224 réponses à ce sujet

[Bio Addict]

JohnEpler wrote...

I should also mention - strawmanning is also not acceptable behaviour.

Since when do you hate farmers Epler?  You've changed.

[Killjoy Cutter]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

I don't believe that Laidlaw's actually ever "bashed" Origins. 

My impression is that he's trying to avoid drowning in the reaction to DA2 by standing on DA:O's shoulders until it drowns. 

[Everwarden]

LiquidGrape wrote...
When people start demanding people be fired because they have this delusional idea of a single person as a legitimate scapegoat for what aspects they took issue with, that's when I start talking about self-entitlement.

Depends on how you define 'demand'. EA doesn't have to do anything, I'm not going to call the RPG police on them if Laidlaw is the lead for DA3 and continues taking DA is the wrong direction, I just won't buy DA3. They got notice in advance. If I hadn't given notice in advance about my problems with DA2 and they were still there in DA3 I wouldn't have much ground to complain. 

We can question creative decisions, sure. But ultimately, those decisions are none of our business. If we do not agree with the direction a certain IP is headed, we can always abandon it and move on to something else with which we have a more successful rapport.

Well the decisions are our business as consumers of Bioware products, and it's only polite to tell them if their products are going downhill to the point where you aren't going to buy them anymore. If DA2 sold more than DAO and people love it, fine, it would be ridiculous to tell them to do things 'my way' when 'my way' would make them less money. Though all evidence we currently have suggests that Origin sold a -lot- more than DA2, and DA2 had a vast "instant pre-order" luxury DA3 will not have. 

Modifié par Everwarden, 15 avril 2011 - 07:11 .

[Mecher3k]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Mecher3k wrote...

axl99 wrote...

Arrogant? Mike Laidlaw?

What about the people asking for him to get fired? What authority do they have?

The $60 dollars I paid for a Dragon Age game, not Dragon Effect.

You know what right your $60 gives you? The right to give feedback

I already knew that, the rest you said is just wrong.

[Miashi]

Strangely Brown wrote...
I was more referring to the irony of you accusing the guy of being subjective and then pointing out the importance of recognizing DA2 as a terrible game which is equally subjective.
Comprende?

Sure:O

[AtreiyaN7]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

I don't believe that Laidlaw's actually ever "bashed" Origins. 

My impression is that he's trying to avoid drowning in the reaction to DA2 by standing on DA:O's shoulders until it drowns. 

My impression is that when someone says <x> didn't work, etc. it's not "bashing." And as people have pointed out, you know, Laidlaw did work on DA:O. My other impression is that threads like this is why I ignore the main forums for the most part - it's filled with useless twaddle and insults.

[Volourn]

"right... enemies exploding in front of your face, popping out of thin air, that was EA's decision, not Mike Laidlawls."

You claiming he went behind his bosses back? If that were true, he'd be fired and they'd be completely incompetent. WOW!

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

Miashi wrote...

As much as I didn't like DA:2 that much, this topic is garbage.
"I won't buy your game if dude x still works on it"
Guess what, this game wasn't the work of a single person, and even if there are more visible faces to the game than others, the game was a group decision.

And what if the decision to turn DA:2 into a more action-ish game was not his decision at all, but he was mandated to execute it? All it takes is someone with a vision that believes it hard enough to convince everyone else that they're right.

Just as the infamous words of one Bioware employee "button" and "awesome" are now inseparable, I believe Mr. Laidlaw is becoming attached to the design changes in DA 2. This is not wholely unfounded since he's had several interviews now where he has stood in staunch support of the product. As Lead Designer, he has a lot of responsibilities and, to his credit, is taking credit for them. So if the game bombs in the long run, it will be interesting to see what happens to him. I might buy DA 3 if significant changes are made to both the DA:O and DA 2 models, but Laidlaw has kind of pushed alot of the new design changes and backed them and it is unlikely they will change with the same Lead Designer on the next project unless Zeschuk and Muzyka say something.

We won't know the true story behind his influence till many years down the line when he's no longer working at Bioware or DA 2's sales are no longer a priority for the company. I don't hope the guy gets fired, I hope the best for him in his life. I do believe though that DA 3 won't likely change for the better if he's still in a position of authority so I hope he's delivering office mail or something, someplace far away from effecting design decisions in this type of game.

[Mecher3k]

Strangely Brown wrote...

Mecher3k wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Mecher3k wrote...

axl99 wrote...

Arrogant? Mike Laidlaw?

What about the people asking for him to get fired? What authority do they have?

The $60 dollars I paid for a Dragon Age game, not Dragon Effect.

You know what right your $60 gives you? The right to give feedback

I already knew that, the rest you said is just wrong.

None of this is true.  Your $60 gives you the right to play the game.  That's it. 

