84 réponses à ce sujet

[Bocks]

Strangely Brown wrote...

Bocks wrote...

Actually, I'd like to go back on my statement a bit. There are some intelligent people here who could very well improve the game both gameplay-wise and story-wise, but unless Bioware listen ONLY to those people, then, again, no.

And this is still no guarantee that it would be improved for the better.  Because what is great for some is bad for others.  This just wouldn't work at all.

You are right to a certain extent, but there are some things even the biggest fans will shake their head at. Take any of the plot holes from Mass Effect which are pointed out day in and day out by this forum, or the slow and sometimes annoying combat of Dragon Age, or any of the retcons Bioware make that are completely unneeded.

[Bocks]

Strangely Brown wrote...

Bocks wrote...

You are right to a certain extent, but there are some things even the biggest fans will shake their head at. Take any of the plot holes from Mass Effect which are pointed out day in and day out by this forum, or the slow and sometimes annoying combat of Dragon Age, or any of the retcons Bioware make that are completely unneeded.

Of course the games have some problems.  Yeah I see plot holes argued in the ME threads all the time.  My only issue with that as an example, is most who argue about them don't even know the definition of plot hole, yet they write huge diatribes about them.  I digress.  The point is, being a fan doesn't necessarily make you qualified to design a game.  The constructive criticism given by many are infromative and I think most decent developers do take note of them. 

Exactly. If there was a steady balance between developer and audience, then potentially excellent games could fruit from that relationship. I'm not sure if companies actually do this, though it would seem like a bad move to just change the game a bit for every little complaint from the fans. Even during Beta testing phases the developers don't always listen to their fans.

So yeah. If the game developers listened to the constructive criticism from the shallow pool of intelligent gamers out there, then the game would undoubtebly improve in some areas. But again, seeing a company that actually does something so selective and risky is rare.

[ganp0t]

Strangely Brown wrote...

LOL - I don't believe this is the founding principle of democracy actually.  Put a large group of stupid people together you don't suddenly get a group of brain surgeons.  What you really get is a intelectual blackhole that absorbs whatever little intelligence exists and destroys it forever and you are left with a void of idiocy.  Have you ever heard of mob mentality?

Yes I have heard of mob mentality, but you are never going to avoid that.  It is a part of human nature.  Brain surgeons aren't the best example, because that is learned intelligence.  Many normal people with a decade of training could become decent surgeons.  It is simply a matter of memorization.  Besides, if you discount every idea due to stupidity, then you also throw out all of the good ones as well.  What if Infinity Ward had laughed at the idea of creating a modern shooter instead of a WW2 one?  What if Bioware had never thought it possible to have a Star Wars RPG?  Sometimes you just gotta take a chance and hope for the best. 

Strangely Brown wrote...

You are very naive.

No, not naive.  Just young and idealistic.  I believe in the potential of humanity, not its present form.  I do think people ususally have to be pushed to accept changes, even if it is good for them. 

Strangely Brown wrote...

No. 
This just seems so impractical.  Who would design these polls?  Also,
there is a greater liklihood of the plot not coming together if you
oversaturate it with thousands or millions of conflicting ideas.  The
company has direction without fans voting on the presence or absence of a
swamp level (just to use your example).  Besides which there is so much
more to the success of a game than simply having certain level
environments that fans may or may not want.  etc.

The polls could be designed by the dev team, and that way they wouldn't be contradictary.  Here, I can give a few examples right now:
1. what era should the game be set in?   a. ancient or early medieval / b. industrial / c. modern / d. early future / e. distant future
2. what class level should the protagonist come from? a. lowest class / b. middle class / c. upper class / d. ruler
3. to what extend should the looks of the protagonist be cutomizable? a. not at all / b. limited (presets only) / c. open
These could determine the questions to follow (enemy types, further plot developments), and already form the rough basis of a plot.  The key is to use very general questions. 

[ganp0t]

grregg wrote...

