Dragon Age The Veilguard lacking live service elements is NOT why it failed. Here, let me tell you some of the reasons why it failed:* Weak dialogue writing. Especially Rook's(the player character). The overall dialogue was pretty shallow and basic...like a tween comic book.* It was NOT a "role playing game" even though you marketed it as such* The marketing was way off base and catered to tween anime types(which has NEVER been the appropriate market for Dragon Age)* There was a severe lack of available interaction between the player character and companions. In previous DA games we could have lengthy in-depth conversations with companions to get to know them. In Veilguard you could only talk to them when the game said it was ok. even in the player base(the Lighthouse) the player couldn't chat with companions at-will. When you walk close to companions they say a line or two and then stop and stare at Rook who never responds because for some puzzling reason you guys removed Rook's autodialogue which contributed to Rook feeling like an isolated outcast. People play and love DA games for the companions and our relationships with them.* The romances were overall shallow, brief and unrewarding, Especially Lucanis'. The game was definitely NOT meant for a mature audience. It is PG 13 at best, which is another insult to DA's traditional market. Romances are a big part of DA games for players. Veilguard's romances can't even compare to DAI's.* Why did you put in a nudity button where is literally NO nudity. Side-butt is NOT nudity. Another failure of the romances.* Limited dialogue choices. Rook has limited choices on the dialogue wheel, and they all result in similar responses. There is NO roleplay here, period. In fact, even when you WANT to be a **bleep** and the dialogue wheel response looks like you're going to be, Rook ends up saying something polite and fuzzy. Are youKIDDING me?* The elephant in the room- Taash. You want representation in Dragon Age? Sure it's been in every game, however you want to make GOOD representation. A one-dimensional character whose entire existence is based on their gender identity is NEVER good writing. It's ESPECIALLY not good writing when that character is unlikeable, rude, hypocritical, and dumb as a bag of rocks. Taash was supposed to be 20-22 but written like a fifteen-sixteen year old brat. Why say she's 20-22? So people could feel ok about romancing them? Tacky. You want a good example of representation? Just look at Dorian from DAI. His troubles stem from him resisting cultural norms and daddy issues. He's a complex character who grows during the duration of the game who isn't defined by his sexuality. Taash falls flat in comparison. Taash IS defined by being non-binary. That's Taash...the non-binary who happens to do a bit of dragon hunting. That isn't complex nor interesting, and the character being obnoxious doesn't help at all. * There were VERY limited World State choices from previous games, which has also been a staple of DA. Why? Veilguard completely disregards the vast majority of what players chose in previous games.* The game was left with no real endings or tie-ups. The epilogues, which are also a staple of Dragon Age games, just went over what we did in the game. WE KNOW- WE WERE THERE. We needed to have the stories wrapped up, consequences, results, and MOST OF ALL what happened with our love interest. We got NONE of that. * The game feels cut off...like suddenly the Powers That Be decided it needed to be released earlier than intended, so the game got cut off at the knees. * These are SOME of the reasons Veilguard failed, but I can ONE HUNDRED PERCENT assure you that it has NOTHING to do with Veilguard lacking Live Service game elements. It would have crashed and burned even worse than it did. I can also tell you that long-time fans of Dragon Age feel dishonored, disrespected, and betrayed. We waited TEN YEARS for this? The frustrating thing is that you can see the game had immense potential- you can see it in there, but DA fans(and I assure you Mass Effect fans) are wondering if EA is so far removed from knowing their own customers that they are incapable of giving us a solid game. There are others hoping ME4 crashes and burns so maybe you'd sell DA and ME to someone who would do the games justice for us. WE ALL HATE LIVE SERVICE. VEILGUARD FAILED BECAUSE OF BAD DECISIONS

I disagree with it being an RPG. To me, it most certainly is not. At best it's an action/adventure game with RPG elements. The problem comes in with Rook's dialogue. Very rarely does anything you say change the response from whomever you're speaking to. The dialogue choices are almost always way too similar to the other choices. People want to have options with dialogue and we just didn't get many variations. Everyone's Rook is the same Rook and there were very few choices that mattered at all, and that's a problem.

