518 réponses à ce sujet

[Thibbledorf26]

Companies have a right to make money, but customers have a right to buy a quality product that does what it was supposed to do, in exchange for their hard earned money. Creating a low-quality game to make money off a reputation (whether or not you agree that is happening) is unethical. It is not good for business in the long run either. Pretty soon customers will get the point and stop buying the product, if this happens. And it won't be easy for Bioware to morph into making ultra-popular mainstream games, there are companies that have been doing that for longer, and frankly, better, than Bioware can do.

Sometimes it is better to stick to a profitable niche, rather than fighting over a larger pie that has a lot of people lining up to eat it.

That is just my opinion, I am not attempting to give a large and successful company financial advice.

[axl99]

zyxe wrote...
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.

In game development, it's a cold hard truth that NOTHING ever goes to plan. 

And so what if he knew what the deadline was and had planned accordingly, he isn't the only person working towards a deadline.  The thing is, the whole team picked out things that were feasible in the time they had. The issue I find here is project scope, it's a common problem all studios have.  Duke Nukem Forever by far is the most guilty of them all.

There will be times that certain ideas and assets just won't work no matter what the artists and designers do to fix the issue, so they get tossed, costing valuable time and effort. It's not like they're doing it on purpose.

The DA2 team already bit off more than they can chew in other words. The art team in particular already went nuts with the amount of stuff they had to make. There was A LOT of stuff. Too bad the camera's pointing 3/4 down most of the time for us to miss a lot of the good detail above and around our characters.  

They're aware that even though they've tried to tighten as many things as they could, there's still so much they could've gone back and refined. They've been working on this project for several months, over and over. Chances are they're practically slapping their foreheads every time a reviewer pointed out a glaring flaw they likely didn't have time to finish. The last thing they need is more grief, because they get enough of it from themselves and their superiors.

Placing the blame of game execution on one person and telling them they should be fired is just plain wrong. It might fly in places like Japan, but look at what happened to their RPG scene. *shrug*

----

On another semi related note:

Has anyone here complained about the sheer amount of asset and level reuse in Assassin's Creed Brotherhood? No? Must've been the insane level design that usually keeps players who aren't looking for things to nitpick from noticing anything reused. Animations, DLC assets, buildings, characters, even NPC banter was lifted from the previous game. Of course that is on top of some new stuff they made just for AC:Brotherhood.

Don't get me started on the story. It's driven completely by semi historical events - which while compelling on their own, the overall pacing and characters do absolutely nothing for me. And the ending made me feel like I've been trolled for the past 20-30 hours I've been playing it. The only reason why I bothered playing is because I'm a sucker for pretty things. I'm an artist. I'm attracted to pretty looking things by default.

That game's credit list is practically 10 times the size of DA2, tons and tons of people worked over it. Even if it's a thoroughly polished game considering it was released roughly a year apart from AC2, the lack of scope in the storytelling and unrefined gameplay variation leaves much to be desired. As a result, it's still a half-baked game to me.

DA2 could have benefited form the sheer amount of talent and manpower behind AC:B. But since not all games and companies are made equal, people just had to make do. There's plenty of room for improvement, but at the very least, art-wise they've made a step in the right direction.

Modifié par axl99, 29 mars 2011 - 05:45 .

[Pyrate_d]

Rushing out a buggy game with a tiny game-world in 18 months is a step in the right direction? I won't get started on the storytelling, because for some ridiculous reason a good amount of people seem willing to accept the total lack of exposition.

It's hard to imagine how DA2 realistically could have been more disappointing.

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

axl99 wrote...

Has anyone here complained about the sheer amount of asset and level reuse in Assassin's Creed Brotherhood? No? Must've been the insane level design that usually keeps players who aren't looking for things to nitpick from noticing anything reused. Animations, DLC assets, buildings, characters, even NPC banter was lifted from the previous game. Of course that is on top of some new stuff they made just for AC:Brotherhood.

Don't get me started on the story. It's driven completely by semi historical events - which while compelling on their own, the overall pacing and characters do absolutely nothing for me. And the ending made me feel like I've been trolled for the past 20-30 hours I've been playing it. The only reason why I bothered playing is because I'm a sucker for pretty things. I'm an artist. I'm attracted to pretty looking things by default.

That game's credit list is practically 10 times the size of DA2, tons and tons of people worked over it. Even if it's a thoroughly polished game considering it was released roughly a year apart from AC2, the lack of scope in the storytelling and unrefined gameplay variation leaves much to be desired. As a result, it's still a half-baked game to me.

