5 réponses à ce sujet

[djwyattwood]

I finshed reading a recent interview of Mike Laidlaw in Game Informer. This is one among many interviews that I have read on Dragon Age 2 with Mike Laidlaw. I notice a trend in these interviews: he is always right (according to him) and all the changes he made from Dragon Age: Origins were right.

He defends the repeated dungeons. Defends lame sidequests. Defends push A for Awesome. Defends poor storytelling. Defends the non-tactical combat.

Every interview that I read with Mike Laidlaw on Dragon Age 2 makes me more and more dislike this person and know that with him at the helm, Dragon Age 3 is gonna be worse. He constantly says things like "personally" amd "my opinnion" with regards to direction on Dragon Age 2. He essentially built the game that he wanted and not the game that the fans wanted. He built the game for people who didn't play Dragon Age: Origins.

I was a huge fan of Bioware up until Dragon Age 2. Not every game was great but I felt that at least, for the most part, Bioware was trying to do right by me. I can't say that about Dragon Age 2. Mike Laidlaw was doing right by himself and I'm assuming EA. We need somebody else than somebody who builds a game for himself instead of his fans. PLEASE somebody else Bioware. If that can't happen, maybe Bioware's finest should split and make their own dev studio.

Before anybody says anything, yes I am still QQ'ing about Dragon Age 2. I don't think I will stop. I just am a fan of what great games Bioware can make. I hope they choose to make the right one next.

[John Epler]

Here's a strong suggestion.

If your entire contribution to a thread is to pop in, make what you consider a pithy comment and then post a gif you no doubt painstakingly made of one of the developer's faces, you might be spamming.

And if that's what you choose to do, then you will be doing it elsewhere.

[John Epler]

Kimberly Shaw wrote...

Dalria, there are 80+ pages of very nicely written constructive criticsm stickied here, and as yet, no response to any of them. So, I call into doubt your assertion that they would do anything differently "if the customers would just clam (sic) down".

I've mentioned a few times that they're being read. Beyond that, I'm not sure what you're expecting at this point - any changes that are made as a result of feedback and issues we want to address will be clear with the next product release, and no doubt if those changes are deemed important enough to discuss they will be talked about at length.

At the moment, though, there's not much else we can say beyond 'we're reading and listening.' And we have said that. Multiple times.

[John Epler]

Dalira Montanti wrote...

@johnEpler
I hope the situation becomes better for you guys and i do hope there will be some light at the end of this strange tunnel

People are passionate. That's good! Of course, the personal attacks become a little tiresome, not to mention that they tend to lead to an immediate discounting of someone's opinion.

Most people restrict themselves to discussing the game and the issues they have with it. That's good, useable feedback, and they make up the majority of those on the forum in the 'negative' camp. It's, unfortunately, the few but vocal that figure that attacking specific people is going to give their point any more weight.

[John Epler]

djwyattwood wrote...

So my opinnion is discounted because of reading interviews that the project lead did? It isn't my fault that the words he uses makes him look like a person who believes himself righteous.

Also, there is no way shape or form I can have a rational discussion with Mike Laidlaw one-on-one at this point. I am just a lowly customer who would need the Gods to shine upon him to get answers from big cheese Laidlaw. I paid for my game just like everyone else, do we not deserve answers?

Here's what it comes down to, though. The forums are extremely active - topics last for maybe an hour on the front page before they're pushed on to the second. From this, I (and others) try to get a sense of what the most common issues and concerns are among the fanbase so that we have a good grasp of what worked, what didn't, and what sat squarely in the middle.

When I see certain posters continually descending to personal attacks, well, I can't read every topic and I can't read every post. If someone has a long history of popping into threads to say, essentially, 'DEVELOPER Y SHOULD BE FIRED' and posting long rants about that particular person, then it's going to colour my perception of them. Because while they're just names and faces to you, they're people I work with, and people I generally consider to be friends. So yes, it does affect my perception of someone's post if I continually see them attacking a particular developer.

Point out flaws in the decisions all you like. Bring up issues you have with particular mechanics - even if I don't agree with you, if it's well-defended and you support your arguments well then it'll give me something to think about, and it'll be a viewpoint I'll keep in mind in the future. But when you descend to personal attacks, it feels to me, at least, like you'd rather not spend the time defending your points, and it certainly doesn't contribute to a constructive forum environment.

[John Epler]

At this point, I think we've passed the point where this thread is continuing to offer constructive discussion.

Now let me show you how to lock a thread... Cajun style.