498 réponses à ce sujet

[Jerrybnsn]

Kail Ashton wrote...

I'm sure they're as shocked as the rest of us with working brains & common sense at how childisly ridiculous everyone here acted (and still do) leting any random troll who makes up any random bull completely influence you're opinions as most of you apparantly can't form your own

Well....maybe this is what the Bioware/EA people think.  They were certainly acting that way last summer and fall when people were posting on here their concerns over the then known changes.  And their initial response over the game in the first three weeks was; it IS a success, it IS selling well, even better than Origins, we see people write that they couldn't get into Origins but absolutely love DAII....

And as for the criticism, the basically have been responding; people just don't understand what we were trying to do, or, there have been some that have been complaining, but most of our fans prefer the changes...

User criticism can be played down with spin talk, but the bottom line sales figures is what has stunned Bioware the most.  That's what Bioware will respond to when they begin to put out DAIII.

Modifié par Jerrybnsn, 07 mai 2011 - 08:47 .

[Shadowbanner]

mindbody wrote...

XxTaLoNxX wrote...

I mean that is a classic example of a defensive behavior brought on by the stress of a shocking situation that forces people into the "fight or flight" response.

Interesting. I disagree, though.  I'm pretty sure Mr. Laidlaw was coached by marketing or there was a meeting on how they should publicly respond to certain criticism; and I'm sure they anticipated these questions given the response on these fora. 

I'll say this though.  The best way to overcome an objection is not to ignore or belittle it.  Mr. Laidlaw should acknowledge it, rephrase it in his own words, and empathize. Then he should at least attempt to explain why the player would get a better experience on different difficulty levels, not just "play it on hard." Then he should point out specific parts of the game which are not dumbed-down.  Then he should say he will take the criticism to heart for future titles.  Doesn't matter if it's a load of crap - that' how you're supposed to handle it.  He definitely made the problem worse, instead.

What he said.

This is how you deal with fan criticism,. You do NOT ignore it, much less belittle it. This only makes customers angrier, it is only logical.

You have to take the bull by the horns and face it, not run away or pretend its not there.

Modifié par Shadowbanner, 07 mai 2011 - 09:13 .

[IanPolaris]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Kail Ashton wrote...

I'm sure they're as shocked as the rest of us with working brains & common sense at how childisly ridiculous everyone here acted (and still do) leting any random troll who makes up any random bull completely influence you're opinions as most of you apparantly can't form your own

Well....maybe this is what the Bioware/EA people think.  They were certainly acting that way last summer and fall when people were posting on here their concerns over the then known changes.  And their initial response over the game in the first three weeks was; it IS a success, it IS selling well, even better than Origins, we see people write that they couldn't get into Origins but absolutely love DAII....

And as for the criticism, the basically have been responding; people just don't understand what we were trying to do, or, there have been some that have been complaining, but most of our fans prefer the changes...

User criticism can be played down with spin talk, but the bottom line sales figures is what has stunned Bioware the most.  That's what Bioware will respond to when they begin to put out DAIII.

Yes, I've seen this pattern before with Infogrames (Atari) and Master of Orion 3.  The 'public line' for almost three months after that POS was published was, "This is a great game.  It's selling well.  Your criticisms are unfounded/overblown/ignorant/etc"  It's almost uncanny the resemblance with how BW is dealing with DA2 and how then Infogrames dealt with MOO3.

Of course there are major differences so I don't want to take the comparison too far.  While badly dissapointed with DA2, it's not objectively a bad game and certainly is playable.  Moo3 was a steaming turd that was nearly unplayable (or played itself for an autowin).  I am told that armies of modders have actually made Moo3 nearly playable after years of work after Infrogrames abandoned the property...but I never had the patience for that....

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

[dp]

[IanPolaris]

Near as I can tell what happened was Mike Laidlaw was brought in very late into the DAO project and he personally loathed the game and it's basic design, but it was far too late in the Dev cycle for him to do anything about it.

So DA2 reflects how Mike Laidlaw thinks DA and DAO should have been made rather than what his marketing said. This is strictly my opinion of course, but I think it is a reasonable take based on reality given the articles and interviews that Mike Laidlow has published pre and post production.

-Polaris

Modifié par IanPolaris, 07 mai 2011 - 09:24 .

