725 réponses à ce sujet

[aries1001]

I'll admit that I'll only so far played the demo, but by playing that I can surely see at least some of the problems in DA2, not at least the wave combat. However, as I understand it, in patch 1.03, the waves have been changed a bit (or a lot) and the exploding bodies when hit have been toned down very much.

Playing the demo, I only have problems with the way rogues have been implemented in the game; in the demo at least, rogues were now some sort of ninjas that when they backstabbed people flew to the place then backstabbed them. Maybe it was supposed to be done differenly via smoke bombs or something like that; I still don't see the reason to why rogues were changed to these flying ninjas.

Also on the word iterative - for those of you, like med, who don't know what it means I've found this explanation:

Iteration means the act of repeating a process usually with the aim of approaching a desired goal or target or result. Each repetition of the process is also called an "iteration," and the results of one iteration are used as the starting point for the next iteration.

[AngryFrozenWater]

JohnEpler wrote...

Feraele wrote...

alex90c wrote...

When Bioware in these little interviews repeatedly blame people who dislike the game for not being able to handle the "innovations" and they "wanted a second Origins" despite people saying this is absolute BS on the forum and it was simply because they thought the game itself sucked, it really does make you wonder whether they're even paying attention to what we say.

I think they are avoiding what we say..ignoring us to be blunt.    They will continue to do things their way (of course..due to budget and orders from HQ)   and I guess think that the fans don't know what they like..that Bioware knows best and so it will go.     I can see a certain amount of that...but at the same time, taking clues from the fanbase on direction headed, what works, what doesn't work.....and discussing it amongst the dev team..wouldn't hurt.   Or would it?

If we're ignoring you guys, we're doing an awfully poor job of it. We're still reading the forums on a regular basis, and whenever we see an opportunity to do so, we still interact with you guys. The Constructive Criticism thread is still being read, as is the review thread in this forum. We're still making sure to see what you guys liked and didn't like in DA2, as well as the reasons behind both. 

However, and I say this as a general statement - insults and vitriol are not going to get us to listen to you. Is there anything wrong with expressing your frustration at the direction DA2 went? Of course not - look to a number of posters on these forums (most of whom are on my friends list because I value their input) for examples of how you can be opposed to the direction the series went with this installment and still be constructive. However, referring to other posters (or developers) as morons, idiots, etc. - that's a quick path to being both A) banned and  ignored.

We understand that there are concerns with DA2, and we're doing what we can to address some of them. Having said that - not every concern you have will be addressed. We're not building a game by committee, and that's good, because doing so would be an impossible task that would result in a mess of a game. Certainly, there are concerns that fans have with DA2 that are near universal - but there are others that are perceived in a wildly different fashion, depending on who you speak with. And there are some concerns that aren't necessarily with the decision that was made, but rather the specifics of implementation.

In the end, we have to make the decisions ourselves. Some of them will work. Some of them won't - that's okay, that's on us. Game design is an iterative process, and if we could make a game where everyone liked every single design decision - well, I'd own no fewer than three islands shaped like my face. But we are listening.

By now you get the idea that some of us are not happy with how the doctor treats his patients (pun intended). Post like yours are appreciated, though. If it weren't for those and I only had to listen to PR and merketing speeches then I would have given up. Thanks.

[Redcoat]

aries1001 wrote...

I'll admit that I'll only so far played the demo, but by playing that I can surely see at least some of the problems in DA2, not at least the wave combat. However, as I understand it, in patch 1.03, the waves have been changed a bit (or a lot) and the exploding bodies when hit have been toned down very much.

Playing the demo, I only have problems with the way rogues have been implemented in the game; in the demo at least, rogues were now some sort of ninjas that when they backstabbed people flew to the place then backstabbed them. Maybe it was supposed to be done differenly via smoke bombs or something like that; I still don't see the reason to why rogues were changed to these flying ninjas.

Also on the word iterative - for those of you, like med, who don't know what it means I've found this explanation:

Iteration means the act of repeating a process usually with the aim of approaching a desired goal or target or result. Each repetition of the process is also called an "iteration," and the results of one iteration are used as the starting point for the next iteration.

