I had to make.

If everyone and everything is some varying degrees of irreverent, light-hearted, and jokey then I don't care. HARD no.

And the pop ups that make sure I know I made some kind of choice leading to a specific direction are insulting. These were always invisible. Now I have everything spelled out for me. Cool RPG.

Each reviewer has their own particular prejudices. I feel like the action combat of Veilguard suited Morti more while Skillup just isn't a fan of DA in general. Morti considers it his personal game of the year even though it won't be for everyone and will turn off quite a few people (like people who liked Origins) which is fair, Skillup seems to be considering more Bioware's roots in his review.

Because they're both at opposite ends of the spectrum it's probably for the best that people either find people who's opinion on games reflect their own and look at their review, or just wait for a broader spread.

It's like Starfield when IGN I think was the first reviewer who rubbished the game when a lot of others had positive things to say, and Paul Tassi was like well that's obviously a trash review, and later on we found out who's review was actually the trash one ...

I remember all the digging players had to do to figure out each game's systems when it came to approval ratings - and with respect to Origins, how impactful your decisions were on factions later- because they were subtle in many cases but still very purposeful. I'm probably not going to miss that in certain circumstances because there are a few times where bugs kept it from working right, but yeah, some of the other notifications seem way too superfluous now that I've actually pondered their relevance in terms of reactivity. Like it's obviously one thing to get a notification about something pretty important to the plot or character dev, but if there really is an excessive amount of this for minutiae I'm going to wish there was a toggle option for them.

Combat was the most competent part of the game but I vastly prefer ME3. They got rid of the orgasmic biotic boom, scandal. The sound design was so poor it wasn't even funny.

ME3(MP) was the most fun I've ever had with combat in any game to this day. That was lightning in a bottle to me. Probably will never be topped.

I too gave the game a 6. Though looking back, I would have given it a 4 because of the removal of features/choices/options that were in the trilogy.

From what has been shown so far, I wouldn't be surprised if I give DAV a low score.

Oh, I'd rate MEA a 2/10 as a Mass Effect game. But since we're expected to treat BioWare games as their own thing now that's the best I could do even for THAT mind bending goalpost moving exercise...

If the snippets of dialogue I've seen so far are representative of the entire games then DAV is a 1/10 as a DA game unless 0/10 is an actual score, then I'll go with the latter.
(Yes, I'm serious.)

I personally think that Warframe in its current iteration is considerably better by a margin. The main Warframe quests have largerly formed quite strong engagement/attachments, and the community there is outstanding. Gameplay there is modern and vastly superior. If one can get through the initial slog of about 50-100 hours, it offers endless hours of quite enjoyable contents.

It really seems limiting the companion list is one of the biggest mistakes they've made, as well as making them all instead of a core few mandatory, and even those could leave depending on your later choices -thinking of Alistair and some in DA 2 as the best example of this. So far I've heard only a few instances where reactions have a true impact and even that is temporary. There was so much potential if they really devoted themselves in terms of player choice like in previous games. It's so interesting to me because I remember Weekes et al talking about how grim the game could get and it's more than apparent that those claims for the most part are just hype in some circumstances that should matter.

Speaking of Andromeda, someone showed some examples of facial animations and they were not good at all. One character was supposed to be angry and the VA was even shouting but the animation made them look bored at best. 

Yeah I have zero interest in that franchise. My enjoyment of ME3 combat is tightly linked to my unmatched love for the trilogy. The exact same gameplay with a different franchise skin would probably have no appeal to me.

If I love a game's world and storytelling fun combat is a boon but not required. My bar for acceptable combat is low. I'm not a particularly good player either and thus don't care for souls-like games, RPG or no. I have never enjoyed a game for the gameplay alone. So how good or bad DAV's combat is is completely irrelevant to me. It doesn't affect my rating unless a game has combat so awful it's a real chore, then I wouldn't give a 10/10 even if thr storytelling was phenomenal.

So Mortismal's approach is opposite to mine and therefore completely useless as a reference to me. While SkillUp criticizes everything that matters to me and from the examples he gives it's spot on and I'm in full agreement. Just browsed some of his older reviews because I've only watched a few over the years and I'm definitely not always in agreement. I really enjoyed Biomutant for example once I got over that it's only AA and not what I had hoped initially. He's definitely not the same kind of gamer as me, but as I noted elsewhere I don't have a go to reviewer. I usually skim the cons listed in several reviews and decide whether or not that's something that bothers me.