518 réponses à ce sujet

[scpulley]

I may not appreciate the fact he is basically spinning this with the interview as the hate coming at the game being from Origin fans that missed that he wanted to be 'innovative' to 'save the dying RPG', which I think is pretty scummy as he is basically bad mouthing how the first game was designed while working for the same company, he personally didn't do anything. He had a vision for the game, he went with it, he is defending it. Whether professionally he did anything wrong? No I don't think he did. But, I do personally hope this bites him in the ass if nothing else, his story he pushed on us was terrible and flashy gameplay can't distract from the glaring holes in that department when Bioware has such a big following due to the usual quality of their storytelling.

[Booger]

OFF WITH HIS HEAD!!!

[elearon1]

RohanD wrote...Wow lots of defensive crazy fanboys and fangirls in here. Bottom line is, Bioware has not closed this thread yet, what does that tell you?

We don't seem to get nearly the input or attention from the devs in here that some of the other forums get - which is really disappointing, considering how the people here tend to be more reasonable in general. (aside from a few posts, naturally)

[elimccl]

I don't think lynching Laidlaw would accomplish much. He's just the butt end of the worm, so to speak. The part you're seeing isn't the head of the problem.

[RohanD]

Cody211282 wrote...

Maverick827 wrote...

RohanD wrote...

The game is just not nearly as good as your previous titles John, and ultimately, someone is responsible for that.

Don't listen to him, John, the game is as good as your previous titles, perhaps even better considering its failings are nowhere near the core of the game and would thus easily be rectified by a lengthier development time.

Your using personal opinion to go up against person opinion, it doesnt work.

What I have stated may be an opinion, but it is one shared by a large portion of gamers and critics alike. There comes a point when the consensus transcends an opinion and becomes common knowledge. This has already happened. 

Before the metacritic scores existed, it was possible to say it was "just an opinion" but now it is like saying believing in the existence of gravity is "just an opinion".

Bioware will look at the reviews. If they ignore them and keep with this direction then they do so at their own risk. 

@Maverick827, you encourage them not to listen, when reviewers, and gamers alike are shouting at them saying this is not what we wanted? When pretty much unanimously, the verdict has been that this is just not a good enough follow up to the game which was so widely praised around the world? What you are suggesting flies in the face of all logic. 

Modifié par RohanD, 27 mars 2011 - 08:53 .

[RohanD]

planed scaped wrote...

shantisands wrote...

I think that *if* they decide to fix some of the more glaring criticisms of the game, they would be wise to release it in the same manner that Witcher did for their enhanced edition: pro bono for people who already bought the game. It would do a world of good, imho. Of course, that is a big *if*.

And release a toolset so fans can get on it.  We work cheap.  

Holy hell why didn't I think of this.

They need to release a Dragon Age 2 Enhanced eddition just like they did with The Witcher. They were forced to release The Witcher early due to running low on money. They then went back to the game, fixed almost all the problems and added more content on top of it then released it as a free download to people who had bought the game as well as retail versions.

I bought The Witcher twice, the original and the enhanced. Partially because I wanted the enhanced edition shawg. But mainly to suppot such an awesome thing to do.

This is understood for a startup studio like CD Projekt Red. Bioware is a well established triple A developer owned by one of the largest game companies in the world; EA. Releasing a shoddy product then "fixing it" with an enhanced edition later is not acceptable. It will be horrible PR for a company of this size, they've already taken a hit with the need for them to do 3 defense interviews since the release. When has that ever even happened before?

Modifié par RohanD, 27 mars 2011 - 08:59 .

[Pygmali0n]

planed scaped wrote...

shantisands wrote...

I think that *if* they decide to fix some of the more glaring criticisms of the game, they would be wise to release it in the same manner that Witcher did for their enhanced edition: pro bono for people who already bought the game. It would do a world of good, imho. Of course, that is a big *if*.

And release a toolset so fans can get on it.  We work cheap.  

Holy hell why didn't I think of this.

They need to release a Dragon Age 2 Enhanced eddition just like they did with The Witcher. They were forced to release The Witcher early due to running low on money. They then went back to the game, fixed almost all the problems and added more content on top of it then released it as a free download to people who had bought the game as well as retail versions.

