219 réponses à ce sujet

[MrTijger]

Ronin2006 wrote...

Goodbye, and hopefully I don't have to waste my time with your nonsense again.

Likewise, but I suspect that's an idle hope, I assume that once this thread disappears you'll come up with another long list of DA2's failures like the previous one you opened.

Btw, are you this much of a pompous *ss in real life too?

[Ronin2006]

Rockpopple wrote...

Somehow, I think they'll be alright.

Probably.  Many large businesses do survive despite horrible decision-making.  Also, if Bioware is a wholly owned subsidiary of EA, then they are backed by one of the largest companies in the industry, so can probably afford to make a lot of stupid mistakes (if they choose to).  But still, no business should make these decisions if they aren't profitable in the long term and it certainly isn't wise.

[MrTijger]

Ronin2006 wrote...


Seeing however, as this is MrTijger, I assume that they will say that what I typed was just opinion and not worth anything and what they say is correct despite having no real content.

Not just pompous but also the passive-agressive type, I see

[Ronin2006]

MrTijger wrote...

Ronin2006 wrote...

Goodbye, and hopefully I don't have to waste my time with your nonsense again.

Btw, are you this much of a pompous *ss in real life too?

I reported this because I haven't actually stooped to the level of a personal insult.  If you want to come and discuss the merits of the game from a business standpoint then you are welcome to do so.

[Rockpopple]

Ronin2006 wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

Somehow, I think they'll be alright.

Probably.  Many large businesses do survive despite horrible decision-making.  Also, if Bioware is a wholly owned subsidiary of EA, then they are backed by one of the largest companies in the industry, so can probably afford to make a lot of stupid mistakes (if they choose to).  But still, no business should make these decisions if they aren't profitable in the long term and it certainly isn't wise.

In your opinion.

[Maconbar]

Regarding items 2 and 6 in the OP.

2. Is the Exile Prince Day 1 DLC significantly different from the Shale DLC in DA:O? I don't think so.

6. Is the DRM in DA:2 more or less onerous than the DRM in DA:O? It seems less intrusive to me.

[AkiKishi]

Maconbar wrote...

Regarding items 2 and 6 in the OP.

2. Is the Exile Prince Day 1 DLC significantly different from the Shale DLC in DA:O? I don't think so.

6. Is the DRM in DA:2 more or less onerous than the DRM in DA:O? It seems less intrusive to me.

Stone Prisoner was unlocked with the normal edition of the game not collectors.

I thought they were under a court order not to use it? And that's why it's considered a big thing.

[Ronin2006]

Rockpopple wrote...

Ronin2006 wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

Somehow, I think they'll be alright.

Probably.  Many large businesses do survive despite horrible decision-making.  Also, if Bioware is a wholly owned subsidiary of EA, then they are backed by one of the largest companies in the industry, so can probably afford to make a lot of stupid mistakes (if they choose to).  But still, no business should make these decisions if they aren't profitable in the long term and it certainly isn't wise.

In your opinion.

Which part of this is opinion?  The part that I insinuated the game suffered from horrible decision-making in terms of business?  If so, please explain why you believe otherwise.  Just because someone has an opinion doesn't make it wrong, but you certainly don't make a good case for yourself when you don't provide anything for an opposing viewpoint.

Also, the rest is quite objective really, and shouldn't really be too controversial.  Think about it:

Businesses can make horrible decisions and still survive.  Ever heard of "new coke"???  Larger businesses too, like Coca Cola can survive despite horrible decisions (and EA is a large company in terms of the videogame industry) because they have a greater range of products and assets to shake off a single failure. However, if they made those decisions continuously (or in the case of Coke continued to sell new coke without reintroducing 'old' coke) they would eventually lose profitability in the long term.

[MrTijger]

Ronin2006 wrote...

I reported this because I haven't actually stooped to the level of a personal insult.  If you want to come and discuss the merits of the game from a business standpoint then you are welcome to do so.

*laughs* No, I dont discuss with people who have made up their mind and use lies to substantiate their argument, I thought I'd made that clear earlier already?

[Shirosaki17]

The question is: Are consumers going to be taken in again when they **** all over DA2 when promoting DA3? I'm sure they will tell us that they agree with all of us about DA2's flaws all while telling us how DA3 addresses all of those flaws and fixes them. Even if it doesn't they will say it does just so people buy it on day 1. It's not even about making great games anymore, it's about great marketing that gets people to blindly buy their product.

[AkiKishi]

Shirosaki17 wrote...

The question is: Are consumers going to be taken in again when they **** all over DA2 when promoting DA3? I'm sure they will tell us that they agree with all of us about DA2's flaws all while telling us how DA3 addresses all of those flaws and fixes them. Even if it doesn't they will say it does just so people buy it on day 1. It's not even about making great games anymore, it's about great marketing that gets people to blindly buy their product.

