645 réponses à ce sujet

[Monica83]

Ufffff those drama screams of rage of people that call doomsayers evrything begins to annoy me...

We are only talking... It's a Forum Right?

I think this fear is born because most people when ear an action RPG thinks:

Diablo!

Maybe they can use better word to descrive it...

Like: The action in the game will bee improved

Anyways its only a fact of misundersteanding...

But the examples i write are a valid examples of disappinting games this happened... Its happened also when Neverwinternights 2 was Released..

And i remember people that calls doomsayers the people who dont like what obsidian did.. In fact nwn2 became a nice game after they release it... With the expansion... Those are not only words those are fact...

I repeat i believe in bioware as i said they made beatyfull games but this lack of information can create some questions in the mind of the players... That's happen..

Is stupid call all the people that have questions in mind Doomsayers... its very annoyng...

Just try to understeand some people have a true passion for roleplay games... And right now most games are only graphic and action..It's normal they ask clarifications..

[Haexpane]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Half-Life 2 was considerably different from Half-Life 1

Diablo 2 was a whole different game from Diablo 1

Nope, they both mainted genre and gameplay.

HL1 - story driven shooter.  HL2 - story driven shooter

Diablo 1 - hack and slash RPG   Diablo 2 - hack and slash RPG

DAO - CRPG in the style of Baldur's Gate 2      DA2 - Press A for something "bad ass awesome" to happen in a visceral big moment way!  Press B to jump for epic more bad ass rank ups!

[Faz432]

If when it's released the people at Bioware can truly and honestly say they're happy and they've made it as good as they possibly could, have no regrets, no thinking 'oh I wish we could of done this or that' then I won't have any complaints.

[Merced256]

Marionetten wrote...

Rakia_Time wrote...

DAO was also a action rpg

And here I thought it was a party based CRPG relying on micromanagement.

I know right, all these ****** kids drinking gaider's koolaid.

[Haexpane]

David Gaider wrote...

Clearly some people have this aversion built into how their precious RPG's are labeled,

The "precious" adjective betrays hostility and anger?  Or is it pure disgust and condescension?

Many of us are actually bright enough to understand that artists hate being labeled.  We have the ability to sympathyze with developers being constantly harrassed over any changes to a game series and being bombarded with labels and accusations for an unfinished product.

However you must be able to sympathize w/ a fanbase that is nervous about the drastic changes to DA2 no?

It's not about the "precious" label.  It's about the drastic changes to a beloved genre and "gameplay style".  When someone who is in charge of a development studio states the change boldly and on the record, do fans not have the right to be a little nervous and apprehensive? 

Being a fan of a game with dragons is already "nerdy" enough without having the developers of the game come out and condescend to said fans as being "precious" because some of us are just worried at the directional change?

Kurt Cobain hated being labeled "Grunge", and over time the label of "grunge" has since disappeared.  But Nevermind and In Utero are both Nirvana albums and within the same sub genre of music.

Compare that to when Neil Young released a Rockabilly album.   He was like "f___ genre and labels!"

Obviously DA2 is not going to be like that disasterous Rockabilly Album. Regardless, DA2 looks/feels/seems like a drastic change.

Whether or not the drastic change is good is up in the air.  Artists are often 100% behind their change.   Other artists usually support them 100%.

Steve Albini is 100% behind PJ Harvey's art fueled Piano songs.  PJ Harvey is 100% behind her own change and could not care less what anyone thinks.  Regardless, her music from the albums Dry and Rid of Me as a 3 piece rock outfit are 1000x better.   More influencial, more relevant, more important, hold up better over time etc...

I'm sure PJ Harvey hated being labeled "Grunge" or "riot grrl" or whatever she was labeled.    The label didn't matter, the music did.  It just so happened that music fit into a genre.

This is how I see Dragon Age.  It's not able lables, it's simply where does the finished product, the end result which is Art...sit?    Bioware might possibly make the next Bayonetta and get rave reviews from IGN and Gamespot and Famitsu.  Lots of people loved Bayonetta.

But fans of the "spiritual successor to BG2" gameplay style can express our opinions no?

What we are lamenting is the "death of a genre".  We are not saying DA2 will be "bad".  But like CODMW is not "bad" it's not a BG2 style game.

Therein lies the conflict.  Bioware is intent on 1 goal, making a game they think is great within the Dragon Age universe they created.  This means it can't be a Racing sim or a Party Mini game collection.  However they can make it an action RPG.   They can change whatever systems they want, they can have a dedicated jump button.  

