263 réponses à ce sujet

[jds1bio]

BobSmith101 wrote...

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.

Well first, let's tell those angry people not to waste their lives being angry over a videogame.  I know it's $60 dollars or 60 euros or whatever, but at some point they need to come out of the corner and let it go.

Everything can be assaulted from any number of angles.  I chose a few angles for this thread alone.  While we don't have a final word on whether BioWare wanted to switch fanbases with this game, that does seem to be a question in people's minds.  I think it's a question of augmentation more than switching, but that's just me.

Also, these things sometimes are a factor of time.  We all know stories of people who were successful at one thing, and then try something new and bomb at it the first time before becoming really good at it after a while.

[jds1bio]

MrTijger wrote...

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.  Some good points.

If so many people really think that DA2 is a setup for DLC, then BioWare really is in a corner.  If they release the DLC, then those people will say "I told you so...see?"  If they decide not to release DLC, then they will say "Hah...we're on to you and we were right".  Either way, that group of people would be "right", but still not satisfied in any way.  When part of your fanbase feels they are right, and feels they are not satisfied, you'll never stop hearing about it no matter what you do.  So I wouldn't be surprised if BioWare does whatever is best for BioWare regarding DA2's DLC.

As far as having time for games, I see that these days many reviewers and forum posters will complete games far more quickly than I do, and either rate their prowess or degrade the experience based on that.  While I have no doubt some people's eye/hand skills are better than mine for certain games, I wonder how many people actually approach gaming in terms of wanting to "savor" the experience.  DA2 may not be your choice of game to savor, but there is a lot more to experience in games beyond the repetitive or beyond "clearing a level", if you seek it.

I've been wondering about that "average gamer 34 years old" thing.  We're starting to have different sub-segments of the gaming population, and the developers who make the games, making their voices known.  But I think that you have to be careful when targeting segments vs. making the game you want to make.  If you make the game you want to make, it doesn't matter what someone else does or thinks, so the greater the chances that multiple segments will enjoy it (i.e. "Red Dead Redemption").  Paul Haggis spent decades floating from job to job as a screenwriter, writing what he thought other people wanted, but didn't get his huge break until he finally wrote what he wanted to write ("Crash").

But if you assign a certain value to a product made for a target segment, and someone comes along and commoditizes what you do, then you're value drops no matter what people think (i.e. Miley Cyrus vs. Rebecca Black's "Friday").    So if DA2 is predominantly targeted to that 80%, or any other specific segment, that carries certain risks with a potential reward of covering that segment.  But if DA2 is simply the game BioWare wanted to make, the greater the chances that many people will like it.  But as the overall reception of the game shows, it's still a chance. 

Sometimes it's just a function of time, though.  Mozart wasn't the universally praised composer during his lifetime that he is now.

Modifié par jds1bio, 14 avril 2011 - 05:19 .

[Ieolus]

jds1bio wrote...

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?

I think her point is not that there is no room for Bioware, but that Bioware lost the benefit of the doubt with DA2.  For some (most?) a Bioware RPG was a "buy immediate" or "preorder blind" game, and now that will most likely not be the case.

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

jds1bio wrote...

MrTijger wrote...

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.  Some good points.

If so many people really think that DA2 is a setup for DLC, then BioWare really is in a corner.  If they release the DLC, then those people will say "I told you so...see?"  If they decide not to release DLC, then they will say "Hah...we're on to you and we were right".  Either way, that group of people would be "right", but still not satisfied in any way.  When part of your fanbase feels they are right, and feels they are not satisfied, you'll never stop hearing about it no matter what you do.  So I wouldn't be surprised if BioWare does whatever is best for BioWare regarding DA2's DLC.

As far as having time for games, I see that these days many reviewers and forum posters will complete games far more quickly than I do, and either rate their prowess or degrade the experience based on that.  While I have no doubt some people's eye/hand skills are better than mine for certain games, I wonder how many people actually approach gaming in terms of wanting to "savor" the experience.  DA2 may not be your choice of game to savor, but there is a lot more to experience in games beyond the repetitive or beyond "clearing a level", if you seek it.

I've been wondering about that "average gamer 34 years old" thing.  We're starting to have different sub-segments of the gaming population, and the developers who make the games, making their voices known.  But I think that you have to be careful when targeting segments vs. making the game you want to make.  If you make the game you want to make, it doesn't matter what someone else does or thinks, so the greater the chances that multiple segments will enjoy it (i.e. "Red Dead Redemption").  Paul Haggis spent decades floating from job to job as a screenwriter, writing what he thought other people wanted, but didn't get his huge break until he finally wrote what he wanted to write ("Crash").

