725 réponses à ce sujet

[John Epler]

Monica83 wrote...
Oh come on Jhon we don't started this.. We costantly called "people that don't accept change" or "people that fear to change" and this from you bioware guys and now you come here and say stop with vitriol comments?

Sorry but i don't find any coerence in this.. Like the lies spread by your team on the marketing campaign of dragon age 2

You asking us to don't point our finger when your team is the first to do so..

Sorry but for me this "company" lost all credibility

You're responding to a post I never made, Monica. At no point did I start wagging my finger and saying 'You guys are wrong and should feel bad for being wrong'. In fact, I made a post suggesting that yes, we do listen, and that we are still reading the forums and seeing what people have to say so that the response from the fans can inform our development process going forward. I did mention that people who throw around insults and vitriol are generally banned and often seen in a different light than those who are able to express their dissatisfaction in a constructive fashion.

We're human. Sorry, but there it is - if someone's telling me I'm an idiot and that they hope I get fired, I am somewhat less inclined to view the rest of their opinion with the same eye as someone who says 'I wasn't happy with DA2 for these reasons'. And frankly, I don't think this is unreasonable - civility costs you nothing. If someone is unable to express themselves without personal attacks against other posters (or, again, developers) then they aren't going to be viewed as seriously as someone who -is- able. And, yes, they will probably find themselves removed from the forums, because these forums are here for discussion. People who are not contributing to discussion aren't really adding much to the forums.

And if we've lost all credibility in your eyes? That's unfortunate, but there's really not much more I can say other than what I already have.

[Demx]

I do recall seeing things like "some people can't accept change or fear change" in interviews when the person is questioned about the backlash at DA2, but not on the forums. I could be wrong.

[Merilsell]

mousestalker wrote...

I think of all the Bioware games, DA2 is the one that needs a hug fix the most.

Fixed.

[MorrigansLove]

JohnEpler wrote...

Monica83 wrote...
Oh come on Jhon we don't started this.. We costantly called "people that don't accept change" or "people that fear to change" and this from you bioware guys and now you come here and say stop with vitriol comments?

Sorry but i don't find any coerence in this.. Like the lies spread by your team on the marketing campaign of dragon age 2

You asking us to don't point our finger when your team is the first to do so..

Sorry but for me this "company" lost all credibility

You're responding to a post I never made, Monica. At no point did I start wagging my finger and saying 'You guys are wrong and should feel bad for being wrong'. In fact, I made a post suggesting that yes, we do listen, and that we are still reading the forums and seeing what people have to say so that the response from the fans can inform our development process going forward. I did mention that people who throw around insults and vitriol are generally banned and often seen in a different light than those who are able to express their dissatisfaction in a constructive fashion.

We're human. Sorry, but there it is - if someone's telling me I'm an idiot and that they hope I get fired, I am somewhat less inclined to view the rest of their opinion with the same eye as someone who says 'I wasn't happy with DA2 for these reasons'. And frankly, I don't think this is unreasonable - civility costs you nothing. If someone is unable to express themselves without personal attacks against other posters (or, again, developers) then they aren't going to be viewed as seriously as someone who -is- able. And, yes, they will probably find themselves removed from the forums, because these forums are here for discussion. People who are not contributing to discussion aren't really adding much to the forums.

And if we've lost all credibility in your eyes? That's unfortunate, but there's really not much more I can say other than what I already have.

We'll see if you actually listened in the upcoming DLC.

[Monica83]

JohnEpler wrote...

Monica83 wrote...
Oh come on Jhon we don't started this.. We costantly called "people that don't accept change" or "people that fear to change" and this from you bioware guys and now you come here and say stop with vitriol comments?

Sorry but i don't find any coerence in this.. Like the lies spread by your team on the marketing campaign of dragon age 2

You asking us to don't point our finger when your team is the first to do so..

Sorry but for me this "company" lost all credibility

You're responding to a post I never made, Monica. At no point did I start wagging my finger and saying 'You guys are wrong and should feel bad for being wrong'. In fact, I made a post suggesting that yes, we do listen, and that we are still reading the forums and seeing what people have to say so that the response from the fans can inform our development process going forward. I did mention that people who throw around insults and vitriol are generally banned and often seen in a different light than those who are able to express their dissatisfaction in a constructive fashion.