I bought The Witcher twice, the original and the enhanced. Partially because I wanted the enhanced edition shawg. But mainly to suppot such an awesome thing to do.

EA rush released DA2 to cash in - they hired Laidlaw, the guy with the vision and willingness to provide a lower quality and stylistically slapdash experience and with the nerve to pretend it's an 'evolution'.

So why would you think they would pay people's wages to substantially improve the game after they sucessfully suckered us in to buying it?

Modifié par Pygmali0n, 27 mars 2011 - 09:07 .

[Firky]

@ RohanD. (Sorry, ninja'd.) Mate, I think you just need to take a chill pill. (Figure of speech, don't do drugs.)

There's been a proportion of fans who haven't enjoyed DAII. How many, we have no idea.

It has scored somewhat lower overall with reviewers. What impact this might have on design, we don't know.

How the internal workings of these companies work, we don't know. Everything you are saying has an element of logic to it, but it's all just guesswork.

I'm not sure why anyone would think that trying to bully a company into firing someone would be a useful way to get what you, personally, want in an RPG (personally I wanted DAII to have Sten flying in on a dragon to ravish my PC - did I get it, no), but this thread is embarrassing.

Modifié par Firky, 27 mars 2011 - 09:13 .

[Speakeasy13]

Firky wrote...
I'm not sure why anyone would think that trying to bully a company into firing someone would be a useful way to get what you, personally, want in an RPG (personally I wanted DAII to have Sten flying in on a dragon to ravish my PC - did I get it, no), but this thread is embarrassing.

I kinda agree with most of this. Hatin' on someone YOU DON'T PERSONALLY KNOW is kind of excessive, and wanting him fired? Oh c'mon that's just mean. Every person/fanchise deserves a 2nd chance, provided their heart is in the right place.

Altho Laidlaw kind of did invite this kind of hatin' with his repeated bashing of his own fanbase... So it's really part overemotional reaction and part mediocre corporate PR.

Modifié par Speakeasy13, 27 mars 2011 - 09:23 .

[Firky]

^ With respect, I think that "repeated bashing of own fanbase" is a very subjective too though. I was an Origins fan, but I enjoyed DAII just a little more. I don't feel bashed in the slightest.

I really don't want to be engaging in this discussion, but the fact that people like me exist (I have no idea in how large a number) is why a thread like this shouldn't ever be taken as seriously as some people think it should. (I don't think BioWare would be taking it too seriously, but that's a guess.)

Edit: Actually, sorry. I'm just going to clarify that. After playing DAII I don't feel bashed in the slightest. When I first heard "button = awesome" I was very shocked and upset, because it did seem so far removed from "spiritual successor." But, marketing is marketing. And, ultimately, BioWare can make whatever game they like.

Modifié par Firky, 27 mars 2011 - 09:37 .

[Pygmali0n]

Firky wrote...

^ With respect, I think that "repeated bashing of own fanbase" is a very subjective too though. I was an Origins fan, but I enjoyed DAII just a little more. I don't feel bashed in the slightest.

I really don't want to be engaging in this discussion, but the fact that people like me exist (I have no idea in how large a number) is why a thread like this shouldn't ever be taken as seriously as some people think it should. (I don't think BioWare would be taking it too seriously, but that's a guess.)

I think an 'I disagree' would do - you can't justify 'I exist therefore this thread should not'. Let other people worry about what they take seriously or not.

[Firky]

Pygmali0n wrote...

I think an 'I disagree' would do - you can't justify 'I exist therefore this thread should not'. Let other people worry about what they take seriously or not.

Fair enough point.

[RohanD]

Firky wrote...

@ RohanD. (Sorry, ninja'd.) Mate, I think you just need to take a chill pill. (Figure of speech, don't do drugs.)

There's been a proportion of fans who haven't enjoyed DAII. How many, we have no idea.

It has scored somewhat lower overall with reviewers. What impact this might have on design, we don't know.

How the internal workings of these companies work, we don't know. Everything you are saying has an element of logic to it, but it's all just guesswork.

I'm not sure why anyone would think that trying to bully a company into firing someone would be a useful way to get what you, personally, want in an RPG (personally I wanted DAII to have Sten flying in on a dragon to ravish my PC - did I get it, no), but this thread is embarrassing.

