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

I wasn't able to find that specific tweet, though there's a number of references about how far they plan things out. For example - in this interview, David talks about how they knew the broad strokes of what DA:I was going to be before they even started DA2. But with what they wanted to do with the canceled DA2 DLC along with their original plans for DA3, they had to scale back as they only had the scope to do half/the first half.

"Solas is not the main antagonist" does not mean "new everything." See: Dragon Age Inquisition

DAI being the first half thus DA4 the second half of a story since they needed to split it. What a wonderful lie that turned out to be. 

I can think of a few things with that quote from Patrick, none of them good. 

Hasn't it? Pretty much every nation or group we come across at least has the possibility of being changed greatly. 

Thank you for posting this, I finally got around to watching it and wow, it was so insightful. Knowing all the context and some of the creative process that goes on behind the scenes.....damn I have so much respect and admiration for David Gaider and his vision. It's strange to think he's not involved in the series anymore. His comments on how they dealt with faith and the characters, and the DAI epilogue was so interesting. I think they totally nailed how the game dealt with faith because it was such a highlight for me. Also it's clear to me how much he loves Alistair, Morrigan, and Cassandra because they are also standout characters to me too . I feel like a lot of my criticism for DAI doesn't take into account how complex it is to make a game as opposed to just telling a story with a singular narrative voice....I forget that often. 

Sure, but Dragon Age is one of those games that give players the illusion of change as opposed to actually letting the player change anything. Did you support the Circles? Well no matter what the College will form as a separate institution. Did you try to make the Ferelden Circle autonomous in DAO? Too bad bucko, that doesn't mean anything cause the Chantry said no. Did you make Celene or Gaspard the ruler of Orlais? Neither choice matters in a few years because of politics.

It's not that I blame them either. It would be hell on earth for us to expect for our choices to both matter and be represented in later games without resorting to codex entries. But I don't think it's inaccurate to say that one of the draws of Dragon Age is that players are allowed to participate in historic events with important choices. When players see that they can affect the outcome of the mage-templar war or decide who rules Orlais, I don't blame them for thinking things can change if they just select X choice. But the only real thing the protagonist of any game really does long term is resolve the major event of the game. For the Warden it was the Blight, for Hawke the Kirkwall Rebellion, for the Inquisitor Coryphaeus's Return. Everything else is just flavor text in the grand scheme of things.

That being said, I am with you in thinking Thedas is receptive to change. In fact, I think its already changing. It's just changing mostly-independently from our protagonists. The Circles are no longer the only legitimate magic institution. The Chantry is going through reforms thanks to thier Inquisition-affiliated Divine. The Qunari are making moves against Tevinter. A lot of disenfranchised elves are flocking to either the Qunari or the Dread Wolf. Etc.

Ah. I think I see what you are saying. But feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

So you want a more railroaded story with minimal to no 'bad' choices. A story about where the protagonist deals with taking down to big bad that takes the form of corrupt systems in Thedas. Examples of such games would include premises like fighting Orlais over how they treat commoners, kicking the Chantry out of Rivain over how they impose themselves on its pantheistic/qunari populace, dismantling Tevinter over slavery, etc.?

I... guess? Linear vs non-linear isn't something I care about in games that much. The most important aspect of BioWare games to me is that they let me play a gay male action hero who can have relationships with other men.

In fantasy/sci-fi fiction *generally*, I am tired of the generic plot of an ancient evil resurfacing to disrupt the status quo, and all the lazy tropes that come with it. I am far more interested in stories where protagonists disrupt a status quo that is oppressive/unjust. I only use the example of a mage revolution because we are talking about Dragon Age.

There's no need for such a game to be any more "railroaded" than DA games already are, there could be plenty of choices in regard to how one goes about making their revolution a success. DA games have always been quite linear anyway. It's not like you can choose *not* to fight the darkspawn or *not* to go to Kirkwall. The "railroading" would simply be more obvious and attract more complaints due to the significant anti-mage fanbase that BioWare has attracted.