442 réponses à ce sujet

[Icinix]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

"Nope! Dragon Age II is not a cover-based third-person shooter set in an extrapolation of the real world in which humanity discovered FTL travel."

Damn, here I was ready to preorder with my Blood Dragon Assault Rifle and everything.

Same.  Well I guess thats the end of my love affair with Dragon Age then!  I'm off to see if theres a PUB!

[mellifera]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

"Nope! Dragon Age II is not a cover-based third-person shooter set in an extrapolation of the real world in which humanity discovered FTL travel."

Damn, here I was ready to preorder with my Blood Dragon Assault Rifle and everything.

I feel deceived. I was promised Dragon Effect. Now I'm going to have to march down to EB Games and get my two blue hockey monies back.

[KLUME777]

Just read the article.



"You can literally start fighting within 15 seconds of pressing the start button"



I don't like the sound of that. Is there not even a beginning movie?

[Brockololly]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Personally, I tend to look at Mass Effect as consisting of more than just a decision to voice the protagonist. When I was at GamesCom, I got asked whether we were "making Dragon Age like Mass Effect?" a lot, and I totally understand why, but my default answer, delivered with a grin, became:

"Nope! Dragon Age II is not a cover-based third-person shooter set in an extrapolation of the real world in which humanity discovered FTL travel."

It does, however, have a main character who talks.

But a huge part of ME's presentation is the whole "cinematic" angle with the dialogue wheel, paraphrases and voiced PC. And more or less thats what DA2 is adopting, and leaving the silent PC approach in the dust. And seeing how all BioWare games seem to be flocking to the MOAR! voice acting angle, its a bit discouraging for those that like having a silent PC and not some jibbering voice actor spouting off. And its that rush to have VO everything and cinematic everything thats a bummer, as it just sort of further blends all BioWare games together into one homogenous presentation style and its that lack of diversity that has me less than enthusiastic with DA2 adopting ME's presentation style.

I'm willing to see how the voiced PC goes in DA2, but I've never played an RPG with a voiced PC where I've been able to really give a damn about them or get nearly as "emotionally engaged" as I'm able to in a game like Origins or New Vegas with the silent PC and full text . I've posted it before, but this article by one of the audio designers at Media Molecule sums up my thoughts on the strengths of DAO's silent PC over ME's mouthy Shep.

[upsettingshorts]

Personally the gameplay of DA:O and Mass Effect could be completely switched, protagonist and all - and I'd still prefer Mass Effect for one reason and one reason only:

I like science fiction much more than fantasy.

Hooray for subjectivity.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 novembre 2010 - 05:39 .

[ENolan]

yukidama wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

"Nope! Dragon Age II is not a cover-based third-person shooter set in an extrapolation of the real world in which humanity discovered FTL travel."

Damn, here I was ready to preorder with my Blood Dragon Assault Rifle and everything.

I feel deceived. I was promised Dragon Effect. Now I'm going to have to march down to EB Games and get my two blue hockey monies back.

As Reverand (Anthony Cumia) Al Sharpton would say, "I AM OUTRAAAAGED!":D

[soteria]

I know they dodged the direct question "is it an aRPG" quite a few times and the only gamesample they've released (exaggerated or not) is just that, an aRPG.

You do know they marketed DA:O as an action RPG, don't you? By that standard, I'm sure DA2 will be one as well. I'm looking forward to it.

[upsettingshorts]

Unless it adds a significant amount of twitch mechanics (such as Mass Effect or Deus Ex) it ain't an action RPG to me.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 novembre 2010 - 08:17 .

[crimzontearz]

is it me....or this whole mess would never happen if the marketing department got their heads out of their ***es

[Sir JK]

crimzontearz wrote...

is it me....or this whole mess would never happen if the marketing department got their heads out of their ***es

Sorry to say, but it's you. This sort of mess is practically unavoidable (especially on the internet). No matter what Bioware's maketing department did the forums would explode in an uproar.

[crimzontearz]

There is a difference between exploding in an uproad because feature X has been cut as per the latest announcement and the devs not being ableto tell the truth about their creation because marketing says it may hurt sales

[upsettingshorts]

crimzontearz wrote...

