15 réponses à ce sujet

[Khraum]

How much have they spent/or have in budget in total? And where is most of the money spent at, animation, in game movies, voice work, bug removal? I mean there is a lot of talk on the forum of them having a limited budget, ex. for romance, combat system etc, but where is most of the money spent, and how does DA, a best selling series compare in its budget with other series, like GTA etc.

Modifié par Khraum, 22 septembre 2010 - 05:00 .

[Mike Laidlaw]

Typically when we say we have a limited budget what we mean is that we have X amount of money, and we need to spend it on different things. Typically there are concerns that we could "just do X" which are usually true in a universe with infinite time and money. However, we do not have infinate ANYTHING, so we, as developers, will pick our battles.

As to how much we're spending? Can't say and never will, but suffice it to say that DA2 is not a budget production.

[Mike Laidlaw]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Mike Laidlaw wrote...
so we, as developers, will pick our battles.

I think you guys may want to rethink how you phrase things on the forums. Naysayers can and will use anything you guys write against you.

Why? That's exactly what happens. You make choices and you go with your gut.

If I have to self edit to the point where I'm too terrified to say anything, I might as well not post.

[Mike Laidlaw]

Agent_Dark_ wrote...

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Mike Laidlaw wrote...
so we, as developers, will pick our battles.

I think you guys may want to rethink how you phrase things on the forums. Naysayers can and will use anything you guys write against you.

Why? That's exactly what happens. You make choices and you go with your gut.

If I have to self edit to the point where I'm too terrified to say anything, I might as well not post.

Confirmed: DA2 will almost entirely be focused on battles and combat and very little else.

Good thing we did all that work to make combat better, then!

[John Epler]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

MKDAWUSS wrote...

I think a lot of the problem is that while movies have grown gradually, video games have grown exponentially. Compare a games in 1985 to 1990 to 1995 to 2000 to 2005 to 2010.

Games generally certainly didn't grow in quality consistently over that period.

4 of my top 5 games all-time came out before 2000.

I think that we're coming back to the notion that everyone has their own opinion about the quality of games - it's certainly not an objective measurement.. Of my top five games, two came out in the 90s, one came out in the year 2000, one in the mid 2000s and one is a release from this year.

[Mike Laidlaw]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Good thing we did all that work to make combat better, then!

That's a value judgment.

You made combat more reactive.  You made combat different.  You (or anyone else) cannot reasonably say you made it better without appealing to some standard of measurement.

Sure I can. I think it's better.

I also think hard and fast measurements of fun take all the fun out of it, and that "being reasonable" also takes the fun out of it.

[Mike Laidlaw]

ShrinkingFish wrote...
"Being reasonable" takes the fun out of everything.

Especially internet forums.

[David Gaider]

Blastback wrote...
Dude, careful, that last part is to easy to take out of context and use as justification to go screaming round the forums.

I've yet to see anyone around these parts needing additional justification to do that.

[David Gaider]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
In otherwords keep doing what you're doing rather than taking the Gaider condescending route.

Oh, is that where I am?

Here I thought I was driving down Entitlement Way. Well no wonder.

[David Gaider]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
So much for giving back to the folks who have bought every Bioware game then, and have enjoyed helping the studio suceed over the years. That we finally got a throw back to those titles that made us Bioware fans in the first place. I guess thats some how  asking too much when there's so much more money to be made catering to the "new ****" crowd, how incredibly greedy of me.

Oh, so this is Entitlement Way. Good, I thought I'd gotten lost for a minute there.

Just took a detour down Elitist Avenue, which is okay since it's in the same neighbourhood.

[David Gaider]

The Director wrote...
Ouch. Talk about customizing your fireballs, huh? I can feel the scroch marks from here. But if I ever saw real response to something, THIS would be it.

What? I'm just making my opinion known. Can't be anything wrong with that.

[David Gaider]

eyesofastorm wrote...
Why don't you just say, "Go away" or even "F*** off."?  It would be so much more elegant.  And then maybe the people who loved the company you used to be would finally get the message.

I'm not telling anyone to "go away" or anything else.

But if someone can sit there and say "we made you and thus we're **** to receive what we want in the future" and expect that the **** in that sentence isn't "entitled" then they're only fooling themselves. Expressing your opinion and saying what you're hoping to see is just fine., but there's a line between that and feeling entitled to get something-- even while you ironically express how loyal you are to our company-- and most people can see that line just fine.

If you wish to suggest that we're making something other than what you want because we don't love you enough and how we've changed, and how you're going to leave heartbroken messages on our answering machine until we change our minds-- well, okay, but don't expect it to go without comment. Especially if you throw up the "it's just my opinion" defense.

Modifié par David Gaider, 24 septembre 2010 - 03:07 .

[John Epler]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

JohnEpler wrote...

I think that we're coming back to the notion that everyone has their own opinion about the quality of games - it's certainly not an objective measurement.. Of my top five games, two came out in the 90s, one came out in the year 2000, one in the mid 2000s and one is a release from this year.

Really?  Nothing from the '80s?

Those 4 I mentioned were 1985, 1992, 1998, and 1999.

I left out the fifth because I've never really nailed that one down.  Right now I'm leaning toward Wasteland, which was 1988.

There are certainly games that came out in the 80s that I consider important and had fun with, but on a personal level, the games I've enjoyed most came out from the early 90s onwards. And again - I think what era you consider to be that with the highest quality of games will depend heavily on what it is you value most in a game. I'm rather indecisive about what makes a game fun to me, so my choices range from 1992 to 2010 Some people, however, undoubtedly have a clearer focus.

But I'm taking this dangerously off-topic

[Stanley Woo]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Hm, why so secretive about budget anyway? We just wish to know what scale we're talking about - huge budget, like 40,60, 100 millions dollars, or something way smaller, like around 10 millions.

It's not like we want to judge the game by budget, like people usually do it for movies...

Because ultimately, a project's budget is a business decision that has absolutely no effect on you, the consumer. no matter how big or small the budget is, no matter what we do wtih it or how we allocate those funds, you won't care as long as the finished product is released adn you either buy it or don't.

In short, you don't make your buying decisions based on a game's budget and it's really none of your business.

[David Gaider]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
And you wonder why I find most of your replies condescending. When EA shutters you guys in 5 years after the addh crowd gets bored of Bioware games and moves on to something else, maybe you'll care again about the old fans.

It has very little to do with entitlement, obviously you guys are going to, and should make the game you want to make, I would just hope you'd keep a few of the old timer's likes in mind. But apparently thats soooo much to ask, and makes one an elitist. Ok sure there Gaider whatever you say.

No, the part that makes you an elitist is the part where you assume that anyone who isn't an "old timer" (these people who you seem to speak for and who you threaten will abandon us if we don't give them what 'they' want) is an... what's one of the phrases you used? One of the "addh crowd"? So they're essentially action-addicted simpletons? Not as loyal as the old timers, not as smart or as worthwhile providing anything for?

That doesn't seem elitist to you?

I get that you want what you want. It's one thing to say, however, that we can and should make the game we want to make and quite another to actually give that concept more than lip service in the rest of your post. My calling you on your codescension towards people who don't like what you like is not condescending, despite your assertation. I don't think I'm better than you, nor do I think the "old timers" aren't worth providing content for (as I do, in fact, think there's plenty for them here to love). I do think, however, that your attitude is unfortunately self-serving.

[David Gaider]

Aaand this topic is done, I think, and well and truly no longer about the original topic. Time to shut it down.