DA2 could have benefited form the sheer amount of talent and manpower behind AC:B. But since not all games and companies are made equal, people just had to make do. There's plenty of room for improvement, but at the very least, art-wise they've made a step in the right direction.

At least Rome felt alive.

[Dagiz]

Why go after just Mike Laidlaw? Why not go after Mark Darrah? Or Matthew Goldmoon? Or Alain Baxter or Adriana Lopez? Hell let's all get Bioware just to fold for such a crappy game!!! I mean Bioware did hire Mike, so they must be at fault and should fold for such an egregious decision. Mark? He's got to go as the Producer of this tripe. Matthew art direction was crap so therefore he needs to go. Alain and Adriana - sorry as development directors you guys did a horrible job so there fore you have to go as well. We deserve to have a gaming company that makes games based on each of our individual tastes and preferences. We deserve to have people who will make the game exactly the way all few thousand voices on these forums want it to be.
/sarcasm

Really? Is this what this world has come down to? Seriously who the hell in their right mind would ever want to make a game knowing full well that if someone doesn't like they can anonymously attack you over the internet. Okay, so you didn't like the game. Alright...there are plenty of others that did (myself included) and having experience in developing software for a major company for ALL their clients I can tell say this...deadlines...are not really deadlines. They are so effin "flexible" (that's the word I heard most often) that its ridiculous. Oh, the bosses all of sudden want this changed?? But I've already bug checked for the code this way and to change it now means a whole month of changes...oh and the deadline has been moved up. Yeah...for those complaining about what he should have known and what he should have done or what the team should have done...stick it. Unless you have ever worked in the game industry or have worked for a MAJOR software design company with MILLIONS of customers...you can't talk.

Was this what I thought when first announced? no. Did it suck? in my opinion no. Could there have been fixes...sure. Just like in every single game that has been developed, there could always be fixes. I have yet to play a game that required no patches. And I will not hold my breath until that happens.

[axl99]

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

At least Rome felt alive.

Well of course it is. Chalk that up to insane level design and several sweatshops worth of 3d artists.

DA2 obvoiusly didn't have that kind of manpower.

Modifié par axl99, 29 mars 2011 - 05:44 .

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

axl99 wrote...

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

At least Rome felt alive.

Well of course it is. Chalk that up to insane level design and several sweatshops worth of 3d artists.

DA2 obvoiusly didn't have that kind of manpower.

I'll have to see numbers first. If they didn't have time they shouldn't have put the product out and charged $60 for it.

[neppakyo]

Uh, didn't CD Projekt Red have a lot less people when they did The Witcher, using the old Aurora Engine (NWN1/2 etc) Yet there's more variety and people than DA2. Just sayin'..

[Gjefflin]

Look....I know this has been said to death but I LOVED DAO.  It had everything I loved in a very detailed in-depth RPG.  It was touted as a spiritual successor to the Baldur's Gate series which is my favorite RPG series of all time.  You command a party, you get to choose everyone's spells/armor/weapons and how they level up, very distinct dungeons and cities (no duplicated maps) and a full storyline that immerses you in tragedy, love, betrayal, fortune, hope and history.  DA:O gave us that.

I am the head of a online RPG group that has been around since the RPG PC game "Stonekeep" in 1995.  DA2...has been a huge let down for not only me but for my entire group.  Everything has been completely changed!  I won't rehash what has been changed because it has been talked to death but this game shows none of the love and hard work that Bioware put into the original DA game.  We (My RPG group) were all very excited that this was going to become a franchise and we've all played through all of the storylines and finished the game numerous times as different races and backgrounds with different endings.  We are no longer excited about the DA franchise and this in all honesty saddens me.

If "dumbing down" is the direction it's going to go moving forward, we will just move on.  And don't get me wrong...we LOVE Bioware.  We've loved ALL of the Bioware games (Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, KOTOR, Mass Effect) and this is the FIRST time that we've thought...."WTF???  What happened??!!  When did they get this lazy!?"

We are all praying to god that this is not a sign of things to come and are hoping that their next incarnation of DA will bring back all of the things we love. 

[axl99]

http://www.cdprojekt.com/company.asp?id=g_history  - Well according to that link CD Projeckt Red started production on The Witcher in 2003, and had it released in 2007. That's much longer than the time it took to create DA2. Rumor has it that DA2 had a 8 month production cycle, but it hasn't been confirmed. But still much longer than roughly over a year of game production.

- And a nice vid of the credit list in Assassin's Creed Brotherhood. Feel free to compare to the one in DA2.

