144 réponses à ce sujet

[bEVEsthda]

I try to never jump at interviews like these.

One reason is I can see how desperately Muzyka tries to say the right things.
But in these cases the representatives being interviewed, be it Ray or Mike or whoever, can never say the right things. It's impossible because no matter how hard they try, it's still going to ****** off some gamers.

One have to understand that they can't bash themselves or their creation. Not in an interview which is always a PR event. They have to protect the business.

In old Japanese culture it was tradition to commit Seppucko on failure, as an ultimate apology. And that is maybe what some gamers would like to see?
But  I think it was a tradition which ultimately cost the Japanese civilization. You see, it's better to have experienced people around. People who have dared, tried and failed and perhaps learned from their mistakes, than yes-people who have never taken any risks and have no real experience at all.

That is not to say that some of the things he says are not depressing. They are, but it's really difficult to judge things from this, in this context. So I kinda don't bother, yet.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 11 août 2011 - 12:40 .

[Bryy_Miller]

bEVEsthda wrote...
In old Japanese culture it was tradition to commit Sepucko on failure, as an ultimate apology. And that is maybe what some gamers would like to see?

You have no idea. 

[TheRealJayDee]

Realmzmaster wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Business 101. The Customer is ALWAYS right. The customer might not be able to clearly articulate what he or she wants all the time but the CUSTOMER IS ALWAYS RIGHT.

If you deliberately take a dump on your customers (which IMO DA2 did), then you won't be in business long. In a contest between what the Devs want and what the Customers want, the Customers should always win if you expect to stay in business.

Bottom line.

-Polaris

What happens when the customers do not agree. Those who like DA2 are as much a customer as those who do not like it. So as a customer those who like DA2 are correct.  Bioware is going in the right direction.
As a customer those who dislike DA2 are correct.  Bioware is going in the wrong diection. It depends on who is the customer.

Business 101 The customer is always right, but it depends on the customer. All the customers do not universally agree. If they universally agreed it would be much easier to say the Customer is always right.

Yeah, this is a pretty difficult situation. I'm honestly curious how they are going to try to get both sides back for DA3. If they are trying at all, it would probably be easier to just try to appeal to either the old or the new fans (including the old fans who like DA2 too). Why they took the risk of bringing themselves in this position I would really like to understand. Because making that kind of sometimes drastic changes on the first sequel of a successful game has to have been perceived a some kind of gamble by someone, especially given the extremly short development time.

[Bryy_Miller]

Gunderic wrote...
They're ripping her off! And then they're going to rip me off! Oh my Gooooooood!! 

... that was amazing.

[Morroian]

Ariella wrote...

Show me the figures. Are you counting that DAO has two different editions to DA2's one? 

Interesting point. Do the vgchartz numbers for DAO include Awakenings, because there doesn't appear to be a separate entry for Awakenings.

[bEVEsthda]

Morroian wrote...

Ariella wrote...

Show me the figures. Are you counting that DAO has two different editions to DA2's one? 

Interesting point. Do the vgchartz numbers for DAO include Awakenings, because there doesn't appear to be a separate entry for Awakenings.

I think he meant DA:O:U, not Awakening. And I'm sure Awakening is not included, and I believe ultimate is not included.

[Blastback]

Gunderic wrote...

... EA has our money?

They're ripping her off! And then they're going to rip me off! Oh my Gooooooood!! 

Win

[Gunderic]

bEVEsthda wrote...

I try to never jump at interviews like these.

One reason is I can see how desperately Muzyka tries to say the right things.
But in these cases the representatives being interviewed, be it Ray or Mike or whoever, can never say the right things. It's impossible because no matter how hard they try, it's still going to ****** off some gamers.

One have to understand that they can't bash themselves or their creation. Not in an interview which is always a PR event. They have to protect the business.

In old Japanese culture it was tradition to commit Seppucko on failure, as an ultimate apology. And that is maybe what some gamers would like to see?
But  I think it was a tradition which ultimately cost the Japanese civilization. You see, it's better to have experienced people around. People who have dared, tried and failed and perhaps learned from their mistakes, than yes-people who have never taken any risks and have no real experience at all.

That is not to say that some of the things he says are not depressing. They are, but it's really difficult to judge things from this, in this context. So I kinda don't bother, yet.

They can't say the right thing because they're not gonna do the right thing.

Anybody but them seems to realize that their PR is causing damage to the company's reputation whenever they open their mouths about Dragon Age 2. 

They're the very definition of not being touch with fans.

[Bryy_Miller]

Gunderic wrote...
They can't say the right thing because they're not gonna do the right thing.

In your opinion.

