417 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

Monica83 wrote...

but i prefear more content a less rushed game than a: Short game poor of content and toons of DLC

Those things aren't necessarily in conflict. 

[Monica83]

In case of dragon age 2 Yes they are...

[nightcobra]

Monica83 wrote...


In case of dragon age 2 Yes they are...

how?

[Monica83]

Short dev time means Less content... In this case people are tempted to puchase DLC to complete theyr game.. If you add that its shorten than origins and the classes are streamlized and static... Maybe someone is very tempted to whait what a DLC have to offer to increase the game content...This is the case of dragon age 2 why im concerned and upset?...



Simple EA acts in this way..I bet bioware been pushed to trow out a rushed sequel only to get easy cash..If the sequel works well we will see other streamlized and short sequels on the future that have shiny graphic a good plot and they have poor content...Then new dlc comes out and people puchase them...



This is how EA works... Im a bit surprised bioware is learning to act like this.. For this i say always i don't recognise bioware in this..

[nightcobra]

BrotherWarth wrote...

nightcobra8928 wrote...

Monica83 wrote...


In case of dragon age 2 Yes they are...

how?

I think what she's saying is that since DA2 will only be about half as long as Origins they will bombard us with DLC to extend the game's life.

it may or may not happen as far as i'm concerned but i wouldn't put it as fact considering there's so much we don't know.

[nightcobra]

BrotherWarth wrote...


But it would be illogical to assume that we won't get a lot of DLC.

depends on the dlc i think, it may be a lot of small dlc, it may be a small number but bigger more expensive dlc, or a mix in between.

Modifié par nightcobra8928, 07 décembre 2010 - 04:29 .

[Monica83]

i prefear always Expansion than DLC more content in a reasonable price... Just add the price of all origins dlcs? then look the price of the base game....



Considering the dlc quality.. and the price of the base game you will see that dlc are not a big deal!

In case of origins...



Dragon age 2 will be different in this? even if yes i don't like to play in a game that looks complete different from the original title... For many reason...

Poor content...

Static classes..

Schematic dialogues...



So i don't care to have better dlc if i have a mediocre rushed title

[Ziggeh]

Monica83 wrote...

Short dev time means Less content...

Pretty sure we've had this discussion with you before. Building on work from previous iteration, development time not equaling man hours, yadda yadda yadda.

Monica83 wrote...
In this case people are tempted to puchase DLC to complete theyr game..

Post hoc ergo propter hoc!

I've been waiting about 2 years to use that one.

[Ziggeh]

Monica83 wrote...

Poor content...

What content is poor, just out of interest?

[Dave of Canada]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

What content is poor, just out of interest?

Everything he / she dislikes.

[Monica83]

Ho...i can make many example of short dev time games that at release day are a sea of disappointment..Time is important if you have more time you have much opportunity to fix bugs you have much opportunity to add things you have much opportunity to add content and improve the game... But its seems is something extremely hard to understeand...Anyways this is a fact..

Say dev time dont influence the content of the games is= Climbing the glass

The only thing i like of dragon age 2 is the humans model for now..

Modifié par Monica83, 07 décembre 2010 - 04:46 .

[Chris Priestly]

WE.DO.NOT.RUSH.GAMES.

I cannot state this any clearer. BioWare does not rush games. If we did, you would already be playing Mass Effect 3 and Star Wars the Old Republic. We take the time we need to make the game great.

Now, I know that saying this means nothing. Certainly Dragon Age II isamong  the shortest developement times we have had. Until you start to see game reviews sayign that DA II IS a very good game and, even more importantly, you play it for yourself, no matter what I or Mike Laidlaw, David Gaider, Ray, etc say, there will be doubts.

However, a couple of points:
Work on DA II had started by team members long before DAO was launched
Much of the story (concept wise) was worked on during the development for DAO
We are not reinventing the game engine (which saves a huge amount of time)
And as for "EA is rushing them", if you are someone who believes that EA is all about the money and only wants a profit, which do you think makes them a bigger profit:
a - a hastily made game that comes out too soon, gets bad press and possibly spoils a valuable franchise
b - a game that is complete and awsome that will get great fan/critic acclaim and sell a ton of copies leaving the door open for more in the future.

Still, haters gonna hate (or, more accurately, worriers gonna worry) until there is proof. That's the way it is. I'm telling you not to worry but know you likely will. So instead, just keep an open mind and do not assume things are bad just because you get awsome sooner than you expect.

