373 réponses à ce sujet

[ejoslin]

mpchi wrote...

I don't know. It seems like people forgot that Laidlaw was also the lead game designer of DA:O that you all loved so much. (Did you give him as much praise than the bashing you are giving now?) Its fair game to dislike the new direction he is taking on DA2, as each gamer can draw their own opinion. Rather than just hear what he has to say in the interview as a developer's point of view, almost all the comments I read here were mere dissatisfaction and uproar that he didn't openly "get down on his knees, apologized, and repent his sin on making the DA2 that he sees fit". Isn't that a bit much?

The sales and public uproar will give him enough nudges to do what it takes to please the gamers, and hopefully fans who are upset about DA2 will be more happy next time.

Not quite.  I believe Brent Knowles was the lead designer for DAO.  Mike Laidlaw took over after he left.  I think that's why the DLCs and Awakening had such a different direction.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong on this one.

[Tommy6860]

Gatt9 wrote...

Blastback wrote...

Laidlaw understands the concept of writing.  And characters.  And story.

Bay sees such things as mere excuses for explosions.

He really should just go work at Bethseda.  I'll never forget the E3 interview where a reviewer tried to ask Todd about roleplaying elements,  he hemmed around for a second,  and then said "Now you've gotta see this explosion!"

He'd fit in perfectly over there,  where they don't actually believe in RPGs,  just FPS/TPS for everything.  Like the art guy at Bethseda who bemoaned Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 not being FPP.

Though off-topic. Fallout 3, as was Oblivion, were very much RPGs, whether they had shooter elements in it didn't take away that you had charcter interactions and you development your own person along certain features and strengths. I mentioned this in another thread. Techonolgy has advanced big time in computers since the 70s and so will RPGs (and video games in general) move along those lines. I am not one who has to have the typical cRPG type game that is nothing but having D&D elements where everything is only being swords, wizards, witches and dragons with a complete medeival theme, with those being the true RPG designators.

It really comes down to taste and I am one that isn't that hard lined on what an RPG is, but DA2 is hardly an RPG by any of its definitions. It is an action based game, IMO, and I get nothing more from it than that.

[aphelion002]

mpchi wrote...

I don't know. It seems like people forgot that Laidlaw was also the lead game designer of DA:O that you all loved so much. (Did you give him as much praise than the bashing you are giving now?) Its fair game to dislike the new direction he is taking on DA2, as each gamer can draw their own opinion. Rather than just hear what he has to say in the interview as a developer's point of view, almost all the comments I read here were mere dissatisfaction and uproar that he didn't openly "get down on his knees, apologized, and repent his sin on making the DA2 that he sees fit". Isn't that a bit much?

The sales and public uproar will give him enough nudges to do what it takes to please the gamers, and hopefully fans who are upset about DA2 will be more happy next time.

Untrue. Brent Knowles, was the lead designer for DA, Mike Laidlaw only took over as the lead designer for the console ports. Brent Knowles was asked to fulfill the same role again for DA2 but felt he couldn't do so due to the new direction of the game. About half a year after this happened, he quit Bioware.

You can see his impresson of the DA2 demo here: http://blog.brentkno...gon-age-2-demo/ , as well as his summary of his work in Bioware and why he left in his blog.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

"but the thing we desperately don't want to lose is the idea that Dragon Age has an alchemy that makes it special. It has party members. It has banter. It has equipping stuff--some of those amazing, classic RPG mechanics that I loved since playing Wasteland or the original Bard's Tale. We wanted to make RPGs, especially fantasy RPGs, accessible, cool, and interesting to people who have been playing RPGs for the last seven years and not realizing that every time they ate food or went for a long run in Grand Theft Auto San Andreas, they were essentially grinding constitution.

To me, that represents a huge audience that may have disregarded RPGs, especially fantasy, as being too hardcore or too confusing. And making certain changes to make the game palatable without ripping out the mechanics that make RPGs so fascinating to a stats guy or what have you. It keeps this genre evolving into something that's fresh and not stagnating. "

So GTA is comparable to fantasy RPG huh? Would you mind clarifying your term of fantasy again? Because I'm having a blast in GTA by butchering everyone in the streets, crashing vehicles on roads and enjoying the bars, nightclubs and the prostitutes. Yet I feel SO outside my monitor. 

[Otterwarden]

aphelion002 wrote...

Untrue. Brent Knowles, was the lead designer for DA, Mike Laidlaw only took over as the lead designer for the console ports. Brent Knowles was asked to fulfill the same role again for DA2 but felt he couldn't do so due to the new direction of the game. About half a year after this happened, he quit Bioware.

You can see his impresson of the DA2 demo here: http://blog.brentkno...gon-age-2-demo/ , as well as his summary of his work in Bioware and why he left in his blog.

