1373 réponses à ce sujet

[Tommy6860]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

A prime example is not fatigue though such systems can fall into that catagory, I mean't as example such things as customisation (companions and protagonist), limiting or reduction with regard to the aspect of re-using maps to extreme's (TW2 all pretty unique areas which has a positive affect on replays and Skyrim another one where they are actually hiring many more map creators to make as many dungeons as possible unique in appearance and design). Lowering the amount of interactions due to using VO and relying only on banter to make up for it, banter that does not include the protagonist who often felt like a third wheel which was neither needed or desired it would seem from his own companions to have input on whatever talked about in that banter. The shrinking of each act to make up for lack of timeframe where it had act one having the most quests (inlcuding rumour type quests not available after act one, a whole type of quests cut out of following acts), act two being 2/3rds the size quest wise of act one and lastly act three literally a few hours long in total with less than half the quests of act two.

These are just some examples off the top of my head. Not everything relating to concept of streamlining or removal, cutting out or reduction revolves around combat and statistics. You shouldn't look down on Serpieri Nei's response which is how it came across, it was valid and concerns both customisation and also ~interactions.

Huh. I had never drawn the equation that "streamlining" was being lumped in with "amount of content." The two are very different things in my head. I tend to look at streamlining as mechanical or tied to the user-experience. Thanks for the clarification.

So, will  these issues be addressed and will you come by from time to time to offer updates?  I saw you also stated that the voiced protagonist is essentially here to stay and I admit that's sad, but that's just me. Considering (correct me if I am wrong) it takes more development time to use a VO while then having animate the character using the voice, I'd say that takes away from adding more content or character interactions, deeper story, IMO.

No silent protagonist, then can we at least ditch the paraphrasing? The guesswork and the intent of the answer was really the intent of the of the writer's thoughts and that didn't translate well to what I expected the conversations to be. Just give the answers directly so one can at least make a solid choice.

I think most other things the Bioware team already knows need to be tweaked like combat and realism, so won't add those again. But I am hoping that your words here are not just simply lip service, because I held your words to a high degree in your marketing promos long ago as well as the DA2 website, and the result was that the end product was not a reflection of those words or the site.

[fchopin]

LiquidGrape wrote...

fchopin wrote...

Mike Laidlaw already knows what i want fixed.

Well, I'm sure your concerns are their number one priority. Or something.

Well they are free to follow your examples if they want, if they are not making rpg’s anymore that is fine, there are many more game companies that do.

[Sister Helen]

fchopin wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

fchopin wrote...

If they don’t know what needs fixing in act 3 then everything Mike Laidlaw said is a waste of time.

Lol, people have different issues with different things. Also, Laidlaw isn't a psychic. What would you, personally, like for Bioware to fix about act 3?

Mike Laidlaw already knows what i want fixed.

He has powers! Special powers! 

[Cutlass Jack]

Sister Helen wrote...

He has powers! Special powers! 

"Not Enchantment."

[Fishy]

Nice post sir .

In the end , there's a lot of posivity that emaned from the negativity of this forum . That how you handle  what seem to be a really bad  situation. Take the negativity and turn  it into positivity!


What i interpreted from the hate it's that a lot of people are really attached to  your work (me also) . I hate everything about the marketing of dragon age 2 and the price and the DLC propaganda and  vowed to not purchase it .. Until the release when i purchased it  even though my pc could barely run it!!!

Some of the idea in DA2 were really awesome .. But in the end the amount of great idea removed from DA:O were too important.I`m pretty sure you guy will come up with a super good DA3 . Now you have a greater challenge to accomplish  ..

Even though i will probably purchase every DLC ..
Geez . 

[Tommy6860]

AudioEpics wrote...

Dear Bioware guys, whatever you decide to do next, please just make it your own game, not what the majority of vocal people on the internet are voting it should be. Whatever their varying levels of popularity may be, your games have always had integrity and that's one of the main reasons why I (and I'm sure a lot of people) love them.

I never saw anyone question the integrity of the game, actually, that doesn't really apply in the context of how you're using the term. The game simply is what it is and Bioware made it the way they thought would be best. As it turns out, the majority think otherwise on "how Bioware should have made the game" and the 'bottom line' is what Bioware needs to be more concerned.

If I wanted to use intergrity though, I say Mr. Laidlaw lost some of his in the way he promoted DA2 long ago and the game didn't reflect his words, nor does the DA2 website reflect how the game actually played. That's where integrity falls into play here.

