1230 réponses à ce sujet

[Morroian]

tbsking wrote...But you go into both of those games with the understanding between player and designer that Geralt and The Nameless One are all preset characters. The Witcher's Geralt is the protagonist of the Witcher in all its varied forms. Hawke, especially if you've played DAO, gives the mere illusion of customization when the reality is that he's far less customizable, especially compared to DAO. The Warden in DAO was entirely your own character. With certain options limited, and with Hawke being voiced, he simply won't be your own character; he will be Hawke.

DA2 is a different game to DAO not a continuation. You now go into the game with an understanding that Hawke is to some extent a preset character. 

Gjefflin wrote...I beg to differ.  It's a fact that there's only going to be one main character.  The same character that we will ALL be playing.  

As has already been said this does not make it an action game.

Addai67 wrote...I think this will especially be the case because we're being told that DAO was not about our Warden at all, it was about Thedas ("so get over it").  So this is Hawke's story, and once it's done, it's done.  It may seem a subtle thing, but it makes for a PC in which you can feel even less invested than in Mass Effect.

If the game is well done then we should be drawn in and invested in Hawke, and I think the DA people should do a better job than the ME team.

Jimmy Fury wrote...See I really don't get this argument. The Warden had some customization options yeah but not every single tiny aspect of him/her was up to the player. We only had control over what the devs gave us control over.My mage has never once been able to not help jowan. It's not an option. If you ever want to leave the tower you have to go get Jowan's phylactery. There's no option to set him and Lily on fire. There's no option to run to Cullen and get them both shanked in the kidney. You have to follow the plot the developers give you and your "choices" are only those options you are provided with.

Spot on, the control over the character was largely an illusion.

Modifié par Morroian, 15 juillet 2010 - 11:04 .

[Jimmy Fury]

tbsking wrote...
We don't know the full extent of the changes, no, and when we do I and others will evolve our opinions accordingly. But we do know that you can only play as a human named Hawke, and we do know that he will be voiced. This all limits our options.

I... but... I...
Those limitations already exist though. Like I said, in Origins we're limited to 3 races. We can't play a Qunari, or a Demon, or a Darkspawn (outside of 1 DLC), or a Sylvan, or a werewolf, or anything other than Human, Elf, Dwarf. Why is changing the number of limitations considered a different type of limitation? Nor could we play all three races in one playthrough yet we still had tons of customization per race.
All of the various ways you could make your 1 PC unique, why can't those still exist?
And again, we always had a set last name. Every single origin came with its own last name. Those never changed so that's nothing new.

A voiced Hawke will, be practical necessity, be relegated to either Nice, Cool, or Mean. There's simply no way it could be otherwise.

Why not? I don't get it. Why can't there be Sarcastic-Hawke or Flirty-Hawke or Kinda-Douchey-But-Charming-Hawke.
Maybe EA is throwing a buttload of money into the voice acting. A wheel divded into six parts (as the ME wheel was) gives room for 6 variations.

You pay a voice actor to deliver lines, there's no way he can deliver them in a way that conveys every intonation and every bit of subtext. If I feel that my character saying, "Have a nice day" is sarcastic, Hawke will still say "Have a nice day" like he means it.

I recommend going back a few pages to the clusters of Exile and I posting very long things. We've covered quite a bit of how this same problem already exists in DAO and is not new or unique to a VO at all.

[In Exile]

Davasar wrote...

So wait...you're saying that only looking to get money at the cost of everything else is a way to go?  I'm sorry, but looking toward integrity and loyalty is superior.

...What?

The lowest common denominator in this case is "make money no matter what and who cares what happens".  Thats the kind of attitude that caused the financial crisis and the gulf oil spill.

...What?

You said:

By leaving their loyal fanbase behind, they will certainly enjoy the
fickle mass market when the next new shiny comes along.

"The next new shiny" is derogative and insulting and suggests a preference for the superficial over the concrete. The post that you are responding to talked spoke about the changes as if they made the game simpler, and the mass appeal was spoken as if it was inherently a bad thing.

