Aller au contenu

Photo

Why Both BioWare and Disgruntled RPG Fans Have Painted Themselves Into A Corner With DA2


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
263 réponses à ce sujet

#176
Dragoonlordz

Dragoonlordz
  • Members
  • 9 920 messages

Tommy6860 wrote...

TY for saving me tons of typing, I agree with you. I was especaially perplexed by Dagiz's claim that DA2 was promoted as not being another Origins. In that direct sense he is correct if he is going by Bioware's/EA's personel claims in blogs and interviews. But it was advertised and promoted as a sequel and many reviews to the game, placed it in that context, hence most of us who loved Origins, expected a sequel that followed in its essence. Had the game been called something other than DA2, like DA: Hawke's Adventure, or a new IP altogether, it may have worked a bit better.


Mike himself said that they would be keeping enough of the original DA IP to keep the fans of DAO happy. In reality I think he mixed up his words and meant subdued but meh.. He did keep some fans happy and they became fans of DA2 but a lot of DAO fans did not follow suit. Myself included. Posted Image

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 14 avril 2011 - 12:20 .


#177
Tommy6860

Tommy6860
  • Members
  • 2 488 messages

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

TY for saving me tons of typing, I agree with you. I was especaially perplexed by Dagiz's claim that DA2 was promoted as not being another Origins. In that direct sense he is correct if he is going by Bioware's/EA's personel claims in blogs and interviews. But it was advertised and promoted as a sequel and many reviews to the game, placed it in that context, hence most of us who loved Origins, expected a sequel that followed in its essence. Had the game been called something other than DA2, like DA: Hawke's Adventure, or a new IP altogether, it may have worked a bit better.


Mike himself said that they would be keeping enough of the original DA IP to keep the fans of DAO happy. In reality I think he mixed up his words and meant subdued but meh.. He did keep some fans happy and they became fans of DA2 but a lot of DAO fans did not follow suit. Myself included. Posted Image


I am happy for those fans and I realize that there was an attempt to reach out to a different gaming crowd, while trying to keep the other crowd onboard. I fall into that "other" crowd and DA2 just made me :(:(:(:(.

#178
jds1bio

jds1bio
  • Members
  • 1 679 messages
I've been reading the past few posts. My thoughts:

BioWare/EA have been saying for months that the game was going to be different. Their screen shots alone were enough to say that this was something different from Origins. Still, I am aware that mixed and multiple messages hit the airwaves in the few months leading up to the release, and yeah marketing probably needs to regroup on this one. It's totally fair to expect a similar but heightened experience from a sequel in all forms of entertainment, something that videogame companies still like to depart from every now and again.

And they kept a tremendous amount of IP, IP = Intellectual Property - the codexes, the lore, the ancestral characters, the races and tribes, the religious and fanatical groups, some returning characters, even some of the same clothes! It's the mechanical and technical aspects that changed.

I think that the relationship that's been carried on between developer and fanbase online is going to start to change. Being open about everything for months or years before release doesn't necessarily pay off in sales. Already some companies understand that Metacritic isn't going to be the be-all yardstick of success and quality. Others understand that they must do something different, or more wide-reaching, to make desired sales targets. Others understand that in order to please a fervent fanbase, they may have to give up certain amounts of initial sales and hope the good word-of-mouth from the fanbase makes up for it. And yet others will continue to futilely try to capture the audiences of the winners who have already won in certain categories. I think BioWare understands some of this, and is starting to come around on other parts of this.

#179
Morroian

Morroian
  • Members
  • 6 396 messages

Dragoonlordz wrote...

No, DA2 was explained to the fans as being a follow up from DAO but better and that they was going to try new things but that they would keep enough of the old system to keep the fans of DAO happy. So in that regard your semi wrong, they did release details of some changes yes, but at same time saying it will be better than DAO and still have enough of DAO to keep the fans happy.

Wrong, every change that people are unhappy with was documented here during development, this obviously doesn't include qualitative criticisms like the writing of Act 3 or the map re-use. The devs said it still feels like DA and IMHO they're right.

#180
jds1bio

jds1bio
  • Members
  • 1 679 messages

Morroian wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

No, DA2 was explained to the fans as being a follow up from DAO but better and that they was going to try new things but that they would keep enough of the old system to keep the fans of DAO happy. So in that regard your semi wrong, they did release details of some changes yes, but at same time saying it will be better than DAO and still have enough of DAO to keep the fans happy.

Wrong, every change that people are unhappy with was documented here during development, this obviously doesn't include qualitative criticisms like the writing of Act 3 or the map re-use. The devs said it still feels like DA and IMHO they're right.


Please, let's not turn this into a battle over who is more wrong or whose opinion is more wrong.  This thread has been civil through eight pages so far.  Thank you.

