On 10/15/2026 at 9:59 PM, Malcador said:

Still before Star Citizen

That really looks amazing. I have been following much of the new features and mechanics that GTA6 is going to include and I believe its going to create a better overall experience than my recent GTA5 playthrough

It will be the wokest game of all time

and make 5 trillion dollars

13 hours ago, BruceVC said:

Im sad about Bioware closing down. They developed some of the best CRPG I have ever played and BG2 ToB is still my favorite game of all time

I also enjoyed ME1-3 and Andromeda and DA1-3

Veilguard was an absolute sales disaster and that was the final nail in the coffin for the new owners

RIP Bioware

A very sad day for me too. As I've said before, BG1 was my very first non-wargame video game. It introduced me to not only video games more broadly but specifically RPGs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP3ieef0mpE

https://www.ign.com/articles/mass-effect-5-trailer-leaks-online-with-mass-effect-universe-title-reveals-returning-characters-and-much-more

Edited Friday at 01:03 AM3 days by Malcador

I very much doubt it would have been good. They hadn't made a good game since and including dragon age 3 at this point.

On 10/23/2026 at 9:34 AM, Sarex said:

I very much doubt it would have been good. They hadn't made a good game since and including dragon age 3 at this point.

You are, in my humble opinion, being rather generous there...

Mass Effect 3 felt like like a rush of, often very disappointing, bullet points they just had to hit to finish up the trilogy, the only part that felt properly fleshed out was the whole Tuchanka section (which, to be fair, was fantastic).

One of the causes, at least in my mind is that I believe Mass Effect 2 did not move the overarching story forward enough for BioWare to be able to stick to the series being a trilogy (a promise they made somewhere early on and probably should have broken), and it really showed. There also was the issue that the writers left, I think, at least there were some really jarring continuity issues that popped up in the third game (the whole Quarian/Geth conclusion was...disappointing after all the build-up).

Andromeda was just "meh" (I'll finish it one of these days, maybe). It actually started off pretty promising with the whole alien thing, but the pivot to colonist drama kinda killed my interest in the story, especially given all the other jank the game came with.

Not sure which other games they made were any more than "decent". Dragon Age just went from identity crisis to identity crisis after Origins (which itself was a bit of a technical mess). Anthem was...well, Anthem.

They arguably botched SWToR, the Star Wars MMO, as well with the endgame being a disaster area for months and months after launch driving away a huge percentage of the initial playerbase. The game is still going, at least, but hard to say how much of a success it is now, but if there ever was a game that had an actual shot at "dethroning" World of Warcraft, that was the one. Alas, it was not meant to be.

It always sucks when a studio that used to be great goes under, but let's face it "old" BioWare has been dead for a very, very long time already and it's honestly amazing they didn't get Westwood-ed earlier. I hope all the talented developers working there get to quickly move on to other, and better, endeavours now that they've been freed of EA's yoke.

1 hour ago, marelooke said:

You are, in my humble opinion, being rather generous there...

Mass Effect 3 felt like like a rush of, often very disappointing, bullet points they just had to hit to finish up the trilogy, the only part that felt properly fleshed out was the whole Tuchanka section (which, to be fair, was fantastic).

Yeah, a lot of people had mainly issues with Mass Effect3 ending, but personally, I didn't think the game was good overall. Dragon Age: Origins and Mass Effect2 were in my view the last games where Bioware stuck the landing. Later games had their moments but overall I felt that Bioware just stopped working under EA.

Not sure I'd actually blame EA that much. May not be a popular take, but IMO Bioware's terminal issues started before them. The trajectory was correctable, but the trend clear.

Jade Empire was a flop that cost its main financer (MS) a lot of money. Largely due to people buying loss leading xboxs just to play one game, which is on MS, but all the later story problems were evident there. The characters and writing were still fresh enough for the Anoarth Sky(den, post ME1) jokes and observations of recycled plot to mostly be affectionate, and the sub Whedon banter hadn't completely outstayed its welcome. Dragon Age Origins may not have been a dev hell game by modern standards, but for the time took ages (heh) to develop and obviously went through multiple cycles and iterations. "Enslave nations with necromancy" anyone? And again, recycled characters and plot, whedonesque bants etc. Same with ME1. The trouble with that though is that eventually, it does get stale. Easy to blame the last games in the sequence for that, but they produced 4 games with essentially the same plot and essentially the same characters; that set everything after up for its staleness.

And yes, ME2 failed utterly to progress the trilogies plot, except for the last dlc (and with it being dlc how many people actually played it vs the base game?), which put 3 into an impossible situation of trying to fit two games worth of plot in.

