127 réponses à ce sujet

[The Angry One]

Plaintiff wrote...

Right, because he's totally gonna badmouth a game he helped produce in a widespread publication. "Hey guys, don't buy my product, it's junk. I don't need to pay off my mortgage this month".

Contrary to popular belief, the customer is NOT always right, and there's no such thing as "right" when it comes to videogames anyway. In my opinion, DA2 did almost eveything better than Origins, with the exceptions of party member interaction, which I felt could've been expanded, and the dialogue wheel which was at times innaccurate and I felt didn't offer enough variety in responses. The issues you mention don't bug me in the least.

Besides, who's to say Laidlaw doesn't genuinely feel this way? He's just as entitled to his view as you are to yours. When people say being disagreed with is a 'slap in the face', I roll my eyes. Being unable to handle dissenting opinions is a sign of immaturity to me.

Sorry, no.
He can still defend his game and call it good while admitting it's blatant flaws, such as the cloned areas.
They are blatant and lazy design. I see no reason why he can't say "Yes, it was a bad decision. This will never happen again".
Stop making this a black/white fallacy.

[Persephone]

The Angry One wrote...

Sorry, no.
He can still defend his game and call it good while admitting it's blatant flaws, such as the cloned areas.
They are blatant and lazy design. I see no reason why he can't say "Yes, it was a bad decision. This will never happen again".
Stop making this a black/white fallacy.

I work in sales and marketing.

And no, that's not how it works.

[Darth Krytie]

I think it's ridiculous to expect a company man to spout anything but company lines. It's unreasonable to expect him to blurt out a huge mea cupla especially since there are plenty who do enjoy the game, like me.

Also, I know that more people preferred Origins...but I wouldn't consider slumping sales over this and the next month as a sign of a huge flop. There's an industry-wide slump...according to an article I read.

Anyhow, I think the number one sin of Dragon Age 2 is not being Dragon Age: Origins.

Modifié par Darth Krytie, 15 avril 2011 - 07:35 .

[Mikeuicus]

If he admitted the game's flaws, that would be the headline. No amount of positive things he said would matter. Every DA2 hater on this forum would post "SEE EVEN MIKE LAIDLAW ADMITS ____!!!" If he admitted but one negative aspect of the game that's the only thing that will matter. He cannot, and will not, for contractual reasons most likely, speak out about the game negatively until well into its release cycle. Perhaps around the time an expansion is in the works: "Well we listened to the feedback and did such and such".

One month into a game's release is far too soon to shoot your own product in the foot by calling it flawed, so don't expect Bioware to do it.

[stobie]

Whatever flaws the game might have, I'm glad they don't base *anything* on forum chatter. It's a hive of negativity and self-serving criticism. Let them watch sales - if people don't share positive word of mouth, sales will drop, & they'll notice. That means a lot more than one a tiny group of forum posters believe, aka 'know,' where opinions are stated as facts.

Modifié par stobie, 15 avril 2011 - 07:46 .

[Foolsfolly]

M8DMAN wrote...

Mike's excuse for the "recycled" level design's was just plain retarded.  He just blew off the question like it was nothing.

The bad environments in DA2 have to be my biggest complaint.

Mike has the best excuse in the world!

That excuse goes a little something like this: "Some committee of eggheads decided the release date, and given the short length of development time we could not both write a story and design maps. We decided to have 7 maps and a lengthier story instead of a shorter game with varied enviroments."

"AND YOU SHOULD BE GRATEFUL!" -Arishok line reading...

[Rockpopple]

Foolsfolly wrote...

M8DMAN wrote...

Mike's excuse for the "recycled" level design's was just plain retarded.  He just blew off the question like it was nothing.

The bad environments in DA2 have to be my biggest complaint.

Mike has the best excuse in the world!

That excuse goes a little something like this: "Some committee of eggheads decided the release date, and given the short length of development time we could not both write a story and design maps. We decided to have 7 maps and a lengthier story instead of a shorter game with varied enviroments."

