288 réponses à ce sujet

[Maria Caliban]

I'm sure it was pushed out. If BioWare had another 6-8 months, we might have less recycled environments and better companion AI.

But you know what? It's still much better than Dragon Age: Origins.

[Ilikered]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Ilikered wrote...

They hadn't made a single decent thing since KoToR. Jade Empire was universally critisized as being a meh game, not to mentioned consolized and dumbed down, in the exact same way they are doing now. Financially, they must have been in a tough position, and it was already five years after KoTor and NWN.

I haven't played Jade Empire, but I think the vast majority of BioWare's audience would disagree with this paragraph. Don't bring Neverwinter Nights up, it sucked. KotOR was good, but not great. But Origins was the best thing since Shadows of Amn. Then ME2 was the best thing since Shadows of Amn. Now DAII is the best thing since Shadows of Amn. The post-BG lull that I admit was there is gone.

Miscommunication. I meant "Before the EA merger". You have a five year gap of time between 03 and 08 where Bioware simply didn't make a single game that didn't suck balls. Five Years.

Origins was ok, worse then KoTor but a decent RPG, probably the best since The Witcher. The thing is it wasn't a product of what Bioware currently is, development began 5 years before its release. Thats 2004!. A year after KoToR!. But rather then investing in there core audience and put DA:O out in a reasonable timespan they chose to develop console exclusives and ****ing sonic chronicles.

These of course sold awefully, and is ultimately what probably made them sell out (In the literal sense) to EA, along with Pandemic, who was in similar, but even worse straits. Cuz ME1 turned out to be successful, they weren't immediately culled, like pandemic, whos first title after the merger turned out to be pretty ****ty (That WW2 game)

Frankly EA sucks, but honestly I'd place the blame just as much on the shoulders of Bioware management as I would on EA execs. I think they "sold out" long before they literally sold out to EA.

Modifié par Ilikered, 11 mars 2011 - 04:46 .

[lv12medic]

Heh, he'd like to be an Orc.

I think any game that has a release date set in stone while in early development is bound to be rushed to a certain extent. It tends to happen to everything that is made with such a deadline. How many people rush to complete a term paper on-time? Or scramble when the 5 minute warning goes out on a timed exam? Or the NY Jets rushing play after play right at the end of the Super Bowl hoping for a last-second touchdown?

I would like DA2 to have a bit more polish so to speak. But how much would that cost? Would it really help or would the dev team still feel rushed at the inevitable deadline? Or do you keep pushing it back? Where do you draw the line?

I could see EA potentially (hopefully) learning that setting the development timeline for a large scale RPG game may need to be a bit longer than what was provided for DA2.

Now if DA3 came out in March of 2012, then I'd believe outright that EA has lost their marbles though. I'll draw my line there.

[jds1bio]

Inon Zur said nothing wrong...this happens in Hollywood all the time. There are scores for movies and TV that are composed, recorded, and wrapped up within a week or less. The fact that his score has to be synced up to gameplay just means that HE may not have had time to review the game. EA may have had their foot on the DA2 schedule, but Zur may have had to work quickly because of HIS schedule, not EAs. A smoking gun this isn't.

[Riloux]

J'accuse. Now I can properly say it without being bashed. **** you EA.

[SnakeSNMF]

The game could've been great, they wanted money, and they needed it now, so they released the game early in a year compared to DA:O's three years.
Still, the progress they made in DA2 in ONE year is completely amazing.

[Goofy McCoy]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Calling you an irrational fearmonger is not childish. I think it's an apt description, since you've come into a thread and said that anyone who says anything bad about BioWare/EA will have their gameplay rights taken away from them. That's so far from the truth as to make calling it irrational fearmongering very accurate. That you're reasonably well-spoken just makes it worse. I might even call you a demagogue.

You are quite free to call me whatever you wish, it's not my place to say you can't.

It is, however, irrelevant to the topic on hand, that:

1. The soundtrack composer alleges that EA pushed DA2 out on a schedule that he felt detracted from the game's quality. (The topic)

2. That at least one user has been allegedly banned not just from using the forum, but the game he purchased as well, for seemingly no more than speaking ill of EA/Bioware. The moderator who commented on that case did not elaborate on the circumstances beyond that an EA specific stipulation was involved in locking his content. (My tangent)

While it may not be immediatley related to the topic, given the likely response to the topic (EA rushed the game, possibly to it's detriment), it's simply sound advice to be wary of how you respond to this particular bit of news, given the consequences being implemented.

