667 réponses à ce sujet

[Obadiah]

Shatterkiss wrote...
...
It isn't just about making a profit if a game makes far less in profit than expected.  They said that they were looking to expand their customer base for the DA series and instead they shrunk it in half. 

Not to mention they have annoyed some of their existing player-base, and so will impact pre-order sales of the next DA game.

[Brockololly]

ejoslin wrote...

I hope DA2 is profitable enough that there is a DA3.

Something would have to go very wrong I'd think for there not be a DA3. When garbage games like Kane and Lynch or Army of Two get sequels, I think its safe to say that unless DA2 completely bombed or totally missed internal EA expectations, we'll definitely see a DA3. The big publishers are so terribly risk averse to any new IP that they'd rather milk a mediocre/underperforming one dry rather than ditch it and start something new.

The real question is how much time and resources go into a possible DA3 and what direction does BioWare go down?

Modifié par Brockololly, 24 avril 2011 - 07:49 .

[In Exile]

ejoslin wrote...

While it's true that extrapolation can be valid, this is not random sampling -- if it were random, of course you can extrapolate.  The problem is you're not taking numbers from population x, population y, and population z -- you're taking numbers from population x and assuming that y and z will do the same. 

The sampling in principle random (or rather, theoretically equivalent to an SRS of the sample) so long as there is no systemic factor that would encourage some gameplay style to turn of their tracking data.

Do you think there is a reason to suppose that there is a systemic bias in turning off (or on) the tracker?

Perhaps they will, but my gut tells me they won't.  Not that what my gut says matters much.  It's possible those numbers are insignificant.  But you cannot know that.  how can you possibly tell whether people are no longer playing the game as opposed to turning off data tracking?  There's not even adequate controls in this sample.

You can't, but like I said, that only matters if there's a reason to suspect that what you're getting is data versus error.

Beyond that, I think with DA:O, given that you had to authenticate DLC to play it, they could at least come up with a rough estimate of what users did disable and keep playing (supposing, of course, there isn't anything unique about the DLC user base).

It's all guesswork, but it's still a better system than what the company had, which is sit in a boardroom and speculate what people want. Now, you can in sit in a board, speculate about what people want, and speculate about what your tracking data shows.

I'd be more worried about this approach if I didn't think there's no substantive difference between the tracking data and no tracking data in terms of what the end game you're getting.

Another issue is we don't know what the data are being examined against. As an example (and I don't know number for any of this), say 50% of all people who are tracked do not make it past ostegar and they are tracking individually and it is somehow confirmed that they really are no longer playing. What does this actually tell
you? It really doesn't tell you much unless you're comparing it to other games and have points to compare.

This is why I happen to think the concern over data tracking is overstated. The data is 90% interpretation, but instead of entirely unfounded speculation you now have marginally more well-founded speculation.

Before you'd try a focus group (maybe); now you try a focus group and your data tracker.

They're still making it up as they go along.

ejoslin wrote...

I hope DA2 is profitable enough that
there is a DA3. And I hope they take what people seem to like about
both games and build upon them and make a fantastic game with an
engaging story.

I would be a very happy fangirl!

The only lesson, IMO, Bioware needs to learn is that the development time that EA wants to cut down won't allow them to make the sort of games their style demands. Bioware doesn't make great games. Combat, level-design, encounter planning... Bioware isn't good at the very general gameplay elements of a game.

What Bioware does well is cinematic presentation and storytelling, and that requires you get an engaging and varied story toghether. Especially when you move away from the open-ended RPG structure where you ask players to fill in the blanks themselves.

If DA2 had another year of development I think you'd see a lot of criticism about it go away.

Modifié par In Exile, 24 avril 2011 - 07:57 .

[In Exile]

Brockololly wrote...
Something would have to go very wrong I'd think for there not be a DA3. When garbage games like Kane and Lynch or Army of Two get sequels, I think its safe to say that unless DA2 completely bombed or totally missed internal EA expectations, we'll definitely see a DA3. The big publishers are so terribly risk averse to any new IP that they'd rather milk a mediocre/underperforming one dry rather than ditch it and start something new.

The real question is how much time and resources go into a possible DA3 and what direction does BioWare go down?