We're human. Sorry, but there it is - if someone's telling me I'm an idiot and that they hope I get fired, I am somewhat less inclined to view the rest of their opinion with the same eye as someone who says 'I wasn't happy with DA2 for these reasons'. And frankly, I don't think this is unreasonable - civility costs you nothing. If someone is unable to express themselves without personal attacks against other posters (or, again, developers) then they aren't going to be viewed as seriously as someone who -is- able. And, yes, they will probably find themselves removed from the forums, because these forums are here for discussion. People who are not contributing to discussion aren't really adding much to the forums.

And if we've lost all credibility in your eyes? That's unfortunate, but there's really not much more I can say other than what I already have.

Yes is very sad but you and not as a person but as a company lost all credibilty on my eyes since im a very old fan i puchased Pretty many of your titles the nice ones: BG saga.. IW saga.. PST...Icewind dale.. Nwn..and now i must listen from people in your team that i dislike dragon age 2 because i am afraid to change.. yes its sad but you lost all credibility on my eyes..

Ill try to be civil but when a team costantly claim that people like are afraid to change when is not true this offend me and ****** me off.. Maybe you never told that but other in your team yes and many many times.. Did you think people are stupid? Did you think im going to smile because someone make thread with write thank you and then: oh we noticed some issues and we are going to fix them oh look at that screenshot... are griffins? oh its seems yes!

The quality of bioware products started to go down after the EA affiliations.. that' really courious but you are not the only company that been influenced in this way from EA...

Im sorry jhon im not attacking you and i don't want to offend you.. But after great rpg like Bg or PST see a game like dragon age 2 its truly a shame..And all those PR talking only to have a sort of damage control don't work with me... If you want some credibility back to my eyes well: "make a true sequel or at leas a decent one"

Because when i see:
Reused Areas
Empty city whit no life and complete lack of detail
A mediocre storyline
And toon dlc..

Well i feel myself offended i am lucky that i tryed the game before so i decided to don't puchase it

[hoorayforicecream]

KilrB wrote...

Morroian wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Words have meanings and saying that DA2 was "critically successful with a lot of new fans" is not just marketing speech. In light of the known sales numbers, it is nothing short of a bald faced lie.

Its not a lie if it was more profitable.

It is if you obviously have to sell more games to get those new fans, and you obviously didn't.

"Critically successful"  = critics liked it. Metacritic score: 82. 

"Lot of new fans": Metrics gathered from those who registered DA2 on a bioware/EA.com account without owning DAO. Also includes those who bought DAO *after* buying DA2 (more registration metrics).

Financial success: DAO cost $X to make and made $Y. If DA2 cost $N and made $M, where (Y - X) < (M - N), then DA2 is actually a greater financial success than DAO, even if both M and N are less than Y and X.

Not all games cost the same. Tomb Raider Underworld sold around 4.5 million copies and broke even. The Witcher 2 sold 400,000 copies and was trumpeted as a huge success. Sales figures in a vaccuum are insufficient.

[xkg]

^^^ Wow. Are you calling the worst critics scores in Bioware's RPGs history a success? Wow
And in nowadays - can you say that Metacritics 82 is a good score ?

Modifié par xkg, 29 juin 2011 - 11:37 .

[John Epler]

MorrigansLove wrote...

We'll see if you actually listened in the upcoming DLC.

Which is precisely what I said previously in this thread. I can say 'we're listening, we're listening' until i'm blue in the face, but it won't be until we release new content that you'll see what that means. I'm not suggesting you just take my word for it - in fact, I've suggested exactly the opposite in this very thread.

And that will have to suffice.

[Lord_Valandil]

hoorayforicecream wrote...
"Critically successful"  = critics liked it. Metacritic score: 82.

Why, of course. After paying off the critics there had to be some "good" reviews.
Like "The Escapist" one. Heh.

Bottom Line: A pinnacle of role-playing games with well-designed mechanics and excellent story-telling, Dragon Age II is what videogames are meant to be.

Still makes me laugh.

[Aaleel]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

"Critically successful"  = critics liked it. Metacritic score: 82. 

"Lot of new fans": Metrics gathered from those who registered DA2 on a bioware/EA.com account without owning DAO. Also includes those who bought DAO *after* buying DA2 (more registration metrics).