None of that has very much to do with money and quite a lot to do with presumptions about a niche market.

Cutting out features or "streamlning" just to make a fast buck flies
in the face of basic marketing:  keep your target audience and attract
more by improvement of existing product and adding a few new features. 
You dont do it by changing basic fundamentals.

But they are not cutting out features. It's not as if they're giving you DA2: now with less NPCs, gameplay and content!

They're replacing silent PCs with VO, which is dramatically more expensive (because aside from the dialogue recording, the VA costs, the QA, the rendering of the speech for the PC they are probably adding cut-scene oriented action, which itself needs to be rendered and is costly).

They're replacing features, but whether or not that's the core...

Moreover, if you think DA:O as is represents the entire and actual taste of the core market, well, this game sold comparably to ME. So this IS the mass market. There is overwhelming evidence the changes are not being made purely on financial grounds.

That depends.  If they have to write much less, then they can save
there for sure.  For instance, if they are only two or three responses
per dialogue choice and there are far fewer of them then in DAO, then
they could probably save quite a bit on writing staff/time.

They have what, 8 writers? Let's say the fire four. That means 4 writers have to do the same work as before, and they save maybe $300,000. Except now they have to record VO for the PC. They have to pay the VA, they have to pay the studio for its time, they have to pay the programmers for the extra work they will put into implementing, QA...etc.

I'm going to say they are likely going to pay more even if they fire the writing staff.

[Gjefflin]

Jimmy Fury wrote...

tbsking wrote...
The Warden in DAO was entirely your own character. With certain options limited, and with Hawke being voiced, he simply won't be your own character; he will be Hawke.

The only difference between The Warden and Hawke is that Hawke can't be an elf or a dwarf. That's it. That's all we know. I get why people are put off by the idea that they'll lose control of the character but we have no idea if we will or not.

...Or a female.

Modifié par Gjefflin, 15 juillet 2010 - 11:32 .

[Grommash94]

Gjefflin wrote...

Jimmy Fury wrote...

tbsking wrote...
The Warden in DAO was entirely your own character. With certain options limited, and with Hawke being voiced, he simply won't be your own character; he will be Hawke.

The only difference between The Warden and Hawke is that Hawke can't be an elf or a dwarf. That's it. That's all we know. I get why people are put off by the idea that they'll lose control of the character but we have no idea if we will or not.

...Or a female.

No Hawke can be a female.

[naumutroi]

based upon what i have seen here in the forums i would dare say that all of us here would be better writers for the new DAO then the jobronni's they got working on DAO2

[Grommash94]

naumutroi wrote...

based upon what i have seen here in the forums i would dare say that all of us here would be better writers for the new DAO then the jobronni's they got working on DAO2

Considering all those 'jobronnis' brought us DA:O, probably not.

[naumutroi]

who's for working on a MOD of the PC version of DAO2 when it comes out to make the wrong things right?? anybody?? I for one will be all for that.

[tbsking]

Jimmy Fury wrote...

tbsking wrote...
We don't know the full extent of the changes, no, and when we do I and others will evolve our opinions accordingly. But we do know that you can only play as a human named Hawke, and we do know that he will be voiced. This all limits our options.

I... but... I...
Those limitations already exist though. Like I said, in Origins we're limited to 3 races. We can't play a Qunari, or a Demon, or a Darkspawn (outside of 1 DLC), or a Sylvan, or a werewolf, or anything other than Human, Elf, Dwarf. Why is changing the number of limitations considered a different type of limitation? Nor could we play all three races in one playthrough yet we still had tons of customization per race.
All of the various ways you could make your 1 PC unique, why can't those still exist?
And again, we always had a set last name. Every single origin came with its own last name. Those never changed so that's nothing new.

A voiced Hawke will, be practical necessity, be relegated to either Nice, Cool, or Mean. There's simply no way it could be otherwise.

