Dragon Age: Dreadwolf

[Deck Rickard]

I doubt many non-gamers have heard of it, and it's not one of the big hitters in the gaming world.

FF: The Spirits Within really annoyed me for this reason too.

The most entertaining thing about FF: Spirits Within was trying to figure out which real life actors they covertly tried to get the CGI characters to look like. I remember we thought they tried to make the main characters look like Ben Affleck and Selma Blair lol.

 

[Iceman]

The most entertaining thing about FF: Spirits Within was trying to figure out which real life actors they covertly tried to get the CGI characters to look like. I remember we thought they tried to make the main characters look like Ben Affleck and Selma Blair lol.

Ha true. I didn't mind the thing itself that much, it just had nothing to do with FF.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Ha true. I didn't mind the thing itself that much, it just had nothing to do with FF.

Yeah I’m kinda on the fence about video game adaptations and how close they should stick to the source material. Like, Werewolves Within was a fun little movie that I really enjoyed. Apparently it’s nothing like the game though, aside from one person in the cast being a werewolf (I’ve never played the game but I believe it’s set in a medieval castle). But maybe that doesn’t matter too much if the movie is good? I don’t know.

I know some fans of the Halo games haven’t been happy with the TV series because of changes that the show made to the lore. I can’t speak to that because I haven’t played the games but, overall, I think the show itself of a pretty good sci-fi series on its own (not perfect but good). Would it be better if it was closer to what’s in the games? Perhaps. But then I’ve also seen cinematic disasters like the unwatchable Warcraft movie that tried to directly adapt storylines from the games and failed miserably. So I’m not sure what the best option is for this genre.

 

[metaphysician]

I would say the issue is less "changing stuff is bad" and more that "changing stuff because you have no respect or consideration for the source material is bad". Historically, most video game adaptations have solidly fallen into the latter camp- they aren't simply different, but different in a way that speaks to the moviemakers not knowing or caring what made the source games appeal to their players, and what made the story work as a story. Being faithful to the source material was rare enough to immediately inspire hope and optimism.

 

[Deck Rickard]

I would say the issue is less "changing stuff is bad" and more that "changing stuff because you have no respect or consideration for the source material is bad". Historically, most video game adaptations have solidly fallen into the latter camp- they aren't simply different, but different in a way that speaks to the moviemakers not knowing or caring what made the source games appeal to their players, and what made the story work as a story. Being faithful to the source material was rare enough to immediately inspire hope and optimism.

Yeah I would agree with that. Like, the Castlevania series on Netflix in many ways is a departure from the games in that it features certain characters acting quite different from their video game counterparts and the story leads them into unexpected territory. Yet the showrunners clearly respect the source material and so the series has the look and feel of a Castlevania game, featuring many fan favorite characters in pivotal roles.

It’s not a Mortal Kombat ‘21 situation where they center the whole thing around some useless original character while they turn all the characters we actually want to see into sidekicks.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

I think it really depends on the adaptation.

But I reckon games like Mass Effect or Dragon Age are such expansive worlds based on rich lore, that they don't need to feature any original characters from the game at all. It's enough to just tell a story set in that world.

It also comes down to audiences. Some fans are happy to see any kind of new story set in a world they love. Or an original adaptation that still captures the essence of the source material. Whereas for some people, it's mostly just about "I want to see the character I love created perfectly on the big screen". I think no show is going to please everyone, but the best we can hope for is a showrunner who has a clear enough vision of which approach they're going to take. It's when they try to water things down to make everyone happy, that we get lifeless adaptations like Uncharted.

 

[metaphysician]

I would say that it depends on the game. Some games are suited for a "direct" adaptation, some are suited for a "new story same world" adaptation. Like, Mass Effect vs Dragon Age. Mass Effect is ultimately the story of Commander Shepard vs the Reaper Apocalypse. If you want to do a movie or cartoon or whatnot, it has to be *about* Shepard and the Reapers, because that is what the whole franchise is about. Yes, Andromeda, but Andromeda failed and failed hard.

Dragon Age, by contrast, is much more free for adaptation. Every game has been about a different hero, all of whom are distinct and dealing with different stuff. There is also no singular overarching menace that renders any sidestory a sidestory; even some of the cosmological reveals in Inquisition still leave room to worry about other things. So, you can pick a place, write a hero, and tell their story, without automatically running into "Why should I care about this pud and his problems which are irrelevant in the grand scheme of things?"

 

[Deck Rickard]

I would say that it depends on the game. Some games are suited for a "direct" adaptation, some are suited for a "new story same world" adaptation. Like, Mass Effect vs Dragon Age. Mass Effect is ultimately the story of Commander Shepard vs the Reaper Apocalypse. If you want to do a movie or cartoon or whatnot, it has to be *about* Shepard and the Reapers, because that is what the whole franchise is about. Yes, Andromeda, but Andromeda failed and failed hard.

Dragon Age, by contrast, is much more free for adaptation. Every game has been about a different hero, all of whom are distinct and dealing with different stuff. There is also no singular overarching menace that renders any sidestory a sidestory; even some of the cosmological reveals in Inquisition still leave room to worry about other things. So, you can pick a place, write a hero, and tell their story, without automatically running into "Why should I care about this pud and his problems which are irrelevant in the grand scheme of things?"

Yeah; good points for sure. Though at least in the case of DAI, I would absolutely LOVE a direct adaptation simply because the characters are so great. Even the Inquisitor feels like a fully formed character, due to stellar voice acting and limited dialogue choices.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

I can't wait for DAD to come out. It would be weird if it came out on Father's Day, though.

