409 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

Melca36 wrote...

First game came out in 2000 and the second game removed some elements from the first game and improved on elements that remained in the game. People either loved it or hated it.

Is it just me, or does this sound awfully familiar?

[rabidhanar]

I notice the "People either loved it or hated it" a lot more then the situation.

Call me a pessimist, I just like staying in my old fashion rpg ways in fantasy settings.

Sorry that this thread got derailed because of me...I just dislike the changes.



When the game comes out there will be a storm of complaints with flaming and whatnot. Happened with ME2, happened with DAO, will happen again. This is fact.

Whether or not the people who dislike the game stop purchasing further installments in order to protest or to move on is a subject of controversy.



I have purchased the SE DA2 game...I will either enjoy it or not enjoy it. If I dislike it, I might or might not buy another game from this franchise. Depends on the game. What I will do is rent the game before I purchase it. Same as Me3.

[AlanC9]

MerinTB wrote...

So drawing any hard conclusions from the 80% played soldier is an exercise in folly and fallacy.  All that number tells you is that 80% played soldiers, not why or what that means for the game overall.

You can draw some conclusions from this sort of information. Since soldier is so much of the play experience for so many people, the class has to be interesting in its own right -- unlike fighters in some game systems . I thought this was a problem in ME1, where having biotic and tech abilities made for more interesting gameplay because the shooter aspect of the game was dumbed down.

[Elite Midget]

Yes I mean exclusive. Also, apparantly it isn't just that simple to make LIs which is why Awakening had none despite many desireing to mess with Veliana even if she was kinda... Deranged.

[RolandX9]

So little love for the non-humans and magic? Dang.

Sure, I'm a magic freak (the concept fascinates me, IRL and in fantasy), but IMO, Thedas' magic is the best system in videogames and second overall only to Mage: the Ascension in concept in roleplaying overall. I'm working on Human and Dwarf Nobles now-- they're both interesting -- but my Elf Mage is my main PC, and he's awesome beyond words (man, am I going to miss Arcane Warrior -- Spellweaver FTW).

Modifié par RolandX9, 25 janvier 2011 - 08:31 .

[Andraste_Reborn]

It would be impossible to design a game by catering to the hardcore fans. The hardcore Dragon Age fans, like all groups of hardcore fans, are strongly opinionated and divided amongst themselves. I doubt you'd find any aspect of the game on which you could get total agreement. And if you went with whatever the majority of your hardcore fans thought ... well, hey, we're back at paying attention to the majority again!

I don't think that the interests of the player majority are even going to dictate BioWare's game design - if they did, we'd all be playing warriors and there would be no female PCs or romance options. It's only sensible, though, to take the telemetry into account when deciding where to invest future resources. And when I see that only 5% of players ever made dwarves, well, I can see why they might want to put those zots somewhere else even though I love playing dwarves.

Modifié par Andrastee, 25 janvier 2011 - 08:50 .

[HTTP 404]

I think Merin said it before. The idea of options is nice to have even if hardly anybody takes option B. Its the idea of owning option A. I mostly choose human in games but it set me apart from other choices and making decisions is part of RPGs that I like. If my only choice is being human, well thats not really a decision. Just trying to make a point....



Otherwise, Im actually okay with just being human in DA2. I just dont want to see bioware go down a slippery slope where its okay to eliminate more decisions because majority of people dont choose option B. But I think bioware is aware of this (at least I hope so)

[Bryy_Miller]

rabidhanar wrote...
I as well as others think that this Percentage they have given is not accurate of the true fans of the game...

I did not know that I didn't actually like the game. Funny. 

[Sjofn]

I have nine complete playthroughs (and three where I'm at the Landsmeet, and I should really go back and finish those). Female dwarf noble 2h warrior was my first completion (she died, and is my canon warden ... not sure how the DA2 will deal with her not doing Awakenings, as she was dead. ).



Counting in my head, I finished the game as a human 3 times, a dwarf once (the romances feel weird as a dwarf, and I really love the romances, so ...), three city elves and two Dalish elves, with varying gender between them. The three almost dones are a Dalish elf, a dwarf commoner, and a human. I have never once finished this game as a mage, they're boring as hell. I've done multiple playthroughs with no mage at all, in fact.

[Morroian]

rabidhanar wrote...

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.")

rabidhanar wrote...
My question is why cut them though, The models are already in use....NPC's have them, why can't we?

Because there are other reasons for restricting us to human. The extensive Hawke family, which will be far more extensive than just Bethany/Carver and their mother; the requirement to have a mage; the fact that the society is human dominated; the fact that the writing and acting would have to sacrifice depth for breadth to cater for the different options.

And no matter what you think they cannot have the VAs be the same through different races there would be at least just as many complaints about them doing that and ultimately what would be the point if there's that little difference between choices?

Modifié par Morroian, 25 janvier 2011 - 10:33 .

[MerinTB]

AlanC9 wrote...

MerinTB wrote...

So drawing any hard conclusions from the 80% played soldier is an exercise in folly and fallacy.  All that number tells you is that 80% played soldiers, not why or what that means for the game overall.

You can draw some conclusions from this sort of information. Since soldier is so much of the play experience for so many people, the class has to be interesting in its own right -- unlike fighters in some game systems . I thought this was a problem in ME1, where having biotic and tech abilities made for more interesting gameplay because the shooter aspect of the game was dumbed down.

That's not so much drawing conclusions as effectively using the data.

