725 réponses à ce sujet

[dheer]

Melca36 wrote...
When Dragon Age 3 and some serious changes are made to bring some of the fans you are going to be reading interviews like this:

"While DA:2 was a good game by its own accord, we made some missteps in how the story was told and the game mechanics. With DA:3 we improved what worked in DA:2 and reincorporated some elementsfrom Origins and hope to bridge the gap between both games and create something that the new fans contiue to love while hopefully luring old fans to come back."

Mark my words, DA:2 will be heavily critiqued when DA:3 comes out. And it will really ****** off the fans who scored it a 9 or higher.

I really hope so. I want to like DA3 and hope it gets the series back on track.

Thanks for the link Brock, hadn't seen this vid yet.

[Melca36]

Maria Caliban wrote...

There is no such thing as a perfect game. If someone thinks a game is perfect then yes, they're going to be upset when someone tells them it's not, but that not a bad thing. BioWare shouldn't have to tiptoe around fans who think all their games should be exactly like game X, which they adore.

I definitely agree but I am sure the combat will change and there will be some different skills.

For example...I love the Force Mage skills but I do not expect it to be in the next game and as much as I will miss those skills...I will adapt.

[Aaleel]

At the end of the day all that matters is if their vision of the best of both worlds (games) is close enough to your vision of the best of both worlds (games)

That's all I'll be looking for when I research DA3 (preorder days are done after DA2). There are some things that were in DA2, that if they're in DA3 will be a deal breaker and a no buy.

So it's all just a wait and see approach at the moment.

[_Aine_]

dheer wrote...

I really hope so. I want to like DA3 and hope it gets the series back on track.

Me too.  I loved the Dragon Age world and would love to see more of it.  

Less awesome, more grit; less one path, more multiple endings.  These are my hopes (in short) .  

I guess I don't want a huge flashy story.  I would prefer a dark, gritty, realistic and consequence filled tale that truly changes as I live and act within the world.  I want people to actually dislike me if I muddle their plans, remember me if I help change their lives for the better....and some even secretly set out to turn my friends against me (sometimes even having it work!).  That sort of thing.  Not always huge world-catastrophic changes, sometimes it is the smaller personal interactions, conflicts and triumphs that make a game great.  I don't think a reactive world is an impossibility these days. In fact, a world that better reacts to multiple variables within the world itself, your choices and your companions is getting to be more realistic to expect all the time.  

[hoorayforicecream]

Melca36 wrote...
Well it was done to Origins. But maybe that won't happen again.   One can hope.

I never felt that their criticisms of Origins were ever unfair. The things they did in DA2 to address changes in Origins, at least in my eyes, were good. I actually liked the concept of wave combat, because it helped address the front-loaded combat difficulty in DAO. Sure, it wasn't done perfectly (it really did not have to be used so often), but I liked it conceptually. I adored the friendship/rivalry system and changing of the gift system, because now I don't have to shovel soup bones on someone to make someone like me. I really, really liked the facial animation system they implemented, the characters emoted so much better, and I could actually lip read them. I liked the faster pace of combat, and the more action-oriented animations.

These were all things that I felt could have used improvement from Origins. I liked origins a whole lot (enough to actually buy it twice - once for PS3 at the start, then a second time, digital special edition, for PC to get my hands on the toolset).

Obviously, these are just my opinions. I really enjoyed my time playing Origins. But I don't see DAO as some sort of sacred cow to be venerated and never criticized. I find it strange if others do.

Edit: Just to be clear, it's pretty obvious DA2 is no sacred cow either. There's plenty of things wrong with it (too *much* wave combat, reused maps, rushed act 3 story, etc.), and I have no problems with people pointing them out, because I do think that the game desperately needs improvement in those areas. Where my opinion tends to differ is whether these problems are a dealbreaker or not. Some folks don't think so, and others do. Your mileage may vary.

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 29 juin 2011 - 02:10 .

