187 réponses à ce sujet

[Ziggeh]

Deviija wrote...

I am concerned in so far as I have yet to see official gameplay for the PC version. We had a lot more info and video out at this time before launch on DAO.

We also had considerably less "very similar previous game" out prior to DA:Os launch.

[PsychoBlonde]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

mokponobi wrote...

More time does not equal better quality.

I would rather they release a game in march of 2011 if that is what they feel confident in doing. Then begin work on something else that will be worthy of the technology available in 2012 or 13, instead of putzing around with stuff for years and falling behind with the technology.

Yes, it does in most cases. The more time you have to perfect something, the better it will be when you decide to release it to the public. It's simple logic, and the only way for it not to be true is if you have major complications or are incompetent.

By this "logic", Duke Nukem Forever should be the best game of all time.

Sometimes having an aggressive deadline will actually improve a product.  It forces you to focus on what's important, helps prevent burnout because it feels like you're messing with it FOREVER and not getting anywhere, etc.  There is no one perfect ideal amount of time that it should take to design a game (or do anything, really).  If there were actually signs that EA was forcing Bioware to work to a schedule that Bioware thought was way to aggressive, that'd be different.  I haven't seen any signs of that so far.  In fact, EA has been pushing its developers to polish games more in recent years rather than pushing for release, release, release.

I do hope they will push back the release date rather than ship a buggy product, though.  But barring any actual information along these lines, I will wait and see before I start screaming. 

[EpicBoot2daFace]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

mokponobi wrote...

More time does not equal better quality.

I would rather they release a game in march of 2011 if that is what they feel confident in doing. Then begin work on something else that will be worthy of the technology available in 2012 or 13, instead of putzing around with stuff for years and falling behind with the technology.

Yes, it does in most cases. The more time you have to perfect something, the better it will be when you decide to release it to the public. It's simple logic, and the only way for it not to be true is if you have major complications or are incompetent.

By this "logic", Duke Nukem Forever should be the best game of all time.

Sometimes having an aggressive deadline will actually improve a product.  It forces you to focus on what's important, helps prevent burnout because it feels like you're messing with it FOREVER and not getting anywhere, etc.  There is no one perfect ideal amount of time that it should take to design a game (or do anything, really).  If there were actually signs that EA was forcing Bioware to work to a schedule that Bioware thought was way to aggressive, that'd be different.  I haven't seen any signs of that so far.  In fact, EA has been pushing its developers to polish games more in recent years rather than pushing for release, release, release.

I do hope they will push back the release date rather than ship a buggy product, though.  But barring any actual information along these lines, I will wait and see before I start screaming. 

By my logic, no it shouldn't. As I said, if the dev or publisher is incompetent and can't decide what they want to do or even decide if they want to release the game or not, then time in dev house doesn't really matter.

My point still stands: with a competent dev/publsiher, extra time, especially for RPG's, will result in a better product than one that is rushed out the door.

[Nerivant]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

PsychoBlonde wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

mokponobi wrote...

More time does not equal better quality.

I would rather they release a game in march of 2011 if that is what they feel confident in doing. Then begin work on something else that will be worthy of the technology available in 2012 or 13, instead of putzing around with stuff for years and falling behind with the technology.

Yes, it does in most cases. The more time you have to perfect something, the better it will be when you decide to release it to the public. It's simple logic, and the only way for it not to be true is if you have major complications or are incompetent.

By this "logic", Duke Nukem Forever should be the best game of all time.

Sometimes having an aggressive deadline will actually improve a product.  It forces you to focus on what's important, helps prevent burnout because it feels like you're messing with it FOREVER and not getting anywhere, etc.  There is no one perfect ideal amount of time that it should take to design a game (or do anything, really).  If there were actually signs that EA was forcing Bioware to work to a schedule that Bioware thought was way to aggressive, that'd be different.  I haven't seen any signs of that so far.  In fact, EA has been pushing its developers to polish games more in recent years rather than pushing for release, release, release.

I do hope they will push back the release date rather than ship a buggy product, though.  But barring any actual information along these lines, I will wait and see before I start screaming. 

By my logic, no it shouldn't. As I said, if the dev or publisher is incompetent and can't decide what they want to do or even decide if they want to release the game or not, then time in dev house doesn't really matter.

My point still stands: with a competent dev/publsiher, extra time, especially for RPG's, will result in a better product than one that is rushed out the door.

So, a simple game that is developed in months is automatically worse than a complex game developed in years?

[Fraevar]

Yes, I am a little bit concerned. We had ample material to make an informed decision about Origins six months prior to release, and the more EA holds back the PC version there more I fear that it will not live up to Origins, leading to a repeat of Awakening, which had a great story with great characters shoe-horned into horrible new gameplay mechanisms.

