390 réponses à ce sujet

[Mooh Bear]

Altima Darkspells wrote...

Mooh Bear wrote...

Bioware is not a paragon of good coding, but still, on this particular point, I still think Bioware>Obsidian. Or , to put it another way, if you feel that DA: O/DA2 are buggy, imagine what it would be with Obsidian at the helm. If only every dev would be like Blizzard...

The only reasons Obsidian is known for bugs is, one, people keep bringing it up, and two, they don't fix the bugs as quickly as they should (if ever).

Obsidian games may not be the best optimized, but I didn't see many 'lazy bugs' in their games (though, in their defense, I have yet to play very much into FONV).

When Origins shipped, it was pretty craptacular.  Remember the memory leak?  The one that started inflating loading times after about twenty minutes of play?  The one BioWare refused to acknowledge it exited until they released a patch to fix it?  It's still there, more or less, though not as bad as it used to be.  And all it took to fix it was to introduce a CTD bug.

Then there were the many, many problems with Awakening.  Quests not firing off, DLC items and abilities that BioWare promised would work that...don't, and even flippin' complete item sets just not being placed.

And with DA2, it seems like BioWare just gave up and just decided to ship the game with a list of known bugs and left it at that.  It will probably be weeks or months before we see a full fix.

So, frankly, I don't think 'bugs' and lack of optimization can be used against Obsidian at this point.  Obsidian's a small company.  What's BioWare's excuse?  "Oh, Origins only made over a hundred million dollars, and it's DLC only pulled in another ten or fifteen mill, tops.  Clearly we couldn't afford to make DA2 the sort of production value it deserves."

Bioware is on a downward slope, but they used to have pretty good support. BG/BG2/NWN/KoToR/ME/ME2 were more or less clean from the get go. DA: O and DA2 are the exceptions. And the years of support they gave to NWN are just amazing. On the other hand, Black Isle/Obsidian has a long track record of very buggy games: Fallout/Fallout2/KoToR2/NWN2/Alpha Protocol/FNV. Fallout 2, KoToR2 and Alpha Protocol were never really cleaned up. NWN2 got decent support and is running more or less fine after 2 extensions. It's too early to say for FNV.

[Otterwarden]

RohanD wrote...

This interview is laughable. The defensiveness of the developers in response to valid concerns and criticism is a total insult to their consumers who actually expect a certain level if quality from a bioware product. Those expectations are quickly being lowered, firstly by the sub standard game they have produced and secondly by the developers' unapologetic defense of glaring design flaws and technical issues. They continue to tell us that our complaints are unfounded and we are just "afraid of change".

We're not afraid of change, but we don't like crap bioware, and sorry, DA2, is crap.

Well at least someone besides fans is now telling them as much...

http://www.gamecriti...w#comment-38510

"WTF The immense drop in quality was inconceivable until I saw it for myself."

[aries1001]

Someone mentioned Assasin's Creed. Please remember that AC and AC2 use the Anvil Engine
http://en.wikipedia....l_(game_engine) - not the (modded?) Lyceum engine that DA2 does.

Bioware clearly wants people who still have single core computers (as I ahve) to play this game - and I can play DA: Origins quite well, too. However, during big fights, like some of the end fights in Awakenings and Origins, my (old) computer was really, really stretched to max power of its capacity.
That's why Yaron, the Lead Level Designer talks about 'consoles and low-level computers.' And adding more people in the streets may well have been taken its graphical tolls on the Lyceum Engine (which is, a modded Aurora engine?)

I would strongly suggest Bioware, or EA, or both to take a trip to Bethesda and talk about their radiant AI and Radiant Story ideas. Maybe, at least some of this, could be added into Bioware's next game? Not making it a sandbox open world game, though, but making sure that the game reacts to your choices e.g. in this case by having the Templars go after Hawke if he is using blood magic in the streets of Kirkwall. Gothic and The Witcher did this, too. So it seems a reasonable ting to design (implement) into the game.