But if you assign a certain value to a product made for a target segment, and someone comes along and commoditizes what you do, then you're value drops no matter what people think (i.e. Miley Cyrus vs. Rebecca Black's "Friday").    So if DA2 is predominantly targeted to that 80%, or any other specific segment, that carries certain risks with a potential reward of covering that segment.  But if DA2 is simply the game BioWare wanted to make, the greater the chances that many people will like it.  But as the overall reception of the game shows, it's still a chance. 

Sometimes it's just a function of time, though.  Mozart wasn't the universally praised composer during his lifetime that he is now.

I had said somewhere else that I enjoy indie titles these days more than ever. I tend to enjoy games more when I know the developers had as much fun making it as I did playing it.

I understand that there are people who don't have time to dedicate to long epics but I can see where someone from say, Australia doesn't want to drop $90 on a 5 hour game. Just because one person is ok paying for a shorter game doesn't mean everyone else values it the same way.

[Sabriana]

I had said somewhere else that I enjoy indie titles these days more than ever. I tend to enjoy games more when I know the developers had as much fun making it as I did playing it.

I understand that there are people who don't have time to dedicate to long epics but I can see where someone from say, Australia doesn't want to drop $90 on a 5 hour game. Just because one person is ok paying for a shorter game doesn't mean everyone else values it the same way.

This has so much truth in it, it's mind-boogling. Yes, show me that you love your creation, and I'll stick with you. QFT.

[jds1bio]

Sabriana wrote...

I had said somewhere else that I enjoy indie titles these days more than ever. I tend to enjoy games more when I know the developers had as much fun making it as I did playing it.

I understand that there are people who don't have time to dedicate to long epics but I can see where someone from say, Australia doesn't want to drop $90 on a 5 hour game. Just because one person is ok paying for a shorter game doesn't mean everyone else values it the same way.

This has so much truth in it, it's mind-boogling. Yes, show me that you love your creation, and I'll stick with you. QFT.

But then when Mike Laidlaw is quoted talking about the things he likes in DA2 and being pleased with certain things, some people's reactions are as if Merrill casted the Horror spell on them.

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

jds1bio wrote...

Sabriana wrote...

I had said somewhere else that I enjoy indie titles these days more than ever. I tend to enjoy games more when I know the developers had as much fun making it as I did playing it.

I understand that there are people who don't have time to dedicate to long epics but I can see where someone from say, Australia doesn't want to drop $90 on a 5 hour game. Just because one person is ok paying for a shorter game doesn't mean everyone else values it the same way.

This has so much truth in it, it's mind-boogling. Yes, show me that you love your creation, and I'll stick with you. QFT.

But then when Mike Laidlaw is quoted talking about the things he likes in DA2 and being pleased with certain things, some people's reactions are as if Merrill casted the Horror spell on them.

Then he goes to quote metrics as a reason design decisions were made. They needed a winter release and sadly DA2 was the sacrifice that had to be made. Old Republic is just around the corner. The changes that everyone dislikes so much was the result of making the series marketable to a wider audience. I have no problem with Laidlaw working on his own project, I enjoyed Jade Empire for what it was. In every interveiw I've read of his he's choking on so much PR speak it's a wonder why he hasn't drowned.

[HeliusOD]

The main flaw with Dragon Age 2 wait scratch that Dragon Age: "The Legend? of Hawke"

"Embark upon an all-new adventure that takes place across an entire decade and shapes itself around every decision you make. Assuming its a straightline and you don't expect the decisions to matter." (If i could add spoliers i could explain what i mean by this).

(We have Pre-) Determine (d) your rise to power from a destitute refugee to the revered champion of the land.

Think like a general and fight like a Spartan (Mostly because we spawned wave after wave of enemies at you to make the game seem longer and to hide lack of development) with dynamic new combat mechanics (console oriented) that put you right in the heart of battle whether you are a mage, rogue, or warrior.
.
Go deeper (insert inception joke here) into the world of Dragon Age with an entirely new cinematic experience that grabs hold of you from the beginning and never lets go.

Discover a whole realm (ok, ok Its the same 5 areas over and over) rendered in stunning detail (as long as you don't use dx11 outdoors) with updated graphics and a new visual style.