[Ziggeh]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

ziggehunderslash wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Yes, it does in most cases. The more time you have to perfect something, the better it will be when you decide to release it to the public. It's simple logic, and the only way for it not to be true is if you have major complications or are incompetent.

If it takes 1 man 6 hours to dig a ditch, how long does it take 3 men?

Yeah, because game development is like digging a ditch.

Indeed, it is different in a number of ways to digging a hole. But the point of the analogy, which I thought was quite clear, is that man hours is not the same thing as project length, meaning the time something takes isn't actually a strong indication of anything. Does the shorter lead time mean it will be shorter? Probably does. Does it mean it will be rushed? No.

[Brockololly]

PsychoBlonde wrote...
In fact, EA has been pushing its developers to polish games more in recent years rather than pushing for release, release, release.

Well, just take Medal of Honor that just came out. Months prior to that coming out you can read articles on how the devs said they were done with the game and polishing, polishing, polishing. Yet the game came out and it was resoundingly mediocre with bugs galore. And EA has said as much about the game and yet they shipped it anyway. I'm not saying that'll happen with BioWare and DA2, but after Awakening and much of the DLC being of noticably lower quality than Origins, I'm skeptical. And the lack of any official gameplay video doesn't do anything to help.

PsychoBlonde wrote...
I do hope they will push back the release date rather than ship a buggy product, though.  But barring any actual information along these lines, I will wait and see before I start screaming. 

I would too, but again, they released Awakening in an awfully buggy state and its still not fixed completely to this day. Nevermind the overall feel that it was just rushed at the end.  I'd much rather the release date be moved back to allow for a better game than to have some buggy, incomplete game ship just so EA can chalk up DA2 in their fiscal 2011.

It just gets down to their marketing really. Apparently its more important to tease and market some nebulous, mysterious shooter game than it is to try and market a game thats coming out in a mere 3 months or so.

[nubbers666]

duno about the leaked game play vids but personaly im glad they have not realeased to much video of it

i want to be kept in the dark about most of it



besides the unknown will be what attracts most of the game buyers becuase of how good it was on dao

[Dave of Canada]

Brockololly wrote...

It just gets down to their marketing really. Apparently its more important to tease and market some nebulous, mysterious shooter game than it is to try and market a game thats coming out in a mere 3 months or so.

....

Please tell me you're not blaming the new game marketing for DA2.

Please.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 17 novembre 2010 - 10:42 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Brockololly wrote...

PsychoBlonde wrote...
In fact, EA has been pushing its developers to polish games more in recent years rather than pushing for release, release, release.

Well, just take Medal of Honor that just came out. Months prior to that coming out you can read articles on how the devs said they were done with the game and polishing, polishing, polishing. Yet the game came out and it was resoundingly mediocre with bugs galore. And EA has said as much about the game and yet they shipped it anyway. I'm not saying that'll happen with BioWare and DA2, but after Awakening and much of the DLC being of noticably lower quality than Origins, I'm skeptical. And the lack of any official gameplay video doesn't do anything to help.

PsychoBlonde wrote...
I do hope they will push back the release date rather than ship a buggy product, though.  But barring any actual information along these lines, I will wait and see before I start screaming. 

I would too, but again, they released Awakening in an awfully buggy state and its still not fixed completely to this day. Nevermind the overall feel that it was just rushed at the end.  I'd much rather the release date be moved back to allow for a better game than to have some buggy, incomplete game ship just so EA can chalk up DA2 in their fiscal 2011.

It just gets down to their marketing really. Apparently its more important to tease and market some nebulous, mysterious shooter game than it is to try and market a game thats coming out in a mere 3 months or so.

QFT, though to be honest I didn't think the design on Awakening was great to begin with with the whole "target points for conversation" Oh hey theres a tree! "Anders: Trees are nice, hey I'm not locked up in the  Circle Tower"  Player clicks on Anders to further the conversation, nada.  Just a really odd way to go about it.

[Ziggeh]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Please tell me you're not blaming the new game marketing for DA2.

Please.

If a different group of programmers weren't working on something different, the programmers that are making DA:O would be able to do more.

Edit: didn't I say I loved doing that?

Modifié par ziggehunderslash, 17 novembre 2010 - 10:45 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

ziggehunderslash wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Yes, it does in most cases. The more time you have to perfect something, the better it will be when you decide to release it to the public. It's simple logic, and the only way for it not to be true is if you have major complications or are incompetent.

If it takes 1 man 6 hours to dig a ditch, how long does it take 3 men?

Yeah, because game development is like digging a ditch.