Hmm... the problem that I see with your idea is that it puts all risks and costs on BioWare's shoulders while all decision power rests with the fans. Generally speaking, separating power from risks and responsibilities is a Very Bad Idea ™. In a way, it's like publishing a poll asking whether ganp0t should jump out of a window. Since the public bears no cost or risk of the decision, I'm sure a lot of people would answer 'yes' just for the heck of it.

But would the majority if they understood that the poll was serious?  That is the question.

[Pacifien]

Just a reminder that insults and derailing threads with sociopolitical discussion that's been repeatedly deemed inappropriate for a gaming forum only serves to get you banned. Carry on.

[ganp0t]

Strangely Brown wrote...

It's an interesting idea.  But I think it only work's in theory.  You are asking a company to spend money and resources, developing questions/polls, in the hopes that enough people to justify the expense would even participate.  Then they have to spend more money analyzing the results and trying to develop a game out of it.  Then they have to hope once it is developed that enough people buy it.  They biggest problem is that most people are lazy and may not even participate in the polls.  And whe the majority gets what they want there is still a large group (possibly) who participated and won't get what they want.  They will not buy the game and ultimately the project will fail.  It just won't work and no company would spend the capital on this kind of long shot.

I honestly don't think setting up the polls would take much effort.  I mean, I could set up a poll on these forums in like 5 minutes.  And if Bioware advertised these series of polls on the home pages of all of their games (they could even advertise on every game homepage owned by EA, which is a lot), then a lot of peole will notice the polls and hopefully vote.  Analyzing the polls literally takes one click of a button.  Since most dev teams spend at least 6 months brainstorming a story, this might actually save them a lot of time.  As for lazy people not voting in the polls, these forums are insanely busy compared to other forums I visit.  Even if only 20 percent of visitors vote on a given poll, that is still a lot of votes in total.  It is a risk, but if it doesn't work out within around 2 months then Bioware could just change to a normal development process.  In the long run, 2 months is nothing (some games are in development for like 10 years). 

Modifié par ganp0t, 04 novembre 2010 - 05:30 .

[grregg]

ganp0t wrote...

grregg wrote...

Hmm... the problem that I see with your idea is that it puts all risks and costs on BioWare's shoulders while all decision power rests with the fans. Generally speaking, separating power from risks and responsibilities is a Very Bad Idea ™. In a way, it's like publishing a poll asking whether ganp0t should jump out of a window. Since the public bears no cost or risk of the decision, I'm sure a lot of people would answer 'yes' just for the heck of it.

But would the majority if they understood that the poll was serious?  That is the question.

No, they won't. Or at least not enough of them will. And that's because people only treat seriously things that affect them personally. That's why you can watch the news reporting a genocide in progress, and then grab a beer and watch a game. As horrible as the things on the news might be, unless it's somewhere close, majority of people won't care. They'll probably say things like 'that's a damn shame' and they'll be genuinely sad, but they won't really do anything.

So your approach is not akin to democracy as we know it, it is more like what would happen if voters in, say, China elected the government in the US. In a democracy, voters do bear the consequences of their choices. The feedback loop might take several years to kick in, but the consequences are there and they're real. In your scenario, what are the fans exactly investing? 10 mins of our time to make a decision? That's not much of a risk, and you'll get a lot of people voting in all kinds of ways.

Same as would happen if you posted a poll about jumping out of the window. Most people don't know you and they don't care much so they have little incentive to be concerned about your well-being. Out of a window you go...

[Stanley Woo]

Remember The Homer? IT's a great example of a company taking a risk on what is essentially a "fan project," and failing miserably. Game development is not easy, and it takes a team working together with a unified vision in order to get it all together.

the OP's suggestion might be a great fantasy for some alternate-universe developer to try, but the process would be just too unwieldy to do well. Just a few of the questions I had when I read the concept included:

- who gets to submit feature ideas? how detailed do they have to be in order to make it to the vote?
- who determines which features make it to the vote? how many in the vote list?
- who gets to vote on the feature? how often? where is the vote held?
- how many features are decided before the developers start working?
- who determines the order in which features are voted on?
- can mutually exclusive features make it onto the same list?
- how many developers work on it? what do the idle developers do? do they still get paid?
- how much leeway do developers have to modify the voted-in feature while in development?
- how much autonomy does the developer have to make decisions? what has to be voted on?

