Dragon Age: The Veilguard's devs say they'll totally make choices from the past games matter next time, though I'll believe it when I see it

pcgamer.com:

One of the big bummer moments from Dragon Age: The Veilguard, especially for many long-time fans of the franchise, was the fact that key decisions from the past games—Dragon Age: Origins, 2, and Inquisition—didn't really matter all that much.

As a matter of fact, you only get to make three real decisions when you boot up the game for the first time. How the Inquisition was disbanded, who your Inquisitor romanced, and whether you vowed to stop Solas or… save him from himself, which is sort of like stopping him with extra steps. While your Inquisitor does get a cameo, it's all a little surface-level.

As our own Robin Valentine puts it: «All those choices made across three games—who lived and who died, how factions were shaped and changed, who rose to rulership or fell from grace, the ultimate fate of the Warden, Hawke, and countless others—are simply discarded.» But there might just be hope yet. Kinda. Sorta.

In an interview with IGN, game director Corinne Busche and creative director John Epler say they've got big plans to make sure that library of choices matter in the future. As Busche puts it: «One thing that we could have stated more clearly, or maybe alluded to … is the idea that just because these choices from the past library of games didn't necessarily impact this particular story, that doesn't mean they're gone. This is a chance for us to really key in to what matters with these events and what's happening in Northern Thedas.

»I do fully expect that these choices going clear back to Dragon Age Origins will again matter. So [I] just wanted to be on record with that."

I mean, listen—I am sceptical of this, highly sceptical, but I at least want to be fair and measured. Dragon Age: The Veilguard has had an impossibly complicated and winding development cycle, with the entire thing having to be torn away from a teetering live service multiplayer edge.

The decision to severely limit the representation of past choices might've just been strictly necessary to ensure