180 réponses à ce sujet

[bEVEsthda]

txgoldrush wrote...

Talk about JRPG influence...lol...why not rip one off.....

And lets not forget the Hellforge Bioware Cliche chart when it comes to narrative. Yes, DAO is a new franchise, HOEVER, it borrows heavily from other past Bioware games so it loses its identity as a new franchise.

And how is DAO not cartoonish...it has the same disbelief  And DAO has a hail of arrows ability as well, so much for that games "realism". If you want to talk dark and gritty, DAII is FAR darker than DAO, especially in its narrative tone. And DAO didn't railroad???? It railroaded except that you had four train stations to pick from in the mid game.
Funny how you mention Nintendo when they are the most innovative company in gaming......

And how does DAII innovate....

Well the friendship rivalry meter allows you to have more character development paths and now more than ever, you can disagree with a party member without them leaving or losing approval with you so you lock their character quests or development. Bioware should expand on this idea by offering alternate companion quests for friends and rivals instead of one.

For Bioware only innovation, it breaks the formula that games past had almost completely. Also the tone is not triumphant like the other games.

When I wrote my piece, I was pretty sure your response would yet again be something like this. In fact I would have been prepared to bet a good deal of money on it. I made the effort anyway. I did my part. If not for you then for someone else.

[Rafficus III]

There's two thought processes every fan should know: 1) Fans make developers and games successful, 2) but fans do not create the games. Unfortunately, most fans seem to overlook the latter thought process. As fans we dictate a games success by consumption, do we make it great? No, developers do this. Why, you must ask? Simple, because we weren't the brilliant ones who created these games that would draw millions globally in entertainment, let alone cause numerous to paint artwork, craft replicas and wardrobes, and own forums that teem by the thousands of users. It is easy to chastise a company for not running the way you would like and to compare it to others, but unfortunately this is what happens. The TC hit this nail right on it's head. I fear most gamers today have become a little too self-entitled and a little too prideful in their self-proclaimed power. Make no mistake, both Skyrim and Witcher 2 are excellent RPG's, but these are forums for Bioware. Let's repeat this. Bioware. With that said, I hope DA:3 is more about what Bioware creates and chooses to implement rather than what the "fans" and EA say. They created the marvels we know and love, we simply gave them the funds. I've been on board with Bioware since Baldur's Gate and have enjoyed the ride to present. I am a fan.

[Bryy_Miller]

txgoldrush wrote...

ever heard of editorals....

thats how I write, get used to it.

Then don't be surprised if nobody ever takes you seriously.

[WidowMaker9394]

What about the godawful combat animations and general design?

What will you do about them in future games?

[Yuqi]

You don't abandon a baby,when it's crying and leave it to die. 

Without customers,you dont have buissness,simple.
Why do you think every major chain has a 'feedback' form?
Customers opinions matter. One negative opinion spreads; they tell there friends,and there freinds tell there friends-until eventually you have hundreds,if not thousands of lost customers.

A pointless thread..

Modifié par Yuqi, 31 juillet 2011 - 09:31 .

[Dormiglione]

Developers should stop listening to "fans" ...

Seriously? Lets try to take a objective look on this. Who are the fans? I think that we are talking about customers, the people who buys the product, who finally decide if a product will be a success or not. Were are not talking about the quality of a product, we are talking about the acceptance of a product in the market.

In the end every company that is bringing a product to the market, wants to sell it. The customers are humans (did you know that), so they have different wishes, different perception of how the product should be, that they want to buy. Should i tell you a secret? The perfect product doesnt exist. The Producer knows it and "most" of the customer know that too. So the producer tries to build a product that has several compromise to appeal a wide audience, the customer is looking for a product with a specification that meets most of the points of the individual customers check list.

There is no almighty "formula" that you can follow and think that you made the perfect product. The "market" decides if a product  will be a success or not.

And if we try to define "what is the market", we will be surprised to find out that the customer is part of the equation, but we will see that there are also a lot of other parameters that have the same weight as the customer in the equation that defines "the market".

-> Developers should stop listening to "fans"?

Listening to "fans" means to take their opinion/feedback into consideration. Not more, not less.

Modifié par Dormiglione, 31 juillet 2011 - 10:07 .

[nicodeemus327]

omg dragons!

