373 réponses à ce sujet

[MJRick]

YipLee wrote...

I was expecting an apology, but he didn't apologize.

Looks like DA3 is going to be just as ****ty as DA2. 

GG

He has nothing to apologize for.

[Lunar Savage]

aphelion002 wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...

Lunar Savage wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Xewaka wrote...

Mike Laidlaw said...
"you can't tell exactly what you'll say"

Please somebody explain me how can any rational mind consider this a positive thing.

You have to be a Bioware employee to understand this. 

Apparently. Thankfully, there are still some sane people on this planet that agree with my opinion. I've been arguing against the ME brand of dialog since it's release. That game drove me crazy to no end. I had to reload so many times because I didn't say exactly what I wanted to say and would have to explore every dialog option until I found the REAL route I wanted to take. :/

that sounds extremely unfun and anal way to play lol.

in DA:O the dialogue was pretty much the same as it is in DA2, its just word for word on the screen.

1.) nice option
2.) sarcastic option
3.) mean option
4.) ask question about ______
5.) as question about ____
6.) goodbye.

its an absolutely better system and allows the games flow, immersion and atmosphere to continue as you play rather than stopping every time its your turn to say somethign to read a block of dialogue choices. the wheel allows the conversation to go at a good pace since you can react faster to it. it feels like a real conversation that way rather than the immersion snapping 1-2 minute silence that can pop up in something like DA:O.

I respect your opinion, but there are some like me who play exactly the opposite way. To me, some of the most important moments in Dragon Age were those silences as I parse the words and wonder exactly what my character should do. Those choices are the most key parts of role playing for me, and I tried my best to put myself in my character's shoes and literally imagine being him or her, and think, based on what I have seen and known in the game, what do I really want to do? The decision is quite personal to me. This is different from how I played ME and ME2, in which I was thinking, "I am writing the story for superhero / bad ass Shepherd, what is the coolest thing for him to do?"

I have always felt that ME and DA were two different types of game, and the dialogue system was part of that. In my view, removing dialogue choice also took away with it a key part of what I consider the core DA experience.

Its okay for you  to disagree, but at least acknowledge the opinion of others that something they consider important has been lost.

Thank you. My point exactly. Just because it breaks immersion for him, doesn't mean it breaks immersion for the rest of us. Actually, ME broke my immersion in almost every dialog sequence because I found the system irritating. Yet in a game like DA:O, I never once had my immersion broken during a play session unless forces outside the game bothered me and I had to pause and walk away.

I also find it kind of irritating to have to listen to my character ask a question. Since I just picked the question, I should already know what the Hell I'm about to say. Therefore, it feels like a waste of time to listen to my character babble on for a minute. Regardless of how smart assed or humorous he is being. I got way more laughs and enthralling moments of fun or suspense from reading the dialog choices in DA:O and picking them to see the NPCs reactions. In ME and ME 2, it's more like, oh hey, I'm being a smart ass...*hears actual line of dialog*...well...that's not the way I wanted him to put it. :/ wtf? Or even worse, you're trying to play the good guy, yet Shepard still acts like a d-bag with his line delivery. Just further driving home the point that I'm just along for the ride Bioware wanted to present. Which really makes me dislike the game even more.

Sidenote: Anyone else really like the fact you could carry on joke conversations with Alistair for quite a while? To me, that was extremely refrehsing to see that at least one character wasn't offended at a joke or acted like you were an idiot for making light of something. I don't remember any bioware characters like that, though I've never played BG 1 or 2 (yeah, yeah, I know...I need to go scrounge up a few bucks and get them).

[Foolsfolly]

Mantaal wrote...

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

I understand disappointment with the game and/or its direction.

But you really expect the man to come out, less than a month after the release, and say "Our game's not that good. We were rushed and we're extremely sorry for our fanbase's displeasure with the game."

Not going to happen. Even if the game was the worst game ever made the devs would come out and do damage control. This is still PR mode. We won't hear anything bad about the game from the devs until DA3 is announced and close to coming out.

You just don't want to tell potential buyers reading the piece that the game's not worth their time.

[dheer]

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!"

We think the big key is to go 360 degrees from DA:O for DA3, because we've seen what 180 did. We think, as a fanbase, we're quite disappointed in what they've done with Dragon Age II, and it establishes a shaky foundation that has deluted a lot, in fact almost everything we wanted to keep from Origins, but still has tons of flashes that make you think the game actually had a viable future. It's one that's hard to think is more sustainable because they brought the world to a place that's inherently more " Yay, we did a bunch of non-related sides quests. Good for us!"

[Otterwarden]

Foolsfolly wrote...