"AND YOU SHOULD BE GRATEFUL!" -Arishok line reading...

lol. Mental image of Laidlaw pulling an Arishok and screaming that line brought a big smile to my face.

[TheBlackBaron]

Foolsfolly wrote...

"AND YOU SHOULD BE GRATEFUL!" -Arishok line reading...

This is how I shall forever picture Mike Laidlaw and the DA2 development team. 

[Dracotamer]

LOL, sorry but fans actually know best, they will see when sales continue to slow down and DA3 sells worse then any other game.

[The Angry One]

Persephone wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Sorry, no.
He can still defend his game and call it good while admitting it's blatant flaws, such as the cloned areas.
They are blatant and lazy design. I see no reason why he can't say "Yes, it was a bad decision. This will never happen again".
Stop making this a black/white fallacy.

I work in sales and marketing.

And no, that's not how it works.

Laidlaw is not a marketer. I've long since given up on the BioWare marketing department for their gross misrepresenation of BioWare products (specifically focusing on Sheploo and Beard!Hawke as if they're the only ones who ever existed).
We have every right to espect a little candor from the designers.

[Justin2k]

Well with all due respect Laidlaw should be fired/demoted/moved to another project. Because he failed, and in big business, theres a price to pay for failure.

That being said, he's hardly in a position where he can do anything but defend DA2 and himself. If he comes out and says "yeah, it was a flop, we let down our fans and the game pretty much sucks" then he's inviting the sack.

If he says "EA made me do it!" then holy hell breaks loose.

I don't blame him for being the way he is, but he sucks, and deep down I think he knows this.

[Dracotamer]

I don't care if anyone made him do it, he could of handled it with much more tact and without slapping us in the face.

[jds1bio]

Some of these posts have been kind of brutal regarding the recent interviews.  People want other people fired, even though it benefits them in no way whatsoever.  Others don't ever want to hear from them again.  Over a videogame.  A videogame. 

If your close friend or relative was responsible for DA2, or worked on DA2, would you want them fired too?  Are you sure that's how you want to continue to respond to this?  I said this in another post and I'd like you to consider it:

May I suggest that perhaps these guys don't actually know WHAT to say, or the best way to say it in regards to the feedback and some of the review scores?  When in recent memory has BioWare received such low scores and negative feedback to this degree?  And how much experience do some  people have with criticism of such range and sharpness?  From some angles, this may be their first rodeo, so to speak.

I see this all the time, where people are humming along for quite a while, and then they have to handle something that never quite came up before - like lay off people or explain what will happen with a merger, or take care of a sick relative,or withstand a public rebuke.  Everyone is going to react differently, and some people won't react as well as you'd like.  Some people might even lean on a script for help.  Sure, it's easy just to write them off.  But once you understand that they too have to settle in and get their arms around the issue, you may decide to be more tolerant.

Modifié par jds1bio, 17 avril 2011 - 04:06 .

[TJPags]

The Angry One wrote...

Sorry, no.
He can still defend his game and call it good while admitting it's blatant flaws, such as the cloned areas.
They are blatant and lazy design. I see no reason why he can't say "Yes, it was a bad decision. This will never happen again".
Stop making this a black/white fallacy.

Or, they can wait until DA3 comes out, and then bash DA2.

You know, like they did with Origins.

[ElvaliaRavenHart]

Lucky for Laidlaw that BioWare and EA will make the decision in regards to his job.

He should have used more tact in responding to the interviewers when asked about the fan's reaction to the new game. Bashing people who put money in your pocket isn't a smart idea. If you want your products to sell then you do have to listen to what your customers are willing to buy. Discrediting their opinion is foolish.

I think if they hadn't used all the same area maps over, and over again and taken us to other areas within the Free Marches like they did in Origins they would have had a winner. It would have been nice to have a quest with Sebastian and going to Starkhaven (within the game) and find out how the circle in Starkhaven burnt down. There is another major city in the Free Marches and we could have gone there as well.

