idyllic_optimism

DA2 has a solid story and very well written companions. I can understand it is too different from the first game for the fans of DA:O. Full disclosure; I didn't know there was a prior game and DA2 was my entry to the franchise and I love it to pieces.After playing DA:O, it made Hawke's story even more meaningful to me, since Hawke was one of many refugees who just did everything in their power to keep their family alive and well. We played through seven years of that struggle. It's a pretty special game to me.

Veilguard marked a new low in every game aspect of a DA game, so I now consider DA2 a masterpiece, considering it was developed in just 2 years. After the empty world of DA:I, I've come to realize, I'll take reused assets with well written stories and characters any day.

DA:I companions were well written mostly, but there were so many of them and I guess I have a bandwidth of how many companions I'll care about in a game and that's not many (cue Iron Bull betrayal because I forgot to complete his companion quests)

I think the title of the article is misleading a bit. According to the article, the game has been in development since 2018 and they've been having issues they cannot seem to be able to fix to their satisfaction and it sounds like it's more viable for the studio to abandon the project than try to fix it by throwing more money and time at it. And it's a console game, so that limits their market, too.To me, reading the article, "narrative driven games don't sell anymore" is not the main problem.

It was very telling EA announced almost right after the launch that they won't release any DLC's and they're moving the team to ME5 already. If that was not the sign EA left DA:V for dead, I don't know what was.

If the leaks to be trusted, they expected to sell 10 million copies but now they're talking about they maybe can sell 3 million copies for the lifetime of the game.

Veilguard is far from success, and it's because it's the worst-written DA game to date. And that is on EA. They had every chance to make it a good game (as the art book they published shows just what a good story it was shaping up to be before EA forced them to start over for a live service version) but they chose to waste everyone's time for 10 years by changing their mind mid development multiple times, firing the veteran team members right in the middle of development....

What doesn't sell are the games that don't have a well written story or well-written characters. Or the games that their developers themselves don't have any passion or interest in, games just made to please shareholders.... Or games that get preachy on issues without proper care...

Sorry for adding comment after comment, I've been in a position to talk to teenagers and experienced when they tune you out, when they're interested in what you have to say.

I find it works best if you start with the positive. As adults, we should challenge ourselves to find the positive at times, since we tend to slide into correction mode without realizing.

Sometimes, we'll start with positive and then talk about the part that's problematic and why. Sometimes, we should just mention the positives, good examples, well thought out arguments, a good word choice etc. In fact, noticing and mentioning good examples will be the real game changers.

And be genuine, I cannot state the importance of this at all. Consider what your friend would think of the tone you're about to use. If your friends would think you're trying to preach, your kid will feel the same.

Keeping the tone casual and at their level should work better. If it sounds like an exam question or job interview, kids would find it difficult to engage. It's a learning process for adults, too.

Thinking about our own childhood and how we would react to the critical thinking questions should help. Instead of a pop quiz sounding questions, we would prefer the adults talking to us to be genuine and not trying to lecture us, or test us.

You wouldn't talk to your friend in a way "what's the streamer's motivations?" but you'd make a conversation out of it. "I was there with them right until they said this..." And you'd state your reasoning. Think of it talking to your friend, but keep it 12 yo. level.

Another option, how about just reacting to it at the moment when you hear something really jarring.

"Gosh, what a harsh thing to say/ harsh way to put it."

"They're dismissing this whole side of the story, that's not a fair judgement at all"

"Behaving like the way they're describing is the easiest way to lose friends. Friendships built upon trust and respecting the lines/boundaries of a person. Who wants a friend who does (breach of boundary example)"

"Can you believe this person is making such a big statement without a single proof? "

Or maybe something like "Language is such a funny thing. Did you notice they use X word to describe group A, but then use Y word while talking about group B. The media does that all the time, too. If you notice, you'll find some very interesting extra stories they're conveying" .

Bit of a gameplay, making the kids notice neutral words, judgement words.This may come back to bite the adult in the back when it turns on you, but hey, we want kids to be able to point out when we miss the spot, too.

That's why I mentioned the "organically coming up in conversation" part. Keeping the didactic tone out of the conversation, finding a genuine interest in the topic ourselves usually important.

"I like how [internet personality] put it but I can't help but wish they also considered this aspect."

"I used to think like that at one point, but then I've come to know how it really worked in real life and that changed my view"

"Interesting point [the internet personality] made, though just last week I've heard of this news/story/experience of (a friend, relative, random stranger), that made me think that is only one side of the coin" etc...

I find starting a conversation with the kid when the opportunity presents itself organically and listen to what they think about the content / subject matter and bringing different perspectives to the subject can teach them critically thinking about what they're hearing.

The same goes for young adult books with questionable relationship examples. Making it a conversation, hearing what they think about certain aspects and bringing different perspectives to the subject works better than taking a stance against something they love.

We all love flawed stuff, we love them while (hopefully) separating wrongs from rights in our minds because we have some degree of critical thinking. We just need to teach/guide the kids the same way. It's ok to like something while still being able to point out the wrongs of that thing.