After the stunt they pulled with console auto attack I really hope not. Pre-order DLC is made for suckering people.

[Ronin2006]

Maconbar wrote...

Regarding items 2 and 6 in the OP.

2. Is the Exile Prince Day 1 DLC significantly different from the Shale DLC in DA:O? I don't think so.

6. Is the DRM in DA:2 more or less onerous than the DRM in DA:O? It seems less intrusive to me.

2.  Hmm... didn't think about the Shale DLC.  I guess the difference is that the Shale DLC went to everyone who purchased a new version of the game  (including standard editions, not just the signature edition), and this makes a difference to anyone who just bought the standard edition.  The standard edition certainly doesn't feel as much a  'complete' game this time around.  But, I'm not defending Shale either.  While I loved the character, making her DLC wasn't great then either, it's just worse when the game feels even more incomplete because of the lack of Sebastien, whom I believe was a more 'important' character in terms of overall game balance.

6.  Can you elaborate on the DRM in DAO?  I honestly don't remember it.  Anyway, I don't think DRM is necessary in either game.  It is hardly an effective form of piracy control, and really only hinders the game for the genuine buyers out there.

Modifié par Ronin2006, 01 avril 2011 - 05:28 .

[cljqnsnyc]

OP........

Very well stated and echos my feelings exactly! Thanks for posting. I'm hoping it's a lesson of what NOT to do next time around.

Modifié par cljqnsnyc, 01 avril 2011 - 06:15 .

[MrTijger]

BobSmith101 wrote...

After the stunt they pulled with console auto attack I really hope not. Pre-order DLC is made for suckering people.

I was quite happy with what I got when I pre-ordered DAO and ME 2, I was even happy with the extras with DA 2. Since I would have bought those games anyway I feel I got something extra for no extra money but YMMV.

For the life of me I cannot see it as a bad business decision, though, but some people hate DLC's on principle which is fine but it's a staple now of the gaming industry.

[Ronin2006]

MrTijger wrote...

Ronin2006 wrote...

I reported this because I haven't actually stooped to the level of a personal insult.  If you want to come and discuss the merits of the game from a business standpoint then you are welcome to do so.

*laughs* No, I dont discuss with people who have made up their mind and use lies to substantiate their argument, I thought I'd made that clear earlier already?

Why haven't you left this thread yet?  You seemed to imply you would.  Once again you have contributed nothing substantial to it.

[Shirosaki17]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Shirosaki17 wrote...

The question is: Are consumers going to be taken in again when they **** all over DA2 when promoting DA3? I'm sure they will tell us that they agree with all of us about DA2's flaws all while telling us how DA3 addresses all of those flaws and fixes them. Even if it doesn't they will say it does just so people buy it on day 1. It's not even about making great games anymore, it's about great marketing that gets people to blindly buy their product.

After the stunt they pulled with console auto attack I really hope not. Pre-order DLC is made for suckering people. 

Yeah. It's all about manipulation. People who were unimpressed with the game and have pretty much given the same negative feedback will be told by devs and marketers, "Hey we agree with you and understand people didn't like DA2 for these reasons, but in DA3 we've addressed and fixed those specific issues." People will likely be so impressed with them admitting DA2 was bad that they will give DA3 a chance. It happens with every sequel these days, regardless of whether it's true or not. Crysis 2 was suppose to look better than Crysis 1 on PC and with their new engine and technology, but everyone says it doesn't because it was developed for consoles that are 6 years old.

Modifié par Shirosaki17, 01 avril 2011 - 05:31 .

[Cybermortis]

Pity that their marketing/PR departments have made such a mess of things after the event, and therefore are unlikely to be taken at face value again.

Of course we shouldn't have taken them at their word the first time around.


The OP was stating his opinion as to why DA2 may have been a bad idea in the long term for Bioware. He is not alone in thinking this - I have too, although he put things better than I did. Even though some people loved the game, it is fairly clear that for what-ever reason many did not or at least found it seriously lacking to the point of being wary of Bioware games in future.
Or put another way DA2 has damaged Biowares reputation overall.

This isn't just an opinion I pulled out of the air. Rather it is something I started to feel browsing though the endless comments on the game posted on this very board. Excluding the fanatical haters and lovers, everyone seems to have issues with the game (not including bugs, which have *ahem* bugged many) and issues with Bioware for releasing it in its current state. Worrying if these issues are going to cause problems for BW later on is reasonable, regardless of if you loved or hated the game.

[BeljoraDien]

Seems like it was a bad idea in the short term as well. According to vgchartz, DA:O had more total sales by the 3rd week than DA2 currently does. I imagine that gap is going to grow ever wider.

[Maconbar]

Ronin2006 wrote...

Maconbar wrote...