I believe that 1.03 shows that BioWare is taking player feedback into account, even if you don't fully agree with the changes they made. Enemies approach more slowly now, meaning that combat is a bit less frantic. Higher-level opponents have fewer HP, so boss battles are not so interminably long. Enemies are far less likely to explode into showers of gore. Granted, a patch can only change so much, but it does show that they are taking criticism into account.

[Brockololly]

aries1001 wrote...
Also on the word iterative - for those of you, like med, who don't know what it means I've found this explanation:

Iteration means the act of repeating a process usually with the aim of approaching a desired goal or target or result. Each repetition of the process is also called an "iteration," and the results of one iteration are used as the starting point for the next iteration.

And thats a major problem I have with DA2- most of it isn't really iterative in tweaking and fixing and building off of the foundation Origins established but rather it started over for the most part and rebooted the series not only in the ME style "cinematic" presentation but in terms of what they were seemingly trying to do with things like combat.

DA2 didn't iterate off of Origins but mostly ripped up the foundation laid by Origins and tried to rebuild the foundation of DA in the same cookie cutter mold of any number of action RPGs with ME's presentation style tacked on. And apparently from what Laidlaw has said as well as the Doctors, DA2 is a more solid foundation than DAO. Yet its had a far worse reception both critically and commercially (in terms of raw sales numbers). I don't get it.

[Yrkoon]

Nerevar-as wrote...

JohnEpler wrote...

We understand that there are concerns with DA2, and we're doing what we can to address some of them. Having said that - not every concern you have will be addressed. We're not building a game by committee, and that's good, because doing so would be an impossible task that would result in a mess of a game. Certainly, there are concerns that fans have with DA2 that are near universal - but there are others that are perceived in a wildly different fashion, depending on who you speak with. And there are some concerns that aren't necessarily with the decision that was made, but rather the specifics of implementation.

In the end, we have to make the decisions ourselves. Some of them will work. Some of them won't - that's okay, that's on us. Game design is an iterative process, and if we could make a game where everyone liked every single design decision - well, I'd own no fewer than three islands shaped like my face. But we are listening.

Could you please elaborate?

He can't, no.  No offense to Epler, but he just  essentially copy/pasted the the mass produced memo from the boss.  Every single active Bioware   Dev who's responded to  the  "concerns" issue on this forum has posted  exactly what you see above almost word for word.  Laidlaw did it in his "thank you" thread  less than a month ago.  And he  couldn't elaborate  either when  asked.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 29 juin 2011 - 10:20 .

[element eater]

im beggining to think da2 might be an excellant game and that my dislike of it is born purely out of my desire to have more of origins..... 


that whole argument is a little double edged to me after all i only bought da2 due to origins if i had judged it on its own merits as if it was a stand alone game i wouldn't have given it a second look after the demo

Modifié par element eater, 29 juin 2011 - 10:18 .

[Atakuma]

Yrkoon wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...

JohnEpler wrote...

We understand that there are concerns with DA2, and we're doing what we can to address some of them. Having said that - not every concern you have will be addressed. We're not building a game by committee, and that's good, because doing so would be an impossible task that would result in a mess of a game. Certainly, there are concerns that fans have with DA2 that are near universal - but there are others that are perceived in a wildly different fashion, depending on who you speak with. And there are some concerns that aren't necessarily with the decision that was made, but rather the specifics of implementation.

In the end, we have to make the decisions ourselves. Some of them will work. Some of them won't - that's okay, that's on us. Game design is an iterative process, and if we could make a game where everyone liked every single design decision - well, I'd own no fewer than three islands shaped like my face. But we are listening.

Could you please elaborate?

He can't, no.  No offense to Epler, but he just  essentially copy/pasted the the mass produced memo from the boss.  Every single active Bioware   Dev who's responded to  the  "concerns" issue on this forum has posted  exactly what you see above, almost word for word, In fact.  Laidlaw did it in his "thank you" thread  less than a month ago.  And he  couldn't elaborate  either when  asked.

It's likely because they aren't allowed to say anything outright negative about the game at this point.

[John Epler]

Yrkoon wrote...

He can't, no.  No offense to Epler, but he just  essentially copy/pasted the the mass produced memo from the boss.  Every single active Bioware   Dev who's responded to  the  "concerns" issue on this forum has posted  exactly what you see above, almost word for word, In fact.  Laidlaw did it in his "thank you" thread  less than a month ago.  And he  couldn't elaborate  either when  asked.