[Wydi]

Many people like to argue with the number of sales.
But: The success of a successor is always greatly dependent on the popularity of it's predecessor.
I didn't buy DA2 because DA2 is a great game (which I could barely know and don't agree with now), but I bought it because DAO is, which is what most people likely did.
Or - the other way around: The popularity (not financial success) of a game is best reflected in the sales figures of it's sequel.
And this is why so many people are disappointed by DA2 even though it sold so well. To me, this is an indicator that most people prefer DAO over DA2, despite the fact that there seems to be an equal amount of DA2 lovers and haters around here.

We, the fans who post in this board, are a minority (in numbers, not necessarily in opinions), so it would be wrong from BioWare to do exactly what the majority of us users wants. But still, feedback is important. As it was stated out before, companies have to listen to what their customers want. For the good of all people.
The real art is to distinguish between what a couple of people want and what the majority wants.
Disappointing the core fanbase is always bad and it never worked out. Doing what a handful of people wants (Anime Merrill and super-sized sword JRPG Fenris? Really?) is even worse. It's not the loudest voice that matters, but the hundreds of almost silent ones in the background.

@bEVEsthda: Yes, so much yes. I never agreed so much to any post in these forums before.
What you tried to explain to txgoldrush on these pages is an absolute truth to me. And I totally understand why you gave up now. 

Stanley Woo wrote...
And we're not stupid, either. Sure, we may not always agree with the fan community, but we are human, and occasionally we will make mistakes or misjudge what people want or how well a given feature or game will be received. But as long as we learn something in the process, and as long we get reasonable, well-written and constructive criticism from our fans and gamers who are into BioWare games, we can do better the next time around.

In some strange way, this really makes me hope and even forgive some of the (subjective) mistakes you guys made with DA2. I was absolutely afraid that DA2 was the end of the short life of my beloved DAO style franchise, but since you are willing to learn from what people want and do not want instead of doing what promises the most sales (without a real indicator for this to be true), I am still looking forward to whatever sequels may come.

Modifié par Wydi, 31 juillet 2011 - 03:18 .

[AlanC9]

Wydi wrote...

Many people like to argue with the number of sales.
But: The success of a successor is always greatly dependent on the popularity of it's predecessor.
I didn't buy DA2 because DA2 is a great game (which I could barely know and don't agree with now), but I bought it because DAO is, which is what most people likely did.
Or - the other way around: The popularity (not financial success) of a game is best reflected in the sales figures of it's sequel.

So the argument here is that game buyers are idiots? They'll buy the sequel if they liked the first game without any regard for anything that the sequel is doing differently? It's not like most of the changes from DAO to DA2 weren't known in advance.

[Wydi]

AlanC9 wrote...

So the argument here is that game buyers are idiots? They'll buy the sequel if they liked the first game without any regard for anything that the sequel is doing differently? It's not like most of the changes from DAO to DA2 weren't known in advance.

No Preview or Review, no gameplay video and no written statement can really explain how you will like a game in the end. It's not about buyers being idiots. It's about the buyer's faith in continuation. When I bought DA2, I have already read some reviews, I have watched gameplay videos and trailers, but I still bought it even though I knew that it wouldn't be as great as DAO was. Why? Because I wanted to see more of the things that have been established in DAO. I wanted to know what happened to my Warden, to my companions, to Ferelden. It's like buying the crappy last book of a book saga that started too well to abandon it later on.
And secretly I have even hoped that it wouldn't have lost all of it's predecessor's spirit (which it didn't, to be fair).

Then again, there are lots of people who either didn't care too much about reviews, didn't want to get spoiled or blindly believed in BioWare's skills they thought to know from DAO. 

Modifié par Wydi, 31 juillet 2011 - 05:13 .

[BrunoB1971]

i think that the point is that Bioware listened more to its parent Company EA than to its fans. Remember that Dragon Age 2 came out in record time. I am gonna go on a limb and say that someone at EA said to bioware to cut corners for da 2 so it can come out earlier so they can have a faster return on investment....that equaled to polarization of fan base which 50% liked it and the other 50% hated the game instead of a more reasonable percentile of people loving it...

EA with their goal of getting stuff out way to fast for this game have damaged the franchise. Bioware cannot admit mea culpa because it would make EA look bad and even do more damage to the franchise so that is why they go about as it nothing is wrong with the game. A sad situation it is when you cannot admit that you may have been wrong because someone above you may punish you for being honest.

Modifié par BrunoB1971, 31 juillet 2011 - 05:23 .

