11 réponses à ce sujet

[topster88]

Is it not obvious that the vast majority of players do not like the casual direction DA2 went?

Is it not obvious that the sales figures for DA2 were bloated because so many fans were expecting more of DA:O (and even *then* DA2 did not sell that much more than DA:O despite marketing it way more than DA:O was), and that sales for DA3 will suffer becuase of it?

Is it not obvious from all the user reviews on metacritic just how many people hate how much you've changed DA?

Is it also not obvious that the stark contrast of "critic" reviews only exist because EA paid them for high grades?

BioWare, your consumers do not like the gamepley. They do not like the story. They do not like the level design. They do not like the equipment, inventory, button-mashing, hack & slash elements.

Can this be any more clear? Can it?

[Brenon Holmes]

Just a reminder folks, please keep the discussion civil. We all want these forums to be a nice friendly space where people can talk in a civil manner about the game.

Thanks.

[David Gaider]

topster88 wrote...
Is it not obvious that the vast majority of players do not like the casual direction DA2 went?

Which players? The vast majority of all players? No, I don't think that's obvious at all.

Is it not obvious that the sales figures for DA2 were bloated because so many fans were expecting more of DA:O (and even *then* DA2 did not sell that much more than DA:O despite marketing it way more than DA:O was), and that sales for DA3 will suffer becuase of it?

Clearly there are some (or many) people that were disappointed by DA2. The implication that everyone who bought DA2 who'd liked DAO was dissatisfied doesn't really follow, unless you prefer to believe that posts on internet forums constitute the opinions of all players? While that certainly doesn't mean that people who don't post don't feel that way, it no more evidence that they do.

Whether the sales of any potential DA3 will suffer will depend on what kind of game it turns out to be, and the amount of feedback we take into account. As with any game, that feedback will need to be weighed, as there is no single opinon among fans... despite how much some people would like us to think it's so. We'll take criticisms to heart, see what we can change and what we want to change, and go from there.

At that point, I'd suggest that someone who is still leery pay attention to info about the game or try any demo that comes out (if there is one; I've no information on such a thing at this point) and make an informed decision on whether or not to buy the game then. Surely that's not an unreasonable expectation.

Is it not obvious from all the user reviews on metacritic just how many people hate how much you've changed DA?

It's obvious that people who post user reviews on metacritic hate it, certainly. Or at least some of them.

Is it also not obvious that the stark contrast of "critic" reviews only exist because EA paid them for high grades?

I think it's obvious that reviewers have starkly contrasting opinions on what makes a good game, just as fans do. Which is not surprising, as many of them are fans themselves. If only negative reviews or user reviews on metacritic are supposed to be examples of honest journalism, then I really don't know what to say.

BioWare, your consumers do not like the gamepley. They do not like the story. They do not like the level design. They do not like the equipment, inventory, button-mashing, hack & slash elements.

Can this be any more clear? Can it?

It's clear you dislike these things. It's also clear there are others who do so, but you're not going to convince us that this is universal. I know the immediate reaction from my saying this is "oh Bioware is just ignoring the criticism and thinks everything's perfect"-- which is typical for the Internet, as only extremes of opinons exist here, but simply not so. Look for Mike's post on things we are looking at currently for improvements. When we have more information to share, we'll do so, but at the end of the day it'll be up to us to decide what we need to change and what we need to keep.

If your opinion is "keep nothing", then I'm afraid that's not going to happen. There are things in DA2 that we're very happy with-- or which are, at least, heading in the direction we like... just as there are things that didn't work like we'd hoped. As for what we work on, that's still to be determined... but the fan feedback we take into account will come from all our fans, and not simply the loudest.

Sorry you didn't like the game. Hopefully what we make next is more to your taste. It might be, and we'll do our best, but from the tone of some posts like this it's truly difficult sometimes to tell if such a thing is even possible-- or desireable.

Modifié par David Gaider, 03 juin 2011 - 03:55 .

[John Epler]

PurebredCorn wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

... but the fan feedback we take into account will come from all our fans, and not simply the loudest.

This is very good to know.

Except yours, PurebredCorn.

It's the goldfish.

[Stanley Woo]

hoorayforicecream wrote...
the goal in this case isn't winning an argument or forcing Bioware to agree that you're right and they're wrong. The goal is to give them the feedback they need in order to glean how to make the next game better.

This. Very this.

[David Gaider]

Myounage wrote...
Yes. DA:O outsold DA2 by a ton. That sends a message clearer than words to any business.