You have to ask whether or not the brand is toxic, though. Bioware burned a lot of goodwill just with the development of DA2. I don't think any of us expected the game we ended up with.

It's one thing for Bioware to recreate a lot of their ME series in DA2, and quite another to do it badly.

I think a real concern is whether or not you start seeing more gimmicks thrown in, and if there is a swing back toward Origins, how that would be done.

I look at Awakening and Dragon Age 2... and it's shocking how much they're the same game once you get past the art change and the dialogue systems.

[Sabriana]

In Exile wrote...
You have to ask whether or not the brand is toxic, though. Bioware burned a lot of goodwill just with the development of DA2. I don't think any of us expected the game we ended up with.

It's one thing for Bioware to recreate a lot of their ME series in DA2, and quite another to do it badly.
.
I think a real concern is whether or not you start seeing more gimmicks thrown in, and if there is a swing back toward Origins, how that would be done.

I look at Awakening and Dragon Age 2... and it's shocking how much they're the same game once you get past the art change and the dialogue systems.

True. They will have to make up their mind as to what direction they want to go. They will have to pick a route, because one half of this and one half of the other will not work. Especially when you try to cram action/h&s/anime/shooter into a RPG game. Neither one is appealing to either crowd.

Who knows, maybe they already have made up their minds, and it's up to them to act on it. If they fully go down the action/h&s/anime/shooter route, I'll be very sad, but at least there would be a clear cut end. I'll always be able to find my RPG fix elsewhere, but I don't want a 'little bit of this, little bit of that' game.

I just wonder how they would make the full turn to the mainstream with a fantasy IP. The CoD people aren't going to view swords and daggers as appealing to their style. I think. I'm not sure though. It might be possible. I know too little about that genre, I only dabble in it - mostly on my friends' computer.

Modifié par Sabriana, 24 avril 2011 - 08:08 .

[neppakyo]

LostScout wrote...

@ In Exile: The people who are most likely to play the game through are also the most likely to turn off data tracking, especially after you get a pop-up saying "unable to connect to Dragon Age servers" in the middle of a fight. You only have to log-in once to authenticate a DLC, after that you can play it offline to your hearts content, and you do not have to allow gameplay feedback in order to authenticate. The one DLC I bought, I logged in to authenticate, exited the game, turned off my internet connection and restarted the game.

I usually start it up, then log out and continue on.

[erynnar]

neppakyo wrote...

LostScout wrote...

@ In Exile: The people who are most likely to play the game through are also the most likely to turn off data tracking, especially after you get a pop-up saying "unable to connect to Dragon Age servers" in the middle of a fight. You only have to log-in once to authenticate a DLC, after that you can play it offline to your hearts content, and you do not have to allow gameplay feedback in order to authenticate. The one DLC I bought, I logged in to authenticate, exited the game, turned off my internet connection and restarted the game.

I usually start it up, then log out and continue on.

Same here. *waves at nep*

[erynnar]

Sabriana wrote...

In Exile wrote...
You have to ask whether or not the brand is toxic, though. Bioware burned a lot of goodwill just with the development of DA2. I don't think any of us expected the game we ended up with.

It's one thing for Bioware to recreate a lot of their ME series in DA2, and quite another to do it badly.
.
I think a real concern is whether or not you start seeing more gimmicks thrown in, and if there is a swing back toward Origins, how that would be done.

I look at Awakening and Dragon Age 2... and it's shocking how much they're the same game once you get past the art change and the dialogue systems.

True. They will have to make up their mind as to what direction they want to go. They will have to pick a route, because one half of this and one half of the other will not work. Especially when you try to cram action/h&s/anime/shooter into a RPG game. Neither one is appealing to either crowd.

Who knows, maybe they already have made up their minds, and it's up to them to act on it. If they fully go down the action/h&s/anime/shooter route, I'll be very sad, but at least there would be a clear cut end. I'll always be able to find my RPG fix elsewhere, but I don't want a 'little bit of this, little bit of that' game.

I just wonder how they would make the full turn to the mainstream with a fantasy IP. The CoD people aren't going to view swords and daggers as appealing to their style. I think. I'm not sure though. It might be possible. I know too little about that genre, I only dabble in it - mostly on my friends' computer.

