Ce sujet est fermé
Edit: To those of you saying this is a hate thread or personal attack.
Okay, I understand where you're coming from, and perhaps I could have elaborated my own view first rather than just saying "discuss" but I didn't want to type up my own opinion here, I just wanted others to have their say. But if you really want to how I feel, and why this isn't a personal attack read on.
Firstly, I don't hate Mike Laidlaw as a person, in fact I don't even know Mike Laidlaw. Mike Laidlaw might in fact be one of the nicest/kindest/smartest men in the world. But this thread isn't about Mike Laidlaw the person, it's about Mike Laidlaw the lead designer of Dragon Age 2. Therefore, it isn't a personal attack, rather it's an invitation to discuss Mike Laidlaw's role as the lead designer of Dragon Age 2.
As someone who has worked in business, and studied it for many years, I have come to realise that the business world is a harsh, unkind, sometimes unjust one. People well and truly live and die by the sword (metaphorically - just thought I'd put that in there considering the discussion is centered around Dragon Age).
The fact is, Mike Laidlaw as the lead designer of the game has been seen to be in charge of it's overall direction, it's policies, and even to an extent it's marketing. In any organisation, it is the head who is responsible for the direction a business takes, and it is often the head who takes the blame when a business fails. It appears that Mike Laidlaw is effectively the head of Dragon Age 2. Now I could be wrong on this, and if it's true please point this out to me, because as far as I can see it's ultimately Mike Laidlaw's vision that has set the direction for Dragon Age 2.
Now understandably, EA does have a role in the eventual product that is Dragon Age 2. But, they are the producer, and a producer is unlikely to have a major input into the direction a series takes. Rather they will likely say to Bioware, that they have X amount of days, X amount of cash and resources for production, and X amount of copies are expected to sell. EA will then market the product and distribute it based on what Bioware creates. Ultimately then, while yes, EA may have given Mike Laidlaw only 12-18 months to make Dragon Age 2, and whether he did a good job given the context is again debatable. What is debatable though is the success/failure of the game to meet public expectations. A failure to meet expectations will then fall on Mike Laidlaw. Harsh or not, this is the world we live in.
Edit again: For those of you who continue to insist that this is a "personal attack" despite what has been said, consider this. The Oxford Dictionary (which is generally considered authorative regarding the English language in case you didn't know) defines "personal" as the following:
- adjective. Of, pertaining to, concerning, or affecting a person as an individual (rather than as a member of a group or of the public, or in a professional capacity etc); ...
The dictionary continues on from this, but hopefully you get the idea. This thread is a discussion on Mike Laidlaw in his professional capacity and nothing more. Further, any discussion that deviates from this I will not take part in. Further, it's quite ironic that those of you whom consider this a personal attack resort to rather 'personal' attacks yourselves in your arguments.
Modifié par Ronin2006, 25 mars 2011 - 02:39 .
Retour en haut