Thank you for that link.  That was quite enlightning and very close to what I personally thought of the demo.

[Crash_7]

Still so much pain being felt over DA 2!

I read the interview and the topic respondents.  Oh, where to start?  Questions.

Is it wrong to try and increase your player base?
Is it wrong to make traditional stat based RPG elements more accessible?
Is it wrong to alter the visual style of combat?
Is it wrong to hide/automate complexity?
Is it wrong to guide the players interaction with the game world?

I personally answered no to all of my own questions -- naturally I'm biased here :-)  But I do believe that those are the questions that Mike and the team were asking themselves throughout the development of DA 2.  Having played through twice now I do think that DA 2 has some positive and progressive additions/removals from DA: O.  Yet I do believe that the team may have been guilty of being too bold and too driven by the changes that they wished to make, and perhaps, they were to the detriment of the overall experience.

There is contrition in that interview --OK you have to look hard.  He accepts that the team may have to rethink character customisation and explains why it was done.  I'm in the give me back my inventory camp and I think their reasoning behind removing equipment layouts was selfish; I understand it though, I get the why of it: I just disagree.  DA 2 does have some positive changes, such as the talent webs, but I do miss crafting and traps and flasks.  Again, in the interview, the team suggest that they will re-address that issue and perhaps put some of those elements back; although they would probably be accessible versions of our old favourites.

I could go on, but I think we are all probably critique fatigued by now.

Taxi for one!  

[Tommy6860]

mpchi wrote...

I don't know. It seems like people forgot that Laidlaw was also the lead game designer of DA:O that you all loved so much. (Did you give him as much praise than the bashing you are giving now?) Its fair game to dislike the new direction he is taking on DA2, as each gamer can draw their own opinion. Rather than just hear what he has to say in the interview as a developer's point of view, almost all the comments I read here were mere dissatisfaction and uproar that he didn't openly "get down on his knees, apologized, and repent his sin on making the DA2 that he sees fit". Isn't that a bit much?

The sales and public uproar will give him enough nudges to do what it takes to please the gamers, and hopefully fans who are upset about DA2 will be more happy next time.

In case you didn't know, Laidlaw wasn't the ONLY LD on Origins. One of them, Brent Knowles left Bioware/EA over the direction DA2 was going after it started development. He even placed that on his personal webite and he was sad about it.

[Monica83]

Is it wrong to try and increase your player base?
Yes if it means make low quality Rpg

Is it wrong to make traditional stat based RPG elements more accessible?
Yes if you want dumb down your rpg's in order to have a different audience.. Some people dislikes rpg i don't see the reason to dumb down rpg games for capture an audience that dislike it..

Is it wrong to alter the visual style of combat?
When you make a game with is own identity at the beginning that have a distinct look and try to appear realistic and in the sequel you go with over the top ability and jerky manga fight yes is wrong because you alienate the essence of your product...

Is it wrong to hide/automate complexity?
I am aganist stramlization in rpg games

Is it wrong to guide the players interaction with the game world?
Interaction? Where? In da2 i don't see great interaction only limitation

[Tommy6860]

Otterwarden wrote...

Everybody is making excuses left, right and center. Nobody is fooled by this mess, they simply don't want to rock the boat. However, this time the discrepancy between "professional reviewers" and gamers' experience is so glaring it is actually quite newsworthy in and of itself.

http://rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=224

"And in Conclusion

Dragon Age 2 is a mediocre and deeply flawed action RPG, rushed out to earn EA a quick buck and betting on Bioware's reputation to pull up the sales. Even though the setting and the events are interesting, and the various options show potential, the overwhelming focus on killing things keeps you from digging into the world and its characters in a satisfying manner, and cripple replayability. Unfortunately, the combat is too repetitive to carry the game on its own. It's bad enough that even the mainstream reporters have noticed, though they are generally quick to make excuses."

I would welcome more exploration into the dirty underside of the biz. Thought this article had an interesting finish.

http://www.gamepro.c...ore-metacritic/

Welcome the future of video game reviews.

"We're going to elevate the user a bit more," reveals Doyle. "People trust users more now than they might have 10 years ago. We always assumed it was the experts who were far and away the most important. But in the last few years, that's changed, and we're going to try and reflect that and make user input as available as the Metascore." The future of Metacritic, it seems, is in you. Use that power wisely, because the fate of thousands of developers, marketing people, and PR flacks is in your hands.

And this is one of the harshest reviews I have ever seen for a game, ever.