"Hmmm - seems like most people didn't finish the game."  Bad conclusion - "We don't have to make a full game, just half a game!"

"Hmmm, most people played human male noble warrior." Decent conclusion - "Best use that if we only have one origin next time."  Actual conclusion for DA2 - "Human commoner - it's close to what most people chose.  Of course we'll let them pick female as well, we think that's important regardless of numbers.  And we still want them to choose their class, no matter how much warrior outranked mage and rogue combined."

You can use that information fairly well as long as your conclusions are based on suppositions you cannot possibly know.  You know the reality of mostly human noble male warriors were played, but you do not know why.  Do not draw conclusions on the why - just work with knowing that it was the end result.


---

Ok, conclusions is a bad word here.

If you can interject the words "motivations" and "reactions" for conclusions, I think it'll read better.

As in "you cannot realistically know the motivations" and  yet "you most certainly can have logical reactions to those numbers."

Modifié par MerinTB, 25 janvier 2011 - 11:15 .

[Bryy_Miller]

JoePinasi1989 wrote...

rabidhanar wrote...

When the game comes out there will be a storm of complaints with flaming and whatnot. Happened with ME2, happened with DAO, will happen again. This is fact.

COME YE, COME YE!

Dis 'ere man can speak the future.

Wonder and behold!

Well, he's right. 

[AerisBru]

My main Warden is a human mage. (yes, this one in my avatar. she even looks like me, my hair was red at the time xD)



My purpose was to create an avatar of myself, that's why it's a human. And a mage? Well, I'm a mage in almost ALL the games that I play, and i just feel that if those fantasy worlds were real and I existed in them, I would certainly be a mage. You know, the bookworm, smart person.

[Morrigans God son]

My canon is human. Never completed the game as a dwarf or elf, but I completed the different Origins, which was fun.

[Piflik]

Well...I played a Dahlish Rogue and an Elven Mage from strat to finish, I started a Dwarven Commoner Rogue, but abandoned him somewhere in the middle, and finished the other Origins once each...Human Noble warrior being the dullest by a long shot...

[Johnny Shepard]

How about "Percentage Non-Humans that played DAO"?

[request denied]

I played every race in DA:O .Why play human if you can play as another race ? Oh i did play human as well .

[sonsonthebia07]

I myself have probably 5 "completed" playthroughs (I have not played in ages), all as either m/f human or elf. I have tried dwarf on more than one occasion but I just can't do it. I'm not holding anything against dwarves, though. If I had a fully dwarven party I would have been able to, and that would have been awesome.

[Nonoru]

My first run was a Dalish Elf.I really felt down when i read the ending about how Oghren named his son after me.



Second run was a Noble Dwarf.



Then a Noble Human,and Mage Human.



I liked more the non-humans to be honest.(Even though the Cousland origin was good)

[The Bard From Hell]

I'm on my... 4th playtrough? Yeah, I guess that's it. 3 Rogues, 2 City Elfs (one male, one female), 1 Human Noble (male), now 1 Human Mage (female). Between that I had a lot of unfinished playtroughs, most warriors (but the ugly massive armors made me restart the game as a rogue every single time).



To tell the truth, Dragon Age made me like 4 things: playing as a female, playing as an elf, playing as a rogue, and playing as a mage. It also made me wonder why I tend to always play as a warrior in RPGs.

[Johnny Shepard]

Nonoru wrote...

My first run was a Dalish Elf.I really felt down when i read the ending about how Oghren named his son after me.

Thats right. He named his son "Warden".


First time I played Male Human Noble.

2:d was Female City Elf.

3:d is Male Human Noble (ruthless).

4:th is Male Dalish Elf (being ruthless wasn't as fun as being a goodguy).

[tigrina]

David Gaider wrote...
*snip-to-make-it-not-overly-long*
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.

Let me put it this way, while I'm part of the statistics, it doesn't mean I like to feel a number. This thread is all about those numbers, I realise that. Besides, I *know* there is a minority out there who only play certain games from certain genres for instance, how am I supposed to show my preference if it drowns in numbers otherwise?

The biggest issue what I have with numbers is that you never see the percentage of gamers who did not buy the game because they couldn't be or do *x* in a game, while at the same time might be interested in most of the other features if  *x* were included.

Not relevant for Dragon Age or even BW in general; but if you fill *x* in as 'play as female', it would be a valid point for me.

On a related note; if DAII would have been I, I would have had a lot less interest in playing the game, seeing as you can only play as human.

Edit: I honestly thought I had put in the 'warrior' part as well

/mostly off topic in this thread, sorry about that, but I couldn't resist :/

--
On topic; what I really do wonder is if those statistics would have been significantly different if you would get a random preset when you start up, instead of always male human noble warrior (or in the ME case: male soldier).

Are you able to make a difference in locations and are there any significant differences in character choices between them?

Modifié par tigrina, 26 janvier 2011 - 02:26 .

[rabidhanar]

That is a good question Tigrina...Bioware should see if changing the preset or the order in which classes are available changes the average players for each class. I say for this game, make the mage character first on the list of items, with perhaps the rogue as the default.

If people are only choosing the preset option...we will see an influx of rogues, if people are only choosing the first option available (which for the record was a human male noble warrior in the first game) we will see more mages.

If we still see a huge percentage of Male Warriors, the devs should indeed follow that people enjoy the warrior class the most. (even though, I myself would rather be either a backstabbing rogue or a mage personally...cannot stand tanking/straight combat)

Modifié par rabidhanar, 26 janvier 2011 - 01:47 .