373 réponses à ce sujet

[elikal71]

dewayne31 wrote...

i never seen a developer actually admit to his mistakes. i have seen games after his mistakes. but that it

Not true. FF XIV developer admitted their failures. Or the boss of Stardock about "Elemental". It DOES happen.

A true gentleman, being a fair sportsman, admits his failure and takes responsibility for it. Such are the ethics I practice and the ethics I expect of everyone else. Period.

[TMZuk]

It would seem mister Laidlaw and I have very different ideas about what makes for a cool RPG.

Well, he can think and believe what he will. Wether his idea is good for Bioware or not remains to be seen. But I doubt it.

[Fidget6]

elikal71 wrote...

dewayne31 wrote...

i never seen a developer actually admit to his mistakes. i have seen games after his mistakes. but that it

Not true. FF XIV developer admitted their failures. Or the boss of Stardock about "Elemental". It DOES happen.

A true gentleman, being a fair sportsman, admits his failure and takes responsibility for it. Such are the ethics I practice and the ethics I expect of everyone else. Period.

Haha, well FFXIV was just a joke. There's a mixed reaction about DA2, but was there even one person who liked FFXIV?

[Swoo]

elikal71 wrote...

dewayne31 wrote...

i never seen a developer actually admit to his mistakes. i have seen games after his mistakes. but that it

Not true. FF XIV developer admitted their failures. Or the boss of Stardock about "Elemental". It DOES happen.

A true gentleman, being a fair sportsman, admits his failure and takes responsibility for it. Such are the ethics I practice and the ethics I expect of everyone else. Period.

Usually it happens a bit longer after release. Right now they are still trying to convince people to buy their game, no matter what's going on. Creative Arts had something like that not too long ago where the lead said he had four to six copies already to give to friends as XMas gifts, and then about five months later he admitted he never gave them out because the game just wasn't very good. (Nappy: Total War I believe.)

[Tommy6860]

Fidget6 wrote...

fchopin wrote...

If the guy had so much dislike for DAO then he was obviously the wrong person to do DA2.

He did DAO as well.....

He worked on the console version of Origins, according to a few notes in this forum. Origins was a PC developed game, then ported to the consoles.

[Dreadstruck]

Well. I get the John Romero vibe from his responses. And Johnnie himself even apologized for Daikatana afterwards, if I remember correctly.

Modifié par Avalla'ch, 25 mars 2011 - 04:20 .

[PinkysPain]

StartOrange wrote...

I think he made some good points. I am actually guilty as charged when it comes to Morrigans robes :|

So how much work would it have been to just let you go to a tailor/armorer and have robes/armour reworked to the fashion tastes of your party members? (ie. use the stats of the loot item with the graphics of the companion gear.) Or hell, make all the armour generic (cloth/light/medium/heavy) with a rune system ... so you can at least gear up your companions, instead of having the problem that the protagonist is hugely superior and the only guy who can really tank on higher difficulties.

This was the same problem with ME2 ... all their complaints about problems in ME1 and DAO are valid, they just always go for the laziest solution. The lawn under their bathroom window is littered with rotting baby carcases.

[Romantiq]

elikal71 wrote...

dewayne31 wrote...

i never seen a developer actually admit to his mistakes. i have seen games after his mistakes. but that it

Not true. FF XIV developer admitted their failures. Or the boss of Stardock about "Elemental". It DOES happen.

A true gentleman, being a fair sportsman, admits his failure and takes responsibility for it. Such are the ethics I practice and the ethics I expect of everyone else. Period.

Creative Assembly admitted all the errors they had with Empire Total War and Napoleon. They learned and delivered a great game Shogun 2.

Some companies / developers are just good in terms of listening to feedback.

[ink07]

Copy paste from the other topic (yes, I'm bitter)

He reminds me of Dennis Dyack after Too Human came out. He actually had the nerve to say this (and I'm quoting, not paraphrasing):

What we’re also seeing is for the people who don’t like it, generally just don’t get it. And it’s because we’ve created something so innovative and different. It’s ironic, it just shows that human nature of if you don’t understand something, you immediately attack it. It’s pretty interesting in that regard.