[neppakyo]

So, according to that, the witcher started with only 15 people? o.O (Did I read that right?)

[Pacifien]

neppakyo wrote...

So, according to that, the witcher started with only 15 people? o.O (Did I read that right?)

Either that or they added 15 people to the existing development team, which is how I read it.

"In September we moved our development team to a new office in Warsaw and found new team members (15 in total)
in order to intensify our efforts on 'The Witcher...'"

[neppakyo]

Ok, makes more sense. I really should put my glasses on

[MrTijger]

neppakyo wrote...

Uh, didn't CD Projekt Red have a lot less people when they did The Witcher, using the old Aurora Engine (NWN1/2 etc) Yet there's more variety and people than DA2. Just sayin'..

5 years to make the game then another year (EE) to make it, you know, playable when you dont have to build an engine? Yah, I can see how much faster they worked.

Oh yeah...and you do know that the Metacritic score for The Witcher is (marginally) lower than the score for DA 2, right?

Modifié par MrTijger, 29 mars 2011 - 07:00 .

[EDarkness]

scpulley wrote...

i agree with this for the most part. It's hard to blame one person, but he's the face to Bioware's reaction to all of this basically. If he is saying something, whether it's the general feeling of his whole team or just him personally, for better or worse, he's going to get blamed for whatever reactions result from him speaking. That's the nature of PR and marketing. So, even though he may completely disagree with his own words privately, that doesn't matter. If he doesn't like that people are pinning his comments on him and reacting in a negative way, he shouldn't be taking up the helm of this game. From what I've read, he's mostly been neutral to negative about the people critizing the game and if I was working at EA or Bioware, I'd be telling him to keep the negative comments about what he thinks of the people trashing DA 2 to himself. Every time he's tried to address the negative comments directly, he's just made it worse as he comes off as either blindingly loyal to his vision or the team's vision or just full of himself and his 'innovative' game.

I agree with this.  He is representing the company when he gives interviews and so people will (and should) hold him responsible.  It's pretty obvious that he and his team had a vision of what they wanted to do, but in my opinion, he went after the wrong thing.  Luckily, they get another try, and I hope he scraps this current direction or at least takes a good hard look at what fans of Dragon Age want.  It's obviously not this kind of game.  Congrats to him for sticking to his guns for this fight, but there is nothing wrong with admitting a mistake and trying to correct it.  Anyway, if he's going to representing the company in this way, then he has to take the good with the bad.  That's just the nature of the game.

[Ronin2006]

Dagiz wrote...

Really? Is this what this world has come down to? Seriously who the hell in their right mind would ever want to make a game knowing full well that if someone doesn't like they can anonymously attack you over the internet. Okay, so you didn't like the game. Alright...there are plenty of others that did (myself included) and having experience in developing software for a major company for ALL their clients I can tell say this...deadlines...are not really deadlines. They are so effin "flexible" (that's the word I heard most often) that its ridiculous. Oh, the bosses all of sudden want this changed?? But I've already bug checked for the code this way and to change it now means a whole month of changes...oh and the deadline has been moved up. Yeah...for those complaining about what he should have known and what he should have done or what the team should have done...stick it. Unless you have ever worked in the game industry or have worked for a MAJOR software design company with MILLIONS of customers...you can't talk.

Was this what I thought when first announced? no. Did it suck? in my opinion no. Could there have been fixes...sure. Just like in every single game that has been developed, there could always be fixes. I have yet to play a game that required no patches. And I will not hold my breath until that happens.

I cut out the rest of your post because this part right here is some of the most blatantly idiotic garbage I have ever read, and considering that this comes from an internet forum, there is some strong competition in the idiocy department, but you sir have topped them all. 

Now, I'm going to try to dissect this mess of a post of yours and try to make a bit of sense of it.

Firstly, it's fantastic you like the game, you can state your reasons and your opinion is still valid, and people should respect it.  But just because you like the game, doesn't mean that a lot of others don't, and it doesn't mean that your opinion is any more valid than theirs.  The game has certainly received some strong criticism since it's release, and for you to simply criticise someone else's opinion simply because you don't share it, demonstrates a lack of respect for difference of opinon.  That's fine, but I don't have much respect for people who are so ignorgant of others and their opinions.

Now, regarding the part about who in their right mind would ever make a game considering that they could get criticised on the internet for it, I hope you realise that this is all part of customer feedback and freedom of speech.  In an open marketplace where people can exchange money for goods and services, there is always going to be an expectation that those goods and services represent a fair trade for their money.  People who then don't receive what they believe was a fair exchange for their money can usually do one of the following:

a. return the good or service, or
b. voice their disapproval of the exchange to other people and the other party in the exchange, or
c. both a and b, or
d. do nothing. 

