336 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryenke]

What is so sad to me is what he said here:

"Dragon Age II certainly made some changes but holds very true to what us as a team sees as core tenets of the series. There's certainly refinement to do, there's learnings to be had, but I don't think it loses as much of the personality as it certainly could have."

OMG, he doesn't think it loses as much personality as it could have - and he's saying it like that is a POSITIVE thing?!?

Modifié par Ryenke, 11 mars 2011 - 03:12 .

[Yriss]

Marbazoid wrote...

Ebenezer wrote...

Marbazoid wrote...

I think Mike did the best he could in that interview. He was very diplomatic, while at the same time honest. I mean really, what do you all expect him to say?

What I got from that interview was:

We knew we were taking a risk.

The metacritic score is lower than we expected.

We will most likely attempt to address common criticisms and complaints in the next installment.

I was somewhat with you up until "We will most likely attempt to address common criticisms and complaints in the next installment."  He actually mentions making the game even more dumbed down in the next installment.  I dont think that exactly addresses the criticisms.  I really didnt even get the impression he even knows what the real criticisms are.

Of course I dont expect him to come out publicly so soon after release and admit all of the games failures, but he seemed pretty clueless and ignorant.  As others have said already, some of what he said was flat out insulting.

He does not mention making the game more dumbed down in the next installment, he was talking about what could have been if their goal from the outset was to appeal to as many gamers as possible, "by commitee".

He makes reference to, and defends the changes to combat.

He acknowledges that there were too many instances of reused levels.

He does in fact mention that going through reviews and fan criticism after a longer time has passed would be the natural next step.

He mentions his surprise at the lower initial review scores.

That was my understanding from the interview too (Marbazoid's posts). Anything more would be reading a bit too much between the lines.

[marcbenigni]

"The 1% of PC Elitist are complaining that it changed, whatevs."

Fascinating math there. Just once for the record:
Metacritic critic reviews: > 8/10
Metacritic player reviews: < 4/10

This is NOT a common disparity no matter how you try to explain it away, and it DOES represent a concern. (Reality check vs. the "whiners always wind up online" explanation: LOTS of happy customers do get online to write about things they like, it's often referred to as the "honeymoon" effect, where customers actually WANT to reinforce their satisfaction with a product since they've committed to the expenditure. The flipside of the buyer's remorse coin.)

Not "hating on" DA2. Just really sick of the off-hand dismissals of any criticism.

Modifié par marcbenigni, 11 mars 2011 - 03:18 .

[ragnaven]

The more this goes on the more I want to drag out Stephen Kings Dark Tower book out, the preface to it talks about writing. You either pander to what sells and write something that is less than what it could be, or you write whats in your heart and you make something timeless. Tolkin and Howard in their day were niche writers, but they still have impact felt to this day. The fathers of modern fantasy that refuse to die. The lord of the Rings inspire readers to this day, while Conan still had people writing new tales for him up until Funcom killed him.

You either do what you love, make it right, and have the whole world giving you respect for it win or lose. Or you go for the money and end up like Ozymandias.
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away." - Percy Shelley

Modifié par ragnaven, 11 mars 2011 - 03:22 .

[FellowerOfOdin]

Okay Mike, getting a "perfect" rating from a review you PAID FOR certainly should not be the scale.

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

Thanks for the link OP, it was an interesting interview and raises some questions for me.

"There are some things I think that are certainly fair criticisms: the re-use of the levels is something we knew was a bit of a risk, but we wanted to make sure there was more content rather than less, so re-using some of the spaces and coming to them again was certainly one we were careful about and tried to re-use as artfully as we could. "

-Reusing areas to increase content? That seems like something of a contradictory statement. He may of meant they tried not to reuse content but alot of reviews out there mention the reuse of alot of content.

"Well it's hard to know exactly what's going on with scores that are really, really negative. One possible culprit could just be a change backlash, i.e. this isn't Origins and I wanted Origins 2. There may be some degree of what I would honestly say is emotional investment in the Origins story, or in the way Origins was presented which is leading to a stronger than average reaction of disappointment. That's understandable, and if anything that really is a compliment to the work on Origins."