(Excerpt)

www.gamecritics.com/brad-gallaway/dragon-age-ii-review

"Defying all expectations, BioWare managed to take one of the most
memorable Western RPGs in recent history and completely destroyed
everything that made it so good. I have absolutely no idea how such a
respected development house could have made so many colossal mistakes
and turned out such an unpleasantly rushed, shallow, utter waste of
time... but they did, and it is. I forced myself to play the game
to completion despite wanting to quit out of disgust and boredom at
least a dozen times before credits rolled, but I shouldn't have
bothered. The insulting level of quality in Dragon Age II is perfectly clear to see from the first hour or two, and everything that comes after is just more salt in the wound. Rating 2.5 out of 10."

[Fhaileas]

Tommy6860 wrote...

mpchi wrote...

I don't know. It seems like people forgot that Laidlaw was also the lead game designer of DA:O that you all loved so much.

In case you didn't know, Laidlaw wasn't the ONLY LD on Origins. One of them, Brent Knowles left Bioware/EA over the direction DA2 was going after it started development. He even placed that on his personal webite and he was sad about it.

Actually as someone else has already stated Brent Knowles "was" the "only" LD for DA:O; Mike Laidlaw was brought on board as LD for the console ports and subsequent DLCs as well as the expansion, "after" Knowles had declined to work on DA 2 due to differences in creative vision. 

[tez19]

Gatt9 wrote...

Blastback wrote...

Laidlaw understands the concept of writing.  And characters.  And story.

Bay sees such things as mere excuses for explosions.

He really should just go work at Bethseda.  I'll never forget the E3 interview where a reviewer tried to ask Todd about roleplaying elements,  he hemmed around for a second,  and then said "Now you've gotta see this explosion!"

He'd fit in perfectly over there,  where they don't actually believe in RPGs,  just FPS/TPS for everything.  Like the art guy at Bethseda who bemoaned Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 not being FPP.

You bashing Bethesda and Todd for not making RPG's how you want them?
Skyrim will sell more than 3times what DA2 sold, and it seems the majority of RPG consumer's rate freedom to explore much higher than other things and Bethesda's open worlds are incredibly well done.
Let us just wait for Skyrim to mop up ALL the awards this year including best RPG and then I would be intrigued to hear you say how bad they are..

[Brockololly]

I think the big key is to not adjust 180 degrees again, because we've  done this. I think, as a team, we're quite happy with what we've done  with Dragon Age II, and this is establishing a solid foundation that  keeps a lot, in fact almost everything I want to keep about Origins, but still has tons of room to grow and, frankly, a more viable future for  the franchise. It's one that's more sustainable because we brought the  world to a place that's inherently more interesting than "Yay, we beat  the Blight. Good for us!"

Soooo.... pretty much admitting that DA2 pulled a 180 from Origins despite the claims that it was just tweaking things. And that DA2's perfection is more of a solid foundation to build off of than Origins.

Modifié par Brockololly, 25 mars 2011 - 02:56 .

[Monica83]

I think the big key is to not adjust 180 degrees again, because we've done this. I think, as a team, we're quite happy with what we've done with Dragon Age II, and this is establishing a solid foundation that keeps a lot, in fact almost everything I want to keep about Origins, but still has tons of room to grow and, frankly, a more viable future for the franchise. It's one that's more sustainable because we brought the world to a place that's inherently more interesting than "Yay, we beat the Blight. Good for us!"

I think the great thing mr. ladiaw is have your dimission on the desk very soon...

[dheer]

Tantum Dic Verbo wrote...
Seems like some people here are disappointed that Gaider isn't slamming a game his company just released and is actively trying to sell. Love or hate the game, isn't that a strange expectation?

I know I don't expect anything like that at all. If anything, I'd hope he's silently disappointed in what the game side of the team did with their side of the equation.

It's kind of like on a football team when the offense is absolutely awful. The defensive players never call out their fellow teamates in the public / press. Those issues are delt with in house / in the lockeroom.

mpchi wrote...
I don't know. It seems like people forgot that Laidlaw was also the lead game designer of DA:O that you all loved so much. (Did you give him as much praise than the bashing you are giving now?)

He was only lead of the console ports, not the game itself.

Modifié par dheer, 25 mars 2011 - 03:01 .

[Speakeasy13]

I think the big key is to not adjust 180 degrees again, because we've  done this. I think, as a team, we're quite happy with what we've done  with Dragon Age II, and this is establishing a solid foundation that  keeps a lot, in fact almost everything I want to keep about Origins, but still has tons of room to grow and, frankly, a more viable future for  the franchise. It's one that's more sustainable because we brought the  world to a place that's inherently more interesting than "Yay, we beat  the Blight. Good for us!"

Well, Mr. Laidlaw, here's a little corporate wisdom: when you involve yourself in a multi-million dollar project and you keep referring to things using the word 'I' as if things should revolve around your every whim, you better have the talent to back it up. And judging from you creative output with DA2, you're not entitled to your ego.

