498 réponses à ce sujet

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/smile.png[/smilie]

This thread is good. RPG fans who aren't frothing at the mouth with rose tinted glasses decrying the end of all good things.

On teh internetz and in making our arguments, we definitely need less:



And more:

[Serpieri Nei]

neppakyo wrote...

erynnar wrote...
OKay I want in on the hugging thing! You both rock. And you too McCrusty..though I too think of underwear...

Aww, ya can. Then Serpie can destroy us all with the witty posters in the Hilarious thread.

And dirty minds do think alike, erynnar.

I'm a lover not a destroyer !!!

cept when killing Darkspawn

[AngryFrozenWater]

abaris wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

If the influence of those new "dev team members" becomes too big then that makes me wonder what's going to be left of "games are art". In combination with that and telemetry nothing will be left to chance and removing creativity will be seen as a good thing because walking an unknown path is commercially dangerous.

Don't kid yourself. It was never primarily about art and creativity. It was always about making a profit cause otherwise a company can't survive. It only happens that creativity coincided with profit with certain product lines.

But aiming for the larger market totally excludes the art factor, especially when they're aiming for the lowest possible denominator. I've seen this with other companies, which ultimately ended up coding handheld games.

Do I kid myself? I don't think so. You seem to think that I cannot make the difference between historic facts and current reality. BioWare did claim that they see games as an art form more than once. I believe that this cannot be the case for products of large companies like EA. I've even mentioned that the current developments within EA make me think that way. I don't think we disagree.

Aiming for the large market doesn't only remove the "art", it also removes the fun. I've also mentioned that in my post.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 09 mai 2011 - 06:56 .

[DarthSliver]

I tried reading the whole thread but its just so hard when your tired lol.

But I will say that its not that I hate DA2 its just that there is alot of negative stuff in the game. I mean I cant think of a full positive thing in the game without its negative counterpart coming to mind. But there is good stuff in the game, I just cant clearly think of it at this time because of all the glaring negative aspects in the game. So I will try my best to put the stuff i did enjoy.

1) The maps and art were well done, but the problem is that you visit the same map so many times by the time you reach the 3rd act you just dont care about anything but beating the game finally. All the side quest that are there are pointless by the third act because you revisit Map A or Map B X amount of times that you just dont want to revisit the same map with a side quest. So you try to progress the story hoping for a new map, but yet your faces with Map A again.
2)Combat, one thing i liked about DA2 combat is that it was fast paced. I am one of the few that didnt like DA:O combat because i didnt like the feel that the computer characters were doing all the work. I didnt have that feeling with DA2, this one i didnt see a real negative with.
3) Character interactions, now I do like how I didnt have to worrying about activating a conversation with my companions on accident when looting areas. But like most things in DA2 there is a counter negative that goes along with it and this one is no different. There was not a lot of interaction with the characters, the game told me when they wanted to talk and dubbed it as a Quest. I liked having conversations with my characters when i felt in the mood to listen to them. But I didnt even have that option here.
4) Party Banter, I really enjoyed the party banter in DA2. But I shouldnt have to rely on them being in my party to have a feel for Merrill or Anders. Thats what party conversation is for.

Ultimately I dont think id preorder or buy DA3 with Laidlaw as the main person. I do find it applauding that he let what was suppose to be DA2 come out. Its plain and simple that DA2 was taken out of the oven sooner than what the recipe demanded to be done right. He has caused Bioware fans to question games that are made by a whole completely different team like ME3, which the ME series has been very successful and only ME3 will tell if its completely successful. But I do Ultimately feel we need the DA:O lead back on DA series or something if Bioware wishes for the DA series to succeed. In ways their best option is to sweep DA2 under a rug and pretend it didnt happen.

[DeadLetterBox]

As someone who does a lot of writing, I truly believe that anyone who creates things is stunned to receive a largely negative reaction. No matter how experienced you are, negative reviews are upsetting. The "you stabbed me in the back" reviews are upsetting because they tell you nothing useful and they're childish and confrontational. The better-phrased ones are upsetting because, well, your work isn't being appreciated. People get attached to their creations.

