454 réponses à ce sujet

[17thknight]

mllrthyme wrote...

Riona45 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...


And "They would rather sell to people who don't even know what Baldur's Gate is." is really kind of silly. Bio has no reason to care if you've heard of a game that came out twelve years ago.

 
I was thinking the same thing.  And, even as someone who loved the BG series, I have to admit that games have changed a lot since then (often for the better).

Agreed.  I liked BG1 & 2, but I don't want another game just like it.  If that's the case, I'll save my money and play BG again.  However, I do like to see the genre that I enjoy evolve into something better and different.

BTW I googled otaku and it is a "Japanese word used to refer to people with obsessive interests, particularly anime, manga, and video games..."

At no point was arguing for another Badlur's Gate. But they sold DA:O as the spiritual successor to BG and that meant something. It meant the game would have a certain tone, that it would have a certain level of RPG...um...hardcoreness...for lack of a better word. It means stats, it means long dialogue, it means a lot of things.

All in all, it means RPG's that lean more towards the Pen and Paper and further away from being a movie.

My point in their target demographic is that they were billing DA:O as the spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate. There's a target audience with that statement. They are not targeting those same people with DA2.

[17thknight]

therewasatime wrote...

That's a wide generalization. Not every console-player is a casual-gamer who wants simplified games. I own a XBox 360 for gaming cause I don't want to deal with hardware-updates on the PC-site anymore. Do I know Baldur's Gate? Sure, one of my favorite games ever.

No they aren't all casual. I own a PS3 and a 360. That isn't the point. The point is that the "casual" market is significantly larger than the hardcore market, and the way to appeal to these people is to, sadly, dumb down a game. They don't want complex stats and deep character interaction, that want a "cinematic" experience.

IE= they think RPGs are meant to be watched, not role-played. People who think  like that are the new targets of RPG developers.

Hell, just look at Final Fantasy 13. Even Square is targeting this market.

[Arttis]

They need to make money you know.

[SDNcN]

Arttis wrote...

I am Otaku now.

Then welcome to your future.
http://www.switched....ual-girlfriend/

[17thknight]

Arttis wrote...

They need to make money you know.

They made money with the original. Quite a lot. 

They made money with Baldur's Gate 1 and 2.

[WilliamShatner]

therewasatime wrote...

17thknight wrote...

....They are solely concerned with the console market of casual gamers. That's it. They really don't give a damn about the people who bought it specifically because it was tagged as "The Spiritual Successor to Baldur's Gate."

They would rather sell to people who don't even know what Baldur's Gate is.

Welcome to the future of Bioware.

That's a wide generalization. Not every console-player is a casual-gamer who wants simplified games. I own a XBox 360 for gaming cause I don't want to deal with hardware-updates on the PC-site anymore. Do I know Baldur's Gate? Sure, one of my favorite games ever.

The most "casual gamers" are on PC.  Ask PopCap.

[mllrthyme]

17thknight wrote...

mllrthyme wrote...

Riona45 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...


And "They would rather sell to people who don't even know what Baldur's Gate is." is really kind of silly. Bio has no reason to care if you've heard of a game that came out twelve years ago.

 
I was thinking the same thing.  And, even as someone who loved the BG series, I have to admit that games have changed a lot since then (often for the better).

Agreed.  I liked BG1 & 2, but I don't want another game just like it.  If that's the case, I'll save my money and play BG again.  However, I do like to see the genre that I enjoy evolve into something better and different.

BTW I googled otaku and it is a "Japanese word used to refer to people with obsessive interests, particularly anime, manga, and video games..."

At no point was arguing for another Badlur's Gate. But they sold DA:O as the spiritual successor to BG and that meant something. It meant the game would have a certain tone, that it would have a certain level of RPG...um...hardcoreness...for lack of a better word. It means stats, it means long dialogue, it means a lot of things.

All in all, it means RPG's that lean more towards the Pen and Paper and further away from being a movie.

My point in their target demographic is that they were billing DA:O as the spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate. There's a target audience with that statement. They are not targeting those same people with DA2.

Then it's probably a good thing that they haven't mentioned anything about BG in relation to DA2 (at least not to my knowledge).

[WilliamShatner]

17thknight wrote...

Arttis wrote...

They need to make money you know.

They made money with the original. Quite a lot. 

