417 réponses à ce sujet

[Stanley Woo]

LucianTansey wrote...
Actually I meant "EA's" not "Bioware's", so I apologise Mr Woo.

And yes your right, I dont know about the internal business decisions. But were the bugs a business decision?

People here keep talking about a publisher "rushing out" a game despite a developer's wishes, so if something like that happened, then yes, that would be considered a business decision. not saying that's what happened here, just that there are any number of reasons you will find bugs in a released game. At some point, a developer has to drop his tools because some greater force--usually related to time or money--said "TIME!"

[eucatastrophe]

DA:O is my first (and only so far) BioWare game. Prior to this, I was mainly a Blizzard gamer (I play 3 of their titles). I was very accustomed to the long (read: 4+ year!) wait between games!

So to a newbie like me, it's really odd to see how fast this company makes games!

I mean it's a good thing in it's own way but I wish the experience were a little slower, so I could savour it

Also, this isn't a Blizzard > Bioware, or BIOWARE SUCKS!!!11!1. I'm just commenting on how 2 different companies work so differently. It;s interesting and I don't think one system is better or worse than the other.

*dons flame suit*

[Lord_Valandil]

Stanley Woo wrote...

LucianTansey wrote...
Actually I meant "EA's" not "Bioware's", so I apologise Mr Woo.

And yes your right, I dont know about the internal business decisions. But were the bugs a business decision?

People here keep talking about a publisher "rushing out" a game despite a developer's wishes, so if something like that happened, then yes, that would be considered a business decision. not saying that's what happened here, just that there are any number of reasons you will find bugs in a released game. At some point, a developer has to drop his tools because some greater force--usually related to time or money--said "TIME!"

That's right, although a little tweak or two would be nice before abandoning the ship and moving on to DA2, to bugs like Leliana's broken conversation, the achievements, and some other things that, in fact, were broken by the patches. I know it's not an "easy thing", but those are not new problems. Not that I'm demanding anything.
I understand that devs cannot do what they want.

Mr. Woo, I know it's not the thread to discuss it, but could you give me your opinion about Nug Bombs, pretty please?
Everyone keeps ignoring them, and yet, yesterday Mr. Peter Thomas said the Nug Bombs are story/plot related, so I'm feeling a bit confused. Thank you.

[Stanley Woo]

MadLaughter wrote...
Just because people make criticisms from an armchair doesn't mean they are wrong. THAT's a generalization. A hypocritical one, considering you're accusing us of making generalizations.

I didn't say people were wrong. in fact, i said quite the opposite in one of my posts--that I wasn't arguing necessarily because people were wrong. I'm arguing more because people are sometimes using bad science and lack of information to come to their foregone conclusions, like an armchair quarterback seeing an open receiver but forgetting that he has a vastly different perspective of the field than the actual quarterback.

There are a few inescapable truths:
-DAO and DAO:A were and are too buggy with no fix in sight.

Many people had no trouble with either game, and several patches have been released that fix a number of the more serious problems people were having. Not an inescapable truth. Bad science.

-The development cycle for DA2 is incredibly short, compared to what Bioware seems to be used to and compared to most big budget games.

That's an opinion, not an inescapable truth. Bad science.

-Short development cycles are positively correlated with worse games.

Correlation does not necessarily equal causation. Bad science.

-Development cycles are determined in most cases by the publisher.

Unless you can come up witha citation for that, I'm going to call bad science once again. Also, not an inescapable truth. I'm sure the developer's opinions of its own capabilities and workflow also help to determine development cycles.

[Stanley Woo]

Lord_Valandil wrote...
That's right, although a little tweak or two would be nice before abandoning the ship and moving on to DA2, to bugs like Leliana's broken conversation, the achievements, and some other things that, in fact, were broken by the patches. I know it's not an "easy thing", but those are not new problems. Not that I'm demanding anything.
I understand that devs cannot do what they want.

When talking about "little tweaks," consider that many times, a game is a very fragile Jenga tower, with some parts of the tower glued together, some taped together, and some pieces made of chocolate and some of bacon. Sure, it's possible to take "just a little" bite of chocolate or, if you prefer, bacon, but you get enough of those "little tweaks," and the tower might grow unstable. One of those glued together sections might be resting on a piece of bacon and bring a huge chunk crashing to the table.

Consider also that when we fix something in a ptach, we have to re-test the entire game to make sure that fix doesn't break anything else. Not only that, but we have to make sure the patch works for each and every version of the game that's been released, PLUS each platform, which may require additional certification or approvals. And all of that takes time and WORK. Work by testers, work by programmers, and producers that have the unenviable job of determining where the patch and fix efforts are going to go. They have to weigh the severity of each bug, the cost to fix it, and the stability of the system that needs to be worked on.