And most importantly:
- who's going to pay for all of it?
- how will it be marketed?
- who'd buy it?
- how good does it have to be? how good can it possibly be?

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 04 novembre 2010 - 05:42 .

[ganp0t]

Strangely Brown wrote...

No.  It would take a long time.  Think of how many questions they would actually have to come up with.  It's not as simple as you make it sound.  Also, these forums might be busier compared to other forums but I think the amount of people who participate on the forums are a small fraction compared to the amount that actually buy and play the game.  So the likelihood of getting a large and representative pool of participators is not that big.

True, there aren't millions of people on the forums.

[Stanley Woo]

ganp0t wrote...
What if Infinity Ward had laughed at the idea of creating a modern shooter instead of a WW2 one?

Then they would have developed a different game, which may or may not have succeeded. it's what game developers do.

What if Bioware had never thought it possible to have a Star Wars RPG?

then we would have done something different, which may or may not have succeeded. It's what we game developers do.

Sometimes you just gotta take a chance and hope for the best.

Sure, but remember that you're talking about multi-million dollar projects that take up to 100 people a couple years to do, and that's just on their own initiative. the larger the project, or the greater the number of people making decisions, the longer it's going to take.

The polls could be designed by the dev team, and that way they wouldn't be contradictary.  Here, I can give a few examples right now:
1. what era should the game be set in?   a. ancient or early medieval / b. industrial / c. modern / d. early future / e. distant future
2. what class level should the protagonist come from? a. lowest class / b. middle class / c. upper class / d. ruler
3. to what extend should the looks of the protagonist be cutomizable? a. not at all / b. limited (presets only) / c. open
These could determine the questions to follow (enemy types, further plot developments), and already form the rough basis of a plot.  The key is to use very general questions. 

So concept art and story aren't even decided on before these polls start. Yeah, this project would take a looooooooooooong time. In fact, with questions like #2, it seems that you feel the devs should be using polls to write the story. I can't imagine how slowly dialogue writing will go.

"All right, so Jimson the Green is talking to an old man. How does he greet him?
a) Hello.
Good day, sir.
c) Pickles and Yahtzee!
d) Die, betrayer!

And how does the old man respond to this first line?
a) positively
negatively
c) neither positively nor angrily
d) unusually
e) dance!

What letter should be predominant in Jimson's dialogue?
a) a
b
c) c
d) r
e) blue"

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 04 novembre 2010 - 05:58 .

[Challseus]

I think this would be a horrible, horrible decision on the part of Bioware. The very fact that the people who come on these forums aren't even the majority of people who play their games should be reason enough to not even think of this.



Then again, Bioware is smarter than that, so we have nothing to worry about

[Crippledcarny]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...
See? That's where it all falls apart. "Waaah, Person Y gets the gear I had but he had an easier time than me!" - So what? The people on top are already in the next raid, they're at the next level of gear.

Because it's an insult to the people who try. Play Y didn't work for that gear like player X did. It's like working your ass off to get an A in a class then the teacher says everyone who doesn't have an A will get at least a B. People with the A still have a better grade, but when a B is as low as you can make is an A even worth trying for? I've watch about 8 or so of the top raiding guilds on my old server die in Wrath because of this, mine included. Some of those guild have been around since the very start of WoW and now they're nothing because no one had the will to keep going.

OnlyShallow89 wrote...
I won't deny that I felt that the new 5-mans in ICC caused trouble; It's not so much "casuals" raiding, because a casual player can be damned good at the game, it's the unskilled people who get into raids that cause issues. I was casual in terms of getting my character ready for raids, but I jumped into a hard mode-ish Ulduar run with one of my server's top guilds, and I was nowhere near as geared as them but I still held my own and did pretty damned good. Skill means more than gear ever did, but a number of players don't realise that. Blizzard don't want their players stuck on Naxxramas, they want them in CC, ICC, Ruby Sanctum - They want their players to "experience the content", and in a way they need them to.