In this particular instance, many of the people who purchased Dragon Age 2 are unable to return this game and receive a refund.  This only means that they will lean further in favour of b and voice their disapproval even more.  Don't like it?  That's fine, but people have a right to express that they didn't like something, particularly when they have paid their own money for it.  This is how a free market with freedom of speech works.  Not everybody is going to agree with you and you need to be respectful of that.  Just like I am respectful of the fact other's don't always share my views, I don't mind so long as you don't cross any boundaries of social decency or legality.  Ultimately, if people cannot accept criticism in their profession for a job that was considered by many to be subpar, then they should leave that said profession.  (Note: I am not actually saying that Mike Laidlaw himself cannot handle criticism for his work)

The "stick it" part and the ensuing rant was absolutely ridiculous.  You are insinuating that this game and the people behind it can only be criticised by others in a similar position and profession.  This is absurd.  This would mean that people can only criticise others if they are in the same line of work and under the same pressures as themselves.  You should bear this in mind next time you dislike a product that you buy.  By your reasoning, you wouldn't be able to complain about your next watch, pants, shoes, t-shirt, television etc or any other product you dislike and felt wasn't up-to-standard, simply because you wouldn't be able to understand the kind of pressures that manufacturer was under.  Once again, plainly absurd and ridiculous.  I don't think I need to say any more on this.

Lastly, of course software bugs occur all the time.  But there's a degree of acceptability here.  A few glitches here and there is one thing, but ones that detract from your overall gameplay experience are unacceptable in a fully fledged retail purchase.  To add to this, no fixes or patches have yet been released that have addressed some of these bugs.  Also, many of the complaints about this game move beyond just the simple bugs and glitches, and are centered around the game design itself.  After all, this thread is about the lead designer and the direction that the series has taken under him, and many people are very unhappy with that direction.  I note that you are happy with this direction, but many others, (legitimately so) are not.

Modifié par Ronin2006, 29 mars 2011 - 09:33 .

[neppakyo]

Ronin2006 wrote...

Dagiz wrote...

Really? Is this what this world has come down to? Seriously who the hell in their right mind would ever want to make a game knowing full well that if someone doesn't like they can anonymously attack you over the internet. Okay, so you didn't like the game. Alright...there are plenty of others that did (myself included) and having experience in developing software for a major company for ALL their clients I can tell say this...deadlines...are not really deadlines. They are so effin "flexible" (that's the word I heard most often) that its ridiculous. Oh, the bosses all of sudden want this changed?? But I've already bug checked for the code this way and to change it now means a whole month of changes...oh and the deadline has been moved up. Yeah...for those complaining about what he should have known and what he should have done or what the team should have done...stick it. Unless you have ever worked in the game industry or have worked for a MAJOR software design company with MILLIONS of customers...you can't talk.

Was this what I thought when first announced? no. Did it suck? in my opinion no. Could there have been fixes...sure. Just like in every single game that has been developed, there could always be fixes. I have yet to play a game that required no patches. And I will not hold my breath until that happens.

I cut out the rest of your post because this part right here is some of the most blatantly idiotic garbage I have ever read, and considering that this comes from an internet forum, there is some strong competition in the idiocy department, but you sir have topped them all. 

Now, I'm going to try to dissect this mess of a post of yours and try to make a bit of sense of it.

Firstly, it's fantastic you like the game, you can state your reasons and your opinion is still valid, and people should respect it.  But just because you like the game, doesn't mean that a lot of others don't, and it doesn't mean that your opinion is any more valid than theirs.  The game has certainly received some strong criticism since it's release, and for you to simply criticise someone else's opinion simply because you don't share it, demonstrates a lack of respect for difference of opinon.  That's fine, but I don't have much respect for people who are so ignorgant of others and their opinions.

Now, regarding the part about who in their right mind would ever make a game considering that they could get criticised on the internet for it, I hope you realise that this is all part of customer feedback and freedom of speech.  In an open marketplace where people can exchange money for goods and services, there is always going to be an expectation that those goods and services represent a fair trade for their money.  People who then don't receive what they believe was a fair exchange for their money can usually do one of the following:

a. return the good or service, or
b. voice their disapproval of the exchange to other people and the other party in the exchange, or
c. both a and b, or
d. do nothing. 