People keep saying the development time was low - I for one disagree with this. They starting working on this game before DAO was even released in the stores. I remember reading this here on the forums somewhere.

I like the game, but I don't love it like Origins. I also agree with a poster above, the title to the new game was wrong. It shouldn't have been marketed as a sequel to the original game, hugh mistake right here.

I do think they did a fair job in the continuation from the first game. I'd like to get on with the dlc or have more dlc and expansions and all the bugs fixed from the first game and expansion.

Has to suck for Laidlaw that the former original designer and lead was right after all.

Modifié par ElvaliaRavenHart, 17 avril 2011 - 05:29 .

[Oneiropolos]

Do I think several errors were made in how this game was made? Heck yes. But when I loosened up and played through the game another time, I discovered things I missed the first time. Then so I got curious and played it a third time...did things a little different, brought different companions, found myself cracking up from things they said that I didn't hear the first two times. The fourth time, I played sarcastic!Hawke the first time and still rearranging the party to bring people along differently. And I still laughed and had way more fun with the game than I should have for the fourth time through. The fact is...it actually is a replayable game if you're not caught up on, "But I already know what happens!". I mean, okay, let's look at games that have big reviews. Assassin's Creed:Brotherhood is an example of this. Am I enjoying playing it right now? Yep. Have I forgotten there's actually a main plot to it? Uh. Mostly >.> I'm just running around rebuilding Rome and trying to find everything and halfway through I got this idea to find ways to kill off all my male assassins so I'd only have female ones because I'm not replaying it just so I can use a cheat to turn them all into females. So then that meant hours of finding civilians and going "Eh, I'll save you're life but I'm not recruiting you" when I found a male.

The fact is, I'm pretty sure I'm not really doing what most people do their first time through the game and I'll probably never play through it again. And I'm certainly not finding the main plot compelling enough for me to even wonder what happens...because unlike some companies (BIOWARE), Ubisoft couldn't get their act together and I already KNOW what happens at the end of the game because the spoilers have been out for the months and months that the game has been released on console and not on the PC. I'm finding a different way to enjoy the game to compensate for that, and that's fine. I mean, honestly, I love the fighting and climbing buildings and all that of AC. I remember the first time I played it, cringing, and going, "I'm not a -serious- gamer. I'm going to SUCK." and the game made me feel way more awesome than I actually am with Altair's movements. I consider that successful. But are there things that I feel just...are way limiting about the AC world? Yes. Good grief, yes. But it's doing well because honestly, besides changing things a bit, the whole....feel of the game hasn't transitioned from the first one that much. And you can't complain about character choices because you don't GET any. This is how most games honestly work.

DAII did change some things I wish they didn't change. I do feel like the recycling was a little...ridiculous. I also don't LIKE some of the character choices made. I'd prefer a much more open playground. But we went from a game that was never guaranteed to have a sequel, so we could do whatever we wanted because it was our sandbox, to now they're planning for the future. This had to be a huge transition for the team in the way they thought, and maybe they overcompensated too much for that. At least visiting houses is STILL better than "No, you can only talk to the companion if you STOP BY THIS TREE... no, not that tree, this one. Are you holding down a key to highlight all interactable objects in the area? Yes. THAT one. Well, no, silly, you don't get to pick WHO you talk to..." That was Awakening companion conversations for the most part. And it was bad. It was just bad. I don't feel they fixed it all the way with DAII, but it was a step in the right direction.

So yeah, there were step backs.. steps forward again.. steps to the side in some cases... but I honestly did enjoy DAII once I enjoyed it for what it was instead of for what I -wanted- it to be. The writing is still witty and amusing, the characters are still vibrant, and the world is still thriving... I'm just eager to see more of the world and I hope they take that into consideration for the next game.

Modifié par Oneiropolos, 17 avril 2011 - 05:51 .

[wowpwnslol]

Ksandor wrote...

You forget that Laidlaw perfectly knows that you are absolutely right. He deliberately ignores you. Because giving an interview is a PR issue. They always do what their PR company tells them to do. I don't think he even has the freedom to say what he really thinks. "EA dictates".

