Dragon Age Dragon Age: The Veilguard Pre-Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[HammyTheFat]

La Creatura!

I remember when elves were described in the first game as being universally attractive.

 

[Lodis]

I feel like whoever created this thing did it as a joke. She's the ugliest looking creature in the entire franchise and is legitimately mentally retarded.

 

[Cat Headed Eagle]

I feel like whoever created this thing did it as a joke. She's the ugliest looking creature in the entire franchise and is legitimately mentally retarded.

The fact of the matter is that she *is* signifcantly uglier than many characters in the game, both male and female.

 

[9ted6]

I feel like whoever created this thing did it as a joke. She's the ugliest looking creature in the entire franchise and is legitimately mentally retarded.

Every character looks this way, but the women all look particularly bad. Human women look like men except for the mage chick who looks as archetypically sassy black lady as possible. The lighting then makes everything look even worse.

Cassandra Comparison

 

[Camel]

In DA:O you had the fereldan circle, which all things considered was pretty cozy. I remember Gaider pointing that out. DA:O failed to make it clear that living as a mage is like living in an asylum where the guards are, at all times, ready to kill all the inmates in case of demonic possession.

The Ferelden Circle was a sane man's idea of how you should treat the DA mages. Considering the fact how the blood mages and maleficarum slaughtered half of the Circle I'd say Greagoir and his templars were extremely benevolent. Cullen wasn't wrong when he demanded mages' heads on a pike. I think Gaider or some other Bioware dev said how the DA:O telemetry showed the players overwhelmingly sided with the mages so the devs went full retard with the Kirkwall Circle. I'm still bitter how we don't meet one sane non-blood mage in DA2 and Casey Hudson forced Bioware to make Orsino one of the final bosses.

 

[9ted6]

In DA:O you had the fereldan circle, which all things considered was pretty cozy. I remember Gaider pointing that out. DA:O failed to make it clear that living as a mage is like living in an asylum where the guards are, at all times, ready to kill all the inmates in case of demonic possession.

I think Gaider or some other Bioware dev said how DA:O telemetrics showed that players overwhelmingly sided with the mages so devs went full retard with the Kirkwall's Circle.

I'd doubt those telemetrics. Both sides look totally reasonable in DAO, though the conflict goes full retard in the sequels. Then again I can see some people taking a chantry = bad mindset and assuming the templars are evil no matter what the situation is.

 

[Camel]

Inquisition Elf

I feel like whoever created this thing did it as a joke. She's the ugliest looking creature in the entire franchise and is legitimately mentally retarded.

Even her cosplay is terrible with a male tears cup. Modern boots and her wig is very cheap. Don't forget about a bowstring!

 

[Camel]

I'd doubt those telemetrics. Both sides look totally reasonable in DAO, though the conflict goes full retard in the sequels. Then again I can see some people taking a chantry = bad mindset and assuming the templars are evil no matter what the situation is.

DA:O had blood mages with Jowan who is redeemable and a cut companion and altruist mages like Wynne and Irving who fought them. Templars were benevolent and forgiving. I've met enough religion hating posters, even fictional ones like Chantry on the BSN lol.

 

[Delterius]

The Ferelden Circle was a sane man's idea of how you should treat the DA mages. Considering the fact how the blood mages and maleficarum slaughtered half of the Circle I'd say Greagoir and his templars were extremely benevolent. Cullen wasn't wrong when he demanded mages' heads on a pike. I think Gaider or some other Bioware dev said how DA:O telemetrics showed that players overwhelmingly sided with the mages so devs went full retard with the Kirkwall's Circle. I'm still bitter how we don't meet one sane non-blood mage in DA2 and Casey Hudson forced Bioware to make Orsino one of the final bosses.

That's the problem, the fereldan circle painted a world that was not intended. It was too reasonable. I get it, the scene at the end is written in such a way that Greagoir and Irving's rapport goes back for so long that Greagoir is fully confident that as long as Irving is safe he can tell that he isn't possessed and the crisis is over. But that's too lovey dovey.

So the devs went into DA2 wanting to write a crueler circle in a more extreme situation, but Gaider himself at the time said they ran out of time and failed to add in reasonable and rational people into the mix. One thing is to write a story where everyone is caught up in a vicious cycle and can't leave it. But its quite different where everyone in authority seem to embody the viciousness itself and is mad.