Just thought id change some of the key features from the steam store page.

[erynnar]

HeliusOD wrote...

The main flaw with Dragon Age 2 wait scratch that Dragon Age: "The Legend? of Hawke"

"Embark upon an all-new adventure that takes place across an entire decade and shapes itself around every decision you make. Assuming its a straightline and you don't expect the decisions to matter." (If i could add spoliers i could explain what i mean by this).

(We have Pre-) Determine (d) your rise to power from a destitute refugee to the revered champion of the land.

Think like a general and fight like a Spartan (Mostly because we spawned wave after wave of enemies at you to make the game seem longer and to hide lack of development) with dynamic new combat mechanics (console oriented) that put you right in the heart of battle whether you are a mage, rogue, or warrior.
.
Go deeper (insert inception joke here) into the world of Dragon Age with an entirely new cinematic experience that grabs hold of you from the beginning and never lets go.

Discover a whole realm (ok, ok Its the same 5 areas over and over) rendered in stunning detail (as long as you don't use dx11 outdoors) with updated graphics and a new visual style.


Just thought id change some of the key features from the steam store page.

My George Takei impression...Oh Myyyyy. ROFL!!!

[jds1bio]

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

Then he goes to quote metrics as a reason design decisions were made. They needed a winter release and sadly DA2 was the sacrifice that had to be made. Old Republic is just around the corner. The changes that everyone dislikes so much was the result of making the series marketable to a wider audience. I have no problem with Laidlaw working on his own project, I enjoyed Jade Empire for what it was. In every interveiw I've read of his he's choking on so much PR speak it's a wonder why he hasn't drowned.

Not everyone dislikes the changes.  It's possible that DA2 was the one game in their roster that had to be squeezed out ahead of some other ones, sure, I could see that.  But it just sounds like you guys like what some developers say, and  you don't like what other developers say.  Which is fine, but both people may still like their own games as much or more than you like playing them.

I know DA2's marketing was full of marketing-speak, and some of the interviews were too, but not everything he's said has been marketing.  Yes they relied on some metrics, but metrics aren't everything, and if they didn't know it before, they know it now.

So now what?  Here's a game that some people don't like, and those who don't like it have listed every reason they don't like it, more than once.  They've written off every post-release BioWare forum posting or interview as balderdash.  They want the combat to not be dumbed-down, but can't come up with a solution that could be patched into the current game.  They want more and unique maps, but would never slog through the Deep Roads in DA:O again.  Enemies should just die, and never disappear or explode.  Companions should be fully dressable in all types of armor, even if they are different classes, races and have different body shapes.  The game should allow the story and character feelings to emerge, rather than just tell me the situation.  The final battle should never be the exact same as everyone else's ever again.

So is there someone out there who is willing to make THIS game?  The game that not only has these features, but also can stand up to every BioWare interview ever given about DA2 before and after its release?  The game that will put certain people at BioWare in their place?  Because it sounds like that's what some people want.

[JaegerBane]

jdsbio1, I think the main flaw in your post is that you've glossed over a lot of the problems from both sides. You're absolutely correct that the hardcore 'fans' will recoil from any change percieved as 'streamlining' the genre and, inevitably, this will eventually result in them hating all new games in the genre. Similarly, the point about lack of actual choice in the game has merit.

That said, there's a number of problems on both sides that feed into the bigger issues here.

On Bioware's side, the general message that was coming out of the gaming public was that there were many changes that didn't seem tested or were there to accomplish a purpose. The removal of the spell combo system (virtually perfected in ME2), the repetition of areas, the redesign of certain races that no-one actually asked for, the token inclusion of characters for no real reason, the time warps that basically pad out the running of the story etc - they all seemed to feed into a general sense that Bioware didn't really seem to know what they wanted to do with DA2. *That* is where Bioware have painted themselves into a corner - as one review said, 'they've alienated their current audience to appease the audience they don't have', or words to that effect.

On the hardcore player's side, the big problem is that the pattern of responses on the forum over the last few years seems to have lurched towards the negative, rather than balanced. Unfortunately that can send out the wrong message to the devs and we end up with bad design decisions being made on the strength of false warnings. I very much doubt the decision to cut out any mako-esque sections from ME2 was made purely on the basis of whining, but I can think of several people on here (not naming any names - at least, people who appear to have the same name now as did ones before) who both p1ssed and moaned about mako sections back in the ME1 era and are now p1ssing and moaning about the lack of them in ME2. Same goes for Awakening - there were those who claimed it was totally rubbish and I've seen at least a few of the same characters no proclaiming that Awakening's design was better and the way to go.