I copy-pasted nothing. It's fine if you don't believe what I'm saying - that's your perogative, and I'm not going to tell you that you can't say that. However, developer participation in these forums is 100% voluntary. I don't come here and post because my bosses are telling me 'BOY, EPLER, BETTER GO THROW THE HORDES A BONE, THEY'RE GETTING FEISTY'. I post because, well, I'm passionate about what I do, and I'm passionate about the sorts of games I get to work on. I feel that our fans have a lot to say, and much of it is worth listening to. So I continue to participate in these forums, even when common sense suggests I should take a long break

As to elaborating? No, you're correct - I won't. Not because I don't have particular instances in mind, but because until final decisions are made and we're told 'this is what we're going to do going forward', I can't say 'hey everyone, we're keeping/getting rid of/massively overhauling X because people loved it/hated it/likened it to a banana split' because the moment I say anything like that, it'll be taken as the Word of God. Not to mention that, while some folks no doubt wish this weren't the case, we're all limited in what we can say publically because, hey, NDAs and other agreements that we sign when we get employed here.  But there are examples of highly divisive issues all over the forums - voiced protagonist, companion equipping, combat speed - that there's no easy 'well, THIS is the right way to handle this' solution to.

As always, the proof will be in the pudding. We're showing off some DLC at Comic Con. You can take a look, or read the reactions of others and decide if you think we're on the right track. Since it's DLC, you'll no doubt find a lot of things from DA2 that haven't changed, but you'll get to see if we've addressed some of the more notable concerns. In the end, though, it'll be up to you guys to decide whether or not that's true. As consumers, you can only vote with your wallet - and as developers, we can tell you what you want to hear until we're blue in the face, but our actions will speak louder than our words ever could.

[Morroian]

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.

alex90c wrote...

My personal problem is that you claim to be listening to what people have to say (and probably are, though we simply have to wait for DA2s DLC, and DA3 to see the extent of that) but the interviews don't seem to reflect that.

The problem is you take formal interviews seriously when they are just PR. Why not take what the devs on here say seriously? They're the ones actually developing the game.

Modifié par Morroian, 29 juin 2011 - 10:35 .

[KilrB]

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.

[Yrkoon]

Atakuma wrote...

It's likely because they aren't allowed to say anything outright negative about the game at this point.

^Yeah, that's probably the case. But it could also mean that they simply haven't compiled a specific list yet beyond the painfully obvious *1* (recycled maps)*

Modifié par Yrkoon, 29 juin 2011 - 10:34 .

[KilrB]

JohnEpler wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

He can't, no.  No offense to Epler, but he just  essentially copy/pasted the the mass produced memo from the boss.  Every single active Bioware   Dev who's responded to  the  "concerns" issue on this forum has posted  exactly what you see above, almost word for word, In fact.  Laidlaw did it in his "thank you" thread  less than a month ago.  And he  couldn't elaborate  either when  asked.

I copy-pasted nothing. It's fine if you don't believe what I'm saying - that's your perogative, and I'm not going to tell you that you can't say that. However, developer participation in these forums is 100% voluntary. I don't come here and post because my bosses are telling me 'BOY, EPLER, BETTER GO THROW THE HORDES A BONE, THEY'RE GETTING FEISTY'. I post because, well, I'm passionate about what I do, and I'm passionate about the sorts of games I get to work on. I feel that our fans have a lot to say, and much of it is worth listening to. So I continue to participate in these forums, even when common sense suggests I should take a long break

As to elaborating? No, you're correct - I won't. Not because I don't have particular instances in mind, but because until final decisions are made and we're told 'this is what we're going to do going forward', I can't say 'hey everyone, we're keeping/getting rid of/massively overhauling X because people loved it/hated it/likened it to a banana split' because the moment I say anything like that, it'll be taken as the Word of God. Not to mention that, while some folks no doubt wish this weren't the case, we're all limited in what we can say publically because, hey, NDAs and other agreements that we sign when we get employed here.  But there are examples of highly divisive issues all over the forums - voiced protagonist, companion equipping, combat speed - that there's no easy 'well, THIS is the right way to handle this' solution to.