I would say that a casual player does have to be bad at the game. Raid hardly takes anytime when your guild doesn't blow. Most people in top end guilds only play about 4-8 hours a week to finish the raid. Time has little to do with being casual, imo.

And yes, gear does matter. And there was a time when if you wanted into an end game guild, you had to work for it. You had to get the best gear in 5mans and then find a guild to sit threw MC, ZG, and AQ20 with. Then you could move on to a better guild to do BWL, to do AQ40, do Naxx. But the fact is gear wasn't all that mattered. There were endless guilds who had every bit of loot from MC and could never make it anywhere in BWL beause they just didn't have the skill.

And I'm sure Blizzard made the changes they did so more players could see more of the game. But guess what? If you just started playing wow how many times do think you're going to into Naxx? Into Sarth? into Ulduar, even? There just isn't reason to do these raids anymore.

OnlyShallow89 wrote...
And yes, the game has gotten easier. There's less need for CC in raids, the fights in Naxxramas were easier than the T4 raids back in TBC. Now any boss is vulnerable to anything - Remember Onyxia? Fire resistance. How about Scholomance and Stratholme? They aren't the easiest 5-mans, but find me one in WotLK that comes close to them in difficulty.

You REALLY REALLY do still need CC for raids. There is no way you could get passed Freya's room with out it. And good luck trying to bum rush Yogg. And if you're talking Wrath Naxx, it was meant to be easy, and it sure as hell was. Pre BC Naxx is pretty much the hardest, and most fun, raid they ever made. The only thing that comes close to it in difficulty is Sun Well. And Idk what you're talking about Ony and Scholo and Strat. They were easy as ****. I remember taking 5-10 groups to kill Ony for gold and bags. I would solo half of Scholo on my priest for AD rep, and I've had a shaman of all thinks tank strat once. And if you're looking for something harder than them in Wrath that's pretty easy, Malygos is endlessly harder than Ony and The Oculus is harder than Strat or Scholo.

[Stanley Woo]

Challseus wrote...
I think this would be a horrible, horrible decision on the part of Bioware. The very fact that the people who come on these forums aren't even the majority of people who play their games should be reason enough to not even think of this.

I was giving the benefit of the doubt and assuming that we had complete buy-in from our playerbase for this hypothetical game.

Then again, Bioware is smarter than that, so we have nothing to worry about

Durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr...

[Randomname1212]

One thing I saw in WoW, is that if Blizzard does one thing people will whine. And then Blizzard caters to the whiners. But if Blizzard does that, then new whiners will arise. And Blizzard will have to switch to them. etc.



There will always be whiners, whats best is to have the smallest amount. And keep the whiner population low.

[ganp0t]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Remember The Homer? IT's a great example of a company taking a risk on what is essentially a "fan project," and failing miserably. Game development is not easy, and it takes a team working together with a unified vision in order to get it all together.

the OP's suggestion might be a great fantasy for some alternate-universe developer to try, but the process would be just too unwieldy to do well. Just a few of the questions I had when I read the concept included:

- who gets to submit feature ideas? how detailed do they have to be in order to make it to the vote?
- who determines which features make it to the vote? how many in the vote list?
- who gets to vote on the feature? how often? where is the vote held?
- how many features are decided before the developers start working?
- who determines the order in which features are voted on?
- can mutually exclusive features make it onto the same list?
- how many developers work on it? what do the idle developers do? do they still get paid?
- how much leeway do developers have to modify the voted-in feature while in development?
- how much autonomy does the developer have to make decisions? what has to be voted on?

And most importantly:
- who's going to pay for all of it?
- how will it be marketed?
- who'd buy it?
- how good does it have to be? how good can it possibly be?

