230 réponses à ce sujet

[I Pop Tarts]

Mr Woo, your tone comes across as quite confrontational. While there is a bunch of sarcasm in the posts you quoted, they also contain a lot of thruth. Responding to that in a confrontational manner just furthers the impression that Bioware is merely throwing around PR speak when they say they're listening and will continue to go down the same path and make the same mistakes they did with DA2 with a "Deal with it" sort of attitude.

[nitefyre410]

Ferris95 wrote...
*snip*

Oh alright, figured you slightly wrong for a second there. In general I hang on to the idea that  Bioware isn't as "button=awesome:O" as we usually assume. I do look forward to seeing how their games turn out from this point forward, DA: 2 really did get some new things right.

No worries I can tend to be a tad harsher than I want at times.  

I don' t think there going that  route -    What I think  they are doing is making what some call the "point of Entry" easier  then adding the depth behind it.    Take a  Super Street Fighter 3 for instance...  Capcom  took the game back to its roots taking away alot  of the features  like Parrying that were in Street Fighter 3: Third Strike.  They made it less immediating for a  novice player to want to pick up and Learn or just play. Yet if you watch some highly play of the game the complexity is mind blowing.

Thats what I think Bioware is trying to do - make the point of entry for people easier get them in - then as get better and dive deeper the complexity emerges. Another game that did was Final Fantasy 13 -  on the surface the battle system looks  rather simple... but once  you get into you realize that you are keeping track of a good number of things and if you slip up its  game over man. 

Accesilabity =/= Does not equal  "Marketing to COD market" (which by the way as COD player bugs me a tad) 

Accesilabity means that if some goes to the story see Dragon Age they are not thrown in 12ft of water not knowing how to swim but 3ft of water where they can learn.

[I Pop Tarts]

I would say that Mike Laidlaws recent comments here on the forum attempting to distance himself and the DA franchise from attempting to gain the CoD crowd and then Mr Woo's "Booya!" citing how the franchise is going to continue to work for the CoD crowd are quite conflicting and only add to the reasons why people are saying they won't believe any word of PR damage control that comes from any employee representing Bioware.

[The Edge]

Zeevico wrote...

I'm just going to throw this out there.

Call of Duty is an RPG.

- Weapons deal set amounts of damage. Sure, it varies where you hit, but this just adds a new dimension to the role playing experience.

- Characters have set amounts of health.

- There are maps.

- You play as a fictional character.

- You kill fake people.

- The environment is fictional and grounded in a story.

This is probably what the developers are thinking when they say "we want to market this to CoD players"--look at all those glamourous similarities. Of course the differences are also a mile wide--but if only we bridge them we get a glorious action RPG game and a "welcoming" experience.

I agree with those shared traits,  but it could be argued that, RPG's aside, every other game having you play as a character in a fictional universe has you roleplaying to the same extent of as a CoD title (which for me personally is not very much). For shooter fans with no interest in RPG's, I don't see why these similarities will make them want to jump over and play DA2 or any other RPG. IMO, there are a different set of priorities between the two...

[Cutlass Jack]

I Pop Tarts wrote...

Mr Woo, your tone comes across as quite confrontational. While there is a bunch of sarcasm in the posts you quoted, they also contain a lot of thruth. Responding to that in a confrontational manner just furthers the impression that Bioware is merely throwing around PR speak when they say they're listening and will continue to go down the same path and make the same mistakes they did with DA2 with a "Deal with it" sort of attitude.

So to be clear its okay for us to post confrontationally, but if he responds to that, he's a bad bad man?

[I Pop Tarts]

Ferris95 wrote...

I Pop Tarts wrote...

I would say that Mike Laidlaws recent comments here on the forum attempting to distance himself and the DA franchise from attempting to gain the CoD crowd and then Mr Woo's "Booya!" citing how the franchise is going to continue to work for the CoD crowd are quite conflicting and only add to the reasons why people are saying they won't believe any word of PR damage control that comes from any employee representing Bioware.

I think "Booya" was sarcastic .

No, I think Booya! was "I agree with the post I quoted".

[I Pop Tarts]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

I Pop Tarts wrote...

Mr Woo, your tone comes across as quite confrontational. While there is a bunch of sarcasm in the posts you quoted, they also contain a lot of thruth. Responding to that in a confrontational manner just furthers the impression that Bioware is merely throwing around PR speak when they say they're listening and will continue to go down the same path and make the same mistakes they did with DA2 with a "Deal with it" sort of attitude.

