738 réponses à ce sujet

[Herr Uhl]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Then perhaps they need better testers, or not go off of console users meta feedback that didn't even finish Origins. Basically they shoehorned the ME system into an IP that was based on being the "spiritial successor to Baldur's Gate" So glad that lasted all of 1 game.

You managed to get some spite against console players in there. Good job.

What feedback are they supposed to use? Sending out questionaries? Just use the forum (which would pretty much comes down to people who like the game enough to gush about it or dislike it enough to go keep on harping on it)?

Or should they just go on internal feedback?

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Alistairlover94 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Oh god they're actually considering multiplayer....

Yep. And was David Silverman dropped on his head as a child?

That's it. Someone start a thread demanding that multiplayer not be included in Dragon Age.




Seriously I just can't see that working in any form. Bioware must really want to destroy their fanbase.

Either that, or they made some sort of bet to see how much they can ****** off the fanbase.

http://www.youtube.c...0hvYNIU#t=8m10s

You could be onto something.

[TEWR]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Alistairlover94 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Oh god they're actually considering multiplayer....

Yep. And was David Silverman dropped on his head as a child?

That's it. Someone start a thread demanding that multiplayer not be included in Dragon Age.




Seriously I just can't see that working in any form. Bioware must really want to destroy their fanbase.

Either that, or they made some sort of bet to see how much they can ****** off the fanbase.

well it's working.

mrcrusty wrote...

They had multiplayer in their older games which worked fine. In the case of NWN, it was it's redeeming feature and in the case of the BG games, no one cares or remembers.

It depends on how they handle it, really.

The only way I can see it being tolerable or likable is co-op where P1 is still the protagonist and has full say on the story, and P2 is just playing as a companion like Merrill or Varric.

[L6-636536]

Imo it sounded like he just heard all the problems the console version had. Which would indeed cause a fix if you look at DA2. Removing clutter,Focusing the world on one palette, easing up on choices and options to narrow down the game and ease up on space limitations and software issues.

[jcp234]

Bejos_ wrote...

For me, it wasn't the game that spoiled Bioware for me-- it was the way that Bioware acted throughout the game's development, marketing and reception.

When a company

-lies ("Don't worry, guys-- the consoles will have auto-attack." "Oops!" *wink*),
-denies ("You just don't understand our genius!"),
-propagandises ("Those are 4chan trolls!" "Stop being a self-entitled b****, princess!"), and
-exploits ("The game is bad because we were rushed. You can fix that! Buy our Day 1 DLC!")

I have no problem in distancing myself from them. I've bought 3 Bioware games. They will not see another cent from me ever again.

People paid them $60 for a buggy, shoddy, rushed, half of a game. Instead of being ashamed, Bioware feels it is "entitled" to treat those customers like **** throughout the entire process.

Stay classy, Bioware.

(No, this is not EA's fault.)

I agree with this. Bioware hasn't really handled this situation very well. Whoever is responsible for public relations needs a demotion.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

The only way I can see it being tolerable or likable is co-op where P1 is still the protagonist and has full say on the story, and P2 is just playing as a companion like Merrill or Varric.

I didn't try multiplayer in the BG games, but I think that's how they handled it. It's also the method Obsidian is using for Dungeon Siege 3.

[Herr Uhl]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

They had multiplayer in their older games which worked fine. In the case of NWN, it was it's redeeming feature and in the case of the BG games, no one cares or remembers.

It depends on how they handle it, really.

The only way I can see it being tolerable or likable is co-op where P1 is still the protagonist and has full say on the story, and P2 is just playing as a companion like Merrill or Varric.

So, what do you think it could be when it was unthinkable to work?

[Eski.Moe]

First time I've seen that YT video. Laughed my ass off at just how terrible some of the points he made were.
It's like taking something that's clearly a positive and trying to make it sound bad. I can't wait till they interview him again in the lead up to Dragon Age 3!

[nuclearpengu1nn]

DA2 has potential but it fails to show it by having a lot of bugs and glitches, having no story, and lack of creativity with the maps which is reused over and over.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Herr Uhl wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Then perhaps they need better testers, or not go off of console users meta feedback that didn't even finish Origins. Basically they shoehorned the ME system into an IP that was based on being the "spiritial successor to Baldur's Gate" So glad that lasted all of 1 game.

You managed to get some spite against console players in there. Good job.

