288 réponses à ce sujet

[Titanominus]

I hate you EA, always have, always will.

[SnakeSNMF]

Samurai Pumpkin wrote...

 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.

This.

[Gaiseric82]

Gatt9 wrote...
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.

Um... How exactly is this a good thing again?

[lv12medic]

Gatt9 wrote...

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.

Well:
1) Should software development get a free ride compared to everything else that has a deadline?
2) How many people work at EA were around when it was founded?  How many of those are involved in allocating time schedules, budgets and resource allocation?
3)  Where is the 12 month development cycle for DA2 coming from?

[slimgrin]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

People very likely will, after this.

You mean "the same people" right?  

The 'same' people are in danger of becoming a majority.

Honestly, with Skyrim and Deus Ex coming out around the same time as ME3, Bioware better pull of something very special. Bethesda is enormously ambitious with their games.

Oblivion and Fallout 3 have their detractors, but they made an idellible impression on the industry. How long has Skyrim been in development? TW2? Deus EX? All of them much longer than DA2. This says something. 

Modifié par slimgrin, 11 mars 2011 - 05:03 .

[upsettingshorts]

slimgrin wrote...

The 'same' people are in danger of becoming a majority.

Possibly.  Possibly not.  It's speculation. 

slimgrin wrote...

Bethesda is enormously ambitious with their games.

Ehhh... yes and no.  They're certainly good at giving that impression, that's for sure.

slimgrin wrote...

This says something.

Something different to different people, I imagine.  That being said, the comparisons to Bethesda 'round these parts always bugged me.  They make - to me - entirely different games.  It's like... if we put all cRPGs under the same label, imagine doing the same thing to sports games.  American Football and Association Football (Madden and FIFA) are both sports games, but both do different things and have different appeals.  Why are they compared?  I get comparisons to say, The Witcher (a story based cRPG) or even Alpha Protocol (same) but to compare such story-based cRPGs to sandbox games like Oblivion or Fallout always struck me as having missed the mark.  That's a slightly off-topic mini-rant though.

[DustArma]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

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

Well, for once it seems that they are sticking with the same mechanics that ME2 used, reworking the mechanics has to take a lot of time to get right which is what they did with DA2.

[upsettingshorts]

Gaiseric82 wrote...

Um... How exactly is this a good thing again?

Well, it depends.

How big is Bioware's staff for DA2 compared to DAO?  How much development time for the latter was spent exclusively on preparation (such as writing lore)?  How many elements - visible and not visible to the player - were reused?  What are the relative development budgets for each project?

Things like that do matter.  We can gloss over them like they're insignificant, or disregard them because we simply do not know - but they are part of the equation.  An inconvenient part - because regardless of which "side" we take, we're all ignorant as to that particular factor. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 11 mars 2011 - 05:11 .

[Armatyr]

i for one support this thread sorry ea but this isnt a buisness youre rushing its art and thats just not right i for one would pay for this game and its dlc knowing bioware was behind this. as for capitalizing on their success you should of released some bridge dlc or something to keep the mood fresh i mean damn, this is bioware your playing with not a one hit wonder game company please show some respect or you will lose money. gamers are not idiots who will accept this crap for long please stop.

[Ilikered]

AFAIK Bioware is EA. The name Bioware is just a brand.

Yeah but former Bioware Studios still operate with design leads and producers from Bioware before the merger. Financially, its just another one of EAs studios entirely owned by the publisher, but I think call it Bioware is still fair.

[Knightstar2001]

You people might want to read the article in question again. Because the editor of it has add a note that makes it clear that Zur was only talking about the Musical score for the game being rushed and not the development process at all.

[Brumbek]

pixieface wrote...

Thanks for the link. I like Inon Zur, EA business aside.

That is unfair. I have been on countless long haul group projects since college started and no one
likes to rush. No one. Working in a team is difficult, but working
under a time crunch is utter maddness. You lose sleep and stress and
worry and you can't eat because Ricky The ****** won't do his share of
the work. Thinking that BioWare doesn't mind being EA's "thrall" is also
uncalled for. If you want to strawman them, go ahead, but I highly
doubt that they are snickering, evil gremlin charicatures out to ruin
your gaming experience for fun and profit. Can't comment on the writers
being gremlins or not, though.

I also really like Inon Zur; he's a master of his craft so I have only good things to say about him.

I understand nobody who actually has to do the work likes to rush things. However, I've had quite a few managers who don't mind at all rushing products to make money...you haven't?

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Brumbek wrote...

And to the people who think DA2 is perfect

Who are these people?  I haven't seen any.  Perfect for someone and perfect for everyone are different things

There are a number of "perfect" reviews, many from users at least one from a publicaiton. That is what I was speaking of. Look up the perfect reviews on Metacritic if you wish.

Gnaeus.Silvanus wrote...

I wanted to believe this post but
when I found out you don't even have badges for the bioware games, I've
lost interest in your brain fart. Stay cheesy though :-)

Here's something to consider: some of us are morally opposed to being forced to register our games on forums so we don't register them ever. And recent events with accounts being banned and access to games brought into question only further elucidate why some of us are morally opposed to this practice.

jds1bio wrote...

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.

Nobody said it was a smoking gun. I wasn't trying to unveil a grand conspiracy. As stated, it's obvious anyway the game was rushed. But read the quote by Zur again, EA wanted DA2 out ASAP, not just the music.

Knightstar2001 wrote...

