255 réponses à ce sujet

[Master Shiori]

MrTijger wrote...

Well, thank god Bioware has such talent as you that can evaluate the people working there without ever having set foot there or spoken to any of these people in person.

I'm sure they'll follow your directions to the letter.

The arrogance is un-f******-believable.

This pretty much.

Even if DA2 doesn't live up to DA:O in terms of sales, having the fans declare what should be done to "save" the franchise is arrogant beyond words.

None od us here know anything about people working at Bioware, so declaring who should be replaced or fired is both ridiculous and insulting to the person in question.

Bioware has been around for years. This wouldn't be the first time a game sold below expectation (proivided DA2 actualy does sell that bad. it's been out for only a month now), so I have no doubt they'll be able to take correct measures to adress the problem.

[Scottish90000]

DRAGOONLORDZ, HOW DARE YOU! HOW DARE YOU, SIR!

/sarcasm

I want to recap Dragoonlordz views for those that just glance at the thread title and immediately decide to get offended:

1) Dragoonlordz thinks Mike Laidlaw would be better off working on other projects (like Jade Empire 2) and not the Dragon Age series.

2) This is an opinion Dragoonlordz has, and it is based on:

A) The drop in quality from Dragon Age: Origins to Dragon Age 2. Again, this is an opinion,
but it is one many of us share.

The seemingly dismissive comments made by Laidlaw in interviews with Gamespot and
other websites/publications, in which he seems to fault the fanbase for their own outrage.

Of course none of us know just how many of Dragon Age 2's less than stellar features were really backed by this man. However, based on what we have to go on, namely the game itself and Laidlaw's interviews, Dragoonlordz and others are able to frame that with their views, draw conclusions, and share their opinions.

In order to have a real discussion on the issue, those of you who disagree should actually look to the game, the interviews, or other sources you have found, and use them to explain why you think Dragoonlordz' opinion isn't justified. In short, we could have an actual dialogue.

Instead, those of you that disagree with Dragoonlordz have expressed your feelings with a lot of personal attacks, calling Dragoonlordz an "armchair developer", saying she isn't qualified to come to her conclusions, and blasting her with mock outrage, frothing with discontent, that someone would DARE suggest that a Bioware employee isn't being properly utilized.

So please, if you disagree with Dragonlordz, state constructively why you disagree, and try and back it up with something you know instead of yelling about how nobody knows and how Dragoonlordz should be horsewhipped for coming to a conclusion based on her opinions of a game and various interviews.

[Rockpopple]

Hey, THIS thread again.

I love how the title of this thread tried to so hard to make it sound like it wasn't gonna be THIS thread again.

"Oh nono, it's a super serious discussion about super serious subjects."
I is curious.*clicks thread*
"Get rid of Mike Laidlaw! Button=awesome blah blah"
HAHAHAHA. Jaysus.

[MrTijger]

Autolycus wrote...

So you now admit that you are in fact just here to argue....

Interesting. And thanks.

So, eh...why do you post here? To admire the weather? Oh wait...didnt you argue something? By gosh, you did!

*shakes head* Oh, the humanity of it all....

[MrTijger]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Everyone here should probably ignore Tijger tbh in this thread specifically because he/she has done nothing but spout righteous indignation from the offset rather than contributing to the 'discusssion' with an open mind. He/she admits she comes here to argue which is exactly what she has done not discuss or debate.

And again....now who is trolling whom here exactly?

Oh and btw, do you know how you debate? With arguments. Do you know the difference between debate and argument? Look it up, you're in for a shock.

It's he, btw, well, it was a blast as per usual.

[Dragoonlordz]

Scottish90000 wrote...

DRAGOONLORDZ, HOW DARE YOU! HOW DARE YOU, SIR!

/sarcasm

I want to recap Dragoonlordz views for those that just glance at the thread title and immediately decide to get offended:

1) Dragoonlordz thinks Mike Laidlaw would be better off working on other projects (like Jade Empire 2) and not the Dragon Age series.

2) This is an opinion Dragoonlordz has, and it is based on:

A) The drop in quality from Dragon Age: Origins to Dragon Age 2. Again, this is an opinion,
but it is one many of us share.

The seemingly dismissive comments made by Laidlaw in interviews with Gamespot and
other websites/publications, in which he seems to fault the fanbase for their own outrage.

Of course none of us know just how many of Dragon Age 2's less than stellar features were really backed by this man. However, based on what we have to go on, namely the game itself and Laidlaw's interviews, Dragoonlordz and others are able to frame that with their views, draw conclusions, and share their opinions.

