518 réponses à ce sujet

[Mad-Max90]

I like mike's youthful enthusiasm, as he did a decent job within the small time allotted him, EA on the other hand should have seen the opportunity in the franchise and actually let bioware cook this game a little longer, I actually sympathize with bioware on that end of the spectrum, that said they did sign a contract with their new publisher for money so it was their fault as well as EA's

[aftohsix]

My 2 cents. Mike you did a great job. If you're reading this (God I hope you're not) all of the raging you see is the result of a job well done.

[axl99]

aftohsix wrote...

My 2 cents. Mike you did a great job. If you're reading this (God I hope you're not) all of the raging you see is the result of a job well done.

Yep. It just goes to show how much love there really is for the franchise .

[LiquidGrape]

axl99 wrote...

I'm sure some people have played Baldur's Gate. When the "cheap MMO gameplay" comment was leveled at DA2, I couldn't help but recall the gameplay in Baldur's Gate felt like a cross between Warcraft and a much slower version of Diablo.

You want arrogance? Look in a mirror. Customers or no, some fans just have self-entitlement issues.

Oh snnaaaaaaap!
But seriously, so much this.
Willful ignorance born of bias seems to be a fairly prevalent condition among the fan communities in this medium.

[thenemesis77]

axl99 wrote...

I'm sure some people have played Baldur's Gate. When the "cheap MMO gameplay" comment was leveled at DA2, I couldn't help but recall the gameplay in Baldur's Gate felt like a cross between Warcraft and a much slower version of Diablo.

You want arrogance? Look in a mirror. Customers or no, some fans just have self-entitlement issues.

So I'am thinking that you are out to take any **** they shovel and just bow and like it?  I think not. I have better standards then that and when you have a great story and game engine in play.......why the hell do you screw with that?  DA2 didn't even tell a full story....it was more or less a 3 to 3 1/2 DLC and that is at best. Lelianas Song was better then this and that is putting it in mild terms.....and you call me out as arrogant?    No I don't spend money on a half ass game that speaks to no story or gamplay......I'am glad you liked it.......good for you.

[LiquidGrape]

thenemesis77 wrote...

So I'am thinking that you are out to take any **** they shovel and just bow and like it?  I think not. I have better standards then that and when you have a great story and game engine in play.......why the hell do you screw with that?  DA2 didn't even tell a full story....it was more or less a 3 to 3 1/2 DLC and that is at best. Lelianas Song was better then this and that is putting it in mild terms.....and you call me out as arrogant?    No I don't spend money on a half ass game that speaks to no story or gamplay......I'am glad you liked it.......good for you.

DA2 demonstrably tells a (quote) "full story".
If you want to get really technical, you could easily fit the three-act structure of DA2 into the classical exposition > rising action > climax > falling action > resolution scheme.
That it would encompass only 3 - 3.5 hours of gameplay is an outright lie.

[axl99]

thenemesis77 wrote...

So I'am thinking that you are out to take any **** they shovel and just bow and like it?  I think not. I have better standards then that and when you have a great story and game engine in play.......why the hell do you screw with that?  DA2 didn't even tell a full story....it was more or less a 3 to 3 1/2 DLC and that is at best. Lelianas Song was better then this and that is putting it in mild terms.....and you call me out as arrogant?    No I don't spend money on a half ass game that speaks to no story or gamplay......I'am glad you liked it.......good for you.

You liked DAO? Good for you. I didn't. But you don't see me ranting and raving about it like the sky's about to fall down or insulting those who genuinely enjoyed it. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy in the comments made in this thread.

"No I don't spent money on a half ass game that speaks to no story or gamplay"

Don't talk about standards when you actually spent money on DA2 and actually activated your online profile to prove it. So you didn't like DA2. Fine. Don't belittle those who enjoyed it. That's just being rude.

Modifié par axl99, 29 mars 2011 - 01:30 .

