131 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

Vaeliorin wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Pauravi wrote...
ME2 had an actual software method of reporting back to Bioware about gameplay habits.  DA lacked such a thing, so it would have to be done by poll, which is inherently unrealiable and comparatively inaccurate.

I thought DA had it too.  Hence the "extremely few people played Dwarves" metric.

It did, but you could turn it off in DA, and I don't know that you could in ME2 (I initially turned it off in DA, before changing my mind and turning it on, so I never bothered to look to see if I could turn it off in ME2.)

It also might not report for people without a persistent internet connection. Achievements and such are stored until login, but I don't know if the other data is too. Although the Achievement data by itself tells you most of what you want to know --   origins played, endings reached, choices made, character designs played.

I don't suppose it really matters that the system doesn't capture everyone's data. Even if folks who turn reporting off or can't make the connection are different from other players, Bio's got no real way to know how they differ, so they might as well just accept whatever data comes in.

[Sir JK]

AlanC9 wrote...
It also might not report for people without a persistent internet connection. Achievements and such are stored until login, but I don't know if the other data is too. Although the Achievement data by itself tells you most of what you want to know --   origins played, endings reached, choices made, character designs played.

I don't suppose it really matters that the system doesn't capture everyone's data. Even if folks who turn reporting off or can't make the connection are different from other players, Bio's got no real way to know how they differ, so they might as well just accept whatever data comes in.

This is basically correct. Bioware can simply use statistics on the data theyr recieve to succesfully make an approximation of all people that purchased the game. All they need is a population, the players that "reported in", and then they can take samples of this and make correct determinations and approximations of the information without having every piece of data. In this information they will, unless there is a heavy bias (which is unlikely in random sample pools), be able to summarize all playstyles and preferences just based on means, standard deviations and then turn that to hard numbers.
Even if they don't have mine, or yours, or Sylvius data our playstyles and preferences will be forseen and included in their statistical models. Even if they just get the data of 10 000 players, that will likely be enough to provide an accurate model of all various playstyles. Assuming no bias.

Modifié par Sir JK, 10 novembre 2010 - 09:27 .

[In Exile]

Sir JK wrote...
This is basically correct. Bioware can simply use statistics on the data theyr recieve to succesfully make an approximation of all people that purchased the game. All they need is a population, the players that "reported in", and then they can take samples of this and make correct determinations and approximations of the information without having every piece of data. In this information they will, unless there is a heavy bias (which is unlikely in random sample pools), be able to summarize all playstyles and preferences just based on means, standard deviations and then turn that to hard numbers.
Even if they don't have mine, or yours, or Sylvius data our playstyles and preferences will be forseen and included in their statistical models. Even if they just get the data of 10 000 players, that will likely be enough to provide an accurate model of all various playstyles. Assuming no bias.

Self-report is a bias. There might be something special about the population of people that has/leaves their game connected to the internet so long as to allow for Bioware to collect data.

This may not be an issue depending on what Bioware tracks. For example, if all they look at is race choice and story choice, then it doesn't matter what playstyle we use. All that matters is the variance in characters selected.

[Vena_86]

So an improvement would be making the game shorter? The outstanding playtime (for todays standards) is one of DAs best features! Those retards who can't be bothered finishing something and getting involved into a game should NOT BE THE TARGET AUDIENCE FOR AN RPG!

Modifié par Vena_86, 10 novembre 2010 - 02:44 .

[upsettingshorts]

Vena_86 wrote...

So an improvement would be making the game shorter? The outstanding playtime (for todays standards) is on of DAs best features! Those retards who can't be bothered finishing something and getting involved into a game should NOT BE THE TARGET AUDIENCE FOR AN RPG!

Well I'm sure your point will be taken with the seriousness it deserves.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 10 novembre 2010 - 02:44 .

[In Exile]

Vena_86 wrote...

So an improvement would be making the game shorter? The outstanding playtime (for todays standards) is one of DAs best features! Those retards who can't be bothered finishing something and getting involved into a game should NOT BE THE TARGET AUDIENCE FOR AN RPG!

My favourite parts were the complexity of the deep roads (yay for linear dungeon crawl!) along with the complexity of the Brecillian forest (yay for the complexity of a dungeon crawl!).

The last Bioware game produced that managed to avoid pointless padding was JE. Bioware just seems to fall in love with a 10 second plot.

[Sir JK]

Vena_86 wrote...

So an improvement would be making the game shorter? The outstanding playtime (for todays standards) is one of DAs best features! Those retards who can't be bothered finishing something and getting involved into a game should NOT BE THE TARGET AUDIENCE FOR AN RPG!