[SoR82]

mindbody wrote...

XxTaLoNxX wrote...

I mean that is a classic example of a defensive behavior brought on by the stress of a shocking situation that forces people into the "fight or flight" response.

Interesting. I disagree, though.  I'm pretty sure Mr. Laidlaw was coached by marketing or there was a meeting on how they should publicly respond to certain criticism; and I'm sure they anticipated these questions given the response on these fora. 

~Chuckles~ If he was coached by external tutors Bioware need to be asking for a refund.
 If he was coached by internal ones.... maybe Laidlaw aint the one that should be collecting his p45 (apologies i do not know what this is called in the US its the official government form that companys use that says your now unemployed so get the fudge out)

IanPolaris wrote...

Near as I can tell what happened was
Mike Laidlaw was brought in very late into the DAO project and he
personally loathed the game and it's basic design, but it was far too
late in the Dev cycle for him to do anything about it.

So DA2
reflects how Mike Laidlaw thinks DA and DAO should have been made rather
than what his marketing said. This is strictly my opinion of course,
but I think it is a reasonable take based on reality given the articles
and interviews that Mike Laidlow has published pre and post production.

-Polaris

Bang on the money for me every interview with him reeks of this vibe.

Modifié par SoR82, 07 mai 2011 - 09:26 .

[Jerrybnsn]

IanPolaris wrote...

Near as I can tell what happened was Mike Laidlaw was brought in very late into the DAO project and he personally loathed the game and it's basic design, but it was far too late in the Dev cycle for him to do anything about it.

So DA2 reflects how Mike Laidlaw thinks DA and DAO should have been made rather than what his marketing said. This is strictly my opinion of course, but I think it is a reasonable take based on reality given the articles and interviews that Mike Laidlow has published pre and post production.

-Polaris

Actually, Brent Knowles turned down being the lead designer for DAII because they (EA people?) told him how DAII was going to be made.  He said he couldn't turn Dragon Age into a third person shooter.  So could you blame Mike Laidlaw for jumping at the chance to be a lead designer when they approached him?  But I do agree, Mr. Laidlaw has come off that he made a game that he wanted to play, but it was pretty much decided for him how the game play would be.  I think artwork, storyline, and level designs were things that developed on the team's own.

Modifié par Jerrybnsn, 07 mai 2011 - 09:52 .

[ChengChung]

XxTaLoNxX wrote...

I know Mike Laidlaw is shocked. If he wasn't then he wouldn't resort to insulting upset fans by telling them that "if they don't like the way the game plays then try it on hard, if you still don't like it then sod off."

I mean that is a classic example of a defensive behavior brought on by the stress of a shocking situation that forces people into the "fight or flight" response. At least the man didn't run away during the interview.. seriously I half expected him to try a Jedi mindtrick and dodge the question.

Taking into account Hawke who be  created by him is good at fight or flight and bad at problem-solving,this makes sense.

Modifié par ChengChung, 07 mai 2011 - 09:46 .

[Eterna]

There's like 10 people here who complain about Dragon age on a regular basis, the rest are trolls.

This "backlash" isn't that big.

[TheBlackBaron]

IanPolaris wrote...

Near as I can tell what happened was Mike Laidlaw was brought in very late into the DAO project and he personally loathed the game and it's basic design, but it was far too late in the Dev cycle for him to do anything about it.

So DA2 reflects how Mike Laidlaw thinks DA and DAO should have been made rather than what his marketing said. This is strictly my opinion of course, but I think it is a reasonable take based on reality given the articles and interviews that Mike Laidlow has published pre and post production.

-Polaris

This is why we need Jade Empire 2. Mike Laidlaw can go develop the game that he wants to play - and Jade Empire 1 was hardly a flop, so you can't say that everything he does is bad - and hopefully somebody more in-tune with what fans of DA:O liked and want improved can develop DA3. 

[Cowboy_christo]

Eterna5 wrote...

There's people here who complain about Dragon age on a regular basis, the rest are trolls.

This "backlash" is that big.

Fix'd

[frustratemyself]

sympathy4saren wrote...

Do you think the fan backlash is shocking to them?

Depends what they are looking at.

