1502 réponses à ce sujet

[Tommyspa]

@hoorayforicecream that is an excellent post. Kirkwall does look awesome, but we just couldn't see how much so.

[Daveros]

Redcoat wrote...

On "Accessibility":

I know that I, and many other people, do an involuntary cringe whenever we hear that a developer is going to make their next game more "accessible;" not because it'll bring in more players (which can only be a good thing), but because we fear that the game is going to be simplified, stripped down, and made generally less deep and complex to avoid intimidating people new to the genre. Sadly, this is exactly how I perceived DA2; it just ripped things out. I won't bore anyone with the details, one can just look at my post in the Constructive Criticism thread or read my GameFAQs review. BioWare's solution, unfortunately, in both DA2 and in ME2 has been to take flawed features like ME1's inventory, and instead of improving upon their implementation, they just throw them out altogether.

I think games can handle a fair bit more complexity than people seem to give them credit for. No, a game like DCS A-10C Warthog isn't going to be making any Best Selling Game lists any time soon, but that's an extreme example. What I think "accessibility" should entail is a well-written manual that explains the game mechanics and some of form of tutorial to introduce the player to the game mechanics. That's "good" accesibility; preserving complexity and depth while not overwhelming those unfamiliar with the system. "Bad" accessibility is removing features and stripping things from the game. That's where you get the accusations of "dumbing down."

In days where paper manuals are being phased out any game that requires the reading of the manual is doing it wrong.

A game can be as complex as you like but if you can't get a feel for it quickly it's not a well designed game.

Modifié par Daveros, 04 août 2011 - 07:18 .

[Bryy_Miller]

Anarya wrote...

@hoorayforicecream: That is actually a REALLY good point. I like to pan the camera around sometimes and look at things while I'm idling, so I did notice that Kirkwall actually has some great things going for it visually, but the amount of time I spent doing that compared to the amount of time I was staring down at a grid of beige squares was really pretty miniscule, and that's a shame.

Kirkwall is really awesome-looking. Most of the feedback seems to be from the fact that there are not a lot of people in it. If there was a population, I doubt it would be an issue.

[devSin]

Dial_595 wrote...

I disagree with devSin, I liked the Origins characters and would very much like to see them featured in the future as well. Especially the warden.

My Warden died, so what do I get to do? Or do I not get to play that game? Or does your Warden count, while mine doesn't?

I don't know that there's place much for the Origins characters. Sten is good, but the qunari are not on the path of coexistence, so it's hard for him to be believable as a companion again. Alistair is king, so he's probably busy. Wynne is probably dead by now. Morrigan is going to be some sort of antagonist, and while I really don't want to ever see her again, I'm sure David is going to drag her back (hopefully her mom will eat her and be done with it). I'm not sure what Leliana would bring that a new character couldn't do just as well.

I should have clarified (and am replying for exactly this reason) that this doesn't in any way apply to Shale. Shale can come back for every game (and she can appropriately live forever, so she really literally can be there for every single one). (Oghren could come back too, but as a Warden, he's living on borrowed time, so is there really much point?)

Modifié par devSin, 04 août 2011 - 07:23 .

[Bryy_Miller]

Daveros wrote...

Redcoat wrote...

On "Accessibility":

I know that I, and many other people, do an involuntary cringe whenever we hear that a developer is going to make their next game more "accessible;" not because it'll bring in more players (which can only be a good thing), but because we fear that the game is going to be simplified, stripped down, and made generally less deep and complex to avoid intimidating people new to the genre. Sadly, this is exactly how I perceived DA2; it just ripped things out. I won't bore anyone with the details, one can just look at my post in the Constructive Criticism thread or read my GameFAQs review. BioWare's solution, unfortunately, in both DA2 and in ME2 has been to take flawed features like ME1's inventory, and instead of improving upon their implementation, they just throw them out altogether.