I had never heard of The Homer, so now I will read up on it.  And to answer your questions in order:
1. Bioware dev team determines the questions / the idea is to have them be gerneral conceptual ideas
2. I don't understand the question, but Bioware makes the polls / as many as Bioware wishes there to be (depending on the question
3. all registered forum members get a vote / a couple polls a week / links on the front page of all Bioware games (DAO, ME1 and 2, tOR) with actual poll stickied on front page of forum
4. the first few polls determine the game type, after that the dev team can start brainstorming alongside the polls
5. the dev team
6. such as?  If something like setting as space age or middle ages, then yes
7. as many as Bioware or EA see fit to work on it / The other devs work on other projects or brainstorm new polls or do concept type stuff (you'll think of something) / if they are still working, then yes.  if they aren't currently working, assign them to another game until they are needed
8. the poll questions and answers will be general in nature, but the devs must go with the winning ones.  Although if a poll said the protagonist was a peasant, then the devs could establish that he was a peasant in the first cutscene or level, and then make him the emperor
9. the major story ideas should be voted one, but the results don't have to be shared with the public.  stuff like major plot twists, the ending(s), and origins are major ideas.  However, stuff such as individual characters and level design should be handled completely by the devs

----
1.  whoever normally pays to develop games...
2. at first (during the poll "season") it will be marketed through Bioware or EA websites and various news sites (gameinformer, x-play, etc), later on (when the game is ready to be sold (if it ever gets to that point)) it will have a normal ad campaign
3. Bioware fans, EA fans maybe, western RPG or action (depending how it works out) fans, and curious gamers eager to see how a game determined by unprecedented levels of fan input handles itself.
4. How good did Mass Effect have to be?  (I assume the correct answer is: good enough to sell well) / it can be as good as the team and fans can make it to be.  I recently heard of an indie game called Infinity: Quest for Earth.  The game has a single developer, who works on it in his free time.  He accepts direct fan contributions of models, skins, and ideas.  He even created a thread for as many people to pour in ideas as they could.  You could say that inspired my idea.     

EDIT: I simply must protest about your comparison to The Homer.  The entire basis of the simpsons show is that Homer is a man of extremely low intelligence.  According to my idea, the majority vote will determine what happens in the game.  Hopefully the average Bioware fan happens to be smarter than Homer Simpson.

Modifié par ganp0t, 04 novembre 2010 - 06:31 .

[Stanley Woo]

Homer is an example of a "fan" who has a lot of ideas about what he wanted in an ideal car. In that episode, he represents the forum-goer.



It appears from your answers to my questions, ganp0t, that you're not really familiar with how game development works. On the one hand, you want the game to be determined by the fans based on polls, but on the other hand, you want the game developer to do roughly twice the amount of work for negative benefit (ie. taking more time to design features, not being able to coordinate workflow, having less autonomy while doing more work outside the game).

4. the first few polls determine the game type, after that the dev team can start brainstorming alongside the polls

This is work that should be in the pre-production stage, before anyone else hears about the project at all. Only a few people are involved at this stage of the project, because there is little development work being done and a lot of concept art, organizational meetings, and budgeting and scheduling. It is at this point that the vision of the project is created, and that is very hard to do when you've got a dozen disparate voices voting on what that vision is.

7. as many as Bioware or EA see fit to work on it / The other devs work on other projects or brainstorm new polls or do concept type stuff (you'll think of something) / if they are still working, then yes. if they aren't currently working, assign them to another game until they are needed

This is assuming there is another project for them to go to. Usually, if there's no other work for people to do, the studio lets them go. Of course, i'm assuming that this hypothetical concept is a viable project that possibly could get funded.

8. the poll questions and answers will be general in nature, but the devs must go with the winning ones. Although if a poll said the protagonist was a peasant, then the devs could establish that he was a peasant in the first cutscene or level, and then make him the emperor

This explanation essentially makes any poll useless, as it means any poll result (that the developer has to take) can be negated or changed at any time. why even have a poll, then?

9. the major story ideas should be voted one, but the results don't have to be shared with the public. stuff like major plot twists, the ending(s), and origins are major ideas. However, stuff such as individual characters and level design should be handled completely by the devs

Define "major story idea" and "major plot twist." And since you say that an origin can be changed right away, can the "major story idea" and "major plot twist" similarly be changed or negated after it is introduced?