[neppakyo]

A lot of the griping is the complete 180 they did from DA:O. 18 months is not near enough time to implement so much new crap and ideas, well, you've seen the result. DA2. The new idea for the story was fine. It was just horribly executed, an not done right. Even the music suffered from the rush Job, Ion did a good job for the time frame given, its just not as good as DA:O's music.

They should of tweaked/fixed the problems from DA:O, not scrap them and try something different and failed at it. In my opinion, the waves of enemies, removal of skills, simplified/streamlined talents/skills, and silly speed crack w.hore combat was a dumb decision. And with him saying they focused on 'more content' instead of level design, the 'more content' was useless horrid side quests that take up probably near half the game play, which they should of cut in half and concentrated on the environment and levels. C'mon.. for spending all your time in kirkwall, its a dead soulless city, visually sparse-less of inhabitants.

On my second attempt through it, I was wishing the Qunari just levelled the city and end the suffering.

/rant
Ok, apologies for being a bit winded there, continue the discussions

PS: To those that think (was posted in a few pages) Laidlaw was the lead over DA:O, you're wrong. He came in after it was finished, when they decided to port it to the consoles. He's only credited with the 360 version. Brent Knowles was the lead over DA:O, and he left after it was finished because he didn't agree with the path the next game was going.

[LocutusX]

Personally, I think this thread should be locked or deleted.

An entire 20-page thread directed *personally* at an employee of BW who is believed to be the cause of all its ills?

This is just ridiculous. I'm also a software developer (not games though, thank goodness) and my management would never let our business clients roast me over a spit if something I built wasn't 100% good. If I did something really bad, they'd roast me directly, or fire me, but they'd never let our customers engage in a public witch hunt...

That said... those who are defending DA2 to death - did you complete the game? I really liked it in Acts 1 and 2 (and defended it on other forums, before I got to act 3), but I think it really fell flat on its face in Act 3. I can no longer in good conscience defend this game, or recommend its purchase by others... but regardless, we should not have threads making personal comments about the developers on this forum.

[TJPags]

LocutusX wrote...

Personally, I think this thread should be locked or deleted.

An entire 20-page thread directed *personally* at an employee of BW who is believed to be the cause of all its ills?

This is just ridiculous. I'm also a software developer (not games though, thank goodness) and my management would never let our business clients roast me over a spit if something I built wasn't 100% good. If I did something really bad, they'd roast me directly, or fire me, but they'd never let our customers engage in a public witch hunt...

That said... those who are defending DA2 to death - did you complete the game? I really liked it in Acts 1 and 2 (and defended it on other forums, before I got to act 3), but I think it really fell flat on its face in Act 3. I can no longer in good conscience defend this game, or recommend its purchase by others... but regardless, we should not have threads making personal comments about the developers on this forum.

I haven't been following this thread completely, but John Epler already commented about locking it:

JohnEpler wrote...

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?

Mostly that we don't censor opinion, and that we aren't going to close a thread just because we disagree with the OP if there happens to be actual discussion contained within.

I assume that it hasn't degraded beyond what it was when he commented.

That said, I do kind of agree with you, so far as it sucks that Make Laidlaw is getting the brunt of this.  But at the same time, he is the one with the Lead Designer title.  He is the one who has been front and center touting the changes.  My impression (could be wrong, but ti's my impression) is that he either came up with or championed the ideas that led to the changes so many are unhappy with. 

He'd also likely be the guy handed the Game of the Year trophy, had this game won one.  So he should also be the one to take the heat at this point.

But it should not get personal . . .if it has, well, that's wrong.

[kingjamesjr1]

[quote]Chaos_1001 wrote...

[quote]Ronin2006 wrote...

[quote]Chaos_1001 wrote...

[quote]Ronin2006 wrote...

[quote]Chaos_1001 wrote...

[quote]AtreiyaN7 wrote...

[quote]Chaos_1001 wrote...

[quote]RohanD wrote...

