Knee-Jerk Rejection Of Things Like Video Games Isolates Conservatives

You never get good dialogue / plot out of shit like this because instead of focusing on a single coherent narrative their is this obsession with allow the player to tell the story and by tell the story they mean you get to chose from one of three banal dialogue options.

This is as close to objectively false as an opinion can get. The player really doesn't "tell the story" in DA:I, and it's incredibly false to suggest otherwise. In the vast majority of situations, the dialogue options just allow the PC to respond to the story how they see fit. Only on occasion does the player actually shape the story by making a decision. Complaining about being able to make decisions that matter in a video game is just a weird rejection of the medium.

more that virtually all of the romance feels forced and awkward, like worse than bad porn. It's actually kind of cringe worthy to have to watch IMO.

Do you ever actually "have to watch" the romance scenes? I guess you might be an expert in awkward porn, but this complaint ultimately seems forced. That said, I agree that the romance in these games is not Hollywood quality. Neither is the action, set design, costume design, or just about anything else. It works, though, if you accept the huge limitations of the medium and embrace its potential. A lot of people enjoy the romances, myself included frankly, and I'd like it if more developers tried to do something other than "fix problems with your gun/sword/lasers version 138923809123801238" (which is the real problem DA:I has, imo).

Bad animations, bad graphics, gutted and simplistic combat, tedious, repetitive tasks

The graphics are actually quite well-done, particularly given the genre, so I'm not sure where this complaint is coming from. The animations can be weak, but that's kind of a problem with the entire medium at this point. The "repetitive tasks" are almost uniformly optional—you can beat the game without touching the vast majority of them.

This article pretty much starts with an ad hominem attack on the author before we even get started because we all known 'conservative' is the direct equivalent for bad person. The author gets to take a dig at the reviewer and seem politically correct all in one.

Do you know who "the reviewer" is? This isn't a good faith review by Milo, someone who was insulting video games and gamers as recently as last year. This is a targeted attack on an inclusive game by a reviewer with an obvious, publicly-announced axe to grind. The "ad hominem" attack is perfectly appropriate: Milo does not deserve to be taken at face value on this review as a journalist or a gamer, because he is not really either.

/r/GirlGamers Thread Link -