It's a difficult picture to interpret. That said, a lot of the issues many of us have with DA2 are not down to preconceptions about the genre etc, but more mistakes that a company like Bioware, frankly, shouldn't be making.

[Cybermortis]

Not everyone dislikes the changes. It's possible that DA2 was the one game in their roster that had to be squeezed out ahead of some other ones, sure, I could see that.

This is my hope, since I recall some statement to the effect that they intended to release 2 games per year. If this is correct it would be reasonable to assume that there could be a gap in the development cycle of projects, so something would have had to be pushed for an earlier release. Logically Dragon Age would have been the best option for this, from a marketing prospective, since the name would ensure better sales than a new title of the same quality.

Educated guess is that they are/were hoping that Mass Effect 3 is/was able to restore credibility in Bioware with anyone who was less than impressed with Dragon Age 2. Unless ME3 turns out to be REALLY badly done this is probably a reasonable assumption to have made, especially given the large gap between the two games.

(Note; I'm discounting the SWMMO here, since this doesn't seem to have been included in the '2-games per year' statement).

I know DA2's marketing was full of marketing-speak, and some of the interviews were too, but not everything he's said has been marketing.

Some of the things that seem to have really annoyed people appear to have originated from Bioware's marketing department rather than the development team. (The 'awesome button' was, I think, one of these).

Someone needs to have a few words with the marketing department methinks....

So now what? Here's a game that some people don't like, and those who don't like it have listed every reason they don't like it, more than once. They've written off every post-release BioWare forum posting or interview as balderdash. They want the combat to not be dumbed-down, but can't come up with a solution that could be patched into the current game. They want more and unique maps, but would never slog through the Deep Roads in DA:O again. Enemies should just die, and never disappear or explode. Companions should be fully dressable in all types of armor, even if they are different classes, races and have different body shapes. The game should allow the story and character feelings to emerge, rather than just tell me the situation. The final battle should never be the exact same as everyone else's ever again.

So is there someone out there who is willing to make THIS game? The game that not only has these features, but also can stand up to every BioWare interview ever given about DA2 before and after its release? The game that will put certain people at BioWare in their place? Because it sounds like that's what some people want

We already have such a game - it was called Dragon Age; Origins.

Mass Effect 2 could also be considered to live up to the same sort of hype as well.


The problem with the combat appears, like so many things, to be a case of it not being tested enough. The tweaks needed to create a 'better' combat experience would largely (at least in the eyes of most who have commented on it) involve minor alterations to its speed and the strength of opponents which could probably be implemented in a mod - heck someone may well be working on that as I type. There are a fair number of ideas as to what would have made combat better beyond this, but many of them would require alterations beyond what you could reasonably expect from a mod.

[Loc'n'lol]

Cybermortis wrote...

The tweaks needed to create a 'better' combat experience would largely (at least in the eyes of most who have commented on it) involve minor alterations to its speed and the strength of opponents which could probably be implemented in a mod - heck someone may well be working on that as I type. There are a fair number of ideas as to what would have made combat better beyond this, but many of them would require alterations beyond what you could reasonably expect from a mod.

I liked the combat in DA2 and place it above DAO's combat. That being said, if I was offered the opportunity totweak it for myself, I can certainly think of a lot of things I would change, not all of them minor (I'd probably largely get rid of all scaling for a start...). But to implement most of these things, well a toolset update is recquired. You can tweak some things with unofficial tools and the existiing toolset but it's just barely scratching the surface.

[Cybermortis]

_Loc_N_lol_ wrote...

Cybermortis wrote...

The tweaks needed to create a 'better' combat experience would largely (at least in the eyes of most who have commented on it) involve minor alterations to its speed and the strength of opponents which could probably be implemented in a mod - heck someone may well be working on that as I type. There are a fair number of ideas as to what would have made combat better beyond this, but many of them would require alterations beyond what you could reasonably expect from a mod.

I liked the combat in DA2 and place it above DAO's combat. That being said, if I was offered the opportunity totweak it for myself, I can certainly think of a lot of things I would change, not all of them minor (I'd probably largely get rid of all scaling for a start...). But to implement most of these things, well a toolset update is recquired. You can tweak some things with unofficial tools and the existiing toolset but it's just barely scratching the surface.