But you really expect the man to come out, less than a month after the release, and say "Our game's not that good. We were rushed and we're extremely sorry for our fanbase's displeasure with the game."

Not going to happen. Even if the game was the worst game ever made the devs would come out and do damage control. This is still PR mode. We won't hear anything bad about the game from the devs until DA3 is announced and close to coming out.

You just don't want to tell potential buyers reading the piece that the game's not worth their time.

Good point, however, you have to strike the right tone and balance of humility as well.  His interviews have come off arrogant sounding, and this focus on pushing his customer base out of their comfort zone risks backfiring in a big way.  Nobody likes to be constantly told that their way of liking a product is not viable.  I think the "new Coke" cited is the standard reference for this.

Modifié par Otterwarden, 25 mars 2011 - 04:59 .

[cljqnsnyc]

Going after 100, gaining 10 maybe 20, while losing 70 isn't the best idea. I seriously hope Bioware is paying attention to what is happening in this forum and others. DA2 has become a highly polarizing subject for good reasons. It would be wise not to simply dismiss those reasons for the sake of bringing in new fans.

[Nozybidaj]

A Puzzled Mind wrote...

Laidlaw sounds like Michael Bay...

Very apt comparison since that is the kind of game they are trying to create.  The style was very evident in ME2 as well.

[Lacan2]

I actually thought he sounded more or less reasonable. He's not going to go out there and badmouth his product. One concession he clearly made was outfitting party members in the next DA.

In the end, it will come down to sales. If DA2 doesn't sell, changes will be made.

I just hope they don't replace the art director and character models. DAO was so LOTR-ish, I will not be playing another DA with typical "ultimate evil" bad guy and crappy high-fantasy character models.

Modifié par Lacan2, 25 mars 2011 - 04:15 .

[Maverick827]

Nozybidaj wrote...

A Puzzled Mind wrote...

Laidlaw sounds like Michael Bay...

Very apt comparison since that is the kind of game they are trying to create. The style was very evident in ME2 as well.

Except DA2 had an excellent story, whereas the criticisms of Michael Bay films are exactly the opposite.

[Mantaal]

Foolsfolly wrote...

Mantaal wrote...

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

I understand disappointment with the game and/or its direction.

But you really expect the man to come out, less than a month after the release, and say "Our game's not that good. We were rushed and we're extremely sorry for our fanbase's displeasure with the game."

Not going to happen. Even if the game was the worst game ever made the devs would come out and do damage control. This is still PR mode. We won't hear anything bad about the game from the devs until DA3 is announced and close to coming out.

You just don't want to tell potential buyers reading the piece that the game's not worth their time.

I know its not going to happen. Im not an idiot

My Point is. If he would do that. I would start thinking about buying DA3.
A Honest "We know we did it the wrong way and we will make it better next time" would make alot fans of Dragon Age happy. (cant speak for others just for me here, but i think it true)

I just wonder what the better way is for the marketing of a Game series. Try to keep your Loyal fan base preordering your Game even if they dont know anything about it. Or try to get new fans and dismiss the Loyal ones you already got. The 2nd way is dangerous in my opinion.

Same happend to other games too. Vanguard: Saga of heroes already had a loyal fanbase waiting for a game like that. And what did sony do? 3 month pre release they did transform the game in a World of Warcraft copy by dumbing it down. And what did happen? How many players has Vanguard today? 1000 maybe? Is its still there? im not sure

[Foolsfolly]

Good point, however, you have to stike the right tone and balance of humility as well. His interviews have come off arrogant sounding, and this focus on pushing his customer base out of their comfort zone risks backfiring in a big way. Nobody likes to be constantly told that their way of liking a product is not viable. I think the "new Coke" cited is the standard reference for this.

I agree. And it sounds like that because we've played the game, and often times it sounds like the interviewer has too, and we're expecting some official word on actual problems with the game. But the way they've handled these interviews so far has all been PR for people who haven't decided to buy the game yet.

And the best thing for those who haven't bought it yet is to them, "Probably wait until the price drop." That's about the best advice I could give BioWare fans. It's decent, not great, and not worth 60-65 dollars.

[Count Viceroy]

Haters gona hate. A lot.

[rpx78noob]

Blastback wrote...

I felt that some of his responses were a bit to dismisive of some of the complaints.

One thing I don't agree with is that the Warden didn't have as much personality. The Warden had plenty in my mind, it was just left more to the player to create and envision. There have been more than enough humerous options for silent PC's to prove that you are not relegated to the role of straight man.

The warden had plenty in my mind too, that's exactly the point. Fantasy.

Choosing the dialogue, with care, makes the player/warden just what he is.

"it was just left more to the player to create and envision" 

This is art my friends and fantasy at work in player's minds.

