409 réponses à ce sujet

[David Gaider]

Hmm. While I certainly appreciate the endorsements from people posting about the X number of times they played through the game, or the various origins, when the subject is the gross percentages of over three million players I'm not certain what that does more than seriously underline the kind of minority that exists on these forums.

Again, not that you all aren't aware of that on some level, but I think there's also an idea that because you only see people expressing the same viewpoint that this represents "the fan base" as a whole.

And not to discount that minority, either. The fact that anyone is willing to play the game more than once is certainly a plus from our end.

[maselphie]

David Gaider wrote...

Again, not that you all aren't aware of that on some level, but I think there's also an idea that because you only see people expressing the same viewpoint that this represents "the fan base" as a whole.

And not to discount that minority, either. The fact that anyone is willing to play the game more than once is certainly a plus from our end.

That's all I wanted.
Now stop arguing on the internet. Special Olympics, blah blah. There's 3 million people out there that aren't going to read your posts so you're just puttin' down the fan base, not educating the masses.

[AlanC9]

TMZuk wrote...

Those data is worth very little, IMO. I am never playing DA:O online. and I always disable achievements. It's a singleplayer game. If they wish to know something about how I play and what I want, they can ask me.

Unless you deliberately disabled data reporting, it looks like your data's in there.

[magicwins]

David Gaider wrote...

Hmm. While I certainly appreciate the endorsements from people posting about the X number of times they played through the game, or the various origins, when the subject is the gross percentages of over three million players I'm not certain what that does more than seriously underline the kind of minority that exists on these forums.

Again, not that you all aren't aware of that on some level, but I think there's also an idea that because you only see people expressing the same viewpoint that this represents "the fan base" as a whole.

And not to discount that minority, either. The fact that anyone is willing to play the game more than once is certainly a plus from our end.

It must be difficult to maintain the '3-million-player' perspective when the 'coupla-hundred' hammers its opinion into you day after day

[aries1001]

I would say that most of us that played non-human characters in DA: Origins even weren't aware that we could upload our data to Bioware. I first heard of this option (via a menu option, before you start the game) when Gaider mentioned this in another thread. And you do need to toggle 'upload

gameplay data' on before you upload your data to Bioware(EA). If you didn't have to do this, I think, EA and Bioware would be in serious trouble with several consumer agencies and maybe also some consumer laws in different countries e.g. Denmark.



And the information we're choosing to send to Bioware(EA) are masked, I believe, so they can't identify which people specifically are playing, say Dwarf Origins or Elven Origins or Human Nobles. Just a tallying up of the count e.g the numbers i.e. how many people are playing the different kinds of origins.



And my best bet is that David Gaider is correct: the majority of people play Human Noble or Human Mage. I think it has something do with the term 'identification' - we need, as humans, to relate to the protagonist we're playing, so we can feel that it coculd be us doing the - eh - monster-slaying...

[Emyer]

I'm guessing I fit right into the main demographic, having played a Human Noble Warrior,  I never could play a dwarf, it just didn't feel right to me, I did the Origins stories and dropped them as soon as they ended :|



I do think most people do realize we represent a minority inside a minority(Gamers>RPG fansDragon Age buyers>DA fans who take the time to sign up and regularly discuss games on a forum, an oversimplification but that's kinda how I see it), problem is that when you see a lot of people, who probably have similar tastes, share the same opinions you create the illusion that that's how most of the fanbase thinks, if you'd check this board during DA2's announcement stages you'd think the game was doomed from the start, same with the big crowd that says ME2 is an abhorrent dumbed down game whilst the majority, fans and critics alike, like/love the game.


A good way to show how we're the minority is ME2's telemetry data:




Around the forums most people dislike or don't favor the Soldier class, yet it's the most used, more than all the others combined
Female Shepard's popularity far surpasses Shepard on these forums
Most people(If not all) have imported a save from ME1 and cleared ME2 at least once

[Xandrar]

Aww man, I'd love to see those statistics. But as you cant/wont give them all, can you maybe give us one more thing that surprised you David? You said the amount of same-sex romances suprised you, anything else? (A)

[MerinTB]

David Gaider wrote...
Hmm. While I certainly appreciate the endorsements from people posting about the X number of times they played through the game, or the various origins, when the subject is the gross percentages of over three million players I'm not certain what that does more than seriously underline the kind of minority that exists on these forums.

Again, not that you all aren't aware of that on some level, but I think there's also an idea that because you only see people expressing the same viewpoint that this represents "the fan base" as a whole.

And not to discount that minority, either. The fact that anyone is willing to play the game more than once is certainly a plus from our end.