Financial success: DAO cost $X to make and made $Y. If DA2 cost $N and made $M, where (Y - X) < (M - N), then DA2 is actually a greater financial success than DAO, even if both M and N are less than Y and X.

Not all games cost the same. Tomb Raider Underworld sold around 4.5 million copies and broke even. The Witcher 2 sold 400,000 copies and was trumpeted as a huge success. Sales figures in a vaccuum are insufficient.

Mike Laidlaw:

"If the Metacritic isn't where we want it to be, and honestly our goal as a studio is to try and aim more for 90"

They didn't reach their own goal.  So if you miss the goal you set for yourself, how do you then turn around and say it was successful?

And I think that 82 is the lowest or second lowest score ever for a Bioware game.  That's not even counting the 79 in got on the Xbox.

Modifié par Aaleel, 29 juin 2011 - 11:37 .

[Mr.House]

Lord_Valandil wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...
"Critically successful"  = critics liked it. Metacritic score: 82.

Why, of course. After paying off the critics there had to be some "good" reviews.
Like "The Escapist" one. Heh.

Bottom Line: A pinnacle of role-playing games with well-designed mechanics and excellent story-telling, Dragon Age II is what videogames are meant to be.

Still makes me laugh.

Yes! Because people enjoyed it, it must mean they where paid off! Really?

[hoorayforicecream]

Lord_Valandil wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...
"Critically successful"  = critics liked it. Metacritic score: 82.

Why, of course. After paying off the critics there had to be some "good" reviews.
Like "The Escapist" one. Heh.

The escapist's review isn't actually listed on metacritic. DA2 has 45 reviews, 38 of which are positive. If you want to believe that EA paid for all of them, that's your prerogative. I'm more inclined to believe that people actually liked the game, because... well, most folks I know liked the game. That's just occam's razor though. 

xkg wrote...

^^^ Wow. You are calling worst critics scores in Bioware's RPGs history a success? Wow
And in nowadays - can you say that Metacritics 82 is a good score ?

I would. The overall average review score of publisher electronic arts is 72, putting DA2 above the average by a decent amount. 

[Mr.House]

Aaleel wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

"Critically successful"  = critics liked it. Metacritic score: 82. 

"Lot of new fans": Metrics gathered from those who registered DA2 on a bioware/EA.com account without owning DAO. Also includes those who bought DAO *after* buying DA2 (more registration metrics).

Financial success: DAO cost $X to make and made $Y. If DA2 cost $N and made $M, where (Y - X) < (M - N), then DA2 is actually a greater financial success than DAO, even if both M and N are less than Y and X.

Not all games cost the same. Tomb Raider Underworld sold around 4.5 million copies and broke even. The Witcher 2 sold 400,000 copies and was trumpeted as a huge success. Sales figures in a vaccuum are insufficient.

Mike Laidlaw:

"If the Metacritic isn't where we want it to be, and honestly our goal as a studio is to try and aim more for 90"

They didn't reach their own goal.  So if you miss the goal you set for yourself, how do you then turn around and say it was successful?

And I think that 82 is the lowest or second lowest score ever for a Bioware game.  That's not even counting the 79 in got on the Xbox.

DAO only got over a 90 on the PC version, console versions got a 87(PS3) and 86(360)

[Yrkoon]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Financial success: DAO cost $X to make and made $Y. If DA2 cost $N and made $M, where (Y - X) < (M - N), then DA2 is actually a greater financial success than DAO, even if both M and N are less than Y and X.

Not all games cost the same. Tomb Raider Underworld sold around 4.5 million copies and broke even. The Witcher 2 sold 400,000 copies and was trumpeted as a huge success. Sales figures in a vaccuum are insufficient.

  True, but  that just seems like semantics/lawyer speak to me.   And anyway, all  that proves is that DA2 was more efficient.  (and I'll even dispute that.  Take away the 400,000+ preorders that were fueled by DA:O's success and then lets see where we're at in terms of sales)   But   The bottom line is that more than twice as many people bought DA:O than DA2.  And for as long as I've been alive,  a company's ultimate goal involves  selling more product than they did in the past, not less product.  So yes, Bioware DID fail to meet  their goal - let alone exceed it.


And lets be honest, they EXPECTED DA2 to  massively sell.  They literally had their sights set on tapping into the Call of Duty/Farmville  market.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 29 juin 2011 - 11:49 .

[Morroian]

xkg wrote...

