265 réponses à ce sujet

[errant_knight]

Games4ever wrote...

Just don't understand why they have this forum then,if they don't care anyway what fans say
Someone remind me, what's the point?

There isn't one. No, I take that back. It keeps people around to be sold DLC, expansions, and new games, that is those who don't mind being told that they're unimportant and potentially rabid.

Modifié par errant_knight, 29 juillet 2010 - 12:40 .

[Games4ever]

Better understand now why Rockstar don't have a forum where fans can talk and ask questions to them,maybe they care too much about what fans say online :-)

Modifié par Games4ever, 29 juillet 2010 - 12:31 .

[errant_knight]

SDNcN wrote...

So people are really surprised a company wants to increase their profits and they don't make decisions based off opinions of small but vocal groups on the internet? Wow.

 No, we're suprised that (a) they think so little of their own product as to completely remake it after less than a year, ( they think it's a good idea to tell people that their opinions of the product they pay for are meaningless, and © that it doesn't occur to Mr. Z. that manipulation works better when you don't actually tell people that you're doing it.

Modifié par errant_knight, 29 juillet 2010 - 12:30 .

[Azdeus]

Don't quite get how he can pay more attention to feedback from someone that gets payed to play their game rather than someone that pays to play the game, but I sort of pointed that out a few pages back.

[Games4ever]

Azdeus wrote...

Don't quite get how he can pay more attention to feedback from someone that gets payed to play their game rather than someone that pays to play the game, but I sort of pointed that out a few pages back.

You're right, very hard to understand
maybe someone from Bioware can explain? nah never mind

[errant_knight]

Games4ever wrote...

Azdeus wrote...

Don't quite get how he can pay more attention to feedback from someone that gets payed to play their game rather than someone that pays to play the game, but I sort of pointed that out a few pages back.

You're right, very hard to understand
maybe someone from Bioware can explain? nah never mind

Whatever....

[errant_knight]

I do wonder if the PR department are huddled under their desks passing a bottle of single malt around....

[Azdeus]

*Grin* Probably drinking Absinthe with the art deparment!

[Haexpane]

Azdeus wrote...

Don't quite get how he can pay more attention to feedback from someone that gets payed to play their game rather than someone that pays to play the game, but I sort of pointed that out a few pages back.

His rationale, the reviews are better organized and easier to read and better written.

The counterpoint, he specifically mentions the IGN review format, so as far as quality writing goes... umm...

"LOL ORCS Nerds!  Who cares!"  - IGN.com
Literary Journalism at it's finest?

Seriously tho, no one expects Bioware to read every forum post, or even to post here regularly.  

It's just a little off putting that fans of the game are so easily dismissed as negative noise that provides no value.

But it's a reality.  Dragon Age 2 is a clear indicator to me that fan feedback is mostly irrelevant to Bioware.   I guess I can respect that they are being honest about it now?  even if it wasn't intentionally honest?

All I really care about is the actual game.   I don't care if the developer reads IGN or EDGE or whatever.
But every bit of info about DA2 so far has made me less likely to buy the game.

[SDNcN]

errant_knight wrote...

SDNcN wrote...

So people are really surprised a company wants to increase their profits and they don't make decisions based off opinions of small but vocal groups on the internet? Wow.

 No, we're suprised that (a) they think so little of their own product as to completely remake it after less than a year, ( they think it's a good idea to tell people that their opinions of the product they pay for are meaningless, and © that it doesn't occur to Mr. Z. that manipulation works better when you don't actually tell people that you're doing it.

A) They are being completely honest about the game's shortcomings and are attempting to make their next game better. If they made the exact same game as Origins, I'm sure you would buy it, but I'm pretty sure a number of fans would also rather they just go back to making games on the infinity engine -- regardless of how sucessful those games would be. Letting other people make decisions on how you run your business isn't the best idea.

No, just that opinions expressed by small but loud groups on the internet won't entirely sway game design or how they run their bussiness.

C) They are making changes they believe are for the best and are being completely open about it, but because you dislike they changes they are making they are really just trying to decieve everyone. Makes perfect sense.

[Azdeus]

Haexpane wrote...

Azdeus wrote...

Don't quite get how he can pay more attention to feedback from someone that gets payed to play their game rather than someone that pays to play the game, but I sort of pointed that out a few pages back.

His rationale, the reviews are better organized and easier to read and better written.

The counterpoint, he specifically mentions the IGN review format, so as far as quality writing goes... umm...