-Wow, that comes across as a bit egotistical. Gamers don't like DA 2 because DA:O was THAT good? DA:O was a fun game, to me, but it was far from perfect.

"Dragon Age II was designed by just the senior, core team. Honestly I don't feel it's a game that's been designed to appeal far and wide and so on. If it were, there were choices we could have made that would have taken it much, much further. We would have probably simplified down to a single character, maybe with companions; probably looked at doing some even deeper changes to inventory management, making sure that... You wouldn't want to confuse people with enchanting or anything complex like that."

-Wasn't there a press release about six months back about trying to capture a wider audience from other genres? I remember the mention of CoD fans as an example.  Has this position been reversed somehow since release?

"I would say get rid of the idea it will be a re-hash. Getting rid of Baldur's Gate is a terrible idea, it created some really fundamental elements of what we've done with Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon Age II. It's never going to be the same game every time out. We see Dragon Age as a story about a place and a time, not just a singular story that continues through games."

-But the promotions on the forums did promote DA:O as a spiritual successor to the BG series. Hopefully this means that if there is a DA 3, it will not be about Hawke!


The interview is, of course, longer than that  but those were the curious parts which stood out to me. Overall I thought it was a good interview and I'm not trying to be rude or harsh on Mr. Laidlaw or Bioware. DA 2 is a casual mystery to me and I'm curious about how it came to be the product that it is.

[Wylfred]

Most of the issues people have with DA2 were caused by a lower budget and only a year and a half of development time.

Bioware, with an indeterminate amount of pressure from EA ,made a decision to churn out something fast and cheap and then ride their previous reputation to profits. All this BS about "stripping away unnecessary elements", and "Not fitting the story" is just the smoke and mirrors of PR-speak.

[tausra]

I like the game, I enjoy the combat, iIt's not DA:O 2, and I thank BIoWare for that. I like almost all the characters, and I like the setting. It's better than any game I've ever made, so I don't have much room to complain. Could they have improved some things? Yes, but everything could be improved. The game isn't the pointless grind that Origins was, go to point a, trek through location B, discover the plot twist, fight the boss and move to point c.

Flame On!

[Marionetten]

Nice to see that they're still harping on about changes. Changes isn't why people dislike Dragon Age II... well, except for the completely idiotic idea of scrapping the isometric camera. People dislike Dragon Age II because it's a rushed product. Short, copy pasted areas, very few actual choices, poor encounter design, mediocre graphics and a very disappointing ending. This all adds up.

BioWare did rest on its laurels. That's the issue. The fact that they've yet to acknowledge that is just ridiculous. Take some responsibility and learn from Dragon Age II. Then start working on Dragon Age III and make it truly great.

[moilami]

Ok time to move on and play some DA2 while waiting for DA3.

[flushfire]

Emoking wrote...
But he doesn't say that.

Because what he says would be the absolute truth and it would be in the game right? That's why you have the auto-attack debacle that up to now has not been solved yet. And also this:
http://vividgamer.co...-dragon-age-ii/

And how true is this?

Honestly I don't feel it's a game that's been designed to appeal far and wide and so on.

after having said these things:

For me, I guess, fundamentally, there are more people who are ready to play RPGs than realize it. These are people who will play FarmVille. These are people who have shot enough people in the head that they've leveled up in Medal of Honor. They've gained XP and have received awards as a result. That's an RPG mechanic. They've played [Grand Theft Auto] San Andreas and they've run enough, and gotten buff enough, that their endurance is a higher. They've leveled.

So there was no mandate, but I mean there were decisions that we made as a team that said, "Okay, this is, I think, more welcoming." Not "dumbed down" or anything like that, but welcoming.

oh, and don't forget about Laidlaw's answer to:

Eurogamer: What do you say when people accuse Dragon Age II of being a console game?

which is totally not dodging the question entirely.

Emoking wrote...
Act like a dumb and crazy paranoid nut, and they'll treat you like one.

After what I've read of Laidlaw lately, apparently I don't need to.

Modifié par flushfire, 11 mars 2011 - 03:58 .