I take chill pills on a regular mate it's all good! Anyway, I'm not trying to bully anyone really. I'm just really on here expressing my views and opinions. 

I don't expect them to listen to me, but isn't this what a forum is for? It's a method of expression isn't it? And a good way to give customer feedback, which is exactly what I am doing. 

I do need to dispute one thing you said in regards to the reviews. The metacritic scores are FAR lower than Origins. We're not talking 1 or 2 percentage points here. We're talking a drop of 7 for the 360 and 9 for the PC. That is huge. The only reason the PC score isn't lower is because of PC Gamer UK and Escapist's VERY suspect scores/reviews. 

Look, I am doing this because I want Bioware to get back into the 90s with a high fantasy RPG, because I love the genre, and they have made some of the greatest games of all time within that genre. Am I some sort of know it all god of cRPGs of course not. But there are some things which are blatantly obvious to me as to why the score is much lower, and a lot of those, in my opinion, have to do with the vision expressed by Mike Laidlaw. 

Modifié par RohanD, 27 mars 2011 - 09:50 .

[Cody211282]

scpulley wrote...

I may not appreciate the fact he is basically spinning this with the interview as the hate coming at the game being from Origin fans that missed that he wanted to be 'innovative' to 'save the dying RPG', which I think is pretty scummy as he is basically bad mouthing how the first game was designed while working for the same company, he personally didn't do anything. He had a vision for the game, he went with it, he is defending it. Whether professionally he did anything wrong? No I don't think he did. But, I do personally hope this bites him in the ass if nothing else, his story he pushed on us was terrible and flashy gameplay can't distract from the glaring holes in that department when Bioware has such a big following due to the usual quality of their storytelling.

honestly my biggest problem with him are the interveiws, he comes off as not much liking what DA:O was and just wanting to make Jade Empire 2 but couldn't get the funding for a game that old so decided to turn DA2 into it instead.

[Firky]

@RohanD Well, I don't think we're too far off the same page, really. I love old school RPGs too. My username is referencing the best dragon of all time, after all. Probably where we diverge is that I enjoyed DAII anyway, despite my old school bent.

Seems like we both care about gaming a lot. I just wish there were a more positive way to go about everything from providing feedback to actually finding an old school style RPG today. I'm not sure if Dragon Age is ultimately going to be where we find it.

I pretty sensitive to negativity, and I guess your previous post grabbed me. And, like I said, I think this thread is embarrassing, as a gamer who cares about gaming image; it not being seen as "childish" or violent or overemotional, etc. But, as Pygmali0n points out, people can take whatever they want seriously. Tis true. Just makes me unhappy.

[RohanD]

Firky wrote...

@RohanD Well, I don't think we're too far off the same page, really. I love old school RPGs too. My username is referencing the best dragon of all time, after all. Probably where we diverge is that I enjoyed DAII anyway, despite my old school bent.

Seems like we both care about gaming a lot. I just wish there were a more positive way to go about everything from providing feedback to actually finding an old school style RPG today. I'm not sure if Dragon Age is ultimately going to be where we find it.

I pretty sensitive to negativity, and I guess your previous post grabbed me. And, like I said, I think this thread is embarrassing, as a gamer who cares about gaming image; it not being seen as "childish" or violent or overemotional, etc. But, as Pygmali0n points out, people can take whatever they want seriously. Tis true. Just makes me unhappy.

This all depends on your definition of what is negative. Pointing out what is wrong is not negative. It is criticism that makes us see what to fix in order to make things better. In the end, isn't that a positive thing?

Now, everyone has a different idea on what is wrong, some don't think anything is wrong at all, but as I said before, there is a general consensus that SOMETHING went wrong and the game is not as good as Origins. 

My point is that as far as I can tell, the one over-arching thing that I have seen throughout the game's development cycle and now into it's first weeks of release, is that the vision Laidlaw had for the franchise was at odds with the market's expectations. He has talked down Origins, mentioned that Baldur's Gate needs to be left to exist in a time capsule and said that people who are criticizing are simply afraid of change. These were very, very bad moves on his part and in my opinion he is completely and utterly wrong on every count. 