[Tantum Dic Verbo]

BrunoB1971 wrote...

i think that the point is that Bioware listened more to its parent Company EA than to its fans

I think the corollary is that Bioware's fans do not have a monolithic opinion that can easily be listened to.  Every fan seems to identify himself as "the fan" Bioware stopped listening to at some point.  Whether it's the new action-oriented gameplay, the approach to romance and sexuality, the voiced protagonist, or any number of other design decisions, there is a profound diversity of preference and opinion among "the fans".

I think the single biggest problem arises in the absence of a coherent design philosophy.  Even if I don't like a particular design direction, I'd rather they pursue it with integrity than pull in too many directions and end up with a mess.  Even if the whole game is something I don't want to play, I'd rather they do a good job at whatever they're trying to do, rather than dilute their creative vision with half measures designed to pander to me.

[Bryy_Miller]

BrunoB1971 wrote...

i think that the point is that Bioware listened more to its parent Company EA than to its fans.

Of course a public company is going to listen to its shareholders more than its fans. 

You want BioWare to listen to you?

Buy stock in EA.

But then you'd be a shareholder, and we all know that nobody likes those.

[txgoldrush]

bEVEsthda wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Talk about JRPG influence...lol...why not rip one off.....

And lets not forget the Hellforge Bioware Cliche chart when it comes to narrative. Yes, DAO is a new franchise, HOEVER, it borrows heavily from other past Bioware games so it loses its identity as a new franchise.

And how is DAO not cartoonish...it has the same disbelief  And DAO has a hail of arrows ability as well, so much for that games "realism". If you want to talk dark and gritty, DAII is FAR darker than DAO, especially in its narrative tone. And DAO didn't railroad???? It railroaded except that you had four train stations to pick from in the mid game.
Funny how you mention Nintendo when they are the most innovative company in gaming......

And how does DAII innovate....

Well the friendship rivalry meter allows you to have more character development paths and now more than ever, you can disagree with a party member without them leaving or losing approval with you so you lock their character quests or development. Bioware should expand on this idea by offering alternate companion quests for friends and rivals instead of one.

For Bioware only innovation, it breaks the formula that games past had almost completely. Also the tone is not triumphant like the other games.

When I wrote my piece, I was pretty sure your response would yet again be something like this. In fact I would have been prepared to bet a good deal of money on it. I made the effort anyway. I did my part. If not for you then for someone else.

And you keep calling DAII "Japanese" style which is quite hypcritical since the original ripped off a JRPG system. And other than the FFXII system, ther eis nothing Japanese about DAII.

Like I said, the only real difference between the two DA's are the pace of combat and the style of narrative. Everything else is the same.

[OdanUrr]

txgoldrush wrote...

Like I said, the only real difference between the two DA's are the pace of combat and the style of narrative. Everything else is the same.

I don't know what you mean by "everything else" but, for one, skin textures are not the same, nor it would seem NPCs' bodies.

[txgoldrush]

Wozearly wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

However rehashing the same formula over an dover again its not good either, especially after a long while.

DAII did echo the core qualities of the originial....its tactical combat and the "gambit" system. It just put an action focus
to it and made it faster. In fact, the only real change from the
console version of DAO is faster speed and no auto attack.

(...and the rest of the post)

Heh...we could probably get into a lengthy debate about what the core qualities of DA:O were - and we'd probably never agree, because what is perceived as critical or highly desirable is different for different people. I don't feel that the things I valued the most were retained in DA2.

As for innovation, you don't *have* to be innovative with a new series in terms of its gameplay, graphics, story structure, etc. Its just the best opportunity to do so.

To me, DA:O wasn't an innovative breakthrough in terms of any specific piece inside it. It was a string of improvements and well-adopted ideas which blended together very well.

Gameplay-wise, it reminded me of BG and KOTOR, but with a series of small, but transformative additions, like the use of tactics. Story-wise, I wasn't surprised to hear that David Gaider had been reading George Martin's novels. In terms of style and feel they managed to blend a relatively grim, humourless setting with tactical use of companions and NPCs to add a comedic uplift.

Innovative? No...but a fantastic improvement on previous Bioware RPGs and, for that matter, other recent RPGs practically across the board. And take the sales figures rather than my word for it.


DA2 didn't innovate especially either. What it did was make further transformative additions, changes and removals, such as;

1) Abilties were now more awesome ™, which meant enemies died faster, which meant we needed much more of them to preserve gameplay challenge, which led to wave combat and the feeling that Hawke was auditioning for a part in Sparta.