The revelation that the reason why mages and templars in Kirkwall keep going insane because Corypheus was nearby is also not flattering at all. The Kirkwall circle should have been abolished ages ago and every mage in the city state taken to Starkhaven from that moment onwards.

That's the advantage that DA:I has over the other two games. With mages from many different circles you have stories and codex entries explaining the multiplicity of this church institution. Moreover the conservative position actually makes sense if you consider that the conservatives - like Vivienne - come from circles that actually work well. Not perfectly well, they work precisely because the institution has unspoken 'failsafes' as it were.

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

Jowan who is redeemable and a cut companion

Instead, we got the gay elf. RIP.

 

[Lacrymas]

So the devs went into DA2 wanting to write a crueler circle in a more extreme situation, but Gaider himself at the time said they ran out of time and failed to add in reasonable and rational people into the mix.

I find it hilarious that some guy who thinks we should lock up a group of people just a little bit instead of a whole lot is considered reasonable and rational. The desire for freedom is reasonable and rational, Anders did nothing wrong (except blow up the wrong building). Yes, I'm aware of the whole demon possession thing, but it's the writers who wrote it that way and then turned around to pretend there is some nuance to the whole thing. There was literally 0 reason to introduce demonic possession as something unique to mages. Mages are already powerful enough and would require some kind of legislation to keep in check, there is no difference between a trigger-happy mage and a demon-possessed one, so why include this?

 

[Camel]

That's the problem, the fereldan circle painted a world that was not intended. It was too reasonable. I get it, the scene at the end is written in such a way that Greagoir and Irving's rapport goes back for so long that Greagoir is fully confident that as long as Irving is safe he can tell that he isn't possessed and the crisis is over. But that's too lovey dovey.

Most players liked it and chose mages in DA:O so Bioware had to show the templar side to be reasonable too. But they did it in an incredibly ham-fisted way. One great C&C is you can ask Irving to go into the Fade to save Conor if you saved the Circle.

So the devs went into DA2 wanting to write a crueler circle in a more extreme situation, but Gaider himself at the time said they ran out of time and failed to add in reasonable and rational people into the mix. One thing is to write a story where everyone is caught up in a vicious cycle and can't leave it. But its quite different where everyone in authority seem to embody the viciousness itself and is mad.

Bioware wrote templar Thrask, a token mage sympathiser and, certainly, a blood mage kills him.

The desire for freedom is reasonable and rational

This is important too.

 

[9ted6]

The Ferelden Circle was a sane man's idea of how you should treat the DA mages. Considering the fact how the blood mages and maleficarum slaughtered half of the Circle I'd say Greagoir and his templars were extremely benevolent. Cullen wasn't wrong when he demanded mages' heads on a pike. I think Gaider or some other Bioware dev said how DA:O telemetrics showed that players overwhelmingly sided with the mages so devs went full retard with the Kirkwall's Circle. I'm still bitter how we don't meet one sane non-blood mage in DA2 and Casey Hudson forced Bioware to make Orsino one of the final bosses.

That's the problem, the fereldan circle painted a world that was not intended. It was too reasonable. I get it, the scene at the end is written in such a way that Greagoir and Irving's rapport goes back for so long that Greagoir is fully confident that as long as Irving is safe he can tell that he isn't possessed and the crisis is over. But that's too lovey dovey.

So the devs went into DA2 wanting to write a crueler circle in a more extreme situation, but Gaider himself at the time said they ran out of time and failed to add in reasonable and rational people into the mix. One thing is to write a story where everyone is caught up in a vicious cycle and can't leave it. But its quite different where everyone in authority seem to embody the viciousness itself and is mad.

The revelation that the reason why mages and templars in Kirkwall keep going insane because Corypheus was nearby is also not flattering at all. The Kirkwall circle should have been abolished ages ago and every mage in the city state taken to Starkhaven from that moment onwards.

That's the advantage that DA:I has over the other two games. With mages from many different circles you have stories and codex entries explaining the multiplicity of this church institution. Moreover the conservative position actually makes sense if you consider that the conservatives - like Vivienne - come from circles that actually work well. Not perfectly well, they work precisely because the institution has unspoken 'failsafes' as it were.