As always, the proof will be in the pudding. We're showing off some DLC at Comic Con. You can take a look, or read the reactions of others and decide if you think we're on the right track. Since it's DLC, you'll no doubt find a lot of things from DA2 that haven't changed, but you'll get to see if we've addressed some of the more notable concerns. In the end, though, it'll be up to you guys to decide whether or not that's true. As consumers, you can only vote with your wallet - and as developers, we can tell you what you want to hear until we're blue in the face, but our actions will speak louder than our words ever could.

Oh come on ...

You know we're going to blame you anyway if we don't get gryphon war mounts in DA3.

May as well spill the beans now ...

[Aaleel]

JohnEpler wrote...

As to elaborating? No, you're correct - I won't. Not because I don't have particular instances in mind, but because until final decisions are made and we're told 'this is what we're going to do going forward', I can't say 'hey everyone, we're keeping/getting rid of/massively overhauling X because people loved it/hated it/likened it to a banana split' because the moment I say anything like that, it'll be taken as the Word of God. Not to mention that, while some folks no doubt wish this weren't the case, we're all limited in what we can say publically because, hey, NDAs and other agreements that we sign when we get employed here.  But there are examples of highly divisive issues all over the forums - voiced protagonist, companion equipping, combat speed - that there's no easy 'well, THIS is the right way to handle this' solution to.

I agree with this, because if you say something it will be taken as a promise.  Then if it doesn't happen you'll be taken to task, and honestly rightfully so. 

[Morroian]

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.

That doesn't follow, its perfectly possible to have picked up  a lot of new fans but the fans who dropped off simply outnumbered them. 

[OldMan91]

As always, the proof will be in the pudding.

Where in the pudding? You'll have to be more specific.

[Redcoat]

JohnEpler wrote...

'BOY, EPLER, BETTER GO THROW THE HORDES A BONE, THEY'RE GETTING FEISTY'.

I know this is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand, but did anyone else read this is a very thick southern drawl?

[Aaleel]

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.

The game being profitable has nothing to do with what he's talking about.  He's saying if the game sold half the copies how did it bring in a lot of new fans.  But a better question is.  If it did bring in a lot of new fans and sold half the copies, how much of the original fan base is left?

The game may have been profitable because of the shorter development time.  But as a company you want to increase your fanbase for future installments or the short term profit will mean nothing if the next game flops.

[Theagg]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

Brockololly wrote...

aries1001 wrote...
Also on the word iterative - for those of you, like med, who don't know what it means I've found this explanation:

Iteration means the act of repeating a process usually with the aim of approaching a desired goal or target or result. Each repetition of the process is also called an "iteration," and the results of one iteration are used as the starting point for the next iteration.

And thats a major problem I have with DA2- most of it isn't really iterative in tweaking and fixing and building off of the foundation Origins established but rather it started over for the most part and rebooted the series not only in the ME style "cinematic" presentation but in terms of what they were seemingly trying to do with things like combat.

DA2 didn't iterate off of Origins but mostly ripped up the foundation laid by Origins and tried to rebuild the foundation of DA in the same cookie cutter mold of any number of action RPGs with ME's presentation style tacked on. And apparently from what Laidlaw has said as well as the Doctors, DA2 is a more solid foundation than DAO. Yet its had a far worse reception both critically and commercially (in terms of raw sales numbers). I don't get it.

Maybe they think that the recycling and waves are the only issues players had with DA2. Maybe they do not realize that people like me prefer a blank slate PC, rather than a mostly pre-set character(canpt even decide Hawke's origin story, at least ME allows to pick one for Shepard). And the removal of non-combat skills definitely isn't an improvement. If anything, it's a step backwards. I personally do not know how DA2 is a more solid foundation. However, I will watch development of DA3 very closely.

But then again quite a few of us don't have an issue with 'waves' at all. Not in the sense that waves of enemies are by default a failing. Or an annoyance. They aren't. They do not destroy the ability to play tactically either, this is just a misnomer. Or a grievance from some who fail to come up with the required tactics to deal with them.

What is true however is the manner in which some waves were implemented was not exactly well thought out. Some of those reasons have been mentioned ad nauseum on here. I suspect the designers get the point in that respect.

Apart from that, the combat, from nightmare level perspective is largely identical to that of Origins. The visual style has changed but the core remains.