I have no problem with the re-use of areas; Brecilian Forest's parts in DA: Origins felt like re-used areas to me. However, each section also had individual content associated with it. In DA2, as I understand, it is the exact same cave, it is the exact same room, it is the exact same streets - during all ten years.

As I said elsewhere in other thread, if you want to tell a game about Hawke, his or her familiy, then please do - but then go all the way. And if you want to tell a game about Hawke and his or her association with followers, then do so. And if this means, cutting the sidequests, or having fewer sidequests, then do it. Tell the story you want to tell - and let the story play out the way you choose it. Because you'll need the story to play out a certian way in order for the next games in this DA universe (thedas world) to unfold a certain way. Don't give the players illusions of choice. As for the companion armour, you make it like it was in Planescape Torment, create maybe 3-5 (or 2-4) different armours that'll only fit certain companions e.g. 2-4 armour pieces for each companion.

Here's an interesting idea or suggestion to ponder about? Do rpgs really need to have sidequests? Maybe a few, if you only have say 2 or 2½ years to develop an rpg....

[Deviana]

In all honesty, guys (and gals), what did you expect him to say in the interview? " Our game sucks, we screwed up, please don't buy it"?  Bioware is well aware that people are unhappy with the changes. They took note of it. Hopefully it'll be corrected in the future. Constant whining and picking apart every single word that they say isn't going to make game development process go any faster. <_<

[didymos1120]

EccentricSage wrote...
EA PUBLISHES games.  They do not MAKE games.

Yeah, they do MAKE games.  Just because they give some of their studios their own names that don't include the letters 'E' and 'A', in that order, doesn't make them suddenly "not EA".  And of course all the studios that do include those magic letters exist.  Nor does it matter that they bought some of those studios wholesale: they're still part of EA now, like it or not.

Modifié par didymos1120, 23 mars 2011 - 10:54 .

[Mooh Bear]

aries1001 wrote...

Someone mentioned Assasin's Creed. Please remember that AC and AC2 use the Anvil Engine
http://en.wikipedia....l_(game_engine) - not the (modded?) Lyceum engine that DA2 does.

Bioware clearly wants people who still have single core computers (as I ahve) to play this game - and I can play DA: Origins quite well, too. However, during big fights, like some of the end fights in Awakenings and Origins, my (old) computer was really, really stretched to max power of its capacity.
That's why Yaron, the Lead Level Designer talks about 'consoles and low-level computers.' And adding more people in the streets may well have been taken its graphical tolls on the Lyceum Engine (which is, a modded Aurora engine?)

That doesn't make much sense. AC runs well on 360 and PS3, hardware that was already obsolete in 2006. AC1 was released in 2006 and still spanks DA2... Also, what computer do you have? A single core machine in 2011? I've had dual core CPUs since 2006.

[Frybread76]

Thank you for translating the interview.

I think I will not buy any more Bioware games until I've played the demos (which I do), read multiple reviews and rented the games. I used to feel safe in preordering Bioware games, but their "streamling" of games to "open them up" to a "wider audience" just has turned me off. I wasn't a big fan of ME2 and I am not a fan of DA2 now that I've played it a few times through.

[Altima Darkspells]

Mooh Bear wrote...

Bioware is on a downward slope, but they used to have pretty good support. BG/BG2/NWN/KoToR/ME/ME2 were more or less clean from the get go. DA: O and DA2 are the exceptions. And the years of support they gave to NWN are just amazing. On the other hand, Black Isle/Obsidian has a long track record of very buggy games: Fallout/Fallout2/KoToR2/NWN2/Alpha Protocol/FNV. Fallout 2, KoToR2 and Alpha Protocol were never really cleaned up. NWN2 got decent support and is running more or less fine after 2 extensions. It's too early to say for FNV.

BG, BG2, NWN, KotOR, ME, and ME2 all shipped with bugs of varying degrees.  I remember, in particular, that NWN was particularly bad for bugs.  Thing is, BioWare used to be good at supporting games and putting out decent patches.