And this^. And for the CoD, I am not as familiar either. Like you, I dabble on friends' home theater/play area.

[Yrkoon]

In Exile wrote...

It's all guesswork, but it's still a better system than what the company had, which is sit in a boardroom and speculate what people want. Now, you can in sit in a board, speculate about what people want, and speculate about what your tracking data shows.

I don't know  if I'm ready to give this  tracking data/metrics system even  that much credit.   What good is  any data  if it  influences the decision makers to go in the wrong direction? 

IMO   Starting off with nothing to go by is  a better  than,  say... starting off  with the wrong vision because you misinterpretted  some very vague data.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 24 avril 2011 - 08:25 .

[Sabriana]

Erynnar wrote...

And this^. And for the CoD, I am not as familiar either. Like you, I dabble on friends' home theater/play area.

Yeah, and I strongly suspect they only allow me to play with their toys, so that they can point and laugh themselves silly at my utter ineptitude,

[ejoslin]

In Exile wrote...

<<snip many interesting and valid arguments, but my post was WAY too big>>

I judiciously snipped your post to avoid unwieldiness.  ANYWAY, here goes...

Well again, this is not random data.  This is the data for people who actually own the game and who are uploading data -- though the reasons for the second is based on speculation.  When BW states, "X" number of people quit playing but you have no actual way of determining if they actually quit playing or if it was some other factor (turning off tracking data or not logging in at all), then there's an issue with the data to begin with and then when you take the flawed data and extrapolate it to populations which you cannot track, there are big issues.

If I had to guess, I'd say a larger than credited proportion of the population who play the game do not log in.  I know I had serious issues with servers so most of the time I just stayed logged out.  Plus not everyone has stable internet access, even when the servers are behaving.

That the sample is not random is a different issue and in fact may not be relevant as it is probably fair to say, if "X" population played HNM, then we can extrapolate that y and z did as well as they all fall under a larger population -- those of people who played Dragon Age.  

Then a second assumption is being made -- that somehow "X" is out of line with other games, especially those of the same genre.  The numbers thrown around are worthless without context.  

Anyway, since I have no clue of how they concantate and sort their data, this is all speculation on my part.

But then also, say the data IS accurate and they had proper controls, the question begs, do you make your next game for the people who didn't enjoy the first game, or for the people who did?

edit: I think I'm the darling of the TLDR crowd now!  I did MUCH snipping and hopefully it's more coherant now!

Second edit: fixed a horrid typo.

Modifié par ejoslin, 24 avril 2011 - 09:27 .

[In Exile]

LostScout wrote...

@ In Exile: The people who are most likely to play the game through are also the most likely to turn off data tracking, especially after you get a pop-up saying "unable to connect to Dragon Age servers" in the middle of a fight. You only have to log-in once to authenticate a DLC, after that you can play it offline to your hearts content, and you do not have to allow gameplay feedback in order to authenticate. The one DLC I bought, I logged in to authenticate, exited the game, turned off my internet connection and restarted the game.

That doesn't prevent data tracking. So long as you log on to the internet, you're tracked. You don't need to log in because they don't collect account information. It's in your EULA. You have to disable data tracking from the menu from DA:O.

Sabriana wrote...
True. They will have to make up their mind
as to what direction they want to go. They will have to pick a route,
because one half of this and one half of the other will not work.
Especially when you try to cram action/h&s/anime/shooter into a RPG
game. Neither one is appealing to either crowd.

That isn't the problem. The problem is choice and consequence. DA:O played like a pile of **** on the console and sold fine because of the game itself. It's choice, consequence, execution, atmosphere... Bioware skimped out on that and that's what hurt them in DA2, at least IMO.

Who knows, maybe
they already have made up their minds, and it's up to them to act on it.
If they fully go down the action/h&s/anime/shooter route, I'll be
very sad, but at least there would be a clear cut end. I'll always be
able to find my RPG fix elsewhere, but I don't want a 'little bit of
this, little bit of that' game.

Bioware made that choice with KoTOR and JE. DA:O was just in production so long they had to release it. And DA:O was more WOW than BG or Fallout.

Yrkoon wrote..
I don't know  if I'm ready to give this 
tracking data/metrics system even  that much credit.   What good is  any
data  if it  influences the decision makers to go in the wrong
direction? 