Careful, you may get banned for this[/quote]

THIS ^
[/quote]

If you seriously think people get banned over disliking the game or being critical, there wouldn't be threads like this, would there? If someone likes the game, then there's really nothing to "discuss." Since the game was enjoyable overall for me, I think he did a good job - even though I'm critical about a few things.
[/quote]

That wasnt my point , this is a personal attack plain and simple..[/quote]

Please read the thread topic.  I have addressed this concern that some of you have.[/quote]

ok...

READ WHAT I POSTED AGAIN !
[/quote]

I can see that this thread has hit a personal nerve for you, and that's unfortunate.  I'm not sure if you were referring to the other person or myself in your post regarding the personal attack, however the post you left is a little ambiguous, so if I misunderstood, I apologise.

I would however like to keep my edited topic as some people seem to be taking my thread as a personal attack on Mike Laidlaw.

PS you don't need to type in big capitals to get your point across.  It just makes you look childish and stupid and doesn't help you at all.[/quote]

Perhaps you are right, I probably should've used a well thought out response to this thread's intentions as it were.. For the record though... The only one being childish and stupid here in this post between you and I is you . Just because the internet gives you a voice to speak your will, does not give you the right to personally attack another person based on your opinion ! If this Mike Laidlaw did you wrong personally I could see / understand a retort . This post however, is utter complete bullsquat to the 50th degree ! You are in fact most likely will get at the very least moderated for this possibly more. I very seldom get angry or upset over opinions and ideas. Your childish and stupid actions shame all of us in the Dragon Age community ! So .. was that professional enough for you to understand ?[/quote] where in this guy post that you read  a personal attack from OP honestly  what makes ur defence for this idiotic reply to something that u misread and now trying to personally attack the op . In my opinion which everyone is in title to speak their minds rather it be good or bad, rather  they have point or not, or maybe if it makes sense or not  u get the picture good now. That my honest opinion 

Modifié par kingjamesjr1, 29 mars 2011 - 02:29 .

[Iliumdawson]

I am not as impressed as I had originally hoped to be with DA2. (Its just like Mass Effect in my opinion, and that annoys me) I most assuredly enjoyed the game, but I had hoped that my choices in DAO would be more prominent.

Modifié par Iliumdawson, 29 mars 2011 - 02:27 .

[neppakyo]

Iliumdawson wrote...

I am not as impressed as I had originally hoped to be with DA2. (Its just like Mass Effect in my opinion, and that annoys me)

Same. I really like the Mass Effect series, and I agree, someone spilled the ME juice in the DA cake batter.

[Cybermortis]

imported_beer wrote...

Every corporation has the right to make money. A company doesn't exist purely to pleasure people or if it did, it would be a very different sort of company with a very different product.

Well, no. But this IS a games company, so by definition they make money by pleasing people. If they forget that wave them goodbye - and regardless of what you think of the game it is clear they haven't forgotten that or they wouldn't be asking for our opinions on the things that could have been done better.

As I said before, while it is convenient and instictive for us to try and point the finger of doom at a single person. In reality problems with projects such as this are the result of several people. In this case just about every problem could have been caught had they had more time to develop the game, and the development cycle for the game was not set by the guy heading the project.

You might not like the direction he wanted to take the game, but do try and be fair to the guy and remember he didn't really have the chance to fine tune his ideas or develop them to the level he was thinking of. If you give an artist a day to paint your portrait don't expect the Mona Lisa.

[RohanD]

LocutusX wrote...

Personally, I think this thread should be locked or deleted.

An entire 20-page thread directed *personally* at an employee of BW who is believed to be the cause of all its ills?

This is just ridiculous. I'm also a software developer (not games though, thank goodness) and my management would never let our business clients roast me over a spit if something I built wasn't 100% good. If I did something really bad, they'd roast me directly, or fire me, but they'd never let our customers engage in a public witch hunt...

That said... those who are defending DA2 to death - did you complete the game? I really liked it in Acts 1 and 2 (and defended it on other forums, before I got to act 3), but I think it really fell flat on its face in Act 3. I can no longer in good conscience defend this game, or recommend its purchase by others... but regardless, we should not have threads making personal comments about the developers on this forum.