Even games as recent as ME2 for the PS3, which is nothing more than a port, shipped with serious, save game deleting bugs.

As for Obsidian, KotOR 2 was rushed by its publisher.  Alpha Protocol was rushed (and suffered heavily from Sega meddling) by its publisher.  NWN2 suffered from poor optimization, but it was still superior to NWN1 in every way that mattered.  Even with all their technical flaws, many people enjoy the story and game elements.  Obsidian games may not be the best, but no one can say that they don't care about their games.

Heck, Obsidian spent five hundred man-hours on a single scene in Alpha Protocol.

This all just is repeating what I said.  BioWare used to be good at support.  NWN1's premium modules helped pay for its patching.  With DAO, millions were spent on its DLC, and we've gotten, what, four patches?  And, of course, not even all the major bugs are fixed.  And one of the patches had to fix things that were broken by the previous patch.

[Blood-Lord Thanatos]

I will wait for the big patch before I pass any sort of Judgement on the game.

[EternalPink]

thebatmanreborn wrote...

Ashr4m wrote...

thebatmanreborn wrote...

Then what is Bioware's excuse going to be when Elder Scrolls V Skyrim and Battlefield 3 come out?  Or what about what Epc showed the 360 is capable of with its unvieling of next generation graphics at the Game Developers Conference a couple months ago?

Console gamers, reality seems to be no issue ... (it helps to read texts beside tech-demos you watch)

Yet i have to admit at least on the level of graphics used in DA2 it should have been no problem with an optimized console-engine etc. (especially since the maps are rather small and the npcs are rather low-poly not to mention dont have much AI either)

Still honestly first of al wtf is "next gen" and why would anyone think that 360/PS3 will get way better graphics, your consoles are what people call fossils from an ancient time.  Maybe you havent realized that by now but because of consoles the best looking game is still a game from 2007. (Crysis, Crysis 2 has nice new lightning but looses in every other aspect not to mention against crysis with visual mods)

Yes, I play games on a console because I do film editing, graphic design, and writing on a PC.  I don't feel like playing games on the thing I do work on.  That's just my opinion.  Although I will likely pick up Witcher 2 on the PC.  
As for reality being no issue for poor pitiful me, well, there are currently 40 million plus 360 users, 38 million plus ps3 users, 50 million plus wii users, 130 million plus DS purchasers, and who knows how many 3ds and psp gamers.  The bulk of the interactive entertainment industry is built upon "console" gamers, not PC gamers.  That is a simple reality.  Console gaming is where the money is.  It's just a fact.  In an industry that is struggling during a recision, this is becoming even more apparent.  Outside of cash hog MMO's, PC games do not do as well as console games.  Hence, Call of Duty Black Ops shattering sales records and Halo Reach taking in $200 million opening weekend or GTA IV selling nearly 20 million copies.  

This doesn't mean PC gaming is bad, its just a fact.  People like me who do work on the PC sometimes don't feel like playing games on the PC.  And, lots of folks don't feel like forking over all kinds of money all the time in a PC just to buy games.  It doesn't mean people who play games on consoles are "not in reality" or "dumb."  Many of us happen to be married college graduates who have well paid careers that just happen to enjoy games on consoles more.   

Anyway, if you had taken note of the GDC, they showed off incredibly highend graphics that are capable on the 360.  Is it outdated?  The technology is, of course, but it still has yet to be used to its full potential.  Games like Elder Scrolls V, Battlefield 3, L.A. Noire, and Crysis 2 are examples.  Why is this important?  What was the reason behind my original post?  Simple: if these companies can push the consoles to their limits, why couldn't Bioware?  It could not be because of the console's limitations as much as it was they were cutting corners.  

 

Thats a lot of consoles, now please remove all consoles that are owned by people that couldn't play the game due to the age restriction (pretend for the sake of argument parents dont let there kids play violent 18+ video games)

So we are left with adult console gamers, now remove all adult console gamers that dont have any interest in RPG ( most adult xbox owners i know have it for racing,football, fps games for instance ) games

Can you see where i'm going with this?