What feedback are they supposed to use? Sending out questionaries? Just use the forum (which would pretty much comes down to people who like the game enough to gush about it or dislike it enough to go keep on harping on it)?

Or should they just go on internal feedback?

Considering I am currently playing ME2 on a PS3 how do you figure?  Orgins was designed as a PC CPRG throwback, which made alot of old time Bioware fans pretty happy. I'm a gamer, I don't care much about platform, though I do perfer the PC obviously.  That being said DA2 feels like an RPG lite with the COD audience in mind.  Generally not a good thing for something that's supposed to be a deep role playing game.

[TEWR]

Herr Uhl wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

They had multiplayer in their older games which worked fine. In the case of NWN, it was it's redeeming feature and in the case of the BG games, no one cares or remembers.

It depends on how they handle it, really.

The only way I can see it being tolerable or likable is co-op where P1 is still the protagonist and has full say on the story, and P2 is just playing as a companion like Merrill or Varric.

So, what do you think it could be when it was unthinkable to work?

Two main heroes having full say on the story. That causes problems.


Or online multiplayer like Call of Duty.


Both of those should never be implemented. If I want Call of Duty, I'll boot up my copy of Black Ops. That's what it's there for.

[ItsTheTruth]

"Things were a little bit broken, all the complaints revolved around three key areas: the graphics, the combat and the story".

Sounds good, sadly that is the from the video about the feedback they took from Dragon Age... Origins.

[TEWR]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Then perhaps they need better testers, or not go off of console users meta feedback that didn't even finish Origins. Basically they shoehorned the ME system into an IP that was based on being the "spiritial successor to Baldur's Gate" So glad that lasted all of 1 game.

You managed to get some spite against console players in there. Good job.

What feedback are they supposed to use? Sending out questionaries? Just use the forum (which would pretty much comes down to people who like the game enough to gush about it or dislike it enough to go keep on harping on it)?

Or should they just go on internal feedback?

Considering I am currently playing ME2 on a PS3 how do you figure?  Orgins was designed as a PC CPRG throwback, which made alot of old time Bioware fans pretty happy. I'm a gamer, I don't care much about platform, though I do perfer the PC obviously.  That being said DA2 feels like an RPG lite with the COD audience in mind.  Generally not a good thing for something that's supposed to be a deep role playing game.

Yea..... I'm a console user and I try and come up with feedback that helps everyone all around. Sure let's just listen to the PC audience! Everyone else's opinions and comments don't matter at all!

[Herr Uhl]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Considering I am currently playing ME2 on a PS3 how do you figure?  Orgins was designed as a PC CPRG throwback, which made alot of old time Bioware fans pretty happy. I'm a gamer, I don't care much about platform, though I do perfer the PC obviously.  That being said DA2 feels like an RPG lite with the COD audience in mind.  Generally not a good thing for something that's supposed to be a deep role playing game.

I prefer the PC too (well, since I own no xbox or playstation I don't have much choice, but still). Mentioning that they are console users that didn't even bother to complete the game seemed petty.

Anyways, honestly, what company culture do you prefer, reacting to feedback from external sources or focusing on internal?

[CaolIla]

Calling ""borrowing" stuff from other games and slapping it on a Dragon Age game" innovations is... nice. I didn't see any innovations, since there was nothing I haven't seen somewhere else before.

Why do i get the idea that the production of dragon age 2 was dominated by far too few hours to create a good game and a manatee tank with idea balls?

[alex90c]

Both of those should never be implemented. If I want Call of Duty, I'll boot up my copy of Black Ops. That's what it's there for.

This. I don't think anyone ever thinks "I want something action-y ... I think i'll get an RPG!", rather they go for something which would appeal to their interest, say Call of Duty. It's like someone saying they wanted a game with interesting characters and buying Call of Duty. It just doesn't happen.

[TEWR]

alex90c wrote...

Both of those should never be implemented. If I want Call of Duty, I'll boot up my copy of Black Ops. That's what it's there for.

This. I don't think anyone ever thinks "I want something action-y ... I think i'll get an RPG!", rather they go for something which would appeal to their interest, say Call of Duty. It's like someone saying they wanted a game with interesting characters and buying Call of Duty. It just doesn't happen.

Eh I wouldn't say that. Call of Duty does have interesting characters.