That's the beauty of the premise of this thread (if I may say so myself), if you think shortening the game is the wrong way of solving the problem that's your perogative. I only ask what you intend to try to do to accomodate those players instead. Since you do in fact seem to think that making the game shorter is a bad move, what do you suggest should be done to make them finish it and how?

[Ortaya Alevli]

Or perhaps it's not the best idea to "improve" DA2 to accommodate the players who don't enjoy long-standing games. You cannot make a soup fit for everyone's taste, no matter how many ingredients you dump in it. A desire to sell as many copies as possible usually translates as simplification.

[Sir JK]

That's certainly a possibility too. But cutting of some of a products consumers is generally a very bad idea financially. Even if you make the perfect rpg, some of the fans will never return. This might be due to their lives moving on, their financial or temporal situation changing, health-issues and what not. In reality, there is no such thing as a perfect game either, so you'll also lose future consumers that simply thinks the game was just not that good.



So if a portion of players don't finish the game because it's too long (which probably more accurately translates as: too boring) that is a group of players you can be sure they won't return for a sequel. Now you can either change that feature they were displeased with (they got bored... something needs to be done there) or make sure the loss of them is compensated with new customers. If you don't then you're slowly heading for financial disaster (and as much as we may hate it, the gaming market is run by financial forces).

So my question to those of you who say: "Good riddance" to the people that didn't finish is: What will you change to attract the same number of other customers? Because ultimately, those are the people that will take part in paying for the game. Sooner or later that precious corte market will be too few to pay for it (due to the above-mentioned attrition).



You don't wish to shorten the game or change it's pacing? That's fine. What do you change instead? Because you have to change something. That's how the market works.

[joriandrake]

TMZuk wrote...

[*]A lot of people didn't finish the game, due to length or uniformity.

More content, less needless combat, more non-combat options, don't penalize on the xp for seeking other options than combat.

this

[AlexXIV]

Well in DA:O recruiting the Elves and Dwarves could have been optional, and not necessary to push the main plot. To me it always seemed like forced side quests. That way people could choose to use the fast road if they wanted.

[Ortaya Alevli]

Sir JK wrote...

That's certainly a possibility too. But cutting of some of a products consumers is generally a very bad idea financially. Even if you make the perfect rpg, some of the fans will never return. This might be due to their lives moving on, their financial or temporal situation changing, health-issues and what not. In reality, there is no such thing as a perfect game either, so you'll also lose future consumers that simply thinks the game was just not that good.

So if a portion of players don't finish the game because it's too long (which probably more accurately translates as: too boring) that is a group of players you can be sure they won't return for a sequel. Now you can either change that feature they were displeased with (they got bored... something needs to be done there) or make sure the loss of them is compensated with new customers. If you don't then you're slowly heading for financial disaster (and as much as we may hate it, the gaming market is run by financial forces).
So my question to those of you who say: "Good riddance" to the people that didn't finish is: What will you change to attract the same number of other customers? Because ultimately, those are the people that will take part in paying for the game. Sooner or later that precious corte market will be too few to pay for it (due to the above-mentioned attrition).

You don't wish to shorten the game or change it's pacing? That's fine. What do you change instead? Because you have to change something. That's how the market works.

A speed run on ME1 takes about six hours of my time, whereas an ordinary playthrough may take up to forty hours. The same kind of approach might work for Dragon Age as well.

Not that I'm one of those who say "Good riddance."

On the other hand, when you go to a restaurant and take a look at the menu, you'll see plenty of dishes most people don't care about on the list. Many people I know don't like grilled whiting. I can kill for grilled whiting. If no restaurant served grilled whiting, I'd totally riot. I just wish attempts to reach for a larger audience will not result in a compromise. Of course it's completely for BioWare to decide if they'll continue to target the same audience they have so far; that goes without saying. But someone better serve me my bleeding grilled whiting, if you catch my drift.

[AlanC9]

In Exile wrote...

Self-report is a bias. There might be something special about the population of people that has/leaves their game connected to the internet so long as to allow for Bioware to collect data.

Even if there was, what does that change for Bio? Did the people who disconnect from the internet or turn reporting off play dwarves more often, or less often? Knowing that there's some potential bias in the numbers you've got doesn't give you access to better numbers.

[upsettingshorts]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...
But someone better serve me my bleeding grilled whiting, if you catch my drift.

If you want to talk about seafood, you should post in the Off-Topic subforum.

[Ortaya Alevli]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...
But someone better serve me my bleeding grilled whiting, if you catch my drift.

If you want to talk about seafood, you should post in the Off-Topic subforum.