I left a pretty negative review of the story myself. I felt like no matter what I did I just couldn't have anything turn out right, and there was no uplifting payoff in the end like the ending I get most often in DA:O. I didn't leave this review to be hurtful, but because I was hoping to get my specific complaint across so that the writers can consider it for next time. I still felt a little bad, because I don't imagine any writer likes negative reviews.

The people who work on these games are real human beings with real feelings who dedicate a real, significant portion of their lives to any game they create. I guarantee you, they care. Just because they didn't read your mind and give you exactly the game you wanted does not mean they suddenly grew horns out of their heads and decided to dance to the tune of your tears. Even if they didn't think it was their best work (and I don't know if they did or not), I bet they didn't expect quite the negative reaction from quite so many people.

I don't think that means we shouldn't voice our criticisms, but I think we shouldn't forget that real people worked on these games, and are either reading the forums or having these things passed on to them.

[bri193]

The level of 'official' denial, patronising and condescending attitude from Bioware that occurred right after release makes me think they were well and truly aware DA2 was going to be a stinker...
So no, I do not think they were/are stunned at the backlash..

[AngryFrozenWater]

DeadLetterBox wrote...

As someone who does a lot of writing, I truly believe that anyone who creates things is stunned to receive a largely negative reaction. No matter how experienced you are, negative reviews are upsetting. The "you stabbed me in the back" reviews are upsetting because they tell you nothing useful and they're childish and confrontational. The better-phrased ones are upsetting because, well, your work isn't being appreciated. People get attached to their creations.

I left a pretty negative review of the story myself. I felt like no matter what I did I just couldn't have anything turn out right, and there was no uplifting payoff in the end like the ending I get most often in DA:O. I didn't leave this review to be hurtful, but because I was hoping to get my specific complaint across so that the writers can consider it for next time. I still felt a little bad, because I don't imagine any writer likes negative reviews.

The people who work on these games are real human beings with real feelings who dedicate a real, significant portion of their lives to any game they create. I guarantee you, they care. Just because they didn't read your mind and give you exactly the game you wanted does not mean they suddenly grew horns out of their heads and decided to dance to the tune of your tears. Even if they didn't think it was their best work (and I don't know if they did or not), I bet they didn't expect quite the negative reaction from quite so many people.

I don't think that means we shouldn't voice our criticisms, but I think we shouldn't forget that real people worked on these games, and are either reading the forums or having these things passed on to them.

I agree with you, but the size of a company has an impact on that as well. I'll notice it is time to be careful when a company gets bigger. Depersonification kicks in when their employees are spewing marketing terms. I change my role from gamer to customer when the company starts to hide behind policies, telemetric data, release dates chosen to improve a given quarter of a fiscal year, and so on. Don't get me wrong. Companies need to make a profit and I am fine with that. However, treating your customers as part of the equation or replacing the consumer base by another just to sell more copies, doesn't make me feel good. Reality suddenly becomes clear when certain promises are made just to convince the audience to buy the game and when that promise only makes it to the packaging and not the content.

Not all employees within a company become like that. A lot of them stay who they were before the change and certainly deserve my respect. Sometimes it is just hard to differentiate between the real people and the "rotten apples".

[Louis deGuerre]

If they did not expect a backlash they are incompetent.
I doubt they are incompetent.
Hence, they must have expected the backlash.

[Everwarden]

Aaleel wrote...
So based on how far they're going to fall short of those goals, something must be going through their heads.

Yup. That thought will be 'needs more button=awesome'. 

[billy the squid]

erynnar wrote...

neppakyo wrote...

Sab, I'd hug you and billy, but it looks odd with myself hugging the monitor. People look at ya funny.

And yes, I to, am sick of that "only happy with the big bad evil" rebuttle, along with the "you're afraid of changes" I actually liked the concept of DA. The concept mind you, not the way they went and did it, also, add the rest of the valid critisims here too. heh.

Sorry for grammar and spelling, too tired!

OKay I want in on the hugging thing! You both rock. And you too McCrusty..though I too think of underwear...

Ahhh, hugs for everyone. Although I'm slightly worried about being caught hugging the monitor aswell.
"Alex, why are you hugging the monitor?"
"I'm giving some love to people on the internet"
"Riiiight.... "walks away
"oops"

[Oban1961]

Clown No.9 wrote...
Stunned? Hardly, they expected backlash with all the changes they made. What they are probably annoyed about is not attracting CoD crowd as planned.