[midgetman94]

 Hi Mike,

Thanks for the response. Well-written, well-said. I'm pumped for DLC/DA3. While DA2 definitely has some issues (environment re-use being key), there are also a lot of things that the game does well (awesome skill trees, voiced Hawke). Just realize that you guys weren't too far off - no need to reinvent the wheel :-)

[Xewaka]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...
Sure do. There's lots of refinement to do, and some missteps that we need to address, but I think that there are a number of things DAII did right, or, possibly, almost right. Player VO

Please tell me this doesn't mean we are stuck with the terrible paraphrase mechanic. I would very much like to choose what my character will say, rather than have to guess it.

Mike Laidlaw wrote...
rivalry, and the responsiveness of combat all fall into that category for me

I think you mistake responsiveness with speed. The frontloading of attacks means the game is less responsive than its predecessor, as we are now stuck with watching the full attack animation run, instead of being able to snap-react and move out of the way inmediately.

Modifié par Xewaka, 27 mai 2011 - 11:35 .

[ladyofpayne]

First look like Fane, Second- some mines.
Third- Deep Roads.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Rojahar wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

As it turns out, the majority think otherwise on "how Bioware should have made the game" and the 'bottom line' is what Bioware needs to be more concerned.

While we're on the subject of integrity... I like how the argument swings like a pendalum between "Bioware needs to heed the majority and think about the bottom line!" or "Bioware needs to stop wh*ring themselves to the majority and selling out to the Call of Duty and console crowds!" from the very same people, depending on if populism will or won't get them what they personally want at the time...

You are too late. Read Mr Laidlaw's post again.

[midgetman94]

Xewaka wrote...

Mike Laidlaw wrote...
rivalry, and the responsiveness of combat all fall into that category for me

I think you mistake responsiveness with speed. The frontloading of attacks means the game is less responsive than its predecessor, as we are now stuck with watching the full attack animation run, instead of being able to snap-react and move out of the way inmediately.

Ugh, sorry, but it's stuff like this that really makes my blood boil. Sometimes the hate for DA2 (or nostalgia for DAO?) gets to the point that the truth is just ignored.

Sorry, you're not really saying that the game which employed THE SHUFFLE was more responsive are you? Or the one where there was a noticeable delay everytime you queued up an attack? 

Please tell me you're not 

[Corto81]

Nice post, nice dev response.

Personally, if these guys go into DA3 like they went into DA:O, it'll be a great game.
Origins showed just how talented they are... Story, characters, level design, gameplay... Every game has its cons, so does Origins, but overall, the best RPG since BG2.
..


If they go in / get limited by deadlines like in DA2... I think the Dragon Age franchise dies right there.

Modifié par Corto81, 27 mai 2011 - 11:50 .

[tivadar27]

Glad to see you're back and thanks for the apology of sorts. I realize it can't be easy dealing with people criticizing a work you obviously put your heart into. That being said, I'm sure much of that impassioned criticism was the result of the fact that fans of the game obviously had their heart invested in it as well.

I believe I've stated this before, but I think DA2 did improve on DAO in a lot of ways. I just also feel as if there were some ways in which it didn't improve overall. I'll give a quick summary statement then try to clarify with actual points. I feel the gameplay in DA2 was strictly better than DAO on the whole, whereas the story and interaction were worse.

Good things:
Ability Trees and Combat (especially strategy, which I feel tended to be a lot more involved), Getting Rid of Herbalism/Runecrafting..., Console Interface as a whole, Friendship/Rivalry, Nightmare difficulty

Bad things:
Reuse of levels, enemy waves appearing out of thin air (not necessarily the waves themselves...), Narrowness of equipment/stat requirements restricts, (which leads to) very little allowed in terms of character customization beyond talents, companion armor, lack of variety in runes, STORY, and this was the big one, both in terms of it being unfocused and feeling like 3 smaller stories and the limited interaction/influence I had over it

Neutral: Character Voicing (I'm a traditional RPGer, I don't mind using my imagination), Romances (not sure about everyone being bisexual)

Anyways, as I said, glad to see you're back. DA3 might not be an instant buy for me (assuming it's released), but I'll definitely have a look.

Modifié par tivadar27, 27 mai 2011 - 12:07 .

[AudioEpics]

Tommy6860 wrote...

AudioEpics wrote...

Dear Bioware guys, whatever you decide to do next, please just make it your own game, not what the majority of vocal people on the internet are voting it should be. Whatever their varying levels of popularity may be, your games have always had integrity and that's one of the main reasons why I (and I'm sure a lot of people) love them.