"LOL ORCS Nerds!  Who cares!"  - IGN.com
Literary Journalism at it's finest?

Seriously tho, no one expects Bioware to read every forum post, or even to post here regularly.  

It's just a little off putting that fans of the game are so easily dismissed as negative noise that provides no value.

But it's a reality.  Dragon Age 2 is a clear indicator to me that fan feedback is mostly irrelevant to Bioware.   I guess I can respect that they are being honest about it now?  even if it wasn't intentionally honest?

All I really care about is the actual game.   I don't care if the developer reads IGN or EDGE or whatever.
But every bit of info about DA2 so far has made me less likely to buy the game.

He might have a point that they are better structured and organized, also probably(possibly) less grammatical errors. That said, reviewers as far as I've been told don't spend as much time/effort with a game as a paying customer; The IGN preview might've been irony on behalf of the writer, although poorly delivered.

I do like honesty on the part of the developers, I do prefer that over lipservice. Guess you'll have to look at the bright side of things. There are developers here reading, that much is noticeable - but how much of our input/feedback actually gets taken in is a question for them to answer more clearly. I can't tell due to not really following development cycles for either DAO or ME2.

I do actually care a bit where they get their feedback from, mostly since I myself have close to bugger all respect for ezines or whatever you want to call them. And I myself am not particularly happy about the revealed changes so far either.

[Haexpane]

SDNcN wrote...
  Letting other people make decisions on how you run your business isn't the best idea.
 

This is absolutely true.  However just because letting fans dictate business is not a good idea, does not mean the changes themselves are "better".

Its like sports.   Minnesota traded away Al Jefferson because they signed Darko Milicic.  No fan wanted that.  Does that make Minn a better team? We wont know until next year but I'd rather have Al Jeff, or at least trader him after he has more time to recover from knee problems.

Minn traded Al Jeff at his lowest possible value.   Remember this was a guy traded away to get Kevin Garnett.
Minn bought HIGH and sold LOW. 

Minn also shocked fans by drafting Johnny Flynn AND Ricky Rubio in the same draft.   Which many would say is a reason Rubio stayed in spain.  No fan wanted that.  

So letting fans make draft picks is a bad idea, but just because the draft picks that are made are not fan choices does not mean they are good picks.

Basically Bioware has set themselves up now.  They are hoping for 10million in sales, and drastically changed Dragon Age to do it.

If it works, well congrats to them.  The other potential is it wont work, and core Bioware fans will be put off, and casualtards will ignore it and go back to CODMW2.

Risk/reward I suppose.

I think for most of us core BW fans, it's just confusing when we see what types of changes they are doing. 

I understand they like the Shooting better in ME2.  But I thought ME1 was a much better game.  ME2 just has better graphics, but at the great sacrifice of very small levels and a zoomed in camera.

I can't even bring myself to finish ME2, it just feels like another cover shooter IMO, albeit one w/ high quality cutscenes.

[Grommash94]

Haexpane wrote...

SDNcN wrote...
  Letting other people make decisions on how you run your business isn't the best idea.
 

This is absolutely true.  However just because letting fans dictate business is not a good idea, does not mean the changes themselves are "better".

Its like sports.   Minnesota traded away Al Jefferson because they signed Darko Milicic.  No fan wanted that.  Does that make Minn a better team? We wont know until next year but I'd rather have Al Jeff, or at least trader him after he has more time to recover from knee problems.

Minn traded Al Jeff at his lowest possible value.   Remember this was a guy traded away to get Kevin Garnett.
Minn bought HIGH and sold LOW. 

Minn also shocked fans by drafting Johnny Flynn AND Ricky Rubio in the same draft.   Which many would say is a reason Rubio stayed in spain.  No fan wanted that.  

So letting fans make draft picks is a bad idea, but just because the draft picks that are made are not fan choices does not mean they are good picks.

Basically Bioware has set themselves up now.  They are hoping for 10million in sales, and drastically changed Dragon Age to do it.

If it works, well congrats to them.  The other potential is it wont work, and core Bioware fans will be put off, and casualtards will ignore it and go back to CODMW2.

Risk/reward I suppose.

I think for most of us core BW fans, it's just confusing when we see what types of changes they are doing. 

I understand they like the Shooting better in ME2.  But I thought ME1 was a much better game.  ME2 just has better graphics, but at the great sacrifice of very small levels and a zoomed in camera.

I can't even bring myself to finish ME2, it just feels like another cover shooter IMO, albeit one w/ high quality cutscenes.