Origins was a brilliant game with a few flaws that needed to be worked on, not removed entirely. Baldur's Gate is a classic game which has a formula ripe for tweaking, not completely abandoning, and none of us are afraid of change, all we want is a game that is still true to what actually makes the western cRPG unique and special.

Modifié par RohanD, 27 mars 2011 - 10:25 .

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Laidlaw's way of expressing his opinions on Origins (and by extension, people who liked Origins) left...a number of the game's fans less than pleased, or feeling as though they were being put down. It hasn't brought out the best in a lot of people. Whether or not they have the right to be upset, I don't know. I'm an Origin's fan and didn't get offended by his comments, but perhaps I didn't read them the right (wrong?) way.

Anyhoo, I liked Origins much better. It could have been improved by some of DA2's elements, just as DA2 could have been improved by some of Origins'. Being 'rushed', as people say it is, wasn't the only issue with DA2, but more time would definitely have helped even if it probably wouldn't have made it as good as the original (in my books at least).

I don't regret buying it, I'll tell my friends I enjoyed it, but I won't say 'OMG you MUST try this game!' For Bioware games, I did that for Origins, Jade Empire and BG2.

Edit: For DAO fans, DA2 also suffered the burden of being the successor. The bar was there and had to be met, so there were expectations, and for many of us these were not met. Things deemed 'sacred' (for better or worse) were changed, lore was ignored in favour of coolness factor, and elves stopped looking pretty. XD Now, it's the devs' sandpit and they can do what they like with it. But we don't have to like what they do. *shrug*

I've seen a lot of likes and dislikes, so I don't know what the overarching feeling for the game is besides 'mixed'.

Modifié par Shadow of Light Dragon, 27 mars 2011 - 10:36 .

[Maverick827]

RohanD wrote....

@Maverick827, you encourage them not to listen, when reviewers, and gamers alike are shouting at them saying this is not what we wanted? When pretty much unanimously, the verdict has been that this is just not a good enough follow up to the game which was so widely praised around the world? What you are suggesting flies in the face of all logic.

Last I checked, the game was scored pretty well by "reviewers" and was unfiarly scored low by disgruntled "gamers." I personally don't put much stock into either, as I have yet to see a fair review of the game at all. Too many people pass opinion off as fact, and are too jaded from either nostalgia for Baldur's Gate or from their ignorantly preconceived notions of what the game was going to be to offer a valid viewpoint.

Your belief that the few thousand - if even that many - negative voices heard thus far is in any way indicative of the game's quality is the only thing here that "flies in the face of all logic."

[Firky]

RohanD wrote...

My point is that as far as I can tell, the one over-arching thing that I have seen throughout the game's development cycle and now into it's first weeks of release, is that the vision Laidlaw had for the franchise was at odds with the market's expectations. He has talked down Origins, mentioned that Baldur's Gate needs to be left to exist in a time capsule and said that people who are criticizing are simply afraid of change. These were very, very bad moves on his part and in my opinion he is completely and utterly wrong on every count. 

snip .... all we want is a game that is still true to what actually makes the western cRPG unique and special.

Well, I guess I'm in for a penny, in for a pound now. (And it is becoming a good discussion.)

I guess what I'd say is - was Laidlaw's vision at odds with the market's expectations? I'd argue that a 10% score drop for a sequel isn't that much of a big deal. (I've been working as a freelance games reviewer for nearly 4 years, and I do have quite a lot of experience with scoring. It's something I take very seriously.)

Also, my original point was, do we really know that this is Laidlaw's vision? It might be, or it might be a collective vision of the entire team.

There has been a vocal backlash, but can we measure it? How? Is it really representative of a majority?

I think you might have a valid point here, actually. "He has talked down Origins, mentioned that Baldur's Gate needs to be
left to exist in a time capsule and said that people who are criticizing are simply afraid of change." Although, that's not exactly the impression that I got, I know what you are referring to. Perhaps this is more of a marketing mistep than a problem with design. (But, like I've said, I thought DAII was great, so my opinion is coming from there.)

Ultimately, I really think that trying to pin blame on one person in this kind of situation, based on reasoning (however logical it may seem) and personal preferences, isn't the right way to approach providing feedback.

Modifié par Firky, 27 mars 2011 - 10:48 .