[bEVEsthda]

Gunderic wrote...

They can't say the right thing because they're not gonna do the right thing.

Anybody but them seems to realize that their PR is causing damage to the company's reputation whenever they open their mouths about Dragon Age 2. 

They're the very definition of not being touch with fans.

Possibly, possibly... I did say that some things he said were depressing.

But the total perspective is a bit more complex. Much have been created and invested in the DA IP. the world and Lore.
They have all kinds of things coming up, including a movie. He can't risk to kill off the DA franchise.  If he still wants a DA3, for instance, and there's good reasons to do so, the work that went into creating the lore deserves to be utilized, well someone must still finance DA3...

Do you get the gist of all this?

[bloodshed17]

Its not like the game was horrendous. They did do a lot of things well. Combat was an improvement, at least for me. Rogue and mage combat are a lot better in my opinion. Going back and playing origins the combat was really slow and clunky even with "haste" on. It was still good, but slow. I did love those finishing moves though.

[Monica21]

Morroian wrote...

Ariella wrote...

Show me the figures. Are you counting that DAO has two different editions to DA2's one? 

Interesting point. Do the vgchartz numbers for DAO include Awakenings, because there doesn't appear to be a separate entry for Awakenings.

Awakening numbers are listed seperately but there are no numbers for PC sales. It's possible that they just weren't high enough: 

Dragon Age: Origins (360) = 2.12
Dragon Age: Origins (PS3) = 1.30
Dragon Age: Origins (PC)  = 0.39
Total = 3.81

Dragon Age: Awakening (360) = 0.31
Dragon Age: Awakening (PS3) = 0.19
Total = 0.50

Dragon Age II (360) = 0.76 
Dragon Age II (PS3) = 0.41
Dragon Age II (PC)  = 0.29
Total = 1.46

If these numbers are accurate (and that's a big if), I have to say that I'm really struck by the sharp drop in console purchases. PC numbers tracked pretty close and only lost 25% of its market. 360 numbers however, lost a whopping 65% of its market, if my math is right.

Modifié par Monica21, 11 août 2011 - 01:38 .

[Ariella]

Monica21 wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Ariella wrote...

Show me the figures. Are you counting that DAO has two different editions to DA2's one? 

Interesting point. Do the vgchartz numbers for DAO include Awakenings, because there doesn't appear to be a separate entry for Awakenings.

Awakening numbers are listed seperately but there are no numbers for PC sales. It's possible that they just weren't high enough: 

Dragon Age: Origins (360) = 2.12
Dragon Age: Origins (PS3) = 1.30
Dragon Age: Origins (PC)  = 0.39
Total = 3.81

Dragon Age: Awakening (360) = 0.31
Dragon Age: Awakening (PS3) = 0.19
Total = 0.50

Dragon Age II (360) = 0.76 
Dragon Age II (PS3) = 0.41
Dragon Age II (PC)  = 0.29
Total = 1.46

If these numbers are accurate (and that's a big if), I have to say that I'm really struck by the sharp drop in console purchases. PC numbers tracked pretty close and only lost 25% of its market. 360 numbers however, lost a whopping 65% of its market, if my math is right.

If the numbers are accurate, and as you say, that's a big if, it's possible the console numbers dropped because of the economic enviroment as a whole. I don't pay attention to sales figures but one of the few things I remember from my long ago economics classes is that luxury items are the first to see sales fall in a ressession. I know I've heard grumblings around here about the industry taking a hit in general, but that might be just forum gossip.

But generally, I'm sure Bioware and EA are aware that the market is probably going to be a bit tighter until things get sorted out.

[Sharn01]

Stanley Woo wrote...

element eater wrote...

well I don't think one cant exist with the other all id really say is not to develop a game based of in game data they collect that way lies trouble

Wait, so you want us to not base our development decisions on what people actually are seen to do in game?

that said these interviews always make me cringe. Not sure why it seems like such an alien concept that fans of the first game should have expected a similar experiance from its sequel. Or the fact that some people have justified reasons to dislike it beyond just that its differant.

It's not an alien concept. We understand many of the reasons some folks didn't like DA2, and we have acknowledged that. but not saying it all the time in every interview does not mean we have forgotten it. At some point, we'd also like to talk about how well we did some things in the game, you know. We happen to be proud of the work we do (and some of the community does as well) and mentioning that does not negate any of the problems we have talked about.

We have also admitted and talked about how we should have done a better job at managing players' expectation when it came to just how different DA2 was going to be from DA:O. That does not mean there weren't good things in the game.