So to be clear its okay for us to post confrontationally, but if he responds to that, he's a bad bad man?

I don't think any of the posts he quoted were confrontational, and I certainly don't think that in Biowares current position responding in a confronational manner is going to help their situation.

Unless you're trying to make the argument that two wrongs make a right.... which it seems like you are.

[The Edge]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

I Pop Tarts wrote...

Mr Woo, your tone comes across as quite confrontational. While there is a bunch of sarcasm in the posts you quoted, they also contain a lot of thruth. Responding to that in a confrontational manner just furthers the impression that Bioware is merely throwing around PR speak when they say they're listening and will continue to go down the same path and make the same mistakes they did with DA2 with a "Deal with it" sort of attitude.

So to be clear its okay for us to post confrontationally, but if he responds to that, he's a bad bad man?

Confrontational remarks are a perk of being a consumer, I suppose

But yeah, you have to be the employee dealing with an angery customer in these situations; bioware employees, I would imagine, try to follow the same mantra.

[Cutlass Jack]

I Pop Tarts wrote...

I don't think any of the posts he quoted were confrontational, and I certainly don't think that in Biowares current position responding in a confronational manner is going to help their situation.

Unless you're trying to make the argument that two wrongs make a right.... which it seems like you are.

I'm saying you talked a good game concerning people speaking their mind earlier on this thread, but when a developer posts something with minimal sugarcoating you call him to task for it. It seems a bit of a double standard to me.

[Giantdeathrobot]

 With a smiley after. And the original post was also probably sarcastic, because if COD is an RPG you would be hard pressed to find a game that isin't one.

I am perfectly fine with forum staffs not bowing to posters; if the post has a harsh tone, a similar response is acceptable. It's not like this is a press conference or something.

And at any rate, for me much of DAII's failures rested less in ''not listening to the true, good-intentionned, selfless, pure-blooded fans instead of those horribly mutated, dumb, stinky and inferior COD fanboys'' and more in being rushed to do a 50 hour game in barely more than a year; the patches and Legacy are proof enough that Bioware is still capable of quality if given time. If Bioware says they will strive to correct this in the future, I am willing to give them a chance.

[sami jo]

The level of vitriol on all sides drove me from the forums for months, and had me hiding in the tech support forums for several months more.  I love DAO.  I've been playing computer RPGs since they were text based quest games on my Apple IIc, and DAO is probably my favorite game of all time.  That said, it has issues.  There are a hoard of as-yet unpatched bugs.  Combat flummuxed newbies on casual and bored experienced players senseless on nightmare.  The story, while well told, was pretty standard fantasy fare.  There were talents, spells and skills that were nigh-on useless and ones that were ridiculously overpowered.  The races weren't very visually distinctive.  In other words, Laidlaw is right, there were things that were broken.

The devs knew those things were broken and started introducing changes with Awakenings and the post-Awakenings DLC.  The problem is that they largely ignored the feedback they got on those.  Admittedly, the feedback was largely soaked in gallons of vitriol and served up with a side dish of bile, so I'm not certain I can entirely blame them for closing their ears to it.

Now, I'm not entirely sure they fixed any of those things in DA2.  The story is definitely a departure from the standard fantasy fare.  It needed to be told better.  For me, Legacy was a step in the right direction on that count.  The story was better integrated into the quest than any of the rest of DA2 and most of DAO.  It had and still has bugs, but there seem to be fewer and fewer still that are outright game-breaking (unlike DAO).  Patches have come out far faster and known bugs have been addressed.  Combat was changed, not necessarily for the better.  Legacy seemed better balanced that anything in the series so far.  Talents, skills and spells were over-simplified and the ability to customize characters severely limited, but those concerns seem to be registering, even if they can't be addressed at this point.  More importantly, the devs are here, listening and attempting to engage the community again.  I don't think it's fair to expect them to not get defensive when people come at them with claws drawn screaming up a storm.  What exactly do people expect them to do or say? 

[nitefyre410]

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

 With a smiley after. And the original post was also probably sarcastic, because if COD is an RPG you would be hard pressed to find a game that isin't one.

I am perfectly fine with forum staffs not bowing to posters; if the post has a harsh tone, a similar response is acceptable. It's not like this is a press conference or something.

