832 réponses à ce sujet

[MonkeyLungs]

Mr. Laidlaw might also be a genius though. What if the new approach really does bring them alot mroe customers? I might not like it (I prefer the RPG to be as complex as possible please) and you may not but the dissenters may be outnumbered.

In general gamers really do like their games to be more simple and easy to figure out than the old titles. Mini map, quest compass, meta game journal entries etc. These features are essential to many gamers,and without them they probably wouldn't play alot of these games. I could do without any of the hand holding going so far as to reduce the journal function to an actual journal that I the player filled in myself. But I am WAY in the minority on this.

[TwistedComplex]

Vandarr1 wrote...

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Brenus wrote...

And Bioware would have had an even larger and devoted fanbase if they had kept making games as good as BG2.

Wrong.  Where are the games similar to BG2 today?  How many do you see out there?

If, as you claim, there is a huge market for those games, companies would be all over it.  Yet they are not.  Because games like BG2 were great for their time... but now, in the market today...  Baldur's Gate 2 would suck.

absolutely not.a remake of BG2 with a graphics overhaul would still sell well

Would it sell well before or after the massive s***storm of people complaining that Bioware just rehashes games?

[Meltemph]

TwistedComplex wrote...

Vandarr1 wrote...

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Brenus wrote...

And Bioware would have had an even larger and devoted fanbase if they had kept making games as good as BG2.

Wrong.  Where are the games similar to BG2 today?  How many do you see out there?

If, as you claim, there is a huge market for those games, companies would be all over it.  Yet they are not.  Because games like BG2 were great for their time... but now, in the market today...  Baldur's Gate 2 would suck.

absolutely not.a remake of BG2 with a graphics overhaul would still sell well

Would it sell well before or after the massive s***storm of people complaining that Bioware just rehashes games?

Or complained that the characters/area's didnt look right or a whole host of other things.  Large scale remakes are risky and is why they rarely happen.  On paper it makes sense to everyone but the risks are not exactly low.

[AtreiyaN7]

RohanD wrote...

He's an idiot. This interview just confirmed the reason why DA2 sucked. Laidlaw is that reason.

Here's an idea Mike, go look up what the word genre means in the dictionary. By it's very nature a genre includes some people (those who like it) and excludes others (those that don't). SURE sometimes you can overlap and fuse genres, but there is already a well established field for what you want to do, it's called the ACTION/RPG genre. If you want to make one, DO IT, but don't tell us it's an RPG but also an ACTION/RPG, you're just confusing people and creating false expectations, which will again result in the hatred being thrown at you from all corners of the Internet.

I am pretty sure that this is it for me with Bioware. I've just downloaded NWN2 from steam, put it on my killer rig all maxed out, and it's 100 times better than DA2 in terms of gameplay, art direction and immersion.

Unless Bioware gets rid of Laidlaw, there's no way they'll ever be able to make a game as good as even Origins again.

Definition of genre (courtesy of the M-W site):
1: a category of artistic, musical, or literary composition characterized by a particular style, form, or content


Nowhere in the actual definition of genre does it say anything about excluding anyone from appreciating a style of or form of gaming.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 20 mars 2011 - 10:11 .

[Goldfinger168]

So much talk about "evolving" the genre, and yet when I'm playing the game I just don't see it at all.

[AllThatJazz]

Complexity is something that has to be learned. I still remember how long it took me to fully get to grips with THAC0 etc in my days as a pen & paper D&D player. And I do believe that there is an increasing lack of patience for such things and an increasing desire for instant gratification amongst the population in general. The videogame industry hasn't (by itself, at any rate) caused this, but any business that wants to survive has to respond to it.

[Meltemph]

MonkeyLungs wrote...

Mr. Laidlaw might also be a genius though. What if the new approach really does bring them alot mroe customers? I might not like it (I prefer the RPG to be as complex as possible please) and you may not but the dissenters may be outnumbered.

In general gamers really do like their games to be more simple and easy to figure out than the old titles. Mini map, quest compass, meta game journal entries etc. These features are essential to many gamers,and without them they probably wouldn't play alot of these games. I could do without any of the hand holding going so far as to reduce the journal function to an actual journal that I the player filled in myself. But I am WAY in the minority on this.

Well a lot it stems from the a lot of those gamers grew up and don't have the time they used to and that "hand holding" you are talking about speeds up the game it an enjoyable level for those who don't have the time.  And since the average age of a gamer has a job(well one would hope most have jobs), they don't have the time they used to.  