So let's not go crazy and get huffy whenever we do an interview or talk about the game and mention the good parts of it. We do know and freely admit there were problems, but it would be a little unreasonable to stand over us at every interview with your arms crossed until we admit the problems all the time.

I normally wouldnt get involved in this kind of debate but its something that bothered me a lot.  I pre-ordered DA2 expecting a much better game, annoyed I came to the forums and to no surprise many others felt the same way.  I recall many a dev post, yourself included completely dismissing fan complaints, telling them they dont like the game because they didnt want to like it before they bought it, etc.  While this may have been true for some, it certainly wasnt true for all the complaints, it took well over a month before any of you would aknowledge that some of the complaints may even be legitimate. 

Its little surprise that fans are still watching the forums and interviews, they dont want to hear what you did right, they want to hear what you will do right next time. They loved DA:O, many probably thought some aspects of DA2 had missed potential.  But this is the internet, people arent just going to forgive and forget, if you want praise again, earn it with the next titl.  I suppose you could fix up DA2 but I doubt that will happen, and I am not sure if you have enough support for the game for an xpac, I dont have those numbers.

[IanPolaris]

Ariella,

ML and others at BW did say that they were targeting the CoD crowd, and did say that they were fundamentally changing the game to do so in order to target 10 million customers (their claim not mine). I am familiar with the posterior covering ML did a few days ago, but it is what it is: Posterior Covering.

-Polaris

[Ariella]

IanPolaris wrote...

Ariella,

ML and others at BW did say that they were targeting the CoD crowd, and did say that they were fundamentally changing the game to do so in order to target 10 million customers (their claim not mine). I am familiar with the posterior covering ML did a few days ago, but it is what it is: Posterior Covering.

-Polaris

Then come up with the quotes and the sources or go somewhere else. If you're an ex fan, why do you even care, unless you're trolling.

You say Mike's on record saying this, prove it, or are you covering your own tush?

[Morroian]

IanPolaris wrote...

Ariella,

ML and others at BW did say that they were targeting the CoD crowd, and did say that they were fundamentally changing the game to do so in order to target 10 million customers (their claim not mine). I am familiar with the posterior covering ML did a few days ago, but it is what it is: Posterior Covering.

Do you have a link to the original comments then?

[IanPolaris]

I'll look but I KNOW he said it. You do realize (sarc) this was some months ago? You will find I am far from the only one that remembers it too.

-Polaris

Edit:  Check this out (esp pages 3-4): http://www.gamasutra...agon_age_ii.php

And this thread discussing it:

http://www.rpgwatch....ead.php?t=12769

I'll go searching for more....

Modifié par IanPolaris, 11 août 2011 - 03:01 .

[IanPolaris]

Acutally ML apparently did say it in Feb's issue of Game Informer:

Game Banshee Link: http://www.gamebansh...-interview.html

Money Quote:

Dragon Age II lead designer Mike Laidlaw has fielded yet another series of questions about the sequel's critical reception, and this time it comes to us in printed form via the latest issue of GameInformer magazine. CthulhuDagon from GameSpot's forums summarizes:

Many of the caves and building interiors are repeated, even though the locations are supposed to be different. What kind of limitations necessitated this decision?

In the balance of production, we realized that we had capacity to create and maintain more stories, content, and encounters than we could necessarily create unique levels for, so we made the call to re-use some of the caves and other levels in the interest of providing more sidequests and encounters.

The fast-paced combat system of the console version is a large improvement over Origins' console entry. How did you zero in on the parts of the system that needed the most attention?

Lots of both formal and informal usability testing. The real key, we discovered, was that of expectation space. Controllers carry with them the feel that "these buttons are designed to do things." Whether jump or attack or grapple, controllers feel at their best when they trigger a response. The question then became whether we could look at our combat system as a whole and get that level of responsiveness while still using our RPG rules, stats, inventory, and so on as the determining factor in the effect of the action. Another key consideration was ensuring that the changes didn't make the game impossible to play on the PC, which is why we kept to an attack/ability paradigm rather than combos or other action game mechanics.

Meredith plays a significant role late in the story, but is largely absent for the rest of the game. Why keep a prominent antagonist in the background for so long?

The "prominent antagonist" is a staple of fantasy, be it the brooding eye of Sauron or the endless hordes of the archdemon. For Dragon Age II, we wanted to attempt something different and break the mold and try to vilify circumstance, rather than a specific evil. It's a story of how heroes are made, not born, and I think that by the same token, it's a story of how the antagonist need not always be the villain. To me, that's a very human tale. I believe the early game likely could have used some additional appearances by Meredith, but we were likely being over-cautious of her being perceived as a source of confusion or frustration for players: "I think she's important, but she feels disconnected from my current goals!"