What I always think about is how there are gamers who will pick up most any game - they are equally happy playing a shooter or a sports game, a racing game or a platformer, an RTS or an RPG, etc.  They may have favorites, sure, but I think most gamers will pick up most anything and at least try it.
And I think it's probably a majority of gamers who buy a game new as opposed to renting or buying used.  They buy it pretty close to release, not usually pre-ordering but browsing shelves and grabbing something new that catches their eye.  The majority of gamers probably pay little attention to sites like IGN or shows like X-Play, instead relying on friends and the description/images on the box, maybe a few tv or such ads that they stumbled across.
Those gamers also tend to be mostly male.

I think this constitutes the majority of gamers.  And as a result you get a relatively homogenous effect... with them playing most games in a similar way.  They are going to treat most fantasy games as hack and slash, even if they aren't, and most games where you can use a gun as a shooter (whether it is Alpha Protocol or Splinter Cell as opposed to Gears of War or Medal of Honor) where such tactics don't always work the best.  They play a lot of games, probably only finish the shortest games, and if the market is anything to go by, most of them play a lot of shooters.  Hence why male soldier is most often used in ME.
Sheer speculation, sure, but I think it's based on some fairly reasonable guesses and extrapolations.

Now the majority of that majority is not a "loyal fanbase" to anything save maybe a game system (PS3, XBOX 360, whatever) and are going to pick up games largely on whims regardless of the quality or content of those games.  That isn't to say they aren't discriminating - just that they make spur of the moment decisions not based on any research or pre-thought beyond "the next  Call of Duty comes out today!"

My argument would be that you have to take THOSE gamers with a grain of salt.  You can try and follow gaming trends to "satisfy" them, but they themselves are NOT following the trends but just buying pretty much what they recognize (series of games) or whatever catches their eyes at the time (ooo, I like Star Wars, I'll this Force Unleashed thing... hehehe, laser swords!)

You know that if you make a good quality game, people will buzz about your game (critics, other players) and that buzz will seep into the awareness of this majority of the majority I'm talking about.  It's not because you tailored the game to that majority's habits, but because the word of mouth penetrating their zone of not caring about researching games and gave them an impetus to try your game.

How you generate that buzz is by being different or having your own angle.

Maybe the majority of players of Origins never finished the game, their one play of the human noble male warrior.
That's the majority you need to ignore as you design your game.
Not as your market your game (yes, I get this is where all the ads and PR that turns me off comes from, I accept that), no, as that's when you need to penetrate the awareness of this majority...
but as you design your game it can't be for that majority.  They buy next to anything that's new, looks good to them, and that their friends like.
The "hardcore gamers" or "loyal fanbase" or "RPG enthusiasts" or whatever label (meant as positive or negative by whomever is using it at the time) often appreciate the choices at the start, will play something different and will either try most of the Origins or at least play as an Origin other than the majority one.
Even 5% of 3,000,000 is 150,000... and that is a big enough number of people praising a game to have a major impact on sales.  The trend setters are always outnumbered.

This is something of the targetted marketing that the company I worked for was getting into before I left - they "knew" that the majority of teens were malleable and easy to influence their tastes and desires, but that the same teens were largely immune to traditional advertising and would often see through any ad that tried to target them.  So instead what the marketing companies were doing was searching for trend-setters, the unofficial leaders of style and "what is cool" amongst groups and they marketted to THEM.  All their research had shown that this had a much higher percentage rate of return than trying to market to the group as a whole.  You get the ones who care about fashion or trends or fads, you get them to adopt, and then the flock follows.

To translate to gaming -
you get the "hardcore gamers" or "loyal fanbase" to be rabid about your product, and the majority of gamers will just follow suit as everyone is talking about a game and critics are raving about a game.  The majority will play most anything, but how they select what they play is far more influence by game critics and hardcore gamers than they realize.

---

Like a political party, you ignore you base and try to play to that (IMO unobtainable) middle and you lose your base and really never grab the middle and NO ONE is excited about you anymore.

If games try to be like blockbuster movies, they are hit or miss.  You get your Pirates of the Carribean and you get your Sorcerer's Apprentices.  You spend a lot of time trying to appeal to too many people, and most of the time what you get is most people going "meh."

THAT's why the "loud minority" matter.  They DO seem like a bigger group than they are because they (traditionally, and I don't see this changing) have a bigger impact than the silent majority.

They are the ones who care.  The rest are fickle and will love you one day and forget about you the next.  The loyal fans may love you one day and criticize you the next, but if they jump ship on you don't expect the majority of "I'll buy anything" to fill that void.  It can happen, but it's as likely to not.

