1502 réponses à ce sujet

[TrooperTethras]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

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.

I'm really interested in what the dev's decide to do with this because as somewhat annoying as it was to be carrying all this armor I can't use on top of the junk in my inventory (junk and how it factors into your inventory should probably be looked at as well) I also liked how my followers had visually unique equipment that was crafted to their place in the story.
Definately going to be following this.

[Savber100]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

In part, I believe that's a communication error on our part. I know we were not universally reassuring about the direction of DA during the DAII marketing campaign or even here on these forums. There were a number of reasons for that, many of which are not fit for public consumption, but rest assured that we'll take steps to rectify that over the next little while.

And wahey! I kept it on topic this time. Woo.

Ah yes.. I would recommand to inform Mr. Silverman to not mention the "Awesome Button" ever again. 

He's passionate with his job but he tends to send the wrong message with all that energy. 

[Ecf1]

Mike

Now that Legacy has been out for a decent amount of time, how do the sales numbers compare to that of say Awakening or Witch Hunt?

Essentially I'm curious as if DA2 DLC is still on the table or if the team has moved on to the next installment, which EA inadvertently announced a while back.

[ianvillan]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Kothoses Rothenkisal wrote...

There was an obvious disconnect between what the Dragon Age community were looking for in DA 2 and where Bioware thought the series should go, now that it has been acknowledged, do you feel the new DLC goes part the way back towards what we wanted, or is it just polishing something unmentionable.

There's also a very large disconnect between where the Dragon Age community thinks we are headed and where we are actually going. As I've noted before, there's two data points in terms of major releases, and I think people have been rather hasty in drawing a line from DAO to DA2 to Devil May Cry. There's a LOT of territory between DA2 and DMC, and if we were truly headed in that direction, we would have made much larger changes. Cut party, remove crafting, one class, etc would all be changes that show a move to action game, but none of those happened. A lot of doom was perceived in the wave combat and changing follower equipment, exaggerated by other faults with the game.

In part, I believe that's a communication error on our part. I know we were not universally reassuring about the direction of DA during the DAII marketing campaign or even here on these forums. There were a number of reasons for that, many of which are not fit for public consumption, but rest assured that we'll take steps to rectify that over the next little while.

And wahey! I kept it on topic this time. Woo.

One of the problems pre-launch for me was that it seemed that all the interviews were about how bad origins was and how DA2 will be better.

I know it wasn't your intention but I had alot of enjoyment in origins and to say that it was bad was ofputting.

When you say that the circle tower had too many books or the enviroments looked all the same, and then go and make DA2 have repeated enviroments is what get many upset with Bioware.

[Droma]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

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.

hm btw what about the idea, of somethink like melting in armors you can't use to get their stats (as runes or something), to add them later to your comp armors (which could be fixxed, a detailed view of mine how comp. armor should be used in da3 is in the other thread). so this would add sense to armors the main protagonist can't use and other comps could use them (or the best part of it) in some ways.

[Tommy6860]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

There's also a very large disconnect between where the Dragon Age community thinks we are headed and where we are actually going. As I've noted before, there's two data points in terms of major releases, and I think people have been rather hasty in drawing a line from DAO to DA2 to Devil May Cry. There's a LOT of territory between DA2 and DMC, and if we were truly headed in that direction, we would have made much larger changes. Cut party, remove crafting, one class, etc would all be changes that show a move to action game, but none of those happened. A lot of doom was perceived in the wave combat and changing follower equipment, exaggerated by other faults with the game.

Except crafting was hugely simplified, not that it is bad, but no more having to simply mix ingredients, just order them up after acquiring the pertinent ingredient, and that is it, no more is needed, just go to the crafting table and click and create.. And yes, while you didn't remove classes, cut party, DA2 went very strongly toward action gaming by removing RPG elements, like choices actually have effects in the story of the game, while gearing the game to about 60% of pure unrealistic action (except I liked the mage changes though), and the rest mainly cinematic discussions (that could only happen one time) where any of the choices I made had little impact on the game. Those are not exaggerated at all when drawing those differences from DA:O to DA2.

In part, I believe that's a communication error on our part. I know we were not universally reassuring about the direction of DA during the DAII marketing campaign or even here on these forums. There were a number of reasons for that, many of which are not fit for public consumption, but rest assured that we'll take steps to rectify that over the next little while.

And wahey! I kept it on topic this time. Woo.

A communication error??? Seriously, the promos, online declarations and even the DA2 website making claims that don't actually happen in the game was a communication error? Just how many errors can one team make in describing DA2 gameplay?