Almost everything you have an issue with, IS BECAUSE DAV started out as a live service/multiplayer game. You can see it in the bones, and it was known a few years ago that the next DA game would be online/multiplayer....and then several things happened, like failure of Anthem, and other MP games, the success of Star Wars single player and EA had a change of heart......the issue is, most of the really good people who made the earlier single player games left and lessor knowledgeable people were left or hired, and in my opinion, the ones hired were less interested in a good story and more in inserting themselves and their personal issues into the game. They were less wanting to make an interesting game based off the DA world and instead wanted a engine to push their real world politics. Many of the issues in the game have little to nothing to do with DA world history or feel. But yeah, the problem with DAV originate with it being a multiplayer game.....not because it doesn't have it. In a MP game it is hard to have in depth dialogs with supporting characters, in depth romances, and likely nudity and such have to be limited, because it is MP....whereas a single player game, seeking to maximize the experiences of a SINGLE PERSON, can do all that, if they are willing.

Retort1: yeah 15+ of a younger newer company should be a bit lesser by comparison. But it's not, I still play da1 and get as much or more satisfaction as I have in the game that's supposed to have "grown and matured" with tech and talent.2.its kind of an rpg. There's a skill tree, there's classes. There the chose a city to save choice that still let's you have both cities, both characters stay, ya may not romance one or the other won't heal. No time to care about wither city or the people really before said choice so the effects are meh. Other than that it's what armor do I want my lesson to have? Whoo...3. The art and world are pretty... but its cosplaying as a DA world. Elves have never been this techy, dwarves suddenly had trains by the looks of the rail lines, the forests float? The fade is whimsy? The blight change is a joke with a weak cover story. 4. I did really miss being more involved with my people in the base. I liked having the talks in the main room that was nice, I liked having more options for scene interactions I just wish they had more substance and worth. The gifts thing was a joke. Da1 had far better gifting mechanics and that was 15 yrs ago.5. There's more to romance than screwing ur boo. And we wanted more of that from everyone. They've been shallow and flippant about their own "struggles" or it's ALL THEY ARE. Everyone has their own tastes, out of all the da games, it's all Alistair zevran fenrins (I wish varric) Collin and solas for me. I can't see Harding as any better than she was in 3, I may have liked her better then honestly. And davrin I really wouldn't peg as a Chad, a dude sure. But to each their own that's why there's options.6. Pg for language sake. Doesn't really seem super mature. 7. The fact that this is a quick romp/ fun / Debbie cake of game for someone is why it's gotten criticized. It's supposed to be a dark fantasy. The relationships were supposed to be the light in the dark bloody gruesome world. Not the rainbows and unicorns with bloody horns now and then.8. Yeah when there's a personality characters are usually better :)9. Multi play should nvr on this table10. My DA games are not the supporting role of the supporting roles. Movies, comics... anything else is NOT the reason to push out a game that's suppose to be the spine of the world and lore.11. See above.12. It's a desperate cash grab that didn't get the care and respect it needed to be great. This game had added to my no faith in waiting for a good follow up game. Kh3 broke my heart and soul I couldn't force myself to play more than 20 hrs cause I'd cry after from disappointment. After all bad reviews from friends and forums I knew this wasn't gonna be great but it's ok, wasn't worth the 10 yrs and love I've had for the others. 1 was amazing for story lore characters and consequence. 2 was great to see your impact on the city. Less choices but ya felt them a lil more than the next 2 games. 3 I wish was little more... more. There was just something i was always looking for, the graphics was it's saving point from total meh. Art and handholding friend circles wasn't gonna save 4 for me. Coulda and shoulda been better but life and circumstances didn't see for for that apparently.

This "Live service" argument isn't really good when people looks at Kingdom Come : Deliverance II (AA game).Kingdom Come: Deliverance II - One million copies sold in 24 hours.

Exactly! Agree with everything written above, very well put. A sad way for ones previously favorite rpg series to end.

Dear EA- NOBODY WANTS A LIVE SERVICE DRAGON AGE GAME