It also wouldn't help console users, unless Bioware was willing to allow any such mod to be released through Microsoft and Sony.

I *think* the DAO toolset can be used for DA2, since the core engine is the same. Of course that doesn't mean you could do much to the combat using it *shrugs* .

[Nimrodell]

JaegerBane wrote...

jdsbio1, I think the main flaw in your post is that you've glossed over a lot of the problems from both sides. You're absolutely correct that the hardcore 'fans' will recoil from any change percieved as 'streamlining' the genre and, inevitably, this will eventually result in them hating all new games in the genre. Similarly, the point about lack of actual choice in the game has merit.

That said, there's a number of problems on both sides that feed into the bigger issues here.

On Bioware's side, the general message that was coming out of the gaming public was that there were many changes that didn't seem tested or were there to accomplish a purpose. The removal of the spell combo system (virtually perfected in ME2), the repetition of areas, the redesign of certain races that no-one actually asked for, the token inclusion of characters for no real reason, the time warps that basically pad out the running of the story etc - they all seemed to feed into a general sense that Bioware didn't really seem to know what they wanted to do with DA2. *That* is where Bioware have painted themselves into a corner - as one review said, 'they've alienated their current audience to appease the audience they don't have', or words to that effect.

On the hardcore player's side, the big problem is that the pattern of responses on the forum over the last few years seems to have lurched towards the negative, rather than balanced. Unfortunately that can send out the wrong message to the devs and we end up with bad design decisions being made on the strength of false warnings. I very much doubt the decision to cut out any mako-esque sections from ME2 was made purely on the basis of whining, but I can think of several people on here (not naming any names - at least, people who appear to have the same name now as did ones before) who both p1ssed and moaned about mako sections back in the ME1 era and are now p1ssing and moaning about the lack of them in ME2. Same goes for Awakening - there were those who claimed it was totally rubbish and I've seen at least a few of the same characters no proclaiming that Awakening's design was better and the way to go.

It's a difficult picture to interpret. That said, a lot of the issues many of us have with DA2 are not down to preconceptions about the genre etc, but more mistakes that a company like Bioware, frankly, shouldn't be making.

100% agreed and that's the fact that's been annoying me while reading angry posts. Many features presented in DA2 were actually players requests and same goes on with Mass Effect. Sometimes it seems like ****ing for the sake of it. And all of it got tiresome. To be honest, one needs multiple playthroughs to see how much BW did put their efforts in making this story.

To be honest, I see myself pretty much spoiled gamer now... I am spoiled nowadays. 15 years ago I played Planescape Torment and Baldur's Gate, NWN and I was mesmerized by those games. Then came Warcraft 2 and 3 and WoW, combat became faster, graphics became much better... Oh I loved KOTOR when it came out, being able to fight as dual-wielding jedi weapon master was thrilling and the story was good... and then Mass Effect came out and everything changed for me. I just can't go back to older ways. DA:O was awesome but I hated blighted Deep Roads and everything in Orzammar, was too slow, lasted an eternity. But in the same time I loved it, that was something that brought new foundations for me and my preferences when it comes to good game.

With ME2 it went even further - and I'm still grateful for removing stupid mako and endlessly boring and look-a-like maps. I don't mind being rail-roaded as a player when it comes to quests - after Mankirk's wife in Vanilla WoW and some hidden bits and bobs in KOTOR or DA:O, it is welcomed by me... finally I don't need to alt-tab and read guides to see if I missed something important just for noticing 'some small black patch on the floor in some obscure corner'.

DA2 brought something else that was actually answer and catering to those that were screaming on Mass Effect forums - paragon/renegade and the fact that renegade will get punished for occasional diplomatic solutions if there's not ME1 import (counting bloody points along with counting paragon/renegade major decisions). With DA2 we got double system that actually works - 1st takes in account how player determined his character will be when it comes to personality - nice one, witty one or bad-ass and according to that Hawke will have unique dialogue options plus unique automatic responses or reactions, but that's not all. Bad-ass can actually be a true hero, honest person that does good, and bad-ass can be moraly suspicious or just one that wants to survive. Same goes for other two models too... if you're kind Hawke, it doesn't mean that your kindness will actually be honest one, it doesn't mean that Hawke will be a hero. And there's friendship/rivalry system as a bonus (KOTOR 2 all over again and I hated that then 'cause I never knew which combination of npcs to take with me and whom to take with me to actually get what I need to make 'em jedis or siths - too many hours of playing and reloading spent there lol). Tho DA2 took it further, their reactions are not that predictable as one might think. So, in whole, I really can't understand all this whining about DA2. They listened to players, they experimented and took the risk for introducing something new and honestly, I can't understand how can anyone be so determined to judge so harshly without actually seeing this game entirely. I understand when someone stops playing and says - this is not my cup of tea - but after reading so many angry posts here I realised that many of them didn't even see so many aspects this game offers and keep talking about it like they played it in its full length. As I said - it became tiresome.