P.S. i had to remove a bunch of off-topic conversation, and inappropriate images and comments. Let's try to keep it clean, and on-topic. i don't mind the occasional joke or tangent, but let's not let it get out of hand if you want this thread to remain open. I'm enjoying this conversation. Thank you.

[Lord_Valandil]

Oh dear. And yet again the NB question is avoided. Why? I'm clueless, as I don't mean to create spam or just make funny comments, I'm totally serious about that idea, is it too much to ask an answer? Like, I don't know, "No kiddo, stop daydreaming, your idea is stoopid/impossible". But oh well...Sorry if that bothered you, Mr. Woo.

And thanks again for answering about the "little tweaks", I supposed it wouldn't be so easy to repair that kind of problems.

[oenis]

I'm a huge fan of DA but I'm really reluctant to spend anymore money on the franchise, although I was very excited about DA2. Maybe its the marketing team over-promising what the devs intend to deliver, but notably with WH, the end of the game left me feeling cheated. In no way was it a conclusion of my warden's story. Awakening delivered a better ending with its 2 lines of text saying I may have gone chasing after Zevran in Antiva. No questions were answered because Morrigan was foreshadowing for DA2.

I haven't gotten any bugs yet but I feel like I was misled. I really feel reluctant now to spend any more cash on the DA franchise. I bought WH looking for continuation and answers and got next to nothing. DA2 is supposed to build on the story arc but will it, with any effectiveness?

[RazorrX]

Wow I must be one of the lucky ones who gets a better build of the game or something. I can not remember ever having a game breaking bug. I know I did not have any in NWN series, Do not think I had any with Baldurs Gate either. Kotor - nope was good to go. Jade Empire - again nope, ran flawlessly. Mass Effect 1 & 2 both were fine, with no game breaking bugs at all.



Dragon Age:Origins - No problems at all and have played it for a LOOOONG time. Very good bang for my buck there. The Awakening was game breaking bug free for me as well (just did not like it as much as Origins). So I fail to see where they are publishing bug ridden crappy games as Bioware has never failed to produce awesome games for me.



DA2 while it is not quite what I had hoped for (Not really happy with the default protagonist thing, would prefer no voice over and be allowed to create any race, etc.) but it still looks freaking sweet. I am really looking forward to it.



As to the DLC - I have all of them but the darkspawn one (no interest in playing a darkspawn) and have enjoyed the ones I have played so far. I have not done Witch Hunt yet, as I reformatted my hard drive and forgot to back up my saves, so have started over to get a good save game first.

[Maverick827]

Stanley Woo wrote...

I don't think that's a wise policy at all. just because some modders enjoy playing with the toolset after a game's release does not mean they would all enjoy being told to fix a game pre-release.

That depends on how well I could easily spin such a task to look good on a resume.  "Electronic Software Error Prevention Consultant."  Not bad...

Stanley Woo wrote...

When talking about "little tweaks," consider that many times, a game is a very fragile Jenga tower, with some parts of the tower glued together, some taped together, and some pieces made of chocolate and some of bacon. Sure, it's possible to take "just a little" bite of chocolate or, if you prefer, bacon, but you get enough of those "little tweaks," and the tower might grow unstable. One of those glued together sections might be resting on a piece of bacon and bring a huge chunk crashing to the table.

Consider also that when we fix something in a ptach, we have to re-test the entire game to make sure that fix doesn't break anything else. Not only that, but we have to make sure the patch works for each and every version of the game that's been released, PLUS each platform, which may require additional certification or approvals. And all of that takes time and WORK. Work by testers, work by programmers, and producers that have the unenviable job of determining where the patch and fix efforts are going to go. They have to weigh the severity of each bug, the cost to fix it, and the stability of the system that needs to be worked on.

I would say about 75% of the bugs that affect most people's gameplay are the result of a typo or logic error, as bugged talents and dialog scripts really wouldn't be much more than that.  I think most people have made peace with whichever of the few remaining fatal crashes that they have experienced, but these small bugs, that have had stable fixes for almost a year now, couldn't hurt to be sent out officially, especially for the console customers.

Modifié par Maverick827, 09 septembre 2010 - 07:45 .

[addiction21]

Maverick827 wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

I don't think that's a wise policy at all. just because some modders enjoy playing with the toolset after a game's release does not mean they would all enjoy being told to fix a game pre-release.

That depends on how well I could easily spin such a task to look good on a resume.  "Electronic Software Error Prevention Consultant."  Not bad...

Flashebacks of my days as a bag boy in a grocery store. I was a customer courtesy clerk.

[Meltemph]

I just wish that developers would take a MMO approach to games like this and have alpha's and closed beta's to a fairly large portion of "public testers" to report bugs and what not. However, I do understand that the risks that would come with that, but I would think it would free up resources to focus on other things.