Regarding items 2 and 6 in the OP.

2. Is the Exile Prince Day 1 DLC significantly different from the Shale DLC in DA:O? I don't think so.

6. Is the DRM in DA:2 more or less onerous than the DRM in DA:O? It seems less intrusive to me.

2.  Hmm... didn't think about the Shale DLC.  I guess the difference is that the Shale DLC went to everyone who purchased a new version of the game  (including standard editions, not just the signature edition), and this makes a difference to anyone who just bought the standard edition.  The standard edition certainly doesn't feel as much a  'complete' game this time around.  But, I'm not defending Shale either.  While I loved the character, making her DLC wasn't great then either, it's just worse when the game feels even more incomplete because of the lack of Sebastien, whom I believe was a more 'important' character in terms of overall game balance.

6.  Can you elaborate on the DRM in DAO?  I honestly don't remember it.  Anyway, I don't think DRM is necessary in either game.  It is hardly an effective form of piracy control, and really only hinders the game for the genuine buyers out there.

Disk is the computer to play for DA:O. With DA:2 I can install and then put the disk away.

[Rockpopple]

Ronin2006 wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

Ronin2006 wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

Somehow, I think they'll be alright.

Probably.  Many large businesses do survive despite horrible decision-making.  Also, if Bioware is a wholly owned subsidiary of EA, then they are backed by one of the largest companies in the industry, so can probably afford to make a lot of stupid mistakes (if they choose to).  But still, no business should make these decisions if they aren't profitable in the long term and it certainly isn't wise.

In your opinion.

Which part of this is opinion? *snippity-snip*

Just about all of it.

I thought about going to your OP, quoting it and remarking on every single point you made and how it was all your opinion. Things like how you believe "appealing to a larger market" was a mistake, or how Laidlaw alienated all of DA's fans, or how.... well now I'm forgetting the rest because it all just melded into this giant soup of opinion I've seen countless times from other people who did not like DA II.

I thought about it. Then I thought: why bother? It wouldn't convince you or anyone else. By this point in time, people are firmly settled in their camps and not likely to budge any way.

So yeah, they're opinions, whether you like to believe everything that you state is cold-hard indisputable fact or not. That's all that I'll say about that.

Modifié par Rockpopple, 01 avril 2011 - 05:37 .

[AkiKishi]

Well unless it's a last throw of the dice type thing like Final Fantasy was. You tend to lose more than you gain with quick cash grabs.

[Shirosaki17]

MrTijger wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

After the stunt they pulled with console auto attack I really hope not. Pre-order DLC is made for suckering people.

I was quite happy with what I got when I pre-ordered DAO and ME 2, I was even happy with the extras with DA 2. Since I would have bought those games anyway I feel I got something extra for no extra money but YMMV.

For the life of me I cannot see it as a bad business decision, though, but some people hate DLC's on principle which is fine but it's a staple now of the gaming industry.

They're bad for consumers because we get less content because they can hold back content and charge people for it later on. It's the same with patching games. If they couldn't patch games they'd have to spend more on Q&A and release games with less bugs. Now they can cut Q&A and release buggy games and if they don't sell well, they don't get patched. Consumers lose. Like the DLC with DA:O, there was suppose to be 1 to 2 years of DLC right? Well because it wasn't selling as well as they wanted, they scrapped it and didn't patch the game and moved on to DA2. People are still complaining about bugs in DA:O and their expansions. Consumers lose again. They don't even have to patch all the bugs out of games anymore they just patch the game for the first few months of release and then after that no support. Look at ME2, 2 patches still has quite a few bugs that were never patched.

[Cybermortis]

@Ronin2006 The DRM issue was, as I recall, from Mass Effect not DAO. The way it worked was to basically install spyware on your PC that limited the number of times you could install the software.
This had an impact on ME sales, as people were understandably not happy at these limitations on what was effectively their property.
The DRM was ruled as illegal, and ordered to be removed from the later copies of the game while a program was released that disabled it on the older versions.

This at least is what I can recall off the top of my head.

[AkiKishi]

MrTijger wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

After the stunt they pulled with console auto attack I really hope not. Pre-order DLC is made for suckering people.

I was quite happy with what I got when I pre-ordered DAO and ME 2, I was even happy with the extras with DA 2. Since I would have bought those games anyway I feel I got something extra for no extra money but YMMV.

For the life of me I cannot see it as a bad business decision, though, but some people hate DLC's on principle which is fine but it's a staple now of the gaming industry.

Not telling people that there was no auto attack until  the day before US release was unforgivable. They clearly knew before hand and even covered it up by saying the versions people were seeing on yourtube were not the real thing.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 01 avril 2011 - 05:40 .

[DamnThoseDisplayNames]

That was good reading, thanks for your analysis on the matter, Ronin2006.