Fact check: IGN gave Dragon Age The Veilgaurd a 9/10 rating. Game Rant gave the game a 10/10 review. Gamespot gave the game 8/10. These sites confirmed their status as little more than extensions of EA's marketing department and have shown by their complicity in attempting to gaslight the gaming community that their interests no longer align with gamers and that they are now in direct opposition to gamers.

1. Summary of the results

The reviews of Dragon Age: The Veilguard are indeed generally positive, but more nuanced than the original statement suggests. Multiple sources confirm high scores, with IGN giving 8.8/10 ^[1], and GameSpot providing a detailed review that, while positive, points out specific flaws particularly with the mage class ^[2]. The reviews demonstrate thorough analysis, with one reviewer completing three playthroughs totaling over 100 hours ^[3].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original statement omits several crucial pieces of context:

• The reviews include detailed critiques alongside their praise, with GameSpot specifically noting narrative and character design shortcomings ^[2]
• International perspectives, such as German media, have provided nuanced assessments while praising the game's emotional storytelling and world-building ^[4]
• The reviews demonstrate extensive playtime and analysis, suggesting thorough evaluation rather than superficial marketing compliance ^[3]
• The game is specifically praised for recapturing the spirit of earlier BioWare titles, indicating authentic appreciation rather than marketing influence ^[4]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement contains several problematic assumptions and biases:

• It misrepresents the review scores, claiming IGN gave 9/10 when the actual score was 8.8/10 ^[1]
• It ignores the depth of analysis present in the reviews, which include both praise and criticism ^[2]
• The accusation of "gaslighting" and being "marketing extensions" is contradicted by:
• The presence of specific criticisms in the reviews ^[2]
• The extensive playtime documented by reviewers ^[3]
• The nuanced analysis across multiple sources ^{[1] [4]}

The original statement appears to reflect a broader narrative about gaming journalism rather than engaging with the actual content of the reviews. This kind of narrative often benefits certain social media influencers and content creators who build audiences through controversy and anti-establishment positioning.