This!
Bioware has turned their backs on old-school RPGs and couldn't care less about losing this "outdated" fanbase.
Well, I will just "suck it up". There are other studios out there.

[Sable Rhapsody]

Internet Nerdrage
Keywords: Force, Implement
At-Will Standard Action; Target: All devs on the forums

Attack: Charisma vs. Will
Hit: 2d12+ Charisma modifier QQ and force damage, and the target is stunned (save ends). Targets without the Thick-Skinned Dev class feature take a -4 penalty to saving throws vs. this effect.
Effect: You are NERD RAGING (save ends). You have a +5 power bonus to QQ damage rolls, and a -2 penalty to saving throws and defenses.

[Icinix]

Oban1961 wrote...

Clown No.9 wrote...
Stunned? Hardly, they expected backlash with all the changes they made. What they are probably annoyed about is not attracting CoD crowd as planned.

This!
Bioware has turned their backs on old-school RPGs and couldn't care less about losing this "outdated" fanbase.
Well, I will just "suck it up". There are other studios out there.

If BioWare is content to be another company that people don't know, but just a random producer who makes games that can be traded in for store credit...so be it.

The thing is I think they were hoping to achieve the opposite.

[ZeroDragon980]

What has happened to Bioware, has happened to many companies before, they get bought out by a bigger company and suddenly the company line changes and never for the better. Making money is a fundamental linchpin to any business. But what Bioware did in terms of DA 2 kinda pulled the linchpin out and dropped the support to hold the bridge up.

Bioware should have said that they want to keep with the tried and true but modify what needs to be fixed, and leave what isn't broken. the story lines of DA:O and DA 2 diverge once the beginning is done, while I support Bioware in the need to change and tell another story of the DA world, they flopped in the execution. To many changes to quickly, never a good idea to 180 a game when your only on the second one.

(Hope I didn't accidentally drop a spoiler in there, if i did *shrugs*)

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

Internet Nerdrage
Keywords: Force, Implement
At-Will Standard Action; Target: All devs on the forums

Attack: Charisma vs. Will
Hit: 2d12+ Charisma modifier QQ and force damage, and the target is stunned (save ends). Targets without the Thick-Skinned Dev class feature take a -4 penalty to saving throws vs. this effect.
Effect: You are NERD RAGING (save ends). You have a +5 power bonus to QQ damage rolls, and a -2 penalty to saving throws and defenses.

Lol.

[Cataca]

ZeroDragon980 wrote...

What has happened to Bioware, has happened to many companies before, they get bought out by a bigger company and suddenly the company line changes and never for the better. Making money is a fundamental linchpin to any business. But what Bioware did in terms of DA 2 kinda pulled the linchpin out and dropped the support to hold the bridge up.

Bioware should have said that they want to keep with the tried and true but modify what needs to be fixed, and leave what isn't broken. the story lines of DA:O and DA 2 diverge once the beginning is done, while I support Bioware in the need to change and tell another story of the DA world, they flopped in the execution. To many changes to quickly, never a good idea to 180 a game when your only on the second one.

(Hope I didn't accidentally drop a spoiler in there, if i did *shrugs*)

Personally, i dont mind the changes as much, at least compared to the stuff that constantly points out that "you are playing a game now!". Thats maybe the main thing that made me wonder what Bioware was on about.. They must have realized that materializing enemies, or making them teleport around (tho that is impossible due to lore) or reusing maps over and over would break immersion. Personally, i dont "get" it, those things would have been as easy to implement otherwise (maybe except the maps), or leave them out of game. 

I have the same grief with qunari horns or elf faces. Those have practically been established before, why risk fans going "huh, did the elves always look like fish?" when it would be perfectly acceptable to leave them as-is? 

They practically kicked their own lore in the nuts, for implementing stuff, that noone would even have noted if left out. And i, dont understand why you would. Are CoD fans attracted to horns and fishfaces? Really. 