They made money with Baldur's Gate 1 and 2.

BioWare could make a new old-school isometric RPG as one of their "smaller games".  Without the need for full voice acting, animation and fancy graphics, they could pump that out for what - couple of million?  Put it on steam and XBL for $15 and it would sell really well, I'd guess.

[Arttis]

It costs a ton to make games...

They may get a few million then they still need to pay everyone...and so on...

[WilliamShatner]

Arttis wrote...

It costs a ton to make games...
They may get a few million then they still need to pay everyone...and so on...

They cost a pittance compared to movies.

A AAA blockbuster game costs 20-30 million.  Pocket change for a blockbuster movie.

And a 2D isometic game would not cost a lot in this day and age.  It wouldn't need the expensive parts of modern gaming - animation, shiny 3D graphics and levels, full voice acting. 

[Arttis]

A movie could also only cost 25k.......you know some movies that only cost about that much have brought in billions before.

[17thknight]

mllrthyme wrote...

Then it's probably a good thing that they haven't mentioned anything about BG in relation to DA2 (at least not to my knowledge).

Exactly. They have abandoned the old demographic in favor of the casual console gamers. They absolutely no interest in a "hardcore" or "pen and paper feeling" rpg. They want people who dislike stats, who want a movie, and that's it.

[Lintanis]

Arttis wrote...

They need to make money you know.

Chuck norris agrees 

[Riona45]

17thknight wrote...

Exactly. They have abandoned the old demographic in favor of the casual console gamers. They absolutely no interest in a "hardcore" or "pen and paper feeling" rpg. They want people who dislike stats, who want a movie, and that's it.

I play pen and paper games, and DA:O doesn't really feel like a pen and paper game to me.  Then again, I don't think it's necessarily "better" for a video game to try to simulate one.  They are really two very different beasts.

[mllrthyme]

17thknight wrote...

mllrthyme wrote...

Then it's probably a good thing that they haven't mentioned anything about BG in relation to DA2 (at least not to my knowledge).

Exactly. They have abandoned the old demographic in favor of the casual console gamers. They absolutely no interest in a "hardcore" or "pen and paper feeling" rpg. They want people who dislike stats, who want a movie, and that's it.

 
It's my understanding that pen and paper games are based off of D&D rules.   DA:O was not based on D&D, so I believe it's fair to say that right there is a change in the demographic.  And I'm not exactly sure what all it takes to be a "hardcore" rpg as there are so many different aspects to an rpg that people enjoy.

[joriandrake]

SDNcN wrote...

Arttis wrote...

I am Otaku now.

Then welcome to your future.
http://www.switched....ual-girlfriend/

if you don't exactly know what otaku means then don't generalize and insult all of them

[WilliamShatner]

Arttis wrote...

A movie could also only cost 25k.......you know some movies that only cost about that much have brought in billions before.

25k wouldn't cover the catering on a blockbuster movie. 

Comparing like to like, a blockbuster movie and AAA game - there is no comparison.  The most expensive game ever made is GTA IV which cost $100 million.  T2 cost $100 million - twenty years ago.

I definitely tink there's a market out there for more traditional games with a low budget sold at a budget price.  Torchlight proved this to a certain extent.  I wish BioWare would test the waters. but they seem more interested in following trends than trailblazing nowadays.  I would certainly rather than them have their smaller teams work on something like what I suggested rather than a flash or iPhone game.

[Majin Paul]

I agree with this thread.

I think DA2 will be amazing.

[17thknight]

Riona45 wrote...

17thknight wrote...

Exactly. They have abandoned the old demographic in favor of the casual console gamers. They absolutely no interest in a "hardcore" or "pen and paper feeling" rpg. They want people who dislike stats, who want a movie, and that's it.

I play pen and paper games, and DA:O doesn't really feel like a pen and paper game to me.  Then again, I don't think it's necessarily "better" for a video game to try to simulate one.  They are really two very different beasts.

That isn't my point. You're all just playing semantics and dancing aroudn what I'm saying. There is a demographic that likes hardcore rpg's. They are the people who played the Dark Isle RPG's. They played Fallout and Baldur's Gate. They like stat-based games, where you are the character, and you control who that character is. Just like pen and paper rpg's.