The nerve and dismissiveness Mike has is astounding:

It's something that resolves one of the parts I really disliked about
Origins where I'd see people's screenshots with their badass team and
they would kind of all look the same. Near the end of the game, everyone
had the same set of suits of armor.

Are you kidding me? So now "screenshots you saw and didn't like" are more important than "player freedom and fun?" You know how to solve this problem? Make more sets of armour, more loot, more distinct/random stas & equipment, let people personalize it.

I know he cannot go out and say publicly: "yeah, the reason equipment for your party is gone is because we want to sell you as many alt appearance packs as we possibly can" but seriously, you cannot go out and say that "party members looked almost the same for all people, so to fix that we now make them look exactly the same." Jesus Christ!

It's funny that what he basically is saying is that RPGs are too hardocre for massive audiences, so now that they have an established a franchise and a nice userbase they want to make them too accessible, like GTA (cus we all know GTA is an RPG), so everyone can enjoy it.

I don't have a problem if they want to make that game, seriously, you just don't frigging do it to the sequel to a game you announced as the spiritual successor to friggin Baldur's Gate, where you deny the foundations of what the game was built upon. You know what is awesome? Not pressing A and seeing pixels explode, for RPG fans is the customization, the long journey, the expansive areas, not the neverending waves of enemies, but the variety of things that you can do in a game.


I know I've said it before, but seriously, I'm done with Dragon Age. Mike, you are so out of touch, it's upsetting.

[Brockololly]

Tommy6860 wrote...

Fidget6 wrote...

fchopin wrote...

If the guy had so much dislike for DAO then he was obviously the wrong person to do DA2.

He did DAO as well.....

He worked on the console version of Origins, according to a few notes in this forum. Origins was a PC developed game, then ported to the consoles.

James Ohlen was DAO's first lead designer and then he went off to work on TOR. Then Brent Knowles took over as Lead Designer on Origins and was responsible for the PC version, as he left after the PC version had been completed in March 2009 but was delayed for the console versions. And Laidlaw came on as LEad Designer for the console port of Origins.

[Mousers]

PinkysPain wrote...

StartOrange wrote...

I think he made some good points. I am actually guilty as charged when it comes to Morrigans robes :|

So how much work would it have been to just let you go to a tailor/armorer and have robes/armour reworked to the fashion tastes of your party members? (ie. use the stats of the loot item with the graphics of the companion gear.) Or hell, make all the armour generic (cloth/light/medium/heavy) with a rune system ... so you can at least gear up your companions, instead of having the problem that the protagonist is hugely superior and the only guy who can really tank on higher difficulties.

I had about the same thought with companion armor. Have their armor on a merchant we can buy and have special coins as loot to turn into the merchant to buy the armor instead of our gold. Plus the armor loot, if there actually was any good ones, that you could take the stats off and apply to a companions gear. Also, being able to dye any of the layers of anyones armor. That would make a nice difference and please fans.

As for devs owning up to game issues. The best one I think is the devs of Two Worlds. They did it with humor engaging in all the forum threads. I'll have to do some research to see how soon after release they did that.

[this isnt my name]

I saw this posted on another forum

http://www.gameinfor...gon-age-ii.aspx

I hardly think selling out your original fanbase (you know they guys that supported you this far) is going to make a more viable future.

Also no 180 great, I am eager to get that dialouge wheel back in future games, and I for one cant wait to follow Commander Hawkes story, then have to pay dlc to get further than an intro to the story, the story will end the same regaurdless of what you do btw (that gives it such great replay value), I also love the cut content so companions feel more unique. /sarcasm

This reminds me of Futurama where everyone is an idiot, there is a trainwreck and the mayor says "Dont worry I am sending more trains" *crash* that seems to be the future of DA, not exactly viable is it.