#181
Dagiz

Dagiz
  • Members
  • 93 messages
[quote]Dragoonlordz wrote...
 DA2 came and some fans of DAO became fans of DA2 but a lot of us fans of DAO did not become fans of DA2, that is the fanbase I uses in my description. I already told you to use common sense in that regard.
[/quote]

Common sense tells me that the bolded part...doesn't add up.   How do you quantify who a lot of fans of DA:O are?    Is it the fans that take the time to post on the boards their dislike?    Is those that stay away?    How do we know that a majority of DA:O fans disliked the game?    i ask because there is the old customer service axiom that if someone dislikes something or has a bad experience they are going to let about 12 people know about...and with internet access and forums that number jumps.  Conversely if someone has a great experience they will only tell about three people.  And again, with forum access that jumps up, but people, in general, complain more than they praise.   

So yes, if I use common sense, to say that the majority of one fanbase hates the game, well that can not be true.  However to say that a segment of the fanbase dislikes the game is closer to the truth than outright saying the entire fanbase...which in reality seems to be your position and a few others.  If I'm wrong I'll eat a hat.  But so far that seems to be the arguement.  That Bioware ignored their most loyal fanbase and made changes to a perfectly good system (according to that fanbase) and came ouw with DA2.  And now the entire fanbase is pissed off.   I simply disagree with saying that and I guess it's not coming across too well. 

It's fine  if you and others feel like you didn't get what you expected out of the game...that's going to happen no matter what the game is (crap go to the old Bio boards and look how pissed people were at the changes that Obsidian was making to NWN2 - different company, same IP and yet somehow that game did alright.)  I just object to using absolute type statements such as "The fanbase is in arms and pissed off and Bioware is ignoring their fanbase when they made this game".

That's is your opinion though.  That's all it boils down to.  Was the entire experiement a rousing success?  Not really, but I  don't see it an epic failure either.  It didn't do what they thought it was going to do, but I don't think it means that we are necessarily finished with this type of experimentation.
[/quote]

[quote]Never said it wasn't my opinion... One thing I would love to have known is if DA2 was a new IP and not a sequal using the name and fanbase of DAO to make sales from this new way of telling their stories (already explained what this means to you), whether or not the sales would even be half of what they are right now. But will never know because the large portion of initial sales were due to DAO fans pre-ordering and buying on the success of DAO. While that isn't 100% relevant to what I said at start it is something I wonder.
[/quote]

Oh I wonder that too.  I also wonder if all the hype was because of DA:O or because of the changes that were made or said to be made.  What does it mean for the future?   I don't know.  But the more you delve into this type of question, it does raise another.   What if the pre-order sales for DA3 are increased than the were for DA2?  and conversely, what if they're not?    What if they do fall? 

[quote]
No, DA2 was explained to the fans as being a follow up from DAO but better and that they was going to try new things but that they would keep enough of the old system to keep the fans of DAO happy. So in that regard your semi wrong, they did release details of some changes yes, but at same time saying it will be better than DAO and still have enough of DAO to keep the fans happy. This lead many people to pre-order on that promise not whether or not the health bar is red or blue or if Anders would or would not have a shave before looking like a tramp in DA2.[/quote] 

I'd like to know where it was said it was going to be a follow-up to DA:O.  I think...and again, if I'm wrong I'll eat a hat, I saw every press release or interview about the game, and I  can not recall anyone saying it was a follow-up to DA:O.  Again, I think that depends on what one defines as the old system.  Each of us is going to look at it and define that differently.  And it's very apparent we have differing views on that.

[quote]
I speak for myself and for anyone who happens to agree with me, it is irrelevant whether you consider yourself in that same fanbase or not because if your not what difference does it make to you. If your going to take offense everytime someone uses the words fanbase your in for a shock, it's an industry wide term used daily everywhere. Like I said try to apply common sense to the term in relation to it's meaning and usage on context of what was written.[/quote]

As mentioned before...though in reverse...it's a generalization of the term that I find...disagreeable.  When someone comes on the boards and see some one post "the fanbase hates this", common sense seems to dictate that the  person stating that knows what the entire fanbase likes, wants, or desires.  I'll stop with that since we have very differing views on the term and the usage...and I do know it's a term widely used...thank you very much. 

Lemme sum it up this way.  To me it's like saying that the Star Wars fanbase hated the last three movies.  I know that simply not to be true.  I know portions hated it...but I will not state equivocally or absolutely that a fanbase hated something.  Same here from my perspective.  

[quote]
As do we with our wallets. But I reserve the right to have an opinion on something I bought whether you like it or not.
[/quote]

And I am not invalidating that right to have an opinion.  Too often though what is listed as fact...is often an opinion.  That's all I am trying to state.  When a person states that "X, Y, and Z were wrong with Game Q" and someone else disagrees...or conversely "X, Y, and Z made Game Q great" all they are doing is stating an opinion...which I am okay with.  It's when we get to the absolutes...which (to try and tie it back up with the OP) is how I read the original post.  

There are no absolutes when talking about something like a game on an internet forum.  It's impossible to get an absolute.  There are just too many varying opinions on what makes "Game Q' a great game and what doesn't make it a great game. 

[quote]Tommy6860 wrote...

TY for saving me tons of typing, I
agree with you. I was especaially perplexed by Dagiz's claim that DA2
was promoted as not being another Origins. In that direct sense he is
correct if he is going by Bioware's/EA's personel claims in blogs and
interviews. But it was advertised and promoted as a sequel and many
reviews to the game, placed it in that context, hence most of us who
loved Origins, expected a sequel that followed in its essence. Had the
game been called something other than DA2, like DA: Hawke's Adventure,
or a new IP altogether, it may have worked a bit better.