Modifié par MerinTB, 25 janvier 2011 - 06:31 .

[HTTP 404]

I totally hear what your saying Merin but unfortunately in the whole grand scheme of things, many of these gamers who are not "hardcore" or dont really play the game pay for the game just like the rest of us and that, money, is huge consideration in making a game.



On a better note, I think telemetry like what Gaider said is just in support of making a sequel not the main course so to speak. I really do think Bioware does take into account what we say, they are on these forums talking to us. I think our impact is greater than any telemetry. But why throw out data that could help bioware appeal to the masses and not just make us happy.

[Kryplixx]

Elves looked like Humans so its really Humans vs Dwarfs... which I'd wager 85% played Human. I'm glad they didn't waste their time making multiple playable races.

[AlanC9]

aries1001 wrote...

I would say that most of us that played non-human characters in DA: Origins even weren't aware that we could upload our data to Bioware. I first heard of this option (via a menu option, before you start the game) when Gaider mentioned this in another thread. And you do need to toggle 'upload
gameplay data' on before you upload your data to Bioware(EA). If you didn't have to do this, I think, EA and Bioware would be in serious trouble with several consumer agencies and maybe also some consumer laws in different countries e.g. Denmark.

That wasn't the case for my US edition -- uploading gameplay data was set to "on" in my install. As opposed to uploading characters to this site, which is a completely different process. Different privacy laws over there, maybe?

Modifié par AlanC9, 25 janvier 2011 - 06:55 .

[rabidhanar]

Wel Kryplixx, im not T-T I have much QQ

Its not that hard to create the models, lips would still work the same, hell I wouldn't mind if all three races had the exact same voiceactors. Male gets hawke one, female gets hawke two.

For those people who love dwarves just because we are dwarves, there really isn't that big a deal to have the same VA as a human (I only play dwarves, human having same voice that I will never play = no problem).

Even the Carver/Bethany thing could have been fine...just change the character models to match race that hawke is. I want a shorti Bethany here.

I am very sad that my favorite race is not available when ti could have been so easy to keep. (I would even be fine with being a surface dwarf like Goram became)  The reasoning doesn't make much sense to me, why take away something that would have been so easy to keep.

Modifié par rabidhanar, 25 janvier 2011 - 06:59 .

[AlanC9]

It would only be easy to keep if being a dwarf just didn't matter, of course.

Edit: I mean matter to the game, not to you.

Modifié par AlanC9, 25 janvier 2011 - 07:09 .

[Maria Caliban]

aries1001 wrote...

I would say that most of us that played non-human characters in DA: Origins even weren't aware that we could upload our data to Bioware. I first heard of this option (via a menu option, before you start the game) when Gaider mentioned this in another thread. And you do need to toggle 'upload
gameplay data' on before you upload your data to Bioware(EA). If you didn't have to do this, I think, EA and Bioware would be in serious trouble with several consumer agencies and maybe also some consumer laws in different countries e.g. Denmark.

It's an opt-out program. It's automatically enabled when you first install. No, BioWare and EA won't be in trouble because when you accepted the EULA, you agreed to let them gather information on you for statistical purposes.

[rabidhanar]

Why does it matter what your race is if you are just a champian?

Yeah, bethany could not be a mage...that wouldn't work.

Carver could be even more Derp...lyrium does that to you.



I have never seen an application for being champian that requires one to be a human.

[Meltemph]

I've beaten it with Dwarf(both male versions), Human(both male versions).

[AlanC9]

You've never been to Kirkwall either, methinks.

[Maria Caliban]

rabidhanar wrote...

Why does it matter what your race is if you are just a champian?
Yeah, bethany could not be a mage...that wouldn't work.
Carver could be even more Derp...lyrium does that to you.

I have never seen an application for being champian that requires one to be a human.

It's the story of Hawke. Not 'a champion.' Hawke.

And given that 'there's a mage in the family' is part of the story, that is reason right there to not have dwarves.

Why not start another thread about this as it's kinda off-topic?

[AlanC9]

MerinTB wrote...
To translate to gaming -
you get the "hardcore gamers" or "loyal fanbase" to be rabid about your product, and the majority of gamers will just follow suit as everyone is talking about a game and critics are raving about a game.  The majority will play most anything, but how they select what they play is far more influence by game critics and hardcore gamers than they realize.

My problem with this is that I can think of a few games with rabid fanbases that nevertheless failed to attract a mass audience. In any event, I don't think that's something Bio really needs to worry about.

[rabidhanar]

Nothing against this thread...
I did not think the discussion was off topic because this topic is one reason they made as to why the other races were not available.