[Joush]

Mavrick Said: Last I checked, the game was scored pretty well by "reviewers"

Nope. It received a 3 out of 5 from X Play, one of the only prime time television video game shows and one that Mike had been on himself to plug just a few days before. (And where Mike oh so kindly lied about being able to play DA2 in the same style as origins if you didn't like button mashing).

To put it in perspective, 3 out of 5 is the score one higher then Alpha Protocol gets. So if they were aiming for that, success! If they weren't.. it's getting mixed critical reviews, and even after getting slammed hard in early player reviews it still is getting mixed, generally middling reviews from players. Whom I might add are the hardcore fans that bought early, to have reviewed it by now.

[Icinix]

*puts on tinfoil hat*

I think Laidlaw is taking one for the team. Making himself a scapegoat when this was all EA's fault.

[PsychoWARD23]

back pain wrote...

Mike had what, 18 months to get this game out the door, I think he did a very good job considering what he was given.

This. It was rushed, but for a rushed game it was decent.

[imnar]

Spatchmo wrote...

CRISIS1717 wrote...

Please Bioware cut loose Mike Laidlaw, and to EA I say give Bioware the support, funding and time to put things right again.

Ever since I saw in another thread that you wanted someone to take legal action against Bioware for Dragon Age 2, I can't take anything you say seriously.

Anyway, I don't think Mike Laidlaw did anything wrong, he doesn't deserve to get fired because he made a game that makes Baldurs Gate fans unhappy. Dragon Age 2 is definitely better than average, however, it has flaws that have no business being in a finished product. To put the blame on one person for those flaws / bugs is pretty ignorant.

I'm still having a hard time grasping all the hate some of you are spewing forth for what is a good (but disappointing, given the developer pedigree) game. You're not giving constructive or useful criticism when all you do is cry for a public lynching of Mr. Laidlaw.

i have a hard time grasping why some people strongly defend a product that is obviously rushed to get money. it is a compliment to be upset when such a great dev folds to pressures and intentionally puts out a sub standard product. i LOVE bioware, because as a dev and i feel they have been one of the most consistant and fan friendly. call me a bad guy for having high expectations. they charged full price for the game. i feel i should get a full effort...deadline schmedline...

[EDarkness]

I have nothing against Laidlaw. He has his opinion about Origins and the fans of that game, and he's welcome to have it. I just don't agree with what he's trying to do. If he wanted to make a completely different game, then why not just make a completely different game? It would have saved him lots of grief and we wouldn't be having this discussion. I can see changing things up if people thought the previous system was broken, but looking around and reading reviews and such about Origins, I don't think anyone would get that impression. So why the changes? Judging from interviews with Mike, it just seems to me like they wanted to change the game to bring in the "casual action RPGer". I suppose that's okay, but the audience for the Dragon Age games was already laid out. It just seems strange to me to throw out the current audience for the series in order to bring in another that isn't really interested in these kinds of games. Sure the market is larger, but it's a gamble.

I kinda feel like Bioware is trying to grab people who really don't like RPGs in the first place. Trying to cater to an audience who wouldn't really play their game seems like a recipe for disaster. Don't get me wrong, I don't see anything wrong with trying to "evolve" RPGs, but I don't see any evolving going on, just a lot of consolidation to make it easier for people who don't play RPGs. I guess that could be considered "evolving", but why does it have to go down that path? Why not just explain things better if they're trying to get more people into playing RPGs? I thought the way stats were explained in DA2 was great. It was easy to understand and the descriptions made a lot of sense. More of this and less not allowing us to customize our party members.

Look at WoW. It's had a lot of consolidation over the years, probably more than I really want to admit, but at it's core it's still has all the basic fundamentals and is still pretty complicated. Yet, it has millions of players. Hardcore RPGers as well as "casual" players. It's not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but they were able to keep the game relatively complicated while easing new players into the game.

Anyway, I probably lost my point in here some where as I was trying to run a dungeon in WoW and lost my way a little. I don't know if Mike should take all the heat for where the game went, but I always thought the goal of any game was to keep the audience you had and add in new people. Not simply switch the old audience with a new one.

[Radwar]

Still can't believe we went from DAO to what DA2 is. So yeah if there is a DA3, I hope Laidlaw will not be involved.
Bring Brent Knowles back!

Modifié par Radwar, 27 mars 2011 - 07:32 .