I think games can handle a fair bit more complexity than people seem to give them credit for. No, a game like DCS A-10C Warthog isn't going to be making any Best Selling Game lists any time soon, but that's an extreme example. What I think "accessibility" should entail is a well-written manual that explains the game mechanics and some of form of tutorial to introduce the player to the game mechanics. That's "good" accesibility; preserving complexity and depth while not overwhelming those unfamiliar with the system. "Bad" accessibility is removing features and stripping things from the game. That's where you get the accusations of "dumbing down."

In days where paper manuals are being phased out any game that requires the reading of the manual is doing it wrong.

A game can be as complex as you like but if you can't get a feel for it quickly it's not a well designed game.

A good example of this is Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood. It was incredibly complex, but you only learned about new mechanics every new chapter. It didn't overwhelm you, so when you finally came to the end of the lessons (which is literally about three-four hours in), you felt like you had been doing this for ages.

[Anarya]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Anarya wrote...

@hoorayforicecream: That is actually a REALLY good point. I like to pan the camera around sometimes and look at things while I'm idling, so I did notice that Kirkwall actually has some great things going for it visually, but the amount of time I spent doing that compared to the amount of time I was staring down at a grid of beige squares was really pretty miniscule, and that's a shame.

Kirkwall is really awesome-looking. Most of the feedback seems to be from the fact that there are not a lot of people in it. If there was a population, I doubt it would be an issue.

Honestly for me, a lot of that could have been avoided by simply altering dialog. It's going to seem ridiculous if you hear characters going on about how Kirkwall is so crowded they're turning people away, and then you get inside the city and it's mostly empty. Or when you hear how awful and dirty the Alienage and Darktown are, and you get there and they both look like they've been swept, and Darktown would never be taken for a sewer if it wasn't called one in the game. I thought it was the disconnect between what was being said and what I was seeing that was the biggest fault in that respect. But yes, I do also agree that Kirkwall needed to look a lot more populated.

[Anomaly-]

Redcoat wrote...
On "Accessibility":

Totally agree. Nice review too, btw. Especially the gameplay part, that's exactly the kind of stuff I've been saying for ages. The limited options in character development with regards to attributes, talents, skills and equipment really hurts the overall experience for me. Honestly, The Witcher 2 suffered from this, as well. The only reason I was still able to enjoy it was because they did everything else so well. Still, I've only managed 1.5 playthroughs. Lack of customization options really hurts replay value, no matter how good the story is.

Modifié par Anomaly-, 04 août 2011 - 07:32 .

[Anarya]

About accessibility, I don't think "accessible" necessarily has to mean "oversimplified". I think drawing a distinction between the two is important, and like Bryy said, it's more about how you teach the mechanics.

[Anomaly-]

Anarya wrote...

About accessibility, I don't think "accessible" necessarily has to mean "oversimplified". I think drawing a distinction between the two is important, and like Bryy said, it's more about how you teach the mechanics.

Yes, that's true, but as Redcoat said too often developers take promising features that may be in need of better explanations or other improvements, and instead opt to completely get rid of them. Then what you are left with really is oversimplified.

[devSin]

Something needs to be done about the absolute vs. percentage attribute values. It's meaningless, the way it's presented in the game. I don't even pay attention to it anymore and have no idea what I'm supposed to infer from 1,900 fire resistance (and yet I'm supposed to agonize over a +12 health spoon or +15 defense thimble or the +1 armor luffa)? These values aren't helping me at all, and it's less helpful that a talent can give me instant 10% defense, while that 3-star item actually gives 1/100th of one single percent (without actually ever making it easy for me to tell that it truly is just as worthless as I think).

And since I'm here, runes should be contextual (especially since they're not treasure drops anymore). I don't need a rune of fire and a rune of fire warding. If I enchant a rune of fire onto my armor, it should give fire resistance. If I enchant it on a weapon, it should give fire damage.

Morroian wrote...

Please don't ever cut content. LIke someone else said what needed to be done was hide the re-use better, it was far far too blantant that the cave was re-used many many time. Sebastians DLC was an example of hiding the re-use pretty well, the cave below Harrimans Estate was the same cave but hidden better.

