1373 réponses à ce sujet

[Bonkz]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Bonkz wrote...

People were just being, indeed, loud cause of their disappointment. I doubt it was hate. 
"A few" doesn't really cut it though. From what i have been reading around many game/critic sites all this time, i'd say a really big chunk of the players, if not the biggest.

Not even close. I'm not sure what critic sites you visit, but most are not confusing being unhappy with the game with Mike being burned at the sake. I can't recall a single critic that said such.

Most players are intellegent enough to realize games are not the work of a single person and just want to play good ones. We don't demand the firing of someone over one misfire. We want them to learn and improve.

Seeing my post again, maybe i wasn't clear enough. I didn't mean to say that critics themselves or reviews burn Mike Laidlaw at the stake. No point in blaming all things on a certain individual.
I meant to say that the players are the ones doing that cause of their disappointment. Drifted off a bit

[Furtled]

It's never easy to admit mistakes, especially when you're faced with a lot of unnecessary personal attacks, so kudos for that and for the work of the mods who've been trying to keep things under control on here - I hope someone bought them a pint or two to say thanks.

[Kimberly Shaw]

Enemy waves, (Massive) Area re-use, Lack of choice impact. I hated all those things. Remove those from DA2, most especially the lack of choice impact, and it would go from a "not bad but not great game" and turn into a worthy sequel to DAO, which had none of those things.

It's hard to understand who thought these would be well received by anyone, so I don't think these were choices made by the devs so much as limitations of time and resources imposed on the devs.

But they clearly should not make it into future games, and I'm glad to see them acknowledged. Especially the lack of choice impact. Did I mention the lack of choice impact? It's the reason I buy Bioware RPGs.

As for the DLC screenshots, the first two are good. Griffons do not save the last one, it is bland and needs tweaking, in my humblest opinion. That said, i won't be buying any DA2 DLC, it has left too bitter a taste in my mouth. Will see you for DA3, if the reviews both paid for and from fans are good.

[MorrigansLove]

Get rid of the para-phrase wheel!

[Kimberly Shaw]

Oh, and also...see my signature for things not to do in future DA games. We like logic more than "fun" when it comes to game lore.

[UltimoCrofto]

I know it's irrelevant for me to say this, but I feel I should anyway.

Basically, like many others I was disappointed with DA2 in some ways, but ultimately still enjoyed it enough to feel like it was worth the purchase (which equates to a 7/10 game, for me). That's not to the level I have experienced with previous BioWare titles, such as KotOR, Mass Effect 2 or Dragon Age: Origins. Normally a 7/10 is okay with me, but when you know a developer is capable of more the disappointment can turn into frustration, especially when you can clearly see areas where quality was compromised. I'm not frustrated, but I understand why others are.

All that said, it is good to see someone brave these forums after so much hate -- a lot of it justified, a lot of it not, and a lot of it downright offensive and shameful to other gamers -- and openly state that they accept the fair criticisms of the game. In all honesty, you guys at BioWare are at a stage now where you could just shut off these forums completely and ignore the community and still function unhindered as a developer selling plenty of games regardless.

I may be falling into a trap, and usually I'm very cynical, but I'm willing to see the honesty in Mike Laidlaw's words, and appreciate that you guys at BioWare still care about what the community think. That really matters to me as a long-time gamer of BioWare titles, and I'm sure it matters just as much to other people too.

There's things that I'm likely never going to like, understand or support in regard to BioWare (how you guys handle DLC, for example), but if you're still checking feedback from fans and taking it on-board is all we can really ask for. Hopefully this will equal a much better experience whenever the next Dragon Age game is released.

Thanks for making this thread/post Mike, it's much appreciated.

[Marionetten]

nightlordv wrote...

So this guy makes one post apologizing and now everyone loves him again when he got flamed more then a witch at the stake? Blows the mind...

I've never hated Mike and I'm probably one of the loudest critics of Dragon Age II. In fact, the few interactions I've had with the man have all been pleasant. Dragon Age II isn't the product of one single mind. It's a team effort. To single out Mike and toss all the blame on him and ask for him to be fired is just insanely ridiculous. Besides, I think he's learned a lot from working on this project. Why would anyone want all that experience to go to waste?

I'm all for keeping Mike on the project as I think he's got a better understanding of what works and what doesn't now. Bringing a new lead in would accomplish nothing beyond confusing the direction of the franchise even further.

[In Exile]

Xewaka wrote...
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.

