Dragon
A little while ago, I wrote a piece of how Dragon’s age: Veilgard’s Catastrophic sales must rebuild an EA and BIOWARE wish to make the RPG series once brilliant once again.
In this section, I notice some problems with the game including the lack of depth in the RPG elements, uneven writing and sometimes preaching politics, with heavy hands (which I go to more depth here). One thing I did not get deep in was corporate intervention and after some very wild comments, out of touch by EA chief Andrew Wilson, it’s time to consider this.
“To explode beyond the essential audience, games must be directly related to the developing requirements of players that increasingly require features of the common world and deeper engagement along with high quality narratives in this beloved category,” Wilson said in an investor call.
“Dragon Age had a high quality departure,” He continued, “and was well examined by critics and those who played. However, she did not resonate with a very wide audience in this very competitive market.”
Wilson is saying two things here:
First, the game was well received by the players “Who Played” which means the game was only negatively received by players who lowered it, relying on negative YouTube and social media reactions. This is a curious statement on its own. He is effectively saying that the bad word of the mouth was a reason the game failed, which is certainly true. He really doesn’t question why the optics of the game was so bad, however.
Second, he suggests that modern players actually want “features of the common world” as a form of multiplayer element or direct service. And for sure, many players love him in video games these days. That is why so many multiplayer games online by Duty BY Gta online BY Miracle rivals They are such great successes. This, and they do what they advertise very well. Ata e kuptojnë audiencën e tyre të synuar, diçka nga krijuesit Veilguard Clearly no.
But this also suggests that players do not want one player games, which is significantly fake. Do not look farther than Baldur gate 3 For an example of a one player game (though one with co-op features) that did extremely well. Elden The ring also has limited collaborative multiplayer and PVP, but the game is largely an experience with one player. I lists both of these games because they are the closest thing to the competitors that VelvearD has in modern gaming landscape. Both games almost certainly took advantage of their involvement of co-op, and I’m sure they gave the players exactly what they wanted: excellent RPG experiences that would be excellent even without multiplayer.
What hits me about Wilson’s comments is how surprisingly out of touch they with what Dragon Players actually want. Like so many corporate suits that only understand trends, Wilson identifies a wide market within the games space (players that “require more and more features of the common world”) while ignoring the essential audience of the game in question. The right question is not “What tendency to gamers should we follow with this well -established franchise?” But on the contrary, “Do you want the essential audience of this well -established exclusivity from this game?”
What actual Dragon RPG players and fans want from a series like this is a return in shape; A bold story, well written with significant choices, tactical fighting and deep RPG elements. I’m sure you can do this and include “common world” elements as co-op or multiplayer competitive, or a kind of universe similar to LuckBut this is not what RPG fans are going through. I have always thought that co-op would be cute in a game like Skyingbut clearly Skying There is no success without him because he had (and remains) a living RPG community that adores games with a player.
That is why it is important to remember how dangerous corporate intervention can be when it comes to video games. Corporate costumes identify lucrative games trends and then mandate these trends are approved in all categories. There is one reason why the Boware games took such a nose after the company was purchased by EA in the first place. Dragon Age 2 was rushed by the door to meet a corporate schedule that may make sense to Madden nfl It releases, but it certainly doesn’t work for a widespread RPG with a player. And see how well the direct service has worked for the Bioware anthem, a game with some really delightful ideas that would have been a thousand times better as a play with a player (and even better if the flight mechanics would had been less difficult).
If you can see the failures of anthem AND Veilguard And not to notice a trend, I’m not sure you are in any position to judge what players actually want from the Boware games. The only thing Wilson gets here is the fact that Veilguard had a good start. Different Mass effect: Andromedaishte goxha e fortë në një front teknik. The truth is, if that would have been a game that called on RPG fans and a long time Dragon The players would have been a massive hit. In trying to satisfy a vague “modern audience” with his strange and aesthetic tone, he alienated fans and, precisely from the first trailer, began generating negative reactions online.
Dragon Age: Origin With modern graphics and slightly up -to -date controls would be a massive hit, but it remains a gold mine that EA still should not be included, which is disturbing. Unë mendoj se jam i befasuar gjithashtu që EA nuk përfshin elemente të shërbimit të drejtpërdrejtë në Veilguard. The design of the game straight at his mobile game UI felt prepared for battles and seasonal updates, where you unlock new heroes and cosmetics every ten weeks or more. I think I should be glad that there wasn’t a shop in the game, but honestly just want to have got a better game.
There are ways to save this exclusivity, though more and more seems to hand it over not only to a new developer, but as far as the EA claws.