219 réponses à ce sujet

[ZombiePowered]

The DRM still isn't a big deal. It's quite reasonable, actually. People should have to buy the game if they play it. The fact that the OP interprets it as being "treated like a suspected criminal" is ridiculous. They're just authorizing your game, and it takes barely any time. If people are seriously offended by this, it's only because they are actively looking for reasons to smear EA/Bioware/DA2, and there are far more legitimate reasons to criticize all parties than this.

[Horus Blackheart]

I'm not saying the drm in DA2 was that harsh Zombiepowered. I was simply stating that Morroian's counter argument on the point was inaccurate.

[Elite Midget]

Didn't you know?

EA runs the show now and they don't mind screwing the Old if it gets the New coming.

[ScotGaymer]

I think from a PR standpoint the date check DRM was a mistake; simply because the release date in various countries were diff so it was kinda pointless to prevent ppl playing who had later release dates but who got their delivery preorder a day or so early.

if it had been a worldwide release date i coulda understood cos then ur preventing the leakage of information about the game/plot in order to sustain sales.
But doing that when having needlessly staggerred release dates makes no sense at all.

It wasnt intrusive or anything. I didnt like how Bioware/EA swore blind that such checks didnt exist on DA2; and then it clearly did.
Like a lot of things wi DA2, Bioware said one thing and the reality was very different.

[Cutlass Jack]

Horus Blackheart wrote...

Um dao has a basic disk check Morroian not a mandatory server handshake (the fact it happens once is irrelevant) Your statement is just plain inaccurate.

It does if you want to use any DLC with it. As the game loved to remind me every time I tried to load before it finished checking.

[Horus Blackheart]

Cutlass Jack i'm aware of the dlc server checks but really if you baught the bioware points in the first place you prolly have a consistent net conection. I was talking about the retail game. Nice try though

[Shatterkiss]

Cybermortis wrote...

Projected figures for DA2 compared to DAO over six months are given here; http://www.huliq.com...ceed-45-million

DAO is predicted to have had 3 million sales in the first six months, with DA2 having been predicted to get 3.25 million in six months.

If DA2 keeps dropping down the chart I somehow doubt it will do that well.

Yeah, that projection was posted on 2011-03-07, so it looks like it's just a guess.

[Zeevico]

I'm fine with a 2 year dev cycle and its consequences, but...
(a) The graphics in DAO were more or less fine. Why spend time redoing them so much, ground up?
( The same goes with inventory screens.
© And tactics screens.
(d) Faces/Armor/Etc: the graphics were okay by me.

My point is, if you have this short dev cycle, use the philosophy--if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Some parts of DAO weren't, in my view, "broke"--graphics, inventory screens and UI among them. Of course the overall stats provided in DA2 (your total attack score and what it means, for example) were great. If anything more info about the core mechanics of the game would have been welcome--how much physical force in a given hit of X damage, for instance, or in the use of a iven talent (x8 is good, but what is the core value?).

Perhaps in the scheme of things these are small complaints. But graphically DAO seems about as good as DA2. Why go to the effort of changing the graphics if you weren't going to improve them?

[Cutlass Jack]

Horus Blackheart wrote...

Cutlass Jack i'm aware of the dlc server checks but really if you baught the bioware points in the first place you prolly have a consistent net conection. I was talking about the retail game. Nice try though

Is there anyone who would buy this game, has a computer that can run it, but doesn't have a good enough net connection for a few seconds once per week? DA2 does not require you to be logged in continually.

So not sure where you're headed with that arguement.

[nisallik]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Horus Blackheart wrote...

Cutlass Jack i'm aware of the dlc server checks but really if you baught the bioware points in the first place you prolly have a consistent net conection. I was talking about the retail game. Nice try though

Is there anyone who would buy this game, has a computer that can run it, but doesn't have a good enough net connection for a few seconds once per week? DA2 does not require you to be logged in continually.

So not sure where you're headed with that arguement.

Oh, but you have to remember... People seem to be capped at 10 Megs per month, just logging in once a week would take half their internet useage!