Bah, again long post... like it matters...

[Cybermortis]

but after reading so many angry posts here I realised that many of them didn't even see so many aspects this game offers and keep talking about it like they played it in its full length.

Most of the people who've posted to say it isn't a good game did indicate that they have played and finished the game at least once, and quite often twice. That or they have finished the game once and tried to finish again, but just couldn't get more than halfway though a second play before they got sick of it.


The problem for many is less what they were trying or intending to do with the story and gameplay, and more to do with how it was implemented in the 'finished' game. I'm in the 'meh' camp, having finished the game once and having tried and failed to play it though again several times before giving up. However I can see many of the intentions behind the game, and frankly think a lot of them had the potential to make a great game. Unfortunately the road to hell (and poor games) is paved with intentions that were never, or never allowed, to be fully developed.

[jds1bio]

JaegerBane wrote...

jdsbio1, I think the main flaw in your post is that you've glossed over a lot of the problems from both sides. You're absolutely correct that the hardcore 'fans' will recoil from any change percieved as 'streamlining' the genre and, inevitably, this will eventually result in them hating all new games in the genre. Similarly, the point about lack of actual choice in the game has merit.

*That* is where Bioware have painted themselves into a corner - as one review said, 'they've alienated their current audience to appease the audience they don't have', or words to that effect.

On the hardcore player's side, the big problem is that the pattern of responses on the forum over the last few years seems to have lurched towards the negative, rather than balanced. Unfortunately that can send out the wrong message to the devs and we end up with bad design decisions being made on the strength of false warnings.

It's a difficult picture to interpret. That said, a lot of the issues many of us have with DA2 are not down to preconceptions about the genre etc, but more mistakes that a company like Bioware, frankly, shouldn't be making.

Thanks for your feedback.  So much has been written already about the individual flaws of the game, that I wanted to take things from a different angle.  But I understand if people can't leave those things out of the conversation when talking about DA2.

As someone said before, they've moved on, or they won't blindly pre-order or day-one a BioWare game again.  A perfectly valid consumer choice to make, and many would agree with it.  We'll see what effect this has on the open market later this year.

Someone else said that the game people wanted has already been made - Origins.  Again, a valid consumer choice.  But if that's the case, then the absolutely worst worst effect on that person is that he/she might be out some money if they bought it.  I mean, you can't make Origins AGAIN, it's already been done.

I also think that what's keeping some of the forum responses aflame is the estimated sales numbers floating around.  For a game they're not low, and depending on the criteria and time period they're greater than or less than Origins' sales, but they're also not 4 million one month out of the gate.  They're in this sort of "neutral zone" which may influence the likers and dislikers to keep pushing the conversation back and forth.  If DA2 sold 5 million by now, I wonder who the dislikers would be blaming most.  If DA2 sold less than one million, I wonder just how deep some dislikers would be willing to cut.

[jds1bio]

Nimrodell wrote...


DA2 brought something else that was actually answer and catering to those that were screaming on Mass Effect forums - paragon/renegade and the fact that renegade will get punished for occasional diplomatic solutions if there's not ME1 import (counting bloody points along with counting paragon/renegade major decisions). With DA2 we got double system that actually works - 1st takes in account how player determined his character will be when it comes to personality - nice one, witty one or bad-ass and according to that Hawke will have unique dialogue options plus unique automatic responses or reactions, but that's not all. Bad-ass can actually be a true hero, honest person that does good, and bad-ass can be moraly suspicious or just one that wants to survive. Same goes for other two models too... if you're kind Hawke, it doesn't mean that your kindness will actually be honest one, it doesn't mean that Hawke will be a hero. And there's friendship/rivalry system as a bonus (KOTOR 2 all over again and I hated that then 'cause I never knew which combination of npcs to take with me and whom to take with me to actually get what I need to make 'em jedis or siths - too many hours of playing and reloading spent there lol). Tho DA2 took it further, their reactions are not that predictable as one might think. So, in whole, I really can't understand all this whining about DA2. They listened to players, they experimented and took the risk for introducing something new and honestly, I can't understand how can anyone be so determined to judge so harshly without actually seeing this game entirely. I understand when someone stops playing and says - this is not my cup of tea - but after reading so many angry posts here I realised that many of them didn't even see so many aspects this game offers and keep talking about it like they played it in its full length. As I said - it became tiresome.