Why not? I don't get it. Why can't there be Sarcastic-Hawke or Flirty-Hawke or Kinda-Douchey-But-Charming-Hawke.
Maybe EA is throwing a buttload of money into the voice acting. A wheel divded into six parts (as the ME wheel was) gives room for 6 variations.

You pay a voice actor to deliver lines, there's no way he can deliver them in a way that conveys every intonation and every bit of subtext. If I feel that my character saying, "Have a nice day" is sarcastic, Hawke will still say "Have a nice day" like he means it.

I recommend going back a few pages to the clusters of Exile and I posting very long things. We've covered quite a bit of how this same problem already exists in DAO and is not new or unique to a VO at all.

I recall those clusters posted pages back, and I recall disagreeing completely. You are right in that you could only play 3 races in DAO. Now you get to play as one. Thank you for stating my point. You're options are limited.

If I may give a cluster of my own, perhaps the same one I've heard used before; when Alistair reveals his heritage:

"What's on your mind?"
"I'm not going to like this, am I?"
"Let me guess: you're an idiot."

Depending on the character I play I can interpret that character asking "What's on your mind" in a number of ways. As sarcastic, as concerned, or as indifferent. The same with "I'm not going to like this".

I thought I heard that "Let me guess: you're an idiot" had a negative response, despite what you might intend. Now, that has a number reasons that served to enhance the roleplaying element. Alistair is a character that is established as being somewhat sensitive about insults to his intelligence, and at this moment he wants a serious conversation. Upon selecting "Let me guess: you're an idiot" I did take it as playful banter. However, seeing his reaction made me feel like a dolt for not realizing that he wasn't in the mood to banter.

Because I like personally like Alistair, I made it a point to carefully consider the context of the situation before answering so that I could be sure not to offend him in the future. i.e. I roleplayed a character that didn't want to be mean to Alistair.

Hawke, however, will always deliver every line, the same way. I didn't want to be mean to Alistair when I called him an idiot; I intrepreted it as playful. He didn't. That's my fault for not thinking before I spoke, and that quite enhances the roleplaying experience, because now I make it a point to think about what I'm saying before I click.

Unless they record that line three different ways, and know when I mean to use that specific manner of speaking, Hawke will always say it to be mean. "Let me guess: you're an idiot" will always come out as douche-y as I can imagine.

As a side note: yes, every Origin had a last name, but unless you played one of the Nobles, it never came up outside of Character Creation. In fact, for me the only time it ever came up was to say "You're Bryce and Eleanor Cousland's youngest, aren't you?" and I was perfectly fine with that. Being called Hawke every time someone acknowledges me serves to remind me that I am Hawke. I am not MY character. I am Hawke.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Morroian wrote...

DA2 is a different game to DAO not a continuation. You now go into the game with an understanding that Hawke is to some extent a preset character. 

I don't see why I would.  I certainly don't have that understanding now, and I'm not going to until a BioWare developer says so explicitly.

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I don't see why I would.  I certainly don't have that understanding now, and I'm not going to until a BioWare developer says so explicitly.

The degree to which you think VO defines a character, I would think, is the degree to which you think you ought to think Hawke is a fixed character. I think that in essence is the view being espoused.

As a total aside, I think the reason why we disagree fairly often is that we're on opposite sides of the part-whole debate. But I'm going to take that to PM once I have the free time since I think there's a good side conversation to be had. Just as a heads up.

[naumutroi]

Grommash94 wrote...

naumutroi wrote...

based upon what i have seen here in the forums i would dare say that all of us here would be better writers for the new DAO then the jobronni's they got working on DAO2

Considering all those 'jobronnis' brought us DA:O, probably not.

