317 réponses à ce sujet

[Carfax]

koshiee wrote...
way to go hyperbole.
not everyone who enjoys games like COD are immature/an adolescent but a large chunk of COD audience is. So when Bioware says they want COD's audience I don't think they're referring to the smaller portion of COD fans who are mature. 
Also, if they want COD's audience then it makes sense that they would need to emulate what COD does to attract that audience which is what probably worries some people.

I think people on this forum should refrain from mentioning the maturity level of CoD gamers..

All one has to do is open up any of the numerous romance threads and it will put all this talk of RPG players being more mature than FPS players to rest...

Modifié par Carfax, 08 février 2011 - 09:50 .

[Sesshomaru47]

JohnEpler wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

JohnEpler wrote...
Unbelievably, it's possible to enjoy more than one type of game. I know, I know. It's crazy, and it flies right in the face of the idea that 'everyone who enjoys games like CoD is immature/an adolescent', but it's true!

I have anecdotal evidence to prove this.

Um, yeah that's entirely true. I like shooters a lot, for instance. And I like games like DA:O a whole lot. But I like for them to be very different from each other. I think that this isn't such an absurd concept either.

I'm responding more to the idea that people who enjoy games like Call of Duty are adolescent and immature than anything else, really.

And I think that you're misinterpreting the original quote - look at it more like 'we want to draw attention to the aspects of our games that they can relate to and ease them into the ones that they aren't used to', rather than 'we want our games to be pretty much like Call of Duty except, you know, with magic and swords.'

It's the idea that the people who enjoy Call of Duty but have never picked up an RPG might actually enjoy an RPG, they've just never given it a shot. And that's what we want - we want them to look at a game like Dragon Age and say 'you know, that might be something I'd enjoy'.

Am I making sense? I'm heavily caffeinated and slowly going insane by creating reams of documentation, so I may not be entirely clear in my point.

Yeah but they won't enjoy it. 1. Dragon Age has a lengthy story. CoD has nither length nor story. At least not a coherent one. 2. There's no MP. OMG what will they do. No MP!!!! That makes most games unplayable.

CoD was ruined because of the console....oh well.

[Guitar-Hero]

I think it's great, the more the merrier, this whole genre thing is borderline retarded, all games are basically RPG's(i am being very black and white here, so bare with me) there are more and more gamers out there playing video games for the unique interactive story elements, and more and more developers are focusing on the narrative, hell even CoD has story elements(or so i'm told) and before the RPG (for lack of a better word) purists comes in here saying that this is not the case, i will say that.. Before you can show me a picture of you slaying a dragon with an assault-rifle made from two lunchboxes and a piece of string, you sir are roleplaying in every game.

[FiveThreeTen]

As long as Bioware doesn't go for the 5 map pack charged 15$ (can't believe some people are actually paying for this)

Saphara wrote...


well, that makes sense. A bit of marketing magic and the stylized fighting do look both fun to the new audience and Bioware fans (at least to me).

Sadly, posts read after only 3 hours of sleep tend to not go over well until lots of Dr. pepper and chocolate have been consumed.

At breakfast ?

[eyesofastorm]

Quoted from the "Whose game is it" thread:

Blastback wrote...

Okay, let me put it like this. Even if they are moving away from the type of game I want, I still find Bioware's products to be possibly the best on the market. Enough of the really important features that i love are still there that yeah, I'm still a fricken loyal customer. If Bioware moved far enough away from what I want in an RPG, and some other company did it better, yes, I would likely eventually switch over, but so far, that hasn't happened.

eyesofastorm wrote...
[ninja post]

But you are missing the point. By the time that they are making games that don't interest you, there will be 10,000 FPS gamers to replace every RPG gamer that currently loves Bioware games and they won't care that they are losing your business. Seriously, have you seen the sales numbers for Call of Duty? Those frikkin' games make more money than Hollywood's biggest blockbusters and Bioware wants in on that. That's why they are heading in this new direction... they want that market, that crowd. But to capture them, they will have to drop us like dirty rags. There's probably nothing we can do to stop it, but I won't support a company that wants someone else's business far more than they want mine. What everyone else does is, I guess, up to them. IDK... maybe I love Bioware games too much. I seem to be the only nutcase that cares this much.

[/ninja post]

I am a prophet.

Modifié par eyesofastorm, 08 février 2011 - 09:53 .