[Monica83]

Im corious if ladiaw want answer in this topic.. or stay in the shadow like a coward

[adneate]

dewayne31 wrote...
i never seen a developer actually admit to his mistakes. i have seen games after his mistakes. but that it

Bethesda admitted they made a bunch of mistakes in Oblivion and that some of their overly ambitious ideas didn't work out that well once the public got their hands on it. They were very engaged with Mod community after release studying what people were fixing and how, even highlighting mods that they thought were really great and people who own Oblivion should try. The lead quest designer for the much praised Dark Brotherhood Assassin Guild was promoted based on the fans overwhelmingly positive reaction to his work.

Todd Howard is always very honest in interviews about their past work and the fact that they aren't perfect.

[syllogi]

If the marketing campaign for DA2 is any indication, Bioware will only start admitting mistakes with this game when they are attempting to push DA3.

I'm really hoping that one day we do get a sincere apology for this game. It had a lot of potential, and some bright spots, but on the whole it is insulting to long time Bioware fans to claim that this was the best quality product they could produce.

[berelinde]

adneate wrote...

dewayne31 wrote...
i never seen a developer actually admit to his mistakes. i have seen games after his mistakes. but that it

Bethesda admitted they made a bunch of mistakes in Oblivion and that some of their overly ambitious ideas didn't work out that well once the public got their hands on it. They were very engaged with Mod community after release studying what people were fixing and how, even highlighting mods that they thought were really great and people who own Oblivion should try. The lead quest designer for the much praised Dark Brotherhood Assassin Guild was promoted based on the fans overwhelmingly positive reaction to his work.

Todd Howard is always very honest in interviews about their past work and the fact that they aren't perfect.

This. Humility is a virtue, not a weakness.

We are all fallible, and we all make mistakes. Denial only hinders the growth process.

[abaris]

adneate wrote...

Todd Howard is always very honest in interviews about their past work and the fact that they aren't perfect.

PAST being the operative word. When Oblivion first hit the shelves, they did anything but encourage the modding community. In fact they tried something pretty similiar to the DLC madness. They sold mods and armors created by their team.

During the selling offensive you won't hear a bad word by any developer. Its their livelihood on the line atfer all. What's more, the bigger the company, the harder the particular PR department breathes damage control down their necks. So its safe to assume, all the leads going public right now are thouroughly coached. Its also in their choice of words. Pure PR gobbeldigokk.

[Brockololly]

this isnt my name wrote...

I saw this posted on another forum

http://www.gameinfor...gon-age-ii.aspx

I hardly think selling out your original fanbase (you know they guys that supported you this far) is going to make a more viable future.

Also no 180 great, I am eager to get that dialouge wheel back in future games, and I for one cant wait to follow Commander Hawkes story, then have to pay dlc to get further than an intro to the story, the story will end the same regaurdless of what you do btw (that gives it such great replay value), I also love the cut content so companions feel more unique. /sarcasm

This reminds me of Futurama where everyone is an idiot, there is a trainwreck and the mayor says "Dont worry I am sending more trains" *crash* that seems to be the future of DA, not exactly viable is it.

From the Game Informer article:

Speaking to GameSpot,
Laidlaw says the adjustments in Dragon Age II were for the good of the  franchise, and BioWare will not be reversing back to the Dragon Age:  Origins style because of fan complaints: *snip*

Sooo, let me get this straight- Origins becomes BioWare's best selling new IP EVER. Better than KOTOR, better than BG, better than their Sacred Cow, Mass Effect. But thats not a good foundation to build a franchise? Are you kidding? Sorry, but I'm fairly certain that a good chunk of the sales propping up DA2 were likely from people that liked Origins. I bought DA2 because I enjoyed Origins, not because of anything I saw in DA2 prerelease. By what it sounds like, a minor miracle might need to happen for me to buy any possible DA3, as I did not find DA2 to be a very good game. Not terrible, but terribly unremarkable.  

You're only as good as your last game BioWare, and in the case of DA2 it wasn't anything to write home about. So its better to build a franchise on your lowest rated game ever than one of your most successful? Especially in a series which is supposed to be a series of one off stories with a revolving door of PC's, its a good idea to leave things on a crummy cliffhanger?

Laidlaw goes on to say that the strong reactions, whether negative or  positive, point toward the fact that people care about Dragon Age, which is what BioWare wants.