There was also a fairly healthy dollop of games Just Moving On from the Bioware model, and Bioware taking so long to make the games- not unique to them of course- that where they tried to iterate they ended up being years behind the market and still feeling stale (both Veilguard and Anthem). That's certainly due to poor leadership from EA as well but EA were damned if they did, damned if they didn't there. Interfere with Bioware and get bad games --> EA's fault; don't interfere and bad games --> also EA's fault.

The biggest problem Bioware had, in my opinion, was chasing the profit dragon. They wanted mass market appeal and were willing to sacrifice more and more at that altar. Focusing on consoles when their core audience were PC gamers also did not help.

Obsidian also suffers from this to a lesser degree.

ea can be blamed for a lot

certainly not switch dai to that engine that couldn't run rpg at all

chasing widest audience and highest graphic quality almost always end in disaster

5 hours ago, marelooke said:

Not sure which other games they made were any more than "decent". Dragon Age just went from identity crisis to identity crisis after Origins (which itself was a bit of a technical mess). Anthem was...well, Anthem.

Matter of debate. Also: My heart-felt condolences to people now losing their jobs.

I'm 100% convinced though that there's a parallel universe out there in which Feargus Urquhart slipped in the shower, broke his ankle and called in sick that fateful day.

In that universe Bioware isn't mourned as some former king and savior of the Western RPG (that only later imploded when chasing the Live-Service and Shooting trends). Over in this universe, Bioware is vaguely remembered as a small boutique studio first doing a Mech sim and then chasing 1990s multiplayer/RTS trends already -- all for finite gains in a crowded market until imploding early (like Cavedog, say). "Bioware magic"? It's a myth! And made by chance. 😁

---

Developer BioWare – now itself a titan of the RPG genre, responsible in Mass Effect and Dragon Age for two of the biggest modern roleplaying franchises – had already worked with Interplay on its debut game, the mech shooter Shattered Steel. The devs then pitched Urquhart their next title: a real-time strategy game called Battleground: Infinity.

“I couldn’t get my head around why they thought it was going to be so amazing,” Urquhart explains, admitting that he actually rejected the first pitch. It was only when they came back claiming to be about to sign with a rival publisher (“I don’t know how true that was”) that he took a second look, and inspiration struck. “I looked at it [and said:] ‘I don’t know that this is the game we’d wanna make.

What about making it a D&D game?’” 🤑

Feargus Urquhart is doing what he does best

Edited yesterday at 04:15 AM1 day by Sven_

18 hours ago, Sarex said:

The biggest problem Bioware had, in my opinion, was chasing the profit dragon. They wanted mass market appeal and were willing to sacrifice more and more at that altar. Focusing on consoles when their core audience were PC gamers also did not help.

Obsidian also suffers from this to a lesser degree.

And this is exactly what I fear about Obsidian (under Xbox's yoke).

so someone in cdpr really want to make another gwent

20 hours ago, kanisatha said:

And this is exactly what I fear about Obsidian (under Xbox's yoke).

Kanie dont get too depressed

We still have several independent companies that aren't owned by massive corporations and they produce great games that include Larian, CDPR and Owlcat and then we have excellent indie studios like Stygian games that made Underrail

Its not all doom and gloom 👍

Warhorse is easily the one I am looking forward to seeing more off.

As to Obsidian - the parallel did come to my mind as well but I don’t think it is similar at all. Obsidian, regardless of their talent, were never a calibre of the studio BioWare was - BioWare set trends, set new bars for western cRPG production value over and over again, and created few, widely beloved strong IPs. Their work in existing IPs still stand as some of their best to date. Then they got acquired by EA they growed, spread thin and release shaky game after shaky game. BioWare’s issue wasn’t that they became too mainstream - it’s was that they stopped releasing widely liked games.

Obsidian has been surviving pumping out rushed sequels to other people games, with just few original IPs that became “cult classics”, and frankly they seem to me to be doing actually pretty well under Microsoft’s acquisition. They did seem to have internal discipline to keep projects focused and on track and not grow too complacent under a guaranteed pay check. Avowed was troubled, but not without merit, but other than that they have been doing good work.

Now that doesn’t keep them save unfortunately - Microsoft didnt shy from slashing down studios regardless of how good their output has been (Tango, ID). And we will see what fate awaits Obsidian under new Bethesda umbrella.

19 minutes ago, Wormerine said:

Warhorse is easily the one I am looking forward to seeing more off.