I'm not sure that was an option (I bet if they had the time for unique areas, they would have done more areas and more content, not cut content), but I never looked at the Origins map creation tools to guess why they weren't able to mix and match art to come up with quick customizations of existing set pieces (individual rooms and what-not). It doesn't seem to be something they were keen on doing, whatever the reason.

Even then, I don't think you can say whether cutting the content would be good without knowing what content was going to get cut (although I'm not inclined to cut Mike much slack here; with such a small number of maps, you would have had to take a hatchet to the game to come out looking like a winner, if there was even enough content left to make a full game, which very well may have not been the case).

But given that there wasn't going to be more art, wouldn't it have been better to clear out some of the meaningless quests (like those "hideout" quests, or those forbidden tomes) and just cutting out ever returning to somewhere like the Bone Pit (do those worthless mine quests in Act II even need to be there)? Sure, we want to play through more and for longer, but do we truly want to go through that one cave or travel that one coastline or visit that one dungeon, that solitary, lonely dungeon, rectangular rooms and corridors lifted from the Deep Roads and stitched together, all to clear a group of spiders for somebody who has two lines of dialogue after we're finished?


Whatever the case, please prioritize dungeon assets for the next game. Origins at least had Tevinter ruins assets (used to death though they were) so it wasn't all Deep Roads all the time. Legacy seemed to do OK with the Deep Roads assets, but honestly, I'm not eager to see them again (unless they're actually, you know, part of the Deep Roads). That dungeon they used over and over and over kills me. It's not even a complex map, but it's the only one they could make? And they made it, using leftover parts, instead of just making a really good dungeon to use over and over? It's infuriating.

Modifié par devSin, 04 août 2011 - 08:40 .

[Icinix]

Anomaly- wrote...

Anarya wrote...

About accessibility, I don't think "accessible" necessarily has to mean "oversimplified". I think drawing a distinction between the two is important, and like Bryy said, it's more about how you teach the mechanics.

Yes, that's true, but as Redcoat said too often developers take promising features that may be in need of better explanations or other improvements, and instead opt to completely get rid of them. Then what you are left with really is oversimplified.

Yep.  There does seem to be a large majority of developers who try something innovative or different, and if it doesn't get the immediate WOW factor - they quickly scuttle it and run back to the safety net.  Which is fair enough I suppose, there is a lot of money involved in the gaming industry, but still, it would be nice to see more developers at least trying to push mainstream gaming into new areas.

Edit: Ok, typos I can understand, but missing every fifth word..what the heck? That can't just be me....

Modifié par Icinix, 04 août 2011 - 09:21 .

[Persephone]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Wozearly wrote...
Bioware is definitely one of the better companies on this score, all the more impressive given that they're a major developer...but they could do more. Summarising the pieces of feedback they've heard and indicating what they feel does and doesn't need changing would go a long way to helping people know that they really are listening, without having to wait for the cast iron proof of a future release.

Oh, and to go some distance toward what you want and look at some hot-button items:

1. Area Re-use.

An obvious problem, and one we are keenly aware of. Not an intentional issue, and certainly not "by design" but something that happened and needs to be addressed. Players should not have to accept that Cave A is also Caves B through D. While -some- assets will be reused in the course of any game (and should be, otherwise games would simply be too expensive to create), they should be done so with considerably more discretion. In retrospect, I probably should have just cut content to reduce the re-use, but that's a tough call to make in the moment.

2. "Wave" combats

When everyone talks about how it's raining men in DAII, there's clearly something wrong. Simple problem: waves were introduced as a mechanic and overused without enough time to tune them. Fan reaction prompted us to start making adjustments to the system pretty much immediately, and Legacy demonstrates the start of the result. I am amused when people note that waves are "gone" from Legacy. They're actually there, just done much better. So, yes, the bad waves are gone. Still more work to do, but a good start.

3. Impact of choice

We knew we were taking a risk making a story about a major even in Thedas that was pretty much going to happen, and reaction has been very mixed. While some folks love the "sound of inevitability" that pervades DAII, there are a number of weak spots in the impact they feel they should have on the world. Fair point. If we're going to offer you a decision, it should matter. Easy fix would be to cut decisions, but that's not what DA is about, so we're going to have to get better about clear impact of those decisions within the same game you're currently playing. Addressable, but not within a DLC, as they are pretty self-contained items.