2) Graphical reimagination of characters and races established in the original, plus a major graphical overhaul of the look, style (e.g. background object lite - see interview with David Silverman) and feel of characters, weapons, armour and user interface...that was always going to be divisive, and whether you prefer it or not is going to be purely down to aesthetics and/or if you hold the view of "it ain't broke, so don't fix it".

3) Junk loot. Limited ability to visually change companions. Warriors no longer able to dual wield or use bows. No secondary weapons. Arguably these all added something to the game, but most people feel they took something away that was valued in DA:O


It was the transformative bits I always felt were the wrong move. There were too many, and even if the core qualities remained, DA2 had a completely different style and feel.

 
How does DAO improve on other Bioware RPGs? It doesn't.

DAO is hardly tactical when you can easily break the game because of how unbalanced it is. Or that some skills are a must and some are complete garbage. Mages die in one hit for the most part with Mana Clash, killing the most dangerous enemies in the game. DAO is a far cry from BGII when it comes to tactical combat.

And how is it improvement when you do the same formula over again. DAO is the game that caused me to stop defending Bioware when it comes to recycling plots.

Lets see, a hero from humble or forgotten origins faces a major brutal attack by the antagonists, joins or learns that he is part of a special organization whose purpose is to defend the world/galaxy, is chased and attacked by an enemy organization, nation, or race, has to collect the three or four plot coupons, and then faces an endgame decision that is black and white to see if he is a saint or a jerk. Its the same formula for four games in a row.

Lets not forget that it rips every fantasy cliche...it can join the 80% of JRPGs that run their narratives on cliches. Hell DAO is even more cliched than a Tales game.

DAII (and ME2 to some extent) broke this formula.

And lets see what else they changed...

Lets not forget that the setting is also extremely cliched. We have already seen a much better dark fantasy setting in games like The Witcher and Planescape Torment. Hell Vizima is a far better written and far better looking place than Denerim was. Lets also rip the poor persecuted elves storyline the Witcher had (luckily DAII went away from this). Then lets rip Song of Ice and Fire and Lord of the Rings (tell me the Deep Roads and Ostagar aren't inspired by Moira and Osigilith).

Jade Empire's setting was way more original, especially for a WRPG, so was Mass Effect, an original sum of cliched parts. DAO wasn't.

[Wydi]

txgoldrush wrote...

And you keep calling DAII "Japanese" style which is quite hypcritical since the original ripped off a JRPG system. And other than the FFXII system, ther eis nothing Japanese about DAII.

Like I said, the only real difference between the two DA's are the pace of combat and the style of narrative. Everything else is the same.

Dude, it's not like BioWare has stolen the one and only FFXII formula and put it into DAO.
I'm even pretty sure that other games used that kind of tactics settings earlier, even though I can't recall one of them right now.
But either way: It's just a simple, user controlled AI. Nothing more but an If..then-statement.
DA2, however, feels much like games as Devil May Cry and similar ones, which is due to the fast-paced combat, the extrasized weapons, the art style in general and the whole fighting and skill mechanics.

There are also many more differences than just the pace of combat and the narrative style.
Most of them, however, have already been stated out in the (mostly) negative parts of the user reviews in the sticky thread.

[txgoldrush]

OdanUrr wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Like I said, the only real difference between the two DA's are the pace of combat and the style of narrative. Everything else is the same.

I don't know what you mean by "everything else" but, for one, skin textures are not the same, nor it would seem NPCs' bodies.

maybe that as well...but at least the art style gives the series more of an identity.

[txgoldrush]

Wydi wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

And you keep calling DAII "Japanese" style which is quite hypcritical since the original ripped off a JRPG system. And other than the FFXII system, ther eis nothing Japanese about DAII.

Like I said, the only real difference between the two DA's are the pace of combat and the style of narrative. Everything else is the same.

Dude, it's not like BioWare has stolen the one and only FFXII formula and put it into DAO.
I'm even pretty sure that other games used that kind of tactics settings earlier, even though I can't recall one of them right now.
But either way: It's just a simple, user controlled AI. Nothing more but an If..then-statement.
DA2, however, feels much like games as Devil May Cry and similar ones, which is due to the fast-paced combat, the extrasized weapons, the art style in general and the whole fighting and skill mechanics.

There are also many more differences than just the pace of combat and the narrative style.
Most of them, however, have already been stated out in the (mostly) negative parts of the user reviews in the sticky thread.