well it is about continuity and making sense of the story, its world and caring about  the character.  I am all for VO and improving graphics and improving combat systems blah blah....blah. but all of these things mean nothing without a compelling story. It all begins with the story. All the other stuff just flesh out the story and adds to the experience. The story needs to be also flexable enough to give the player a sense of ownership and immersion. Thus far i have not seen much as to how their new story will relate to the original one or give us the sense of ownership and immersion.  Many in the forums have presented some good ideas and some not so good ideaas.   But the bottom line is we the players care about our created character and took much effort to create him or her.  We were given the impression that the DA series will focus on our created Hero. In the interactions with one of the villains it is alluded that our Hero's coming was fortold as the Chosen One. There would not have been as many comments about the changes and about Hawke if we the player's did not care and were not passionate about the game. On the money line I would be sympathetic to all of this concern because if there is a big enough backlash the player's will not buy the product or not enough will buy the product which hurts the bottom line of making a profit and in these troubled economic times when companies and even video game companies are feeling the crunch putting out a product that ******'s off your core audience is not smart business.

[Grommash94]

naumutroi wrote...

Grommash94 wrote...

naumutroi wrote...

based upon what i have seen here in the forums i would dare say that all of us here would be better writers for the new DAO then the jobronni's they got working on DAO2

Considering all those 'jobronnis' brought us DA:O, probably not.

well it is about continuity and making sense of the story, its world and caring about  the character.  I am all for VO and improving graphics and improving combat systems blah blah....blah. but all of these things mean nothing without a compelling story. It all begins with the story. All the other stuff just flesh out the story and adds to the experience. The story needs to be also flexable enough to give the player a sense of ownership and immersion. Thus far i have not seen much as to how their new story will relate to the original one or give us the sense of ownership and immersion.  Many in the forums have presented some good ideas and some not so good ideaas.   But the bottom line is we the players care about our created character and took much effort to create him or her.  We were given the impression that the DA series will focus on our created Hero. In the interactions with one of the villains it is alluded that our Hero's coming was fortold as the Chosen One. There would not have been as many comments about the changes and about Hawke if we the player's did not care and were not passionate about the game. On the money line I would be sympathetic to all of this concern because if there is a big enough backlash the player's will not buy the product or not enough will buy the product which hurts the bottom line of making a profit and in these troubled economic times when companies and even video game companies are feeling the crunch putting out a product that ******'s off your core audience is not smart business.

No, we weren't. It was stated multiple times that Dragon Age is a franchise, not like Mass Effect which is a series.

Sort of like The Hobbit, Silmarillion, and the actual LOTR series. A franchise, sort of related, but not about the same characters.

[naumutroi]

Prof Tolkien fleshed out that world of Middle Earth in great detail and The Hobbit, the prequel of Lord of the Rings was connected. And what Prof Tolkien did not write in detail in the novels it is stated in the appendicies of the things that happened outside of the main  story. Silmarillion also connects to the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings since it is essentially the middle part that fills in the gap between the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings and it also serves as a prequel as well by telling of the events before the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings. It is one huge epic story divided into several books. Tolkien's publisher requested a sequel to The Hobbit, and Tolkien sent them an early draft of The Silmarillion. But through a misunderstanding, the publisher rejected the draft without fully reading it, with the result that Tolkien began work on "A Long Expected Party", the first chapter of what he described at the time as "a new story about Hobbits", which became The Lord of the Rings. The Silmarillion comprises five parts. The first part, Ainulindalë, tells of the creation of Eä, the "world that is". Valaquenta, the second part, gives a description of the Valar and Maiar, the supernatural powers in Eä. The next section, Quenta Silmarillion, which forms the bulk of the collection, chronicles the history of the events before and during the First Age, including the wars over the Silmarils which gave the book its title. The fourth part, Akallabêth, relates the history of the Downfall of Númenor and its people that connects it to King Aragorn, which takes place in the Second Age. The final part, Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age, is a brief account of the circumstances which led to and were presented in The Lord of the Rings. The Silmarillion is meant to have been translated from Bilbo's three-volume Translations from the Elvish, which he wrote while at Rivendell after his birthday in the opening chapter of Lord of the Rings: the Fellowship of the Ring.  In Lord of the Rings and in the film version there are referemces to the Hobbit and the Silmarillion.  As you see, continuity not "SORTA CONNECTED". Everything connecting to everything else. Bilbo is in the Hobbit and in Lord of the Rings as is Gandalf....same characters.  In fact Gandalf appears in The Hobbit, Lord of the Rings and Silmarillion. King Aragorn's infamous ancestor and to whom he resembled, .Isildur appeared in or was referenced in The Lord of the RIngs, Simarillion and the Unfinished Tales.  The events of the previous effecting the events that come after. Where is all of that in DA2 in relation to DA1?????