4. Follower customization

A mixed bag. Lots of folks liked unique looks for followers. Many more hated losing the ability to put new platemail on Aveline. Completely understandable, and likely aggrivated by finding platemail that your mage character would likely never be able to equip. Needs to change, but we'll cement how before talking in detail. Also not really addressable in a DLC, as there would be fundamental changes to the core game needed, which goes beyond the scope of what a DLC can deliver.

There's more issues out there, for sure, but those are some that I'm comfortable talking about at this point.

Thanks, Mike. Good to hear you guys are still planning and plotting. :happy:

I wonder, would it take a whole new game to do most of these things or could an expansion (Post main campaign, please) address some of these issues in the main game as well?

[taine]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

1. Area Re-use.

An obvious problem, and one we are keenly aware of. Not an intentional issue, and certainly not "by design" but something that happened and needs to be addressed. Players should not have to accept that Cave A is also Caves B through D. While -some- assets will be reused in the course of any game (and should be, otherwise games would simply be too expensive to create), they should be done so with considerably more discretion. In retrospect, I probably should have just cut content to reduce the re-use, but that's a tough call to make in the moment.

I see mostly good things in what you are saying, but I can't help but wonder what you mean when you say this was not intentional or by design. That seems to imply that you didn't know it was happening, but surely that can't be the case; do you mean it was caused by factors outside of your control?

Anyway, it sounds like some of the flaws of DA2 are being taken into account. One thing I have not really seen mentioned though, and probably the thing that bugged me most about the game was that it added very little lore-wise to The DA Setting. Not that it needed to contain a library of books with obscure information about the history of the world, but the only new information in the game was a bit about the Qunarri (which was very cool), and a bit about Kirkwall. In the same vein, there was a grand total of one new monster/enemy type in the entire game (the rock wraiths). This seems a bit sparse/uncreative for a full sequel -- I hope DA3 or whatever it is called works actively to expand the bestiary and introduce new parts of the world.

Modifié par taine, 04 août 2011 - 10:10 .

[Xewaka]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Ryenke wrote...
1.  The use of generic icons for loot items made me feel like I was playing an unfinished beta product.  This feeling was compounded by the generic names for things like rings - there was no way to distinguish one ring from another visually, or by name.  A little thing, yes.  But that impression lasted the whole game on most every piece of loot and colored my experience and was part of what made me feel bored doing the typical RPG things in inventory.  Please don't strip inventory down more - that would be the opposite of what I'm saying.  But the DA2 inventory and loot experience was excessively dull (especially on a console, where I could not even examine a piece of loot when picking it up.)

Yup. Agreed. Loot needs some loving overall. I'm leaning towards "less, but more special" but we'll see what develops.

Bring back the loot description on mouse over. It goes a long way in adding flavor. Also, if "less, but more special" means sidequests specifically designed to find this fabled piece of rumored old mystic power, I'm all for it. Nothing adds flavor to a setting quite like legends and rumours, and putting the legends as quests for the player go hunting them would allow for beautiful setting building opportunities.

taine wrote...

Mike Laidlaw wrote...
1. Area Re-use.
An obvious problem, and one we are keenly aware of. Not an intentional issue, and certainly not "by design" but something that happened and needs to be addressed. Players should not have to accept that Cave A is also Caves B through D. While -some- assets will be reused in the course of any game (and should be, otherwise games would simply be too expensive to create), they should be done so with considerably more discretion. In retrospect, I probably should have just cut content to reduce the re-use, but that's a tough call to make in the moment.

I see mostly good things in what you are saying, but I can't help but wonder what you mean when you say this was not intentional or by design. That seems to imply that you didn't know it was happening, but surely that can't be the case; do you mean it was caused by factors outside of your control?

My guess would be they expected the location design to take less time than it took and thus, expected to have more options in locations. You can tell by the design that the locations were designed as singular, whole pieces, rather than composed by modular units to be assembled in different ways. This means each scenario must be handcrafted from scratch, rather than assembled from set pieces, which considerably increments its building time.