And there goes my effort at sublety.

[In Exile]

AlanC9 wrote...

Even if there was, what does that change for Bio? Did the people who disconnect from the internet or turn reporting off play dwarves more often, or less often? Knowing that there's some potential bias in the numbers you've got doesn't give you access to better numbers.

There's nothing Bioware can do. I was just pointing out it isn't per se reasonable to assume the data isn't biased when it has a pretty clear response bias. Whether or not that matters is a different question. It probably depends on what data Bioware is collecting.

[upsettingshorts]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...
But someone better serve me my bleeding grilled whiting, if you catch my drift.

If you want to talk about seafood, you should post in the Off-Topic subforum.

And there goes my effort at sublety.

And apparently my effort at bone-dry humor.

[Ortaya Alevli]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

And apparently my effort at bone-dry humor.

It didn't, as far as I'm concerned. I was just hoping nobody would catch me red-handed with that extra lame pun.

[AlanC9]

Sir JK wrote...

So if a portion of players don't finish the game because it's too long (which probably more accurately translates as: too boring) that is a group of players you can be sure they won't return for a sequel. Now you can either change that feature they were displeased with (they got bored... something needs to be done there) or make sure the loss of them is compensated with new customers. If you don't then you're slowly heading for financial disaster (and as much as we may hate it, the gaming market is run by financial forces).

Bio doesn't seem to have been too worried that only approximately 50% of ME2 players finished the game. If they though that was damaging data I don't think they would have released it. Though OTOH that 50% includes renters and borrowers, so those folks aren't sales anyway.

[AlanC9]

In Exile wrote...
There's nothing Bioware can do. I was just pointing out it isn't per se reasonable to assume the data isn't biased when it has a pretty clear response bias. Whether or not that matters is a different question. It probably depends on what data Bioware is collecting.

Or in this case non-response bias, since you have to go out of your way to turn the system off. Though actually the term "response bias" doesn't refer to either of these things. we want "voluntary response bias " for that; I'm not aware of a term for the reverse situation.

Modifié par AlanC9, 10 novembre 2010 - 06:53 .

[Epic777]

Ah, the art of improving elements that no one can agree on. I wonder if this will be as vicious as me2's inventory "debates".

[Hollingdale]

The reason Bioware fail at graphics (the exception being Mass Effect franchise) is because they tend to focus on rendering certain things (usually character models but also certain buildings, and spell effects etc) in a very detailed realistic fashion while leaving enviroments looking like something from the previous generation.



This inconsequence graphic wise not only leads to performance issues on consoles because Bioware are to vain to cut down on the things that they think look good (auras stand out as the most idiotic example of this in Origins) but also means that those detailed features are essentially wasted as they don't look natural when appearing in such shabby enviroments even on a PC with maxed settings.



Imo Bioware should chill the **** out with their Polygon count and texture details (which Dragon Age 2 seems to be doing luckily) if it makes them unable to create an immersive world. It's ridiculous that people here actually don't understand this and tend to complain about just those things that are part of the problem.

[Nighteye2]

Sir JK wrote...
Outdated visuals. The graphics are a bit on the old side. Okay for DAO, not for it's sequel

Use higher res textures, tesselation and other DX11 effects to make it look more real. The consoles haven't changed since DA:O, so the same old graphics will work for them.

Sir JK wrote...
Lack of a distinct art style. People see screenshots but don't know immediatly it's dragon age. SOmething needs to be done.

Just increase the number of screenshots with darkspawn - they're distinctive enough already.

Sir JK wrote...
Combat is sluggish, slow and crude.

Add a combat speed slider that increases the combat animation speed  - that should satisfy both those who want it faster and those who enjoyed the combat speed of DA:O.

Sir JK wrote...
A lot of people didn't finish the game, due to length or uniformity

Make a shorter critical path for those who want to rush it, with lots of optional content for those who enjoy exploring and taking their time.

Sir JK wrote...
The controls for the console versions are far behind the PC version

It's a hardware limitation of the consoles, and can't be helped without harming the PC version. cRPGs just don't work well with console controls. Maybe team up with a hardware manufacturer to bring mouse and keyboard to the consoles?

Sir JK wrote...
Some people felt it was too easy, some too difficult

Provide a bigger spread between difficulty levels, added more monsters and perhaps giving monsters a bit higher hp on higher difficulty settings to keep more monsters alive longer.


It's not that hard, really, and can be done relatively cheaply - freeing up the devs to concentrate on content and an awesome story.

[Hollingdale]

Nighteye2 wrote...