I'm also critical of people who decry the reduction in the ability to 'personalize' their character from the start in DA2 and point out this loss as a sign, as they see it, that DA2 has moved away from being an RPG. (In essence what they are saying is that being able to customise your character is a primary requisite of an RPG) Then at some other point praise games like The Witcher 2 as being better RPG titles, games Bioware should be looking towards.

How much freedom do you have to personalize Geralt's character ? Less than Hawke, since your are constrained to playing as a male. I wish people would be consistent in their line of reasoning.

[Serpieri Nei]

but the Cake is the Lie 

Modifié par Serpieri Nei, 29 juin 2011 - 11:08 .

[Brockololly]

Theagg wrote...
How much freedom do you have to personalize Geralt's character ? Less than Hawke, since your are constrained to playing as a male. I wish people would be consistent in their line of reasoning.

While I often prefer the more Origins style non voiced PC, I think I've come to realize that the wishy washy middle ground of Shepard/Hawke that BioWare seems intent on pushing just isn't that appealing to me. As it seems like it just makes said characters boring- you lack the freedom (real or imagined) to give them a voice of your choosing but they're trying to still keep them like a relatively blank slate for the player to create.

I'd much rather have a more defined character like Geralt where you can choose different tones and dialogue but its Geralt the Witcher and the game reacts to that. But it also reacts much more than any other BioWare game to the choices Geralt makes. And being able to make wildly divergent choices with drastic and varying consequences is why I'm fine with Geralt as opposed to Hawke/Shepard.

Its about reactivity, not just from dialogue tones but the larger choices and consequences too. And while most BioWare games as of late lack meaningful reactivity, its especially obvious in DA2.

[Monica83]

JohnEpler wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

He can't, no.  No offense to Epler, but he just  essentially copy/pasted the the mass produced memo from the boss.  Every single active Bioware   Dev who's responded to  the  "concerns" issue on this forum has posted  exactly what you see above, almost word for word, In fact.  Laidlaw did it in his "thank you" thread  less than a month ago.  And he  couldn't elaborate  either when  asked.

I copy-pasted nothing. It's fine if you don't believe what I'm saying - that's your perogative, and I'm not going to tell you that you can't say that. However, developer participation in these forums is 100% voluntary. I don't come here and post because my bosses are telling me 'BOY, EPLER, BETTER GO THROW THE HORDES A BONE, THEY'RE GETTING FEISTY'. I post because, well, I'm passionate about what I do, and I'm passionate about the sorts of games I get to work on. I feel that our fans have a lot to say, and much of it is worth listening to. So I continue to participate in these forums, even when common sense suggests I should take a long break

As to elaborating? No, you're correct - I won't. Not because I don't have particular instances in mind, but because until final decisions are made and we're told 'this is what we're going to do going forward', I can't say 'hey everyone, we're keeping/getting rid of/massively overhauling X because people loved it/hated it/likened it to a banana split' because the moment I say anything like that, it'll be taken as the Word of God. Not to mention that, while some folks no doubt wish this weren't the case, we're all limited in what we can say publically because, hey, NDAs and other agreements that we sign when we get employed here.  But there are examples of highly divisive issues all over the forums - voiced protagonist, companion equipping, combat speed - that there's no easy 'well, THIS is the right way to handle this' solution to.

As always, the proof will be in the pudding. We're showing off some DLC at Comic Con. You can take a look, or read the reactions of others and decide if you think we're on the right track. Since it's DLC, you'll no doubt find a lot of things from DA2 that haven't changed, but you'll get to see if we've addressed some of the more notable concerns. In the end, though, it'll be up to you guys to decide whether or not that's true. As consumers, you can only vote with your wallet - and as developers, we can tell you what you want to hear until we're blue in the face, but our actions will speak louder than our words ever could.

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

[por favor]

[spam post removed]

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 29 juin 2011 - 10:59 .

[TheRealJayDee]

aftohsix wrote...

So new fans cannot possibly be people who like Halo, GOW etc.. etc... because they're like totally stupid. Just like at least part of the reason you didn't like DA2 couldn't possibly be because at least in part  you just didn't like the changes.

And you guys have the nerve to get angry when you're told you're elitist.