Anarya wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Anarya wrote...
@hoorayforicecream:
That is actually a REALLY good point. I like to pan the camera around sometimes and look at things while I'm idling, so I did notice that Kirkwall actually has some great things going for it visually, but the amount of time I spent doing that compared to the amount of time I was staring down at a grid of beige squares was really pretty miniscule, and
that's a shame.

Kirkwall is really awesome-looking. Most of the feedback seems to be from the fact that there are not a lot of
people in it. If there was a population, I doubt it would be an issue.

Honestly for me, a lot of that could have been avoided by simply altering dialog. It's going to seem ridiculous if you hear characters going on about how Kirkwall is so crowded they're turning people away, and then you get inside the city and it's mostly empty. Or when you hear how awful and dirty the Alienage and Darktown are, and you get there and they both look like they've been swept, and Darktown would never be taken for a sewer if it wasn't called one in the game. I thought it was the disconnect between what was being said and what I was seeing that was the biggest fault in that respect. But yes, I do also agree that Kirkwall needed to look a lot more populated.

The story / gameplay segregation is one of the biggest issues in DA 2, ranking above waves and reused dungeons in my books. The fact it's not being actively adressed is worrying.

Modifié par Xewaka, 04 août 2011 - 11:38 .

[Kothoses Rothenkisal]

To be honest I have to disagree with people who said DA 2 added nothing to the lore of the setting, it added a lot, the issue for me was that most of it seemed to happen off camera or be based around setting up a new super hero.

I hope in DA 3 we see a return to focusing on story over combat and on exploration over progression (See what I did there?) while the combat in DA 2 felt faster and more responsive I did prefer the more tactial elements of DA:O also I prefered the long drawn out fluffed up dialogues with companions over the Awakenings.DA 2 system but I can see the advantages of the latter too.

I have to say I am now feeling tempted to try legacy just to see if it lives up to the excellent comments in this thread, where as prior to this I was not interested in it at all.

I might just give it a bash and if it really does address things as well as is claimed make that a subject for a future video something along the lines of how community feedback can influence change, a follow up to episodes 1 and 2 in promoting thought.

@Mike Laidlaw
Call it Hijacking but the fact is your interaction here has really opened up the discussion in this thraed. Plus it has given me a lot of material to discuss in future videos so all in all I think its a winner.

[Kekkis]

Tommyspa wrote...

@hoorayforicecream that is an excellent post. Kirkwall does look awesome, but we just couldn't see how much so.

It looks empty and sterile. If that is awesome to someone then its good for them . I expected something else from ancient overcrowded city.

[Fast Jimmy]

" What I think "accessibility" should entail is a well-written manual
that explains the game mechanics and some of form of tutorial to
introduce the player to the game mechanics."

Bigger manual, no. Let's not kill anymore trees for something people will likely read only once (or never at all).

But better in-game tutorials about how to handle inventory, the tactics menu, character leveling and aspects such as Cross-class Combos?

Absolutely.

Your new player can be taught the basics, then learn the more advanced concepts through gameplay. And the experienced vet may need a little nudging to understand the deeper applications of a new feature.

I know a tutorial screen popping up ruins immersion for some people, but a way to teach these skills in game that is less intrusive, coupled with a feature to turn it off all together, could be the best result.

In summary... don't assume people are stupid and streamline things. Assume people are inexperienced, and come up with innovative solutions to teach them.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 04 août 2011 - 01:37 .

[AloraKast]

Kothoses Rothenkisal wrote...

Vogel does talk a lot of sense, but I do think it would be worth while to encourage community managers to bring the well constructed feedback, good and bad, for the developers them selves to occasionally respond to. The disconnect between community and company is a 50/50 split in terms of blame. Rage kids raging and then CMs towing the "company line" really does lead to a feeling of disconnection which only enhances some peoples frustration.

Vogels article is a good one though, very thought provoking.