What would you say to the PC gamer who feels like Dragon Age II was "dumbed down" compared to Origins?

I would suggest that they play on Hard, frankly. Origins on normal delivered a pretty painful experience on the PC if you were new to RPGs, and I firmly believe that it turned people off. There's a very clear "skill gap" between someone new to Dragon Age II and a returning Origins player, and I think it's very easy to forget how steep that learning curve could be once you've overcome it.As such, we've made the early game quests and encounters more forgiving, especially on normal, to help someone just getting their feet under them acclimate. Hard, however, presents a solid, and consistent challenge to veterans, and one where I think teamwork, pause-and-play, and smart thinking are all quite important.

So they were actually considering the implementation of attack combos and "other action game mechanics", on top of all the other changes? Wow.

In the above snipped, the bold is the interviewer and the normal is ML.

-Polaris

Modifié par IanPolaris, 11 août 2011 - 03:12 .

[Firky]

Polaris, I'm trying to follow but what's your point? How is that ^ a "money quote" and I can't see "CoD" or "10 million" in those links.

[IanPolaris]

Firky wrote...

Polaris, I'm trying to follow but what's your point? How is that ^ a "money quote" and I can't see "CoD" or "10 million" in those links.

Actually ML directly compares DA2 to CD-4 in one of the interviews I linked to on page three.  Not the one that I expanded on.  Also if you read the commentary on BOTH interviews, the interpretation was pretty nearly universal that ML was trying to appeal to the CD crowd.

-Polaris

Edit: http://www.guardian....aw-dragon-age-2

Here's another link with imbedded video.  Pay particular attention to the last couple of questions.

Modifié par IanPolaris, 11 août 2011 - 03:25 .

[Ariella]

Ian, none of your quotes prove anything, and I'm reading through the Gamesutra feature which has no reference to making DA2 into CoD. In fact, the only time CoD is mentioned is when it comes to visual direction and artistry. The final paragraph says the same thing that John Epler said a few days ago in that same thread. People have been using RPG mechanics for some time now, and being able to expand the market (which is what businesses do in order to survive) is showing those who like the concept of progression, leveling, and other RPG mechanics that:

"'We had those years ago, but we understand that they kind of were scary.'"

That's not dumbing things down or making the games like CoD.

[Ariella]

IanPolaris wrote...

Firky wrote...

Polaris, I'm trying to follow but what's your point? How is that ^ a "money quote" and I can't see "CoD" or "10 million" in those links.

Actually ML directly compares DA2 to CD-4 in one of the interviews I linked to on page three.  Not the one that I expanded on.  Also if you read the commentary on BOTH interviews, the interpretation was pretty nearly universal that ML was trying to appeal to the CD crowd.

-Polaris

Edit: http://www.guardian....aw-dragon-age-2

Here's another link with imbedded video.  Pay particular attention to the last couple of questions.

Again, embedded video he said NOTHING about CoD, and the one time he mentioned CoD in the interview his message is consistant about it not make DA2 into CoD but bringing in people who enjoy elements of RPGs like progression which exists in CoD (he also uses WoW in the same example) would also enjoy RPGs like Dragon Age. The idea is to get these people over the stereotypes of who RPGs are made for.

[John Epler]

Let's try to avoid creating 'quotes' out of whole cloth, shall we?

If you can't attribute something, don't make wild claims that it's been said. It does you a disservice and it does nothing to contribute to a constructive discussion, which is what these forums are all about.

[IanPolaris]

Ariella wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Firky wrote...

Polaris, I'm trying to follow but what's your point? How is that ^ a "money quote" and I can't see "CoD" or "10 million" in those links.

Actually ML directly compares DA2 to CD-4 in one of the interviews I linked to on page three.  Not the one that I expanded on.  Also if you read the commentary on BOTH interviews, the interpretation was pretty nearly universal that ML was trying to appeal to the CD crowd.

-Polaris

Edit: http://www.guardian....aw-dragon-age-2

Here's another link with imbedded video.  Pay particular attention to the last couple of questions.

Again, embedded video he said NOTHING about CoD, and the one time he mentioned CoD in the interview his message is consistant about it not make DA2 into CoD but bringing in people who enjoy elements of RPGs like progression which exists in CoD (he also uses WoW in the same example) would also enjoy RPGs like Dragon Age. The idea is to get these people over the stereotypes of who RPGs are made for.

You still refuse to smell the napalm:

Here is this: http://news.softpedi...-2-186647.shtml

It's pretty much an open invitation for CoD players and the like to play DA2 because it's more CoD like.

Don't urinate on my leg and tell me it's raining.

-Polaris