I think nobody is denying they didn't like the changes. Of course I didn't like a lot of the changes. It's just the absurdity of accusing people who didn't like DA2 of being unable to handle change at all that's irritating. There's change for the better and change for the worse...

[Yrkoon]

JohnEpler wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

He can't, no.  No offense to Epler, but he just  essentially copy/pasted the the mass produced memo from the boss.  Every single active Bioware   Dev who's responded to  the  "concerns" issue on this forum has posted  exactly what you see above, almost word for word, In fact.  Laidlaw did it in his "thank you" thread  less than a month ago.  And he  couldn't elaborate  either when  asked.

I copy-pasted nothing. It's fine if you don't believe what I'm saying - that's your perogative, and I'm not going to tell you that you can't say that. However, developer participation in these forums is 100% voluntary. I don't come here and post because my bosses are telling me 'BOY, EPLER, BETTER GO THROW THE HORDES A BONE, THEY'RE GETTING FEISTY'. I post because, well, I'm passionate about what I do, and I'm passionate about the sorts of games I get to work on. I feel that our fans have a lot to say, and much of it is worth listening to. So I continue to participate in these forums, even when common sense suggests I should take a long break

As to elaborating? No, you're correct - I won't. Not because I don't have particular instances in mind, but because until final decisions are made and we're told 'this is what we're going to do going forward', I can't say 'hey everyone, we're keeping/getting rid of/massively overhauling X because people loved it/hated it/likened it to a banana split' because the moment I say anything like that, it'll be taken as the Word of God. Not to mention that, while some folks no doubt wish this weren't the case, we're all limited in what we can say publically because, hey, NDAs and other agreements that we sign when we get employed here.  But there are examples of highly divisive issues all over the forums - voiced protagonist, companion equipping, combat speed - that there's no easy 'well, THIS is the right way to handle this' solution to.

As always, the proof will be in the pudding. We're showing off some DLC at Comic Con. You can take a look, or read the reactions of others and decide if you think we're on the right track. Since it's DLC, you'll no doubt find a lot of things from DA2 that haven't changed, but you'll get to see if we've addressed some of the more notable concerns. In the end, though, it'll be up to you guys to decide whether or not that's true. As consumers, you can only vote with your wallet - and as developers, we can tell you what you want to hear until we're blue in the face, but our actions will speak louder than our words ever could.

Ok, I stand corrected.  instead of the Boss  ordering you to come on these boards   and  parrot the official line,  you're voluntarily  coming on these boards  and parroting  the  official line.  My bad.

My turn.  Before you dismiss me as another douche bag, just hear me out, and then I promise this'll be my last post on the issue.   

As a frustrated and sorely disappointed  Gamer, I've been, for the last 3 1/2 months,  seeking some answers, some explanation for what the hell happened with DA2 (which doesn't even feel like a bioware game)   And yes, I  AM sorta pleased that at least you guys have come out to basically say  "alright, alright, we're listening to you;  we're reading the forums, we're documenting your concerns, and we're going to address some of them in future  product releases etc."    And don't get me wrong, I'm well aware that such  Developer communication to the fanbase is  unusual in the gaming industry, as many MANY companies don't even bother doing that much.

But that  having been said, see my side for a second.  I see dozens of threads discussing specific issues.  I see thousands  of posts complaining about specific issues.   And more importantly,  I've seen all of it  going on constantly, for 4 straight months.  But all I see from the devs  are posts that either 1) just address forum behavior  (stop trolling; stop spamming;  I'm locking this thread)  or 2) we hear you.  We're working on changing.....  er... we can't say.  But we hear you and we'll address.... some things in the future.

I know you can't give specifics  because nothing has been officially confirmed, but   you can  give hints.  you can initiate discussion about these changes.  For example, you  (or another  member of the Bio team) could start threads/posts   discussing which specifics your team has their eyes on in terms of  changes.  And you can reiterate the fact that nothing has been  set in stone.  It's not hard, and it'd go a hell of a long way in quelling the vitriol on this forum.  But what you're doing now is just more... teasing.   And we're better than that.


Or not.  I'm really close to not caring anymore.  And like you said.  we can  simply just vote with our very loud and relevant wallets.  But I'd rather it not come to that.  We're a community here.   And old and storied one.    And communities communicate

Modifié par Yrkoon, 29 juin 2011 - 11:16 .