[Redcoat]

Again with this "DA2 brought in a lot of new fans" bit.

How many new fans, exactly? How do they know this? Is it even possible determine such a number? If DA2 were posting sales numbers that greatly outpaced DA:O, then yes, you could see it was bringing in many new fans, but there's nothing to suggest that it's selling significantly better than Origins.

I don't know, maybe they mean that the backlash against DA2 has been so loud and so vocal that it got the attention of people who had never heard of Dragon Age and who are now curious to see what all the fuss is about.

[Brockololly]

hoorayforicecream wrote...
Obviously, these are just my opinions. I really enjoyed my time playing Origins. But I don't see DAO as some sort of sacred cow to be venerated and never criticized. I find it strange if others do.

I don't see DAO as a Sacred Cow either but I just find most of the changes to DA2 a.) Are IMO, somewhat flawed at a design level where they take away some of the defining characteristics of Origins and b.) Most of the changes weren't executed very well. So maybe I would love the framed narrative or wave combat or a faster action game pace, but I don't think DA2 executed any of those things very well at all.

Then with DA2, most of my issues with Origins weren't addressed but only became worse when added to the other changes. I thought Origins had mediocre encounter design but compared to DA2's waves it makes Origins look great. They have the unique Origin stories that provide a good amount of varied content- so they get rid of almost any notion of diverging content and have everything railroaded down the same path.

I hate to bring "that" game into this discussion but yeah, The Witcher 2? Say what you will about it, but I would LOVE to see a BioWare game that had the balls to have that level of not only choice but CONSEQUENCES- to the extent that the entire second Act is entirely different and unique- levels, quests, characters. Thats what I thought we'd get out of the middle of DA2 and it falls flat.

There was an article on Gamasutra a while back from a GDC talk by Blizzard on WoW where they outlined a rule for sequels: One third old, one third new and one third improved. BioWare sequels in general have this problem where they don't improve things they just ditch them and stick new stuff in.

Instead of tweaking the art style and improve the graphics on a technical level, they go for some wholesale art style change.  Instead of adding content (Hey, maybe add a fifth party member slot!) BioWare sequels seem to think the way to mass market success is by stripping things down. I don't get it. Hopefully the DLC shows some modicum of better design choices and better execution cause I like the DA world but I'm losing faith in their overall vision for their games.


So yes, in a way I'd say DA2 was too different than Origins on a core design choice level but at the same time it didn't do itself any favors by not executing the new elements very well.

[sympathy4saren]

I wonder if they know a lot of people aren't just going to preorder DA3 because its Dragon Age anymore.

Fans are genuinely skeptical now and will be observing closely. CD Projekt is ready to pounce on fans who feel abandoned.

"Want a genuinely rich and non-streamlined fantasy rpg? Come to us."

Check out The Witcher 2 in Off Topic. It's swarming with enthusiasm and praise.

I personally want a new fantasy IP from BioWare but I know I'm not gonna get it yet

[hoorayforicecream]

Redcoat wrote...

Again with this "DA2 brought in a lot of new fans" bit.

How many new fans, exactly? How do they know this? Is it even possible determine such a number? If DA2 were posting sales numbers that greatly outpaced DA:O, then yes, you could see it was bringing in many new fans, but there's nothing to suggest that it's selling significantly better than Origins.

I don't know, maybe they mean that the backlash against DA2 has been so loud and so vocal that it got the attention of people who had never heard of Dragon Age and who are now curious to see what all the fuss is about.

Actually, they have a bunch of data on who has played origins and who hasn't. The EA/Bioware accounts and their data-gathering metrics show who bought both DAO and DA2, who bought only DAO, who bought only DA2, and who bought DAO *after* getting DA2. It's not perfect, of course, but the majority of people don't turn off the metrics-gathering and it only takes connecting once to validate your DLC items and such for them to know such things.

[Aaleel]

Redcoat wrote...

Again with this "DA2 brought in a lot of new fans" bit.