Laidlaw just tries to secure the new Dragon Age II sells. He will never admit to a magazine that they made a mistake. Their concern is to fool more people to buy this inferior game.

They WILL never play your ball unless Dragon Age II sales will be so low that they won't make any profit. Do you see it happening?

I don't think that Bioware has fredoom to be more creative in game design either. I think Bioware CEOs or EA people dictate Bioware what to do when it comes to major game decisions like streamlining the combat and yes, dumbing the game down. If you work at a company you will understand.

They are out there to make money not to develop quality products or satisfy the customer. We are an ignored tangent. Once Bioware cared about fans. That is because they were not rich enough to rely on mass PR marketing to sell mediocre products good. So they cared fans in order to make quality niche products to compete with all the other stupid games which are crap but have more marketing budget.

Now EA backs Bioware and they know that if you do good marketing your mediocre games will sell more to general audience than the high quality games you spend more time and money.

This trend will not improve in the future. It will get worse. Because wether you like it or not crowds usually buy mediocre products. Not every customer takes the game they buy seriously as we do. Don't you read the posts here? People are cool man! They say us "Sheesh! It is just a game! Calm down!". Like we do not pay the game.... They are shocked to read why we bother to ciriticize the game and fanboys maul us here but they are not banned. Because they are used by EA to police the boards to scare away the negative criticism. Voluntary bodyguards for free...

Amazing post. Could not have said it better myself.

[Bmeszaros]

ElvaliaRavenHart wrote...

People keep saying the development time was low - I for one disagree with this. They starting working on this game before DAO was even released in the stores. I remember reading this here on the forums somewhere. 

In the first Dev Diary, they did mention that they had brainstorming sessions for ideas before DA:O was released to the public.

How far "Brainstorming" is to "Developing" or "putting your ideas to use", is left up to the interpreter.


I would argue that sessions were most likely held from probably 2 months before Origins release, meaning September, 2009. (open to interpretation, of course.)


Considering that they went back to the drawing board on almost the entire series (Again, Laidlaw's decision, I assume), I would agree there wasn't enough time allotted.

[TEWR]

Plaintiff wrote...

Right, because he's totally gonna badmouth a game he helped produce in a widespread publication. "Hey guys, don't buy my product, it's junk. I don't need to pay off my mortgage this month".

Contrary to popular belief, the customer is NOT always right, and there's no such thing as "right" when it comes to videogames anyway. In my opinion, DA2 did almost eveything better than Origins, with the exceptions of party member interaction, which I felt could've been expanded, and the dialogue wheel which was at times innaccurate and I felt didn't offer enough variety in responses. The issues you mention don't bug me in the least.

Besides, who's to say Laidlaw doesn't genuinely feel this way? He's just as entitled to his view as you are to yours. When people say being disagreed with is a 'slap in the face', I roll my eyes. Being unable to handle dissenting opinions is a sign of immaturity to me.

I agree with this whole entire thing. I find it funny that a lot of the people on these forums that are immature when I say something they disagree with are usually considerably older than me.

[Ariella]

Bmeszaros wrote...

ElvaliaRavenHart wrote...

People keep saying the development time was low - I for one disagree with this. They starting working on this game before DAO was even released in the stores. I remember reading this here on the forums somewhere. 

In the first Dev Diary, they did mention that they had brainstorming sessions for ideas before DA:O was released to the public.

How far "Brainstorming" is to "Developing" or "putting your ideas to use", is left up to the interpreter.


I would argue that sessions were most likely held from probably 2 months before Origins release, meaning September, 2009. (open to interpretation, of course.)


Considering that they went back to the drawing board on almost the entire series (Again, Laidlaw's decision, I assume), I would agree there wasn't enough time allotted.

Mark Darrah would have had to sign on as would Dave Gaider, and a lot of the decisions came because of consumer feedback, especially in the art design department. I can't tell you how many times I saw the word"generic" in reference to the visuals in  Origins or even talking about the setting itself as a supposed rip off of "x" fantasy setting.