In order to have a real discussion on the issue, those of you who disagree should actually look to the game, the interviews, or other sources you have found, and use them to explain why you think Dragoonlordz' opinion isn't justified. In short, we could have an actual dialogue.

Instead, those of you that disagree with Dragoonlordz have expressed your feelings with a lot of personal attacks, calling Dragoonlordz an "armchair developer", saying she isn't qualified to come to her conclusions, and blasting her with mock outrage, frothing with discontent, that someone would DARE suggest that a Bioware employee isn't being properly utilized.

So please, if you disagree with Dragonlordz, state constructively why you disagree, and try and back it up with something you know instead of yelling about how nobody knows and how Dragoonlordz should be horsewhipped for coming to a conclusion based on her opinions of a game and various interviews.

Thank you, it does get some what tiresome having to repeat my points each time every new person joins the thread even though the thread politely asks them to read it before posting directly in the title.

It is nice to see some people in here read what it is that has been said before grabbing their pitchforks and torches. So you have my thanks.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Why should it aim for AAA when it's the only AAAA title around? Why make it worse by trying to emulate lame old games?

[MrTijger]

Scottish90000 wrote...

So please, if you disagree with Dragonlordz, state constructively why you disagree, and try and back it up with something you know instead of yelling about how nobody knows and how Dragoonlordz should be horsewhipped for coming to a conclusion based on her opinions of a game and various interviews.

So, basically, we need to prove a negative? Interesting proposition. How can you disprove something that doesnt exist except in someone's mind? Let me know when you have a clue how to do that, please?

[Dragoonlordz]

Rockpopple wrote...

Hey, THIS thread again.

I love how the title of this thread tried to so hard to make it sound like it wasn't gonna be THIS thread again.

"Oh nono, it's a super serious discussion about super serious subjects."
I is curious.*clicks thread*
"Get rid of Mike Laidlaw! Button=awesome blah blah"
HAHAHAHA. Jaysus.

You didn't even read the first post, please go back and do so. It's not asking anyone to be fired or attack his competency or ability, it's merely wondering if for the next title one which probably hasn't even started yet (so has no lead on it right now I believe) be switched with someone more in line with the original concepts of what dragon age was/is from the offset with DAO that created the fanbase to begin with. It was designed with a certain player in mind, Mike wanted a new direction which is why we got DA2 more as a test peice for different ideas and direction as an end result. It has been changed and not improved from the UI the combat, the graphics, the dialogue, how a story is told, time gaps, ninja spawns, vast amount of bugs, customisation, repeating maps and missing features promised from the start from the most basic idiology standpoint his veiws has been completley different to the first title one which made the name Dragon Age what it is. It's like saying Fight Night is an improvement on Streetfighter or vice versa, it isn't an improvement it's a change in direction.

Some of those aren't his fault at all but he is responsible for the direction of a title that is what a lead does. Watch, listen to his interviews, read his quotes he did not have the same intentions or ideas about what an RPG is compared to Brent in what DA was meant to be about and who is was for. Brents version/concept became triple A rated highly acclaimed and created a vast fanbase but if you watch and listen and read what is written then you see Mikes vision was completley different. I am of the opinion that for the next title one which probably right now has no lead yet that we have in place alead which carries forward the original concept and what created all this success with DA series to begin with.

It has already been admitted that DA2 was a title which purpose was to try out new things, by definition of new that is change and should of been tested on a new series or title not one that was built on success of a different mindset. I do not see an issue with discussing between like minded people if we would like to see a lead in taking the reins of DA3 who follows up on what made DA a success to begin with rather than using it as a trial and error series for different concepts.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 04 avril 2011 - 03:08 .

[Rockpopple]

I'm sorry, but your entire premise is flawed. Your premise is that

It has been changed and not improved from the UI the combat, the graphics, the dialogue, how a story is told, time gaps, ninja spawns, vast amount of bugs, customisation, repeating maps and missing features promised from the start.

Basically you're starting from the thought that Dragon Age II failed in basically every aspect of its gameplay and presentation.

That's laughable. I'm sorry, I don't mean to laugh, but it is. I can't take you seriously if you're starting from that position. I just can't.

Modifié par Rockpopple, 04 avril 2011 - 02:26 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Rockpopple wrote...

I'm sorry, but your entire premise is flawed. Your premise is that

It has been changed and not improved from the UI the combat, the graphics, the dialogue, how a story is told, time gaps, ninja spawns, vast amount of bugs, customisation, repeating maps and missing features promised from the start.

Basically you're starting from the thought that Dragon Age II failed in basically every aspect of its gameplay and presentation.