Am slowly making my way through this interesting thread (btw, many thanks for the thread Kithoses) but wanted to add my two coppers here.

What you're saying here is definitely an interesting if perplexing conundrum (at least to me). When it comes to the DA2 initial 'feedback' (and I use the term loosely) and the company response, I honestly cannot decide what is preferable; the silence or the towing of company line. Having to deal with the latter constantly, no matter what specific point the debate might be about, just makes me see red, but at the same time having no acknowledgement whatsoever from the devs to mostly justified (of course in my mind) issues with the game only results in a feeling of abandonment on the part of the fans... which very easily leads to people seeing red. It is a viscious cycle indeed...

Of course the devs will want to defend the new product that they have spent the last x amount of time working on, because they take pride in what they accomplished and want it to succeed. It's silly to think otherwise. What bothered me the most was reading time and again the company line of "Well, people were expecting DA:O2" (or whatever the actual wording was) which to me implied that because I enjoyed DA:O very much and was looking for a similar experience from its sequel, that somehow made me inferior, a total moron and I just don't know what's good for me. Of course, I am sure that is not what the devs implied at all, but that is genrally how it came across. Oh, the other line was about people not being able to handle change. Reading those same sentiments from the devs time and time in defence and as justification for DA2 really didn't go over very well with me and it seems with other fans as well. With one side (the devs and the fans who enjoyed the experience) defending DA2 and its merits vehemently only causes the other side (fans who felt disappointed with the product) to escellate their attacks which in turn causes a more aggrevise defence which then escellates the attacks even further... and that is how wars are started. Especially when both sides are very passionate, whether about the product itself or the company which they have been supporting for a very long time. Incidentally I am surpsied that these forums are anything but a smoking ruin.

And so this is where the perceived extreme divisivness originates. Looking at DA2 itself and on its own merits, no, the game is not that bad, it was overall an entertaining experience... but at the same time it's not the shining jewel of Bioware that so many were hoping for.  Some have truly enjoyed it and some truly despise it but I get the sense that the overall consensus (and no, I don't have any figures to support this) is that it's an average game... and from a company like Bioware, who unfortunately are victims of their own sucess and the stellar reputation they built over the years, it is very easy to perceive an average game as a failure.

Going back to the thought process earlier in my post, I absolutely hate politics; I detest duplicity in people and so this is why reading the standard company line from the devs as response to fan criticism made my blood boil easier than most. It got so bad at one time, that after my disappointment with DA2 and trying to follow the discussions between fans and fans and devs, I had to leave the forums for a few months, had to get some space and regain my perspective because the state of mind I was in at the time wasn't productive and advantageous to anybody, least of all me.

Circling back to my original point, I still am unsure which dev response is preferable; the complany line or silence. Perhaps it's neither because too much of either is not a good or productive experience - one is like beating your head against a brick wall and the other... well, the other is like beating your head again the wall of silence. Not resolving anything that way. But what can we realistically expect from the makers of a game? Certainly not bashing their own product... but perhaps all it takes is an acknowledgement of fan critique? By all means, support the product you poured so much of your time and energy in developing. But also leave that little bit of room for acknowledging the shortcomings or aspects that didn't quite work out as well as room for future improvement. I think it was Fernando posts before Legacy was released that really drove this point home for me. A simple sentiment was present in his posts; no standarized company line but simply his posts talking about Legacy, of course being proud of the DLC and very excited about it being released, but also containing that small grain of salt if you will, that tiny caution that we may not necessarily adore it and to simply wait for the fan reviews before giving it a go. Just a small acknowledgement of previous player concerns made all the difference in the world. And also perhaps the fact that we weren't require to automatically love the product helped as well? All I know is that one line acknowledgement made all the diffenence in the world.

Heh, it's strange when I think about it... we generally want for developers to treat us like adults, not like some idiot children... but following my through process above, it seems like at times we are those little children seeking acknowledgement from their parents and some soothing... well, perhaps not children but young adults who still, at times, require that parental reassurance.

What do you all think of that, I wonder.

Edit: Fixed some typos.

Modifié par AloraKast, 04 août 2011 - 01:52 .