^^^ Wow. Are you calling the worst critics scores in Bioware's RPGs history a success? Wow
And in nowadays - can you say that Metacritics 82 is a good score ?

You're talking in relative terms not absolute terms.

[Lord_Valandil]

Mr.House wrote...

Lord_Valandil wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...
"Critically successful"  = critics liked it. Metacritic score: 82.

Why, of course. After paying off the critics there had to be some "good" reviews.
Like "The Escapist" one. Heh.

Bottom Line: A pinnacle of role-playing games with well-designed mechanics and excellent story-telling, Dragon Age II is what videogames are meant to be.

Still makes me laugh.

Yes! Because people enjoyed it, it must mean they where paid off! Really?

I have said several times that I don't have any problems with people liking the game. To each their own.
But as a "professional" critic, giving it a 100 and saying that it's the pinnacle of the RPG genre...well.........

[Mr.House]

xkg wrote...

^^^ Wow. Are you calling the worst critics scores in Bioware's RPGs history a success? Wow
And in nowadays - can you say that Metacritics 82 is a good score ?

ANything over a 80 is a good score, also just because the game has over a 90 does not mean it's a good game. MW2 and Halo 3 are prime examples of that.

[LiquidGrape]

I liked Dragon Age: Origins, but I was never a fan.

I played Dragon Age 2, and it successfully made me a fan.

Does this render me a fantastical creature of myth?

[Mr.House]

Lord_Valandil wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Lord_Valandil wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...
"Critically successful"  = critics liked it. Metacritic score: 82.

Why, of course. After paying off the critics there had to be some "good" reviews.
Like "The Escapist" one. Heh.

Bottom Line: A pinnacle of role-playing games with well-designed mechanics and excellent story-telling, Dragon Age II is what videogames are meant to be.

Still makes me laugh.

Yes! Because people enjoyed it, it must mean they where paid off! Really?

I have said several times that I don't have any problems with people liking the game. To each their own.
But as a "professional" critic, giving it a 100 and saying that it's the pinnacle of the RPG genre...well.........

That review is also not listed on metacritic

[Lord_Valandil]

LiquidGrape wrote...

I liked Dragon Age: Origins, but I was never a fan.

I played Dragon Age 2, and it successfully made me a fan.

Does this render me a fantastical creature of myth?

Nah. You're just in the minority.

[Lord_Valandil]

Mr.House wrote...

Lord_Valandil wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Lord_Valandil wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...
"Critically successful"  = critics liked it. Metacritic score: 82.

Why, of course. After paying off the critics there had to be some "good" reviews.
Like "The Escapist" one. Heh.

Bottom Line: A pinnacle of role-playing games with well-designed mechanics and excellent story-telling, Dragon Age II is what videogames are meant to be.

Still makes me laugh.

Yes! Because people enjoyed it, it must mean they where paid off! Really?

I have said several times that I don't have any problems with people liking the game. To each their own.
But as a "professional" critic, giving it a 100 and saying that it's the pinnacle of the RPG genre...well.........

That review is also not listed on metacritic

That's weird. I remember it was there...or maybe not, I don't have a really good memory.
But still, if that isn't a paid-off review I don't know what is it.

[Aaleel]

Mr.House wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

"Critically successful"  = critics liked it. Metacritic score: 82. 

"Lot of new fans": Metrics gathered from those who registered DA2 on a bioware/EA.com account without owning DAO. Also includes those who bought DAO *after* buying DA2 (more registration metrics).

Financial success: DAO cost $X to make and made $Y. If DA2 cost $N and made $M, where (Y - X) < (M - N), then DA2 is actually a greater financial success than DAO, even if both M and N are less than Y and X.

Not all games cost the same. Tomb Raider Underworld sold around 4.5 million copies and broke even. The Witcher 2 sold 400,000 copies and was trumpeted as a huge success. Sales figures in a vaccuum are insufficient.

Mike Laidlaw:

"If the Metacritic isn't where we want it to be, and honestly our goal as a studio is to try and aim more for 90"

They didn't reach their own goal.  So if you miss the goal you set for yourself, how do you then turn around and say it was successful?

And I think that 82 is the lowest or second lowest score ever for a Bioware game.  That's not even counting the 79 in got on the Xbox.