[AlexXIV]

Marionetten wrote...

JohnEpler wrote...

Unbelievably, it's possible to enjoy more than one type of game. I know, I know. It's crazy, and it flies right in the face of the idea that 'everyone who enjoys games like CoD is immature/an adolescent', but it's true!

I'd just prefer my RPGs being RPGs and my shooters being shooters. Oldfashioned? Maybe. But that's just how I am.

Not everything needs to be bridged or glued together.

It does if you need money to make games. If the old fashioned RPGs are just not selling then it is better to have action RPGs than none.

[KBomb]

Sesshomaru47 wrote...

Yeah but they won't enjoy it. 1. Dragon Age has a lengthy story. CoD has nither length nor story. At least not a coherent one. 2. There's no MP. OMG what will they do. No MP!!!! That makes most games unplayable.

CoD was ruined because of the console....oh well.

Yes. Someone who likes CoD couldn’t possibly like DA because of the story and length of said story. I just play CoD for the pictures.

[Saphara]

AlexXIV wrote...

Marionetten wrote...

JohnEpler wrote...

Unbelievably, it's possible to enjoy more than one type of game. I know, I know. It's crazy, and it flies right in the face of the idea that 'everyone who enjoys games like CoD is immature/an adolescent', but it's true!

I'd just prefer my RPGs being RPGs and my shooters being shooters. Oldfashioned? Maybe. But that's just how I am.

Not everything needs to be bridged or glued together.

It does if you need money to make games. If the old fashioned RPGs are just not selling then it is better to have action RPGs than none.

But didnt DA:O and ME 1 and 2 sell very well? Expecting every game to compete CoD is like wanting every MMO to compete with WoW. Probably wont happen. If games sell well in their own right, but not as much as CoD, thats no reason to suddenly change formulas dramatically.

Plus, TOR is coming out soon. If that goes over well, EA will have their cash cow. Assuming they arnt making the mistake of trying to comepete directly with a monster of an MMO.

[Sauronych]

That quote is quite... alarming. I've preordered DA2 because it still looks good enough to me and I rather like the recent gameplay videos, but this info makes me wonder what they will turn DA3 into.

[Marionetten]

AlexXIV wrote...

It does if you need money to make games. If the old fashioned RPGs are just not selling then it is better to have action RPGs than none.

Pandering to the lowest common denominator isn't a necessity when it comes to running a successful business. Oftentimes it can be downright detrimental as you risk losing your core fanbase. Sure, it can pay off but it's by no means a surefire way to success.

Saphara wrote...

Plus, TOR is coming out soon. If that goes over well, EA will have their cash cow. Assuming they arnt making the mistake of trying to comepete directly with a monster of an MMO.

Unfortunately, they are. EA is repeating the mistake known as Warhammer Online.

Modifié par Marionetten, 08 février 2011 - 09:58 .

[FellOpenIan]

FiveThreeTen wrote...
As long as Bioware doesn't go for the 5 map pack charged 15$ (can't believe some people are actually paying for this)

Or churn out some costume pack DLC while save data corruption goes unpatched.

[koshiee]

Carfax wrote...

koshiee wrote...
way to go hyperbole.
not everyone who enjoys games like COD are immature/an adolescent but a large chunk of COD audience is. So when Bioware says they want COD's audience I don't think they're referring to the smaller portion of COD fans who are mature. 
Also, if they want COD's audience then it makes sense that they would need to emulate what COD does to attract that audience which is what probably worries some people.

I think people on this forum should refrain from mentioning the maturity level of CoD gamers..

All one has to do is open up any of the numerous romance threads and it will put all this talk of RPG players being more mature than FPS players to rest...

after that create a gamer tag with the word gay in it play CoD. Come back here and compare. 

[Saphara]

Marionetten wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

It does if you need money to make games. If the old fashioned RPGs are just not selling then it is better to have action RPGs than none.

Pandering to the lowest common denominator isn't a necessity when it comes to running a successful business. Oftentimes it can be downright detrimental as you risk losing your core fanbase. Sure, it can pay off but it's by no means a surefire way to success.

Saphara wrote...

Plus, TOR is coming out soon. If that goes over well, EA will have their cash cow. Assuming they arnt making the mistake of trying to comepete directly with a monster of an MMO.

Unfortunately, they are. EA is repeating the mistake known as Warhammer Online.

