*Dragon Age: The Veilguard *is going to be divisive. It already is. When you’ve spent ten years waiting for something with an idea of what it would be in your head, if it’s not that thing, you’re bound to be disappointed. But ultimately, *The Veilguard *is not trying to accomplish the same things *Baldur’s Gate 3 *did. Its focus on action-based systems means we’re probably not going to get the highly reactive, Dungeons & Dragons-esque spells and problem-solving mechanics. But it does mean we’re going to get what looks like a frenetic action RPG that continues the story we’ve been waiting a decade for. That might not be what you wanted from Dragon Age, but that other game exists.
I think it would be totally fair to compare the new Dragon Age to DA: Origins, in the context of talking about all of the depth of writing and roleplay that will be lost (as it looks like they’re going a very different direction for the series). The new game looks fundamentally worse as a work of art compared to the original.
In that conversation, I think it’s reasonable to bring up the fact that a game came out last year which copied the DA:O formula in every way, and became the bestselling fantasy RPG of the last decade.
One could absolutely ask what BioWare is thinking straying so far from the original, successful, formula. The answer of course is valuing short-term profit over the creating of something that will stand the test of time.
“SoulsLike games sells well, let’s make dragon age a souls like” is what they thought
Baldurs Gate 3 did not copy the Dragon Age formula, Dragon Age did not create it in the first place.
DAO presented a very specific iteration of the cRPG formula, and that iteration is the closest I’ve seen to BG3.
I’m not criticizing BG3. I think it’s awesome that Larian structured the game so much around the same skeletal structure as DAO.
Oh I understand now, thanks for clarifying.