[blacqout]

Personally, i think the BioWare/EA partnership is a great one.

I believe Mr Laidlaw explained why The Exiled Prince had to be released as downloadable content - something to do with a shorter rating period for DLC - and the Black Emporium seems to be their way of enticing consumers into purchasing new copies of the game. Which is perfectly reasonable.

The little things, such as the staff of Parthalan, are neat promotions and worked in building hype in the months prior to release.

If the DLC is down to EA involvement, then it's a great thing. The base content of ME2, DA:O and DAII is all easily in surplus of 40 hours. That is to say they are very full games.

I'm all for a quality developer expanding an already full game with quality additional content, and am not sure why you wouldn't be.

[Horus Blackheart]

You can have all the great addons lined up you want but if the core game is subpar none of that matters as the impression is already made. Then all the great planed content gets shelfed because of low sales, and then thay concentrate on churning out what will make money over quality to recoupe investments. in short we all lose

[DragonAddict]

Excellent post Ronin.........well said.

Modifié par DragonAddict, 02 avril 2011 - 02:30 .

[Alozaps]

Yeah, I agree with pretty much everything the OP has said.  My biggest gripe with this whole thing is that for the most part Bioware didn't refine, tweak, polish, improve or build upon DA:O, which I believe would have been the key to making a worthy successor to Origins. 

They could have built upon DA:O's combat by improving a few animations while still maintaining the gritty realism that made DA:O so unique (none of the fast-paced idiotic acrobacy with rogue teleportation crap in DA2), as well as removing and improving some talents/spells that were glitched or otherwise useless. 

I'm not that concerned about the UI as I think it's okay, although it was probably unnecessary and a waste of time for Bioware to do a complete overhaul of it. 

They should have kept DA:O's style of graphics while optimizing performance; DA:O's graphics looked real but there were a lot of glitches associated with them (clipping, flickering, etc.) - DA2 could have improved upon this, but instead Bioware did an overhaul and went with the cartoon-style graphics, which I believe was a mistake.  The graphical changes to the darkspawn and elves look horrible in my opinion, specifically the darkspawn, and they just made me *facepalm* with a "what were they thinking?" moment.  They've been babied up.  DA2 just doesn't look as real as Origins - not even in the slightest.

Dragon Age: Origins was a unique game that stood out from the rest.  Why stray from this unique style and make a game that is like all the rest out there?

This, as well as a longer development cycle, would have done wonders for DA2.  Such a shame.  Wish I wouldn't have preordered, but I've learned my lesson. 

Modifié par Alozaps, 02 avril 2011 - 03:11 .

[Firky]

blacqout wrote...

I'm all for a quality developer expanding an already full game with quality additional content, and am not sure why you wouldn't be.

I agree.

I played DAII the first time through totally vanilla, with no Black Emporium and no Sebastian (not pirated or dodgy, review code.) I thought it felt like a complete game.

I subsequently bought a boxed copy and Sebastian for $7 - so I could play it again (and use the respec potions and Dog to learn NM - sheesh.) We're supporting a family of 4 on one full time income, with a few moneys incoming here and there, so we're pretty frugal. There are some other games I want at the moment, like Crysis 2 etc, but I'll probably wait until they are on sale.

What's the point? I think your analysis of this is all good, and shows an understanding of some of these issues, but you've missed the consumer in there. Consumers aren't all the same. I want to spend my spare $7 on Sebastian. My hubby would probably spend a spare $7 on something for his bike. My sons would spend it on lollies. Other people I know would buy a coffee and a cake.

I bought nearly all of the DLC for Origins because I wanted to. What didn't I want? A stoopid chastity belt for Zevran, so I didn't buy it. I also didn't buy Golems because I was busy at the time, and a little disenchanted by whatever came before it - what was that again?

The original feedback is useful, but is it as useful as what consumers actually want to - and will - buy? Sure, I'll buy pretty much anything that attaches to DAII and catches my fancy - no chastity belts. I don't see refusing to buy something I want as some grand campaign against "the man." Presumably, they can judge with sales how many people are still buying it. Why would they change if sales are good? (PS. I know I'm just one tragic DA DLC hussy, but who knows if people will buy it or not, yet, until it comes out.)