Indeed, it is different in a number of ways to digging a hole. But the point of the analogy, which I thought was quite clear, is that man hours is not the same thing as project length, meaning the time something takes isn't actually a strong indication of anything. Does the shorter lead time mean it will be shorter? Probably does. Does it mean it will be rushed? No.

Perhaps not. But it is likely that the game will be rushed to meet the deadline.

[PsychoBlonde]

Brockololly wrote...

It just gets down to their marketing really. Apparently its more important to tease and market some nebulous, mysterious shooter game than it is to try and market a game thats coming out in a mere 3 months or so.

From the number of bits of leaked demo footage etc., I'd hardly say that they aren't marketing DA2.

[Realmjumper]

To me there's just not enough time to get everything up to par. Seriously think about it, this game is less than four months away. The only logical conclusion I can come up with the schedule is that the new technology they invented for Mass Effect 2 is helping them come up with levels much more faster.



That is they can edit on the fly as they are building the level. There was a preview of this tech in E3 to the press before Mass Effect 2 was released. I'm not sure if you guys can remember.



3 months and change till this game is released, if there's a delay I wouldn't be surprised at all.

[Annarl]

Bioware isn't known to release gameplay footage, so no I'm not worried.  Some of the changes have me concerned but I still believe Bioware will come through with a great game.  Right?

Modifié par omearaee, 18 novembre 2010 - 12:00 .

[Schuback]

We need character trailers!! We'll get to see gamplay videos in them too.

[ErichHartmann]

The last time I recall playing a PC game without bugs was in the 1980's. Naturally they were a lot more simplistic back then. And the time between BG and BG SOA was 19 months.

[Revan312]

omearaee wrote...

Bioware isn't known to release gameplay footage, so no I'm not worried.  Some of the changes have me concerned but I still believe Bioware will come through with a great game.  Right?

Yet as has been reiterated a dozen times.. they released gameplay footage for both DA:O and Mass Effect 2 well before their 3 1/2 month deadlines..

Not showing gameplay footage isn't nescessarily a bad thing, but I will say that their marketing team is choking on when to push the game. 3.5 months is so little time consdering going gold is about a month out from release, which means really there's only 2 1/2 months left of dev time, which for most games is the bug testing and polishing phase.

To not have really.. anything out that shows the actual content of the game at this point in time is odd, if not maybe worriesome.  From a marketing standpoint this is when Bioware should be really pushing videos, bios, content peeks and detailed previews out and yet there's almost nothing atm. Since this isn't a holiday release, the month before and after December should be the major time periods for marketing, so I'm just boggled why they're not railroading sneak peeks etc into the game-o-sphere.

Modifié par Revan312, 18 novembre 2010 - 01:24 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

I just don't think a year is enough time for any sequel, let alone an RPG. Was this game in dev a year before Origins shipped?

[slimgrin]

It's not uncommon for devs to show early builds of a game up to a year ahead of release. Thats what gamers want to see: how the game actually plays. It seems to me they are waiting too long before showing this.

[Brockololly]

Revan312 wrote...

To not have really.. anything out that shows the actual content of the game at this point in time is odd, if not maybe worriesome.

Thats the thing though too- they clearly have had the game at conventions and are showing it off to the press. And have been for months. Why not toss something up online if its good enough to show off to the press and thousands of people at conventions?

Revan312 wrote...
From a marketing standpoint this is when Bioware should be really pushing videos, bios, content peeks and detailed previews out and yet there's almost nothing atm. Since this isn't a holiday release, the month before and after December should be the major time periods for marketing, so I'm just boggled why they're not railroading sneak peeks etc into the game-o-sphere.

Even if it was just a weekly piece of lore or concept art every Friday or something like they're doing with TOR. Just something on a regular basis to sort of build some hype. I mean, they put up Varric on the DA2 site, but unless you were digging for that you would never know.

Mostly, I just hope for some substantial PC gameplay walkthroughs before January 11th. I might really want to preorder this, but I'm not going to until I can see what the game is actually like on the PC.

[Crimson Invictus]

I'm not the least bit worried and I'm not entirely sure why anybody would be. One would assume they will show them when they want to, regardless of what people might imagine is the best time to show them.

[Morroian]

cosgamer wrote...

Morroian wrote...

2 years is not incredibly short especially when they are using the same engine.

It is when you're talking about something covering the scope of time for DA 2, improvement for consoles and all of the other changes. 

Not really they have a budget they can employ more people within that budget to finish it within 2 years.

[Merced652]

Liana Nighthawk wrote...

I'm not the least bit worried and I'm not entirely sure why anybody would be. One would assume they will show them when they want to, regardless of what people might imagine is the best time to show them.

Yea, why the hell should we expect them to show us anything at all about the product they want us to buy. The nerve of us, how dare we wish to have gameplay footage. We should blindly accept that it will be amazing.