There are a lot of fans that wanted a different art style and a voiced PC w/ dialogue wheel. It could be that BioWare was listening, but to different fans.

I really think the 10 mill was in regards to SW:TOR. Those sort of numbers aren't ever hoped for with single player RPGs, and are more for the MMO ball park.

[thenemesis77]

errant_knight wrote...

It would seem that the more you care, the less it matters, so.... Not a whole lot of point in talking about DA2. Especially since I have a feeling that all the reaction is part of a fairly peculiar marketing campaign. It's not like they didn't know that traditional RPG fans and people who care even a bit about continuity would be really upset by the changes. They just plain don't care. That being the case, my reaction to everything from this point will be 'whatever...'

very true, smart and deep story is not wanted in this day and age of shooters, thats just the facts.

[Bryy_Miller]

thenemesis77 wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

It would seem that the more you care, the less it matters, so.... Not a whole lot of point in talking about DA2. Especially since I have a feeling that all the reaction is part of a fairly peculiar marketing campaign. It's not like they didn't know that traditional RPG fans and people who care even a bit about continuity would be really upset by the changes. They just plain don't care. That being the case, my reaction to everything from this point will be 'whatever...'

very true, smart and deep story is not wanted in this day and age of shooters, thats just the facts.

So, you played the game already?

[Saibh]

I'd like to say again: the article does not say "we expect DA2 to sell 10 million copies". They said that's what they want from future releases. This can include DLC, SW:TOR, and DA2.

"We always joke that if we only do half as well as Blizzard on Star Wars: The Old Republic, we'll be quite satisfied."

"BioWare is currently working on continued DLC for Mass Effect 2. The studio has also announced Dragon Age 2 and Star Wars: The Old Republic for release in March 2011 and spring 2011, respectively."

EDIT: Okay now in bold print red so people stop screaming about it.

I could be wrong. But I'm pretty sure I'm not.

Modifié par Saibh, 29 juillet 2010 - 01:48 .

[SDNcN]

Grommash94 wrote...

There are a lot of fans that wanted a different art style and a voiced PC w/ dialogue wheel. It could be that BioWare was listening, but to different fans.

I don't think there was anyone who really asked for a different artstyle, just that people recognized there was a conflict visually and thematically over the game being dark fantasy.

Modifié par SDNcN, 29 juillet 2010 - 01:17 .

[DPB]

Azdeus wrote...

There are developers here reading, that much is noticeable - but how much of our input/feedback actually gets taken in is a question for them to answer more clearly. I can't tell due to not really following development cycles for either DAO or ME2.

Having read the old Dragon Age forums for several years before it was released - not a great deal. DAO would be completely unrecognisable if they put it all the things people did or didn't want, and perhaps not for the better. Bioware has always done their own thing, this is nothing new.

The one big thing they did take from the forums was the name Thedas - originally it was an acronym for 'The Dragon Age Setting,' the writers liked it and it stuck.

[Grommash94]

SDNcN wrote...

Grommash94 wrote...

There are a lot of fans that wanted a different art style and a voiced PC w/ dialogue wheel. It could be that BioWare was listening, but to different fans.

I don't think there was anyone who really asked for a different artstyle, just that people recognized there was a conflict visually and thematically over the game being dark fantasy.

True enough.

[Grommash94]

dbankier wrote...

Azdeus wrote...

There are developers here reading, that much is noticeable - but how much of our input/feedback actually gets taken in is a question for them to answer more clearly. I can't tell due to not really following development cycles for either DAO or ME2.

Bioware has always done their own thing, this is nothing new.

I think it is good they do that tbh. Mythic made the mistake of listening to their most vocal fans for WAR, and they ended up hurting the game in general.

Sure you should care about your fans, but that should just be it. That applies to everything really. Bands shouldn't change because their fans don't like their new direction, writers shouldn't change the endings to their books, and developers should do what they feel is best. If there are enough fans that hate those decisions, then the developer would most likely go back to their roots. So, basically, if you don't agree with the 'new' BioWare and its directions, don't buy the game, and speak with your wallet. At least, thats what I think anyway.

Also, I really haven't seen anything that really shows that BioWare doesn't care anymore. All the interview shows is that the guy doesn't think the more vocal fans shouldn't dictate the direction of the game. Not that anyone here is arguing that they should.

Modifié par Grommash94, 29 juillet 2010 - 01:28 .

[errant_knight]

SDNcN wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

SDNcN wrote...

So people are really surprised a company wants to increase their profits and they don't make decisions based off opinions of small but vocal groups on the internet? Wow.