[/quote]

Than I  guess we were both looking at different marketing materials and promos becuase that was not how I  remembered it.  I didn't pre-order the game for a long time simply because I  was not sure whether or not I wanted to buy it based off what I  heard.   I  took a chance though and did.  I was both happy and disappointed.  Bot more happy than disappointed.  To be honest I  really thought it was going to be a ton more like a FPS...I really did.  That was what I  thought about...I thought it would be more like a Gears of Wars game. 

As far as reviews of the game...whose fault is that?    Bioware or the reviewer for saying what they did?  As for the name...I think it would have been better if it was called some like DA:  Kirkwall or DA:  Adventures of Hawke.  Simply because the first one was called DA: Origins.  With that though I was not expecting a sequel type game because they never said it was DA:O2.  I was expecting a game that took place in the same world, with a differing method of telling the story, and a few changes to some of the systems.  But I was not expecting a direct sequel.  

#182
Dragoonlordz

Dragoonlordz
  • Members
  • 9 920 messages

Dagiz wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...
 DA2 came and some fans of DAO became fans of DA2 but a lot of us fans of DAO did not become fans of DA2, that is the fanbase I uses in my description. I already told you to use common sense in that regard.


Common sense tells me that the bolded part...doesn't add up.  


I am not responsible for another persons ignorance. I made an explanation and was quite clear. I did not use the word majority, I said a lot of us which means here and now on these forums. I don't really want to be mean about it but I answered your question about confusion regarding my initial response but it three times now doesn't seem good enough to you and thats beyond tedious having to explain again and again because you didn't understand each time my explanations.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 14 avril 2011 - 05:29 .


#183
erynnar

erynnar
  • Members
  • 3 010 messages

Sabriana wrote...

@ Morroian


THERE COULD BE SPOILERS!!! Watch out!!!



I am not going to quote any picked apart post, that would take up far too much space. Feynriel is an interesting character, but he doesn't represent "many people". Hawke saves him from a certain fate, but he certainly isn't important enough to make Kirkwall history in any way, shape, or form. He could have been, he was certainly intriguing, but he was just left by the wayside.

Aside from that, in my play-through he ended up exactly where he would have ended up had Hawke not interfered. Detailed explanations would be to spoilerish, but given a certain country's practices regarding timid mages (per Fenris), he could have easily ended up just in the same predicament that the original 'business-person' had in mind for him.Who knows. I'm neither told nor shown enough in that regard.

Varric is the one who encouraged Hawke to use the alternate financier. Hawke denied it, she wanted to reap the profit all herself. The alternate financier could have easily found another patsy, even Varric himself. Iirc, Bartrand wasn't too thrilled about Hawke, he more or less told her to STFU and GTHO. If they missed the idol without Hawke, they could be labeled legally blind. The way it was set up, there was no way other than straight toward it.

They terrorized Kirkwall? When? Iirc, they were the ones being constantly attacked. Especially through one particular person and her trained templar hound. When they attacked it came as a surprise for everyone, including Hawke and Aveline.

I don't care if it's in the game. I don't want to be told what happened. I want to see what happened. I want to shape my pixel person, and I want her to interact with the game world. I want her to matter, make a difference, be *in* the world. I don't want her to just be along for the ride, cleaning up the messes the NPC's make because *they* make choices that change things.

If I want to be told a story, I ask for it. If I want to watch a movie, I go get one. If I want to play an action RPG, I get one of those. I expected something and got something completely unexpected and unwanted. My fault? Perhaps. But for me, a RPG is show, not tell. Mileage may vary.

I'm not going into the DA:O vs. DA 2 issue. I'm not bashing DA 2 because of DA:O. I have little problem disliking it on its own. I love DA:O, but I'm not blind to its faults. I do not like DA 2 much because imo it has far too many glaring flaws that I simply can't overlook or explain away. DA 2 will always be 'meh' to me. That will never change. It's the way I see it, and more importantly, it's the way I feel it.



This ^. You did it again, you read my mind! :D I don't hate DA2, it iust is meh due to the flaws I can't ignore.

#184
Dragoonlordz

Dragoonlordz
  • Members
  • 9 920 messages

erynnar wrote...

Sabriana wrote...

@ Morroian


THERE COULD BE SPOILERS!!! Watch out!!!



I am not going to quote any picked apart post, that would take up far too much space. Feynriel is an interesting character, but he doesn't represent "many people". Hawke saves him from a certain fate, but he certainly isn't important enough to make Kirkwall history in any way, shape, or form. He could have been, he was certainly intriguing, but he was just left by the wayside.

Aside from that, in my play-through he ended up exactly where he would have ended up had Hawke not interfered. Detailed explanations would be to spoilerish, but given a certain country's practices regarding timid mages (per Fenris), he could have easily ended up just in the same predicament that the original 'business-person' had in mind for him.Who knows. I'm neither told nor shown enough in that regard.