Modifié par naumutroi, 16 juillet 2010 - 01:12 .

[Riona45]

tbsking wrote...
Within the limits set for us, it was very possible to come up with a unique character. The limits being imposed in DA2, however, will necessarily make it even more difficult to create a unique character. Though I am loathe to use this analogy, look at Mass Effect. You could really only play a nice Shepard or a mean Shepard, male or female.

These canards are getting old, fast.  The developers have stated more than once that Hawke is a less defined character than Shepard.  Since you don't know what the limits in DA2 are going to be, you simply cannot declare that it will be very difficult (or impossible) to create a unique character.

Modifié par Riona45, 16 juillet 2010 - 01:05 .

[Jimmy Fury]

tbsking wrote...
I recall those clusters posted pages back, and I recall disagreeing completely. You are right in that you could only play 3 races in DAO. Now you get to play as one. Thank you for stating my point. You're options are limited.

If it wasn't your intent then I apologize but I was under the impression that you considered the racial limitation to be something new and radically different than was present in origins. My point was that it isn't it's just a different form of the same limitation that already existed.

So here's a question. Have you played the same origin more than once?
If so, were those characters always exactly the same or were they different in many ways?
If they were different, then why must 1 origin be seen as riobbing us of customization?

If anything by not having 5 other origin campaigns it will free up space for that 1 origin to produce a wider variety of characters.

As a side note: yes, every Origin had a last name, but unless you played one of the Nobles, it never came up outside of Character Creation. In fact, for me the only time it ever came up was to say "You're Bryce and Eleanor Cousland's youngest, aren't you?" and I was perfectly fine with that. Being called Hawke every time someone acknowledges me serves to remind me that I am Hawke. I am not MY character. I am Hawke.

I still don't, and don't think i ever will, understand why these must be such mutually exclusive concepts. I say "My Cousland" in the exact same fashion as i say "My Shepard" so playing "My Hawke" won't change anything at all for me.

[Riona45]

Davasar wrote...
The lowest common denominator in this case is "make money no matter what and who cares what happens".  Thats the kind of attitude that caused the financial crisis and the gulf oil spill.

That's just repugnant, comparing people who disagree with you about a video game to people who caused the recession and those who caused one of the worst enviromental disasters in recent memory.

Modifié par Riona45, 16 juillet 2010 - 01:08 .

[Grommash94]

naumutroi wrote...

Prof Tolkien fleshed out that world of Middle Earth in great detail and The Hobbit, the prequel of Lord of the Rings was connected. And what Prof Tolkien did not write in detail in the novels it is stated in the appendicies of the things that happened outside of the main  story. Silmarillion also connects to the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings since it is essentially the middle part that fills in the gap between the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings and it also serves as a prequel as well by telling of the events before the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings. It is one huge epic story divided into several books. Tolkien's publisher requested a sequel to The Hobbit, and Tolkien sent them an early draft of The Silmarillion. But through a misunderstanding, the publisher rejected the draft without fully reading it, with the result that Tolkien began work on "A Long Expected Party", the first chapter of what he described at the time as "a new story about Hobbits", which became The Lord of the Rings. The Silmarillion comprises five parts. The first part, Ainulindalë, tells of the creation of Eä, the "world that is". Valaquenta, the second part, gives a description of the Valar and Maiar, the supernatural powers in Eä. The next section, Quenta Silmarillion, which forms the bulk of the collection, chronicles the history of the events before and during the First Age, including the wars over the Silmarils which gave the book its title. The fourth part, Akallabêth, relates the history of the Downfall of Númenor and its people that connects it to King Aragorn, which takes place in the Second Age. The final part, Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age, is a brief account of the circumstances which led to and were presented in The Lord of the Rings. The Silmarillion is meant to have been translated from Bilbo's three-volume Translations from the Elvish, which he wrote while at Rivendell after his birthday in the opening chapter of Lord of the Rings: the Fellowship of the Ring.  In Lord of the Rings and in the film version there are referemces to the Hobbit and the Silmarillion.  As you see, continuity. Everything connecting to everything else. The events of the previous effecting the events that come after. Where is all of that in DA2 in relation to DA1?????