[adneate]

The biggest probelm for DA2 for me was that after that made so much out of all these changes they were making and how different the game was going to be, the vast majority of these changes didn't clearly out do the similar systems in Origins. It felt like needless change being done by a group of people who maybe should have been more conservative in making their game. It's a bizzarre combination of "Design by focus group" and "Designers run amok", someone told them to make it less of a niche title but then the developers took that concept and went way too far with it. Origins knew what it was and what it wanted to do, Dragon Age 2 feels like all it wants to be is not Origins.

[locolazy]

Have no fear they'll ignore all basic requestsfor improvements and add multiplayer since everygame needs multiplayer for longevity now.

[cipher86]

There's really no excuse for the recycled level layouts.  I don't care if they had to get on their hands and knees to beg EA for another week or have some level designers put in some serious overtime.  It's a $60 game on the PC and this one "oversight" makes it seem like a budget title.

Modifié par cipher86, 11 mars 2011 - 03:49 .

[JoePilot]

From the Interview:

Eurogamer:
One stronger criticism levelled at Dragon Age II was that it was
designed by committee; it tried too hard to appeal too far and wide, and
in doing so it lost a sense of self. What do you say to that?

Mike Laidlaw:
Dragon Age II was designed by just the senior, core team.
Honestly I don't feel it's a game that's been designed to appeal far and
wide and so on. If it were, there were choices we could have made that
would have taken it much, much further. We would have probably
simplified down to a single character, maybe with companions; probably
looked at doing some even deeper changes to inventory management, making
sure that... You wouldn't want to confuse people with enchanting or
anything complex like that. Really what we wanted to do with the game,
just talking about first-principles, was to look at elements of Origins
that were over complex and needlessly so and see if we could pull those
out in a clean way and didn't take out what I always saw as core
elements of the experience: strong, character-driven stories, and the
idea that the combat should be a party working together, especially at
higher difficulty levels.

I just threw up a little in my mouth.  Laidlaw seems to think you are all mouth-breathing imbeciles who can barely tie your shoes in the morning without getting confused.

This man should never be allowed to work on a video game ever, ever again. 

Modifié par JoePilot, 11 mars 2011 - 03:52 .

[Bourne Endeavor]

I can appreciate the dissociation from its predecessor in the Final Fantasy-esque manner but for a complete overhaul of virtually everything. They may as well have begun a new franchise, which coincidently would have lessened the negative response. I do not dislike what I have seen of DA2 but I cannot claim it a superior title to what came before. The storyline appears rushed, the characters less intriguing. It rests precisely where it should; a good game that is not quite up to the standard of what came before.

BioWare is in this egotistical and nonsensical delusion they can capture the CoD masses yet continue to ignore the conundrum in their midst. They are not interested in story, character development and general plot advancement. In their perception what BioWare adheres to being champions of is tiresome, monotonous and wasteful. It interferes the core objective to their gaming experience; shoot things. We are undoubtedly the most opposite fanbases in existence and BioWare must decide between them. You cannot have your cake and eat it to.

[culletron1]

Wylfred wrote...

Most of the issues people have with DA2 were caused by a lower budget and only a year and a half of development time.

Bioware, with an indeterminate amount of pressure from EA ,made a decision to churn out something fast and cheap and then ride their previous reputation to profits. All this BS about "stripping away unnecessary elements", and "Not fitting the story" is just the smoke and mirrors of PR-speak.

I too suspect this may be the root cause. 18 months is a very short dev peroid... I do hope however that there wasn't an attempt to ride their reputation rather than a belief that they could pull it off. Riding your reputation to easy profits is a sure way of losing your reputation.

DA2 seems to be more of an Episode in thedas (similar to awakenings) rather than the grand sweeping epic that DA:O was... To be honest I am fine that. I think if it was marketed as such there wouldn't really be much of an issue. 

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

moilami wrote...

Ok time to move on and play some DA2 while waiting for DA3.

Yeah, at this rate you won't have to wait long. Maybe they will churn it out before 2012 hits so they can flood the market in a bid for RPG of the year.

[jds1bio]

I thought this interview title and a few of the questions were designed just to attract hits to the eurogamer.net website (a site I generally like overall). Since other developers recently have acted hurt and defensive when their games were criticized, the interviewer clearly took one look at these boards and tried to get a scoop out of BioWare. A defence? As if something is so wrong? Why does BioWare have to be on the defensive?