Varric is the one who encouraged Hawke to use the alternate financier. Hawke denied it, she wanted to reap the profit all herself. The alternate financier could have easily found another patsy, even Varric himself. Iirc, Bartrand wasn't too thrilled about Hawke, he more or less told her to STFU and GTHO. If they missed the idol without Hawke, they could be labeled legally blind. The way it was set up, there was no way other than straight toward it.

They terrorized Kirkwall? When? Iirc, they were the ones being constantly attacked. Especially through one particular person and her trained templar hound. When they attacked it came as a surprise for everyone, including Hawke and Aveline.

I don't care if it's in the game. I don't want to be told what happened. I want to see what happened. I want to shape my pixel person, and I want her to interact with the game world. I want her to matter, make a difference, be *in* the world. I don't want her to just be along for the ride, cleaning up the messes the NPC's make because *they* make choices that change things.

If I want to be told a story, I ask for it. If I want to watch a movie, I go get one. If I want to play an action RPG, I get one of those. I expected something and got something completely unexpected and unwanted. My fault? Perhaps. But for me, a RPG is show, not tell. Mileage may vary.

I'm not going into the DA:O vs. DA 2 issue. I'm not bashing DA 2 because of DA:O. I have little problem disliking it on its own. I love DA:O, but I'm not blind to its faults. I do not like DA 2 much because imo it has far too many glaring flaws that I simply can't overlook or explain away. DA 2 will always be 'meh' to me. That will never change. It's the way I see it, and more importantly, it's the way I feel it.



This ^. You did it again, you read my mind! :D I don't hate DA2, it iust is meh due to the flaws I can't ignore.


I also happen to feel the same as you both.

#185
MelfinaofOutlawStar

MelfinaofOutlawStar
  • Members
  • 1 785 messages

Dragoonlordz wrote...

erynnar wrote...

Sabriana wrote...

@ Morroian


THERE COULD BE SPOILERS!!! Watch out!!!



I am not going to quote any picked apart post, that would take up far too much space. Feynriel is an interesting character, but he doesn't represent "many people". Hawke saves him from a certain fate, but he certainly isn't important enough to make Kirkwall history in any way, shape, or form. He could have been, he was certainly intriguing, but he was just left by the wayside.

Aside from that, in my play-through he ended up exactly where he would have ended up had Hawke not interfered. Detailed explanations would be to spoilerish, but given a certain country's practices regarding timid mages (per Fenris), he could have easily ended up just in the same predicament that the original 'business-person' had in mind for him.Who knows. I'm neither told nor shown enough in that regard.

Varric is the one who encouraged Hawke to use the alternate financier. Hawke denied it, she wanted to reap the profit all herself. The alternate financier could have easily found another patsy, even Varric himself. Iirc, Bartrand wasn't too thrilled about Hawke, he more or less told her to STFU and GTHO. If they missed the idol without Hawke, they could be labeled legally blind. The way it was set up, there was no way other than straight toward it.

They terrorized Kirkwall? When? Iirc, they were the ones being constantly attacked. Especially through one particular person and her trained templar hound. When they attacked it came as a surprise for everyone, including Hawke and Aveline.

I don't care if it's in the game. I don't want to be told what happened. I want to see what happened. I want to shape my pixel person, and I want her to interact with the game world. I want her to matter, make a difference, be *in* the world. I don't want her to just be along for the ride, cleaning up the messes the NPC's make because *they* make choices that change things.

If I want to be told a story, I ask for it. If I want to watch a movie, I go get one. If I want to play an action RPG, I get one of those. I expected something and got something completely unexpected and unwanted. My fault? Perhaps. But for me, a RPG is show, not tell. Mileage may vary.

I'm not going into the DA:O vs. DA 2 issue. I'm not bashing DA 2 because of DA:O. I have little problem disliking it on its own. I love DA:O, but I'm not blind to its faults. I do not like DA 2 much because imo it has far too many glaring flaws that I simply can't overlook or explain away. DA 2 will always be 'meh' to me. That will never change. It's the way I see it, and more importantly, it's the way I feel it.



This ^. You did it again, you read my mind! :D I don't hate DA2, it iust is meh due to the flaws I can't ignore.


I also happen to feel the same as you both.


Is there room in this boat for one more?

I agree, it's not a bad game. It's not a great game either. And I had a years gap in play from Origins to DA2. As a stand alone title DA2 as an "RPG" is average at best. That guy that posted the metrics thread had it right. This industry is turning into a robotic arm that chucks out titles based on stats. It seemed most changes were answered with statistics. "90% chose the human origin" so they got rid of the choice. "80% never finished Ostagar." so they made story elements shorter and padded it with respawning enemies. Considering Origins success was in part to "word of mouth" I find is hard to believe that everyone was telling their friends about "a great game but I got bored an hour in.".

#186
jds1bio

jds1bio
  • Members
  • 1 679 messages

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

Is there room in this boat for one more?