[Giltspur]

Q: Why are the city's streets not as crowded as one can expect from a
city as congested as Kirkwall? Is it due to technical limitations?

A:
Yes, this is completely due to technical limitation. We had more people
crowding the streets in early stages of development but we had to cut
the number to be able to cope with the limitations of game consoles and
low-end computers.

I don't really get this.  Assassin's Creed games on consoles handle crowded streets just fine.  So maybe it's not consoles per se but Bioware's engine on the consoles.  Or something techy like that that I don't understand.

Modifié par Giltspur, 24 mars 2011 - 12:32 .

[Romantiq]

Giltspur wrote...

Q: Why are the city's streets not as crowded as one can expect from a
city as congested as Kirkwall? Is it due to technical limitations?

A:
Yes, this is completely due to technical limitation. We had more people
crowding the streets in early stages of development but we had to cut
the number to be able to cope with the limitations of game consoles and
low-end computers.

I don't really get this.  Assassin's Creed games on consoles handle crowded streets just fine.  So maybe it's not consoles per se but Bioware's engine on the consoles.  Or something techy like that that I don't understand.

AC has good engine with solid featured like LOD, DistanceLOD, Crowd Density all working well.





I don't know how far they went with this in DA2 because some npcs had very low level of detail , making NPCs look quite ugly, polygonal and unrealistic while other npcs looked normal. They could have just used distnacelod on em and made em ugly from far away (where the eye cant see much anyway) and pretty when you're close. I guess its too much work or their engine limitation. idk


Could't find a better screenshot of what I mean but w/e its here.

Modifié par Romantiq, 24 mars 2011 - 01:41 .

[Thibbledorf26]

I am glad that the interview asked the tough, pertinent questions, instead of the kid-glove interviews. Not all questions were phrased properly, but that could be the translation no offense. Thanks for posting.

[OPini]

Seeing the popularity of this thread which I completely didn't expect, I'll do my best to try and translate the rest of the interview when I'll have time. Thank you guys for all the positive feedback, I'm very glad to know my efforts are appreciated, and even more glad for the discussion here, which seems mostly constructive (apart from some out of place comments)
Had I been a BioWare employee I could've picked up some great ideas here, hope they're reading it!

[Persona]

Neku054 wrote...

OPini wrote...

Q: Why is it no longer possible to manage your party's gear? Why is it that an armor worn by Hawke cannot be given to other characters?

A: There are many benefits of keeping a unique appearance for the companions: it gives them presence during cutscenes and dialogues and it's even useful during combat - they're easier to tell apart that way. I know it limits the possible customization but there are still many other elements you can upgrade such as weapons, accessories and even upgrade the main armor's stats.

i think he meant "we can make money off of people by releasing costume packs later on."

Yea theres that of making money and also the fact they rushed the game out.  Because if you where able to equip your party.  They would have to make it so the armor fit diffrent shapes and sizes.  Hench why hawke was preset except for his/her face.  Hench why you had to be human, cause bioware didnt wanna take the time to make the armor and weapons size diffrence.  At least square enix openly admits they do it because its very time consuming to do it.  Biowares just giving a lame excuse because they are to dam lazy to take the time and actually work on something.

[MonkeyLungs]

Giltspur wrote...

Q: Why are the city's streets not as crowded as one can expect from a
city as congested as Kirkwall? Is it due to technical limitations?

A:
Yes, this is completely due to technical limitation. We had more people
crowding the streets in early stages of development but we had to cut
the number to be able to cope with the limitations of game consoles and
low-end computers.

I don't really get this.  Assassin's Creed games on consoles handle crowded streets just fine.  So maybe it's not consoles per se but Bioware's engine on the consoles.  Or something techy like that that I don't understand.