And at any rate, for me much of DAII's failures rested less in ''not listening to the true, good-intentionned, selfless, pure-blooded fans instead of those horribly mutated, dumb, stinky and inferior COD fanboys'' and more in being rushed to do a 50 hour game in barely more than a year; the patches and Legacy are proof enough that Bioware is still capable of quality if given time. If Bioware says they will strive to correct this in the future, I am willing to give them a chance.

To you first point   if the R in RPG stands for Role and in all games we are playing a Role, then would not all games be Role playing Games.   


To your  second point  - you  are right  DA 2 did not have alot of time but  they have to look a what is coming out  as well.  So they did delay it to say the  3rd or 4th quarter this year - the game itself my have very well be lost in the noise of the all  big titles coming out later this years. 

just some food thought but You are right sir they need more time 

[FieryDove]

Be nice to Mr. Woo or else!

And I am unanimous about this! (Are you Being Served reference that I bet no one knows!)

[Stanley Woo]

I Pop Tarts wrote...

Mr Woo, your tone comes across as quite confrontational. While there is a bunch of sarcasm in the posts you quoted, they also contain a lot of thruth. Responding to that in a confrontational manner just furthers the impression that Bioware is merely throwing around PR speak when they say they're listening and will continue to go down the same path and make the same mistakes they did with DA2 with a "Deal with it" sort of attitude.

Confrontational? I can understand emphatic, impassioned and blunt, but I don't think I was confrontational. The user I quoted had already decided to close himself off to further communication so there really isn't anything to confront him on.

"Truth" is subjective. You the community/fans/consumer have one, and we the company/business/developer have another. It's as simple as the consumers accusing us of making games solely for the money, making it sound like something bad or abnormal, when we as a company are out to do just that by making the best games we can, business as usual.

But you've got to decide how you want to be talked to, I Pop Tarts. Do you want us to "throw around PR speak when we say we're listening" or do you want us to talk to you openly and honestly, like people do with each other? If the former, then yes, absolutely, you can call me out as sounding confrontational and suggest/demand/insist that I speak with more decorum and professionalism. If, on the other hand, you wish the latter, then I'm going to speak the way I would speak to your face, and sometimes, I'm going to say something that doesn't agree with you. And that's cool, since we're having a discussion, not necessarily a debate or a subcommittee hearing or anything like that.

I can promise to try and not insult you or call you names, but I can't promise to refrain from speaking honestly and openly with a community I love.

[Stanley Woo]

Filament wrote...

I'm pretty sure Stanley Woo misinterpreted that post by Zeevico and thought it was honestly supportive of BioWare as opposed to sarcastic.

Indeed. I thought someone had finally started to get what that whole misunderstood and oft-cited "trying to steal CoD's audience" concept was about.

[sami jo]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Filament wrote...

I'm pretty sure Stanley Woo misinterpreted that post by Zeevico and thought it was honestly supportive of BioWare as opposed to sarcastic.

Indeed. I thought someone had finally started to get what that whole misunderstood and oft-cited "trying to steal CoD's audience" concept was about.

Plenty of people got it; sadly not those who need to just yet. 

[FieryDove]

I would think if one wanted to steal anything consumer wise it would be the Sims and WoW.
But EA has Sims so that leaves WoW.

[sami jo]

FieryDove wrote...

I would think if one wanted to steal anything consumer wise it would be the Sims and WoW.
But EA has Sims so that leaves WoW.

I think that is the audience TOR is after (along with a good chunk of the DA and ME audiences). 

[Valcutio]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Zeevico wrote...

I'm just going to throw this out there.

Call of Duty is an RPG.

- Weapons deal set amounts of damage. Sure, it varies where you hit, but this just adds a new dimension to the role playing experience.

- Characters have set amounts of health.

- There are maps.

- You play as a fictional character.

- You kill fake people.

- The environment is fictional and grounded in a story.

This is probably what the developers are thinking when they say "we want to market this to CoD players"--look at all those glamourous similarities. Of course the differences are also a mile wide--but if only we bridge them we get a glorious action RPG game and a "welcoming" experience.

Booya. 

You just agreed that CoD is a RPG. Have you lost your mind?