Modifié par Tommy6860, 05 août 2011 - 12:22 .

[ScotGaymer]

Tommy6860 wrote...


A communication error??? Seriously, the promos, online declarations and even the DA2 website making claims that don't actually happen in the game was a communication error? Just how many errors can one team make in describing DA2 gameplay?

I dont precisely disagree.

Id just like to point out that this isnt the fault of the dev team; the fault with this lies with the marketing/pr department who clearly had very little idea about what they were on about.
Hence my suggestion that heads ought to roll over it.

Anything official said by Bioware employees (ie stuff that isnt casual posts on here) goes via marketing/pr to be made suitable for public consumption. This is standard practice for most companies everywhere.

Therefore any incorrect "official" information making it out is the fault of marketing/pr not of the Dev team. They only say what they are told to say trusting that the marketing people know what they are talking about.

The fact that the DA dev team was generally made to look like idiots, or malicious gits according to some, is entirely down to the marketing/pr department.

EDIT:
Having watched Mr Silverman on Bioware Pulse I have to say I think he would make an excellent Television Presenter. Enthusiastic, engaging, coherent, and clearly has a sense of humour. I just dont know if he has done the best job as head of marketing lol.

Modifié par FitScotGaymer, 05 août 2011 - 12:25 .

[Tommy6860]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...


A communication error??? Seriously, the promos, online declarations and even the DA2 website making claims that don't actually happen in the game was a communication error? Just how many errors can one team make in describing DA2 gameplay?

I dont precisely disagree.

Id just like to point out that this isnt the fault of the dev team; the fault with this lies with the marketing/pr department who clearly had very little idea about what they were on about.
Hence my suggestion that heads ought to roll over it.

Anything official said by Bioware employees (ie stuff that isnt casual posts on here) goes via marketing/pr to be made suitable for public consumption. This is standard practice for most companies everywhere.

Therefore any incorrect "official" information making it out is the fault of marketing/pr not of the Dev team. They only say what they are told to say trusting that the marketing people know what they are talking about.

The fact that the DA dev team was generally made to look like idiots, or malicious gits according to some, is entirely down to the marketing/pr department.

Agreed, but Mike did do promos back before DA2's release. The fact is, the dev team and the marketing team being on different pages is a serious error on both parts (you know the old saying, there's no "I" in team). Do they not communicate amongst each other while positing diametrically opposing game info?

[CRISIS1717]

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.

I think it was on an article on the push back of the release date of Armored Core V and the general response was fine if it's a better game we are prepared to wait. I think quite a few fans also felt this way about Dragon Age 2. Whether people say this was design decision or the godly hand of EA doesn't matter to me because I suspect both were at fault.

 You say area re-use was just something that happened? really? it wasn't the result of a scaling back so you needed area content to fill up the game and fast? 

You say waves were introduced without enough time to tune them in? maybe the game should have been postponed until they were fine tuned then. With Origins you knew exactly what you were dealing with, now streams of enemies just suddenly appear like some god awful hack and slash game. 

Your impact and choice and scope of the story in my opinion was terrible. Honestly I don't care what some others are saying about the scope of Dragone Age 2 because what they want is not fantasy they want a documentary in a fantasy world, the Hobbit wouldn't have been the Hobbit if Bilbo did odd jobs and just ventured to the other end of the Shire and beat up on the strongest hobbit. Now with Origins chat options you had areas where you said something you didn't want to say, with DA2 with even more limited options that happens alll the time! 

On your last point, if people actually liked restricted customisation then they are welcome to their games in future offering less when they should be offering more and paying for content which they would have received free. In Origins you could stylize all you wanted, now in DA2 you are stuck with what you're given. 

A lot of people dislike the game believe it was all EAs doing but honestly I think this was a mix of bad decisions and a scaled back development project. 

Now a lot of people have said to me if you don't like it don't play it. Which is exactly what I'm going to do, I won't be buying any more Dragon Age games and I won't be buying any current Dragon Age 2 DLC, I won't even take it for free. 

You know people can call me whatever they want: melodramatic, whiney, childish, maybe I am a little but I at least have enough conviction to stand by my own opinion and not throw up my hands, shrug and say "well what can you do?" and drop another stack of cash on something I am  100% against. 

Modifié par CRISIS1717, 05 août 2011 - 06:28 .

[Dexter111]

Personally I don't think "calm rational feedback" helps that much at all, at least I can't think of much of an incident where it did... now a huge massive ****storm that is abrewn on the horizon on the other hand...

