738 réponses à ce sujet

[ddv.rsa]

haberman13 wrote...

I absolutely agree... I would buy DA3 way before ME3.

ME2 was a massive disappointment of gimped features and streamlining out the good stuff in leiu of pew pew and duck/shoot duck/shoot
duck/shoot duck/shoot
duck/shoot duck/shoot
duck/shoot duck/shootduck/shoot duck/shootduck/shoot duck/shootduck/shoot duck/shootduck/shoot duck/shoot
duck/shoot duck/shoot
duck/shoot duck/shootduck/shoot duck/shoot
duck/shoot duck/shoot
duck/shoot duck/shootduck/shoot duck/shoot
duck/shoot duck/shoot
duck/shoot duck/shoot
duck/shoot duck/shootduck/shoot duck/shoot
duck/shoot duck/shoot

When you make changes for a sequel not everyone is going to like them. That's ok. But for all the changes, I think they kept what made ME great. DA2 abandoned a lot of what Origins such a classic.

[ddv.rsa]

FieryDove wrote...

I disagree. I think the DA team listens far better than the ME team ever did.

They're more active on the forums, I'll give them that. But why do you say they listen better?

[Slayer299]

Bejos_ wrote...

I'm not really clued up on the gaming industry, but here's a theory that I've come across:

EA marketed DA:O as what DA2 actually is.
That's why DA:O sold so well.
Apparently DA:O had a silly play rate-- something like only 20% of people got past Ostegar. (I don't know if they counted repeated origins playthroughs. A lot of people may just have played multiple origins after their first for the achievements, and then stopped at Ostegar.)
Because of this really low play-through rate, Bioware realised that they were in for a storm if they didn't match the product to the advertising.
Hence, DA2 production started before or at about the same time DA:O came out.
The final product, DA2, is what DA:O was marketed as.
They may just have burned their possible new audience with DA:O, and discouraged their old audience with DA2.

Anyway, that's the theory. It sounds like a possible explanation for Bioware's deaf ears during and post production of DA2. Anyone care to comment on how possible this is?

So you're saying that DA2 is really the spiritual successor to BG2 instead of DAO? Because the two aren't even comparable except by who developed them alone.

[Bejos_]

Slayer299 wrote...

Bejos_ wrote...

I'm not really clued up on the gaming industry, but here's a theory that I've come across:

EA marketed DA:O as what DA2 actually is.
That's why DA:O sold so well.
Apparently DA:O had a silly play rate-- something like only 20% of people got past Ostegar. (I don't know if they counted repeated origins playthroughs. A lot of people may just have played multiple origins after their first for the achievements, and then stopped at Ostegar.)
Because of this really low play-through rate, Bioware realised that they were in for a storm if they didn't match the product to the advertising.
Hence, DA2 production started before or at about the same time DA:O came out.
The final product, DA2, is what DA:O was marketed as.
They may just have burned their possible new audience with DA:O, and discouraged their old audience with DA2.

Anyway, that's the theory. It sounds like a possible explanation for Bioware's deaf ears during and post production of DA2. Anyone care to comment on how possible this is?

So you're saying that DA2 is really the spiritual successor to BG2 instead of DAO? Because the two aren't even comparable except by who developed them alone.

Hahah, oh you kidder you. I'm talking about the Marilyn Manson music and the blood splatters and the action footage that was continuously paraded about before DA:O came out. That's basically what DA2 is.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Since they've demonstrated that the can market a DAO-style game like that, and do so successfully, there was no reason to actually make the game like that.

[foo man chew]

What innovations if you mean stripping down things like companion armor,game length,a cohesive story,the ability to choose your own race and rpg elements then yeah i suppose somewhere there was innovation going on but i cant think of anything that was innovative about this game.It feels like it was made to make a quick buck thats it.

[Bejos_]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Since they've demonstrated that the can market a DAO-style game like that, and do so successfully, there was no reason to actually make the game like that.

This whole thing, whatever the interpretation of events-- since, you know, nobody will tell the customers what the hell is going on-- speaks to a fundamental lack of faith and interest in the RPG genre.

I'd rather not have those kinds of people working on RPG games.

Edit: I'm sure many of the employees are interested in making RPG games. It's pretty obvious the higher-ups (in both Bioware and EA) are not of the same mind.

Modifié par Bejos_, 15 juin 2011 - 10:15 .

[Bejos_]

And more smiles from NeoGaf:

"didn't get the innovations "
"Innovations are coming soon as DLC - EA Origin only!"

[Morroian]

ink07 wrote...

People feel strongly about the game and sure as hell they want Bioware to listen, because so far they seem to have not. I

Hmm rather ironic cause that comment shows you aren't listening to them.

[Morroian]

Maverick827 wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Lol NeoGAF is having a field day with this article

http://www.neogaf.co...ad.php?t=433894

Edit: Favorite quote "Has a franchise ever been destroyed as quickly as Dragon Age?"

Wait a second...is that forum trying to compete with these forums as the least constructive place to discuss Dragon Age 2?!

To hell with that!

Quick, someone get the neppakyo signal: we need some more hyperbole and misinformation in this thread, now.

Nah they actually seem to be rpgcodex wannabes.

[Morroian]

ddv.rsa wrote...

Different teams. The Mass Effect devs proved themselves with ME2. Almost every choice from ME1 is acknowledged,  and they improved gameplay by listening to feedback. The result was solid gold.

So while I won't preorder DA3, I feel completely safe pre-ordering ME3.