DAO only got over a 90 on the PC version, console versions got a 87(PS3) and 86(360)

Origins was designed for the PC, and ported horribly at a different time for consoles.  DA2 was designed for all at once, and on the XBox it didn't even break 80.  Also how many game of the year awards did DA:O win?  I think the critical success of that game is undisputed.

[Demx]

Aaleel wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

"Critically successful"  = critics liked it. Metacritic score: 82. 

"Lot of new fans": Metrics gathered from those who registered DA2 on a bioware/EA.com account without owning DAO. Also includes those who bought DAO *after* buying DA2 (more registration metrics).

Financial success: DAO cost $X to make and made $Y. If DA2 cost $N and made $M, where (Y - X) < (M - N), then DA2 is actually a greater financial success than DAO, even if both M and N are less than Y and X.

Not all games cost the same. Tomb Raider Underworld sold around 4.5 million copies and broke even. The Witcher 2 sold 400,000 copies and was trumpeted as a huge success. Sales figures in a vaccuum are insufficient.

Mike Laidlaw:

"If the Metacritic isn't where we want it to be, and honestly our goal as a studio is to try and aim more for 90"

They didn't reach their own goal.  So if you miss the goal you set for yourself, how do you then turn around and say it was successful?

And I think that 82 is the lowest or second lowest score ever for a Bioware game.  That's not even counting the 79 in got on the Xbox.

Sonic Chronicles: The Dark Brotherhood got a 74 from the critics.

[xkg]

Mr.House wrote...

Lord_Valandil wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Lord_Valandil wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...
"Critically successful"  = critics liked it. Metacritic score: 82.

Why, of course. After paying off the critics there had to be some "good" reviews.
Like "The Escapist" one. Heh.

Bottom Line: A pinnacle of role-playing games with well-designed mechanics and excellent story-telling, Dragon Age II is what videogames are meant to be.

Still makes me laugh.

Yes! Because people enjoyed it, it must mean they where paid off! Really?

I have said several times that I don't have any problems with people liking the game. To each their own.
But as a "professional" critic, giving it a 100 and saying that it's the pinnacle of the RPG genre...well.........

That review is also not listed on metacritic

Not listed ? Ok be my guest and go visit this link:
http://www.metacriti.../critic-reviews

Look at the first review then comeback and tell me what you see.

[hoorayforicecream]

Yrkoon wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Financial success: DAO cost $X to make and made $Y. If DA2 cost $N and made $M, where (Y - X) < (M - N), then DA2 is actually a greater financial success than DAO, even if both M and N are less than Y and X.

Not all games cost the same. Tomb Raider Underworld sold around 4.5 million copies and broke even. The Witcher 2 sold 400,000 copies and was trumpeted as a huge success. Sales figures in a vaccuum are insufficient.

  True, but  that just seems like semantics/lawyer speak to me.   And anyway, all  that proves is that DA2 was more efficient.    But   The bottom line is that more than twice as many people bought DA:O than DA2.  And for as long as I've been alive,  a company's ultimate goal involves  selling more product, not less product.  So yes, Bioware DID fail to meet  their goal - let alone exceed it.


And lets be honest, they EXPECTED DA2 to  massively sell.  They literally had their sights set on tapping into the COD market.

The goal of any company that sells product is not to sell more product, the goal is to make money. You don't make as much money by selling 10 million units product that cost $X each and sell for $X+1 when you can sell 3 million units that cost $X each and sell for $X+5. Sure, there is some volume involved, but the goal isn't just to move units, it's to make money.

Ascribing an arbitrary goal in a vaccuum like that is the epitome of a straw man argument, and I don't think that's particularly fair. Like I said, Tomb Raider Underworld sold 4.5 million copies, but it barely broke even. Square-Enix doesn't want a repeat of that. Certainly they're happy that it didn't lose money, but by your definition it was a success when it clearly wasn't.

xkg wrote...

Not listed ? Ok be my guest and go visit this link:
http://www.metacriti.../critic-reviews

Look at the first review then comeback and tell me what you see.

The 82 I linked was to the PC SKU, which does not list the escapist. DAO also was not reviewed as highly on the 360, which should not surprise anyone. Still, the 360 reviews also include the 2/10 given to it by the GameCritics guy who has a pretty big chip on his shoulder given the language he uses. Should that be thrown out alongside the guy at the escapist who loved the game?

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 29 juin 2011 - 11:57 .