If you work in software development and you are the lead behind a large project then you are to be held accountable for the vision of that project, whether it is a success or failure.

Your comparison of your situation and Laidlaw's is quite different. Firstly, Laidlaw put himself in the public eye, appearing in numerous media as the "Lead Designer" openly discussing the game. Secondly the game is released to the largest possible client base - the world. It's not like this is some custom piece of software developed for a single client. 

When large scale companies do things and a lot of people see that as a negative, there will always be calls for resignations and changes of management. Small businesses are largely safe from this kind of situation, and its associated risks. But with great risk comes great rewards. With the gaming world as your client base you can stand to make hundreds of millions of dollars in profit. You can also crash horribly. 

I'm sorry but a certain amount of responsibility comes with being the lead designer behind a project of that nature. Laidlaw got the job and now he has to deal with the aftermath of his creation.

What if the game was loved by so many? I doubt you would you then say it is not right for people to come on here praising him and saying they need him to come back for the next game. Why is praise allowed and criticism not?

Modifié par RohanD, 29 mars 2011 - 02:34 .

[TJPags]

Cybermortis wrote...

imported_beer wrote...

Every corporation has the right to make money. A company doesn't exist purely to pleasure people or if it did, it would be a very different sort of company with a very different product.

Well, no. But this IS a games company, so by definition they make money by pleasing people. If they forget that wave them goodbye - and regardless of what you think of the game it is clear they haven't forgotten that or they wouldn't be asking for our opinions on the things that could have been done better.

As I said before, while it is convenient and instictive for us to try and point the finger of doom at a single person. In reality problems with projects such as this are the result of several people. In this case just about every problem could have been caught had they had more time to develop the game, and the development cycle for the game was not set by the guy heading the project.

You might not like the direction he wanted to take the game, but do try and be fair to the guy and remember he didn't really have the chance to fine tune his ideas or develop them to the level he was thinking of. If you give an artist a day to paint your portrait don't expect the Mona Lisa.

However, he chose the vision or direction of this game knowing the deadline.  He could have chosen a less extensive overhaul, for instance.  He could have focused on changing fewer things. 

He had an ambitious vision - and I don't fault him at all for having it - and chose to go ahead knowing the deadline he and his team were operating under.

[kingjamesjr1]

Cybermortis wrote...

imported_beer wrote...

Every corporation has the right to make money. A company doesn't exist purely to pleasure people or if it did, it would be a very different sort of company with a very different product.

Well, no. But this IS a games company, so by definition they make money by pleasing people. If they forget that wave them goodbye - and regardless of what you think of the game it is clear they haven't forgotten that or they wouldn't be asking for our opinions on the things that could have been done better.

As I said before, while it is convenient and instictive for us to try and point the finger of doom at a single person. In reality problems with projects such as this are the result of several people. In this case just about every problem could have been caught had they had more time to develop the game, and the development cycle for the game was not set by the guy heading the project.

You might not like the direction he wanted to take the game, but do try and be fair to the guy and remember he didn't really have the chance to fine tune his ideas or develop them to the level he was thinking of. If you give an artist a day to paint your portrait don't expect the Mona Lisa.

I agreed to a point the direction was completely opposite of the game in fact and truly, if this is the direction this series is heading then count me out, For one i love RPG GAMES,  dunno what the Lead designer was thinking  but clearly he miss his mark. This is no way shape or form a rpg this is a game with no direction period, and to call it dragon age 2! Well i spit on this direction of this game cuz dragon age 2 really spit on everyone That TRUELY believes in rpg if i wanted a action rpg i would buy one and there are plenty out there done way better then this one. I almost forgot  i love rpg because of the fantastic story telling which should have a plot, and draw u into the story. IF there was a poll on who should be the blame Mike or whoever else that work on this awful of a title i blame everyone at bioware and EA the destroyer of companys both was at fault, there are alot of anger folks out there and i'm one of them totally not what i expect at all.
Most of all as a consumer i preorder a product that was misleading in everyway to bad i can't get my money back.
The game was short compare to most RPG games the story, eh what story? If i was Mike laidlaw i would go to the higher up and smack one of them for not giving him the proper time that was needed, but either way if he would of stuck to this utterly garbage then he definately need to retire.