Im also one of those guys, that thinks the story does not lack "epic",  they implemented it horribly tho. 7 or so 1-2 hour long main quest strains, packed in a multitude of sidequests. I said it allready in another thread, but it ended up giving the story as much direction as a drunken panda on a unicycle. 

[Sabriana]

Cataca, I do agree with the re-design of the elves. That was weird and unnecessary. In all the backstories, the elves were described and looked at as "very beautiful". It's even mentioned in DA 2. Although I admit that the one elf in question was kinda cute, that hardly applies to the general elf population, aka fish-faced aliens.

I could get over the Qunari, because they did come closer to the DA:O ogre (no, I'm not talking about that odd thing that passed for an ogre in the other game). Sten and his buddies are the only Qunari we see in DA:O, and because the Qun takes in other races as long as they embrace the Qun they could simply be a mix of races that became the no-horn Qunari. (like the hairless Kajit or something).

I agree with the point that shredding your own lore into bite-size pieces and kicking it to the curb was totally unnecessary. Whatever for? Did they truly think that cartoonish/anime-ish/whatever pixel toon design appeals more to the "casual" crowd - whoever they might be?

@ AFW

I agree with you too. Losing touch with the real people and turning them into stats, metrics, and focus groups is a mistake. Nobody likes to hear "Oh, we don't need you. You's not enough, we don't care if you leave, we get us some new money-marke.... ah, customers."

Lol, @ Sable

Hugs back for Billy and Mrcrusty. I need to go back to work now. I hate it when my posting time is interupted by work...o_O... somehow that came out weird.

[veramis]

They had to turn the elves into fish so they could explain why Orsino has such low self-esteem and does such strange things.

Merrill, why are you always obsessing over that _______
Because I'm a freak and I think this can save me...

[Mrbananagrabber]

I dont feel like hugging anybody when I pay top dollar for a surf and turf and end up with a Big Mac with a shrimp on top.

Would I turn into a mutant and terrorize the Capital Wasteland over it though? Thats pushing the enveloppe...

[ZeroDragon980]

Cataca wrote...

ZeroDragon980 wrote...

What has happened to Bioware, has happened to many companies before, they get bought out by a bigger company and suddenly the company line changes and never for the better. Making money is a fundamental linchpin to any business. But what Bioware did in terms of DA 2 kinda pulled the linchpin out and dropped the support to hold the bridge up.

Bioware should have said that they want to keep with the tried and true but modify what needs to be fixed, and leave what isn't broken. the story lines of DA:O and DA 2 diverge once the beginning is done, while I support Bioware in the need to change and tell another story of the DA world, they flopped in the execution. To many changes to quickly, never a good idea to 180 a game when your only on the second one.

(Hope I didn't accidentally drop a spoiler in there, if i did *shrugs*)

Personally, i dont mind the changes as much, at least compared to the stuff that constantly points out that "you are playing a game now!". Thats maybe the main thing that made me wonder what Bioware was on about.. They must have realized that materializing enemies, or making them teleport around (tho that is impossible due to lore) or reusing maps over and over would break immersion. Personally, i dont "get" it, those things would have been as easy to implement otherwise (maybe except the maps), or leave them out of game. 

I have the same grief with qunari horns or elf faces. Those have practically been established before, why risk fans going "huh, did the elves always look like fish?" when it would be perfectly acceptable to leave them as-is? 

They practically kicked their own lore in the nuts, for implementing stuff, that noone would even have noted if left out. And i, dont understand why you would. Are CoD fans attracted to horns and fishfaces? Really. 

Im also one of those guys, that thinks the story does not lack "epic",  they implemented it horribly tho. 7 or so 1-2 hour long main quest strains, packed in a multitude of sidequests. I said it allready in another thread, but it ended up giving the story as much direction as a drunken panda on a unicycle. 

I love the lore of DA:O. To me that lets me understand the characters, enviroments, creatures, etc. of the game. I spent a good couple hours reading through all the codexes. DA 2 not so much, i simply just hit mark all as read and continued on. 

By the second dungeon I was already bored of the scenery, went in did what I had to do and left for other quests. 
But I do understand the dislike for what they did aesthetically to the NPCs of the game be in the people or the creatures, but from what I have read so far it was because of time constraints. To me a game needs to be aesthetically pleaseing in all aspects, as well as lore need to be interesting enough to keep me hooked and consistent with all other parts of the game. 