How many new fans, exactly? How do they know this? Is it even possible determine such a number? If DA2 were posting sales numbers that greatly outpaced DA:O, then yes, you could see it was bringing in many new fans, but there's nothing to suggest that it's selling significantly better than Origins.

I don't know, maybe they mean that the backlash against DA2 has been so loud and so vocal that it got the attention of people who had never heard of Dragon Age and who are now curious to see what all the fuss is about.

The thing about it though.  Is that DA2 is selling about half as well as DA:O.  So if they brought in a lot of new fans, what does that say about the number of fans they retained?  The higher one number, the lower the other.

Modifié par Aaleel, 29 juin 2011 - 02:40 .

[Morroian]

sympathy4saren wrote...

Check out The Witcher 2 in Off Topic. It's swarming with enthusiasm and praise.

I personally want a new fantasy IP from BioWare but I know I'm not gonna get it yet

Why would you want a new IP rather than just improving on DA2? The DA world is a rich world, one of the better imagined worlds around.

[In Exile]

Brockololly wrote...
I don't see DAO as a Sacred Cow either but I just find most of the changes to DA2 a.) Are IMO, somewhat flawed at a design level where they take away some of the defining characteristics of Origins and b.) Most of the changes weren't executed very well. So maybe I would love the framed narrative or wave combat or a faster action game pace, but I don't think DA2 executed any of those things very well at all.

So you do admit that part of it is that you just don't like the game that DA2 is, and may well have never liked it even if it was done well (e.g. if it was ME2)?

There was an article on Gamasutra a while back from a GDC talk by Blizzard on WoW where they outlined a rule for sequels: One third old, one third new and one third improved. BioWare sequels in general have this problem where they don't improve things they just ditch them and stick new stuff in.

DA2 retained a third of DA:O. It just retained the worst parts - the story design, the role of the protagonist, the plot structure, the loot system, the superficial consequences and ''RP counts'' approach to decisions.

DA2 is a terrible game becuase it was the spiritual successor of DA:O's structure.

So yes, in a way I'd say DA2 was too different than Origins on a core design choice level but at the same time it didn't do itself any favors by not executing the new elements very well.

It really isn't. DA2 is DA:O with a different aesthetic and PC VO. The combat runs differnetly under the hood, but the structure is the same,and DA:O's structure sucked. But now that you have PC VO and the designs that you don't like right out in your face, you go from wanting to cut DA:O slack for them (the origins are rich because we can play different races so we experience the story differently!) to disliking them (Hawke can have different reasons for doing something and even express them, but then it turns out all the same in the end!?).

It's just Bioware being Bioware. The worst thing for DA2 (and DA3) is not calling out Bioware on what they did wrong the first time and instead talking about the ''epic plot'' or ''choices'' in DA:O.

[Gunderic]

sympathy4saren wrote...

I wonder if they know a lot of people aren't just going to preorder DA3 because its Dragon Age anymore.

Fans are genuinely skeptical now and will be observing closely. CD Projekt is ready to pounce on fans who feel abandoned.

"Want a genuinely rich and non-streamlined fantasy rpg? Come to us."

Check out The Witcher 2 in Off Topic. It's swarming with enthusiasm and praise.

I personally want a new fantasy IP from BioWare but I know I'm not gonna get it yet

I've already discussed nearly the same thing elsewhere, and most things I wanted to say have already been covered. So I'm just going to say that doing what CDProjekt does can go a long way in bulding up reputation from the community and winning over the loyalty of fans, and doing what BioWare did with Dragon Age 2 can go a long way in jackhammering every shred of credibility built up to this point into dust.

Though, to be fair, Greg & Ray have acknowledged some concerns too in that video, so here's hoping!

[Bryy_Miller]

What's sad is that there are going to be those that rate DA3 poorly because they didn't like DA2.

[ItsTheTruth]

<--- DA2 ------------------------------------------------ DA:O --- [Optimal DA] --->

[Travie]

"DA2 was critically and commercially successful"

Lol, no.