 

[Deck Rickard]

I can't wait for DAD to come out. It would be weird if it came out on Father's Day, though.

 

[metaphysician]

I can't wait for DAD to come out. It would be weird if it came out on Father's Day, though.

Doubly so if the main villain of the game is the current ruling emperor of Tevinter, who is also the main hero's father. And you have to kill him in all the not-totally-evil endings. *eg*

 

[Gee]

Another teaser... Full reveal next summer.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

It feels like a decade since we got that initial Solas teaser and the game has been rebooted at least twice since then.

 

[Iceman]

Another teaser... Full reveal next summer.

Yep, shows F all lol. Can’t wait for a proper trailer.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Yeah it’s a pretty pathetic tease. I guess they are leaning farther into their Bethesda influences. BioWare must have looked at that Elder Scrolls 6 title font reveal video from 6 years ago or whenever that was and they thought, “Yeah; let’s do that.”

Anyway. I was bored with most of the games I’ve been trying out on GamePass and so I decided to give Inquisition another playthrough. I’m amazed at how well it’s held up. I only beat it once and when I did, I sided with the mages in the early conflict. I sided with the Templars this time and WOW, it changes a lot of story elements and character interactions. Generally, I love the NPCs in this game but I HATED Cole during my first playthrough. But he’s MUCH better if you choose the Templar path. I guess I always just assumed the Templar/mage conflict was like the Empire/Stormcloak war in Skyrim and the game would mostly play out the same no matter which side you choose. And a lot of the same stuff still happens but some quests are wholly unique (and really cool) depending on which way you go. I hope Dreadwolf takes this sort of thing even further.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

I read Asunder (the David Gaider novel that introduces Cole) and his character was pitch perfect in the game. Was a natural evolution of where that book left him off, and if you spec him right in Inquisition he is very useful.

 

[Deck Rickard]

I read Asunder (the David Gaider novel that introduces Cole) and his character was pitch perfect in the game. Was a natural evolution of where that book left him off, and if you spec him right in Inquisition he is very useful.

Cool. I always avoided using him as a companion in my first playthrough (Cassandra, Sera and Dorian where my go-to team, though I would occasionally swap out Cassandra for Iron Bull… but DON’T do that in Tresspasser). Anyway, I’ll have to give Cole more of a try this time around.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

Cool. I always avoided using him as a companion in my first playthrough (Cassandra, Sera and Dorian where my go-to team, though I would occasionally swap out Cassandra for Iron Bull… but DON’T do that in Tresspasser). Anyway, I’ll have to give Cole more of a try this time around.

Cole's banter in the game with the other companions is great and well written but you can just find that on Youtube if you don't want to play with him. Gameplay wise you need to prioritize his specialization (which gets unlocked after Haven, right as he's playable basically) and spec him to avoid having him trying to tank enemies (and you can always spec him as a ranged combatant like Sera with the bow and arrow).

While I do appreciate that Inquisition has two different quests that you can only do one of, I don't like that the boss of one just disappears from the plot just because you didn't go after them, but still replaces them with another character that serves the same function (meaning, if you side with the templars or mages, the main villain still has a mage/templar sub boss as his second in command, just not the one you are introduced to earlier... I just find that weird writing, why not just use the character already introduced earlier but because you didn't deal with them earlier they become a bigger threat, instead of just disappearing from the plot altogether (Alexis) or being relegated to a companions loyalty quest, like Lord Seeker Lucius).

 

[Deck Rickard]

Cole's banter in the game with the other companions is great and well written but you can just find that on Youtube if you don't want to play with him. Gameplay wise you need to prioritize his specialization (which gets unlocked after Haven, right as he's playable basically) and spec him to avoid having him trying to tank enemies (and you can always spec him as a ranged combatant like Sera with the bow and arrow).

While I do appreciate that Inquisition has two different quests that you can only do one of, I don't like that the boss of one just disappears from the plot just because you didn't go after them, but still replaces them with another character that serves the same function (meaning, if you side with the templars or mages, the main villain still has a mage/templar sub boss as his second in command, just not the one you are introduced to earlier... I just find that weird writing, why not just use the character already introduced earlier but because you didn't deal with them earlier they become a bigger threat, instead of just disappearing from the plot altogether (Alexis) or being relegated to a companions loyalty quest, like Lord Seeker Lucius).

Yeah, that was an odd choice. Alexis just disappears and then Calpernia shows up as Corypheus’s right hand. Even though you’ve had no interaction with her. Still, it didn’t bother me that much because I just wanted to get to Skyhold because that’s where the game really gets good. The war table stuff is one of my favorite parts of the game, as are the little diplomacy side quests in Orlais. It all really adds a Risk and Game of Thrones element to the game that a lot of similar action RPGs lack and keeps the game from getting stale.

 

[DKDetective]

It feels like a decade since we got that initial Solas teaser and the game has been rebooted at least twice since then.

And rebooted once even before that. The original version of DragonAge 4 was very different and sounded much better to me.

Another teaser... Full reveal next summer.

Yep, shows F all lol. Can’t wait for a proper trailer.

With Gaider and the rest of the old guard long gone, this will be fan fiction at best. Honestly, I have zero interest in this game. The BioWare that I loved and that created DragonAge is long dead. I'm all in with Larian for scratching my BioWare itch from now on. Anything that is left of the old BioWare can be found at Archetype Entertainment and hopefully it will also carry the banner forward as well.