I'm sure they love the current build and will be celebrating when it goes gold.

I have no idea if I will like the game or not, my guess is I probably will.  I like a lot of games, from a lot of genres.

If the changes are drastic enough that it is not a BG2 style game, that marks the unofficial death of the genre.  If that happens.  I will morn.  If I get condescended to, so be it.  

But the tortured artist who defies lables and genres thing was played out centuries ago.

[saruman31]

Haexpane wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

Clearly some people have this aversion built into how their precious RPG's are labeled,

The "precious" adjective betrays hostility and anger?  Or is it pure disgust and condescension?

Many of us are actually bright enough to understand that artists hate being labeled.  We have the ability to sympathyze with developers being constantly harrassed over any changes to a game series and being bombarded with labels and accusations for an unfinished product.

However you must be able to sympathize w/ a fanbase that is nervous about the drastic changes to DA2 no?

It's not about the "precious" label.  It's about the drastic changes to a beloved genre and "gameplay style".  When someone who is in charge of a development studio states the change boldly and on the record, do fans not have the right to be a little nervous and apprehensive? 

Being a fan of a game with dragons is already "nerdy" enough without having the developers of the game come out and condescend to said fans as being "precious" because some of us are just worried at the directional change?

Kurt Cobain hated being labeled "Grunge", and over time the label of "grunge" has since disappeared.  But Nevermind and In Utero are both Nirvana albums and within the same sub genre of music.

Compare that to when Neil Young released a Rockabilly album.   He was like "f___ genre and labels!"

Obviously DA2 is not going to be like that disasterous Rockabilly Album. Regardless, DA2 looks/feels/seems like a drastic change.

Whether or not the drastic change is good is up in the air.  Artists are often 100% behind their change.   Other artists usually support them 100%.

Steve Albini is 100% behind PJ Harvey's art fueled Piano songs.  PJ Harvey is 100% behind her own change and could not care less what anyone thinks.  Regardless, her music from the albums Dry and Rid of Me as a 3 piece rock outfit are 1000x better.   More influencial, more relevant, more important, hold up better over time etc...

I'm sure PJ Harvey hated being labeled "Grunge" or "riot grrl" or whatever she was labeled.    The label didn't matter, the music did.  It just so happened that music fit into a genre.

This is how I see Dragon Age.  It's not able lables, it's simply where does the finished product, the end result which is Art...sit?    Bioware might possibly make the next Bayonetta and get rave reviews from IGN and Gamespot and Famitsu.  Lots of people loved Bayonetta.

But fans of the "spiritual successor to BG2" gameplay style can express our opinions no?

What we are lamenting is the "death of a genre".  We are not saying DA2 will be "bad".  But like CODMW is not "bad" it's not a BG2 style game.

Therein lies the conflict.  Bioware is intent on 1 goal, making MONEY... they think is great within the Dragon Age universe they created.  This means it can't be a Racing sim or a Party Mini game collection.  However they can make it an action RPG.   They can change whatever systems they want, they can have a dedicated jump button.   

I'm sure they love the current build and will be celebrating when it goes gold.

I have no idea if I will like the game or not, my guess is I probably will.  I like a lot of games, from a lot of genres.

If the changes are drastic enough that it is not a BG2 style game, that marks the unofficial death of the genre.  If that happens.  I will morn.  If I get condescended to, so be it.  

But the tortured artist who defies lables and genres thing was played out centuries ago.

Fixed.

[Vandrayke]

saruman31 wrote...

Haexpane wrote...
.  Bioware is intent on 1 goal, making MONEY..

Fixed.

Alright honestly if they didn't want to make money they'd be a horrible company, nobody would invest in them, and they'd die.

Everything you bought that you ever liked was produced because someone wanted to make money.  There are no philanthropists building factories and making TVs.  

[Vandrayke]

Haexpane wrote...

If the changes are drastic enough that it is not a BG2 style game, that marks the unofficial death of the genre.  If that happens.  I will morn.  If I get condescended to, so be it.  

Hmm.  I never thought of "genre death," really, at least as far as I can remember.  I think that while a game's particulars might disappear, the purpose for having those particulars does not.

For example: What can you use besides a loot system that accomplishes the same goal in a more accessible and more fulfilling manner?  I think that through DLC and different product releases, BioWare is experimenting with questions like this, and trying to find answers we might not have thought about before.  I think that in ME2, they tried one approach and learned that they "streamlined" too much, but they got some things right.  I think that DA2 will show similar experiments... but it will also show REACTIONS to failed experiments from the past.  