Bah, again long post... like it matters...

Well, it does matter.  I read it, and I bolded some things that hopefully some other people will take a closer look at.

But again, I think it's hard for people to have a conversation about DA2 and leave out certain things they do not like.

[YohkoOhno]

Sabriana wrote...

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.

Good luck with that.

http://www.escapistm...h-The-Witcher-2

With The Witcher 2[/i] just a month away, CD Projekt used today's livestreamed conference to finally reveal details about launch of the upcoming RPG. We might as well get this little tidbit out of the way first: the game will use SecuROM for a one-time online activation when it's installed. It's a minimal implementation that presenter Tomasz Gop, the senior producer on The Witcher 2[/i], explained is not meant to be "troublesome" but simply to keep pirates at bay prior to launch. "It's pretty much the only way we could make sure that the game is going to be safe until May 17 and it's not the pirates who are going to play the game first," he said.

[Dragoonlordz]

It shouldn't have been a story about Hawke, he was not the main character in it. I didn't help Anders at all in his plans (not saying what plans) but in reality the story is about him. He is the main character not Hawke. The ending drives this home so hard given no choices you make through the entire game (what very little there was to begin with) has no affect.

[jds1bio]

YohkoOhno wrote...


http://www.escapistm...h-The-Witcher-2

Thanks for the link, interesting article.  It'll be interesting to see how DA2's competition does, and how DA2 continues to perform, now that both companies will be disappointing their fanbase in some way.

[Ieolus]

Nimrodell wrote...

DA2 brought something else that was actually answer and catering to those that were screaming on Mass Effect forums - paragon/renegade and the fact that renegade will get punished for occasional diplomatic solutions if there's not ME1 import (counting bloody points along with counting paragon/renegade major decisions)....

So because Mass Effect players were screaming for a better gameplay mechanic with their dialogue wheel, Dragon Age got saddled with it?  How does that make sense?  DA and ME are two different types of games, or atleast WERE, until Bioware decided to throw out the traditional RPG for a hybrid action/rpg.

Thanks, but no thanks.  If I wanted an improved dialogue wheel, I would wait for ME3, not expect it in DA2.

[jds1bio]

Ieolus wrote...

Nimrodell wrote...

DA2 brought something else that was actually answer and catering to those that were screaming on Mass Effect forums - paragon/renegade and the fact that renegade will get punished for occasional diplomatic solutions if there's not ME1 import (counting bloody points along with counting paragon/renegade major decisions)....

So because Mass Effect players were screaming for a better gameplay mechanic with their dialogue wheel, Dragon Age got saddled with it?  How does that make sense?  DA and ME are two different types of games, or atleast WERE, until Bioware decided to throw out the traditional RPG for a hybrid action/rpg.

Thanks, but no thanks.  If I wanted an improved dialogue wheel, I would wait for ME3, not expect it in DA2.

I don't know what the big deal is in saying "yeah, the teams look across the aisle every now and again, and we share ideas" instead of downplaying it.  After all, if someone didn't get their chocolate in someone else's peanut butter at the right time, we wouldn't have peanut butter cups.  If this forum is any indication, chocolatiers must have freaked out the first time they saw one.

Anyhoo, the dialogue wheel totally worked in DA2 for tone, and in companion and side quests. Sorry you expected the old 1-2-3-4 dialogue options.  So if that wheel is in ME3, it will be an improvement over the click-fast-before-you-miss-it option (which you're always tempted to do because it's there for a limited time).

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

The dialog wheel would have worked better if the choice you selected is what actually came out of their mouths. God my Hawke was such a ponce.

[Doyle41]

I think Laidlaw was concerned for people playing DA:O briefly never to return. How do you correct alienating the "core fans" that quit DA 2 after one playthrough?
I don't mind a company making changes or trying to grow their market. I feel as though that the "core fans" were taken advantage of.
I also think the way that they shrug off many of the negative feedback is arrogant and very annoying. Curious to see how future presells go.