Do you contend that this is not the case, or that attacking me is somehow MORE relevant to the topic at hand?

[cipher86]

How can people say they don't notice music in DA2? Do they have it turned off? Is their game glitched? It's always present, it just doesn't always pop - sometimes it does, sometimes it's pushed back for atmosphere.

The music while exploring the Wounded Coast is my current favorite. Haunting.

[jds1bio]

Gaiseric82 wrote...

I'm surprised no one's mentioned the tidbit about Inon opting for a 'string quartet' over an orchestra.

Talk about seriously cutting back on the music budget.

Um...he mic'd up the string quarted separately from the 50 piece Hollywood Orchestra.  The quartet is responsible for the theme for the Hawke family.

[mesmerizedish]

Ilikered wrote...

I didn't say origins was bad. It was ok, worse then KoTor but a decent RPG, probably the best since The Witcher. The thing is it wasn't a product of what Bioware currently is, development began 5 years before its release. Thats 2004!. A year after KoToR!. But rather then investing in there core audience they chose to develop console exclusives and ****ing sonic chronicles.

These of course sold awefully, and is ultimately what probably made them sell out (In the literal sense) to EA, along with Pandemic, who was in similar, but even worse straits. Cuz ME1 turned out to be successful, they weren't immediately culled, like pandemic, whos first title after the merger turned out to be pretty ****ty (That WW2 game)

I didn't say you said Origins was bad. I said Origins was, at its launch, the best thing since BGII. It was better than KotOR (which was only technically the best thing since BGII; the statement is factually accurate, but implies that the game was better than it was). It was (much) better than NWN. This was mostly because they lost the D&D license, which was an unnecessary crutch for them. Origins proved that they can develop their own CRPG ruleset that works.

And Origins, which isn't a "product of what BioWare currently is," isn't as good as DAII, which is. So, I don't see where you're going. Every game that BioWare has released while under EA has been better than every game they've made after BGII. And, every game they've put out has been better than the one that precedes it.

I really hope that BioWare have more time to develop DAIII, because DAII could have been better. But DAII didn't need to be better. It's still amazing.

Tangent: why isn't anyone going nuts over ME3's pittance of a development cycle?

[Savber100]

"Unlike other titles from Bioware, this [score] was kind of a rush job. EA really wanted to capitalize on the success of Origins, so the game was really being pushed hard to be released now." -Inon Zur
...
And I wept.
Damn you EA... just damn you.

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Tangent: why isn't anyone going nuts over ME3's pittance of a development cycle?

I am

People are silent because they want to avoid judging a game before release. But the short development time makes me very very worried.

Modifié par Savber100, 11 mars 2011 - 04:50 .

[upsettingshorts]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I'm sure it was pushed out. If BioWare had another 6-8 months, we might have less recycled environments and better companion AI.

But you know what? It's still much better than Dragon Age: Origins.

My companion AI was pretty good.  Granted it took me until early Act 2 to "program" it to be/work out all the kinks.

Otherwise... co-sign.

[slimgrin]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Tangent: why isn't anyone going nuts over ME3's pittance of a development cycle?

People very likely will, after this.

[upsettingshorts]

slimgrin wrote...

People very likely will, after this.

You mean "the same people" right?  

[mesmerizedish]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I'm sure it was pushed out. If BioWare had another 6-8 months, we might have less recycled environments and better companion AI.

But you know what? It's still much better than Dragon Age: Origins.

My companion AI was pretty good.  Granted it took me until early Act 2 to "program" it to be/work out all the kinks.

Otherwise... co-sign.

Ooh, we're signing things now? Yay!

Since companion AI is largely user-defined, I'm not sure what "bad AI" means I've just re-specced and re-worked all my companions' tactics, but I haven't had a chance to try them out in combat yet.

[Perfect-Kenshin]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I'm sure it was pushed out. If BioWare had another 6-8 months, we might have less recycled environments and better companion AI.

But you know what? It's still much better than Dragon Age: Origins.

Not even close.

[Ilikered]

And Origins, which isn't a "product of what BioWare currently is," isn't as good as DAII, which is.
So, I don't see where you're going. Every game that BioWare has
released while under EA has been better than every game they've made
after BGII. And, every game they've put out has been better than the one
that precedes it.

There really isn't any use debating with a rabid fanboy like you, so lets move away from subjectives and go into objectives.

You could argue that the texture and aroma of poop is fantastic, and since its an entirely subjective argument I couldn't say you were wrong.