I agree, it's not a bad game. It's not a great game either. And I had a years gap in play from Origins to DA2. As a stand alone title DA2 as an "RPG" is average at best. That guy that posted the metrics thread had it right. This industry is turning into a robotic arm that chucks out titles based on stats. It seemed most changes were answered with statistics. "90% chose the human origin" so they got rid of the choice. "80% never finished Ostagar." so they made story elements shorter and padded it with respawning enemies. Considering Origins success was in part to "word of mouth" I find is hard to believe that everyone was telling their friends about "a great game but I got bored an hour in.".


Yes, welcome aboard!

So that's interesting...let's take the 80% never finished Ostagar stat.  One interpretation I've heard of this (I think from a BioWare interview a while ago) is "people got bored or confused after an hour and gave up on playing the game". 

So what did they do?  They front-loaded the very start of DA2 with combat that would showcase the combat and some of the abilities so people could "play" right away.

The reaction?  "The combat is too console-ly and dumb with exploding bodies.  I stopped playing it."

The danger of statistical interpretation, perhaps? (I actually thought this change worked and fit Varric's exaggerations well, but I am only one person)

Modifié par jds1bio, 14 avril 2011 - 05:51 .


#187
MelfinaofOutlawStar

MelfinaofOutlawStar
  • Members
  • 1 785 messages

jds1bio wrote...

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

Is there room in this boat for one more?

I agree, it's not a bad game. It's not a great game either. And I had a years gap in play from Origins to DA2. As a stand alone title DA2 as an "RPG" is average at best. That guy that posted the metrics thread had it right. This industry is turning into a robotic arm that chucks out titles based on stats. It seemed most changes were answered with statistics. "90% chose the human origin" so they got rid of the choice. "80% never finished Ostagar." so they made story elements shorter and padded it with respawning enemies. Considering Origins success was in part to "word of mouth" I find is hard to believe that everyone was telling their friends about "a great game but I got bored an hour in.".


Yes, welcome aboard!

So that's interesting...let's take the 80% never finished Ostagar stat.  One interpretation I've heard of this is "people got bored or confused after an hour and gave up on playing the game". 

So what did they do?  They front-loaded the very start of DA2 with combat that would showcase the combat and some of the abilities so people could "play" right away.

The reaction?  "The combat is too console-ly and dumb with exploding bodies.  I stopped playing it."

The danger of statistical interpretation, perhaps?




That's the problem with metrics. You can look at the numbers all day long but they'll give you no reasoning behind them.

#188
Sabriana

Sabriana
  • Members
  • 4 381 messages
I am not in any kind of corner, as far as I'm concerned. I usually have a clear pattern of choosing games to purchase. I am an adult, and I have people to feed, clothe, and house. I have to support the upkeep of a car. My 'free' money is limited. Therefore, I am usually very careful with purchases.

The usual way I choose to go when it comes to games is to wait and see. When Oblivion came out, I waited for reactions. I knew Bethsoft, and I know their strong points and their short-comings. I was quite sure that it would fall way short of "Morrowind", because I expected it to do so. I waited a good amount of time until Oblivion's price went down, and until the modding community was able to fix and expand the game.Only then did I purchase it. I put "Knights of the Nine" on my Christmas list, because all their DLC came bundled with it. Same with "Shivering Isles", that went on my birthday list.

I'm happy with Oblivion. It's the most heavily modded game I've ever played, but it is enjoyable. I feel I received my money's worth. This is my usual buying behavior for all games. Except for the DA IP. I let myself be fooled into thinking it was a true sequel. Perhaps because the word "sequel" was thrown around often, very often. Or perhaps it was because the name of the game was "DA 2", keypoint being the numeral 2.

I loved DA:O. This was the major reason I blindly rushed out and bought DA 2. I spent all my 'free' money on a product that I should've waited for. I should have adhered to my usual buying habits. I let myself be fooled by the number "2", my love for the predecessor, and the name Bioware. My own bloody fault? Perhaps. I'm not denying that I acted like a fool, but I did have reasons to trust the company and like I said, I love DA:O. I am aware of its flaws, but I love it nevertheless. And no, I'm not using DA:O to 'bash' DA 2. I did however, base my brainless behavior on the fact that DA:O was and is one of my favorite games.

That no longer applies. It was an expensive lesson, but I've learned it. I can get action RPG hybrids for a much cheaper price. I don't like them all that much anyway, but I do like some.

GOG has not done me wrong yet, especially because they don't pack nasty DRM's into their merchandise. From now on that goes on my "caution" list as well. I will wait for every game and see if it packs a DRM. If it does, I'll pass. Due to my usual habits, I was quite able to bypass games that packed snoopware, especially malware that nestles itself into an administrator position on my system, but not this time. That only adds to my severe disappointment.

Another habit of mine was to watch out for the DLC issue. I watch and research a game, and if it becomes clear that the base game is incomplete and needs further milking of customers, I pass. No thanks. I either get a complete game for my complete money, or I'll keep my money. There are other choices out there, sell your incomplete game to someone else, thank you all the same. I refuse to buy DLC, not for DA:O (which I love) nor for any other games. I was even careful with Awakenings. I researched it, came to the conclusion that it was most definitely NOT worth my money, and passed on it.