So you will probably find some things you don't like, and you'll probably find some things you like.  But I think that BioWare recognizes that their games have a unique flavor, and they don't want to lose that at all.  They just want to make it better and be creative enough to expand their audience without alienating their fans.  

[Kristofer1]

sooo bioware is making a dragon age themed fable... wonderful....

[Nighteye2]

Vandrayke wrote...

saruman31 wrote...

Haexpane wrote...
.  Bioware is intent on 1 goal, making MONEY..

Fixed.

Alright honestly if they didn't want to make money they'd be a horrible company, nobody would invest in them, and they'd die.

Everything you bought that you ever liked was produced because someone wanted to make money.  There are no philanthropists building factories and making TVs.  

Making money is not a goal, merely a necessity. Your purpose in life is not just to breathe, to use an analogy.

Anyway, a lot of people loved DA:O a lot and therefore are worried about the changes. How much will DA2 be like the DA:O we loved, and how much will it be something else?

[saruman31]

Vandrayke wrote...

saruman31 wrote...

Haexpane wrote...
.  Bioware is intent on 1 goal, making MONEY..

Fixed.

Alright honestly if they didn't want to make money they'd be a horrible company, nobody would invest in them, and they'd die.

Everything you bought that you ever liked was produced because someone wanted to make money.  There are no philanthropists building factories and making TVs.  

Orly? Are you serious about this?Thanks for the big enlightenment. 
On a serious note. They are not even remotely close to bankruptcy. They are just getting greedy and all they ever succeed in doing is pissing fans off. As i said in another topic; i know many people that will not be interested in this type of game even if it had devil may cry gameplay. 

[Vandrayke]

saruman31 wrote...

Vandrayke wrote...

saruman31 wrote...

Haexpane wrote...
.  Bioware is intent on 1 goal, making MONEY..

Fixed.

Alright honestly if they didn't want to make money they'd be a horrible company, nobody would invest in them, and they'd die.

Everything you bought that you ever liked was produced because someone wanted to make money.  There are no philanthropists building factories and making TVs.  

Orly? Are you serious about this?Thanks for the big enlightenment. 
On a serious note. They are not even remotely close to bankruptcy. They are just getting greedy and all they ever succeed in doing is pissing fans off. As i said in another topic; i know many people that will not be interested in this type of game even if it had devil may cry gameplay. 

I dunno man... their track record says that every game they release is loved by most people and that they have kept some fans for over a decade.  And they've tried to make more money the whole time.  

I think the "getting greedy" argument only really comes in to play when a company buys another one and they start downsizing and selling off to increase earnings per share... but that kind of thing isn't as popular as it used to be.  And if anything, EA has thrown more money into BioWare since buying them, not invested less.  

[Blessed Silence]

ibortolis wrote...

I'm not sure why Ray Muzyka is suddenly calling the sequel an action-RPG, but I suppose we ll find out sooner or later

Source:

http://g4tv.com/vide...Access-Preview/

This is why I hate labels put on things, games or otherwise.

My guess it is an RPG game with faster combat which makes it "action packed" or something like that.  Really doesn't matter to me what label is put on it as long as it is fun.

[addiction21]

Kristofer1 wrote...

sooo bioware is making a dragon age themed fable... wonderful....

Sweet that means were going to get a chicken trailer? Its about time my people got some more love...

[saruman31]

Vandrayke wrote...

saruman31 wrote...

Vandrayke wrote...

saruman31 wrote...

Haexpane wrote...
.  Bioware is intent on 1 goal, making MONEY..

Fixed.

Alright honestly if they didn't want to make money they'd be a horrible company, nobody would invest in them, and they'd die.

Everything you bought that you ever liked was produced because someone wanted to make money.  There are no philanthropists building factories and making TVs.  

Orly? Are you serious about this?Thanks for the big enlightenment. 
On a serious note. They are not even remotely close to bankruptcy. They are just getting greedy and all they ever succeed in doing is pissing fans off. As i said in another topic; i know many people that will not be interested in this type of game even if it had devil may cry gameplay. 

I dunno man... their track record says that every game they release is loved by most people and that they have kept some fans for over a decade.  And they've tried to make more money the whole time.  

I think the "getting greedy" argument only really comes in to play when a company buys another one and they start downsizing and selling off to increase earnings per share... but that kind of thing isn't as popular as it used to be.  And if anything, EA has thrown more money into BioWare since buying them, not invested less.  