True, some games like Fallout 2 used AI tactical settings but at least FFXII didn't rip off completely a tactical system. In fact, FFXII had the most detailed and effective one at the time. Bioware just ripped it off. I am suprised SquareEnix didn't call them out for it. And in both games they are essential.

[Wydi]

txgoldrush wrote...

True, some games like Fallout 2 used AI tactical settings but at least FFXII didn't rip off completely a tactical system. In fact, FFXII had the most detailed and effective one at the time. Bioware just ripped it off. I am suprised SquareEnix didn't call them out for it. And in both games they are essential.

Well..again: The whole tactical system in FFXII and DAO is nothing more but a collection of if..then-statements that every developer out there does all the day long.
The exact same thing can be found in every game with an AI, but it's normally under the hood instead of being user accessible. Do you really want to complain about that?
Hell, every game dev studio steals from various other games. The FPS games do it, platformers do it, action games do it, and - of course - RPGs do it. There's nothing wrong about it, as long as BioWare doesn't bring chocobos to DA3. 

Regarding your point that BioWare's DAO formula has been seen various times before:
Yes, you're right. Everyone will admit that.
But that's just the mainframe of the game. It has been improved by various nice little ideas that made the story believable and far from boring. Games are always about a very special person fighting something evil, that's how it goes and that's how people like it.
Because doing some insignificant business in one single neverchanging city without a real goal and without being of any greater importance is what pretty much all of us do in real life.

Modifié par Wydi, 02 août 2011 - 03:10 .

[OdanUrr]

It's a bit like saying that nobody should write books using the "Hero's Journey" formula because it's been done to death, but we all know that's never going to happen.

[0x30A88]

When people are trying to decide whether to buy the product or not they want to get some background for an informed choice. They then ask people who have played it and the first. I remember when DA:O was on sale (33€ on Steam) and I asked in a forum's gaming thread whether it was worth buying. Two posts saying yes within minutes convinced be really. And I liked the game.

With DA2 mixed answers are given and I think I can account for one lost sale as I gave my answer to "is DA2 any good?" -- though I did not say explicitly that it was bad.

That I suspect is the reason for the quick fall in sales on week two onwards.

When it comes to Dragon Age 2.

Combat is slow != combat needs to be speed-of-light tp action ninja fun. There's no need to jump to the other extreme.

Modifié par Gisle Aune, 02 août 2011 - 06:23 .

[Darth Obvious]

dreadpiratesnugglecakes wrote...

Well, I would venture the opinion that for DA2 they didn't listen to the fans. I don't remember a big outpouring of opinion when DAO came out for wave style combat that embodies the glorious tradition of the original Diablo.

I don't remember people screaming for Darkspawn that look like clowns, elves that look plain silly, or Qunari that look like candy cane tatooed weirdos with stupid horns.

All of the really random design changes that made this game such a joke in my eyes either didn't come from the fans, or came from a demographic so small I didn't hear about it.  

Exactly.

And where was the fan outcry to give us fewer choices when it comes to customizing/role-playing our characters and their affect on the story?

Where was the outcry to make combat so overly busy that it becomes literally comedic to watch? The ADHD crowd? Are 10 year-olds the demographic that is dictating the direction of these newer Bioware games? Or is that just EA's influence?

Bioware has become a total joke. And I used to think they were so awesome. It's like night and day.

Apparently their new company mantra is "If it ain't broke, then just send in several waves of EA paratroopers. That'll fix it!"

Modifié par Darth Obvious, 02 août 2011 - 07:04 .

[Montana]

txgoldrush wrote...

maybe that as well...but at least the art style gives the series more of an identity.

Ah yes, the "ultrafastcartoonyhugeanimejumpcantbebotheredtomakekillanimationssoweregoingwithexplodingbodiesinstead" style that DA has now...

Instead of the "Dark heroic fantasy" that DA:O was marketed as, and did ok (not as good as The Witcher 2 though).
I'll admit that DA:O had a somewhat bland "generic fantasy" style, but it didn't annoy me like DA2 does.

[JonathonPR]

How you view a fan base is very important. A company may choose to alter an ip to draw a different crowd. If the new fans are temporary consumers and long term fans have been alienated the company has lost. I would look at the introduction of the Clans to battletech as an example. It had an affect on game mechanic and story. The miss management of battletech and other ips resulted in the decline of FASA.