4. How good did Mass Effect have to be? (I assume the correct answer is: good enough to sell well) / it can be as good as the team and fans can make it to be. I recently heard of an indie game called Infinity: Quest for Earth. The game has a single developer, who works on it in his free time. He accepts direct fan contributions of models, skins, and ideas. He even created a thread for as many people to pour in ideas as they could. You could say that inspired my idea.

But the fans aren't "making" anything. All they're doing is clicking on polls. the development team is still the one doing all the work, except now they're adding "design, implement, and analyze use polls" to their workflow, which significantly increases the time needed to complete this project. and in our world, time equals money, which is paying for developer salaries, technology and software licenses, facilities, and administration.

[Freelancer rook]

It depends on the idea.

[ganp0t]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Homer is an example of a "fan" who has a lot of ideas about what he wanted in an ideal car. In that episode, he represents the forum-goer.

It appears from your answers to my questions, ganp0t, that you're not really familiar with how game development works. On the one hand, you want the game to be determined by the fans based on polls, but on the other hand, you want the game developer to do roughly twice the amount of work for negative benefit (ie. taking more time to design features, not being able to coordinate workflow, having less autonomy while doing more work outside the game).

It is true that I am not at all familiar with the way games are developed.  I don't see how creating polls doubles the work load, but I will take you at your word. 

Stanley Woo wrote...

This is work that should be in the pre-production stage, before anyone else hears about the project at all. Only a few people are involved at this stage of the project, because there is little development work being done and a lot of concept art, organizational meetings, and budgeting and scheduling. It is at this point that the vision of the project is created, and that is very hard to do when you've got a dozen disparate voices voting on what that vision is.

The entire point was to make the fans involved with the pre-production stage, and actually have them determine at the most basic level what the game is about.  The devs would take that foundation and create a game around it.  What I really wanted was a fan-created game vision. 

Stanley Woo wrote...

This explanation essentially makes any poll useless, as it means any poll result (that the developer has to take) can be negated or changed at any time. why even have a poll, then?

I sort of mis typed there.  I meant that by the end (or even the middle) of the game the peasant could become something different.  Another example is havng a "tough" character in the game.  Just because they are tough doesn't mean they won't have moments of weakness or kindness.  In that way most of the poll results would be flexible while still matter to the framework of the game. 

Stanley Woo wrote...

Define "major story idea" and "major plot twist." And since you say that an origin can be changed right away, can the "major story idea" and "major plot twist" similarly be changed or negated after it is introduced?

I can't really explain except through an example.  Say the fans wanted a close character to betray you as a plot twist.  The poll wouldn't have te options of saying who betrays the protagonist, or when, or why.  The only real restrictions to the devs are that somewhere throught the story, a character close to the protagonist will betray him (or her), and that this has to have an impact on the overall story (can't just put it in a sidequest then never speak of it again).  Everything else is left up to the devs to decide. 

Stanley Woo wrote...

But the fans aren't "making" anything. All they're doing is clicking on polls. the development team is still the one doing all the work, except now they're adding "design, implement, and analyze use polls" to their workflow, which significantly increases the time needed to complete this project. and in our world, time equals money, which is paying for developer salaries, technology and software licenses, facilities, and administration.

I disagree.  The fans aren't actually making things inside the game (like the levels), but through choosing things which make it into the game they are still helping (even in a small way) to design it.  The fact that Bioware actually does listen to its fans (as evidenced by our conversation) is extremely appreciated by many fans (including me).  I see this idea as an experimental step forward in that department.  Regardless of how you feel, I am grateful that you have taken the time to talk with me.

[Funkcase]

Getting ideas from fans is great and thats what makes Bioware great, but making a game with every idea coming from the fans? That would be horrible. Most fans cant agree on anything, how the hell are they supposed to tell people who make games for a living how to do there job? Would a civilian tell a soldier how to strip a gun?