[Yuqi]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Brockololly wrote...

Mike Laidlaw wrote...
...there's a game out there that's better  than both Origins and DAII, and I'll be damned if the talented folks of  the DA team can't find it.

I'll help.

Or maybe this'll help too.

See, you're not just here for the god baby. You're here to be a wise ass. Good times as always.

^ I Agree. I'm sick and tired of hearing about the'witcher' and skyrim. I much prefer (DARE I SAY IT) DA2 over the witcher(Even with its very many,many,many, flaws.) The witcher is not the god almighty game; some people seem to think it is. Graphics never make a good game IMO,of course I'm biased because I played games in B/W with sound affects, as your only audio. So don't (in respect of those of us, who DO NOT LIKE THE WITCHER) use the dev's comment, to say the witcher is better.

Back to the topic at hand.

I agree with the OP, on most of his points,however..one point was missed. The Devs have to be even more careful,then us; in what they post. In any job you sign an agreement, and now days there is also 'the use of electronic media' form.When you sign that ,you cant for example:  look up Po*n' while representing the company. I'm certain, it would be stricter for anyone dealing with interactive media, on a daily basis.

(IIt's Late,here on the other side of the equator. So if this dosen't make much sense,I apoligize.)

[jds1bio]

AloraKast wrote...

Heh, it's strange when I think about it... we generally want for developers to treat us like adults, not like some idiot children... but following my through process above, it seems like at times we are those little children seeking acknowledgement from their parents and some soothing... well, perhaps not children but young adults who still, at times, require that parental reassurance.

What do you all think of that, I wonder.

I'm sorry that you've been so disappointed in the DA2 forums.  Those of us who have stuck it out through the vitriolic posts these past few months have found quite a few people worth reading and corresponding with.  That we can find quality conversation with fellow gamers AND developers, who have no obligation to converse in the forums whatsoever, gives us no need to compare ourselves to children.

I'm sure there are people at BioWare who haven't been through this cycle of criticism before, as there are gamers who are disappointed with a BioWare game in a way they've never been before.  For all of them, this is perhaps the first time they've been in this situation.  Both devs and gamers have acknowledged when they have posted something that might have been worded more kindly, and I think for the most part we are now all taking greater care with what we say and how we say it.

[AloraKast]

jds1bio wrote...

AloraKast wrote...

Heh, it's strange when I think about it... we generally want for developers to treat us like adults, not like some idiot children... but following my through process above, it seems like at times we are those little children seeking acknowledgement from their parents and some soothing... well, perhaps not children but young adults who still, at times, require that parental reassurance.

What do you all think of that, I wonder.

I'm sorry that you've been so disappointed in the DA2 forums.  Those of us who have stuck it out through the vitriolic posts these past few months have found quite a few people worth reading and corresponding with.  That we can find quality conversation with fellow gamers AND developers, who have no obligation to converse in the forums whatsoever, gives us no need to compare ourselves to children.

I'm sure there are people at BioWare who haven't been through this cycle of criticism before, as there are gamers who are disappointed with a BioWare game in a way they've never been before.  For all of them, this is perhaps the first time they've been in this situation.  Both devs and gamers have acknowledged when they have posted something that might have been worded more kindly, and I think for the most part we are now all taking greater care with what we say and how we say it.

Hmmm, the point I was attempting to convey (which was a direct result of my musing in the previous paragraph of my post) was that while we generally like to be treated like adults, when it comes to voicing our displeasure with a product we feel passionate about and then either receiving no response from the makers of the product or the standard company approved text only exacerbates the frustration and displeasure. Whereas that tiny bit of acknowledgement of our concerns can make all the difference between bloody war and manageable peace. And in that regard, it can come across as seeking that tiny bit of parental acknowledgement/appeasement.

Oh, and apologies for not making it clear, but I was not merely referring to the forums, but also to the various interviews given by the game developers after the release of DA2. These forums are only one form of communication that Bioware can use.

