Lifting The Veil Behind Dragon Age: The Veilguard
The reviews for Dragon Age: The Veilguard are filing in nice and neatly... and something just doesn’t feel right. Nearly every review parrots the same phrase, “a return to form,” lavishing praise on Bioware and EA’s latest release. But this isn’t a case of consensus—no - actually it’s coordinated propaganda. Thanks to @Grummz on Twitter, we’re all seeing in real time - a staggering manipulation of review scores and narratives, a trend disturbingly being amplified by the consolidated ownership of major gaming media outlets under a few select entities. Weird.
Selective Review Copies and Targeted Reviewers
According to information coming out of some YouTube channels, Bioware and EA seem to have been handpicking reviewers based on identity and ideological alignment, heavily favoring those who identify as trans or non-binary to try and ensure favorable coverage.
YouTuber Fextralife has accused BioWare of selectively distributing review codes to ensure higher ratings for their latest game, potentially sidelining more critical creators. He notes that many players were waiting on reviews before deciding to purchase, and EA's marketing team may have used this to their advantage, focusing on creators likely to give higher scores. He states:
“Just think about this for a second if you’re on the EA end and you’re trying to manipulate review scores because you want high review scores, what are you going to do? You’re going to research press and content creators and what they usually give to games score-wise to give you a general idea of how they’re going to review your game”
This tactic, he argues, would enhance the game's public reception by reducing critical voices.
This selective strategy wasn’t about fairness—it was about shaping the narrative to emphasize “inclusivity” while reducing the chance of any actual genuine criticism. By controlling which journalists received early access, EA and Bioware essentially guarantee positive coverage from the jump, forcing narratives into the pipeline that cast The Veilguard in a glowing light, even if it didn’t deserve it. This kind of exclusionary practice silences voices that may have had legitimate critiques, creating a sterilized media environment where praise is the only option... and in the long run, creates an environment where future reviews of the game may be subconsciously impacted by the overwhelming glowing positivity up front...
John Epler’s “Return to Form” Directive and Review Repetition
Adding fuel to the fire, the phrase “a return to form” repeatedly appeared in reviews across major gaming publications.
Over on Bluesky, John Epler, Narrative Director of The Veilguard, set this exact phrase as a goal when he rejoined Bioware after working on Anthem. In his own words:
“So 5 years ago, when I first re-joined the project as Narrative Director after a hiatus on Anthem, I was asked my goals for the project
and one of the ones I put was ‘I want to see the phrase ‘a triumphant return to form for BioWare’ in at least one review’
excited to finally mark that goal done”
Epler’s comment exposes their planned PR campaign, one where narratives are planted and echoed by compliant media, creating the illusion of universal acclaim. This “return to form” mantra has spread like a virus across platforms in a disturbingly uniform manner, having al these excited lap dogs in media yipping with excitement to be noticed - it's suggesting a clear alignment between Bioware’s internal goals and the media voices tasked with delivering them.
Nothing to see here! Nope! Now go look over there like a good little boy...
The Media Monopoly: Ziff Davis and Its Reach
At the heart of this echo chamber is a monopolized media landscape. People are starting to see the patterns I've been covering for a while now. Ziff Davis Media, a GIGANTIC conglomerate, controls a massive share of gaming journalism. Under its ownership are Eurogamer, ExtremeTech, GamesIndustry.biz, IGN, PCMag, Rock Paper Shotgun, and VG247. The empire extends even further as IGN alone owns Outside Xbox, Digital Foundry, and Hookshot, which... in turn controls Nintendo Life, Push Square, Pure Xbox, and Time Extension.
The consolidation that I covered previously means that a single parent company holds sway over the opinions coming from multiple platforms, leaving readers with the impression of a diverse media landscape when, in reality, it’s just a handful of entities recycling the same narratives.
Effectively, there are only like two or three real controlling voices in gaming journalism, despite the abundance of brand names sprinkled throughout. These media giants exert power over perception, dictating EXACTLY what YOU hear about major releases. By placing nearly identical articles across their network of sites, they create an illusion of independent praise that all flows from the same source. When one company owns nearly all the mainstream outlets, it isn’t surprising at all that every review sounds the same—because they come from the same people and, ultimately, the same agenda.
Captured Journalism: How Consolidation Skews Truth
This monopolization means that most of what you read isn’t independent opinion but controlled content coming from just a few powerful players. While many have felt this is how media in general has been working on a major level for years, it's unfortunate to see it make it's way to the game industry like this.
These “lords of media” wield immense influence, using it to amplify messages that serve their bottom line or please their industry partners however they like. When there’s criticism to be stifled, they shut it down or spin it. And if there’s an outlet willing to speak out? It’s only a matter of time until it’s bought out or squeezed into compliance. Independent critique on a major platform level is disappearing, as any dissent is either absorbed into the corporate fold or drowned out by synchronized praise across the Ziff Davis network and its affiliates... Which, in a weird way, is also giving a natural rise to independent creators elsewhere. People want to hear the truth. Not corpo speak. Especially when it comes to gaming.
Why This Matters to Gamers
Gaming media should exist ONLY to serve gamers, not publishers. When one company owns every major outlet, diversity of opinion disappears, replaced by a well-oiled PR machine that speaks with one voice, telling us not what we need to know but what benefits the people at the top.
Kern’s tweet nailed it:
“We need to talk about CAPTURED gaming JOURNALISM and how CORRUPT it’s become. Dragon Age Veilguard is ASTROTURFING articles and reviews now, parroting the lead narrative designer of the game. Look at these reviews and articles that all repeat the same phrase and ask yourself what is going on.”
The gamer community deserves better than a network of media monopolies parroting corporate messaging. As readers, you need to be aware of who controls the news and whether those sources have your interests at heart. When major media outlets echo the same talking points, orchestrated by the developers themselves, it’s clear: we’re not reading independent journalism; we’re reading marketing material.
The Future of Honest Reviews
Dragon Age: The Veilguard accidentally exposed a deep-rooted issue in gaming journalism that goes beyond one game or one company. As more games come out and try to rely on these manufactured narratives, it’s up to us - independent voices and the communities to push back. Gamers don’t need an industry controlled by a handful of voices; they need transparency, genuine criticism, and diversity of opinion.
As it stands, our opinions are being shaped not by honest critics... but by corporations who profit from keeping you in the dark.
This is no conspiracy - if we want to get fix, demand change, or move to more trusted sources.
~~Smash