[axl99]

I wasn't aware that Mike Laidlaw had determined any deadlines for DA2. If he has, someone is going to have to link me to an interview where he explicitly mentions having done so.

Usually Lead designers don't dictate deadlines, publishers do. Producers help make the schedules so that certain things get done on time according to said deadlines and in turn lead designers and the rest of the dev team work towards their milestones.

But besides that, I think we can all agree DA2 needed more production time. They were putting out builds all over the place for each major gaming convention for the past year. That's an insane pace to be working at, and obviously we've seen how that went.

At this point they're already well aware about the criticism aimed towards their product. It doesn't need reiterating. Chances are they're working through a giant list of bugs their QA team picked up, and as they're fixing a few, new ones pop up in their place. It's a bitter pill to swallow, but game development can sometimes turn out like that.

In the meantime that we're waiting on gameplay patches, I'll just go back to playing other games I've neglected on my Steam game list.

[kingjamesjr1]

imported_beer wrote...

Every corporation has the right to make money. A company doesn't exist purely to pleasure people or if it did, it would be a very different sort of company with a very different product.

You may have a vision for the direction the dragon age universe was supposed to take. They disagreed and took it somewhere else. The ONLY determinant of who was wrong and who was right that counts is pure profit. They have to eat, sleep, feed their families and cannot exist on "good will" of a small microcosm of the gaming community.

They may lose buyers, and I may not agree with their direction but I am never ever going to begrudge them the right to make the game that they want, and that will make their company prosperous.

I will express my disagreement politely, but the choice is theirs.

And it is ridiculous to ask for someone to be fired.

You have  good a valid point but to rob us as consumers well how do u rate that and what i mean by that is the ones who faithfully bought this game preorder? Once u got it to ur pc was utterly garbage. Well for one u can't get ur money back  so the next best thing is to bash the company who sold you this crap and everyone has every right to do it. Furthermore, i don't have any problems with them making money but to  place a product that was unfinish on the market like that deserve bashing period.

Let's not get into direction if i had a dream or prediction!  I hope this team stay far far far away from dragon age 3 but i'm
way ahead of myself. That's crazy when they want people opinion about a game they knew was going to divide the community some folks say they love it  some say it's heading in the right direction, to me and this is my reason i spit on company that uses a good name of a good game then make  sequel that has nothing to do with the first! If that what mike or bioware as a whole wanted to do they should have went with a different name altogether but to call it dragon age 2 is a smack to my face now i have a game i will never play into my collection of dusty old games the coulda woulda been great. If they continue to make unfinished product and everyone keep accepting it guess what i predict that alot companys going to take note and say well hell if bioware and ea can get away with it so can we, this crazy that i see alot comments saying it was a great game and why some of the people complaining about it but Hell what do i know i'm just a guy who works hard and play hard and flows of cash to waste on bs product that claims one button does great things lmao. 

P.s Drop the damn prices on these games and you'll get less of the complaints my opinion and it just that my opinion. This is getting out of control with some of the bs product  that starting to come from these companys.

[Pyrate_d]

Yeah, I don't see how you can really blame a single person for DA2. I don't know how they come up with deadlines. I'm sure Bioware and EA both have input. Some group of people definitely screwed up, but it doesn't make sense to blame a single person.

I think they've received a lot of negative feedback, and are taking it rather well. Even review sites are bringing up common issues in interviews. Of course Bioware isn't going to say "we made a bad game," but hopefully they'll know better than to recycle the same handful of areas for an entire game. Issues like that are mentioned in most reasonable reviews.

[Spaceboy Zero]

YohkoOhno wrote...

I've seen nothing to suggest ML is doing a bad job.