There is a difference between exploding in an uproad because feature X has been cut as per the latest announcement and the devs not being ableto tell the truth about their creation because marketing says it may hurt sales

Yeah one of those things - the bolded one - is based purely on conspiratorial speculation.  The other example is pretty reasonable, all things considered.

[Lord Gremlin]

I like this interview. Personally, I think DAO had a bit of RTS feel, it's like a slight stench of feces in your meal: distracting and disgusting.

I personally think that RPG should have more of an action, not RTS feel. The big difference between a good RPG and action game combat though is that in RPG every move/action available to you is determined by your stats. Stats determine damage, armor penetration, length of your jump, speed of your dodge etc. But such obvious dice-rolling like in Origins when it comes to combat... Meh. Learn from Demon's Souls. If Demon's Souls had DAO level of dialogue and DAO had Demon's Souls level of combat... Dreams, dreams. Still, good to know PS3 build is running fine.

[crimzontearz]

In most large companies that is exactly what happens...I know it happens in mine...the devs also said it happens in bioware, they are forbidden by marketing and branding from revealing certain info before certain times often for sales purposes......go to the old ME forums to find the direct quote

[Sir JK]

crimzontearz wrote...
...the devs not being ableto tell the truth about their creation because marketing says it may hurt sales

Oh, that? Sorry, I misunderstood you. Then it's definantely just paranoia talking.

Seriously, I get that you're passionate about the game and see everything as an indication of bad news yet to come. But it's a tad excessive. The Devs are honestly doing what they think is the best game they can make, they are genuinely trying their very bets to make it as good as game they can for all of their current, past and future fans. Even you. All you hear is marketing tell us about what's different... just like origins was presented as an action rpg, played to aggressive heavy metal, showed excessive bloodsplatter and such. This is no different, and no more accurate.

The devs are not lying or witholding information (okay... they are withholding information, but it's planned to be revealed eventually. They can't just drop all at ones... they need to drip it) from you. The marketing allows for a lot of room for interpretation (both good and bad) and all the changes they present will probably be a lot less noticeable than expected (just like cooldown-based ability combat was a lot less noticeable change from classic rpg combat than many feared).

In the words of Douglas Adams: "Don't Panic!"

[crimzontearz]

Have you ever worked for a large company with a marketing department JK?

That is exactly what happens...also...one of the devs specifically said marketing and branding tell them exactly what not to tell publicly about the game

[JrayM16]

crimzontearz wrote...

Have you ever worked for a large company with a marketing department JK?
That is exactly what happens...also...one of the devs specifically said marketing and branding tell them exactly what not to tell publicly about the game

I might be more inclined to trust you if you gave some details, but if you really work for a company that does this sort of thing then I imagine they wouldn't be happy if you divulged said details on a forum.

[Sir JK]

crimzontearz wrote...

Have you ever worked for a large company with a marketing department JK?
That is exactly what happens...also...one of the devs specifically said marketing and branding tell them exactly what not to tell publicly about the game

Yes, that I take as a given. The vast majority is things that we either don't need or have no business knowing (exact budget figures or exact how many minutes were "lost" due to coffee breaks for instance). Granted, sometimes companies keep things we should know from us and that is despicable and a horrid practise.

Mind, Bioware can't just tell us everything now. The best thing they can do is keep out interest peaked at all times, keep us coming back from more and licking up every tidbit of information. If they just drop everything at once this early we'd simply lose interest. That's why we get things one little bit at a time. To keep our interest peaked. Because that's just good business practise (and you got to admit... it's working).
It isn't until shortly after release we will know if we had all information we needed. That's how it works.

Assuming this early that they are holding something back (and not intending to divulging) we as consumers should know about the product is both premature and quite the accusation.

[crimzontearz]

Jray you are correct....I mentioned before I do work for one such company (I am trying to get out) but telling you which one would royally screw me if this was to surface. Suffice to say we do have a marketing department and they do tell us exactly what to tell and what not to tell the customers and clients and what bs to feed themwhen they ask for questions that would require answering with a seemingly inconvenient truth

[Vaeliorin]

the_one_54321 wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...
Alpha Protocol is probably the most recent example of that.