Sir JK wrote...
Outdated visuals. The graphics are a bit on the old side. Okay for DAO, not for it's sequel

Use higher res textures, tesselation and other DX11 effects to make it look more real. The consoles haven't changed since DA:O, so the same old graphics will work for them.

Sir JK wrote...
Lack of a distinct art style. People see screenshots but don't know immediatly it's dragon age. SOmething needs to be done.

Just increase the number of screenshots with darkspawn - they're distinctive enough already.

Sir JK wrote...
Combat is sluggish, slow and crude.

Add a combat speed slider that increases the combat animation speed  - that should satisfy both those who want it faster and those who enjoyed the combat speed of DA:O.

Sir JK wrote...
A lot of people didn't finish the game, due to length or uniformity

Make a shorter critical path for those who want to rush it, with lots of optional content for those who enjoy exploring and taking their time.

Sir JK wrote...
The controls for the console versions are far behind the PC version

It's a hardware limitation of the consoles, and can't be helped without harming the PC version. cRPGs just don't work well with console controls. Maybe team up with a hardware manufacturer to bring mouse and keyboard to the consoles?

Sir JK wrote...
Some people felt it was too easy, some too difficult

Provide a bigger spread between difficulty levels, added more monsters and perhaps giving monsters a bit higher hp on higher difficulty settings to keep more monsters alive longer.


It's not that hard, really, and can be done relatively cheaply - freeing up the devs to concentrate on content and an awesome story.

You input regarding graphics are completely off, have you played many Bioware 3d rpg's? Their issues are basic, they are simply bad at graphics, and technology wont help them, in fact it tends to cripple them further because they become fixated with just the sort of things you mentioned rather than what really matters (creating an in all aspects immersive living breathing world).

A combat speed slider ruins immersion, the main issue with combat speed was the fact that you can't strike an enemy while moving or at anything but a very specific distance. For concoles the lack of a real pause button kinda sucked to though. Both theese issues will be fixed.

You idea regarding lenght is basically to make a sandbox game instead, which first of all: Is obviously not going to happen, and second: would be a bad idea even if development on Dragon Age 2 hadn't even begun yet. Looking at Dragon Age 2 with it's voiced protagonist and action packed combat I'm very much inclined to think that it will be more similar to ME2 in lenght than it's predecessor. Which unfortunately sucks for most fans. Kudos for not ranting about casuals or console kiddies and that their opinions ''shouldn't'' matter as if what a small group of hardcore fans deems ethically has any real effect on what more casual people want in a game.

The controls for consoles are only partly a hardware issue (if the lack of buttons on a controller can be called that). For example the lack of a genuine pause buttons on consoles (you have to hold down a button to pause because if you select click to pause then the game will unpause after every selected action losing you precious time unless you instantly reclick which is more frustrating than holding a button down in the first place anyway) is inexcusable and the result of sheer incompetence imo. As is the small number of hotkeys when the controllers do allow for at least twice the amount. The pausing issue will hopefully be fixed. As regards the hotkeys, I think not.

I think you onto something with the HP, despite the combat being pausable I think the issue for a lot of novices was that they died too quick; indeed incoming damage can sometimes be a little too uneven, especially on normal and easy. Another problem is that Bioware often tend to lead the player into a series of very easy fights only to suddenly have them encounter a very hard one. Theese two things seriously suck for those who are new to the genre and know not to expect them.
The issue with the higher difficulties is as usual that while enemies gain HP and DMG their AI remains pretty much the same (maybe there are differences, I didn't really feel them going from normal to nightmare though), this predictability in regards to enemy behaviour means that even on nightmare you rarely have to think twice about what to do, you just have to pull it off a bit tighter and if things start going bad you can resort to some cheap tactics to lure the enemy. Sadly you really do have to metagame or fail in order for the game to be challenging.

Modifié par Hollingdale, 10 novembre 2010 - 10:08 .

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

Actually the design example of architecture you used to explain art direction in the LotR movies is nothing greater than the art direction followed in the making of DA:O. Human buildings are based very much of design aesthetics from Saxon Britain. The dwarven architecture and stone work is actually based on Meso-American design with it's geometry and sharp angular patterns. The color pallette for Dragon Age is earthy, muddy, dark and gritty for the most part and it is intentional. The design team for Dragon Age did have an art direction plan, though it's a subtle and realistic one as opposed to your other example of World of Warcraft with it's cartoony, stylized characters, vibrant colors and over the top, expressive characters. Dragon Age is just more subtle though I can agree with SnakeStrike8 in saying I can identify it seperately from most game screenshots I see. But...some people might not be able to notice it because the art direction and style is subtle.