• umbraroze@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 hours ago

    No, it failed because making a good game was pushed aside in favor of making a game with a message—and not even a very good one.

    I see! So there was some kind of explicit order, or at least concerted effort with explicit goal, to make a game with “a message”. And I assume we have all the evidence to look at to see the day-to-day chain of events that led to the market failure.

    No?

    Seriously though, there were many reasons why DAV failed, and “having a Message” was not even in the top 100. Every piece of media has a message.

    It makes no sense to have nonbinary people in The Veilguard!

    …This is literally just the “historical accuracy” argument.

    • mechoman444@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      You’re misrepresenting my point. I never claimed there was an explicit directive to prioritize “a message” over game quality—I said it feels like that’s what happened. That’s a critique of execution, not a conspiracy theory.

      Yes, every piece of media has a message, but there’s a difference between a theme that naturally emerges from storytelling and one that feels forced or out of place. The issue isn’t that the game has a message—it’s how it delivers it.

      Claiming messaging wasn’t in the “top 100” reasons for failure is just hand-waving. You provide no evidence for that, and even if it’s not the primary reason, that doesn’t mean it wasn’t a factor.

      Finally, comparing this to the “historical accuracy” argument is a bad-faith deflection. Dragon Age isn’t real history, but it does have established lore and internal consistency. When a game introduces elements that contradict its own worldbuilding, it breaks immersion. That’s the issue.