[Ariella]

Zeevico wrote...

I'm fine with a 2 year dev cycle and its consequences, but...
(a) The graphics in DAO were more or less fine. Why spend time redoing them so much, ground up?
( The same goes with inventory screens.
© And tactics screens.
(d) Faces/Armor/Etc: the graphics were okay by me.

Actually tactics is much better now if only for one addtion: dead status.

The reason for the redesign in graphics was one of the major feedback pieces that Bioware got was that DAO looked too generic and too washed out colorwise. Thus the redesign on the art.

In fact a lot of what they did mechanics wise was in response to fan feedback from DAO. Bioware's better at listening than most people give them credit for, especially right now.

[Ronin2006]

Morroian wrote...

Ronin2006 wrote...

I personally find a lot of the business decisions behind this game to be mind-boggling stupid and shortsighted.  I honestly believe that if they wanted to make a profit from this series, and in the long term, then they are really going about it the wrong way.  If I was a shareholder in a company that is moving in the direction that EA/Bioware is heading, then I would sell my shares ASAP because companies that follow this kind of business strategy tend not to last.

A lot of your points are actually irrelevant to Bioware being bought by EA.

Ronin2006 wrote...



[*]Mike Laidlaw dismissing some of the concerns of disillusioned DA O fans.  Honestly, no business wants to alienate it's core/existing customers.  Some of the things that have been stated are not going to endear him to people who have been loyal customers of Bioware.  (this is regardless of whether he is right or not, the fact is a lot of the DA O fans felt that he has criticised them personally by failing to really acknowledge their concerns and complaints in interviews)

People have overreacted to Mike interviews. ANyone who expects a developer to criticise their game a few weeks after release is living in fantasyland.

Ronin2006 wrote...



[*]The use of DLC at launch for an arguably incomplete game.  Many people (myself included) felt as though a big part of the "core" game was missing 

Many people would be wrong. Sebastian is clearly extraneous to the core game. Nothing is missing.

Ronin2006 wrote...



[*] and that it was designed in part to sell more DLC. 

Bioware were moving in a dlc direction since before the EA takeover.

Ronin2006 wrote...



[*]Short development cycle.  I am assuming that EA wanted to capitalise on the success of DA O, and wanted to sell DA 2 while the first game was still in the minds of gamers around the world. 

I agree it needed more development time or resources.

Ronin2006 wrote...



[*]"If you push a button, something awesome has to happen."  - This has been mentioned so many times, so I don't really want to say too much on it.  But it does seem as though they wanted to produce a more simple action-oriented experience in the combat.  Unfortunately, if the action only requires the simple press of a button, it is generally insulting to the intelligence of the customer, and if they catch on to that feeling, it is generally pretty bad for the company. 

Combat could be just as tactical as DAO if you wanted it to be.

Ronin2006 wrote...



[*]DRM (or whatever that weird verification thing was).  Now this only really applies to the PC gamers, but honestly, nothing in my mind could be more shortsighted from a commercial perspective.  The people who are really inconvenienced and effectively taxed and treated like criminals for this game are ultimately the legitimate paying customers.  The fact is, that if I *really* wanted to pirate this game, I would, and I wouldn't encounter any of the stupid DRM.  So why should I, having decided to buy a legitimate copy of the game in good faith, be treated like a suspected criminal?  Have more faith in your customers! 

The DRM is more mild than DAO and more mild than most major releases, they cannot be criticised on this front.

Thanks for your points, I want to address each of them, but getting under each quote with a text box is a little too time consuming for me personally, but I've tried to make my responses as easy to read as possible.