Your actions DO have an effect on DA2. Who becomes the king of Ferelden, did the warden die...all those will probably be addressed, I have no doubt. No need to explain the Silmarillion to me btw, big Tolkien fan here 

[Davasar]

Riona45 wrote...

Davasar wrote...
The lowest common denominator in this case is "make money no matter what and who cares what happens".  Thats the kind of attitude that caused the financial crisis and the gulf oil spill.

That's just repugnant, comparing people who disagree with you about a video game to people who caused the recession and those who caused one of the worst enviromental disasters in recent memory.

Above. 

Read.

Dont cherry pick.

[naumutroi]

I am a big fan of Prof Tolkien also. He was a genius.

[joriandrake]

Grommash94 wrote...

Gjefflin wrote...

Jimmy Fury wrote...

tbsking wrote...
The Warden in DAO was entirely your own character. With certain options limited, and with Hawke being voiced, he simply won't be your own character; he will be Hawke.

The only difference between The Warden and Hawke is that Hawke can't be an elf or a dwarf. That's it. That's all we know. I get why people are put off by the idea that they'll lose control of the character but we have no idea if we will or not.

...Or a female.

No Hawke can be a female.

true, human female

[Riona45]

Davasar wrote...

Above. 

Read.

Dont cherry pick.

Why, does the truth hurt?

I read the entire post where that came from.  It didn't make much sense--In Exile was basically just telling you not to be elitist and didn't even mention making money.  You responded by accusing that poster of having a mode of thought that favors making cold hard cash over everything else:

So wait...you're saying that only looking to get money at the cost of everything else is a way to go? [No he didn't!]  I'm sorry, but looking toward integrity and loyalty is superior.

Modifié par Riona45, 16 juillet 2010 - 01:30 .

[naumutroi]

i hope Hawke has a dog. i missed not having dog around in DA: Awakenings.

[Davasar]

In Exile wrote...

By leaving their loyal fanbase behind, they will certainly enjoy the
fickle mass market when the next new shiny comes along.

"The next new shiny" is derogative and insulting and suggests a preference for the superficial over the concrete. The post that you are responding to talked spoke about the changes as if they made the game simpler, and the mass appeal was spoken as if it was inherently a bad thing.

None of that has very much to do with money and quite a lot to do with presumptions about a niche market.

Cutting out features or "streamlning" just to make a fast buck flies
in the face of basic marketing:  keep your target audience and attract
more by improvement of existing product and adding a few new features. 
You dont do it by changing basic fundamentals.

But they are not cutting out features. It's not as if they're giving you DA2: now with less NPCs, gameplay and content!

They're replacing silent PCs with VO, which is dramatically more expensive (because aside from the dialogue recording, the VA costs, the QA, the rendering of the speech for the PC they are probably adding cut-scene oriented action, which itself needs to be rendered and is costly).

They're replacing features, but whether or not that's the core...

Moreover, if you think DA:O as is represents the entire and actual taste of the core market, well, this game sold comparably to ME. So this IS the mass market. There is overwhelming evidence the changes are not being made purely on financial grounds.

First off, ME and DAO are not necessarily the same target audience, there are plenty of people that didnt like the way ME played, but did like the way DAO played (and vice versa).  Trying to lump those markets together as exactly the same?  I think not.

It IS inherently a bad thing when the very features that attracted people to the game are the very ones being replaced.  Are you trying to say that they want to drive fans away with non-purchases?  Regardless, they are doing a good job of it.