Lets take a good example here: Mass Effect (arguably the best bioware game ever) and its seriously lackluster sequel: Mass Effect 2(bad, bad game) They must have taught that since ME did such a good job, making it more accessible to a larger audience would be better. Although it was a success it still failed miserably compared to its prequel. 

[Aratham Darksight]

Nighteye2 wrote...

Making money is not a goal, merely a necessity. Your purpose in life is not just to breathe, to use an analogy.

Anyway, a lot of people loved DA:O a lot and therefore are worried about the changes. How much will DA2 be like the DA:O we loved, and how much will it be something else?

Well, I don't know about anyone else, but I think that when you're worried and uncertain about something, the best thing to do is to conjure up some nightmare scenario that's contrary to established facts and based entirely on incoherent prejudices about stuff you don't understand. Once you pulled that out of rear, try wielding it as an argument, or just shoving it down the throat of anyone nearby who seems like they're enjoying themselves too much. Always helpful, that.

[MadLaughter]

Look, Bioware staff. People are just concerned that the old school 'spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate' gameplay isn't going to exist in the PC version, but instead of clearing things up or pointing to places where you've already cleared those things up, you've just gotten into arguments about semantics and technicalities. Just because you 'could' call DA:O an action RPG (which I don't think you should anyway) doesn't mean that's the best moniker for the game. Action RPGs are typically associated with mashy controls and repetitive gameplay, though some do it much better than others.

[In Exile]

saruman31 wrote...
Orly? Are you serious about this?Thanks for the big enlightenment. 
On a serious note. They are not even remotely close to bankruptcy. They are just getting greedy and all they ever succeed in doing is pissing fans off. As i said in another topic; i know many people that will not be interested in this type of game even if it had devil may cry gameplay. 

Do you know how software develop is funded? Generally speaking, your release funds not only shareholder return, but also salaries and the development cycle for the next piece of software.

For a very simplified example, let's say DA:O brought in a profit of $60 million and the operating cost of Bioware is $20 million annually. Bioware could only live off their release for 3 years before having to release another game, and that's if they were in the business of breaking even.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

Well, sure, but that's like how Bioware introduced Mass Effect as the spiritual successor of KoTOR.

Did they?  They're not even vaguely similar.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Nighteye2 wrote...

Making money is not a goal, merely a necessity.

No, for a corporation the core objective is to make money.

That's what corporations are for.  And even before EA came along you could see all the BioWare logos said "CORP" in the bottom corner.

[Nerevar-as]

Faz432 wrote...

If when it's released the people at Bioware can truly and honestly say they're happy and they've made it as good as they possibly could, have no regrets, no thinking 'oh I wish we could of done this or that' then I won't have any complaints.

I doubt they are even allowed to do that. It already feels suspicious how soon DA2 is coming out and that they cut short the DLC for Origins, and let´s not get in the patching. I can´t really see the BW devs looking at all the complains about Awakening bugs and thinking "who cares?". I have no doubt they want to create the best game possible, but whether they are actually allowed to is another matter.

[DragonRageGT]

If only there were Griffons in DA2...  Poor showmethelight wrote this 3 months ago: "Dragon Age sequel will have griffons... wait for it :D"

Dragon Age: Origins - Why are the Griffons gone?

And well, if DA2 is not as brilliant as DA:O, as a RPG, I'm sure there will be more versions of

Why is the Rum Gone? - Remix

For me there are deep involvent story driven RPG with nice action to support it, like DA:O, TW and a few more... And some heavy action packed games with some sort of story to support it, (huh.. ME2?, Torchlight, Diablos). And if done right they're both fun.

[DragonRageGT]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Nighteye2 wrote...

Making money is not a goal, merely a necessity.

No, for a corporation the core objective is to make money.

That's what corporations are for.  And even before EA came along you could see all the BioWare logos said "CORP" in the bottom corner.

Sorry but Corporations too have "Mission Statements" and they are usually not "making money". Making money is a necessity and a consequence of a job well done.

Recommended Reading
Jeffrey Abrahams, The Mission Statement Book: 301 Corporate Mission Statements from America's Top Companies

http://www.quickmba....trategy/vision/

[Sylvius the Mad]

Mission statements are motivational tools.

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius, corporations are groups of people working toward similar ends. The individuals exist within the corporation, but the corporation itself is not an entity and therefor cannot have a goal/motivation.

/tongue in cheek