Anyway:

• "A lot of your points are actually irrelevant to Bioware being bought by EA."  - Actually, if you read my thread topic you will see that I actually more or less state that a lot of the blame for many of these business decisions have gone to EA and I'm personally not convinced that we, the consumers, can be certain who has made many of these decisions.  This is why the thread topic explicitly places EA and Bioware into one group known as EA/Bioware, because it is the corporate entity as a whole that is responsible.  Whether it's the parent company or the subsidiary, the fact is somewhere within this larger corporate entity these decisions have been made and that is what I am discussing.
  
• "People have overreacted to Mike interviews. ANyone who expects a developer to criticise their game a few weeks after release is living in fantasyland."  - I wholeheartedly understand that Mike Laidlaw, nor anyone for that matter, should criticise their own creation shortly after release, particularly as they are still very much trying to sell it.  What I believe however, is that he could have done this a lot more diplomatically and intelligently.  By almost ignoring or dismissing any of the criticism there is a lack of respect and courtesy to the fans who are disappointed and have genuine issues with the game.  Many longtime fans have expressed some degree of irritation by this, and even though others like it, it would be wrong to just dismiss the unhappy fans in such a manner. For example, from a PR standpoint he could state something along the lines of "While I understand many people disliked some of the changes and we are currently addressing them, we believe that we have created a rather unique and thrilling new gameplay experience and an excellent game with a fantastic story.  However, we as a company will always consider fan feedback so that any subsequent releases will continue to be an improvement on the previous game."  - This is just an example, but I'm sure people wouldn't have been as irritated if he had stated something along these lines.
  
• "Many people would be wrong. Sebastian is clearly extraneous to the core game. Nothing is missing.
  "  - While this is quite subjective, I can state that for me personally I felt that the game was lacking something.  Many others have expressed a similar view, and just because you say otherwise doesn't quite make them "wrong".  That is a terribly pretentious way of viewing your own opinions.
  
• "Combat could be just as tactical as DAO if you wanted it to be."  - I'd be very happy if you, or someone could show me this, it may in fact make me enjoy this game just a little more.  Because for me personally, the harder difficulties seem almost wholly reliant on kiting and other less "tactical" approaches.  Anyway, the discussion of tactics misses the point a little as well.  There were other parts of the game that meant a greater reliance on visceral impact went into the combat mechanics rather than a more subdued and "mature" combat presentation.  In some ways the over-reliance on "exploding" enemies and OTT animations as a result of a single button were part of what many people felt was an insult to their intelligence.
  
• "The DRM is more mild than DAO and more mild than most major releases, they cannot be criticised on this front."  -  Firstly, whether the DRM is more mild than in DAO is debatable. DAO used a simple disk check: http://www.destructo...us-146344.phtml and for me personally, I'd consider a disk check to be more mild than an online authentication.   From a personal perspective, AVG blocked my online authentication, and closing AVG was insufficient.  I had to actually create an exception to the program for the installation folder and the disk drive, after reinstalling the game before it started to work.  Hardly something ideal for a legitimate retail purchase.  Further, many DA 2 defenders state that the game should be assessed on it's own merits as an individual standalone game, and if we are to do that here, then it doesn't matter what other DRM is contained in major releases, it is still a pain and a nuisance to legitimate paying customers.  I am more than confident that it hardly deters real piracy of these games.  I'm sure I've read it somewhere, and if I have the time I will try to dig up some articles on the ineffectiveness of DRM in preventing piracy then I will.

Modifié par Ronin2006, 02 avril 2011 - 02:08 .

[ScotGaymer]

Ronin...

While I largely agree with most of what you have been saying, blaming Bioware/EA for AVG being a pain in the backside of a program and regularily causes more problems for users than it solves is a bit daft forgive me for sayin.

I used to have AVG and it literally wrecked my computer. It ran a anti virus scan said it found a trojan; i had it set to automatically deal wi viruses. And it proceeded to destroy my OS installation by deleting Windows critical files.

You cant blame Bioware for AVG being horrible. Delete it and install another program, live Avast Anti Virus or something.

[neppakyo]

Ariella wrote...

Zeevico wrote...

I'm fine with a 2 year dev cycle and its consequences, but...
(a) The graphics in DAO were more or less fine. Why spend time redoing them so much, ground up?
( The same goes with inventory screens.
© And tactics screens.
(d) Faces/Armor/Etc: the graphics were okay by me.