Remember when Blizzard wanted to introduce their "RealID"-system on their forums, their Account cancellation page was gone because there were so many people hitting it (or they took it down to prevent worse), actual papers and publications started writing (not very favourably) about it and there were posts with literally thousands of pages of comments telling them in words I wouldn't like to utter what a great idea that was...

Yeah a few days later they retracted their plans because of "overwhelming response" http://www.pcworld.c..._id_policy.html

Similar was the situation for Dragon Age 2 (and rightfully so if you ask me), as much as it might have been time for a "productive discussion" or not, it was sorely needed and it apparently got through where a few "orderly" threads where you post your concerns would have not.

That said Mr. Laidlaw missed a few points often discussed:
- The game was missing a proper introduction
- The world felt absolutely empty, the re-use is one thing but the game-world didn't make the impression of a "living" world at all
- Almost every area was On-Rails
- Barely any change whatsoever (both in the world and your companions/their characterization) even though the game had a story that was nearly begging for it over a timespan of 7 years.
- Generally mediocre graphics stemming from a lack of time, malformed characters/hands, areas that sport 2-3 trees and areas that looked like they were put together quick by a mod-team
- MMO-quests, collecting 5 something, 10 other and gaining 50 gold and "Oh thank you, never thought i'd see THIS again" isn't awfully interesting
- Dialogue was cut to a minimum, Companion-based dialogue was now disguised as doing "quests" and everyone else barely had anything of much interest to say aside of the main plot
- Overdone gore
- Lack of Customization in several ways (like skills and equipment on your companions) and Tactical choices
etc.

[Rawgrim]

You forgot the oversized anime-hero weapons, Dexter111.

[CRISIS1717]

Dexter111 wrote...

Personally I don't think "calm rational feedback" helps that much at all, at least I can't think of much of an incident where it did... now a huge massive ****storm that is abrewn on the horizon on the other hand...

Remember when Blizzard wanted to introduce their "RealID"-system on their forums, their Account cancellation page was gone because there were so many people hitting it (or they took it down to prevent worse), actual papers and publications started writing (not very favourably) about it and there were posts with literally thousands of pages of comments telling them in words I wouldn't like to utter what a great idea that was...

Yeah a few days later they retracted their plans because of "overwhelming response" http://www.pcworld.c..._id_policy.html

Similar was the situation for Dragon Age 2 (and rightfully so if you ask me), as much as it might have been time for a "productive discussion" or not, it was sorely needed and it apparently got through where a few "orderly" threads where you post your concerns would have not.

That said Mr. Laidlaw missed a few points often discussed:
- The game was missing a proper introduction
- The world felt absolutely empty, the re-use is one thing but the game-world didn't make the impression of a "living" world at all
- Almost every area was On-Rails
- Barely any change whatsoever (both in the world and your companions/their characterization) even though the game had a story that was nearly begging for it over a timespan of 7 years.
- Generally mediocre graphics stemming from a lack of time, malformed characters/hands, areas that sport 2-3 trees and areas that looked like they were put together quick by a mod-team
- MMO-quests, collecting 5 something, 10 other and gaining 50 gold and "Oh thank you, never thought i'd see THIS again" isn't awfully interesting
- Dialogue was cut to a minimum, Companion-based dialogue was now disguised as doing "quests" and everyone else barely had anything of much interest to say aside of the main plot
- Overdone gore
- Lack of Customization in several ways (like skills and equipment on your companions) and Tactical choices
etc.

I agree with a lot of your points but I believe you mean linear or to be even more descriptive severely linear instead of on-rails. 

[G00N3R7883]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

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.

I'm all for more people playing RPGs. This is my favourite genre, the stories, the characters, the choices ... most of my favourite games of all time are RPGs. And I especially want more people to play Bioware RPGs, as your games make up a large chunk of my top 10.

My thought is this - you can talk about making the RPG genre more accessible to new players (and I hope you are honest about not dumbing down, although I could certainly give examples of mechanics that I think are more simple in ME/DA than they were in BG/NWN) - but have you also given any thought to how you could educate new players? Could you leave the RPG formula as it is, even make it more complex, and then do things, either inside or outside the game, to help new players get a better understanding of what RPGs are all about and what existing RPG fans love so much about them.