 No, we're suprised that (a) they think so little of their own product as to completely remake it after less than a year, ( they think it's a good idea to tell people that their opinions of the product they pay for are meaningless, and © that it doesn't occur to Mr. Z. that manipulation works better when you don't actually tell people that you're doing it.

A) They are being completely honest about the game's shortcomings and are attempting to make their next game better. If they made the exact same game as Origins, I'm sure you would buy it, but I'm pretty sure a number of fans would also rather they just go back to making games on the infinity engine -- regardless of how sucessful those games would be. Letting other people make decisions on how you run your business isn't the best idea.

No, just that opinions expressed by small but loud groups on the internet won't entirely sway game design or how they run their bussiness.

C) They are making changes they believe are for the best and are being completely open about it, but because you dislike they changes they are making they are really just trying to decieve everyone. Makes perfect sense.

Did you read what he said about the PR, or are you just assuming I didn't?

[BLunted]

Ah, so the true motivation for mass effecting the DA franchise is revealed. Hoping to pick up extra sales by catering to the lowest common denominator.

[Grommash94]

errant_knight wrote...

SDNcN wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

SDNcN wrote...

So people are really surprised a company wants to increase their profits and they don't make decisions based off opinions of small but vocal groups on the internet? Wow.

 No, we're suprised that (a) they think so little of their own product as to completely remake it after less than a year, ( they think it's a good idea to tell people that their opinions of the product they pay for are meaningless, and © that it doesn't occur to Mr. Z. that manipulation works better when you don't actually tell people that you're doing it.

A) They are being completely honest about the game's shortcomings and are attempting to make their next game better. If they made the exact same game as Origins, I'm sure you would buy it, but I'm pretty sure a number of fans would also rather they just go back to making games on the infinity engine -- regardless of how sucessful those games would be. Letting other people make decisions on how you run your business isn't the best idea.

No, just that opinions expressed by small but loud groups on the internet won't entirely sway game design or how they run their bussiness.

C) They are making changes they believe are for the best and are being completely open about it, but because you dislike they changes they are making they are really just trying to decieve everyone. Makes perfect sense.

Did you read what he said about the PR, or are you just assuming I didn't?

I assume you are talking about:



Q: That's all very well with constructive
criticism, but what would you say to one of the "urgh!" people if they
were sitting here right now?

GZ: I'd say, hey, they're entitled
to their opinion, but also take a look at the final game when we're
done. It's pretty hard to get the full picture That's actually part of
the way we've been doing PR the last little while. We haven't
specifically been provoking our fans, but we've doing stuff to drive
them a little bit up the wall. If you look at the Mass Effect thing with
Shepard being dead, or the Marilyn Manson thing [with Dragon Age]...
this isn't in the same vein, but you come to expect the response. At the
very least, you want people to talk about you. We absolutely stand
behind the stuff we're doing with Dragon Age 2. The whole difference is
'played it' versus 'not played it'. That's the litmus test. It's like,
"Hey, great. Hold the comment, remember the game, then play it and make
your decision at that point." It's funny. On the one hand people don't
like change, on the other hand they'll complain if it's all the same.
There will be people who say, "Oh, I like Dragon Age just the way it is!
I want more of just that!" And then when you give them that they'll
say, "Why didn't you make the graphics better?" It's this funny
Catch-22, so we in a sense pre-empt them and push it in an innocent
direction.


He isn't the first person to use those sort  of tactics. He probably shouldn't have mentioned it though. 

As to this part


GZ:
What you don't listen to is the loud internet commentary. The loudest
voice is probably not the one you listen to. You listen to the person
who put a lot of thought into it, who went out of their way to provide
feedback. We're starting public testing for Star Wars: The Old Republic,
and the fans are encouraged to write up their perspectives in the
private forums. You're not allowed to break NDAs (non-disclosure
agreements) - if they want to talk, they can talk all the want in their
official, appropriate area. It's interesting to read, and the incites of
the fans are valuable. I think there's a sort of thuggish mentality of
the crowd on the internet, with people jumping on board. I think it
would be very rare that you would find valuable things in the comments
section of anything. Occasionally there's stuff, but we're not swayed by
it. You can really be reactive to that. We tend to be very analytic, we
put it down and move it around until we actually understand it. But I
think one of the ways we make great games is by being really, really
open to criticism.

All he is saying is the people who only say 'ugh why BioWare' and not 'This is a bad idea BioWare because" shouldn't be the people you listen to.