I thought BioWare did a pretty good job on the interview, no sore feelings at all. The interviewer can't even give the game credit for being more accessible to play on consoles than Origins. Even Eurogamer's comment thread after the article talks about how people are having a better time with the combat. Are they now going to interview every developer whose game gets an 8/10 on their site and ask for a defense?

The only thing that disappointed me was that getting a 90 on Metacritic is an actual goal of BioWare's, and that reviewer statements may be analyzed to try and engineer a 90 or higher on the next game. The industry currently believes that a score of 90 or higher gives them the only chance that they will keep their projects afloat financially. I believe that assertion will ultimately prove to be false in the end.

[element eater]

its pretty weak how he dismisses the negative feed so back so quickly. Also the interviewer didnt have the balls to mention metacritics user score which is very weak indeed

he also completely dodged this question completely failing to give an actual anser for it
Eurogamer: Should people let go of the idea that Dragon Age is a reincarnation of Baldur's Gate?  

Modifié par element eater, 11 mars 2011 - 04:04 .

[ACDimps]

ragnaven wrote...

The more this goes on the more I want to drag out Stephen Kings Dark Tower book out, the preface to it talks about writing. You either pander to what sells and write something that is less than what it could be, or you write whats in your heart and you make something timeless. Tolkin and Howard in their day were niche writers, but they still have impact felt to this day. The fathers of modern fantasy that refuse to die. The lord of the Rings inspire readers to this day, while Conan still had people writing new tales for him up until Funcom killed him.

You either do what you love, make it right, and have the whole world giving you respect for it win or lose. Or you go for the money and end up like Ozymandias.
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away." - Percy Shelley

great post. Big SK and Dark Tower fan here. This game's atrocious (mostly) story/writing is a true testament to your idea.  They are pandering in the worst sense.  Thankfully, this is my last EA/Bioware game. As painful as it will be to miss out on Battlefield 3, ME3...   But EA has grown too big for it's own good, and they think they can get away with this garbage.

[Yriss]

JoePilot wrote...

From the Interview:

Eurogamer:
One stronger criticism levelled at Dragon Age II was that it was
designed by committee; it tried too hard to appeal too far and wide, and
in doing so it lost a sense of self. What do you say to that?

Mike Laidlaw:
Dragon Age II was designed by just the senior, core team.
Honestly I don't feel it's a game that's been designed to appeal far and
wide and so on. If it were, there were choices we could have made that
would have taken it much, much further. We would have probably
simplified down to a single character, maybe with companions; probably
looked at doing some even deeper changes to inventory management, making
sure that... You wouldn't want to confuse people with enchanting or
anything complex like that. Really what we wanted to do with the game,
just talking about first-principles, was to look at elements of Origins
that were over complex and needlessly so and see if we could pull those
out in a clean way and didn't take out what I always saw as core
elements of the experience: strong, character-driven stories, and the
idea that the combat should be a party working together, especially at
higher difficulty levels.

I just threw up a little in my mouth.  Laidlaw seems to think you are all mouth-breathing imbeciles who can barely tie your shoes in the morning without getting confused.

This man should never be allowed to work on a video game ever, ever again. 

Maybe it's just me, but I read the first few sentences that you bolded as sarcasm from him (the "We could have" stuff), which may not have translated well in writing.

[AkiKishi]

They would probably be better off staying silent every time they open their mouths lately they just pour more oil on the fire.

[Massi75]

Ebenezer wrote...

Rushed or not there's no excuse for stupidity, and some of the design decisions are downright stupid.

Again though, he says us players are the stupid ones. We cant handle change and we should be lucky they even left in complicated things like party members and items to tax our feeble minds.

I agree completely! They can deny it as much as they want, but it's clear that they wanted to get DA2 out as fast as possible to cash in the success of DAO and they thought that using the "ME2 recipe" was the most convinient way to achive this. WRONG!

They expected that just becase it was branded Bioware and had Dargon Age in the title it would be an instant success. WRONG angain! Now they blame the community and loyal customers for not accepting this utter mess called DA2.