Hell, yesterday I was watching The Totally Rad Show and Alex Albrecht was calling this his favorite RPG in a long time, because of how the map sysytem told you exactly where to go, so if you havent been able to play in awhile you are not trying to remember what you were last doing. a 

It's just small examples like that as to why all that stuff is "required" nowadays.  Hell even I admit all the tools they add now are a nice touch, cause I aswell don't have the time I used to, to sit down and one or 3 shot a long game.

Modifié par Meltemph, 20 mars 2011 - 10:17 .

[Medhia Nox]

@AllThatJazz - my use of checkers was simply to reference the similarities between the board and the fact that pieces are simplified. Whereas chess has pieces with varying levels of utility - checker's pieces are all the same. But the principle of the game (to remove all pieces) is essentially the same.

If I were to try to introduce people to Chess - I would form an entirely new club actually. I would not punish my veteran chess players - holding them back - by forcing them to wait while I bring newcomers up to speed. And I wouldn't intimidate newcomers by throwing them in with veterans who could run circles around them.

Yes, I'm aware that development constraints make this impossible for a game developer. However - my statement isn't even that both should be done. My statement is simply - Bioware has chosen to teach new people, but it had to choose. It has chosen to close down its veteran chess club - and, if those people want to come over to the introductory course just to get a fix, they're welcome.

For myself - I have decided that I will simply look to other companies (other chess clubs) who are not catering to newcomers in such a cut and dry fashion.

In the end - it is their choice who to sell to, but it is my choice to no longer purchase their products. My time on the boards is simply a mourning period - I'll get my aggravation about Dragon Age 2 out - then I'll move on and play any number of fantastic games.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 20 mars 2011 - 10:18 .

[Salaciouschicken]

I have no problem with experimenting and evolving. In a way I thought that's what DAO was about as it was a little grittier than your usual rpg. DA2 just took it way too far, and didn't do pretty much anyting particularly well.

[Vice-Admiral von Titsling]

Translation: "I want to turn this game into a not-RPG in order to attract the non-RPG playing crowd, because they are more numerous than the RPG playing crowd, and I want to make money."

[Sandmanifest]

Salaciouschicken wrote...

I have no problem with experimenting and evolving. In a way I thought that's what DAO was about as it was a little grittier than your usual rpg. DA2 just took it way too far, and didn't do pretty much anyting particularly well.

Yeah I Scythe into a group of adds then look on the ground and think "Who thought that was a good idea?"

[AllThatJazz]

RohanD wrote...

He's an idiot. This interview just confirmed the reason why DA2 sucked. Laidlaw is that reason.

Here's an idea Mike, go look up what the word genre means in the dictionary. By it's very nature a genre includes some people (those who like it) and excludes others (those that don't). SURE sometimes you can overlap and fuse genres, but there is already a well established field for what you want to do, it's called the ACTION/RPG genre. If you want to make one, DO IT, but don't tell us it's an RPG but also an ACTION/RPG, you're just confusing people and creating false expectations, which will again result in the hatred being thrown at you from all corners of the Internet.

I am pretty sure that this is it for me with Bioware. I've just downloaded NWN2 from steam, put it on my killer rig all maxed out, and it's 100 times better than DA2 in terms of gameplay, art direction and immersion.

Unless Bioware gets rid of Laidlaw, there's no way they'll ever be able to make a game as good as even Origins again.

I loved NWN2. Ranks the same as the PC version of DA2 on metacritic. 

[Meltemph]

For myself - I have decided that I will simply look to other companies (other chess clubs) who are not catering to newcomers in such a cut and dry fashion.

Big budget games like that though don't exist, you have to go to the small publishers. Even The Wticher(and it looks like 2 as well will) very much lends itself to fairly shallow system. You just are not going to get the same type of gameplay that you got in the older CRPG's anymore(at least until the tide of the trends changes). Hell even DAO was very accessible and for a lot of casual players and even that was to hard(there were massive complaints about the difficulty with DAO) for a lot of new comers.

I like the new games that have been coming out, so I am fortunate, but I wouldn't mind the more old school version either, but I can't see it coming from a big budget seeing as the sales just are not there for time invested.

Modifié par Meltemph, 20 mars 2011 - 10:25 .