For example, I guess some players might find a character creation screen scary if its their first time. All those stats and they've got to divide points between them, and what if they do it wrong and they're too weak, and so on. Couldn't you help new players to realise that, although getting a good build is certainly helpful, its actually really hard to make a character so bad that its literally impossible to finish the game? (especially on the easiest difficulty, which is where a player totally new to the genre should be playing, and I don't mean that in an insulting way - I'm a very inexperienced strategy game player, so I've been playing Shogun 2 on easy hoping to work my way up). There must be things like this that you can do, so that you can both attact new players, and give existing fans what we're expecting.

I'd also like to think that, if Bioware focuses on just making a great game, the players will come, and they will take the time to learn what they need to be successful, because they're enjoying the experience. I think if someone tries a game, and then quits straight away, there is more wrong with the game than just being hard.

[HTTP 404]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Kothoses Rothenkisal wrote...
  Is there a single point you will take aware as something to do or avoid when the next launch comes out?

No, not really. It's nigh-impossible to predict the circumstances of each launch. I could say "be more careful in my postmortem interviews" but that's a lie. Nothing I said was meant in a tone of arrogance, but it was certainly construed that way. I could say "Be here on the forums and take my lumps," but, that would probably also be a lie. At the end of a project, most devs are more than a bit hollowed out and in serious need of some recouperation. And even the best-received games have people on forums that despise them. Human nature dictates that we can skim 17 pages of YAY and linger on the BOO as if it were a bell tolling our doom.

Ultimately, it's not about the launch. It's about preparing the community for the launch, so they know what they're getting. DA II shocked some people, and shocked people tend to have strongly emotional reactions. I'd rather the shock be minimal, if only because I want people to make an informed choice in the games they purchase.

I hope you took a vacation after Da2 released

[Kothoses Rothenkisal]

I think the difference between what came out of Bioware and EA prior to DA probably was a marketing ploy, I think what is being said now and the response that Bioware are giving now is actually a good sign that they wont be rushed next time. This might in the grand scheme of things (the launch of DA 2) be a watershed moment for EA where they realise that when they acquire an amazing studio it is better just to let them do their own thing, look at the delays to SWToR and ME 3.

I like to think that the 100+ pages of constructive critique at the top of this forum most of which were calmly and well presented had more of an impact than all the trolling of what seem like a good bunch of people at launch time.

[Kothoses Rothenkisal]

Seems this thread is going a bit Viral and has been featured so far on Euro Gamer and PCGamer UKs websites. I hope that this proves my opening point, that community can be a powerful tool for engineering change and and bring about real meaningful dialogue. I think it may end up sadly becoming another circular lets bash DA 2 thread and that would be a pity, as the points discussed here have a lot of merit beyond that and the feedback on these forums has the potential to be so much more.

http://www.eurogamer...gon-ages-future

http://www.pcgamer.c...-it-was-busted/

Modifié par Kothoses Rothenkisal, 05 août 2011 - 03:15 .

[HTTP 404]

wow! they took huge sections of quotes. This thread should be stickied.... also kudos to OP

Modifié par HTTP 404, 05 août 2011 - 04:04 .

[David Gaider]

hoorayforicecream wrote...
One concern that I've had for a while has been for the visual style of DA2. What I've noticed specifically is that Kirkwall is actually a very good looking city, with a lot of iconic looking imagery. Unfortunately, most of that imagery was above the normal sight line, and I ended up not seeing it unless I stopped playing, and started looking.

Just wanted to thank you for your post, HFIC-- excellent examples and reasoning, and it actually started an interesting discussion here. Much appreciated.

[kingjezza]

“I’ve said it before, and I will say it again: we stripped some stuff out of DA becuase it was busted”

What exactly was busted in Origins? I'm curious to know.

If something is busted then the idea is normally to try and fix it, not just strip it out entirely. Companion armour didn't need stripping, it just needed a bit more effort put into making armours/head gear more interesting and unique.

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,”
Laidlaw adds. “Not diminished, but made less imposing and less
terrifying to new players.

How about we just stop trying to cater to simpletons at all, I'm sorry if people find that insulting but it's bleedin' annoying to constantly hear how the games will try to cater to the non thinking lazy crowd who can't be bothered to take the time to read a sentence or grasp the most basic of things. Who are these people who found Origins too complicated and terrifying? You literally choose a couple of skills, a few spells/talents and put 5 points into your character, everything is explained and as simple as can be for anybody who makes even the smallest amount of effort to understand, I would suggest that anybody who finds that too much effort and too complicated isn't going to be the target audience for fantasy RPG's anyway. It's nothing to do with trying to attract the Call of Duty crowd/console players etc etc as I think the vast majority of Call of Duty players and console users would be highly insulted if they were told they couldn't handle a few simple numbers and choices, people don't like being patronised.