[Kulharin]

Shorter game, dumbed down mechanics, console noobified, easier, recycled/repeated content, linear dungeons, weaker story, weaker characters, anti-climactic non ending, more or less confined to one city.... yes superior to DA: O in everyway... me thinks DA: O wipes it's ass with this inferior spin off.

This game was a just a cash grab.

Modifié par Kulharin, 25 mars 2011 - 04:33 .

[Foolsfolly]

I just wonder what the better way is for the marketing of a Game series. Try to keep your Loyal fan base preordering your Game even if they dont know anything about it. Or try to get new fans and dismiss the Loyal ones you already got. The 2nd way is dangerous in my opinion.

I agree. Word of mouth has a lot of importance. I got my uncle, siblings, and three friends to buy DA:O. I had more buy Mass Effect.

My uncle wanted to know how Dragon Age 2 was and I told him, "Eh. It's not as good as it should be but it has enjoyable parts."

His follow up question was "Is Morrigan in it?"

I told him no and he lost interest, saying something about how they're going to drag that out forever then. I can't disagree with that statement.

He still ended up buying DA2 today. I'm sure he'll enjoy parts of it but he really wants a continuation of the Origins story and BioWare really didn't want to do that. So...maybe next time he'll listen to me and wait until it gets its price cut in half.

But I agree with you. It's important to make the best game possible, obviously. You need new players to buy the game but you've also got to hold on to your fanbase. Origins sold really really well, you'd think they'd want to keep that base instead of alienating it by trying to get people who don't like fantasy RPGs to buy a sequel to a fantasy RPG.

Modifié par Foolsfolly, 25 mars 2011 - 04:41 .

[TestUserSS7x]

DA2 suck and I am a casual gamer that prefers RPG. I have the money and bioware is not getting a penny from me anymore with their pompous attitude.

[Otterwarden]

Foolsfolly wrote...

And the best thing for those who haven't bought it yet is to them, "Probably wait until the price drop." That's about the best advice I could give BioWare fans. It's decent, not great, and not worth 60-65 dollars.

I'd go a step further and suggest that they download the demo and watch a few silent walkthroughs on You Tube.  There are enough side quests that you could easily do that without ruining the game for you.  That price drop will not be long in coming, especially if players quickly unload their copies on the used market.  Replayability keeps copies in customers homes.

One thing is certain.  There is certainly enough information out there now for anyone to make an informed decision.  In fact, the old Hollywood axiom that "there is no such thing as bad publicity" may be at work.  I've seen a few confess that it was their curiosity over the backlash that drove them to buy.  Unfortunately, in each of these cases, they regretted not heeding the warnings.

Modifié par Otterwarden, 25 mars 2011 - 04:43 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

Pcrews wrote...

The only reason the interview was done was for damage control. He's acting as the PR guy for Bioware, of course he is not going to say that they f*cked up.

I agree. In the past Mr Laidlaw was able to dismiss the "complaints" to be from "people who don't like change". The situation has changed, though. Those complaints have become mainstream.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 25 mars 2011 - 04:47 .

[Akulakhan]

EA Superior: What did we learn, Laidlaw?
Mike Laidlaw: I don't know, sir.
EA Superior: I don't ****in' know either. I guess we learned not to do it again.
Mike Laidlaw: Yes, sir.
EA Superior: I'm ****ed if I know what we did.
Mike Laidlaw: Yes, sir, it's, uh, hard to say.
EA Superior: Jesus ****ing Christ.

rpx78noob wrote...

Blastback wrote...

I felt that some of his responses were a bit to dismisive of some of the complaints.

One thing I don't agree with is that the Warden didn't have as much personality. The Warden had plenty in my mind, it was just left more to the player to create and envision. There have been more than enough humerous options for silent PC's to prove that you are not relegated to the role of straight man.

The warden had plenty in my mind too, that's exactly the point. Fantasy.

Choosing the dialogue, with care, makes the player/warden just what he is.

"it was just left more to the player to create and envision" 

This is art my friends and fantasy at work in player's minds.

Yeah, with the exception that the players mind don't matter **** since the dialogue was already defined and this system don't show what the main character will say.

What is the problem of putting the exact same line that the player will say? Reading is the hard, uh!? Also, console players cannot into words.

Modifié par Akulakhan, 25 mars 2011 - 05:03 .

[Otterwarden]

Akulakhan wrote...

What the problem of putting the exact same line that the player will say? Reading is the hard, uh!? Also, console players cannot into words.

Seems reasonable to me.  You could put it in as a hidden option, much in the same way that they did roll dice results in the BG series.  Those who didn't want to see the mathematical mechanics of the gameplay were not forced to watch them.  Personally, once I discovered that option, the battles finally started to make some sense.