[Foolsfolly]

Supposedly they were working on the Qunari redesign before Origins even came out. They knew before anyone played the game that the Qunari design (tall bronze hobbit-ear'd humans) was a weak design.

That's the earliest I know they worked on DA2. And that's just visuals for a race not actually making the game.

[ElvaliaRavenHart]

Ariella wrote...

Bmeszaros wrote...

ElvaliaRavenHart wrote...

People keep saying the development time was low - I for one disagree with this. They starting working on this game before DAO was even released in the stores. I remember reading this here on the forums somewhere. 

In the first Dev Diary, they did mention that they had brainstorming sessions for ideas before DA:O was released to the public.

How far "Brainstorming" is to "Developing" or "putting your ideas to use", is left up to the interpreter.


I would argue that sessions were most likely held from probably 2 months before Origins release, meaning September, 2009. (open to interpretation, of course.)


Considering that they went back to the drawing board on almost the entire series (Again, Laidlaw's decision, I assume), I would agree there wasn't enough time allotted.

Mark Darrah would have had to sign on as would Dave Gaider, and a lot of the decisions came because of consumer feedback, especially in the art design department. I can't tell you how many times I saw the word"generic" in reference to the visuals in  Origins or even talking about the setting itself as a supposed rip off of "x" fantasy setting.

Wasn't it more the console players having issue with the art design of the original game?  I play on the pc and I never felt that the first game was that bad.  I do know on the PS3 version it really doesn't look that good (DAO).  I understand why they changed the art direction.  I think they did a great job on alot of the areas and technical side of making the game.  I just wish more thought had gone into those maps.  Using the same areas over and over is what got to me and is my only real disappointment with the game. 

[Dracotamer]

Well DA2 sales are plummeting, so hopefully Bioware will realize that it's core fan base has the power to make or break their sales simply with word of mouth and will put Mike Laidlaw on a leash until he learns tact and respect for Bioware's fans.

[Persephone]

Dracotamer wrote...

Well DA2 sales are plummeting, so hopefully Bioware will realize that it's core fan base has the power to make or break their sales simply with word of mouth and will put Mike Laidlaw on a leash until he learns tact and respect for Bioware's fans.

Because this is so tactful and respectful.

Yes, hate campaigns, brainwashing and diatribes are powerful. Nothing new. They have killed entire franchises before, often undeservedly so. (Gabriel Knight, anyone? If I ever get that "core fanbase" within arm's reach I'll give them a pat on the back for shooting themselves in the foot and having a hand in killing an entire genre. You "true" RPG fans think your genre is in danger? At least you still get yearly releases while we adventure fans are living on bloody scraps) All this will accomplish is to get one of the best recent RPG franchises dropped in favor of ME and more KOTOR clones. Damaging Sales via hate campaigns will kill the franchise. Giving constructive criticism might improve it. But hey, fanaticism calls, right?

[TheBlackBaron]

Persephone wrote...

Because this is so tactful and respectful.

Yes, hate campaigns, brainwashing and diatribes are powerful. Nothing new. They have killed entire franchises before, often undeservedly so. (Gabriel Knight, anyone? If I ever get that "core fanbase" within arm's reach I'll give them a pat on the back for shooting themselves in the foot and having a hand in killing an entire genre. You "true" RPG fans think your genre is in danger? At least you still get yearly releases while we adventure fans are living on bloody scraps) All this will accomplish is to get one of the best recent RPG franchises dropped in favor of ME and more KOTOR clones. Damaging Sales via hate campaigns will kill the franchise. Giving constructive criticism might improve it. But hey, fanaticism calls, right?

Ah, adventure games were already nearing the end of their rope by the time Blood of the Sacred, Blood of the Damned was released. 

I hardly think a negative reaction to one release that everybody knows was rushed out the door is going to kill a franchise, much less a genre. 

Modifié par TheBlackBaron, 20 avril 2011 - 10:18 .