In this particular instance, many of the people who purchased Dragon Age 2 are unable to return this game and receive a refund.  This only means that they will lean further in favour of b and voice their disapproval even more.  Don't like it?  That's fine, but people have a right to express that they didn't like something, particularly when they have paid their own money for it.  This is how a free market with freedom of speech works.  Not everybody is going to agree with you and you need to be respectful of that.  Just like I am respectful of the fact other's don't always share my views, I don't mind so long as you don't cross any boundaries of social decency or legality.  Ultimately, if people cannot accept criticism in their profession for a job that was considered by many to be subpar, then they should leave that said profession.  (Note: I am not actually saying that Mike Laidlaw himself cannot handle criticism for his work)

The "stick it" part and the ensuing rant was absolutely ridiculous.  You are insinuating that this game and the people behind it can only be criticised by others in a similar position and profession.  This is absurd.  This would mean that people can only criticise others if they are in the same line of work and under the same pressures as themselves.  You should bear this in mind next time you dislike a product that you buy.  By your reasoning, you wouldn't be able to complain about your next watch, pants, shoes, t-shirt, television etc or any other product you dislike and felt wasn't up-to-standard, simply because you wouldn't be able to understand the kind of pressures that manufacturer was under.  Once again, plainly absurd and ridiculous.  I don't think I need to say any more on this.

Lastly, of course software bugs occur all the time.  But there's a degree of acceptability here.  A few glitches here and there is one thing, but ones that detract from your overall gameplay experience are unacceptable in a fully fledged retail purchase.  To add to this, no fixes or patches have yet been released that have addressed some of these bugs.  Also, many of the complaints about this game move beyond just the simple bugs and glitches, and are centered around the game design itself.  After all, this thread is about the lead designer and the direction that the series has taken under him, and many people are very unhappy with that direction.  I note that you are happy with this direction, but many others, (legitimately so) are not.

You, sir, are just plain amazing. *bow* I have no words to express the depth and logical manner in which you expressed this response. Very well put together, and I do agree.

[Saboera]

Omika_Pearl wrote...

Missed what?  What did I miss?  What evidence of your disgruntled nerd majority is there, beyond internet slamming and screaming?

If there's a mass demonstration of 200,000 gamer activists at ComiCon this year to protest Mike Laidlaw's existence as a human being, I'll start to take you jackasses seriously.

Hell, if even TWO of you showed up to attempt a real, human conversation with either him or other Bioware employees about this very thread, I'd be flabbergasted.

As it stands, you're all hot air and fluff.  Venting into an indifferent digital space.

And to answer an earlier assumption, I am not an EA/BW employee, but I've been around.  I know what kind of heartache and hard work goes into making most games, films, books, and other things that enable otherwise paralyzed, ambition-less people to pretend, vicariously, that they are for just a few moments, someone or something beyond themselves.

The point, which you missed again btw, congratulation i didn't think it was possible when it was layed down before you twice.

I'm losing patience here and frankly have no desire to go further down in a discussion with someone whos sole argumentation is based around insulting people on the internet. Funny how you blast people for criticising a game from behind their computer screen (calling them nerds) yet all you did so far is insult people from behind your screen for disagreeing with you.

Guess what, the internet is valid medium to express yourself since the mid 90s and gained major popularity and signification since the turn of the century, welcome to the present where people can be fired or even sued for comments they make on facebook. The internet is a valid place to discuss and share, if you don't wanna be part of it then do us a favor and go away. Your fantasy world in which the only way to voice a complaint is to fly in other countries and disrupt events, which are unrelated in the first place, is your way of protesting, then have fun while the rest of us living the real world use the means we have at our disposition that are quick and effective.

I've been polite or tried to, I never asked for Mike to be fired, simply explained that he is still responsible for a lot of the complaints and that you, acting like a child going LALALALA, won't make the complaints you disagree with go away or have any less weight because they are on the forums or voiced on internet.

Calling you an EA/Bioware employee is frankly stupid, even if it wasn't my post i'm not even sure why you even bother to clarify that in the first place.

You've been around? Good for you, I've been too and I know what goes in games, movies, books and any bloody creative media there is and participated in some of them. One thing in common in those is that the people working in them know how to deal and receive critics, and it's not by throwing a tantrum or plugging your ears every time somebody says something bad about your work. It's shocking i know but they usually even welcome them.

Modifié par Saboera, 29 mars 2011 - 01:45 .

[John Epler]

And as this thread has degenerated into personal attacks, we're done.

Couple of bans handed out. If you can't be civil, then don't post. Simple as that.