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.
Mike, I believe myself to be the prototypical example of the 'accessibility' crowd you are attempting to court. I play primarily on the 360 and have spent a shameful amount of time in XBOX Live MP lobbies and parties. Up until Nov 09, for over a decade, I've only played FPSs and TPSs for my video game entertainment . This is the first developer community I ever signed up to actually interact with others (outside of MP Deathmatches
) about a video game.
Dragon Age Origins was the first RPG I ever played. I thought the Ashes trailer was cool, and thought that a video game developer had finally gotten that whole shield thing right and the player could actually use it as a weapon. That's what led me out of a self-imposed, sole-focused Gears brutality goondom (I can say this still immersing myself among the ranks of the knuckle-draggers) and into playing a "lame" fantasy game. I played through DA:O seven times, with a number of partial playthroughs to "get things right." I simply could not get enough of it, as I learned more and more from each playthrough. I couldn't believe how much replayability there could be in a game. I also couldn't believe how much functionality you guys could give me through my XBOX 360 controller. I was smitten.
Some of the things that brought me out of the desert, so to speak, were 'realistic' dialogue (for a video game), squad-like tactical pause and play combat that was multi-dimensional, characters and characterizations I had no idea could be developed in a video game, an epic story and PC that felt like were my own creations, a deep inventory to manage, player and team mate customization, siginificant emotional engagement, and a very cool user interface. These, simply are things I had never had any experience with, and they were there in spades in Origins. I actually got six of my shooter friends to play this "gay" fantasy game and they too (minus one, who is a hopeless case [but that's another story altogether]) became obsessed; and before you knew it, a small group of veteran shooter goons were talking about Dragons, Darkspawn, character builds, crafting bombs and poisons, and AOE spells. I have been critical of certain aspects of Origins to be sure; primarily story-related things. I was certainly not blinded by the faults of my first "love," but my criticisms were not the one's that were supposedly 'corrected' in DA2. Having said all this, Dragon Age Origins holds the top spot of all video games I ever played. I also purchased all DLC for my 360 and the Ultimate edition for PC, so chalk up two sales (+) for this user.
DA:O led me to a genre of games that I had no real idea existed. Since April of 2010, I played ME1, ME2, Fallout 3 GOTY, FO:NV, ES4 Oblivion GOTY, Alpha Protocol, and The Witcher to name a few. None, still hold a candle to Origins.
DA2 seemed so denuded of anything I found attractive in Origins that I no longer felt I was playing a Dragon Age game. I pre-ordered the Sig edition. It lived up to very few expectations I had developed from "my first." I've been honest in my criticisms of DA2: didn't hate it, certainly didn't love it; was just supremely disappointed by it. The criticisms I've seen are well deserved, but I do not begrudge anyone who might have enjoyed it. My criticisms go way beyond recycled environments and parachuting baddies. The new user interface, loss of inventory, virtually no team mate customization, loss of the epic story, etc, etc, etc, just barely begin to cover the disappointments. BW's post-game commentary, mainly to include you, seem to be communicating throughout, that even if hell froze over, there will be no return to Origins form. I know I'm certainly not alone in my disappointment with this game, but no one can call me a PC-elitist, a nostalgic RPG geek, or a firmly entrenched troglodyte incapable of change. I played DA2 once, and had to force myself to complete it as it was just so blah (a bad indicator of a game's quality in and of itself, but positviely disastrous when comparing it to Origins). For me, DA2 = one playthrough/DAO = seven playthroughs. That may mean nothing to your current bottom line, but it will certainly have an impact on future sales, if it becomes a trend among players. I won't be purchasing any DLC for DA2 (the only BW DLC I haven't purchased) and will not be pre-ordering DA3, because you all seem convinced that Origins was riddled with problems that I (and evidently many others) simply did not see; and that the direction of DA2 has more "potential," which, again, I do not see. Time will tell if you hold to that course or not.
Bottom line: You won me (and many others it appears) over with Origins; you lost me with DA2. Origins was more than accessible for the type of players I associate with. Origins brought over those that WOULD be brought over. I can account for six in my own experience. There was nothing intimidating or terrifying about Origins, (try entering a GOW Team Deathmatch session and wanting to actually do well, against of team 100 ranks for a real feeling of terror and intimidation); and it was certainly nothing that my simple shooter's brain could not learn after a couple of attempts. So when I hear the "accessibility" card being thrown around, I have to laugh silently to myself and wonder who in the hell you guys (or what data you are making design decisions on) are listening to.
DA2 lost alot of that magic. It appeared a product of mass production and sterile business decisions, than a crafted labor of love. Not terrible, just disappointingly mediocre, as it lost those things that brought us over in the first place. Me and my friends all agree that DA2 would not have brought us into the RPG genre, as it was barely discernible from what we play already, but was not nearly as fun. Origins was great precisely because it was
not COD, HALO or GOW. Hack and slash games appear to be mildly fun, but hybridizing DA into something in-between just makes it another game in a sea of action games, as opposed to something special that stands alone and MUST be played, or at least a gem to be kept on the shelf to impress people.
You may have data that says I'm full of $#!+and that I (and these other five) are some sort of anomoly, or are not representative of "our" demographic, but it doesn't change the fact that Origins was very successful in leading many of those that WOULD be led, from the dark side. To me, it only makes sense to slightly correct the known issues of Origins, keep the core mechanics that your base has a reasonable expectation to see, and bring outsiders into the fold over time. Marketing will certainly play a key role here, but radically overhauling a game, using hotrod market speak, and downplaying the success or greatness of Origins, seems like a bad call from my humble shooter's perspective. To me, Origins was the right mix for players who WILL come over. I know this crowd, and no amount of simplification can change attitudes. It will only dilute and inflame the base you had in place. A quality, emotionally engaging experience, however, can change attitudes and make people try something they might otherwise not. Giving your base what they want ensures at least that they stay around. It doesn't appear you can even count on that at this point. I will await your decisions on DA3, and will take in all reviews first, and still give you a shot at my dollars, if you can (or even want) to return to form. But expect no pre-order; and if all we are going to get for DA3 is "the potential wrought by DA2," and less Origins...well, we will dissolve our business relationship and part company, amicably.
Of course, this may all be a 'constrained resource' issue, so, obviously, you would have to distance the franchise from Origins pretending it to be riddled with all sorts of problems; so, if that's the case...nevermind, feedback is virtually rendered moot, and you're going to do what you have to do; player feedback will affect maybe 1-5% of what you do in the future if this be the case. I'm only making this response and providing a little feedback from a relevant trench, in the event there really is a chance to impact and correct the future course of this great franchise, and it's not already a thing pre-determined from above, and we're just acting as witnesses to your fragile balancing act.
So, there it is from the COD perspective. Believe it or don't. I've given BW quite a bit of money thus far if you look at my registered games, there's a few there, so I'm merely exercising my consumer's voice here. As such, feel free to accept or discard this feedback at your leisure.
Respectful.
Modifié par Barbarossa2010, 04 août 2011 - 08:23 .
Retour en haut