I think what they did was more of them wanting to make the Chantry/Templars evil, possibly because of how they see real religion.

The Mages act insane in 2 but they're clearly meant to seem like the victims. Inquisition takes it further and makes them rational and noble contrasted to the Templars and the Chantry itself being crazy and bloodthirsty. The tranquil retcon especially, because now the Chantry not only doesn't help keep mages from being possessed, they don't even try because they don't even care about it.

 

[Delterius]

I think what they did was more of them wanting to make the Chantry/Templars evil

is that why they added a scene where your deus vult army sings campfire hymms

Inquisition takes it further and makes them rational and noble contrasted to the Templars and the Chantry itself being crazy and bloodthirsty.

I don't agree.

When the game starts the chantry is in disarray, its leadership fucking died in a nuke and of course the high clergy remaining thinks your inquisition are a bunch of upstarts. Leliana and Cassandra go out of their way to point out that the remaining sisters are all angling for the mamacy and that some will try and take lead as best they are able.

As for the templars, that initial scene in val royeaux where the templars disavow the church and punch a cleric makes it pretty obvious that there's something wrong with the templars. They aren't just pissed off that the church held them back. Cassandra talks about how the knight commander is acting weird. Their voices are strange and stunted.

The player might then be persuaded to go and see what the mages are about. At which point you discover that most if not all the mages in redcliffe are high on mage supremacy and full throttle support fiona's decision to go ask the magisters for an intervention on their behalf.

A half observant player will by then realize that both factions of the mage-templar war are being usurped from within. You have your suspicions on both sides. And it's up to you which side you want, really. I felt that the mage npcs in redcliffe were untrustworthy, which is why I went with the templars even though I was a mage.

I find it hilarious that some guy who thinks we should lock up a group of people just a little bit instead of a whole lot is considered reasonable and rational.

The point I wished to make is that if they wanted to portray the Circles as prisons, then DA:O wasn't very good at that concept. Case in point, the actual Anders was a playful womanizer who made several prison breaks and wasn't hurt for it. Then he gets possessed and goes to Kirkwall, where things were meant to be worse than in Ferelden. They just overcorrected.

Yes, I'm aware of the whole demon possession thing, but it's the writers who wrote it that way and then turned around to pretend there is some nuance to the whole thing. There was literally 0 reason to introduce demonic possession as something unique to mages.
Mages are already powerful enough and would require some kind of legislation to keep in check, there is no difference between a trigger-happy mage and a demon-possessed one, so why include this?

Yeah, if anything one of the points that Inquisition liked to make (through Vivienne) is that the circle is an archaic institution that was partly founded to also protect the mages from everybody else. Before the andrastian church was formalized you had lots of these andrastian cults running around, the quasi inquisition included, and one of the things they most enjoyed doing was to kill mages. Mages had just destroyed the world and people were reacting accordingly.

Meanwhile the level of paranoia that sudden demonic possessions should instill on people seem to vary according to the plot's needs. DA:O gives you the impression that a properly trained and steeled mage can just stave off the demons, which creates a basis of trust there. Then DA2 seems to argue that the reason mages can easily become insane/possessed in kirkwall regardless is because the city was cursed / actually welcome to the DLC, it was just corypheus all along. I tend to think the former is the rule of thumb.

One great C&C is you can ask Irving to go onto the Fade to save Conor if you saved the Circle.

I always felt that was cowardice on their part. Letting the player have their cake and eat it too.

 

[Lacrymas]

Mages were a mistake. Or at least mages that can tear the fabric of space and assault the throne of the god de jour.

 

[NecroLord]

Mages were a mistake. Or at least mages that can tear the fabric of space and assault the throne of the god de jour.

*Templar approving noises.

 

[Aarwolf]

This image reminds me how I fucking hate modern animation style in the west. I did liked highly stylised style of 90s cartoons (ie. Dexters Lab), but then it was something new and very different from saturday cereal animation style of the 80s and early 90s. Now everyone and their dog use this style without knowing (or caring) what made it and why it was used then and there and why it shouldn't be overused now, 30+ years later.


tl;dr - modern graphic designers in AAA gamedev are equally shitty and uneducated and tasteless as the writers are.