Which I said it did, but you said none of what I said is true. Which would mean I don't have the right to provide feedback.  But you said I do have that right as well.

So which is it?

Your lack of something is showing.

[H1natachan]

I'll be holding back and will wait for the reviews before deciding.

[Volourn]

Attention seeking. That's what all threads are for, and nothing wrong with it.

[MorrigansLove]

Mike Laidlaw wasn't even part of the origins project until near the very end. I think he was in charge in how the DLC was handled, which is obviously why they were all so lackluster (excluding shale).

[Killjoy Cutter]

Volourn wrote...

Attention seeking. That's what all threads are for, and nothing wrong with it.

Perhaps that's your motive.  Don't pretend to know anyone else's motive, you're not a mind-reader.

[Volourn]

Or am I?

[Volourn]

I dunno. I've been told I can't read minds, and that might mean i can't read my mind ... so.. am I a mind reader? Otehrs think they can rea dmy mind better me so I'll let them decide if I am a mind reader or not.

[orbit991]

Strangely Brown wrote...

axl99 wrote...

Arrogant? Mike Laidlaw?

What about the people asking for him to get fired? What authority do they have?

I echo this sentiment/question.

Wouldnt be the first time someone got fired because of a consumer or group. As far as their right, well they have their oppinion thats enough they dont need a permit.

[Johnsen1972]

Volourn wrote...

"right... enemies exploding in front of your face, popping out of thin air, that was EA's decision, not Mike Laidlawls."
You claiming he went behind his bosses back? If that were true, he'd be fired and they'd be completely incompetent. WOW!

Nope Im claiming EA made ALL game design decision. Read more carefully?
Mike Laidlawl is as innocent as my cute puppy. 
But my puppy isn't game designer

Modifié par Johnsen1972, 15 avril 2011 - 07:25 .

[Siansonea]

LiquidGrape wrote...

Everwarden wrote...

It was only a matter of time before someone came along and tossed out the word 'entitled'. Bioware isn't giving out charity games to help cure cancer, they're selling a product and people have every right to demand quality in a product that costs money.

I would never deny anyone the opportunity to question creative decisions. It's well in their right, and that is perfectly fine. When people start demanding people be fired because they have this delusional idea of a single person as a legitimate scapegoat for what aspects they took issue with, that's when I start talking about self-entitlement.
We can question creative decisions, sure. But ultimately, those decisions are none of our business. If we do not agree with the direction a certain IP is headed, we can always abandon it and move on to something else with which we have a more successful rapport.
Nobody is making anyone buy BioWare's products.

LG, what have I told you about being rational and dispassionate and making sense?

Traditionally, if a customer dislikes a product, the customer has the option of a refund. A customer who does not pursue a refund probably doesn't dislike a product all that much, after all, the corporation still retains the dollar amount, and the number of units sold does not change. Sometimes a customer might have some complaints about a product. It is appropriate and fair to voice those complaints, so the company is aware of the customer's disatisfaction, and so they can make decisions for future products based on relevant feedback. But disparaging people who disagree with one's feedback is simply not helping one's cause. If one wishes to refute a person's logic, one can do so, in fact one should do so. But one shouldn't couch it terms of a personal attack.

It seems like a lot of threads I see around here are variations on the same formula:

A: "I hate X"
B: "Really? I like X."
A: "What? That's absurd, how could anyone like X?"
B: "Because of Y and Z."
A: "WHAT?! You like Y and Z?! You must be stupid!"
B: "Hey! You're stupid because you DON'T like Y and Z!"
A: "Nuh-uh!"
B: "Yeah-huh!"
A: "Nuh-uh!"
B: "Yeah-huh!"
A: "Nuh-uh!"
B: "Yeah-huh!"
A: "Nuh-uh!"
B: "Yeah-huh!"

and so on...

Really, does that help ANYONE?

[John Epler]

And I'm locking this thread, as it has abandoned what pretense at actual discussion it had and devolved into bickering.

Let me remind you of a few things that might serve you well in future posts.

A) Insults are unacceptable. Period. I don't care if you're in favour of DA2 or against it, if you start insulting other posters you will be warned and subsequently banned.

Posts where you simply post links to Youtube spam videos or spam images are unacceptable. They add absolutely zero to the discussion, and are not one tenth as clever as you think they are.

C) Strawmanning is also unacceptable. If you disagree with someone's position, represent it fairly, not as 'I WANT BIOWARE TO CATER DIRECTLY TO ME' or 'I THINK BIOWARE CAN DO NO WRONG'.

And we're done.

ADDENDUM: If you think you're clever by changing a developer's name to something it isn't, you aren't. That falls under heading A.

Modifié par JohnEpler, 15 avril 2011 - 07:31 .