[Vice-Admiral von Titsling]

Further translation: "Teaching CoD kiddies how to work stats requires reading and maths and is too hard, screw it, just press A and something awesome happens! Buy Dragon Age 2!"

[Cobrawar]

experimenting should be done very lightly and only when to try and fix something that did not work before.. Always give the Base fans what they want.

[Meltemph]

Vice-Admiral von Titsling wrote...

Further translation: "Teaching CoD kiddies how to work stats requires reading and maths and is too hard, screw it, just press A and something awesome happens! Buy Dragon Age 2!"

No that is an incorrect translation, imo.

That is what he is saying in the interview(well not near as exagerated as you are taking it but still, I'll play along).  What he is actually meaning is that he wants to get them to play his games somehow.  And the way you are going to do that is make it more aggressive/combat oriented if you want to take it in that direction.  

After WoW, I don't think anyone is actually dumb enough to think people don't get how stats work.  I think that was just ML's way of saying, "we want to move a little farther over to that type of game in hopes of pulling them in by adjusting".

That would be my take on it.

Modifié par Meltemph, 20 mars 2011 - 10:28 .

[bEVEsthda]

Really, people, hold back  a second with all that "Laidlaw is an idiot" etc.
Just take a moment and consider the time they had to develop this. I'm sure there are many things DA2 got somewhat wrong to get such a bad reception from so many. But I think we should start with the fact that it's a rush job. What do you think it feels like to become the head of a rush job? Like Laidlaw became when Knowles so wisely decide that he didn't want to have anything to do with this. It's also clear from Knowles blog that the decidion to strip a lot of choices, freedom and gameplay away was also done before. The stack of cards were fixed from the beginning of this. Give Laidlaw some credit for pulling it off as well as he did instead.

And while I think it was a strategic mistake to change so much, I think you read way to much into things said, and build too much out of just a few words. For some reason, DA2 didn't get much time or much budget. Think about that for awhile. Why not?

[AllThatJazz]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@AllThatJazz - my use of checkers was simply to reference the similarities between the board and the fact that pieces are simplified. Whereas chess has pieces with varying levels of utility - checker's pieces are all the same. But the principle of the game (to remove all pieces) is essentially the same.

If I were to try to introduce people to Chess - I would form an entirely new club actually. I would not punish my veteran chess players - holding them back - by forcing them to wait while I bring newcomers up to speed. And I wouldn't intimidate newcomers by throwing them in with veterans who could run circles around them.

Yes, I'm aware that development constraints make this impossible for a game developer. However - my statement isn't even that both should be done. My statement is simply - Bioware has chosen to teach new people, but it had to choose. It has chosen to close down its veteran chess club - and, if those people want to come over to the introductory course just to get a fix, they're welcome.

For myself - I have decided that I will simply look to other companies (other chess clubs) who are not catering to newcomers in such a cut and dry fashion.

In the end - it is their choice who to sell to, but it is my choice to no longer purchase their products. My time on the boards is simply a mourning period - I'll get my aggravation about Dragon Age 2 out - then I'll move on and play any number of fantastic games.

I really do respect your opinion, and I am genuinely sympathetic that you were disappointed in DA2 - believe me, I've been there with games/films/books that I was really looking forward to. And yes it is absolutely your choice to vote with your wallet, as it were. No greater power exists to the consumer.

But using your own analogy, I am also a member of this Veteran Chess club, (in this instance having played all of Bio's games since Baldur's Gate), and my own feeling is that my club hasn't been closed down, it's just been made a bit friendlier to people who aren't quite as awesome at chess as I am. x

[Vice-Admiral von Titsling]

Meltemph wrote...
After WoW, I don't think anyone is actually dumb enough to think people don't get how stats work.

Anybody who has played WoW for any length of time can tell you; at least half the playerbase has no idea how to properly work stats.

[AkiKishi]

Meltemph wrote...

Vice-Admiral von Titsling wrote...

Further translation: "Teaching CoD kiddies how to work stats requires reading and maths and is too hard, screw it, just press A and something awesome happens! Buy Dragon Age 2!"

No that is an incorrect translation, imo.

That is what he is saying in the interview(well not near as exagerated as you are taking it but still, I'll play along).  What he is actually meaning is that he wants to get them to play his games somehow.  And the way you are going to do that is make it more aggressive/combat oriented if you want to take it in that direction.  

After WoW, I don't think anyone is actually dumb enough to think people don't get how stats work.  I think that was just ML's way of saying, "we want to move a little farther over to that type of game in hopes of pulling them in by adjusting".