Final Fantasy 13 is the culmination of every BAD decision made in RPG development. More "cinematic" and less gameplay. It literally involves you running forward, and then clicking "autobattle" and then running forward "auto battle" 10 minute cutscene, repeat.

This is the antithesis of everything Baldur's Gate and DA:O were. Yet it's the direction many RPG's and series are moving to appeal to the casual gamers, who dont' want stats, they don't want involved rpg stories, they just want a movie with a few button presses.

How many times have we heard "cinematic" in conjunction with an RPG? It is not a good thing to take the "role-playing" out of the roleplaying game.

[Kenrae]

17thknight wrote...

Riona45 wrote...
I play pen and paper games, and DA:O doesn't really feel like a pen and paper game to me.  Then again, I don't think it's necessarily "better" for a video game to try to simulate one.  They are really two very different beasts.

That isn't my point. You're all just playing semantics and dancing aroudn what I'm saying. There is a demographic that likes hardcore rpg's. They are the people who played the Dark Isle RPG's. They played Fallout and Baldur's Gate. They like stat-based games, where you are the character, and you control who that character is. Just like pen and paper rpg's.

I play pen and paper rpg's, but I prefer stat-light ones. Not everything is d&d.

Final Fantasy 13 is the culmination of every BAD decision made in RPG development. More "cinematic" and less gameplay. It literally involves you running forward, and then clicking "autobattle" and then running forward "auto battle" 10 minute cutscene, repeat.

This is the antithesis of everything Baldur's Gate and DA:O were. Yet it's the direction many RPG's and series are moving to appeal to the casual gamers, who dont' want stats, they don't want involved rpg stories, they just want a movie with a few button presses.

Having stats and having involved stories are two completely different things. I don't mind that much about stats, I care about stories.
I agree about FF13 though.

How many times have we heard "cinematic" in conjunction with an RPG? It is not a good thing to take the "role-playing" out of the roleplaying game.

Roleplaying isn't about having more STR or INT, or being one class or another (another thing I hate, class based systems). It's about choices, about developing a character and the interactions with other characters. That can be made in a cinematic fashion on computer games. Cinematic in the way Bioware is doing, for conversations, not having a cutscene every two minutes, of course.

By the way, no computer game has really felt like a pen and paper game to me, ever.

[Arrtis]

I thought roleplaying was playing a role of a character.SO technically all Games that involve you playing a character is a Roleplaying game.

[Gaxhung]

DAO was quite cinematic right? The thought "interactive movie" did cross my mind while playing at some point. Was BG even close to DAO "cinematic" wise? Stat wise I think DAO, ME1 (I dont have ME2) is fine, just complex enough and not OVER complicated. I hated WoW's juggle of stats from gear, character stats, crafting items, it is too complex, they do it so people stay hooked and keep playing right? Its like a mini game for accountants. DA do that, what for?

[LPPrince]

DAO was the spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate.



DA2 was never said to be the spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate.



So I don't see the problem here.

[Arrtis]

People want something they can not have.That is the problem.

[Metalunatic]

Bratt1204 wrote...

Therumancer wrote...

Jasuke34 wrote...

I just want to say to the devs to keep their hearts up despite all the flak they are getting about the changes to DA2. While I admit I am a little concerned about the changes, I trust that Bioware will continue to make the same great games they always have. Don't get discourage because of all the flames you are receiving. You have made great games and you will continue to do so. Keep up the amazing work.

To everyone else, please support the devs. They work hard to provide us with awesome entertainment. Be glad that they are devoted to such excellence.

I don't mean to fill the forum with more clutter, but I felt that the devs need some support and encouragement after all the junk I have read people saying about them.

Once again, Keep up the amazing work devs!

 Actually, I don't think "we" want the Devs to keep their hearts up, but to abort this project and work on a proper sequel to "Dragon Age: Origins". If they are becoming disheartened, well... that's the point of feedback sometimes. My big fear right now is that the reaction to this news is going to be dismissed as general internet negativity, with people screaming about how this is somehow getting similar to the "No Mutants Allowed" schtick did for "Fallout".

 To put things into perspective, "Dragon Age: Origins" was a game that was popular for it's amazing depth of character customization, up to and including multiple origin stories for the character which was a really incredible thing. It was also a true RPG with stat allocation, and skill and abillity selection, even if it was not the deepest system of it's kind to ever be created. All of these things were praised by RPG fans. 