That's because the console version was the base for the animations (or rather, that's what my guss is). There, you control directly. So the game is very responsive, when you click to attack. The problem is on PC, the way the created macros for these console actions led to a very weird ordering effect, and we were always forced to go through the full animation to the next command because we effectively had an emulation of a console using keyboard/mouse.

[Warlock of the Wilds]

Mike,

Thanks for your post. I am definately enjoying the game very much. I see the game as a basic platform from where you guys can take the game to many different directions. Maybe you guys can do a DLC where we get to play from the Qunari's point of view during Act II. Kind of like the Darkspawn Chronicles in Origins. I definately love the new combat system that to me was a major improvement and the spells look awesome!

[Catsith]

MorrigansLove wrote...

Get rid of the para-phrase wheel!

For the love of god, yes. This kills roleplay for me. At the very least, have an option to have the full response highlighted in the subtitle box for those of us who want to be in complete control of how our character communicates. Deus Ex 3 is doing this and I think it's great. It is not a difficult thing to do.. literally just make it a toggle in options.

[upsettingshorts]

Catsith wrote...

It is not a difficult thing to do.. literally just make it a toggle in options.

And somewhere in Canada, a kitten is viciously punted through a plate glass window.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 27 mai 2011 - 07:45 .

[_Aine_]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Catsith wrote...

It is not a difficult thing to do.. literally just make it a toggle in options.

And somewhere in Canada, a kitten is viciously punted through a plate glass window.

Oh sure, make it the Canadian kittens....

*heads out quickly to round up as many as possible to relative safety*  

[Fiery Phoenix]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Catsith wrote...

It is not a difficult thing to do.. literally just make it a toggle in options.

And somewhere in Canada, a kitten is viciously punted through a plate glass window.

[Halley Comet]

I love Dragon Age 2. I think it is a massive improvement over Origins. I like the combat system better, the inventory system better, and I love my character has a voice. The only thing that I hated was, as before mentioned, the level reuse. I understand it to a point. But after awhile it got pretty annoying.

Anywho, I think you guys have done a great job and are doing well in the story line. Nobody wants the same story every time. Keep up the good work!

[Dormiglione]

TheTranzor wrote...

KilrB wrote...

OK, now that all the suck-ups have had their say:

Mike Laidlaw wrote...
Hey guys and gals,

As some of you have noted, I have been absent from these forums for a time, and my apologies for going dark, but I did not feel prepared to deal with some of the more personal attacks in a professional manner. And as a rule if I don't feel like I'm going to be professional, I don't post. You guys deserve better than that.

I don't blame you, and yes we do.

Mike Laidlaw wrote...
I am absolutely aware of the concerns voiced here. Issues like level re-use, the implementation of wave combat, concerns about the narrative and significance of choice and so on have all been not only noted, but examined,
inspected and even aided me (and many, many others on the team) in formulating future plans. Further, I'm not only aware of the concerns, but I agree that there are aspects of DA II that not only can but must be improved in future installments. And that is precisely our intent.

Rich stories, for deeper RPG mechanics, for more choice, and for something even more epic to come?

Exactly the opposite of what we got.

You scammed me out of $60 Mike.

I hope it was worth it, cause it may be the last money EA/Bioware gets out of me.

You talk a lot about potential.

Dragon Age 2 had it, and you wasted it.

Wow... major tears on your pillow.  Seriously, if he "scammed" you out of $60, you must be the easiest mark in history.   

And if $60 for something bothers you, I'd hate to think what you might do if you make a bad decision buying a television, or a furniture set, or heaven forbid a car... hopefully people keep the long length of rope and the rafters away from you if that ever happens.

Personally, I appreciate that Laidlaw came out here and addressed some concerns and decided to take some heat... because you know that's what he was going to get from a lot of people here.  The game had its issues for sure, but it was far from the worst game in history that I felt so teary-eyed that I went all Dawson's Creek-style angsty over it.

And you really think that the problem are the $60 dollars? Its not about the price, its about what i got for the $60 dollar. On the package i see Dragon age 2.
One of the key feature should be: Embark upon an all-new adventure that takes place across an entire decade and shapes itself around every decision you make.

How comes that issues like "level re-use, the implementation of wave combat, concerns about the narrative and significance of choice" are pointed out by players? Did Laidlaw and all of the Bioware developers and testers not realize on single point of them?
All this issues are major issues and i cant believe that they didnt notice that to many corners were cut. So how does that help that Laidlaw "addressed some concerns"? In my eyes, my opinion, in my perception Dragon Age 2 remains a big disappointment and a major desaster.