To a point, yes. One must also consider, however, that DAO took five times longer to make than DA2. In a development world where time equals money, that means DAO had to sell five times as many copies in order to be profitable. If it makes it easier to understand, take whatever sales numbers you believe DA2 had and multiply that by five-- that's an indication of its profitability relative to DAO.

Does that mean sales are the most important thing? Not really. It's not to us just as it's not to you. I'm not sure a large amount of sales would mean a fan would like a game any more or find it any more worthwhile, so a fan citing a lower amount of sales as being suddenly meaningful strikes me as a bit specious.

The whole "10 million sales figure, CoD audience" thing gets repeated a lot around here, after all, but that's a self-referencing interpretation that has nothing to do with our realistic sales expectations. We're not in the business of making games just to go out of business, yes, but it's also not a good idea to mortgage a franchise for short-term gain. So hopefully there's a middle ground to be found here, and certainly there are a number of things we feel we can and should improve on (as Mike has said)-- as much because it will help sales as because we want to make them better. If we don't talk about what those specifics are, it's because we're not ready to... and because it would be better to eventually show you what we mean rather than simply discuss them.

Modifié par David Gaider, 03 juin 2011 - 08:59 .

[David Gaider]

Valcutio wrote...
The only reason DA2 sold even remotely as well as it did is because of the DA:O fans. Do you REALLY think you'll have that advantage when DA3 rolls around?

I imagine the people who enjoyed DA2 will be looking forward to DA3, yes, unless your supposition is that everyone who bought DA2 was unhappy? I don't think that's true. Either way, it'll depend on what kind of game DA3 turns out to be, won't it?

Make the next game in a month so you can multiply that number by 60. You'll need to in order to hit that sales quota.

If you want me to care about how much you respect me, you might not want to employ reductio ad absurdum. That's not what I meant, and I think that's clear. Profitibility is not the only factor here.

[David Gaider]

tmp7704 wrote...
But then didn't large part of that time go into producing the engine, which is a long-term investment supposed to provide equally long-term returns by cutting that development time from the future titles? In other words, didn't DAO take five times longer in part so then DA2 and future titles could be pushed out much quicker ... and that cost-saving investment is --in a way-- part of DAO-generated profit, as well? Since as you put it, time equals money so time saved = money saved.

To a point, absolutely. It's a simplified comparison, but so is directly comparing DA2's sales to DAO's. If someone intends to interpret what I said is "DA2 was mega-profitable so there's nothing we should change", they should probably read a bit further.

[John Epler]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

David Gaider wrote...
We'll take criticisms to heart, see what we can change and what we want to change, and go from there.

Are you sure you and Mike aren't the same person? Because you just laid down the law!

That caused me physical pain.

[John Epler]

Aaleel wrote...

Valcutio wrote...

Everytime you open your mouth, I lose more and more respect for you.

The only reason DA2 sold even remotely as well as it did is because of the DA:O fans. Do you REALLY think you'll have that advantage when DA3 rolls around?

Make the next game in a month so you can multiply that number by 60. You'll need to in order to hit that sales quota.

Is it really a need to attack the Bioware people when they post.  Last thing I want to see is for them to say these complainers will not be satisfied no matter what we do, so we're just not going to worry about trying to compromise or change anything.

I wouldn't worry too much about that. We spend enough time on the forums that we're able to make the distinction with someone who was unhappy with DA2 and simply wish their opinion to be heard and those who are unable to share their criticism in a civil fashion.

The majority of those unhappy with the game fall into the previous category. The vitriol from the latter is not going to make us suddenly disregard anyone's concerns.

[David Gaider]

WilliamShatner wrote...
If DA2 cost 1/5th the amount DA:O did as Gaider suggested I am disgusted.

Sigh.

DAO took roughly 5 years to make. DA2 took just over a year? The only cost for a development studio is the money spent in keeping it running and all its employees paid. What part of that comparison is so surprising to you? If you feel that we should have spent more time making the game, that's a reasonable suggestion. My response was regarding the comment that the sales (as in the number of units sold) would be the only takeaway we would listen to-- and I was responding to that only, in that there is far more involved.

If there's any question as to why such discussions can't be reasonably had on forums in the future, this would be an excellent thread to direct them towards.

[John Epler]

And we're locking this thread because it's gone completely off the rails at this point.

A few bans handed out, too. Guess what - insulting other users is against the ToS. Don't mistake the right to criticism with a right to immature vitriol and childish barbs. If you're unable to comport yourself like a rational, civil adult on these forums, then I strongly recommend not posting.