It is completely Bioware's fault and their engine. Not to mention a long history of bland level design since their switch to 3D. I am a fan of Bioware and have greatly enjoyed their games before KoTOR and the games after but level design is something they have never impressed me with (exception being a few of their dungeon layouts but even those that looked nice were entirely pedestrian in their core design). Their cities are less vibrant than many game's villages. it's not something I ever look to Bioware to do particularily well as they never have.

[MonkeyLungs]

BTW that screenshot with Varric and the mutants -sorry, elves- is probably not the best one to show. They remind me of the mutant vampires from Blade 2.

[Nekator]

"There are many benefits of keeping a unique appearance for the companions: it gives them presence during cutscenes and dialogues and it's even useful during combat - they're easier to tell apart that way. I know it limits the possible customization but there are still many other elements you can upgrade such as weapons, accessories and even upgrade the main armor's stats."


wow.. why doesn´t he just say "We think our customers are such idiots, that they can´t remember their partners, if they are customizeable".

Unique appearance my ass...

[Loup Blanc]

OP, thanks for sharing. Very interesting and revealing indeed.

[Gatt9]

Nekator wrote...

"There are many benefits of keeping a unique appearance for the companions: it gives them presence during cutscenes and dialogues and it's even useful during combat - they're easier to tell apart that way. I know it limits the possible customization but there are still many other elements you can upgrade such as weapons, accessories and even upgrade the main armor's stats."


wow.. why doesn´t he just say "We think our customers are such idiots, that they can´t remember their partners, if they are customizeable".

Unique appearance my ass...

Because it's likely that the real answer is...

"Our schedule was so short that art didn't have time to render the NPC's with different armor/weapons,  and we were stuck with the choice of either don't change their appearance with equipment,  or don't allow them to have equipment.  We chose the latter.  This is also why we reused levels".

Generally,  you don't say bad things about the guy writing your paycheck,  and I'd guess that's why this was done.  It's really the only explanation that makes sense.

[tmp7704]

Taura-Tierno wrote...

And that, had they scrapped the Blood Mage because there was no perfectly logical way to implement it (like the Warden in DA:O), I'd bet we'd have heard tons of rants about how they should've found a way to do just that, because "it should be our choice if Hawke wants to be a blood mage or not".

Identical reasoning can be applied to all DAO specializations which didn't make it to DA2. It didn't stop them from removing these specializations.

The whole design of DA2 shows pretty well they aren't exactly afraid of doing things that could cause people rant.

[mordarwarlock]

Galad22 wrote...

A: Part of the tactical game is adapting to changes. The waves might feel different, but this is not necessarily a bad thing. I do not agree with those that think the wave pattern is terrible as of itself, but I do agree that there are things it's possible to do in order to improve the use of the waves. We can use them less often and improve the breeding mechanic, for instance. All in all I think the waves are an excellent addition to the game.

This is my biggest issue. They can't honestly think this was excellent addition.

Terrible is exactly what this is.

exactly

I just...don't know what to say, seriously, how blind could bioware be this time?

[ji.Ruichi]

Blood magic is illegal, there is no justification behind it. Deal with it, no blood mage will ever be accepted as champion.

[didymos1120]

L.Rui wrote...

Blood magic is illegal, there is no justification behind it. Deal with it, no blood mage will ever be accepted as champion.

Except of course Mage Hawke with the Blood Magic specialization.  Then it's just fine.

[SCpanther]

kelsjet wrote...

Filament wrote...
Yeah, I know what the term means, bigot.

If I am a bigot for calling a stove "a stove", then you are a racial supremacist for thinking that this guy should get a free pass.

We were promised a Bioware game. Instead we got 4 levels repeated 50 times with identikit waves of trash mobs to fight. This guy is directly responsible for this (notice the "Lead" in "Lead Level Designer").

If that's not the core definition of "getting jewed", I don't think anything else can be.

You can provide links to some bogus definition of the term you used but the reality is that the word "jewed" has historically been derogatory to Jews, implying they are money-grubbing hagglers and cheats.