Dragon Age 2 was the least well recieved and most critisized game Bioware made since ****ing Sonic Chronicles.  That isn't because there is a vast conspiracy against Bioware. It shows that gamers, console and PC gamers alike, genuinely thought that Dragon Age 2 was a rushjob, that lacked the immersion and quality of writing as its predesscor.

Modifié par Ilikered, 11 mars 2011 - 04:53 .

[Gatt9]

lv12medic wrote...

Heh, he'd like to be an Orc.

I think any game that has a release date set in stone while in early development is bound to be rushed to a certain extent. It tends to happen to everything that is made with such a deadline. How many people rush to complete a term paper on-time? Or scramble when the 5 minute warning goes out on a timed exam? Or the NY Jets rushing play after play right at the end of the Super Bowl hoping for a last-second touchdown?

I would like DA2 to have a bit more polish so to speak. But how much would that cost? Would it really help or would the dev team still feel rushed at the inevitable deadline? Or do you keep pushing it back? Where do you draw the line?

I could see EA potentially (hopefully) learning that setting the development timeline for a large scale RPG game may need to be a bit longer than what was provided for DA2.

Now if DA3 came out in March of 2012, then I'd believe outright that EA has lost their marbles though. I'll draw my line there.

There's a very large difference when you're talking about software.  When you're told to make a game and make the following changes,  you have no idea how long it's going to take to make those changes to an existing engine.  Changes could lead to entire systems breaking that you didn't realize had such strong connections to what you were playing with,  leading to a significant increase in development time.

Then there's the balance issue once you're done with that,  such as DA2's combat changes which require significant rebalancing of most every supporting system.

1 year is nowhere near sufficient time to make those changes and implement sufficient content,  18 months is possible. 

EA knows quite well how long it takes to develop an RPG.  You are either unaware or completely forgetting,  EA is one of the founding fathers of gaming.  EA was formed in the C64 era in the early 80's,  they've developed numerous RPGs as well as virtually every other type of game.  EA believes yearly product refreshes are the way to go,  regardless of what has to be comprimised in getting there.

I've gotta be honest,  why are you bothering waiting to say EA's lost their marbles?  They gave the DA2 team 12 months to do what the rest of the industry takes 18-24 months to do.

[mesmerizedish]

Ilikered wrote...

There really isn't any use debating with a rabid fanboy like you, so lets move away from subjectives and go into objectives.

You could argue that the texture and aroma of poop is fantastic, and since its an entirely subjective argument I couldn't say you were wrong.

Dragon Age 2 was the least well recieved and most critisized game Bioware made since ****ing Sonic Chronicles. 

Fangirl. And I thought we were getting along fine. Way to go and be a jerk

Modifié par ishmaeltheforsaken, 11 mars 2011 - 04:53 .

[thegoldfinch]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I'm sure it was pushed out. If BioWare had another 6-8 months, we might have less recycled environments and better companion AI.

But you know what? It's still much better than Dragon Age: Origins.

Yes. I assume that all the core writing was done far before the deadline to allow for the game construction. As it stands, it was worlds better than Origins. There was a particularly nasty moment in the game where I cried. Wish I could reveal it here because it was so good, but I won't.

Anyway, music. The battle music in Darktown stands out to me, I don't know why. It's very peppy

[Esoj16]

This makes me a sad panda =( I'm barely 16 hours into the game (Just started the deep roads) and I'm loving it so far, the thing is, I'm not loving it as much as DA:O, which I sort of expected =/

Environments are recycled a lot, and I miss camp time with my companions, I dislike not being able to talk to them when I want to, but other than that I don't have many complaints, but I do wish Bioware would've had more time to polish it more, just hope the same thing doesn't happen with SWTOR and ME3

[AdmiralCheez]

Well, damn.

I'll be returning my copy in protest and waiting until the price goes down to purchase it, if at all.

This isn't right, EA. Dragon Age isn't Madden.

[Shifty Assassin]

Just goes to show how good EA is at screwing things up....

[Samurai Pumpkin]

 This happens to every company that gets bought by EA.  As long as EA is hanging over Bioware's name their product quality will go to garbage due to stuff like this.

Understand, my grievance is with EA.  Not Bioware.  I stopped being a fan of EA at around 1998.

I have seen stuff like this firsthand.

People can flame Bioware all they want but ultimately it is not their decision; I'd imagine.

[Twitchmonkey]

slimgrin wrote...

People very likely will, after this.

I'm certainly concerned. It would be a shame for ME3 to be rushed, ME2 is one of my favorite games ever, and ME3 has the potential to be incredible. DAO was a fine game, but I can get over a disappointing sequel in that series.