Actually tactics is much better now if only for one addtion: dead status.

The reason for the redesign in graphics was one of the major feedback pieces that Bioware got was that DAO looked too generic and too washed out colorwise. Thus the redesign on the art.

In fact a lot of what they did mechanics wise was in response to fan feedback from DAO. Bioware's better at listening than most people give them credit for, especially right now.

Heh combat improved? Debateable. Seems like they went to the extreme opposite in response to DA:O combat.
like "Lets take meth, it'll be FAST, oh, and add mind numbing waves and waves of enemies that appear out of THIN air weeee, squeee herp derp"

My opinion. Just sayin'

[Ronin2006]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

Ronin...

While I largely agree with most of what you have been saying, blaming Bioware/EA for AVG being a pain in the backside of a program and regularily causes more problems for users than it solves is a bit daft forgive me for sayin.

I used to have AVG and it literally wrecked my computer. It ran a anti virus scan said it found a trojan; i had it set to automatically deal wi viruses. And it proceeded to destroy my OS installation by deleting Windows critical files.

You cant blame Bioware for AVG being horrible. Delete it and install another program, live Avast Anti Virus or something.

Hmm, I guess AVG is a nightmare, though I've never had anything as bad as you've just described.  I've gotten rid of it anyway, regardless of what happened with this game.  So yes, maybe it's more AVG's fault than EA/Bioware.

From a personal viewpoint, I still much prefer disk checks to an online authentication.  Sometimes I buy games when travelling and like to put them on my laptop, and don't always have an internet connection.  It's a nuisance.

My point is really though, that DRM is not really a useful or necessary means of piracy prevention, and it can and does cause some headaches for people who buy games legitimately.  At the end of the day, is it really any harder to pirate a game if the legitimate copies have DRM?  In my opinion no, and the only way I'm ever going to be subject to DRM is by buying the game legitimately and to me that is stupid.

[Ronin2006]

neppakyo wrote...

Ariella wrote...

Zeevico wrote...

I'm fine with a 2 year dev cycle and its consequences, but...
(a) The graphics in DAO were more or less fine. Why spend time redoing them so much, ground up?
( The same goes with inventory screens.
© And tactics screens.
(d) Faces/Armor/Etc: the graphics were okay by me.

Actually tactics is much better now if only for one addtion: dead status.

The reason for the redesign in graphics was one of the major feedback pieces that Bioware got was that DAO looked too generic and too washed out colorwise. Thus the redesign on the art.

In fact a lot of what they did mechanics wise was in response to fan feedback from DAO. Bioware's better at listening than most people give them credit for, especially right now.

Heh combat improved? Debateable. Seems like they went to the extreme opposite in response to DA:O combat.
like "Lets take meth, it'll be FAST, oh, and add mind numbing waves and waves of enemies that appear out of THIN air weeee, squeee herp derp"

My opinion. Just sayin'

Hmm... haven't taken any illicit substances since high school, but you've just given me an idea.... Maybe there is hope for DA 2 after all?

Modifié par Ronin2006, 02 avril 2011 - 03:02 .

[neppakyo]

Ronin2006 wrote...

Hmm... haven't taken any illicit substances since high school, but you've just given me an idea.... Maybe there is hope for DA 2 after all?

haha. "DA2, it'll make you take drugs" I see market potential there lol

[MrTijger]

Ronin2006 wrote...

My point is really though, that DRM is not really a useful or necessary means of piracy prevention, and it can and does cause some headaches for people who buy games legitimately.  At the end of the day, is it really any harder to pirate a game if the legitimate copies have DRM?  In my opinion no, and the only way I'm ever going to be subject to DRM is by buying the game legitimately and to me that is stupid.

Again you show a large lack of knowledge and understanding, DRM is not implemented to make piracy impossible, its implemented as a barrier and to keep honest people honest.