I give a **** about DA because DAO was one of my favorite games in a good long time. DA2 was merely ok and IMO, a step in the wrong direction- so, I don't really care at all about DA2 beyond that it seems to be the direction all of DA is going now. If DA keeps going full throttle for the GTA/Madden fanbase, godspeed BioWare. Any strong reaction from me is because I see DA squandering its potential to stand out from the mass market generic action RPG crowd in an attempt to gobble up the monies of Madden, GTA and CoD people that don't give a **** about any fantasy game no matter how simple you make it. By all means, try to bring that fanbase into RPGs, but its a stupid proposition to cater your game design to those who don't care about the game in the first place. It would be like a presidential candidate pandering to moderates and independents in a party primary.

All BioWare is doing is cutting off their nose to spite their face.

Modifié par Brockololly, 25 mars 2011 - 05:15 .

[ink07]

@adneate

Not to mention they are taking their time with Skyrim instead of rushing out a sequel to Oblivion after much praise and great success, not unlike DA:O. Some developers just get it.

Modifié par ink07, 25 mars 2011 - 05:13 .

[this isnt my name]

Brockololly wrote...

this isnt my name wrote...

I saw this posted on another forum

http://www.gameinfor...gon-age-ii.aspx

I hardly think selling out your original fanbase (you know they guys that supported you this far) is going to make a more viable future.

Also no 180 great, I am eager to get that dialouge wheel back in future games, and I for one cant wait to follow Commander Hawkes story, then have to pay dlc to get further than an intro to the story, the story will end the same regaurdless of what you do btw (that gives it such great replay value), I also love the cut content so companions feel more unique. /sarcasm

This reminds me of Futurama where everyone is an idiot, there is a trainwreck and the mayor says "Dont worry I am sending more trains" *crash* that seems to be the future of DA, not exactly viable is it.

From the Game Informer article:

Speaking to GameSpot,
Laidlaw says the adjustments in Dragon Age II were for the good of the  franchise, and BioWare will not be reversing back to the Dragon Age:  Origins style because of fan complaints: *snip*

Sooo, let me get this straight- Origins becomes BioWare's best selling new IP EVER. Better than KOTOR, better than BG, better than their Sacred Cow, Mass Effect. But thats not a good foundation to build a franchise? Are you kidding? Sorry, but I'm fairly certain that a good chunk of the sales propping up DA2 were likely from people that liked Origins. I bought DA2 because I enjoyed Origins, not because of anything I saw in DA2 prerelease. By what it sounds like, a minor miracle might need to happen for me to buy any possible DA3, as I did not find DA2 to be a very good game. Not terrible, but terribly unremarkable.  

You're only as good as your last game BioWare, and in the case of DA2 it wasn't anything to write home about. So its better to build a franchise on your lowest rated game ever than one of your most successful? Especially in a series which is supposed to be a series of one off stories with a revolving door of PC's, its a good idea to leave things on a crummy cliffhanger?

Laidlaw goes on to say that the strong reactions, whether negative or  positive, point toward the fact that people care about Dragon Age, which is what BioWare wants.

I give a **** about DA because DAO was one of my favorite games in a good long time. DA2 was merely ok and IMO, a step in the wrong direction. If DA keeps going full throttle for the GTA/Madden fanbase, godspeed BioWare. Any strong reaction from me is because I see DA squandering its potential to stand out from the mass market generic action RPG crowd in an attempt to gobble up the monies of Madden, GTA and CoD people that don't give a **** about any fantasy game no matter how simple you make it. By all means, try to bring that fanbase into RPGs, but its a stupid proposition to cater your game design to those who don't care about the game in the first place. It would be like a presidential candidate pandering to moderates and independents in a party primary.

All BioWare is doing is cutting off their nose to spite their face.

Its greed, they ahd a good thing going, but wanted the more casual audience, they sold out, and imo it will cost them dearly, DA2 didnt sell well iirc, and most people bought it becuase they liked DAO, it will just sink further imo, and ME3 is the last in the ME trilogy, they may have spin offs but it wont be the same imo, and ToR will likely fail against WoW, so BW only has DA, with an alienated, fractured audience. With DA2 they lost their paddle.