The posts with people ranting on about how Bioware stabbed them in the back, sold them out, sacrificed small children to the old gods are no doubt laughed at as is proper. Constructive feedback will hopefully be taken into account for future DA games & content.

[IanPolaris]

frustratemyself wrote...

sympathy4saren wrote...

Do you think the fan backlash is shocking to them?

Depends what they are looking at.

The posts with people ranting on about how Bioware stabbed them in the back, sold them out, sacrificed small children to the old gods are no doubt laughed at as is proper. Constructive feedback will hopefully be taken into account for future DA games & content.

I agree.  The internet posts in of themselves is probably considered to be the 'usual noise' except that it's gone on for much longer than I suspect BW expected.  However, the people that post here are hardly respresentative.

Like I said before, though, when the negativity here (and elsewhere) is COMBINED with very low megacritic scores (which really do matter to EA and Bioware) and dissapointing sales, then to quote Apollo 13....."Houston, we have a problem...."

-Polaris

[xkg]

Eterna5 wrote...

There's like 10 people here who complain about Dragon age on a regular basis, the rest are trolls.

This "backlash" isn't that big.

So there must be huge number of trolls here. Let's look at  Sharkey1337's polls

653 - More than half of voters (1280 votes) - said "NO" for DA2.
62% prefer DAO (only 14% prefer DA2)
Sure "backslash" isnt' big at all

[Akka le Vil]

I doubt they are that shocked.
They DID develop the game. They KNEW it was rushed. They WERE aware of the flaws. They SAW the complaints and worries many people had about the "new direction".

Maybe they thought it wouldn't bring such an angry answer, but I don't see how they could be surprised, without even saying "shocked", about the backlash.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

xkg wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

There's like 10 people here who complain about Dragon age on a regular basis, the rest are trolls.

This "backlash" isn't that big.

So there must be huge number of trolls here. Let's look at  Sharkey1337's polls

653 - More than half of voters (1280 votes) - said "NO" for DA2.
62% prefer DAO (only 14% prefer DA2)
Sure "backslash" isnt' big at all

The problem with Sharkey's polls is that they suffer from self selection bias, so while I would look at the results, I'd take it with a massive grain of salt.

That said, Dragon Age 2 has been unusually divisive and while I wouldn't say that it's overwhelmingly negative, it's far from the glowing reception with minor detractors that Bioware is used to by now.

I find myself agreeing with IanPolaris on almost all of the posts he's made in this thread. So, that's probably where you'll find my own opinion.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 07 mai 2011 - 10:18 .

[Chugster]

tbh, Bioware have enough experience to ignore all the crap...posts saying the game is bad etc....the game isnt bad....it works the way it was intended....personal taste is another matter

Hopefully, like me, they ignore all the trolling and 'game is crap...BW suck' nonsense and read all the constructive posts

Modifié par Chugster, 07 mai 2011 - 10:31 .

[Sabriana]

Akka le Vil wrote...

I doubt they are that shocked.
They DID develop the game. They KNEW it was rushed. They WERE aware of the flaws. They SAW the complaints and worries many people had about the "new direction".

Maybe they thought it wouldn't bring such an angry answer, but I don't see how they could be surprised, without even saying "shocked", about the backlash.

I agree. Who in their right mind would think that *That Cave* would go unnoticed and be simply accepted? And that's only one gripe. The "Constructive Criticism" threads appear to consist of many, many repeated concerns and complaints.

[Chugster]

xkg wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

There's like 10 people here who complain about Dragon age on a regular basis, the rest are trolls.

This "backlash" isn't that big.

So there must be huge number of trolls here. Let's look at  Sharkey1337's polls

653 - More than half of voters (1280 votes) - said "NO" for DA2.
62% prefer DAO (only 14% prefer DA2)
Sure "backslash" isnt' big at all

yeah, and interweb 'stats' could show im the best looking man on the planet...doesnt mean they are right

[xkg]

Chugster wrote...

xkg wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

There's like 10 people here who complain about Dragon age on a regular basis, the rest are trolls.

This "backlash" isn't that big.

