166 réponses à ce sujet

[Realmzmaster]

dragonfire100 wrote...

Guys dont blame bioware for that blame EA just saying.

Bioware is EA. Bioware is not a separate company. Bioware is a division or subsidary in the EA framework. The qulaity or lack thereof is the responsibility of the developers. Even if the EA higher ups told Bioware that you have 18 months to produce a game in the Dragon Age franchise, the quality or lack thereof is the responsibility of the developers.
The planning of the game is the responsibility of the developers. The problem is that their plans may have been very ambitious and Bioware overreached. But once you are that deep into the process you cannot just pull back. They ended up making compromises. The product ended up lacking polish and several actions got rushed. Bioware believed they put out the best product they could in the time frame. Someone underestimated the time and resources necessary.

Now you could say that Bioware should have gone back to the higher ups at EA and said cannot do in the time and budget given. Unfortunately, that is easier said than done and it reflects badly on the team since they are unable to deliver a project on time and at budget.

I like DA2, but I am well aware of its shortcomings.

[dragonfire100]

Realmzmaster wrote...

dragonfire100 wrote...

Guys dont blame bioware for that blame EA just saying.

Bioware is EA. Bioware is not a separate company. Bioware is a division or subsidary in the EA framework. The qulaity or lack thereof is the responsibility of the developers. Even if the EA higher ups told Bioware that you have 18 months to produce a game in the Dragon Age franchise, the quality or lack thereof is the responsibility of the developers.
The planning of the game is the responsibility of the developers. The problem is that their plans may have been very ambitious and Bioware overreached. But once you are that deep into the process you cannot just pull back. They ended up making compromises. The product ended up lacking polish and several actions got rushed. Bioware believed they put out the best product they could in the time frame. Someone underestimated the time and resources necessary.

Now you could say that Bioware should have gone back to the higher ups at EA and said cannot do in the time and budget given. Unfortunately, that is easier said than done and it reflects badly on the team since they are unable to deliver a project on time and at budget.

I like DA2, but I am well aware of its shortcomings.

But theres also other companies working with EA like the people that made BFBC2 or the people that made TW2 so bioware is like them just partners helping each other out but that does not mean bioware is at fault here so thats what im trying to say.

[Bryy_Miller]

dragonfire100 wrote...

Guys dont blame bioware for that blame EA just saying.

As much as I *do* blame EA for the rushed schedule, do I blame them for wanting a good financial quarter? No. And it sounds lik they have learned from this.

[Addai]

OP I think you and the critics you're lambasting are looking at two sides of the same coin. The suits wanted the game out the door, the developers wanted a new combat system and art style and consolization. Try to do too much in too little time and you get a crappy, half-finished game. Doesn't change the fact that "cash grab" was still part of the equation.

[FieryDove]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

(snip)
EA +  learned from this

I think world peace is more likely. (Just going on past and present history) The future is out there tho...

dragonfire100 wrote...

But theres also other companies working with EA like the people that made BFBC2 or the people that made TW2 so bioware is like them just partners helping each other out but that does not mean bioware is at fault here so thats what im trying to say.

Maybe you didn't understand Realmzmaster's post but EA bought Bioware lock, stock and barrels...

[MorrigansLove]

It was a ****ing cash grab, their "innovations" were only put into the Dragon Age series because they wanted the COD crowd! There is a link to prove it aswell!

[Zanallen]

MorrigansLove wrote...

It was a ****ing cash grab, their "innovations" were only put into the Dragon Age series because they wanted the COD crowd! There is a link to prove it aswell!

No there isn't because Bioware never said they wanted the COD crowd. That has been disputed by both Laidlaw and Epler.

[dragonfire100]

FieryDove wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

(snip)
EA +  learned from this

I think world peace is more likely. (Just going on past and present history) The future is out there tho...

dragonfire100 wrote...

But theres also other companies working with EA like the people that made BFBC2 or the people that made TW2 so bioware is like them just partners helping each other out but that does not mean bioware is at fault here so thats what im trying to say.

Maybe you didn't understand Realmzmaster's post but EA bought Bioware lock, stock and barrels...

They brought out a hole bunch a companies but that does not mean that there EA because thats what master said so i guess the people that made BFBC2 is EA right?

[BeefoTheBold]

Just a small thought to toss in here:

I see a number of people asking for "proof" that Dragon Age 2 was a cash grab. I'm curious, exactly what would the "proof" look like and how in the world would non-Bioware or EA employees gather such evidence?

OF COURSE there's no legal PROOF that Dragon Age 2 was a cash grab. Asking for it is pretty much the equivalent of asking for me to whip the sun and the moon out of my pajamas instead of my two testicles. It's asking for something that is, for all intents and purposes, impossible to provide.