I as well as others think that this Percentage they have given is not accurate of the true fans of the game...The data is given for all players that played the game, not just from the forums. What race the people who are not on the forums (not the loyal fanbase perhaps?) play does not have any meaning compared to what we select few chose as our warden. Some of us liked humans, some liked elves, and some like dwarves...I do not believe that the reasoning behind roleplaying as Hawke was sound. (No offense devs, I just like my fantasy rpg with different types of races to choose between).

I play ME and ME2 to be a human, being a human in a fantasy setting when so many interesting races or species could be chosen is to me a waste of time. My opinion, sorry if it angers you, I am just annoyed tha I could not be a dwarf.

EDIT: im not saying that the others are unimportant...on the contrary sales = good. I just wish that the removal of two of the classes could be explained far easier then by "percentage shows that humans were the most played, therefore humans are now the sole option." I am fine if they wanted a voiced protagonist,I am fine if they want a mage in the family, I jst wish that we could choose another race to play during DA2 (elf would have been fine...maybe a better option if they tied in discrimination against elves as to a reasoning against Hawke's championship.)

Modifié par rabidhanar, 25 janvier 2011 - 07:30 .

[MerinTB]

HTTP 404 wrote...
I totally hear what your saying Merin but unfortunately in the whole grand scheme of things, many of these gamers who are not "hardcore" or dont really play the game pay for the game just like the rest of us and that, money, is huge consideration in making a game.

I think, to boil down that overly long explanation, what I was trying to say is that as a business you do want the large numbers to buy...
but for any product that is leisure or entertainment, you cannot do so by trying to appeal to everyone nor by just hoping that you are at the forefront of the next trend.

What you can do is target an audience and make the best product you can for that narrow audience, without making the product itself so niche that no one else could like it of course - there's making your base happy and then there's making something only your base can appreciate.  For games, that's where accessibility comes in... but that's a digression from my point.

Yes, you want the gaming money of the majority - but you can't market to the majority, it fails as often as it works and that success ration has little to do with what the product is.
You get the gaming money of majority by getting the approval of the "hardcore" gaming community.  That doesn't mean you go to that group and ask them what they want, but it does mean you design for them and market to them.
And, again, of course you make sure you game is accessible to the majority - the "simplifying" or "dumbing down" that is often decried is, unfortunately, a business necessity and is outside of what I mean.

I'm not advocating the "art house" or "indie" route here, that's not the point.  I'm not saying if you make an overly focused game that only "hardcore" gamers will enjoy that the majority will follow...
I'm saying that if you stick to a genre (like film, you make an action film or a romance) but you make it of the best quality while not trying to exclude those who aren't fans of (action or romance), maybe by adding very small dashes of other genres (some comedy, perhaps, but not too much) you get approval of the fans (who maybe wanted something more niche, but are still happy with this product that is to their tastes) and positive word of mouth.

After the product is made it's the job of advertisers to get it into the public awareness (breaking that indifference bubble of the majority who don't follow such things on their own), but once it's in the public awareness the fans of such things will most of the time make or break the product.  If you don't have a pre-established fanbase of sometype (you make a movie that's hard to categorize, like say Requiem for a Dream or Being John Malkovich or even something like Blade Runner) it will either always only be a small success at best or take a long time to seep into public consciousness.

You play to a mainstream audience, trying to have a big budget, big bankable stars, and a mix of action, comedy and romance.... and you can easily end up with a Pluto Nash or even a Cutthroat Island.
In game examples, you could get an Advent Rising or Daikatana.

[AlanC9]

Oh, gods... only the "true fans" should count?

[MerinTB]

AlanC9 wrote...

MerinTB wrote...
To translate to gaming -
you get the "hardcore gamers" or "loyal fanbase" to be rabid about your product, and the majority of gamers will just follow suit as everyone is talking about a game and critics are raving about a game.  The majority will play most anything, but how they select what they play is far more influence by game critics and hardcore gamers than they realize.

My problem with this is that I can think of a few games with rabid fanbases that nevertheless failed to attract a mass audience. In any event, I don't think that's something Bio really needs to worry about.

Again, the trick is you have to make something the "hardcore" will like and cheer whilst STILL be accessible and fun for a mainstream audience.

What you want to avoid is trying to do the reverse.

Don't confuse me saying that you need to market towards the trend setters as meaning that you should find a niche and make a game that only that niche could like.

[MerinTB]

AlanC9 wrote...
Oh, gods... only the "true fans" should count?

If that's in response to me, you aren't actually responding to what I'm saying at all.