Now obviously, it could hurt you if the people you released it to uploaded it to a FTP or whatnot, but I think Starcraft 2 proves it can work very well to your advantage.

Modifié par Meltemph, 09 septembre 2010 - 08:09 .

[upsettingshorts]

JoePinasi1989 wrote...
Ya know, after reading all your comments I have reached a conclusion: you have absolutely no reason NOT to release a Toolset upgrade for DA2, HEH HA HAH HA HAH! <_<

Yeah, the whole toolset issue is really the only one where I come down firmly in the pro-rabid fans and not the Bioware apologist camp. 

[Saibh]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

JoePinasi1989 wrote...
Ya know, after reading all your comments I have reached a conclusion: you have absolutely no reason NOT to release a Toolset upgrade for DA2, HEH HA HAH HA HAH! <_<

Yeah, the whole toolset issue is really the only one where I come down firmly in the pro-rabid fans and not the Bioware apologist camp. 

I'm honestly not sure how I'd react. After all, only NWN and DAO came with a toolset. It's not something that I feel entitled to in a BioWare game.

But, at the same time, the reason I relented and bought a product freaking twice was for the mods. So...

[Maverick827]

The toolkit is equally important to me for mods as it is for bug fixes.

Both of these, though, could be circumvented by releasing and maintaining a better product. If DA2 is more stable and has better patching, and if it has better armor/weapon models and better hairstyles, I really don't think I would need a toolkit.

[Blastback]

Stanley Woo wrote...

There are a few inescapable truths:
-DAO and DAO:A were and are too buggy with no fix in sight.

Many people had no trouble with either game, and several patches have been released that fix a number of the more serious problems people were having. Not an inescapable truth. Bad science.

Considering that some bugs do remain, are there future patches for Origins and Awakening in the works?  I'll admit, I know that ultimatly glitches like the Armor of the Sentinal and Vigilence for consoles are merely cosmetic,  but the knowledge of what they should have been vs what they were genuinly hurt my ability to enjoy the game. 

I think part of it boils down to feelings rather than logic.  Logically i think we all know that it is near impossible to catch every possible problem in a game.  However, we still feel that we've been cheated when we encounter various bugs and glitches.  It feels like we gave you our money in good faith, epecting a whole and completed product, only to find one that has a number of bugs of various signifigance.  I'll admit, I still feel a bit burned and disillusioned. 

P.S.
Really sorry for whatever it was that I said that was inapropriate earlier in the thread.  I honestly don't even remember what it was that I said that you had to remove, but i really am sorry for any offence caused.

[Everwarden]

Stanley Woo wrote...

LucianTansey wrote...

"they have no choice but to rush, EA is keeping bioware on a tight leash"

Thats Bioware's fault, not ours, why should the gameplay for the gamer suffer as a result? If it wasnt for us there would be no Grey Wardens!

Actually, you've got it a little backwards. If it wasn't for us, there'd be no Grey Wardens. And I'd think twice about spouting off on what you think you know about the internal business decisions of companies you're not a part of. Speculation is all well and good, but far too many people think they know how businesses work when they've only been on the consumer side of things.

I don't care about your business decisions except to the extent that they make Bioware push out poorer and poorer content. Awakening had the potential to be awesome, but was half baked and didn't reach what it could have been. I have a feeling (and hope I'm wrong) that this problem of rushed, buggy, half-fulfilled content is going to continue until Bioware fans stop giving Bioware an "I'll buy whatever you make." pass.

[LaztRezort]

Meltemph wrote...

I just wish that developers would take a MMO approach to games like this and have alpha's and closed beta's to a fairly large portion of "public testers" to report bugs and what not. However, I do understand that the risks that would come with that, but I would think it would free up resources to focus on other things.

Now obviously, it could hurt you if the people you released it to uploaded it to a FTP or whatnot, but I think Starcraft 2 proves it can work very well to your advantage.

I don't necessarily disagree with the general idea, but I think there is something here not being considered - Starcraft 2 has a more secure DRM in place (you need internet access and need to register the game, IIRC, even for single player).  I think convincing the publisher to let them given out binary builds (even betas) pre-release would be difficult if such systems were not in place, even if the developers thought it a good idea.  Also, MMO's (and Blizzard by itself) get to enjoy a different business model than other games.

Also, a beta-testing community is not a panacea.  Look over at Stardock's current drama over its release of Elemental - and Stardock is about the most open and transparent developer that I know of.

On the subject of buggy DA:O, I'll just say that in my experience I had few problems with the core game (at least, compared to any other PC game in my arsenal).  The only game-breaking bugs I found were walkmesh related - in both instances, I fell through the world geometry (or got pushed) and became trapped.  Crashes happened but were not persistant enough to be called anything near game-breaking.

Bugs upset me as much as the next person, but the line of "too much" is subjective.

Of course, I am not a fan of DLC so I cannot comment on those particular titles.