That said, trying to turn a fantasy RPG into a multiplayer game is wrong on so many levels.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Then perhaps they need better testers, or not go off of console users meta feedback that didn't even finish Origins. Basically they shoehorned the ME system into an IP that was based on being the "spiritial successor to Baldur's Gate" So glad that lasted all of 1 game.

You managed to get some spite against console players in there. Good job.

What feedback are they supposed to use? Sending out questionaries? Just use the forum (which would pretty much comes down to people who like the game enough to gush about it or dislike it enough to go keep on harping on it)?

Or should they just go on internal feedback?

Considering I am currently playing ME2 on a PS3 how do you figure?  Orgins was designed as a PC CPRG throwback, which made alot of old time Bioware fans pretty happy. I'm a gamer, I don't care much about platform, though I do perfer the PC obviously.  That being said DA2 feels like an RPG lite with the COD audience in mind.  Generally not a good thing for something that's supposed to be a deep role playing game.

Yea..... I'm a console user and I try and come up with feedback that helps everyone all around. Sure let's just listen to the PC audience! Everyone else's opinions and comments don't matter at all!

What I'm saying, and have said many times over the past year, is there's a middle ground, Bioware just continually fails at finding said middle ground, instead perfering to streamline features into oblivion and at times remove features outright.  DA2 lack of customization was criminal imo.  Oh yay Isabella's so unique she wears the same clothes for 10 years.  Clothing doesn't define a companion, their personality and input into the world/story/quests does.

[Johnny20]

Laidlaw has "ideas" for Hawke?

Why? He sucked. He isn't that popular, why bring him back? Why not someone new? So much for Thedas being the "Main character" of the Dragon Age series. I guess they used that line in defense of dropping the Warden.

Bah! Not happy about more Hawke...

[Herr Uhl]

Johnny20 wrote...

Laidlaw has "ideas" for Hawke?

Why? He sucked. He isn't that popular, why bring him back? Why not someone new? So much for Thedas being the "Main character" of the Dragon Age series. I guess they used that line in defense of dropping the Warden.

Bah! Not happy about more Hawke...

Because so many people complained about the change of protagonist?

[sandokas]

I am tired with demon's story of Dragon Age and not going to buy any more dlc or the Dragon Age follow up.
I got really confused on the amount of times i got asked if either i supported the mages or templars, and the lack of consequences in either support you would show. Also the ending being double just for show off despite your choices was also a big no no.
And the fact that you kept coming back to the same areas time after time was very confusing also, and stole any immersion that you might have had.
But, i did like a lot of things on Dragon Age 2, if they had kept the game shorter and more replayable, would have hidden the lack of new areas and still show off the content. Also, when making moral choices you have to get a immediate, strong and lasting feedback from the choices you do.

[TEWR]

What I'm saying, and have said many times over the past year, is there's a middle ground, Bioware just continually fails at finding said middle ground, instead perfering to streamline features into oblivion and at times remove features outright.  DA2 lack of customization was criminal imo.  Oh yay Isabella's so unique she wears the same clothes for 10 years.  Clothing doesn't define a companion, their personality and input into the world/story/quests does.

Ok, I'll give you that one.


All they had to do was make it so that you picked up character specific equipment and could customize their look (gloves, boots, chestpieces). Granted, I can't imagine Varric in anything else than what he wears. It would just look..... wrong. So maybe give him a Morrigan type deal. Starts off in one set of clothing, and then you find another set that keeps the same appearance


But I'm sure we could've found some things for Isabela, Merrill, Fenris, etc. And Merrill's ultimate armor set could've been her white chainmail type thing.


They could've had a unique look for the characters whilst still retaining customization.

[Romantiq]

What innovations? Lazy repeated environments, character design, mediocre story and overall lack of freaking love and passion invested in this game are now considered innovations? Seemed more like utter degradation and a spat on the face to me. Combine that with initial price tag of $59.99 for PC which added insult to injury. diaf ea

EDIT: didn't know there were two threads

Modifié par Romantiq, 14 juin 2011 - 04:11 .

[Johnny20]

Filament wrote...

Johnny20 wrote...

So much for Thedas being the "Main character" of the Dragon Age series.

Faulty logic there, just because they may use the same protagonist for more than one game (which you don't know) doesn't mean the Dragon Age series and setting is "about" that protagonist exclusively and no longer about Thedas.

Well due to Kirkwall and the surrounding area being so painfully dull I very much doubt Thedas is the main character. Then again, Hawke was also painfully dull so either way, I'd like someone new for Dragon Age 3.