IMO   Starting off with nothing to go by is  a
better  than,  say... starting off  with the wrong vision because you
misinterpretted  some very vague data.

Except it wouldn't mean anything.

Right now they said, we want the COD crowd, we want a higher use base, so what can we do to get the most out of what we have? Let's look at the tracking data and see what we should keep and what we should gut.

At best, tracking data influences resources.

[billy the squid]

Sabriana wrote...

True. They will have to make up their mind as to what direction they want to go. They will have to pick a route, because one half of this and one half of the other will not work. Especially when you try to cram action/h&s/anime/shooter into a RPG game. Neither one is appealing to either crowd.

Who knows, maybe they already have made up their minds, and it's up to them to act on it. If they fully go down the action/h&s/anime/shooter route, I'll be very sad, but at least there would be a clear cut end. I'll always be able to find my RPG fix elsewhere, but I don't want a 'little bit of this, little bit of that' game.

I just wonder how they would make the full turn to the mainstream with a fantasy IP. The CoD people aren't going to view swords and daggers as appealing to their style. I think. I'm not sure though. It might be possible. I know too little about that genre, I only dabble in it - mostly on my friends' computer.

I think that this was actually one of the big problems with DA2, it didn't define itself in terms of appeal and the game suffered for it. (obviously there are numerous other issues but I won't go into those) The game feels, to me at least, that they sat around a table and threw out a lot on concepts without thinking how they would fit together, to appeal to the broadest possible base.

Regarding the CoD crowd, yes I have played numerous times *hangs head in shame* no, RPGs are unlikely to appeal to fans who want fast paced combat and simple designs, unless they are looking for something else. Although I can't speak for all players, particularly as I loved DA O, but hated DA2, how's that for irony! As I play both RPGs and FPS/TPS the experience that I want from each is the complete opposite, I like the obsessive fiddling of equipment in DAO, it does not mean it is something I look for in FPSs

The underlying problem of what I have seen in interviews, sales and game design is that it is a mistake to work on the assumption that players who have games with customization and progression elements in them will play RPGs, I certainly don't play CoD for the customisation or storyline, rather for the glorified online twitch fest. It is inherently wrong to believe that people will be swayed from one genre to another by taking the percieved tedious bits out of DAO, shoe horning in a load of combat and cranking up the speed.

Eg. Sports games, I hate them I can never control the players I don't know what is going on half the time, I actually get lost on the pitch, yes, that is how shockingly bad I am at these types of games. But I don't expect the developer to change the game completely and even if they did, Its unlikely I'd buy into it, I don't find the entire concept particularly appealing, I'd rather go out and play football

Modifié par billy the squid, 24 avril 2011 - 09:08 .

[Sabriana]

@ billy the squid

I think this patchwork they did on DA 2 to make it "one size fits all" is partially responsible for making the game seem disjointed. That's only a personal opinion, but I often felt as if it lacked coherence and consistency because it waffled too much.

More or less, it felt like the game itself had an identity crisis. It was fine for a while, and in comes something that startled the heck out of me, because it didn't belong there. It took me a bit, but I soon realized that I was forced down a specific route. No decision mattered much beyond the immediate happenings. Hawke was a reactor not an actor. Other people (NPCs) made wide-reaching decisions, and Hawke could only watch and clean up their messes.

I finally gave up, and let Hawke be a pixel puppet I was pushing around, and it was a bit better - play-wise. However, the R in RPG was gone. She was not my Hawke, not by a long shot.

I did have fun in parts of the game. Act II was pretty good, for what it was. But then came Act III. I was mostly staring in disbelief. Action/h&s/anime/shooter elements jumped out galore. I felt like I was in a whole different universe.

Shooters aren't bad, and no, you should not be ashamed for liking them
But I'm just not a shooter/action/anime fan. I can take some h&s, but not in an overwhelming manner. I dreaded having to make Hawke go out at night. I abandoned all tactics, and just went in hacking away. It was awful.

I'm can imagine that the action/fps people just snickered at it. It was far too off base for their preferred genre. The same goes for the anime/h&s people. That's why Bioware simply has to make up its collective mind of were they want to go, else they end up with only half (or less) their targeted consumers.