[Marionetten]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Many people had no trouble with either game, and several patches have been released that fix a number of the more serious problems people were having. Not an inescapable truth. Bad science.

You just released a DLC which completely disregards one of the biggest choices made in the game. You're even recruiting beta testers from the community to make up for your nonexistent testing.

That, Mr. Woo, is bad science.

Modifié par Marionetten, 09 septembre 2010 - 09:17 .

[Mecha Tengu]

slimgrin wrote...

Bugs are excusable. Late patches aren't.

just patch it yourself

heh

[AlexXIV]

Everwarden wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

LucianTansey wrote...

"they have no choice but to rush, EA is keeping bioware on a tight leash"

Thats Bioware's fault, not ours, why should the gameplay for the gamer suffer as a result? If it wasnt for us there would be no Grey Wardens!

Actually, you've got it a little backwards. If it wasn't for us, there'd be no Grey Wardens. And I'd think twice about spouting off on what you think you know about the internal business decisions of companies you're not a part of. Speculation is all well and good, but far too many people think they know how businesses work when they've only been on the consumer side of things.

I don't care about your business decisions except to the extent that they make Bioware push out poorer and poorer content. Awakening had the potential to be awesome, but was half baked and didn't reach what it could have been. I have a feeling (and hope I'm wrong) that this problem of rushed, buggy, half-fulfilled content is going to continue until Bioware fans stop giving Bioware an "I'll buy whatever you make." pass.

I have to agree here. Just speaking of Dragon Age, I had no problems with Mass Effect in this regard.

DA:O is a really good game, and I never felt it didn't deserve the money I spent. But starting with Expansion 'Awakenings' this feeling slowly changed. Stone Prisoner, Warden's Keep and Ostagar are good enough DLCs, but what the hell did Bioware think when they made WH? I mean, you can't tell me they didn't know that every single person who bought it would be disappointed. Awakening almost cost as much as the original game, and was not only 1/5 of content, it also was rather blunt and shallow compared to DA:O. I can't help but feeling that DA:O was the bait to get us to pay way too much for the expansion and DLCs.

So that wouldn't be so bad since DA:O is still worth it. But for me there is the question now if DA2 actually goes back to the DA:O roots (in terms of quality and price/performance rate) or if it is another moneymaker piece surfing on the high wave of the original game. Sorry but it seems to me that none of the Expansions/DLCs had the same amount of effort put into it as the original game, and I also think that's actually part of Bioware strategy. And the next step would be DA2, trying to get the same sales as DA:O just with only 50% effort.

[Everwarden]

AlexXIV wrote...

Everwarden wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

LucianTansey wrote...

"they have no choice but to rush, EA is keeping bioware on a tight leash"

Thats Bioware's fault, not ours, why should the gameplay for the gamer suffer as a result? If it wasnt for us there would be no Grey Wardens!

Actually, you've got it a little backwards. If it wasn't for us, there'd be no Grey Wardens. And I'd think twice about spouting off on what you think you know about the internal business decisions of companies you're not a part of. Speculation is all well and good, but far too many people think they know how businesses work when they've only been on the consumer side of things.

I don't care about your business decisions except to the extent that they make Bioware push out poorer and poorer content. Awakening had the potential to be awesome, but was half baked and didn't reach what it could have been. I have a feeling (and hope I'm wrong) that this problem of rushed, buggy, half-fulfilled content is going to continue until Bioware fans stop giving Bioware an "I'll buy whatever you make." pass.

I have to agree here. Just speaking of Dragon Age, I had no problems with Mass Effect in this regard.

DA:O is a really good game, and I never felt it didn't deserve the money I spent. But starting with Expansion 'Awakenings' this feeling slowly changed. Stone Prisoner, Warden's Keep and Ostagar are good enough DLCs, but what the hell did Bioware think when they made WH? I mean, you can't tell me they didn't know that every single person who bought it would be disappointed. Awakening almost cost as much as the original game, and was not only 1/5 of content, it also was rather blunt and shallow compared to DA:O. I can't help but feeling that DA:O was the bait to get us to pay way too much for the expansion and DLCs.

So that wouldn't be so bad since DA:O is still worth it. But for me there is the question now if DA2 actually goes back to the DA:O roots (in terms of quality and price/performance rate) or if it is another moneymaker piece surfing on the high wave of the original game. Sorry but it seems to me that none of the Expansions/DLCs had the same amount of effort put into it as the original game, and I also think that's actually part of Bioware strategy. And the next step would be DA2, trying to get the same sales as DA:O just with only 50% effort.

You know, I wouldn't mind DA2 having bad expansions and DLC... so long as the base DA2 is AWESOME like DAO was. I don't see that happening, though. Not in the development timeframe they have had. (I REALLY hope I'm wrong by the way, I'm seriously not just a hater.)