The "old school gamers" (and loath to lump people together like that, but I have to guess) are sick and tired of quality and good features being thrown out for something new and shiny.

But, I suppose it's just the nature of things.

But you do point something out.  If they spend a lot of money on voice acting, like with say, 5-6 responses every so often, they will spend a lot on the VO. 

But, if they want to save money and produce the exact same product to the people who will keep their blinders on to things being lacking in the game (and they may be counting on that), and buy it anyway, which choice do you think Bioware will make?  They are a gaming company, and with EA taskmasters being them, they are there to make money...now more then ever. 

To think less then optimistic on this is being willfully naive.

And I am sorry if you are offended by the truth, but saying things as they are and being blunt is often lacking in discorse.  I do it because at least you get to the point faster.

The mass market DOES jump from one thing to another and when it comes to entertainment, they want it NOW and they want the next, newest, biggest thing.  They have gamer A.D.D. or something.  I am not wrong in this, and everyone knows it.  (if you arent one of these A.D.D. gamers, then you have no need to be offended).  It's happened in the market time and time and time and time again.  So many times it would be impossible to list them all.

Now tell me quality wont go down with this sort of mentality when trying to appeal to this kind of audience.

You might even be able to find one, two or even a few examples, but it would be the exception, rather then the rule as the examples you bring would be outnumbered by scores of others showing my point.

Again, to think otherwise is being willfully naive.

Modifié par Davasar, 16 juillet 2010 - 01:45 .

[Jimmy Fury]

Davasar wrote...
First off, ME and DAO are not necessarily the same target audience, there are plenty of people that didnt like the way ME played, but did like the way DAO played (and vice versa).  Trying to lump those markets together as exactly the same?  I think not.

From a marketing perspective they can be lumped together in at least three ways:
1. The portion of the market likely to purchase BioWare games.
2: Sci-Fi / Fantasy Fans
3: Character Oriented Game players

It IS inherently a bad thing when the very features that attracted people to the game are the very ones being replaced.  Are you trying to say that they want to drive fans away with non-purchases?  Regardless, they are doing a good job of it.

That presumes that everyone was attracted to the same features which is not true. It's clearly not true based on the threads in this forum. Look around. This thread is debating the merits of character control and many of the arguments suggest control should be the focus at the expense of everything else.
Head over to the screenshots thread and it's a debate over the merits of graphics and many of the arguments suggest graphics should be the focus at the expense of everything else.
Try some of the other Hawke-Hate threads and you'll see arguments about how continuing the very same story from Origins should take precedence over everything else.
Romance, combat, strategy, etc. etc. etc. There is a thread for every single aspect of DAO and in every single one someone is arguing that one specific aspect is what drew everyone to the game and how that aspect and that aspect alone should be the focus of DA2.
It's very clear that not everyone was attracted to the same features.

The "old school gamers" (and loath to lump people together like that, but I have to guess) are sick and tired of quality and good features being thrown out for something new and shiny.

Are they? They keep buying games. If every company is doing the exact same thing and throwing out all of the quality, throwing out all of the good features, alienating all of the "old school gamers", and have been doing that for years now... how are there any "old school gamers" left?

Now tell me quality wont go down with this sort of mentality when trying to appeal to this kind of audience.
You might even be able to find one, two or even a few examples, but it would be the exception, rather then the rule as the examples you bring would be outnumbered by scores of others showing my point.

So... you think that marketing games to a segment of the audience that wants "new and shiny" quality will decrease? Wouldn't it logically increase since quality is what makes something shiny? Again, check out the screenshot thread, people are breathing fire over the fact that the DA2 screenshots don't look like Witcher 2. They're furious and preaching doom because of a perceived lack of quality.
So again, it comes down to your definition of "quality game" for some that's graphics, for some that's control, for some that's combat, I'm in the "quality=good story" camp myself.'
But then I know my opinion is not universal.

Modifié par Jimmy Fury, 16 juillet 2010 - 02:25 .