That's laughable. I'm sorry, I don't mean to laugh, but it is. I can't take you seriously if you're starting from that position. I just can't.

If you have to ask or make assumptions at this stage already then I know for fact you haven't actually read this thread before posting like the title asks you to. This very question I answered earlier in the thread. Seriously if your not even willing to take the effort to read what is being talked about then please don't post until you do. Go back to Start and do not collect $200.

[Rockpopple]

*sigh*. There's nothing you wrote in your OP that invalidates anything I've said here. If you really expect me to read 5 and a half pages of this thread before being informed enough to post... then wow.

Also, I never said you wanted to fire Laidlaw. I said you wanted to get rid of him (off the project), which in your OP is only exactly what you said.

Anyway, whatever. Just my .02. I'm done now.

[Dragoonlordz]

Rockpopple wrote...

If you really expect me to read 5 and a half pages of this thread before being informed enough to post... then wow.

Also, I never said you wanted to fire Laidlaw. I said you wanted to get rid of him (off the project), which in your OP is only exactly what you said.

Anyway, whatever. Just my .02. I'm done now.

Yes I do. To put it simply thats why I wrote it in the title asking people to do so.

That way I was hoping to get less mob mentality and jumping on the bandwagon in this thread.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 04 avril 2011 - 02:43 .

[Cyberstrike nTo]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

MrTijger wrote...

Well, thank god Bioware has such talent as you that can evaluate the people working there without ever having set foot there or spoken to any of these people in person.

I'm sure they'll follow your directions to the letter.

The arrogance is un-f******-believable.

You must be living under a rock buddy. If anyone's arrogant, it's that stubborn Mike Laidlaw. You don't have to work at Bioware, just look up the interviews with this guy, and you'll see why pretty much no one likes him after what he did to the game.

-Polite

Frankly I hope he stays for DA3 just to ****** crybabies like you off.

[AkiKishi]

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

MrTijger wrote...

Well, thank god Bioware has such talent as you that can evaluate the people working there without ever having set foot there or spoken to any of these people in person.

I'm sure they'll follow your directions to the letter.

The arrogance is un-f******-believable.

You must be living under a rock buddy. If anyone's arrogant, it's that stubborn Mike Laidlaw. You don't have to work at Bioware, just look up the interviews with this guy, and you'll see why pretty much no one likes him after what he did to the game.

-Polite

Frankly I hope he stays for DA3 just to ****** crybabies like you off.

That's a great reason to ruin an IP.

[Lux]

I think that Mike, as well as the rest of the team, know by now what went wrong. I agree that it was unfortunate the way they came out towards the previous game and towards "players that don't like change".

I liked the changes done to ME2. I've been playing games long enough to recognize appropriate changes to what's essentially a shooter with good RPG elements. The streamlining there was done with care and, perhaps, with proper budget and time allotted.

Not so with DA2. It's a bold but somewhat crude mixed bag which definitely alienated my RPG love of the series. Where was the immersion needed for role-playing? Why was I immediately placed into the action and expect to feel anything about characters I barely met? What's the point on the "exploding" endless waves, the instant teleport of enemies? This is not the making of a mature game. It's like a cartoon show making no attempt to be taken seriously. With this setting, then comes the companion interaction done in a serious and even more liberal tone than its predecessor. DA2 turned out to be a disjointed experiment. I found out that I missed being a role-player and nearly despised being a puppeteer.

Another feeling that I got with this game was: cash grab. If it wasn't, why put a "2" to what's essentially a remake with restrictions in time and budget? Was there really a need for this marketing ploy, given the limitations? BioWare here, IMO, failed to be honest as well as realistic.

My point being is this. In the end, I don't think that Mike and the team were given a fair chance to meet prior quality standards. Given the valuable feedback that's (hopefully) taken into consideration, I don't see why Mike shouldn't have another chance at it, as long as he (or another taking his lead) have the power (or the balls) to only green light release when it reaches prior BioWare standards. Otherwise they'll just keep falling behind and, given EA's history in such occasions, cease to exist.

[gingerbill]

MrTijger wrote...

Well, thank god Bioware has such talent as you that can evaluate the people working there without ever having set foot there or spoken to any of these people in person.

I'm sure they'll follow your directions to the letter.

The arrogance is un-f******-believable.

have to agree with this .

[Dragoonlordz]

gingerbill wrote...

MrTijger wrote...

Well, thank god Bioware has such talent as you that can evaluate the people working there without ever having set foot there or spoken to any of these people in person.

I'm sure they'll follow your directions to the letter.

The arrogance is un-f******-believable.

have to agree with this .

