528 réponses à ce sujet

[Sarevok Synder]

Boiny Bunny wrote...

You'd be surprised.  The cost of producing a game is a function of many variables, time obviously being a prominant one, but certainly not the only one.  The size of the respective development teams is an important one.

I don't believe anybody outside of Bioware or EA can literally state without a doubt that Origins made more or less profit than ME2.  What we do know is that it sold more copies, by quite a margin.  That doesn't necessarily mean more profit though.

At any rate, ME3 will probably become Bioware's best selling game to date, I'm guessing with about 3.5 million sales after a few years.  It will never ever, even come close to 10 million.  Those sorts of numbers are more or less exclusive to very specific franchises (e.g. Mario, CoD, all Blizzard games, etc.)

It is pretty obvious that DA:O made a lot more money than ME2, yes it also cost more. This is not what EA want, rather than "maximum game" their motto should be "maximum profit." COD is basically just a re-skin and slight gameplay changes with each sequel. This is what EA wants; minimal development costs; maximum sales. Quality isn't in their vocabulary.

Exactly, they won't match COD or even get near it. No matter what they do. Which is why I say; they should stick to what they're good at.

Modifié par Sarevok Synder, 23 août 2011 - 08:05 .

[Il Divo]

slimgrin wrote...

The problem is, Bioware hasn't been all that creative in story telling and quest design. They pretty much use the same formula for each game. So spouting off about relevance and evolution in RPG's seems a bit misplaced when other devs are more progressive in this regard.

Well, I would consider Mass Effect's cinematic presentation a step forward from both KotOR and Jade Empire, despite resorting to the "choose your own mission" gimmick. Bioware has always excelled at providing interesting/emotional characters and a compelling plotline for the player to interact with. YMMV, of course.

[Bcuz]

Il Divo wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

The problem is, Bioware hasn't been all that creative in story telling and quest design. They pretty much use the same formula for each game. So spouting off about relevance and evolution in RPG's seems a bit misplaced when other devs are more progressive in this regard.

Well, I would consider Mass Effect's cinematic presentation a step forward from both KotOR and Jade Empire, despite resorting to the "choose your own mission" gimmick. Bioware has always excelled at providing interesting/emotional characters and a compelling plotline for the player to interact with. YMMV, of course.

Well, choose your own mission makes it an actual RPG, where you play the role of Shepard, not just playing on a one way traintrack down the game. So I wouldn't say "choose your own mission" is a gimmick.

EDIT: wait... I used the term RPG again didn't I? Wonderful and this thread was going on such a lovely and peaceful tangent...

Modifié par Bcuz, 23 août 2011 - 03:02 .

[Rockworm503]

Il Divo wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

The problem is, Bioware hasn't been all that creative in story telling and quest design. They pretty much use the same formula for each game. So spouting off about relevance and evolution in RPG's seems a bit misplaced when other devs are more progressive in this regard.

Well, I would consider Mass Effect's cinematic presentation a step forward from both KotOR and Jade Empire, despite resorting to the "choose your own mission" gimmick. Bioware has always excelled at providing interesting/emotional characters and a compelling plotline for the player to interact with. YMMV, of course.

Well for my 2 cents I don't think Bioware's stories are all that cracked up to be.  They make up for it with good story telling.
Is ME2 nothing but a bunch of loyalty missions slapped together with a few main missions in between?  absolutely but it was done compelling enough to make you care about it.
Also would like to point out that game stories aren't that great to begin with.  I can gush about ME's story all I want.  I can go on about Assassin's Creed's historical setting... But at the end of a day they don't deserve any awards for it because compared to Books and such their stories are nothing special.
And to be fair Movies aren't up to par with Books either.
The important thing to note is games are funner than reading a book (at least to me they are)

Modifié par Rockworm503, 23 août 2011 - 03:04 .

[Il Divo]

Bcuz wrote...

Well, choose your own mission makes it an actual RPG, where you play the role of Shepard, not just playing on a one way traintrack down the game. So I wouldn't say "choose your own mission" is a gimmick.

Personally, I disagree. Planescape Torment is a wonderful example of a game with a fairly linear narrative, but it's regarded as one of the best in gaming. And (to my knowledge), few have doubted Planescape's status as an RPG. I think players would care less about what order they complete main quest missions in, as long as they are still able to engage in dialogue and make meaningful decisions.

The problem with the "Choose your mission" format is that less plot development typically can happen over the course of any individual mission, since all threads have to connect to a similar end. This is best seen with KotOR, Dragon Age: Origins, and Mass Effect 2, where every mission has only a distant connection to the main plotline. It's not clear why the PC has to collect 4 star maps; it's an arbitrary decision the developers made because that's how many planets they wanted.

Modifié par Il Divo, 23 août 2011 - 03:08 .

[Sepewrath]

slimgrin wrote...

The problem is, Bioware hasn't been all that creative in story telling and quest design. They pretty much use the same formula for each game. So spouting off about relevance and evolution in RPG's seems a bit misplaced when other devs are more progressive in this regard.

Well can they afford to be, they were praised for doing the status quo in Origins, the moment they broke from the formula with DA2, it was WWIII. The storytelling and quest design is burdened with as many preconceptions as to what they should be as every other part of an RPG game. Look at someone like CD Projekt or 38 Studio's, they can do whatever they want, because their not under the magnifying glass. But companies like BioWare, Square Enix, their under the microscope and the audience expects them to hover in a general area and when they color outside the lines, its a problem i.e. Final Fantasy XIII. I think BW is capable of being progressive or doing some great things, beyond the status quo, if they would just stop trying to cater to an audience, that refuses to let them grow.