So there must be huge number of trolls here. Let's look at  Sharkey1337's polls

653 - More than half of voters (1280 votes) - said "NO" for DA2.
62% prefer DAO (only 14% prefer DA2)
Sure "backslash" isnt' big at all

yeah, and interweb 'stats' could show im the best looking man on the planet...doesnt mean they are right

Yep. Post your picture, let others post their pictures too.
If huge number of voters choose You as the Best looking man - that would be ok i guess.

[IanPolaris]

Chugster wrote...

tbh, Bioware have enough experience to ignore all the crap...posts saying the game is bad etc....the game isnt bad....it works the way it was intended....personal taste is another matter

Hopefully, like me, they ignore all the trolling and 'game is crap...BW suck' nonsense and read all the constructive posts

Oh I expect they will.  BW/EA like pretty much any other company is quite good about ignoring internet 'crud' as you put it.  My concern, however, is I am seeing at least some signs of a Bunker Mentality from the writers and dev team of DA2.  I hope I'm wrong, but given the character of Mike Laidlaw which seems fairly well known, I don't think I am.  When a Dev/Writing team gets trapped in a bunker mentality, they reject ALL criticism and tend to procede as though "they know better than their market" (and it drives the marketing people nuts when this happens).

Such cases almost never end well....

-Polaris

Modifié par IanPolaris, 07 mai 2011 - 10:42 .

[Akka le Vil]

IanPolaris wrote...

When a Dev/Writing team gets trapped in a bunker mentality, they reject ALL criticism and tend to procede as though "they know better than their market" (and it drives the marketing people nuts when this happens).

Such cases almost never end well....

-Polaris

Actually, it's funny, but I tend to respect much more an art direction giving the middle finger to the market, saying "f*ck you idiots" to the entitled consumers, and going to develop a game exactly as THEY want. These games usually ends up of a much higher inner quality than the ones trying to cater to every idiot consumer out here, and they are usually the ones people remember years afterward, because they actually had personnality and a sense of wholesomeness because they were following an "idea" rather than the whims of the casual retards forming the market.

Of course, there is two catches.

The first one is : though a good amount of "I know best" (or at least "I don't care what they say, I want it to be like that") is required, there is a fine line between "following your creativity" and "becoming blind to criticism". Even if you want something a certain way and you then should not change it due to others having different tastes and preferences, you still should always listen to and consider criticism, to know which ones are contrary to your actual design decisions, and which ones actually point flaws in your design, without being contrary to the philosophy behind it.

And the second one is : "as they want", when what they want is actually a creative process. The problem here is that what they want looks much more about "getting more market share", which is certainly not at all the same.

[Zeevico]

I doubt it. They probably saw this coming a mile away.

Has any game ever been praised for repetitive, wave-based combat and recycled environments? 

Modifié par Zeevico, 07 mai 2011 - 10:56 .

[IanPolaris]

Zeevico wrote...

I doubt it. They probably saw this coming a mile away.

Has any game ever been praised for repetitive, wave-based combat and recycled environments? 

You'd think so (that Bioware saw this coming a mile away), but given the defensive reactions of the lead Dev and Writer(s), I doubt this.  I really think that Mike Lailow sincerely thought that his "vision" would sway all doubters once it actually was 'tried' by the market in spite of what anyone else tried to tell him (and yes the repetative environments were deliberate and Laidlow's idea...he has flat out said so...it wasn't an artifact of rushed dev time).

This is what I mean by a bunker mentality.  Being true to your 'muse' is one thing and not a bad thing.  However, this isn't really Laidlow's franchise for all that he's the lead dev.  He INHERITED it along with it's own vision and very loyal niche following, and he's ignoring this IMHO to his potential peril.  Again, such cases IMHO and IMX almost never end well....

-Polaris

[Akka le Vil]

IanPolaris wrote...

You'd think so (that Bioware saw this coming a mile away), but given the defensive reactions of the lead Dev and Writer(s), I doubt this.  I really think that Mike Lailow sincerely thought that his "vision" would sway all doubters once it actually was 'tried' by the market in spite of what anyone else tried to tell him (and yes the repetative environments were deliberate and Laidlow's idea...he has flat out said so...it wasn't an artifact of rushed dev time).

This feels much more like "damage control" going into frenzy because the big bosses at EA forced it and you can't really say "these a-hole just destroyed our work" when talking about the ones handing out your paycheck, than genuine blindness, to be honest.