I will expand these spending habits to any and all games from now on. I will wait and see, and wait some more. The name Bioware will no longer mean automatic quality. They will no longer get first choice. I saved my money up for DA:O. Because it was a bioware title, and because I loved the sound of it. There were years spent on assorted forums (fora?) talking about the game, and everyone jumped in, including the devs/creators. It was fun.

I rushed out to buy DA:O, and haven't regretted it ever. DA:O had no predecessor to ride piggy-back on, but DA 2 did. And I acted like a fool and let myself be drawn into a blind rush buy. So lesson learned, and from now on I will treat bioware and its IP's like any other developer. No more preferential treatment, no more recommendations to friends and acquaintances before facts are in. I never pre-order anyway, so no changes there.

I'm not in any corner, but I no longer trust the company. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. It'll not happen, trust me. I want to play a game that I consider RPG. I don't know about anyone else's definiton of RPG, but I know mine, and DA 2 is not it. The Wardens are MY Wardens. I love them all. Hawke is not mine. I never connected in any way, shape or form with her. I felt no emotions, no suspense, nothing.

I was watching an interactive movie, and got to move their little pixel doll around. I never even really knew what the character, that is supposedly mine would say at any given moment. My character development was severely limited. I was told many things, and saw almost none of it. I was told that Kirkwall was a city full of life, but I was shown a dull, neverchanging, lifeless city. I was told that many years had passed, but was shown none of that. Nothing changed. Change the word "Years" to "Month" and it will stay the same. It's a word, nothing more. The list goes on and on, and as far as I'm concerned, personally, this is not an RPG.

Are they in a corner? I doubt it. Once a company feels they can ride roughshot over a large chunk of their fans, they will continue on that path. Does DA 2 have its supporters? Indisputably, and I'm happy for them. However, to me, personally, and imo, DA 2 is 'meh'. It's an average interactive movie/action RPG that was nowhere near worth the 56 euros I paid for it.

So in my conclusion, no one is in any corner. If bioware wishes to continue on this path, I wish them luck and a grande journey. I, on the other hand, will cast my eyes toward other companies that produce RPG's and I will keep the purchasing habits I had, and expand it over all companies. There are enough out there, and action RPG's are churned out by the score. I will re-direct my attention toward the indies and toward the older games. I also will watch the eastern market, who knows, they've shown patches of trying to capture the western market. Maybe they'll manage to do that.

#189
MrTijger

MrTijger
  • Members
  • 752 messages

jds1bio wrote...

Yes, welcome aboard!

So that's interesting...let's take the 80% never finished Ostagar stat.  One interpretation I've heard of this (I think from a BioWare interview a while ago) is "people got bored or confused after an hour and gave up on playing the game". 

So what did they do?  They front-loaded the very start of DA2 with combat that would showcase the combat and some of the abilities so people could "play" right away.

The reaction?  "The combat is too console-ly and dumb with exploding bodies.  I stopped playing it."

The danger of statistical interpretation, perhaps? (I actually thought this change worked and fit Varric's exaggerations well, but I am only one person)


One conclusion that could also be drawn is that the 80% you mention are the target audience for DA 2 and its the 20% that are up in arms.

Second point I'd like to make, I found it telling that the DA 2 website itself does not mention the word RPG at all.

Third, this article gives a new insight as well: http://arstechnica.c...rn-industry.ars

I'll highlight a choice quote but please, read the entire article

"Grant said he wants to have an "awesome experience" between the time when his son goes to bed and when he reluctantly follows, and that he doesn't care about a game's length or price.
"If I only have five hours a week to invest in Dragon Age, then months of real time have passed when I find the mid-game. I can't remember the plot anymore. So, as a game buyer, I'm happier if a plot-heavy game is shorter," he said."

Food for thought, perhaps.

#190
Dagiz

Dagiz
  • Members
  • 93 messages

Sabriana wrote...

A very eloquent post


Nicely put.

I have to agree with the buying habits.  I  also have always tended to that way of shopping for games.  DA games are the only two games that I have bought right out of the gate.  The only two.  Normally its a wait and see attitude like you described.

Where I  diverge is that I  am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on this and say that the uproar that has been caused  -whether good or bad, warranted or unwarranted - will give them an idea of things to change as they see what some of the  fans look for.  than again, like you said, I could be fooled and what I get for the third installment is worse than the second.  at that point its a matter of looking at the bargain bins for their games....it's what I did with Obsidian.  Gave them a second chance with NWN2 and felt they screwed that up, IMO, and have waited and will wait till I  feel that the Fallout NV price drops even farther.  

And that unfortunately to my mind is where I  think we are heading...simply based of off what has occured in the gaming industry in the last couple years.  TW2 maybe a great RPG...I dunno yet.  They may also look and see some of the different things that are occuring in the industry and make those adjustments as well.  Or they may not and keep to what they are doing.  It reminds me of CCP in a way.  For years EVE online was a ver ruthless and cutthroat game to get into.  Took a long time to get to a position where you could do things that quite a few older players could do.  But along comes some changes that made it easier to get into the game.  And the lastest changes make that even easier.  It's a trend and I'm not really sure if it's a good one or not. 