You people might want to read the
article in question again. Because the editor of it has add a note that
makes it clear that Zur was only talking about the Musical score for the
game being rushed and not the development process at all.

I'm afraid you are wrong, respectfully. I quote "EA really wanted to capitalize on the success of Origins, so the game was really being pushed hard to be released now." The editors note simply says the bugs he was talking about were music cue bugs, not game bugs.

Modifié par Brumbek, 11 mars 2011 - 05:18 .

[jds1bio]

slimgrin wrote...

Honestly, with Skyrim and Deus Ex coming out around the same time as ME3, Bioware better pull of something very special. Bethesda is enormously ambitious with their games.

Oblivion and Fallout 3 have their detractors, but they made an idellible impression on the industry. How long has Skyrim been in development? TW2? Deus EX? All of them much longer than DA2. This says something. 

I seems that this March release date was the window they wanted to release DA2...with TW2 and the other RPGs and button=awesome games coming out over the course of the year, plus their own ME3.  With the year's release calendar, Steam summer sales, etc.  and worrying about a corporate balance sheet, there's a lot of pressure on a publisher to get something out at the right time to maximize sales.  Although you wouldn't know it by reading this forum, EA may have just succeeded with DA2 here.

Modifié par jds1bio, 11 mars 2011 - 05:16 .

[cachx]

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.

This.

Once again proving that dev time does not necessary equal game quality. Wasn't DAO stuck on development hell for 5 years or something?

[Gaiseric82]

Knightstar2001 wrote...

You people might want to read the article in question again. Because the editor of it has add a note that makes it clear that Zur was only talking about the Musical score for the game being rushed and not the development process at all.

The note is simply there to cover IGN from any negative liability from the quote.

I think it's pretty clear given the context and the wording that Inon was stating he had to finish the score faster than usual in order to keep up with EA's inisistance on rushed development cycle. 

He even mentioned EA by name.  Were it simply about developing a score, he would've brought Bioware's name up instead.

[SMTPersona]

Knightstar2001 wrote...

You people might want to read the article in question again. Because the editor of it has add a note that makes it clear that Zur was only talking about the Musical score for the game being rushed and not the development process at all.

Hmm I'm not sure if I agree with what you said. The editor was talking about the bugs that Zur mentioned. Which means that Zur is possibly/ likely talking about the whole development of the game being rushed, including the music devlopment.

Edit: I totally agree with what you said, Gaiseric82. You took the words right out of my mouth!

Modifié par DestinationTruthFTW, 11 mars 2011 - 05:24 .

[mr_luga]

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.

I'll admit the combat is better, not much else is though :-/  It's kind of important to point out though it's still a good game, just compared to Dragon age origins it just..

It looks like the game was made like this Dragon age 2 -> Dragon age origins.

There's just alot less in DA2, and alot more in origins :-/

[jds1bio]

Gaiseric82 wrote...

Knightstar2001 wrote...

You people might want to read the article in question again. Because the editor of it has add a note that makes it clear that Zur was only talking about the Musical score for the game being rushed and not the development process at all.

The note is simply there to cover IGN from any negative liability from the quote.

I think it's pretty clear given the context and the wording that Inon was stating he had to finish the score faster than usual in order to keep up with EA's inisistance on rushed development cycle. 

He even mentioned EA by name.  Were it simply about developing a score, he would've brought Bioware's name up instead.

He mentioned EA by name because EA has the VPs in charge of getting licenses, rights, and contracts to music and access to people like Florence and the Machine, arrange for the orchestra and recording space, etc.  This arrangement allows Bioware to focus on game development and Zur to focus on the music composition.

[Hyunsai]

Knightstar2001 wrote...

You people might want to read the article in question again. Because the editor of it has add a note that makes it clear that Zur was only talking about the Musical score for the game being rushed and not the development process at all.

The note is talking about the BUGS of the musical score.

This is still correct : "so the game was really being pushed hard to be released now" .

Modifié par Hyunsai, 11 mars 2011 - 05:30 .

[tbsking]

You know, now might be a good time to chime in and say that I, and the rest of the naysayers who were all told to just wait and see and stop saying the sky was falling, turned out to be quite right.

I truly don't understand how you can say DA2 is superior to Origins. Not only were there simply less features than in DAO, there was less story, less characterization for companions, less time spent on making environments and backgrounds.

But everyone is excited that combat is faster and the PC speaks, so maybe EA/Bioware figured out where the money lay.

[casedawgz]

slimgrin wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

People very likely will, after this.

You mean "the same people" right?  

The 'same' people are in danger of becoming a majority.

Honestly, with Skyrim and Deus Ex coming out around the same time as ME3, Bioware better pull of something very special. Bethesda is enormously ambitious with their games.

Oblivion and Fallout 3 have their detractors, but they made an idellible impression on the industry. How long has Skyrim been in development? TW2? Deus EX? All of them much longer than DA2. This says something. 

You can beat Fallout 3 in under 2 hours, which negates at least a good third of the DA2 complaints, which are often about length.

[Jaron Oberyn]

Well that explains ME3's short development time.... EA is trying to make a quick buck, but what they don't realize is that they would make so much more money if they would have the patience to wait for a quality product. They're all about quantity over quality. The Bioware of old is dead unfortunately. I figured something like this happened when I saw the excess amounts of reused environments. Reminded me of ME1. I wonder if it's possible for Bioware to go independent, or sign up with another publisher...

-Polite