You do know the forum moderators and devs hate the whole "^This" argument a great deal. I agree with them if you haven't got an original thought in your mind and don't wish to state your own opinion as opposed to copy paste style of "^This" type posts then don't post at all.

JohnEpler wrote...

Everyone is allowed to have and share their own opinion. If your entire contribution is to jump into a thread and say 'Is this a joke?', or, even better, quote that post and add 'This.', then I'd strongly suggest not posting in the thread at all.

Have whatever opinion you want, but if you're only interested in dog-piling on those with differing opinions, then perhaps you should avoid posting.

[Marionetten]

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

Frankly I hope he stays for DA3 just to ****** crybabies like you off.

Yes, I'm sure that BioWare's goal is to ****** off their fanbase until they go out of business.

[Dragoonlordz]

Merkar wrote...

I think that Mike, as well as the rest of the team, know by now what went wrong. I agree that it was unfortunate the way they came out towards the previous game and towards "players that don't like change".

I liked the changes done to ME2. I've been playing games long enough to recognize appropriate changes to what's essentially a shooter with good RPG elements. The streamlining there was done with care and, perhaps, with proper budget and time allotted.

Not so with DA2. It's a bold but somewhat crude mixed bag which definitely alienated my RPG love of the series. Where was the immersion needed for role-playing? Why was I immediately placed into the action and expect to feel anything about characters I barely met? What's the point on the "exploding" endless waves, the instant teleport of enemies? This is not the making of a mature game. It's like a cartoon show making no attempt to be taken seriously. With this setting, then comes the companion interaction done in a serious and even more liberal tone than its predecessor. DA2 turned out to be a disjointed experiment. I found out that I missed being a role-player and nearly despised being a puppeteer.

Another feeling that I got with this game was: cash grab. If it wasn't, why put a "2" to what's essentially a remake with restrictions in time and budget? Was there really a need for this marketing ploy, given the limitations? BioWare here, IMO, failed to be honest as well as realistic.

My point being is this. In the end, I don't think that Mike and the team were given a fair chance to meet prior quality standards. Given the valuable feedback that's (hopefully) taken into consideration, I don't see why Mike shouldn't have another chance at it, as long as he (or another taking his lead) have the power (or the balls) to only green light release when it reaches prior BioWare standards. Otherwise they'll just keep falling behind and, given EA's history in such occasions, cease to exist.

Thanks for your input it's nice to see level headed discussion as opposed to a red hot poker up my bum from the fanatic's. I kind of think more along the lines of direction he wanted to take the series/(pre-exsisting title) rather than the time he took.

Such as most recently I mentioned http://social.biowar...19590/6#6928075 as a snapshot version of what I have been saying throughout the thread.

But I do appreciate it when open minded people are willing to discuss with me such things, so thanks.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 04 avril 2011 - 04:38 .

[Maverick827]

I believe Mike has already admitted to the reuse of maps being a poor aspect of the game. Since that is the game's only unarguable fault, I think he's well within his rights to argue in favor of the other so-called faults.

[Lyssar]

I don't know enough about Bioware's internal decisions or about Mike Laidlaw to judge if he should move to a different project or not, and I don't think it is my place. However, I do agree that experiments should be done on new game series/projects and not on existing ones. The risk of ruining expectations is simply too high. If DA2 would have been a start into a new series, I think it wouldn't have been much better received.

I hope that Bioware takes all the criticism very seriously and that DA3 will be less "awesome" and more RPG. I wish they would keep at least one series with more classic RPG elements, namely DA. They could create a new project which elaborates on action RPGs and attracts a new/different fan base. Maybe I would even like and play these games. However my preferences tend towards more classic RPGs, it's why I loved DA:O, and I would like the series to continue or better say return to that direction.

Now it's Bioware's turn to decide if they want to do that and how they are going to achieve it.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Marionetten wrote...

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

Frankly I hope he stays for DA3 just to ****** crybabies like you off.

Yes, I'm sure that BioWare's goal is to ****** off their fanbase until they go out of business.

Their fanbase isn't pissed off, just the "Remake Baldur's Gate Forever" crowd.  :D:D

[Rovay]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...
Their fanbase isn't pissed off, just the "Remake Baldur's Gate Forever" crowd.  :D:D

Which is usually pissed off.

Or maybe I just look at the wrong threads.

[Dragoonlordz]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Marionetten wrote...

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

Frankly I hope he stays for DA3 just to ****** crybabies like you off.

Yes, I'm sure that BioWare's goal is to ****** off their fanbase until they go out of business.

Their fanbase isn't pissed off, just the "Remake Baldur's Gate Forever" crowd.  :D:D

If your just here to troll the thread please leave.