Have you not played this really rushed game? Actually you may have a point it's pretty good for how much it was rushed. That being said. I think the big baddy here is EA. I just don't think bioware was given the proper amount of time to do an epic rpg.

[Ronin2006]

axl99 wrote...

I wasn't aware that Mike Laidlaw had determined any deadlines for DA2. If he has, someone is going to have to link me to an interview where he explicitly mentions having done so.

Usually Lead designers don't dictate deadlines, publishers do. Producers help make the schedules so that certain things get done on time according to said deadlines and in turn lead designers and the rest of the dev team work towards their milestones.

But besides that, I think we can all agree DA2 needed more production time. They were putting out builds all over the place for each major gaming convention for the past year. That's an insane pace to be working at, and obviously we've seen how that went.

At this point they're already well aware about the criticism aimed towards their product. It doesn't need reiterating. Chances are they're working through a giant list of bugs their QA team picked up, and as they're fixing a few, new ones pop up in their place. It's a bitter pill to swallow, but game development can sometimes turn out like that.

In the meantime that we're waiting on gameplay patches, I'll just go back to playing other games I've neglected on my Steam game list.

Of course Mike Laidlaw does not determine the deadline for this game.  However, Mike Laidlaw as far as we can tell, was well aware of that deadline and what was expected of him and his team within that said deadline.  What he produced within this time frame was something that has received very mixed responses and a significant part of Bioware's fanbase has expressed disappointment at the direction he and his team has chosen to take within this deadline.  [note: People who continue to dismiss the negative responses as being nothing more than a vocal minority are perhaps being a little bit naive.  While this forum represents only a small part of the fanbase, a greater sample pool that includes metacritic, youtube, amazon etc. still suggests that a lot of customers are unhappy.  (and yes a lot of customers are also happy, but this still represents a very mixed response)]

While the deadline may have been harsh or unfair, it was Mike Laidlaw's job to ensure that what was produced within that timeframe would satisfy customers and ultimately bring in a certain number of sales.  While the sales of the game cannot really be assessed until much later, what we can determine is that what he created within a time frame that he would have known about for a long time, has annoyed a lot of Bioware customers.  No successful business should seek to alienate such a significant part of their customer base.  It may be harsh that he only had a short time to complete the game design, but ultimately it was his job to design the game within that time frame.  Just because you have a tough job, doesn't mean you should be praised for trying hard, but not quite completing it.

Modifié par Ronin2006, 29 mars 2011 - 05:03 .

[zyxe]

Lilacs wrote...

axl99 wrote...

"I wasn't aware that Mike Laidlaw had determined any deadlines for DA2. If he has, someone is going to have to link me to an interview where he explicitly mentions having done so.

Usually Lead designers don't dictate deadlines, publishers do. Producers help make the schedules so that certain things get done on time according to said deadlines and in turn lead designers and the rest of the dev team work towards their milestones.

But besides that, I think we can all agree DA2 needed more production time. They were putting out builds all over the place for each major gaming convention for the past year. That's an insane pace to be working at, and obviously we've seen how that went.

At this point they're already well aware about the criticism aimed towards their product. It doesn't need reiterating. Chances are they're working through a giant list of bugs their QA team picked up, and as they're fixing a few, new ones pop up in their place. It's a bitter pill to swallow, but game development can sometimes turn out like that.... "

^THIS!
You express my exact sentiment!

the hole in this argument is that, while he may not have set any deadline, he should have known WHAT the deadline was, and should have planned accordingly. if you know you have limited time, for whatever reason--not under your control and all that--then you shouldn't expect to overhaul the entire thing, you need to do more of an incremental design and pick what you can change and do well on, not take on so much that you can't do most of it correctly.

y'know, i think there were some great ideas in this game, my real problem is that the execution just didn't convey what the team must have been thinking. again, if this was due to the time crunch, they should have bit off what they could chew, because now it has done their vision a complete disservice, and possibly an irreparable one.
just not worth it.