Earning exp and getting weapon unlocks for doing so does not a RPG make. Those are elements FOUND IN a RPG. By this logic, CoD is also a simulation game, a puzzle game and a racing game. Because you're simulating combat, puzzling out where the enemy is and racing to get the most kills. I'm sure I could figure out a way to call CoD a sports game as well. There are points and competitions after all.

This line of thinking is a recipe for disaster. Let me be perfectly clear - CoD is so successful because it introduced some rpg elements into the shooter genre. DA2 is a massive failure because you removed RPG elements from a RPG.

I know CoD and now Battlefield 3 are selling like hotcakes but it's because of the massive hype train, fueled by an insane amount of advertising. Plus, the games aren't bad for what they do. Looking at CoD sales with greedy eyes is going to do nothing but kill any chance you people have of redeeming this series.  We want a solid RPG.

When we, your fanbase, tell other people whether or not to buy DA, it will be based on if it's a solid RPG with an original, involving story with tons of choices and a plethora of creative and unique characters. It will be based on if it has a deep leveling system where I'm choosing more than a new scope or +15% fire damage vs 15% cold damage. It will be based on if the game does or doesn't try to push the devs' political bias on me and those I recommend it to. It will be based on whether or not it looks like the devs actually gave a damn and not just created a DLC machine to nickle and dime the fans with item packs and content that SHOULD have just been on the disc to begin with.

I promised myself I wouldn't make another post like this but then you actually agreed that CoD is an RPG - to a post that I believe was being sarcastic. My mind is blown.

Edit: PS - You still have yet to accept my friend request and I'm starting to think it's because you don't like me. That hurts.

Modifié par Valcutio, 08 août 2011 - 05:41 .

[nitefyre410]

I Pop Tarts wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...

I Pop Tarts wrote...

Mr Woo, your tone comes across as quite confrontational. While there is a bunch of sarcasm in the posts you quoted, they also contain a lot of thruth. Responding to that in a confrontational manner just furthers the impression that Bioware is merely throwing around PR speak when they say they're listening and will continue to go down the same path and make the same mistakes they did with DA2 with a "Deal with it" sort of attitude.

So to be clear its okay for us to post confrontationally, but if he responds to that, he's a bad bad man?

I don't think any of the posts he quoted were confrontational, and I certainly don't think that in Biowares current position responding in a confronational manner is going to help their situation.

Unless you're trying to make the argument that two wrongs make a right.... which it seems like you are.

 

He was not being confronational -   He was as they say  in some parts  "Tellin' it like it is".    

[OdanUrr]

nitefyre410 wrote...

Thats what I think Bioware is trying to do - make the point of entry for people easier get them in - then as get better and dive deeper the complexity emerges.

If I understand you correctly, you mean to say Bioware is trying to make the DA franchise more accessible to players, is that right? That DA2 was intended as a point of entry for new players to join in. The obvious problem is that ideally any company would want a constant influx of new players while retaining their core fanbase. If you reboot the franchise in every instalment to that end, you'll eventually trade one group of players for another. Key word: trade.

The second point. Players are smart, contrary to popular opinion, at least where gaming is concerned. We embrace challenge, unless it's purposefully out of our reach, like having to play a game with a keyboard, a mouse, and two joysticks at the same time, or having to press two keys for an attack that are on opposite ends of the keyboard. Developers are smart people too. There's a reason why I don't need to look in a manual for the keys to attack, reload, run, or jump, or why we adapt easily enough to different UIs. Naturally, there's a learning curve involved, same as with every game out there regardless of genre. That is usually addressed with tutorials that may or may not be a part of the campaign itself.

So, summing up, accessibility is all well and good. If the game's hard to play, chances are you're not going to play it. But let us not underestimate the player's ability to adapt. There are hundreds of games out there, and I bet we all play several genres that have their own set of rules. There's also the odd game that is a b**** to play at first, but a deep story and interesting characters may drive us to learn and assimilate its rules (e.g.: The Witcher. You know this to be true).

On a more personal note, RPGs have always been known to be somewhat hardcore in their fanbase. They take more thought, time, and effort to play than practically any other genre. This is not meant no demean other genres, it's merely a statement of fact. Take Oblivion for example, with its hundreds of hours of gameplay it's not a game to be taken lightly. The point I'm trying to make, and I'm curious about the answer, is, does every game belonging to every genre need to have the same degree of accessibility? And why?

Modifié par OdanUrr, 08 août 2011 - 05:41 .