[Eski.Moe]

berelinde wrote...
Making RPGs for people who don't play RPGs. What's next? Enya tries her hand at death metal?

Now that, I'd pay to see.

[Steven83]

Verbose mode feature the wheel.
Yes. i Could get behind this feature for future DA.

[Terror_K]

Crash_7 wrote...

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?

If it's at the expense of the existing fans, then the answer is "yes" as far as I'm concerned. If you want to bring them aboard to your company then that's fine... do it with a new IP and a new action RPG. The problem is lately BioWare seem determined to sabotage their existing IPs by making them too different and taking away a lot of what drew a good deal of fans to them and made them fans in the first place. If in order to appeal to a larger audience you have to remove, tone down or dumb down the very elements that appeal to the existing fans to do so then the answer is simply "yes" to this question. DA2's main problem is actually that "2" on the end. It should have been a spin-off title... it should have been Dragon Age: Dark Alliance, not a direct sequel. If one has to sacrifice a chunk of their player base to increase it, then they shouldn't. A game series should be made for its existing fans above all else, and the problem is that BioWare seem to be making their sequels more for those who weren't really fans because they were put off by a few factors than they are for those who are fans.

Is it wrong to make traditional stat based RPG elements more accessible?

That depends. One can take this too far and make them too simple, just as one can make them too complex. Complexity is part of the appeal to an RPG. I've always said --particularly regarding ME2-- that the whole point of streamlining something is to make something more user-friendly and accessible, but while still maintaining the full functionality of the mechanic in the process. Both ME2 and DA2 failed to do this and oversimplified, and instead of making complexity simple like they should they removed the complexity entirely and just left us with simplicity. Fine in an action game, but not an RPG. When one goes too far then one just makes the system and game shallow and lacking. A classic example of this in DA2 is Rogues now automatically being able to simply unlock things and disarm traps without needing any linked skill to do it. It's just shallow and dumbed down.

Is it wrong to alter the visual style of combat?

Again, it depends. The problem with combat in DA2 visually is that it tries too hard. It's just clearly putting so much effort to be flashy and fast and "badass!" without any real substance. DA2 combat is the guy that Indiana Jones shot flinging his sword around in Raiders of the Lost Ark. It's like a Michael Bay movie. It's just the Rule of Cool and is just there to be visually impressive and give teenagers a hard-on rather than offering any depth or purpose. It just comes across as peurile and immature, like a modern Hollywood action film. And the fact that this chump and his family are more adept it seems at dealing with darkspawn at level one while flipping all over the place like Jay Kay and Jackie Chan's lovechild on coffee more effectively than The Hero of Ferelden does while fighting sensibly at Level 25 in DA:O is a joke.

Is it wrong to hide/automate complexity?

Yes. This was one of my biggest beefs with ME2 actually: that half the game ends up playing itself for me and barely lets me mess with or tweak anything because the developers made the game more for ADD-riddled teenagers who are scared by numbers and start whining like a baby baboon as soon as anything even remotely gets "in the way" of their gameplay and killing things. A good RPG should never automate too much to the point where it feels like you barely have any control over anything but dialogue or what to kill. Dragon Age: Origins and Mass Effect felt like driving a car: i could choose where I went, how I went, as fast as I went, in what gear and listening to whatever music I liked. ME2 and DA2 were like a taxi-drive: somewhat the same trip, but most of this is done for me and I barely have any input. Simply put, overautomating makes the game shallow, boring and even pointless. Cutting the player out of the game and not letting them have control when they should is a bigger sin in my books than making them deal too much with things unneccesarrily, which is while I'll still always find sifting though hundreds of samey weapons and omni-gelling them one at a time more satisfying than a system that just sets things on autopilot and lets me God-mod everything to the max without any real input, thought or effort simply because the former actually gives me choice and the other is mindless automation that doesn't.

Is it wrong to guide the players interaction with the game world?

Guiding and pushing are not the same thing. After some fairly long responses, I think --fittingly-- that this one can simply be summed up with that rather succinctly.

[Jaron Oberyn]

Eski.Moe wrote...

berelinde wrote...
Making RPGs for people who don't play RPGs. What's next? Enya tries her hand at death metal?

Now that, I'd pay to see.

It's like a toy company who produces nerf guns. They're incredibly efficient and talented at what they do, but look at the weapons market, and tries to emulate their production. They figure - "we know how to make good toy guns, lets make real guns"! And they do, but it's not good enough to be a real weapon, and it angers all of the little kids who won't be getting nerf guns anymore.

That's Bioware in a little story for ya.

-Polite

[Fiery Phoenix]

I like that analogy, Polite.