[ErichHartmann]

Monica83 wrote...

Ho...i can make many example of short dev time games that at release day are a sea of disappointment..Time is important if you have more time you have much opportunity to fix bugs you have much opportunity to add things you have much opportunity to add content and improve the game... But its seems is something extremely hard to understeand...Anyways this is a fact..

Say dev time dont influence the content of the games is= Climbing the glass

Opinions are not facts and you have said nothing to prove your point. 

[Dave of Canada]

Monica83 wrote...

Ho...i can make many example of short dev time games that at release day are a sea of disappointment..

... and I can think of many that are amazing, your point?

[Shepard Lives]

Chris Priestly wrote...

WE.DO.NOT.RUSH.GAMES.

I cannot state this any clearer. BioWare does not rush games. If we did, you would already be playing Mass Effect 3 and Star Wars the Old Republic. We take the time we need to make the game great.

Now, I know that saying this means nothing. Certainly Dragon Age II isamong  the shortest developement times we have had. Until you start to see game reviews sayign that DA II IS a very good game and, even more importantly, you play it for yourself, no matter what I or Mike Laidlaw, David Gaider, Ray, etc say, there will be doubts.

However, a couple of points:
Work on DA II had started by team members long before DAO was launched
Much of the story (concept wise) was worked on during the development for DAO
We are not reinventing the game engine (which saves a huge amount of time)
And as for "EA is rushing them", if you are someone who believes that EA is all about the money and only wants a profit, which do you think makes them a bigger profit:
a - a hastily made game that comes out too soon, gets bad press and possibly spoils a valuable franchise
b - a game that is complete and awsome that will get great fan/critic acclaim and sell a ton of copies leaving the door open for more in the future.

Still, haters gonna hate (or, more accurately, worriers gonna worry) until there is proof. That's the way it is. I'm telling you not to worry but know you likely will. So instead, just keep an open mind and do not assume things are bad just because you get awsome sooner than you expect.

Wow, I believe this is the first time the Overlords speak clearly about this matter. Well worded, Evil Chris.

[Monica83]

This is not a simple opinion if you have much more time to make things you can do a lot of things don't admit that its silly and also not so smart.. Short time less content... Long time more content...



We have also example to long dev times for title that at release will be the huge disappointment (like spore) but this is another different thing

[ladydesire]

BrotherWarth wrote...


I'm talking about things like systems not functioning properly. Like crossbows, dexterity, etc. Those are minor problems to some, major to others. Then there are things like the ending wrap-up being wrong, like your Warden being alive when they're supposed to be dead and the like. That is definitely major and definitely not a design decision.

You mean being able to import your US Warden into Awakening? Design Decision (or engine limitation); one of the developers said as much back when we found out this would happen.

They don't enter the actual content development until after the previous has gone gold. They may throw ideas around and such before that, but the actual development doesn't start before then. How could it? The team would still be working on the current game.

You do realize that DAO for PC was supposed to be released in February or March of 2009, and was probably ready to be sent out to manufacturing when EA made the decision to delay it until the console versions were ready; that's why the DA Toolset came out at the same time as all 3 versions of the game and I'm sure it didn't take the whole team of developers to work on that, plus what few things ended up as day one bugfixes for PC.

[Perfect-Kenshin]

If you ask me, Mr. Priestly has been going through serious cold sweats ever since this thread started. All of the devs have. Probably couldn't even get any sleep. They know we're onto them. Notice how it took him more than 12 hours to work up the nerve to respond the topic.

[TMZuk]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

Snoteye wrote...

TMZuk wrote...

Each and every change in BG2 from BG was about adding choices, not removing them. More classes, more skills, more customization, more gameplay, more content.

More linearity.

Not to mention fewer companions.  IIRC BG2 was shorter than BG1, too (in terms of # of areas and the amount of stuff you can do in them.  BG was HUGE.)

You can't *quantify* game quality by enumerating features.  Otherwise Daggerfall was probably the best game ever made.

Perhaps there was fewer companions, I don't recall. But I disagree that BG2 was shorter than BG, nor was it more linear. That's of course subjective, but the added choices in BG2's character creation and development, and the improved gameplay are facts. So I will be damned if I understand why Bioware is forcing the players into narrower classes in DA2. A warrior who cannot shoot a missile weapon, or dualvield, for crying out loud.

I don't know if Bioware has to rush this, but it certainly feels that way.