I  dunno, I always like the fact that a company makes games that reaches a broader stream because it means more revenue for the comapny.  Which in turn means they can do a few more things with the extra revenue.  At least one hopes.  When all else fails though I will always have BG and the mods there. 

Oh and GOG  is a GREAT  site.  GREAT.  Love it.  And with Oblivion....I just...I couldn't finish it...I don't know why...I just...it...I dunno.  Still have it somewhere.  There were somethings that I just felt were...off.  May have to reload and try again.  

Modifié par Dagiz, 14 avril 2011 - 06:39 .


#191
gotthammer

gotthammer
  • Members
  • 1 237 messages

Sabriana wrote...
*snip*


Great post. :wizard:

Sadly, I doubt my 'buying habits' will change (maybe it will for future DA-related products, but I'll definitely be more wary about BioWare's future releases).
I'm actually 'scrambling' to find where I can, locally, pre-order an upcoming game from this Polish developer....
:lol:

#192
MelfinaofOutlawStar

MelfinaofOutlawStar
  • Members
  • 1 785 messages
If we're on the subject of game length DA2 is not exactly short.

#193
gotthammer

gotthammer
  • Members
  • 1 237 messages

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

If we're on the subject of game length DA2 is not exactly short.


True. (esp. when you compare it to the single-player campaigns of most first-person shooters ;) )

On the other hand, DA:O did set the bar for some folks (myself among them) for a lot of things, game length included. ^_^

Is it unreasonable to expect as much when DA2 was sold/advertised as the sequel to the game that set some 'standards'? :lol:

#194
Corto81

Corto81
  • Members
  • 726 messages

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Nice post. Although people agreed about story in DA2 being linear and player choice being unimportant long ago, and yes, that is the problem.
Let me correct you about Origins ending. Yes, Archdemon is being slain. But you decide who will slay it and become a hero, and you decide if Archdemon's essence is destroyed of preserved. Also, you decide who will rule the country that's been saved from Archdemon.
In DA2 you decide... Basically nothing. At all. THAT is the problem.


It's not just the ending.

You can kill off/run off half of your companions.
Dwarves, Elves, Magi, Redcliffe.... All have great alternative endings. Your choices.
You get to choose the fates of the future and former regents.
You get to choose HOW you kill the Archdemon.

The Blight was a cloak over a plot and storyline where your character mattered.

Comparing the choices in DA:O and DA II is missing the whole point tbh.

In that regard, DA II went some weird action-RPG way where they flirted with the interactive-movie routine a la AC or Uncharted, just executed it poorly.
It felt like rail-roading cos it was rail-roading.

#195
sphinxess

sphinxess
  • Members
  • 503 messages

MrTijger wrote...

jds1bio wrote...

Yes, welcome aboard!

So that's interesting...let's take the 80% never finished Ostagar stat.  One interpretation I've heard of this (I think from a BioWare interview a while ago) is "people got bored or confused after an hour and gave up on playing the game". 

So what did they do?  They front-loaded the very start of DA2 with combat that would showcase the combat and some of the abilities so people could "play" right away.

The reaction?  "The combat is too console-ly and dumb with exploding bodies.  I stopped playing it."

The danger of statistical interpretation, perhaps? (I actually thought this change worked and fit Varric's exaggerations well, but I am only one person)


One conclusion that could also be drawn is that the 80% you mention are the target audience for DA 2 and its the 20% that are up in arms.

Second point I'd like to make, I found it telling that the DA 2 website itself does not mention the word RPG at all.

Third, this article gives a new insight as well: http://arstechnica.c...rn-industry.ars

I'll highlight a choice quote but please, read the entire article

"Grant said he wants to have an "awesome experience" between the time when his son goes to bed and when he reluctantly follows, and that he doesn't care about a game's length or price.
"If I only have five hours a week to invest in Dragon Age, then months of real time have passed when I find the mid-game. I can't remember the plot anymore. So, as a game buyer, I'm happier if a plot-heavy game is shorter," he said."

Food for thought, perhaps.


Thanks for the article. Lots of interesting information to think about - like perhaps a person with only a few hours of game time a week probably wouldn't even notice the repeating dungeons.

As a side note I'm totally shocked they say that multi-player "takes up just as many development resources as the single player story does."

Modifié par sphinxess, 14 avril 2011 - 09:00 .


#196
AkiKishi

AkiKishi
  • Members
  • 10 898 messages

jds1bio wrote...

I've been reading the past few posts. My thoughts:

BioWare/EA have been saying for months that the game was going to be different. Their screen shots alone were enough to say that this was something different from Origins. Still, I am aware that mixed and multiple messages hit the airwaves in the few months leading up to the release, and yeah marketing probably needs to regroup on this one. It's totally fair to expect a similar but heightened experience from a sequel in all forms of entertainment, something that videogame companies still like to depart from every now and again.

And they kept a tremendous amount of IP, IP = Intellectual Property - the codexes, the lore, the ancestral characters, the races and tribes, the religious and fanatical groups, some returning characters, even some of the same clothes! It's the mechanical and technical aspects that changed.