[Cutlass Jack]

In Exile wrote...

That happened for me in DA:O. My Warden didn't want to be a Warden (but did want to save Ferelden) yet the game never recognized that potential motivation. It just assumed, in fact, you wanted/cared/identified with the Wardens. Which is fine - all RPGs need a buy in. Except DA:O had the origins, where you get a totally different non-Warden background. And DA:O never gave me a reason to want to be a Warden once it had me buy in to not wanting to be one.

That sounds remarkably similar to my first playthrough. My Warden was an irresponsible Cousland rogue who wanted absolutely nothing to do with joining the Wardens. The only thing that got him motivated was protecting his family. Because the plot pretty much railroaded me into abandoning my mother and not pursuing my brother it made me rebel even more against being a Warden. But if I could have had a one line dialogue option to say to Duncan "Look, help me save my mother and I'm yours." and it would have changed the whole game's equation for me.

My second playthrough (Angry City Elf Bride) connected a little better to the whole thing. Her first meeting with Duncan, where she attempted to kick his arse in her wedding gown, was truly the stuff of comedic legends. And by the end of her origin, joining the Wardens felt like a very good option for her.

I guess thats part of why I bought in to DA2 so much. Playing the charming Rogue who was his own person yet motivated by protecting his family is the playthrough I couldn't get in the previous game.

[In Exile]

tmp7704 wrote...
Was it really needed to devote a whole game to that castle kicking, though? What i meant is, if the goal was to put the series at the point where it's more than just the wardens and darkspawn then you could've done just that, start the next game at that point and provide a brief "how we got here from the relatively peaceful Thedas" cutscene in the beginning, not unlike DAO.

I agree with you. It just feels like DA2 was a game that should have been released after what will now be DA3 so we could see how it all came to happen. It feels like you're playing the prequel to a movie you've never seen, and all the bits that are supposed to be "oh, wow, is that how it really happened?" actually turn out to be disjointed and confusing.

Perhaps it'd feel different if that process of sandcastle kicking was elaborate and involved lot of player's input in order to take place... but since it wasn't and since it's predestined to occur no matter what, and it occurs largely at the very end of the game, and it'd occur even if the player didn't exist at all (since it's a result of chain of events independent from the player and his/her actions) it just feels... i dunno, superfluous? Because as it is the game stops just as things start to get interesting, and it takes seven years of fighting spawns of NPC thrash to get there which... to be honest is pretty dull. (and no, adding exploding enemies doesn't alleviate that in the slightest, despite what the art team might believe)

The predestination is fine. My current paragon of branching choice (knocking off alpha protocol) is the oft-mentioned TW2. And TW2, for the political realm, ends effectively the same way (there are only very minor differences in the political structure of the north with the same general threat in all endings).

DA2 could easily have ended as it did and allowed us to have much choice. Specifically, by being able to rise to power by any means neccesary and then actively working to make the conflict come about (or fighting to prevent it and failing).

A great exampe is the number of posters who actively support and wish they could help a not to be named mage. Opportunities to help (and stop him, with some other event taking place or another character replacing him - who says he should work alone?) would have taken DA far.

[In Exile]

Cutlass Jack wrote...
That sounds remarkably similar to my first playthrough. My Warden was an irresponsible Cousland rogue who wanted absolutely nothing to do with joining the Wardens. The only thing that got him motivated was protecting his family. Because the plot pretty much railroaded me into abandoning my mother and not pursuing my brother it made me rebel even more against being a Warden. But if I could have had a one line dialogue option to say to Duncan "Look, help me save my mother and I'm yours." and it would have changed the whole game's equation for me.

That was my Cousland in a nutshell. He wanted to protect his family, but Duncan kidnapped him and left his mother to die. But I couldn't even call this scumbag out to Alistair. He agreed to try to save Ferelden because it was his home and it would honour the memory of his father and mother - but underneath that goal, he wanted political power to execute Arl Howe. He wanted to work with Alistair and Eamon, to have Alistair renounce the Crown and bring the Couslands to greatness by being crowned at the Landsmeet.

My second playthrough (Angry City Elf Bride) connected a little better to the whole thing. Her first meeting with Duncan, where she attempted to kick his arse in her wedding gown, was truly the stuff of comedic legends. And by the end of her origin, joining the Wardens felt like a very good option for her.

I guess thats part of why I bought in to DA2 so much. Playing the charming Rogue who was his own person yet motivated by protecting his family is the playthrough I couldn't get in the previous game.