Well, at least it wasnt FFXIV. Im hoping Bioware, because its Bioware, does have success with TOR.

[Ginen]

Just in pure economic terms, I think any game developer would go nuts if they had CoD's numbers (plus 13 million copies sold at last count). Even having a sliver of that amount is desirable. A lot of very good games don't sell well. Enslaved is a good example; it sold 460,000 copies worldwide and its 82% on the Metacritic. Answering the question of why Enslaved sold poorly is difficult especially if you want to make the case that good games sell themselves.

[Irkalla]

Appeal to Cod players? In what damn way are these two comparable? Could a game possibly get more shallow than Cod? Somebody post that "bang boring, bang boring, bang boring" viral video

[Carfax]

AlexXIV wrote...

It does if you need money to make games. If the old fashioned RPGs are just not selling then it is better to have action RPGs than none.

The Witcher had very strong RPG elements, moreso than DAO in some respects, and it sold very well considering it was PC platform only and CDProjekt Red is a budding developer.

As I mentioned earlier, there is still a large market for hardcore RPGs.  But most gamers are reluctant to spend 60 or 70 hours on a game; particularly a game like DAO that has way too much grind.

Orzammar was like torture.  It just kept going on and on and on.....

[FiveThreeTen]

Either ways, they can't appeal to the biggest part of Cod audience or expect to make 5 millions copies with a single player game .Succes of games like Wow or Cod relies on the fact that people are playing with a group of friends on a regular basis . It's much harder to make everyone in that group move to another game .

[AlexXIV]

Saphara wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Marionetten wrote...

JohnEpler wrote...

Unbelievably, it's possible to enjoy more than one type of game. I know, I know. It's crazy, and it flies right in the face of the idea that 'everyone who enjoys games like CoD is immature/an adolescent', but it's true!

I'd just prefer my RPGs being RPGs and my shooters being shooters. Oldfashioned? Maybe. But that's just how I am.

Not everything needs to be bridged or glued together.

It does if you need money to make games. If the old fashioned RPGs are just not selling then it is better to have action RPGs than none.

But didnt DA:O and ME 1 and 2 sell very well? Expecting every game to compete CoD is like wanting every MMO to compete with WoW. Probably wont happen. If games sell well in their own right, but not as much as CoD, thats no reason to suddenly change formulas dramatically.

Plus, TOR is coming out soon. If that goes over well, EA will have their cash cow. Assuming they arnt making the mistake of trying to comepete directly with a monster of an MMO.

It's not your money and not your job depending on it. So it's easy to talk. If you are wrong you lose nothing, if Bioware is wrong alot of people could lose their jobs. I don't think they just flip a coin to make their decisions.

[the_one_54321]

Saphara wrote...

Marionetten wrote...

Saphara wrote...
Plus, TOR is coming out soon. If that goes over well, EA will have their cash cow. Assuming they arnt making the mistake of trying to comepete directly with a monster of an MMO.

Unfortunately, they are. EA is repeating the mistake known as Warhammer Online.

Well, at least it wasnt FFXIV. Im hoping Bioware, because its Bioware, does have success with TOR.

Actually, from what I've seen SWtOR looks awful. I'm hoping that it fails, not out of spite or negative feelings, but out of principle. I think a game like should fail as a big example of why games should not be made that way.

[koshiee]

[inappropriate link removed]
This is CoD. 

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 08 février 2011 - 10:21 .

[KBomb]

Irkalla wrote...

Appeal to Cod players? In what damn way are these two comparable? Could a game possibly get more shallow than Cod? Somebody post that "bang boring, bang boring, bang boring" viral video

I don't know, but some people sure can be.

[lv12medic]

Ginen wrote...

Just in pure economic terms, I think any game developer would go nuts if they had CoD's numbers (plus 13 million copies sold at last count). Even having a sliver of that amount is desirable. A lot of very good games don't sell well. Enslaved is a good example; it sold 460,000 copies worldwide and its 82% on the Metacritic. Answering the question of why Enslaved sold poorly is difficult especially if you want to make the case that good games sell themselves.

There are a lot of variables to consider why certain products that are made really well don't sell that well.  Be it poor or misdirected marketing, economic conditions, competition, failure to catch onto general market trends, etc.

[DPB]

This thread is ridiculous. All Fernando Melo said was that gamers who enjoy CoD and the like, which have character progression, might enjoy DA2 since it also has that.