I think that the relationship that's been carried on between developer and fanbase online is going to start to change. Being open about everything for months or years before release doesn't necessarily pay off in sales. Already some companies understand that Metacritic isn't going to be the be-all yardstick of success and quality. Others understand that they must do something different, or more wide-reaching, to make desired sales targets. Others understand that in order to please a fervent fanbase, they may have to give up certain amounts of initial sales and hope the good word-of-mouth from the fanbase makes up for it. And yet others will continue to futilely try to capture the audiences of the winners who have already won in certain categories. I think BioWare understands some of this, and is starting to come around on other parts of this.


If you want to be different then you have to be good. Apparently when Diablo came along there was a huge backlash over it. But it was good enough to rise above all that.
DA2 is not a good game, it has so many flaws that you can assault it from any number of angles. When you plan to switch fan bases this is the worst thing that can happen as you are already dealing with a bunch of angry people anyway. The last thing you do is give them so much free ammunition to fire.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 14 avril 2011 - 09:07 .


#197
AkiKishi

AkiKishi
  • Members
  • 10 898 messages

gotthammer wrote...

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

If we're on the subject of game length DA2 is not exactly short.


True. (esp. when you compare it to the single-player campaigns of most first-person shooters ;) )

On the other hand, DA:O did set the bar for some folks (myself among them) for a lot of things, game length included. ^_^

Is it unreasonable to expect as much when DA2 was sold/advertised as the sequel to the game that set some 'standards'? :lol:


Thing is,if you remove the repetative elements from DA2, then the game is short. DA2 is mostly padding.

#198
Cybermortis

Cybermortis
  • Members
  • 1 083 messages

BobSmith101 wrote...

gotthammer wrote...

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

If we're on the subject of game length DA2 is not exactly short.


True. (esp. when you compare it to the single-player campaigns of most first-person shooters ;) )

On the other hand, DA:O did set the bar for some folks (myself among them) for a lot of things, game length included. ^_^

Is it unreasonable to expect as much when DA2 was sold/advertised as the sequel to the game that set some 'standards'? :lol:


Thing is,if you remove the repetative elements from DA2, then the game is short. DA2 is mostly padding.


Imagine how long it would take to finish the game if there were no respawned mobs.

#199
jds1bio

jds1bio
  • Members
  • 1 679 messages

Sabriana wrote...

I am not in any kind of corner, as far as I'm concerned. I usually have a clear pattern of choosing games to purchase. I am an adult, and I have people to feed, clothe, and house. I have to support the upkeep of a car. My 'free' money is limited. Therefore, I am usually very careful with purchases.

Are they in a corner? I doubt it. Once a company feels they can ride roughshot over a large chunk of their fans, they will continue on that path. Does DA 2 have its supporters? Indisputably, and I'm happy for them. However, to me, personally, and imo, DA 2 is 'meh'. It's an average interactive movie/action RPG that was nowhere near worth the 56 euros I paid for it.

So in my conclusion, no one is in any corner. If bioware wishes to continue on this path, I wish them luck and a grande journey. I, on the other hand, will cast my eyes toward other companies that produce RPG's and I will keep the purchasing habits I had, and expand it over all companies. There are enough out there, and action RPG's are churned out by the score. I will re-direct my attention toward the indies and toward the older games. I also will watch the eastern market, who knows, they've shown patches of trying to capture the western market. Maybe they'll manage to do that.


Thanks for posting this.  I'm glad you feel that you're not in a corner, even when you feel like you're down 56 euros.

I bought DA2 out of the gate myself, as I have done with movies and music and books and other things with decidedly mixed results.  I got my playtime's worth out of this game, but I just don't like that BioWare is passing story constraints directly on to the player (import save retcons, no-choice choices), when the story's climax is about making a choice.  If they're going to continue weave different story types into an RPG, I think that these types of things need to be considered.  I know that there are other factors that contribute to your assessment of BioWare running over a chunk of its fanbase, but if more people had said "it had a pretty cool ending where my choice mattered", perceptions might have swung more positively.

You've decided to depart from the path BioWare seems to be following and move on, yet still keep an open mind via indie games and such.  That's cool, but is there really no more room in that open mind for BioWare?

#200
jds1bio

jds1bio
  • Members
  • 1 679 messages

Cybermortis wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

gotthammer wrote...

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

If we're on the subject of game length DA2 is not exactly short.


True. (esp. when you compare it to the single-player campaigns of most first-person shooters ;) )

On the other hand, DA:O did set the bar for some folks (myself among them) for a lot of things, game length included. ^_^

Is it unreasonable to expect as much when DA2 was sold/advertised as the sequel to the game that set some 'standards'? :lol:


Thing is,if you remove the repetative elements from DA2, then the game is short. DA2 is mostly padding.


Imagine how long it would take to finish the game if there were no respawned mobs.


Well, I can tell you that playing through the game on Hard, then playing through the game on Casual took about half that time.  Far less replaying of battles, but also much less time on pause.  I don't think the game would be all that shorter without respawns on Casual, since you can slice them up within a few seconds anyway. 

I think there are some battles where the respawns are tactically effective, and some battles where they are ridiculous and they just should have had more enemies in play at the start of the battle.