 From what has been said by the Devs, and there is no way to "misunderstand" these things the game is both being simplified, and character generation/selection is also being greatly limited. Neither of these things are good by the standards of most RPG players. 

 It should be noted that the simplification of "Mass Effect" in it's sequel was not an unmitigated success as is believed. Almost from the beginning there were tons of complaints from people who did not like the fact that they turned it into a slightly customizable shooter with a lot of cut scenes. While a good game, and one I would have tried at some point, as it was it was not something I would have budgeted money for so I could run right out and get a collector's edition on day #1. I am also far from being alone in this respect. 

 Bioware said a lot of the same things about "Mass Effect 2" while keeping the details close to their chest. A lot of people like me who took a "trust Bioware" approach wound up being seriously disappointed with the results. The game barely had any remaining RPG elements. They didn't improve itemization and inventory, they wound up removing it outright. Where the old vehicle sections were boring, they managed to both make hunting minerals MORE boring, and when they finally released vehicle sections (as a free download) they turned it into what amounts to a platformer where your doing presician jumping with your tank. Heck, with "Firewalker" you can't even save game during missions, which makes the thing like bloody "Mario Brothers" since dying makes you restart the level. Sorry, that is *NOT* an RPG. You might not want to believe me, but there are a LOT of people who think exactly like I do, and I think the backlash Bioware is receiving is a sign of this, and they are probably surprised by the vehemence
due to the simple fact that they managed to convince themselves that people really did universally love what they did with "Mass Effect 2" when it's simply not true. A lot of their sales were due to a level of trust and support of the "Bioware" name which has now taken a hit at least in the eyes of their RPG fans who are becoming considerably
more cynical. 

 At any rate I got the impression that "Dragon Age" was a bigger success than they anticipated. A lot of what they are doing with the "sequel" seems to be a rush job, justified by people's love of the simplification of "Mass Effect". I mean I don't think "Origins" is even a year old yet, and we still have DLC being made for it. This whole "Hawke" thing seems like a quick cash in project, I'd expect a proper sequel to "Origins" to take years to develop, and just what they have said so far shows that massive corners are apparently being cut compared to the original to make this relatively quick release practical. 

 A lot of fans have been wondering how "Bioware" could keep up the quality of their RPGs with so many balls in the air at once. I mean simultaneously developing for "Dragon Age", "Mass Effect", and a big-budget MMORPG is enough to strain anyone, especially if they decide to try and release something quickly. Simply put "Dragon Age 2" is a ball that is about to hit the ground... and really I think they need to grab it and get it on track. Everything from the somewhat limited concept to the reduced options to the simplified combat and character development is a strike against it, not in it's favor as Bioware seemed to think we'd take it. Sorry but having a voice actor does not equal all of the game play and RPG elements being removed... and heck, there is absolutly no reason why multiple voice actors could not be used based on differant origins and so on. Games like "Saint's Row 2" have hours of dialogue and had multiple voice actors doing everything for the main character, you'd select your character's Voice/VA as part of the customization process. There is no reason at all why the same cannot be done here. What's more anyone who claims voice actors are hugely expensive within these budgets is a bit mistaken, I've read stuff on voice actors who do Anime and computer games and such over the years (producing hours upon hours of material) and while they make a living at it, it doesn't seem like they are exactly cruising around in Lamborginis.... the point being that while the main character having a voice is not a bad thing, it is not so much of an advantage that it excuses all of these sacrifices, especially seeing as there is no reason to have one and only one "protaganist" voice actor.

 Basically my suggestion is that they should scrap "Hawke" and what they have so far entirely. I'm sure a lot of the assets in terms of voice, graphics, locations, etc... can be salvaged and built into another game which means they wouldn't be losing everything. The game is currently slotted for a release date in 8 months, this wouldn't be the first game to see a release date delay of a year or so, so add another year to this and aim for March of 2012 and produce a quallity sequel that genuinely follows in the footsteps of "Origins". 

 Bioware dropped their information for feedback, they got it, no cards they might be keeping close to their chest are likely to overcome the problems people have with what has been clearly stated so far. I think Bioware needs to stop acting all hurt because the feedback wasn't what they expected, and adapt to their customers.    


 

First of all - awesome post. I cannot agree with your sentiments more. Many DA:O feel exactly the same as you do.

Hats off to your eloquence.

This.