So do you come at the ME series with different expectations to the DA series?

Darth Executor wrote...

Neither team listens. However, ME2 was an excellent pure shooter (the word RPG is nowhere to be found on the box),

I disagree, the shooter aspect is one dimensional ie. stay behind cover at all times, and they reduced the rpg aspects to the barebones, the worst of both worlds, both aspects of the game are shallow. What saves it are the excellent npcs.

Modifié par Morroian, 15 juin 2011 - 10:41 .

[dzizass]

Morroian wrote...

Nah they actually seem to be rpgcodex wannabes.

lol, because they don't like DA2?

[Morroian]

dzizass wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Nah they actually seem to be rpgcodex wannabes.

lol, because they don't like DA2?

No the way they conduct themselves.

If you want good intelligent game discussion go to the QT3 forums, and no they aren't soft on DA2, the discussion is just more reasoned. 

[csfteeeer]

Anathemic wrote...

Lol NeoGAF is having a field day with this article

http://www.neogaf.co...ad.php?t=433894

Edit: Favorite quote "Has a franchise ever been destroyed as quickly as Dragon Age?"

lol, i think the last one was Deus Ex, although the third one looks like it's going to be awesome.

[Maverick827]

dzizass wrote...

lol, because they don't like DA2?

Because they're the kind of people who begin their sentences with "lol."

[Bejos_]

Maverick827 wrote...

dzizass wrote...

lol, because they don't like DA2?

Because they're the kind of people who begin their sentences with "lol."

That someone begins their sentence with "lol" is not indicative of what "kind" of person he or she is. Also, you will find this "kind" of person on any forum.
NeoGaf is more exclusive than other forums, so you tend to get less riff-raff. NeoGaffers are by and large intelligent people who sometimes like to spew vitriol. Sometimes the vitriol is warranted, sometimes it's not.
RPGCodexians are trolls extraordinaire, and many of them are also of an ilk I wouldn't share room-air with, but I can't deny that some of them also make excellent points and are constructive.
You will also find a panoply of "kinds" of people at BSN.

Let's try for less knee-jerk reactions.

Modifié par Bejos_, 15 juin 2011 - 11:48 .

[dzizass]

Maverick827 wrote...

dzizass wrote...

lol, because they don't like DA2?

Because they're the kind of people who begin their sentences with "lol."

That's a pretty dumb remark, considering that English is an international language.

Morroian wrote...

No the way they conduct themselves.

If
you want good intelligent game discussion go to the QT3 forums, and no
they aren't soft on DA2, the discussion is just more reasoned. 

I suggest you read the DA2 review on rpgcodex. Contrary to what Mr. Gaider says, it is not overly hating and pretty is the best summary of what the game is.

Modifié par dzizass, 16 juin 2011 - 12:14 .

[Bejos_]

dzizass wrote...

I suggest you read the DA2 review on rpgcodex. Contrary to what Mr. Gaider says, it is not overly hating and pretty is the best summary of what the game is.

That is the best DA2 review.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Then read his Origins review for good measure.

The reviews themselves are mostly fine. Almost all are incredibly detailed and well written, if snarky. It's the forums which really draw out all the crap.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 16 juin 2011 - 12:34 .

[Bejos_]

Some interesting (?) figures for EA.

EA losses:
$454 million FY2008
$1088 million FY2009
$677 million FY2010
$276 million FY2011

Maybe they'll eventually end up in the black next year.

Unless TOR crashes.

[Maverick827]

Bejos_ wrote...

Let's try for less knee-jerk reactions.

I assure you, my reaction is not one of the knee nor the jerk variety.

[Zanallen]

Game companies are often in the red.

[ink07]

Morroian wrote...

ink07 wrote...

People feel strongly about the game and sure as hell they want Bioware to listen, because so far they seem to have not. I

Hmm rather ironic cause that comment shows you aren't listening to them.

Oh I've been listening alright. I've been listening to them when they said tactical camera would be there, or when they said the asset reuse was to provide more variety in mission content (as if the 18 months dev cycle was inexsitent) I also heard them when they said they "couldn't do anything about not offering the Signature Edition on Steam and that it wasn't a plan to target that specific store", and lo and behold Origin comes along, and I've been listening to Gaider and his "I don't care what you choose in-game when we gave you the option to choose, your decisions don't matter," and I've been listening to Laidlaw when he says "wave based combat is going to be there in DA3" and I am listening now when they say that their game "was full of innovations, it is just that fans didn't get them."

There is an actual difference between YOU, that will eat up whatever Bioware says, and ME, who listens to these comments and can actually discern what they say.

But keep thinking that, I know you won't give in the discussion, I realised that when you actually stated that the lack of choice in DA2 was a conscious decision to make the player feel "powerless" in Kirkwall. I s'posse that you also think the city was completely barren as a metaphor of Hawke's heart, or that it doesn't change in 10 years time to symbolize time is eternal or some crap lke that, so I won't bother with you anymore. I think my stance is perfectly clear by now.

[Zanallen]

If that is what you are getting from what Bioware has been saying, then you have fairly poor reading comprehension and are actively seeking out the negative to reinforce your own conclusions.

[Elhanan]

Bejos_ wrote...

Some interesting (?) figures for EA.

EA losses:
$454 million FY2008
$1088 million FY2009
$677 million FY2010
$276 million FY2011

Maybe they'll eventually end up in the black next year.

Unless TOR crashes.

Source? Or is the interesting part where you got the figures?