Alpha Protocol was just broken. It's an excellent example of why mixing rulesets can create games that just don't work. ME1, arguably nearlly pulled that off as well.

Personally, I thought Alpha Protocol played beautifully, and yes, I've played both stealthy and run-and-gun characters (interestingly, the run-and-gun character was easier to play.)  Deus Ex's skill system wasn't really that different than Alpha Protocol's (seriously, try aiming a sniper rifle with no rifle skill in Deus Ex, it's all but impossible), and I'd argue that AP's worked better, because even weapons you were unskilled in were fairly useful (my run-and-gun character used a shotgun almost exclusively for up-close work, and I didn't have any ranks in shotguns until the end of the game when I'd maxed out the other skills I wanted to use.)

Anyway, my concern with the "15 seconds to get into the action" bit is that I'm going to end up stuck playing a character who doesn't even have the correct weapon set/skills.  I get that it's an exaggeration, but if I'm planning on playing an archery rogue, and in the exaggerated bit I'm stuck with dual-wielding weapons and skills, then that's not just exaggeration, it's outright lies that would seem wholely out of place (as one of the things people often associate with heroes is their combat style and often their unique weapon.)  Since I'm planning on playing an archer my first playthrough...it's a concern (as the footage we've seen has all been dual-wielding or two-handed warrior.)

Also, if I'm stuck playing default Hawke at any point in time (even though I may want to use default Hawke on some playthrough, it should be my choice) I'm going to be less than pleased.

[crimzontearz]

Jk, the simple question "has DA2 shifted to Arpg combat?" And "is full customization" available for team mates has been dodged MANY times as the latter indeed was dodged for ME2in the same manner.



And those are pretty legitimate questions if you ask me...yet if you remember right me2's lack of squad customization was not fully revealed until what...a month before release?



Anyways...believing that witholding basic informations is simply to keep us coming back is naive and NO I do NOT hold the devs responsible for this situation

[Sir JK]

Yes, those are very legitimate questions (or well... close to). I too think we should know the answer by the time of release... which is 4 months from now. There is still plenty of time to have it answered.



But yes, the questions are being dodged. Why? Because they have a schedule when to release what information. First they reveal design goals, which they did around announcement. Then they'll reveal what is different one thing at a time once they're certain it's not going to change.



They want us to be here. They want us to discuss it. They want us to build up expectations. They want us to follow their marketing every second we can spare. They want our complete attention. So they use our curiosity, our fears, concern and hopes by drip-feeding us information. Making us come back for more week after week, day after day until release.

It's not naïve to think that they're playing on our human nature to sell their product, is it? It is marketing after all. And they want us to obsess about their product.



... which we are.

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

Nah, I just come here for the comedy of the forumites. There is no obsessing and the game hasn't sold me yet because I haven't seen any actual footage that isn't ripped from very brief seconds of cutscenes spliced together into a Frankenstein's teaser.



He no kappa.

[crimzontearz]

The problem with that modus pensandi is that it starts fromthe preconcept of the release of flavor bits regarding the game but we are talking about the most basic nature of its gameplay which at 4 months from release should be known

[Sir JK]

crimzontearz wrote...

The problem with that modus pensandi is that it starts fromthe preconcept of the release of flavor bits regarding the game but we are talking about the most basic nature of its gameplay which at 4 months from release should be known

Let me put it like this then:

Marketings job is to sell you the game, to make you buy the game
You're saying that you want to learn combat details.
You've just informed marketing what you are waiting for.
Their job is now to figure out how much else they can tell you before your patience runs out so that by the time they do tell you, it won't matter anymore because those other features will have made you interested enough (if they do their job right).  They will tell you eventually... since they need to do it before you lose interest.

That's what I expect marketing to do.

You think the "flavour bits" are the nice to know, but you're waiting for the need to know. That's a argument for them to wait with that and tell you more flavour or other need to knows. They want to make sure that ultimately the answer to your question isn't really important to you anymore.

A bit blunt and simplified of course, but that's the general idea.