[AkiKishi]

this isnt my name wrote...
Its greed, they ahd a good thing going, but wanted the more casual audience, they sold out, and imo it will cost them dearly, DA2 didnt sell well iirc, and most people bought it becuase they liked DAO, it will just sink further imo, and ME3 is the last in the ME trilogy, they may have spin offs but it wont be the same imo, and ToR will likely fail against WoW, so BW only has DA, with an alienated, fractured audience. With DA2 they lost their paddle.

This is a problem when you try to expand your fan base and at the same time make a game that is questionable at best. A cycle of mediocrity as more and more people begin to doubt your product.

[Seitur]

Well seems it is as I feared. Developer team at BW have totally diffrent vision of their future "rpg's" than games I would like to play. Shame really as few BW games was one of best games I played in my life (including other genre games).
This is not an option with DA2 , if I want arcade , flashy and simplified/streamlined kind of play I choose games like Heavenly Sword over some weird action adventure limited rpg-like game DA2 was.

So good buy Bioware , I'll check every now and then if you have changed your strategy and if you have changed your developers.
If your next games will follow DA2 steps I won't buy them.

You lost consumer, I don't want to lose more time&money hoping for things you don't want to deliver anymore.

Modifié par Seitur, 25 mars 2011 - 05:20 .

[this isnt my name]

BobSmith101 wrote...

this isnt my name wrote...
Its greed, they ahd a good thing going, but wanted the more casual audience, they sold out, and imo it will cost them dearly, DA2 didnt sell well iirc, and most people bought it becuase they liked DAO, it will just sink further imo, and ME3 is the last in the ME trilogy, they may have spin offs but it wont be the same imo, and ToR will likely fail against WoW, so BW only has DA, with an alienated, fractured audience. With DA2 they lost their paddle.

This is a problem when you try to expand your fan base and at the same time make a game that is questionable at best. A cycle of mediocrity as more and more people begin to doubt your product.

You can expand your fanbase by adding to the game, building off it, what BW did was just change everything, if they built of it, like make it like DAO, just with the combat of DA2 and a few minor changes, here they took several features and just removed them entirely.

Look at halo for a good example, first we had multiplayer, then they added forge, then firefight, now forge 2.0, armour abilities/equipment too. You may not like halo, but you cand deny they know how to treat their fanbase and what the fans want.

[AkiKishi]

this isnt my name wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

this isnt my name wrote...
Its greed, they ahd a good thing going, but wanted the more casual audience, they sold out, and imo it will cost them dearly, DA2 didnt sell well iirc, and most people bought it becuase they liked DAO, it will just sink further imo, and ME3 is the last in the ME trilogy, they may have spin offs but it wont be the same imo, and ToR will likely fail against WoW, so BW only has DA, with an alienated, fractured audience. With DA2 they lost their paddle.

This is a problem when you try to expand your fan base and at the same time make a game that is questionable at best. A cycle of mediocrity as more and more people begin to doubt your product.

You can expand your fanbase by adding to the game, building off it, what BW did was just change everything, if they built of it, like make it like DAO, just with the combat of DA2 and a few minor changes, here they took several features and just removed them entirely.

Look at halo for a good example, first we had multiplayer, then they added forge, then firefight, now forge 2.0, armour abilities/equipment too. You may not like halo, but you cand deny they know how to treat their fanbase and what the fans want.

I'm in complete agreement. However had they actually made something worthwhile, but different the reaction would be different to what DA2 got.
Looks at Diablo hardcore RPGers loathed that game when it was released for the most part. It vindicated itself through sales.

[Scorpgul]

I just read it and its the most ridiculous piece of **** ever. Mister Laidlaw is happy with EVERYTHING fans hate about Dragon Age 2 and the only reason he seems to be giving for the changes is 'Innovation' Why not just accept that the decisions you made are WRONG??? At the end of the day its us gamers that make you what you are, just accept it goddamn it and stop trying to cover it up by saying you made those changes to appeal to a bigger audience blabla WE ARE THE AUDIENCE