[Slayer299]

In Exile wrote...
DA2 retained a third of DA:O. It just retained the worst parts - the story design, the role of the protagonist, the plot structure, the loot system, the superficial consequences and ''RP counts'' approach to decisions.

So, and I ask this question in all seriousness, if those elements are detrimental and should be removed (as that is what I am reading into what you've said there) what should go into making DA3 if you were in a position to have some suggestions into it?

[hoorayforicecream]

sympathy4saren wrote...

I wonder if they know a lot of people aren't just going to preorder DA3 because its Dragon Age anymore.

Fans are genuinely skeptical now and will be observing closely. CD Projekt is ready to pounce on fans who feel abandoned.

"Want a genuinely rich and non-streamlined fantasy rpg? Come to us."

Check out The Witcher 2 in Off Topic. It's swarming with enthusiasm and praise.

I personally want a new fantasy IP from BioWare but I know I'm not gonna get it yet

Oh, I've played the witcher 2. I didn't like it very much, and I didn't like being told by its fans that I was just bad at the game for disliking it.

The game had beautiful environments, and it had (some) choices that matter. It also had unresponsive controls, a terrible difficulty curve, bad voice acting, lousy character development for some of its main characters, an equally short and disappointing third act, a bad UI, an awful tutorial system, and was plagued with bugs. The game made me work for my fun, and I don't like that. So I didn't like it that much.

The thing is that a lot of the witcher fans agree with me about the problems the game has. Like I said earlier though, different things are dealbreakers for different folks. I put a lot more stock in things like difficulty curve, control responsiveness, and character development. As I played through the game, I chose every possible Triss-oriented romantic element, and I tried my absolute best to like her, but she came across as flat, boring and had all the charm and emotional range of a wooden block.

Some folks are willing to look past that, and find all the awesome fun in the game. I can appreciate the design elements that they did that turned out well. I just weigh them differently against all the things that they did poorly. Your mileage may vary. Mine certainly does.

[Aaleel]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

What's sad is that there are going to be those that rate DA3 poorly because they didn't like DA2.

I doubt this.  I think the greater likelihood is that those people just wouldn't buy it at all.

[Travie]

If you want to debate The Witcher 2, go to the Offtopic forum. Sympathy4saren was just making the point that The Witcher 2 had a much better fan reception, which is true.

If you didn't like it personally, thats fine... but it doesn't change the fact that the game was leagues better in terms of the way fans reacted to it.

[Kinkaku]

Travie wrote...

"DA2 was critically and commercially successful"

Lol, no.

It is when they sold a couple million copies.

[Travie]

Kinkaku wrote...

Travie wrote...

"DA2 was critically and commercially successful"

Lol, no.

It is when they sold a couple million copies.

If by couple you mean less than 2, and also less than the first game... then sure.

If you think selling less and having to try to beef up your sales with a miriad of promotions is success... well good on ya.

Modifié par Travie, 29 juin 2011 - 03:32 .

[Zanallen]

Aaleel wrote...

I doubt this.  I think the greater likelihood is that those people just wouldn't buy it at all.

Not buying a game doesn't prevent you from rating it.

[Zhijn]

As a fan hanging on as kitty about to drop. Why do i feel my sanity being insulted everytime i see a interview around DAO/DA2?. I swear everytime i see these guys mention "we listen to all the feedback" my teeths start to grind automatically. =(

EAware rep: Wider audience, bigger numbers, more action, fan feedback to heart (debatable).

Times sure have changed.

[Kinkaku]

Travie wrote...

Kinkaku wrote...

Travie wrote...

"DA2 was critically and commercially successful"

Lol, no.

It is when they sold a couple million copies.

If by couple you mean less than 2, and also less than the first game... then sure.

If you think selling less and having to try to beef up your sales with a miriad of promotions is success... well good on ya.

Yes anything above a million is considered a success even if you don't