Perhaps you should inform yourself before spouting off on a subject like this, especially since you clearly have no idea how this fits or does not fit into the business side of gaming. I'll even help you and suggest you start with this: http://www.tweakguid...m/Piracy_8.html

[Ronin2006]

MrTijger wrote...

Ronin2006 wrote...

My point is really though, that DRM is not really a useful or necessary means of piracy prevention, and it can and does cause some headaches for people who buy games legitimately.  At the end of the day, is it really any harder to pirate a game if the legitimate copies have DRM?  In my opinion no, and the only way I'm ever going to be subject to DRM is by buying the game legitimately and to me that is stupid.

Again you show a large lack of knowledge and understanding, DRM is not implemented to make piracy impossible, its implemented as a barrier and to keep honest people honest.

Perhaps you should inform yourself before spouting off on a subject like this, especially since you clearly have no idea how this fits or does not fit into the business side of gaming. I'll even help you and suggest you start with this: http://www.tweakguid...m/Piracy_8.html

At least this time you have actually addressed my concerns directly (rather than me personally) and I respect that, and perhaps you will get a more constructive and fair response this time.

Anyway, I'm fully aware that DRM is a way of keeping "honest people honest" as you put it, afterall, the part is more or less implied by what DRM stands for.  But there's also a matter of logic and extrapolation.  Why would a company want to ensure that their "customers" are being "honest"?  Because they don't want the digital rights of their products to go to people who have not bought the game legitimately and who are not trying to access the product legitimately, and so they implement these checks on the product.  If there's some other reason, please inform me, because as far as I can see, this still means that they are addressing the piracy issue with DRM.  It's not quite a direct method like copyright protection, but it is still an objective that they have with DRM.

I know there's a definite distinction, but I think you're nitpicking at me a little just to make a point.  The real issue is how it can potentially encumber the very people who have actually paid money for the "rights" to the game by placing extra barriers to obtain those rights.  It is as far as I can tell an indirect means of piracy prevention that is not as overt as copyright protection.  Once again, if you see another purpose to it, please point it out.  (Yes, I understand the keeping "honest people honest" point, but why would they want to keep people honest? - It's a broader question)

Anyway, what irritates me is that in order to access the "rights" to a game, and to show my "honesty", I no longer have to just purchase it at the shop in good faith.  No, instead, I now have to show that what I just bought is a legitimate copy via an online activation that (sometimes, but I know that in this instance it doesn't) keeps something on your computer permanently.  Then, to put the boot in further, I then sometimes (like in Starcraft 2, but it's getting a bit beside the issue) have to keep activating my game online.  While I concede that the DRM in DA 2 wasn't the worst that there's ever been, I certainly didn't appreciate having to show my "honesty" when all things considered, people who were much less "honest" don't have to encounter this at all.

Modifié par Ronin2006, 02 avril 2011 - 04:22 .

[Scottish90000]

MrTijger wrote...

Ronin2006 wrote...

My point is really though, that DRM is not really a useful or necessary means of piracy prevention, and it can and does cause some headaches for people who buy games legitimately.  At the end of the day, is it really any harder to pirate a game if the legitimate copies have DRM?  In my opinion no, and the only way I'm ever going to be subject to DRM is by buying the game legitimately and to me that is stupid.

Again you show a large lack of knowledge and understanding, DRM is not implemented to make piracy impossible, its implemented as a barrier and to keep honest people honest.

Perhaps you should inform yourself before spouting off on a subject like this, especially since you clearly have no idea how this fits or does not fit into the business side of gaming. I'll even help you and suggest you start with this: http://www.tweakguid...m/Piracy_8.html

I know this is an exercise in futility, but I will still ask you to please explain the logic of how DRM keeps honest people honest. Maybe I'm ignorant (and I'm sure you will jump at the chance to tell me so), but it seems to me that it punishes the honest by giving them more obtrusive hoops to jump through just to play the game, and makes them more likely to look at a "pirate" and say, "Well he doesn't have to deal with this crap, why don't I do like he does?"

But if he's honest, he wont do that. So honest people actually stay honest DESPITE DRM.