It would be sad if they abandoned the RPG, but they must do what's best for them. Underestimating the number of the RPG niche seems to be all the rage now. Except for those who know that they can make a very good profit off them. No, I'm not going to throw the obvious ones out here. Most people will know who I mean anyways.

Edited because typos snuck in while I wasn't looking

Modifié par Sabriana, 24 avril 2011 - 09:55 .

[billy the squid]

@ Sabriana

I agree the, lack of choice is also a one of the other issues I had with the game, I know certain people will always cry out that no game will give unlimited choice, yes, I realise this, but the fact that there is an illusion or that despite the overarching theme, within it you have options. I got the feeling DA 2 didn't really even attempt to disguse the lack of significant options.

I think DAO's redcliff quest illustrates the choice concept despite the overarching theme of defeating the blight:
1)  Defend the village/ allow it to be destroyed (inc. all NPC side quests some of which result in different epilogues)
2)   defeat the demon you can either (I say defeat as you don't have to kill it)
A)   kill the boy
   use blood magic (oops if you killed Jowan etc. Alistair has a moan at you if this is done
C)  go to the circle of Magi (oops if you sided with the templars and destroyed the circle, and can betray Morrigan to the templars, although the content was removed the concepts were still present, good by Dark Ritual)
3) The plot then leads to the village of Haven, where you may fight (and kill) Leliana, Wyne and Sten
There are other examples but I don't want to list all of them...

Was DAO perfect? No, but it certainly left a solid base for DA2 to build on, which it didn't. The issue with trying to appeal to the CoD crowd, is of understanding what appeals to that type of gamer, I like and enjoy FPS/ TPS, but really dislike hack and slash/ anime orientated games, so the very broad strokes, bandied around by individuals, I don't mean you of course, that all CoD players inherently like any type of manic " button awsome" is rather misleading. (which from Mr. Laidlaw's interviews seems to be the false premise that he is working under)

I could be slightly wierd in this respect as I like two polar opposites, RPGs and FPS/ TPS, but I think that within the so called casual/ action base you will have varied groups, because games like CoD are by design very easy to just pick up and play for half an hour, rather than for indepth stories or game mechanics, (I still have'nt played the single player story in CoD) but also more hardcore FPS players, like myself to a certian extent, will (if they don't like it) avoid hack and slash and as such the appeal of DA2 to this percieved audience is going to be limited. 
 
Edit:

I am slightly biased in the opinion that, Bioware should attempt to stick to its roots, RPGs, but I do understand the attempt to appeal to an action orientated crowd although, I would be dissapointed, that a franchise like dragon age would change tact so drastically. Particularly the details in the lore which made the world of Thedas so interesting, really tends to take a back seat in more action orientated games.

While I agree that Bioware could take a more action orientated approach in their games, look at the competition they're up against. CoD, Halo, Gears of War etc. These games sold millions each in their first two weeks. If Bioware wants to compete they are really going to have to pick up their game (no pun intended)

Modifié par billy the squid, 24 avril 2011 - 11:29 .

[Sabriana]

Billy, I apologize for giving the impression that I'm lumping everyone together. I re-read my post, and it certainly reads like that. What I wanted to say was that I don't like many action games, although some are okay.

As to anime..., well, I played 'Harvest Moon' with my daughter, and liked it, does that count?

H&s, like I said, I can tolerate some, but not in overwhelming numbers inside one game.

Shooters, I usually just play around with at a couple of friends' houses. But like I said, I strongly suspect they only let me play with their toys because they get a good laugh over my ineptitude. I swear, I always manage to present my pixel puppet as great, big, shiny target for the attackers - somehow.

I don't think it's weird at all to like several genres for their own sake. I have friends who meet regularly at an internet cafe for their 'shoot-outs'. I also have friends who tell me that they can't meet up tonight because it's raiding time. Or leveling time. Yeah, those would be my MMO fan friends. But they also like RPGs. However, they don't like them squished together into one game.

To me, it feels like with DA 2 they had 4 or 5 individuals each cooking their own little soup, and then they simply poured it into one pot. The result was something unidentifiable. Something that wanted to be everything to everyone and simply couldn't be that. It failed because it couldn't blend.