And absolutely, the sentiments in your first paragraph are certainly true now (I find), though that was not the case earlier on. I do find the quality of communication has improved, both on the part of the community and the devs and certainly there was a learning curve... but perhaps the perspective of time and distance has allowed for strong emotions to take a back seat to more constructive dialogue as well.

I can not recall an example in the past where Bioware has encountered such a vehement and pollarized fan reaction... but that only speaks to the quality of work we have seen from this developer so far (whether the quality piece being DA:O or DA2 or even other titles, as like I said earlier, passionate defence breeds even more passionate attacks and vice versa). Certainly a learning curve for all involved.

[Mike Laidlaw]

Anarya wrote...

About accessibility, I don't think "accessible" necessarily has to mean "oversimplified". I think drawing a distinction between the two is important, and like Bryy said, it's more about how you teach the mechanics.

That is precisely the distinction I'm trying to draw. DA II is not a "simple" game when held up in comparison to the current crop of games out there. It is, however, more simple than Origins, and I understand why people are upset about that.

It doesn't mean the solution is to just revert to Origins, however.

[Fast Jimmy]

^

They don't give you a day off, do they Mike?

[Saintthanksgiving]

Allow me to make a distinction here. There is vitriol for vitriol's sake, and there is angry criticism.

In fairness to those of us who have made the occasional "heated" post... people who make valid criticisms or bring up legitimate arguments are too easily dismissed or attacked based on the tone of the post.

Not all of us subscribe to the catching bees with honey mantra. Some of us believe that a mob of angry villagers with torches and pitchforks are required to make a point from time to time.

For example,
My last rant was about the recent interview where Melo repeated the "DA2 isn't DAO2" talking point. There are a large number of fans that preordered DA2 based on their affection for Origins. Telling these fans that they should have EXPECTED to be dissapointed in DA2 is ridiculous. The fact that this line is repeated in every interview is, in my opinion, insulting.

Situations like that need a little bit more than Oliver Twist begging" please sir, can I have some more?"

Are wrath of khan quotes and moby dick references over the top? Not if it gets the job done.

[erynnar]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

csfteeeer wrote...

i do not want it to die, but i also don't know if i'm fully compeled by the way it's going right now, and that is why i try hard for my voice to be heard.

And it has been.

Up until Legacy, though, I don't think anyone would have believed me if I'd said we were going to take it into account. A lot of people on this forum had built up a grand conspiracy theory where we were deliberately stripping RPG out of Dragon Age because we are MEAN.

I've said it before, and I will say it again: we stripped some stuff out of DA becuase it was busted. Other stuff was simply a design choice, and some of it was circumstance. There is no way you guys could know exactly what falls on what side of that triangle, and as devs we are not always able to be crystal clear on that kind of thing, especially immediately after a controversial game launch when the community was so far out for blood that they took my suggestion that setting a game that was too easy to a higher difficulty might be a good call was some sort of gigantic, egotistical middle finger to the entire fanbase. That was not a time for reasonable discussion, clearly.

Now is the time. And I'm still very interested to hear what you folks have to say (unless it is a demand for gameplay videos before we announce anything, that is. ), and we are still working on the formula. If I'm going to ****** you guys off, it's going to be because I still firmly believe that RPGs do need to be more accessible to new players. Not dumbed down, not "consolized" (whatever that means. There are insanely complex games on the console), not diminished, but made less imposing and less terrifying to new players. In part because I want more people to play Dragon Age, and in part because there have been a lot of improvements in gameplay and UI design in the past 15 years, and we can learn from them.

So on that point, I'm sure we can all agree to disagree, so long as the end product is more choice-driven, offers more "twiddle" to the player's experience in terms of equipment, offers satisfying, constructed encounters and a deep story. DAII clearly didn't deliver on all fronts for you guys. For some it did, but I'm truly, deeply cognizant of the parts that are weak, and while we're not going to agree on everything, there's a game out there that's better than both Origins and DAII, and I'll be damned if the talented folks of the DA team can't find it.

Well, now that I know you're actually paying attention to me, I am all self conscious.  Really, thanks. Legacy was fun and showed you were listening. DA team is very talented.