[slimgrin]

A fairly depressing read, actually. I feel like me and Bioware are...growing apart.

*sniffle*

[adneate]

I think the big key is to not adjust 180 degrees again, because we've  done this. I think, as a team, we're quite happy with what we've done  with Dragon Age II, and this is establishing a solid foundation that  keeps a lot, in fact almost everything I want to keep about Origins, but still has tons of room to grow and, frankly, a more viable future for  the franchise. It's one that's more sustainable because we brought the  world to a place that's inherently more interesting than "Yay, we beat  the Blight. Good for us!"

Really? Origins wasn't a good base to build a franchise off of, your first entry in the new franchise didn't have enough story to make an actual franchise? Yet you made it anyway and talked about how deep Thedas was and how Origins was just a glimpse of this world and you had so much more to show. So I guess that was a lie and you in fact had jack all and needed to reboot the entire franchise from the ground up.

I want whatever Mike Laidlaw is on that makes this kind of drivel make sense, I want that party flowing through my veins.

[Mantaal]

My personal Opinion is. Mike should not make any Games. He has no idea what his costumers want or he just dont care what they want.. Both ways go in the wrong direction.

If you Made an veryy good RPG and make a 2nd part of it and promise another good RPG you just should not come along with that thing called DA2 (What ever it is. Splatter-Anime-Action Game with RP elements?)

Many Peoples dont like it. And he pretends like he did the greatest Game in the universe. I respekt marketing somehow. But what i really respekt is the truth. I dont need a Developer lie to me. Ive got alot Politics for that already

[Erode_The_Soul]

.....

This was a depressing read to say the least. I mean, I enjoy DA2 and I liked it but I loved DAO. I was sincerely hoping they would try to pull a bit more from DAO into their future DA games but judging from this interview, that was a fools dream

[Foolsfolly]

Ya know the series that they do have that's a blend of RPG and Third Person Shooter? The one that if you've ever shot anything in any game you can pick up and play?

Isn't that the series that should be used to get people into RPGs and then you can point them in the direction of Dragon Age, which has always been a pure RPG game and not a hybrid?

Watering down this experience to get people who are not interested in RPGs makes no sense. Mass Effect can get fans because shooters are widely popular and the RPG elements and style can be taught through that game instead of this.

But, don't go watering down ME3. It's easy to play now. If anything step your game up with the shooter elements.

[mcha82]

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...

so theyre basically making rpgs for people that dont play rpgs now. interesting.

haha, that is the quote of the day.

[Otterwarden]

Tommy6860 wrote...

And this is one of the harshest reviews I have ever seen for a game, ever.


(Excerpt)

www.gamecritics.com/brad-gallaway/dragon-age-ii-review

Yes, and I see that his stuff only gets filed under xbox 360 on metacritic.  Shame really, because I think the PC crowd would be in total agreement.  Orctowngrot wrote an interesting user review on March 23 under the PC section.  It mentioned something that I had noticed as well, which is the phraseology of some of the 10 score posts.  It's not natural, too polished, too pointed in the commentary, and too few typos.

Modifié par Otterwarden, 25 mars 2011 - 03:51 .

[jimmy_smith]

(read this post in Verric sound)

meanwhile in 2015

"And then the worst case scenario just began.
Our champion tainted by the sweet of quick bucks from making rush game
and they started to trade their reputation for more of it.
I think that's the first step of their down fall,from the champion of RPG to nobody care by now.
Just like hundred of game companies that die out in the flow of time"

Modifié par jimmy_smith, 25 mars 2011 - 03:26 .

[Otterwarden]

Brockololly wrote...

I think the big key is to not adjust 180 degrees again, because we've  done this. I think, as a team, we're quite happy with what we've done  with Dragon Age II, and this is establishing a solid foundation that  keeps a lot, in fact almost everything I want to keep about Origins, but still has tons of room to grow and, frankly, a more viable future for  the franchise. It's one that's more sustainable because we brought the  world to a place that's inherently more interesting than "Yay, we beat  the Blight. Good for us!"

Soooo.... pretty much admitting that DA2 pulled a 180 from Origins despite the claims that it was just tweaking things. And that DA2's perfection is more of a solid foundation to build off of than Origins.

Just in case anyone missed that point, Gamespot was kind enough to put this one in bold right under a picture:

"We certainly knew there would be some friction between what Origins
players have come to expect and what Dragon Age II delivers."

Modifié par Otterwarden, 25 mars 2011 - 03:26 .

[Swoo]

slimgrin wrote...

A fairly depressing read, actually. I feel like me and Bioware are...growing apart.

*sniffle*

Don't worry, in a year or two when the next game rolls around  they will make sure everyone who liked DA2 will know they think you are an idiot, but it's ok because they have the perfect project coming up to save you from yourself.