I agree about the choices. They were arching through the whole game of DA:O. Yes, they were some that were cleverly disguised illusions, but many were real, and had an impact (even if it was often only a small one) at the end-game. No, DA:O was not perfect, but it was still a great RPG.

[billy the squid]

Thats quite okay, I don't think you gave that impression, I was re editing my post a minute ago as what I said wasn't conveyed as clealy as I would have liked, apologies if I came across a little brusque.

P.S
 I'm not really one for anime, I've never really understood the attraction, so you're not alone. I'm also unfamiliar with "Harvest Moon"

I can empathise in respect to playing games which one is hopeless at. Sports games are my bane, I get lost on the pitch or get confused and run in the wrong direction. My brother thinks its hilarious and manages to derive ammusement from by rants and rages as I become more frustrated. Being beaten by a 14 yr old when your 24 is slightly embaressing, but he seems to get some fun out of it.

(I think the part of the problem is time, between finishing my degrees, looking for work and going to the gym, I don't get too much time to myself, so spending hours on types of game I dislike or perform poorly on isn't for me.) 

Modifié par billy the squid, 24 avril 2011 - 11:58 .

[In Exile]

Sabriana wrote...

@ billy the squid

I think this patchwork they did on DA 2 to make it "one size fits all" is partially responsible for making the game seem disjointed. That's only a personal opinion, but I often felt as if it lacked coherence and consistency because it waffled too much.

More or less, it felt like the game itself had an identity crisis. It was fine for a while, and in comes something that startled the heck out of me, because it didn't belong there. It took me a bit, but I soon realized that I was forced down a specific route. No decision mattered much beyond the immediate happenings. Hawke was a reactor not an actor. Other people (NPCs) made wide-reaching decisions, and Hawke could only watch and clean up their messes.

I finally gave up, and let Hawke be a pixel puppet I was pushing around, and it was a bit better - play-wise. However, the R in RPG was gone. She was not my Hawke, not by a long shot.

But Bioware always does this. Take DA:O as an example - the Warden is just a puppet; you're forced along in the Origin, kidnapped (more or less) by Duncan, and then forced to run errands for each region to recruit your army, and then when you get any credit at the Landsmeet, Alistair or Anora with Eamon actually run the army. You don't even get to give a speech. You're as bad of an errand boy as Hawke - worse, even, given the credit the Warden gets versus Hawke.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

In Exile wrote...

But Bioware always does this. Take DA:O as an example - the Warden is just a puppet; you're forced along in the Origin, kidnapped (more or less) by Duncan, and then forced to run errands for each region to recruit your army, and then when you get any credit at the Landsmeet, Alistair or Anora with Eamon actually run the army. You don't even get to give a speech. You're as bad of an errand boy as Hawke - worse, even, given the credit the Warden gets versus Hawke.

No game has complete freedom, but Origins gave a more convincing illusion of choice than DA2 did.

You could choose who ran Orzammar.
You could choose if the Anvil was kept or destroyed.
You could choose if the werewolves or the Dalish came out on top, or if there was a compromise between the two.
You could choose whether the Circle Tower was annulled or not.
You could choose if the Ashes were defiled, revealed to the world, or lost forever.
You could choose if Connor was killed or saved or given to the demon, or if Isolde sacrificed herself or not.

Not only did all of these affect the end of the game and shape Ferelden in different ways, but some provided ingame differences at the Denerim Siege (Golems, Werewolves/Elves, Templars/Mages as army options).

That wasn't all the endgame reflected. Minor quests were often mentioned in the epilogue slides (High Dragon's death? Dagna? Burkel? that kid from Redcliffe and his sword?), but DA2 has letters to compensate for that. DA2 didn't have much in the way of an aftermath, which Origins did--you get a coronation (or funeral!), whether or not your PC is crowned, a chance to talk to your companions after the battle, AND epilogue slides that tell you 'rumours and hearsay' of what they did after having known you, which vary depending on approval. DA2 just says they go their separate ways except for the LI. DA2 just says you're made viscount or exiled, though we never see any desperate flight from the city, no establishment at the palace, no celebration or feeling that you've won.

To be honest I'd rather have all that than a pre-recorded few-second speech. Not everyone likes public speaking, y'know.