I never saw anyone question the integrity of the game, actually, that doesn't really apply in the context of how you're using the term. The game simply is what it is and Bioware made it the way they thought would be best. As it turns out, the majority think otherwise on "how Bioware should have made the game" and the 'bottom line' is what Bioware needs to be more concerned.

Maybe I wasn't clear. All I was trying to say was: "please, when Dragon Age III comes along, keep doing what you do now: make the game you guys want to make". 
Any objective flaws like re-using environments etc. should (and almost certainly will) be addressed, I agree. But Bioware tried to do some really fresh things here that came from the developers' own minds and that's what I admire. I don't want them to start trying to copy The Witcher now because that's what a lot of people seem to like better. Doing that may be a temptation when your own product receives a lot of harsh criticism and a competing one is held in high regard. I don't want Bioware to succumb to that temptation.
It would really sadden me because I think Dragon Age II is a unique game with its own rich personality. It's absolutely one of my favorites and I'd hate to see that magic go away out of a fear to disappoint the majority...

[aftohsix]

Thank you for the response Mike. I had always assumed that you guys were secretly watching, gathering intel as it were. Glad to know you're taking what didn't work in a great game to heart to make an even better one.

[Xewaka]

midgetman94 wrote...

Xewaka wrote...

Mike Laidlaw wrote...
rivalry, and the responsiveness of combat all fall into that category for me

I think you mistake responsiveness with speed. The frontloading of attacks means the game is less responsive than its predecessor, as we are now stuck with watching the full attack animation run, instead of being able to snap-react and move out of the way inmediately.

Ugh, sorry, but it's stuff like this that really makes my blood boil. Sometimes the hate for DA2 (or nostalgia for DAO?) gets to the point that the truth is just ignored.
Sorry, you're not really saying that the game which employed THE SHUFFLE was more responsive are you? Or the one where there was a noticeable delay everytime you queued up an attack? 
Please tell me you're not 

Considering I had more shuffle issues with DA 2 than with DA:O, that's exactly what I'm saying. In DA:O, when I clicked the ground, my character immediately started moving to the new position. In DA 2, when I clicked the ground, my character finished whatever he/she was doing, then moved to the new position. Therefore, DA:O was more responsive than DA 2.
DA 2 is faster, I concede that. But faster does not equate more responsive.

Modifié par Xewaka, 27 mai 2011 - 12:09 .

[Ad Dugg]

First off, your welcome.

If I was granted one wish though, it would have to be to make beards grow out of peoples faces, like real beards, instead of the joke shop stick on beards we have.

I know it's a minor issue, but alot of us enjoy making the "perfect" character for RPGs and if in cutscenes you can see the beard is hovering on their face it's bvery distracting and makes the beard programmers look like they couldn't be bothered to finish what they started.

Dragon Age has one of the best create a charaters in the industry and these little flaws stop it from being the best in the industy.

EDIT:
Is image three The Black City? 

Modifié par Ad Dugg, 27 mai 2011 - 12:14 .

[Cutlass Jack]

Xewaka wrote...

Considering I had more shuffle issues with DA 2 than with DA:O, that's exactly what I'm saying. In DA:O, when I clicked the ground, my character immediately started moving to the new position. In DA 2, when I clicked the ground, my character finished whatever he/she was doing, then moved to the new position. Therefore, DA:O was more responsive than DA 2.

I guess I'm just not seeing what you're seeing. In DA2, you could finish your action and be across the battlefield to hit your next target in 1/3 the time the DAO shuffle took. It was almost too responsive. As a rogue especially, I was anywhere and everywhere I needed to be in a flash.

I suspect it probably has something to do with you clicking the ground instead of the next target.

[devil_foetus]

If you cut corners, people notice it. We aren't so blinded by the magnificence of the developer to simply ignore blatant flaws.

I hope BioWare do learn from their mistakes and don't cast off the overwhelming feedback of the fanbase.

If people didn't care they wouldn't say anything.

[Xewaka]

Cutlass Jack wrote...
I guess I'm just not seeing what you're seeing. In DA2, you could finish your action and be across the battlefield to hit your next target in 1/3 the time the DAO shuffle took. It was almost too responsive. As a rogue especially, I was anywhere and everywhere I needed to be in a flash.
I suspect it probably has something to do with you clicking the ground instead of the next target.

As I said, faster =/= more responsive. As responsiveness, I understand we refer to downtime between command and execution. DA:O had zero downtime. DA 2 had full animation downtime.

[RGC_Ines]

Yah thanks for post Mike, but it's very interesting why it's posted after EA/BioWare anounnced Dragon Age 3..It's really honest message from You or just try to convice customers to pre-ordering DA3 etc?