This whole idea that people find it too complicated basically strikes me as a bit of an excuse for the dumbing down of the game, I just can't grasp or get my head around the idea that somebody spent money on a game, loaded it up, reached the character creation screen and thought sod this, way too complicated, way too much effort involved and stopped playing, if they did then tough luck for them, maybe the priority should be put on those players that actually did manage to make it past the character creation screen and enjoyed the game, rather than those who never will.

Modifié par kingjezza, 05 août 2011 - 04:21 .

[Mike Laidlaw]

G00N3R7883 wrote...

I'm all for more people playing RPGs. This is my favourite genre, the stories, the characters, the choices ... most of my favourite games of all time are RPGs. And I especially want more people to play Bioware RPGs, as your games make up a large chunk of my top 10.

My thought is this - you can talk about making the RPG genre more accessible to new players (and I hope you are honest about not dumbing down, although I could certainly give examples of mechanics that I think are more simple in ME/DA than they were in BG/NWN) - but have you also given any thought to how you could educate new players? Could you leave the RPG formula as it is, even make it more complex, and then do things, either inside or outside the game, to help new players get a better understanding of what RPGs are all about and what existing RPG fans love so much about them.

That's pretty much my goal. Always has been. Lots of people misinterpret "making the game easier to get into" as "stripping out the complexity" but I have never seen those two things as coupled.

If anything, DA's future is more complex, but more subtle and intuitive in how it's presented.

[Tommy6860]

Barbarossa2010 wrote...

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.

Best post in the whole of this thread. I have a few 360 buddies who just loved Origins and are hard core shooter fans that never got into RPGs. Two of them got DA2 and didn't care it. So, in a sense, though this is anecdotal, it shows that grabbing the "larger audience" with the changes from DA:O to DA2 wasn't the way to go. I think Bioware actually created a huge audience by getting some who were not at all RPGers, and making them RPGers with their expereinces with DA:O. IMO, that's something that no other Bioware game has really done before (though most of their earlier RPGs were PC only, so that not a huge statement to make), outside of maybe KoTOR, but it didn't sell near what Origins did on all platforms. The ME series has heavy shooter elements, so that will probably grab the shooter/action crowd a bit, but even then, DA:O still sold better overall. Seriously, even Fallout 3 and Vegas only sold really well because they are more shooter than RPG, yet DA:O's sales are very comparable to them in overall sales.

[Tommy6860]

David Gaider wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...
One concern that I've had for a while has been for the visual style of DA2. What I've noticed specifically is that Kirkwall is actually a very good looking city, with a lot of iconic looking imagery. Unfortunately, most of that imagery was above the normal sight line, and I ended up not seeing it unless I stopped playing, and started looking.

Just wanted to thank you for your post, HFIC-- excellent examples and reasoning, and it actually started an interesting discussion here. Much appreciated.

HFIC seems to always make reasonable well thought out replies without ad hominem.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

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

+10 million thousands of billions

[Kothoses Rothenkisal]

Tommy6860 wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...
One concern that I've had for a while has been for the visual style of DA2. What I've noticed specifically is that Kirkwall is actually a very good looking city, with a lot of iconic looking imagery. Unfortunately, most of that imagery was above the normal sight line, and I ended up not seeing it unless I stopped playing, and started looking.

Just wanted to thank you for your post, HFIC-- excellent examples and reasoning, and it actually started an interesting discussion here. Much appreciated.

HFIC seems to always make reasonable well thought out replies without ad hominem.

I will second this, I was highly impressed by the dissection of Kirkwall.

I have to say though I have not seen a bad post in this thread yet, I have been impressed at the quality of discussion.

[Rawgrim]

I`d like to adres the post of kingjezza abit here. While making some very very good points, he\\she also manages to paint things very black and white too. alot of people just can`t afford a good PC, these days, or let alone upgrading constantly either. For them, a console is a good alternative. Personally, i am just tired of upgrading my PC, and mostly just use it for old games (really old). However, I did play DA:O on PC and xbox, and I have to admit it was dumbed down on the xbox. That last bit in the Gauntlet, for example, was ALOT easier on xbox. Just an example. I remember when I first started playing roleplaying games, and whatsnot. We had to buy arrows, food, outfits for the entire party, rest - all kinds of things. Most of this is gone now, in newer games. Its not just DA2 either. Check out the reduction of skills from Morrowind, to Oblivion, and from there to Skyrim. Its simplified\\dumbed down all over the place. DA2 didn`t start this trend. Far from it. It started way before rpgs got "consolified" too.