[Cybermortis]

In Exile wrote...
But Bioware always does this. Take DA:O as an example - the Warden is just a puppet; you're forced along in the Origin, kidnapped (more or less) by Duncan, and then forced to run errands for each region to recruit your army, and then when you get any credit at the Landsmeet, Alistair or Anora with Eamon actually run the army. You don't even get to give a speech. You're as bad of an errand boy as Hawke - worse, even, given the credit the Warden gets versus Hawke.

Except there was nothing in DAO that even hinted that you had any choise over the overall story - that is you had to deal with Logain and the Blight and this was very clear as soon as you'd done Ostogar. Your choises in DAO related to how you dealt with them, and how far or what you were willing to do to get the allies you needed.

DA2 has no clear 'you must do this' story, which sounds great right until you start to realise that the only way the dev's could get Hawke to follow the plot was to prevent you from making what should have been logical choices.

For an DAO example, In Ozamar you have to side with one of the two contenders for the throne, you can pick which one but you have no option not to get involved. This, however, is not a problem storywise since you need the Dwarven army and putting someone on the throne is the only way to get that army. In order to put someone on the throne you have to go into the Deep Roads.

In DA2 there is no reason given for Hawke to do all the quests in act one, then go into the Deep Roads - in fact Hawke will point out that if they had the money to go down there he/she wouldn't need to go down there...but then seems to forget this two seconds later. Heck, there is no reason why Hawke has to stay in Kirkwall after the first year and every reason to leave.


I've noted in other posts that the problem with DA2's story is that there is nothing or no one you are attempting to overcome throughout the game. Basically the game needed an end goal to focus on, which in turn would help to explain why Hawke is doing things that have no clear logic behind them.

Modifié par Cybermortis, 25 avril 2011 - 02:37 .

[Pygmali0n]

The price of DA2 has been slashed in half across all platforms on Amazon uk. That seems early - isn't that early?

And still the DA2 team seem to be in denial.

Let me spell it out for you in simple terms - your long-time fans aren't thick, they are amongst the most intelligent gamers out there - they should be your weather gauge - not your whipping boys for your failure.

Our love for Baldurs Gate didn't stop the love for KOTOR and even the streamlining in ME2 was widely accepted (with sales almost as high as DA:O) - Because they were good! - DA2 is not good! in whatever measure you care to use (we've given you enough well argued and justified reasons why by now).

It's not because we're stuck in the past - a few socially retarded hermits will hate good change - but not a large mass of people. Promise me an apple but give me an orange and I'll still be pleased - but don't give me half a lemon and call me bitter. Change in and of itself is not a worthy god to worship - he's bitten you on the arse because you summoned him up without specifying whether you wanted him to be good or bad.

Lesson is, if you want to make an action game, hire some people who make action games. And be prepared for a whirlwind of competition you never had to worry about in the RPG world. If you want to cynically make a quick cash-in on a successful game, don't whine when your alienated fan base gives you feedback, and your rushed hash of a game hasn't won over enough new love from strangers.

Repent Bioware! admit that you were led astray, that you thought all the cool kids were doing it, you had a mid-life crisis, even lie and say the dog ate the real DA2, we'll still take you back.

Modifié par Pygmali0n, 25 avril 2011 - 10:24 .

[AkiKishi]

Pygmali0n wrote...
Let me spell it out for you in simple terms - your long-time fans aren't thick, they are amongst the most intelligent gamers out there - they should be your weather gauge - not your whipping boys for your failure.

Maybe that is the problem ? Stupid people are both less demanding and more numerous, the ideal buyer.

[Pygmali0n]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Pygmali0n wrote...
Let me spell it out for you in simple terms - your long-time fans aren't thick, they are amongst the most intelligent gamers out there - they should be your weather gauge - not your whipping boys for your failure.

Maybe that is the problem ? Stupid people are both less demanding and more numerous, the ideal buyer.

A grimly satisfying explanation - but it's been tried and failed - now Bioware has the justification to make Dragon Age actually awesome, to make real improvements - but stay within the genre - that's the way to entice new people over to your game whilst keeping the old fans - make it irresistable, make them want to spend a little time to learn the controls and tactics.