If you loose that you loose your fan base, core gamers more then the fringe element.

Edit: Should point out I'm not as hard core as some RPG gamers, But I do like a good story line. like I said above I need to be kept interested or I won't bother. 

Modifié par ZeroDragon980, 09 mai 2011 - 12:37 .

[Wozearly]

ZeroDragon980 wrote...

What has happened to Bioware, has happened to many companies before, they get bought out by a bigger company and suddenly the company line changes and never for the better. Making money is a fundamental linchpin to any business. But what Bioware did in terms of DA 2 kinda pulled the linchpin out and dropped the support to hold the bridge up.

Bioware should have said that they want to keep with the tried and true but modify what needs to be fixed, and leave what isn't broken. the story lines of DA:O and DA 2 diverge once the beginning is done, while I support Bioware in the need to change and tell another story of the DA world, they flopped in the execution. To many changes to quickly, never a good idea to 180 a game when your only on the second one.

Ultimately the financials will tell the main story to an arms-length owner like EA - although those will naturally be interpreted accordingly by Laidlaw et al. And I don't necessarily mean that in a negative sense. Its likely they'll consider both player feedback and their own views - for example, things we currently hate might be reworked rather than removed, if Bioware believes the general direction is right. Or they may 180 on things which we felt were minor grumbles but they believe are indicative of a wider problem. Or vice versa.

The good thing is that Bioware isn't exactly a tinpot developer, they've got one heck of a track record and a highly engaged fanbase (for the most part). That should be a useful tool should the Bioware guys feel the need to go back to EA and say "Forcing x, y and z caused damage. What we need to do was a, b and c, as we told you, and you should have trusted us - look at the fan feedback, look at the comparisons between sales with DA:O and other franchises".

EA are known for a profit-focus and have a track record of pushing for rushed releases to hit a certain date - although I suppose the flip side of that is that the developers in their stable don't generally go bust, so it has its benefits in the event of a screw up. But even so, I don't personally believe they're the devil reincarnate, even if they do have the image of being primarily men in grey suits.

That said, Hollywood (and other film areas) still create pretty decent stuff, despite being essentially run by the suits rather than the artists. Sadly, a lot of the dross comes in the attempts to hit a mainstream audience with surface-level epic graphics and explosions, and the surprisingly lasting and successful films are those which have a lot more care and attention and, frankly, obsess a little bit less about copying what's already out there and trying to appeal to everyone.

[MDT1]

I think some are stunned some are not and I also think the higher the person is positioned in EA the less they are stunned.
If the responible persons at EA would care about the customers the DA franchise lost they wouldn't let Laidlaw name us idiots.
I guess the goal of DA will be to have a smaller fanbase of 1-2 mio that will buy a copy EACH YEAR and provide a steady income to fund other things.

On the other hand the level designer that had only the time/money to create one mediocre dungeon or the guy who was told to make elves look like fish might be stunned.

Modifié par MDT1, 09 mai 2011 - 01:10 .

[Torhagen]

EA fully intends to turn their IP'S into year round franchises

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Torhagen wrote...

EA fully intends to turn their IP'S into year round franchises

That doesn't give enough information though.

It could simply mean that they plan to work on Dragon Age material all year round. Which almost happens currently, anyway. Development for Dragon Age 2 started even before Origins was finished,

It could also mean yearly Dragon Age installments though. Which would pretty much make me lose faith in the franchise.

[Cataca]

mrcrusty wrote...

Torhagen wrote...

EA fully intends to turn their IP'S into year round franchises

That doesn't give enough information though.

It could simply mean that they plan to work on Dragon Age material all year round. Which almost happens currently, anyway. Development for Dragon Age 2 started even before Origins was finished,

It could also mean yearly Dragon Age installments though. Which would pretty much make me lose faith in the franchise.

Yeah, that financial report this is based of doesnt clearly state what they intend to do to the IP. That said, development times are not crucial to quality. If they do it in half the time with twice the manpower it wont really matter (much), if they continue to cut corners like they did with the original to shave off dev time, we'll get products like DA2 in the future too.