 

[9ted6]

Meanwhile the level of paranoia that sudden demonic possessions should instill on people seem to vary according to the plot's needs. DA:O gives you the impression that a properly trained and steeled mage can just stave off the demons, which creates a basis of trust there.

Inquisition's lore about it is dumb IMO. DAO handled it all far better, but that probably goes without saying. The Circles didn't need to be miserable places and the Chantry didn't need to be totally evil.

You gotta remember that all the cringe singing sequences aside, Inquisition goes out of its way to tell you they're the bad guys, and they're also wrong about everything. There are way more options to be an atheistic fuck the chantry inquisitor than one of faith, and the few faith options are usually evil or meant to be humorous and stupid-sounding.

It makes me think it's rooted in the way the writers themselves see religion and belief, and expressing that is what made the portrayal of the Chantry and religion so different between games.

This image reminds me how I fucking hate modern animation style in the west. I did liked highly stylised style of 90s cartoons (ie. Dexters Lab), but then it was something new and very different from saturday cereal animation style of the 80s and early 90s. Now everyone and their dog use this style without knowing (or caring) what made it and why it was used then and there and why it shouldn't be overused now, 30+ years later.
tl;dr - modern graphic designers in AAA gamedev are equally shitty and uneducated and tasteless as the writers are.

The same artist's responsible for the shit from the last page. All his art's in that same style.

 

[Assisted Living Godzilla]

That style isn’t even kind of similar to what Dexter's Laboratory looks like, either version of it.

I find the difference between Dragon Age’s art direction and the actual visuals of the games to be quite odd. They’ve got fairly cartoon stylized art direction, (and people will bitch about it, but it’s not bad look) but then BioWare, when making their games, translate this highly cartoony style as more realistic looking. It’s weird for two reasons. The first is, it’d just look better if they made it look more like the concept art and it was more cartoonish in game. And the second is they could probably get away with lower budget games if they made it look more like the concept art. Like that could get way with models on the level of Persona 5 or Hi-Fi Rush and have it look better and more consistent than the realistic models of Inquisition dressed up in cartoon armor. Just seems weird to me they’ve put Matt Rhodes as the art director of the series, they use his cartoony costume designs, but they don’t make the games actually look like his art style...which makes the visuals clash. It’d almost be like getting Bruce Timm as your character designer but still making the actual game look as realistic as you can.

 

[Silverfish]

Only took 50 years for a Phantom of the Paradise sequel. Well worth the wait, honestly.

 

[Fedora Master]

Jesus fuck stop with your gay little tea party you're having in here.
Bad game.
Dead series.
Behead Infinitron.

 

[Assisted Living Godzilla]

Berserk already beat it to a sword wielding Phantom of the Paradise sequel. Similar kind of sword as Griffith too.

Although that looks like they’re mixing Science Ninja Team Gatchaman into it with those transparent beak visors.

 

[Cat Headed Eagle]

Inquisition Elf

I feel like whoever created this thing did it as a joke. She's the ugliest looking creature in the entire franchise and is legitimately mentally retarded.

Even her cosplay is terrible with a male tears cup. Modern boots and her wig is very cheap. Don't forget about a bowstring!

A number of years ago, cons banned the use of props that could be used as weapons. That included a baseball bat, had to be replaced with a soft one that wouldn't hurt anyone upon use. So that's most likely why that bow has no string.

 

[jaekl]

Inquisition Elf

I feel like whoever created this thing did it as a joke. She's the ugliest looking creature in the entire franchise and is legitimately mentally retarded.

Even her cosplay is terrible with a male tears cup. Modern boots and her wig is very cheap. Don't forget about a bowstring!

A number of years ago, cons banned the use of props that could be used as weapons. That included a baseball bat, had to be replaced with a soft one that wouldn't hurt anyone upon use. So that's most likely why that bow has no string.

What about the pointy stick?? Could put an eye out.

 

[Camel]

A number of years ago, cons banned the use of props that could be used as weapons. That included a baseball bat, had to be replaced with a soft one that wouldn't hurt anyone upon use. So that's most likely why that bow has no string.

Chloe Dykstra is Sera’s cosplayer in 2014 and its not forbidden to use bows with bowstrings.