To be honest there is an entire transgender arc in the game. Id imagine if you were critical of Concord, suicide squad, Dustborn, star wars outlaws and so on. The marketing team probably advised against giving them review copies. The IGN reviewer literally referenced being nonbinary themselves in the review. I don't think they wanted the negative press. Ive heard the dialogue it's pretty on the nose. In a fantasy world with little technology the fact the game has gender reassignment surgery as a option in the character creator, would leave them open to potentially harsh criticism for certain RU-vidrs. I don't think they wanted that in the ether prelaunch. Even shoehorning the term "nonbinary" in game which would have no meaning in that world was already making waves. I think they tried to head off as much backlash as possible by manipulating who got copies, not based on merits but observed track records for prior reviews. Im basing that theory on multiple creators who up until recently were told directly by bioware handlers they would get review copies then radio silence as of late. 🤷🏾♂️
Lono "there's something about this that stinks, it doesn't pass the smell test". i absolutely agree with you. everything leading up to the embargo seemed just very suspect. as of now there are only 51 reviews on PS5, 23 on PC and only 5 on Xbox. almost end of the first day. very low review count for a massive and highly anticipated game from Bioware. even a highly regarded RU-vidr like ACG did not get a review code...that tells you something
Ngl if a Veilguard review actually says choices have a huge impact in the game, the story is powerful written and something about its tight in-depth combat system they are actually lying and/or shouldnt be reviewing games. these things are objectively the worst parts of the game
Kinda funny says it not them trying to not give people to much time with it it’s them not having enough review topic they are giving them out 3 people who played it 9/10 Andy Greg 9/10 says it’s his game of year 50 hours is 8/10 prob 9 still after credits rolled Mike 8.5 out of 10 BioWare is back so idk why it’s getting such low score and high scores everywhere else I hear it’s a slow burn at the start but later in the game it gets better.
I think its a game which could be controversial for Dragon Age fans and uninteresting for many other people. Gamers just expect more if they see a IP like that. Its kinda like Starfield. Starfield is not bad, its just extremely lackluster and your asking yourself every minute what Starfield could have been. This doesnt mean you cant have fun with Starfield or Veilguard, but its just not for everyone (even tho they tried to make it for everyone and the modern audience lmao)
Your discussion at 1:49:08 in was intriguing to me. People lambasted Abubakar Salim , his studio his game simply for associating with a particular consulting company which is wild to me and here its happening again. Fextralifie is about to be written off for simply including images / clips of RU-vidrs in his video that people disagree with. What happened to context? Do people not seek this out anymore? Seems like both sides of the aisle are making this mistake 😩
not even close to being the same. Sony are only putting their games on PC at a later date, once they’ve stopped selling on PlayStation. The only games Sony put on PC day-and-date are live service games, because those type of games need large player counts to sell micro transactions. Whereas Microsoft put all of the games on PC day-and-date, even including their single player experiences, and they have now started putting all their games on PlayStation and Nintendo Switch as well. Sony only put their games into their subscription service (PlayStation Plus Extra) once those games are no longer selling in the PlayStation store. Whereas Microsoft are putting their games into their subscription service (Gamepass) day and date. The only thing PlayStation and Xbox are doing the same, is Licenceing there IP in other avenues such as TV and movies etc. However, there are a couple of exceptions such as MLB The Show, but that’s because Sony had no choice but to do that, otherwise the MLB would’ve taken away their license to use actual player likenesses in the game, and Sony make a lot of money from player packs, just like EA do with FIFA and Madden, or Take 2 do with NBA 2K. The only other exception is Lego Horizon Adventures, where Sony have licensed out the Horizon IP to Lego, to make Lego toys and a one off multi-plat Lego game. However that game is still skipping Xbox consoles completely, and is likely only launching on Nintendo Switch because that’s the platform where the majority of Lego games get bought. Sony are the (home) console market leader; and the PlayStation Store makes more revenue every year than the Xbox Store, Nintendo E-Shop and Steam combined. Whereas Microsoft have been struggling to sell consoles at all, and continue to sell less and less consoles year-over-year, and they have been for the last 3 years straight, which is why Microsoft needed to buy 2 of the biggest third-party publishers in order to compete. Sony are simply branching out because they want to, as they are looking for additional ways to make extra money, but they are doing it strategically to ensure they don’t cannibalise their existing player base. Whereas Microsoft are pivoting and going full multi-platform because they have to, because their console isn’t making enough money anymore, so they are now looking to become one of the biggest third-party publishers in the world, and unfortunately they now appear to be abandoning their existing player base. So NO they are not doing the same things at all.