Exact same thing that happened to me - only with me it was a male mage. It was either the Circle or the Wardens, and at least with the Wardens you weren't shackled.

[Cutlass Jack]

Bonkz wrote...

Seeing my post again, maybe i wasn't clear enough. I didn't mean to say that critics themselves or reviews burn Mike Laidlaw at the stake. No point in blaming all things on a certain individual.
I meant to say that the players are the ones doing that cause of their disappointment. Drifted off a bit

I suspect we're on two different topics here. The quote you took of mine was aimed at those attacking developers directly. Not at those who have legitimate complaints or disappointment in the game. Which is completely fair.

[Dragoonlordz]

Leave the kittens alone dam you ebil little man!

I would personally like DA3 a better solution to resolve the closing in issue, which tbh is not a real issue in DAO because here's a thought if a mob is out of range use a spell either on mob as attack or on party member for protection, bow or crossbow, throw a knife or even hide around a corner let him come to you.. Hell even "suck it up princess" if you choose melee class use one of your ranged party member to take out the ranged mobs  while you deal with melee ones!

Instead of DA2 everyone ~>

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 27 mai 2011 - 08:06 .

[Guitarjoe91]

Mike Laidlaw, It's good to have you back!

I agree with the folks who want a more open design that allows for better exploration. I think exploration and character development are the two most important parts of an RPG (at least to me anyways) so more locations and more to see on the way to them means a lot to me.

Also, don't give up on bringing a more personal story like you guys tried in DAII. I for one wouldn't mind it to be a bit more driving but I have become tired of the same "ultimate evil" LOTR ripoff stories most RPG's use. Stories with a more grounded rival (this doesn't mean there can't be an ultimate evil too) tend to do well to give the player a more personal drive to continue. Bioware has given us great examples in the past with characters like Loghain and Saren; and who can forget their rival back when they played Pokemon as kids?

[In Exile]

suntzuxi wrote...

I played through TW2 once. It is the same thing that Bioware put off with Dragon Age 2 just with better scripting and graphics.  I really do not see how it's better than TW1 and other BioWare classics. 

Play it twice and pick the other person in Act I. That's all that TW2 did that wasn't in TW1 and in another Bioware game. That choice is what DA2 promised to be, and wasn't. And that's where, at least for me, you have dissapointment.

[Pudricks]

Thank you? I guess, you're welcome then?
  
   Well thanks for making the game, even though it didn't meet my expectations of a Bioware game.
I think you got many things right in DA2, such as tone in dialogue, faster combat, cross class combos, etc.

   But you cut so many corners in order to release the game on time. Waves of enemies is a cheap way to extend a fight or to pump up the difficulty. Boss fights that are too reminiscient of a World of Warcraft raid encounter. Re-used environments. These are just a couple of things that I think didn't turn out too well.

   However, my main gripe really is the story. I know not every story needs to be an epic about saving the world. This was supposed to be a more personal story. Immediately I would think that the family would be a huge focus, but it really wasn't. The family just got picked off and kept in the background. The only reason we have any attachments to this family is because that we're told that we're supposed to because they're family. There wasn't any emotional link set in place for what happens to Hawke's mom.

   The story just feels like a series of unrelated events. Hawke had his hand in too many cookie jars. He was mucking with the local politics, and he was stirring things up with the mages and templars. The conflicts are supposed to be more complicated than good vs evil, then why have both of these elements in the same game? As it is both these elements, the Qunari and the Mage/Templar situation, end up being both a little shallow. And since we're doing so many different things throughout the acts, the whole game just feels like a long series of unrelated events and then it's over.

   The game, to me, felt like a Dragon Age 2 starter kit. Whereas it is by design that the main campaign is not fulfilled or fulfilling and we're made to want resolutions to conflicts or answers.

   I'm guessing there was a lot of pressure from your publisher to make some of the decisions you did. But this isn't a Madden game. This isn't Call of Duty. This a Bioware game. This is an RPG. It's more complicated than those other games because an RPG requires us to care about the story and the interactions.

Modifié par Greenleaf6, 27 mai 2011 - 08:16 .

[Aradace]

Mike if you're still around can you answer a quick question;

I know the item pack #1 isnt up on PSN store yet because, well, the store isnt up yet. But seeing as how it's supposed to be back up by this Tuesday (The 31st) does that mean you guys will be putting it up Tuesday? I've been putting off some of my playthroughs untilI could get this item pack. Thanks in advance

Modifié par Aradace, 27 mai 2011 - 08:14 .