Yes Warhorse is another good example. We can think of lots and then small indie studios

Thats my whole point., its sad about Bioware and Obsidians possible future but we still have many reasons to be positive about the future of gaming

Edited 6 hours ago6 hr by BruceVC

2 hours ago, BruceVC said:

Kanie dont get too depressed

We still have several independent companies that aren't owned by massive corporations and they produce great games that include Larian, CDPR and Owlcat and then we have excellent indie studios like Stygian games that made Underrail

Its not all doom and gloom 👍

But those studios you mention are exactly what don't give me much hope. Larian has returned to its Divinity IP, which I can't stand, and especially if their next game is a horror RPG, a genre I won't touch. Owlcat is now entirely about the WH40K IP, which again I won't touch. And CDPR's games, which I will at last try, are also not quite my thing because they're very much action RPGs. Fantasy genre non-action RPGs are now very few and far between, and being made almost entirely only by extremely small indie developers with just pennies for a budget.

hope sequel will come out soon

1 hour ago, Wormerine said:

BioWare’s issue wasn’t that they became too mainstream - it’s was that they stopped releasing widely liked games.

Dragon Age: Inquisition was their most sold game and it marked their downfall for me. They dumbed it down to be more open world and easier to play, ie. more mainstream.

13 hours ago, uuuhhii said:

so someone in cdpr really want to make another gwent

I will never understand why people like card games so much.

49 minutes ago, Sarex said:

Dragon Age: Inquisition was their most sold game and it marked their downfall for me. They dumbed it down to be more open world and easier to play, ie. more mainstream.

Dumbed it down in what regard and from what? Bioware games haven't been very deep since KOTOR - after BG1&2 it's been always about increasing production value and they have been gradually moving from simplified D&D to action combat. DA:O would be an exception as they clearly tried to go back to cRPG roots, but I still didn't think it was particularly "deep" game. I feel what seperates DA:I from, lets say DA:O is a ratio of narrative content vs gameplay length. I feel it's a production issue, not an ideological issue.

2 hours ago, kanisatha said:

Fantasy genre non-action RPGs are now very few and far between, and being made almost entirely only by extremely small indie developers with just pennies for a budget.

ha! you don't like turn based you don't like action. You are very hard to please. I fear real-time with pause is and will be a rare occurance as it is a bastard child of "we want to make a turn based game, but Diablo success forces out to make it run in real time". And I think Bioware's MO was always to make approachable RPG-like experiences. Baldur's Gates success was taking D&D and turning it into faster, more blockbuster experienced. KOTOR simplified D&D mechanics to the point that there was little player input and added somewhat cheated full VO and found a way to make RPG work on console. Jade Empire already played with making combat more action-like. DA:O pretty much stands alone as a deliberate "throwback" title.

21 minutes ago, Wormerine said:

ha! you don't like turn based you don't like action. You are very hard to please. I fear real-time with pause is and will be a rare occurance as it is a bastard child of "we want to make a turn based game, but Diablo success forces out to make it run in real time". And I think Bioware's MO was always to make approachable RPG-like experiences. Baldur's Gates success was taking D&D and turning it into faster, more blockbuster experienced. KOTOR simplified D&D mechanics to the point that there was little player input and added somewhat cheated full VO and found a way to make RPG work on console. Jade Empire already played with making combat more action-like. DA:O pretty much stands alone as a deliberate "throwback" title.

You're right. And that's why my Steam library only has 49 games in it, compared with most of you all who probably have games in the hundreds.

I've become much more flexible about playing both action combat and TB combat games nowadays. The secret for me, I've found, is to play on Easy difficulty, thereby being able to get through tedious (TB) and/or aggravating (action) combat easily and quickly. Furthermore, RTwP combat doesn't automatically make it fun combat either, as the Tower of Time and Dark Envoy games demonstrated to me.

Edited 3 hours ago3 hr by kanisatha

1 hour ago, Lexx said:

I will never understand why people like card games so much.

gwent in witcher 3 are pretty nice and addictive

not sure about that multiplayer gwent game

1 hour ago, Wormerine said:

Dumbed it down in what regard and from what? Bioware games haven't been very deep since KOTOR - after BG1&2 it's been always about increasing production value and they have been gradually moving from simplified D&D to action combat. DA:O would be an exception as they clearly tried to go back to cRPG roots, but I still didn't think it was particularly "deep" game. I feel what seperates DA:I from, lets say DA:O is a ratio of narrative content vs gameplay length. I feel it's a production issue, not an ideological issue.

In every regard. I think you can compare it point for point with DA:O and it's simpler in every aspect. Combat and all aspects of it were far more MMOish and optimized for consoles, quests were simpler and lower quality, story was a downgrade. The only upside were the graphics.

DA:O was as much of a stepdown from BG2, but it didn't try to cater to everyone.