The only proof that can be had is in looking at one game (Dragon Age 2) versus the majority of other fully priced, major release, $60 Bioware games in their history. Comparing things like development time, critic and user scores, features and flaws etc. is where the "proof" comes from and it will INHERENTLY be subjective for people with our resources. (I.E. Fans speculating on a message board.)

My personal viewpoint is that, YES, Dragon Age 2 was a cash grab. The only proof I have is my personal opinion of how good of a game I found DA2 to be versus every other Bioware game I've ever played prior to it and from looking at what the major flaws were. (Recycled environments, poor graphics, enemy waves, no storyline branching, poor writing, etc.)

But can I PROVE that my viewpoint is correct? Of course not. Just like people who liked DA2 can't prove otherwise.

[clennon8]

It was a "cash grab" in the sense that it was rushed to production. However, a lot of good, creative work went into the game. It isn't like the writers, designers and programmers mailed it in. They just didn't have time to properly flesh out some portions of the game.

[FieryDove]

dragonfire100 wrote...

But theres also other companies working with EA like the people that made BFBC2 or the people that made TW2 so bioware is like them just partners helping each other out but that does not mean bioware is at fault here so thats what im trying to say.

They brought out a hole bunch a companies but that does not mean that there EA because thats what master said so i guess the people that made BFBC2 is EA right?

Battlefield: Bad Company 2 is a first-person shooter video game developed by the Swedish firm EA Digital Illusions CE. EA Digital Illusions Creative Entertainment is a Swedish video game developer, wholly owned by Electronic Arts.

So the answer is yes? They are now EA.

I am guessing TW2 is the witcher 2? I have no idea what you think TW2 or CD Projekt has to do with DA2/Bioware or EA. Is EA planning to buy them as well? Otherwise I don't get *it*.

Modifié par FieryDove, 19 août 2011 - 03:03 .

[IanPolaris]

Zanallen wrote...

MorrigansLove wrote...

It was a ****ing cash grab, their "innovations" were only put into the Dragon Age series because they wanted the COD crowd! There is a link to prove it aswell!

No there isn't because Bioware never said they wanted the COD crowd. That has been disputed by both Laidlaw and Epler.

I would argue that they at the very least strongly implied it, whether they intended to or not.  The fact that ML had to explicitly deny it months later should tell you what the initial impression was whether you agreed or not.

-Polaris

[Follow Me on Twitter]

Agreed, they went and completely redesigned the game and tried something new if they wanted to make cash they would have just reused everything from orgins with minor changes.

[IanPolaris]

Follow Me on Twitter wrote...

Agreed, they went and completely redesigned the game and tried something new if they wanted to make cash they would have just reused everything from orgins with minor changes.

I think there is enough reasonable evidence to conclude that EA intended DA2 to be a "cash grab" at least in part, but the actual Dev team probably didn't...which meant the Dev team didn't have the time and resources to do what they wanted.

-Polaris

[Gunderic]

dragonfire100 wrote...

Guys dont blame bioware for that blame EA just saying.

You can't really expect too much from a publisher that hires fake religious protesters as viral marketing for one of their (substandard) releases (not BioWare-related), or someone who sends out severed hand replicas together with 200$ checks to the gaming press 'to educate them about greed'.

[dreadpiratesnugglecakes]

Zanallen wrote...

Dormiglione wrote...

I dont think that it was the intention of Bioware to alienate part of the existing fanbase.  Innovation is good when you keep that what worked and added innovation to that.

DA2 was a 180 degree turn. It was not an innovation.

Not this crap again. DA 2 has plenty of innovations within the franchise and within Bioware games. Refusing to acknowledge them doesn't make them any less so. But really, this thread isn't about opinions on how well DA2 did or what game you liked more. It is about how it would have been easier and cheaper for Bioware to make a game exactly like Origins while making changes takes more time and money.

Yes, this again.  Innovation is something new; never seen before.  Generally a positive.  Bioware making a shovelware action RPG is surprising, given the way they've crafted their games in the past, but it's not an innovation.  Action RPGs are not innovative.  They may have an original story here or there but the gameplay is derivative and banal, going back to the original Diablo.  Doesn't mean it's not fun; I hated it, but you might enjoy it.  Some people like to eat dirt.  World is a funny place.  But please don't play amateur marketing exec and try to pass this crap off as some kind of earth shattering bit of new awesomeness.  It isn't.

[Stanley Woo]

I think we have enough threads discussing the pros and cons of Dragon AGe II without another one trying to suss out the motivation behind certain business decisions.

End of line.