That would be my take on it.

This is what Bioware are not understanding. It's not that the mechanics are complicated people are just not interested in their story telling.
Final Fantasy more or less proves it, FF tells you a story and it sells well, mechanically , it's quite complex.
Same with WoW you need to know how to build a character, you don't sit through dialogue just to kill stuff.

[Vice-Admiral von Titsling]

AllThatJazz wrote...
my club hasn't been closed down, it's just been made a bit friendlier to people who aren't quite as awesome at chess as I am. x

There's a game for people to play that aren't good at chess. It's called checkers.

If RPGs are too 'hard' for people to grok, they need to go play something else.

[Meltemph]

Vice-Admiral von Titsling wrote...

Meltemph wrote...
After WoW, I don't think anyone is actually dumb enough to think people don't get how stats work.

Anybody who has played WoW for any length of time can tell you; at least half the playerbase has no idea how to properly work stats.

Not "properly", but they still get how stats work.  There are tons of people who are horrible at making effecient D&D builds, but they still enjoy the game.  So I don't think peoples "scukieness" is a driving motivator.

[AngryFrozenWater]

AllThatJazz wrote...

Complexity is something that has to be learned. I still remember how long it took me to fully get to grips with THAC0 etc in my days as a pen & paper D&D player. And I do believe that there is an increasing lack of patience for such things and an increasing desire for instant gratification amongst the population in general. The videogame industry hasn't (by itself, at any rate) caused this, but any business that wants to survive has to respond to it.

I certainly agree about the instant gratification. About complexity... The games industry is trying to produce games economically. That not only means less complex games for a greater audience, but it also means that less complex games tend to produce less bugs and need less development time. There is also this odd assumption that people in general do not want or like complexity. If that was the case then the world would be very dull indeed.

[MonkeyLungs]

Meltemph wrote...

MonkeyLungs wrote...

Mr. Laidlaw might also be a genius though. What if the new approach really does bring them alot mroe customers? I might not like it (I prefer the RPG to be as complex as possible please) and you may not but the dissenters may be outnumbered.

In general gamers really do like their games to be more simple and easy to figure out than the old titles. Mini map, quest compass, meta game journal entries etc. These features are essential to many gamers,and without them they probably wouldn't play alot of these games. I could do without any of the hand holding going so far as to reduce the journal function to an actual journal that I the player filled in myself. But I am WAY in the minority on this.

Well a lot it stems from the a lot of those gamers grew up and don't have the time they used to and that "hand holding" you are talking about speeds up the game it an enjoyable level for those who don't have the time.  And since the average age of a gamer has a job(well one would hope most have jobs), they don't have the time they used to.  

Hell, yesterday I was watching The Totally Rad Show and Alex Albrecht was calling this his favorite RPG in a long time, because of how the map sysytem told you exactly where to go, so if you havent been able to play in awhile you are not trying to remember what you were last doing. a 

It's just small examples like that as to why all that stuff is "required" nowadays.  Hell even I admit all the tools they add now are a nice touch, cause I aswell don't have the time I used to, to sit down and one or 3 shot a long game.

 I can understand why it's done. I can even empathize with the people that enjoy the streamlining. I get why it's there. Yet, even when I was working 6 days a week with 24 on call status I didn't want my games streamlined but I'm totally in the minority ... I know.  I only ever play one game at a time though so maybe a small break from the game doesn't take the details as far out of my mind as it does for others ... I have no idea.  I know my preference is not because I'm somehow smarter than other gamers, it is probably simply that I find certain aspects of RPGs 'fun' that alot of people seem to consider 'tedious'.

I want the characters statistics to be extremely numerous. I want a 10 page character sheet.  I want to get utterly lost in a deep unforgiving dungeon and have to reload because I thought I could wing it and not make a map of my progress or have to reload to a previous save because I stupidly entered that dungeon without enough supplies. I want to be able to have enough choices for making a character that I can (if I choose) make a build that can actually fail. I want some strategy to be present in all aspects of character development. I don't think everyone should be able to 'win the game'.  <---------------There will never be games like this again probably.

[Vice-Admiral von Titsling]

Meltemph wrote...
There are tons of people who are horrible at making effecient D&D builds, but they still enjoy the game. 

That's great, I'm glad they enjoy it.

When D&D is dumbed down to cater to them, let me know.