[Mike2640]

Rockworm503 wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

The problem is, Bioware hasn't been all that creative in story telling and quest design. They pretty much use the same formula for each game. So spouting off about relevance and evolution in RPG's seems a bit misplaced when other devs are more progressive in this regard.

Well, I would consider Mass Effect's cinematic presentation a step forward from both KotOR and Jade Empire, despite resorting to the "choose your own mission" gimmick. Bioware has always excelled at providing interesting/emotional characters and a compelling plotline for the player to interact with. YMMV, of course.

Well for my 2 cents I don't think Bioware's stories are all that cracked up to be.  They make up for it with good story telling.
Is ME2 nothing but a bunch of loyalty missions slapped together with a few main missions in between?  absolutely but it was done compelling enough to make you care about it.
Also would like to point out that game stories aren't that great to begin with.  I can gush about ME's story all I want.  I can go on about Assassin's Creed's historical setting... But at the end of a day they don't deserve any awards for it because compared to Books and such their stories are nothing special.
And to be fair Movies aren't up to par with Books either.
The important thing to note is games are funner than reading a book (at least to me they are)

I don't know if i'd go that far. True it's a lot harder to find a good story in games than books, but Red Dead Redemption still has better story than a great many movies that i've seen.

I'd argue the interactivity of games is an important factor in judging a games story. Yeah, Dragon Age doesn't reach the same levels as Tolkien (arguably) but Sauron will always be defeated the same way every time. The path to taking down the Arch Demon can be wildly different, and that's where games have their edge, especially RPGs.

[Il Divo]

Rockworm503 wrote...

Well for my 2 cents I don't think Bioware's stories are all that cracked up to be.  They make up for it with good story telling.
Is ME2 nothing but a bunch of loyalty missions slapped together with a few main missions in between?  absolutely but it was done compelling enough to make you care about it.
Also would like to point out that game stories aren't that great to begin with.  I can gush about ME's story all I want.  I can go on about Assassin's Creed's historical setting... But at the end of a day they don't deserve any awards for it because compared to Books and such their stories are nothing special.
And to be fair Movies aren't up to par with Books either.
The important thing to note is games are funner than reading a book (at least to me they are)

In some cases, I would agree. However, there are notable exceptions that do come to mind (Legacy of Kain, Planescape: Torment, any conversation with KotOR 2's Kreia). But overall, gaming is still a new medium and has alot of potential down the road. And while games might not be on par with books, what I find more compelling about them is that they take advantage of my ability to interact with the narrative. At least, some games do.

Modifié par Il Divo, 23 août 2011 - 03:12 .

[Icinix]

Sepewrath wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

The problem is, Bioware hasn't been all that creative in story telling and quest design. They pretty much use the same formula for each game. So spouting off about relevance and evolution in RPG's seems a bit misplaced when other devs are more progressive in this regard.

Well can they afford to be, they were praised for doing the status quo in Origins, the moment they broke from the formula with DA2, it was WWIII. The storytelling and quest design is burdened with as many preconceptions as to what they should be as every other part of an RPG game. Look at someone like CD Projekt or 38 Studio's, they can do whatever they want, because their not under the magnifying glass. But companies like BioWare, Square Enix, their under the microscope and the audience expects them to hover in a general area and when they color outside the lines, its a problem i.e. Final Fantasy XIII. I think BW is capable of being progressive or doing some great things, beyond the status quo, if they would just stop trying to cater to an audience, that refuses to let them grow.

WWIII didn't happen because DA2 went against the Status Quo.
WWIII happened because DA2 was poorly executed.

[Kusy]

Icinix wrote...
WWIII didn't happen because DA2 went against the Status Quo.
WWIII happened because DA2 was poorly executed.

Fancy words... it was a ****ty game.

Modifié par Mr.Kusy, 23 août 2011 - 03:13 .

[Mike2640]

Sepewrath wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

The problem is, Bioware hasn't been all that creative in story telling and quest design. They pretty much use the same formula for each game. So spouting off about relevance and evolution in RPG's seems a bit misplaced when other devs are more progressive in this regard.

Well can they afford to be, they were praised for doing the status quo in Origins, the moment they broke from the formula with DA2, it was WWIII. The storytelling and quest design is burdened with as many preconceptions as to what they should be as every other part of an RPG game. Look at someone like CD Projekt or 38 Studio's, they can do whatever they want, because their not under the magnifying glass. But companies like BioWare, Square Enix, their under the microscope and the audience expects them to hover in a general area and when they color outside the lines, its a problem i.e. Final Fantasy XIII. I think BW is capable of being progressive or doing some great things, beyond the status quo, if they would just stop trying to cater to an audience, that refuses to let them grow.

I don't want to speak for other people, but i'm pretty sure people weren't happy with DA2 for a lot of reasons that weren't "breaking from formula". People don't mind change, when it's a good change. From my perspective, the changes made to the Dragon Age formula weren't good ones, and that's why it was condemned. CDProject weren't too criticized for the change to the Witchers formula because they were almost universally seen as improvements.

Edit:'d. Gotta type faster...

Modifié par Mike2640, 23 août 2011 - 03:14 .

[Weiser_Cain]

Bcuz wrote...

Sarevok Synder wrote...

Mike2640 wrote...

If so then, yeah, i'm not sure why they aren't sticking to a more DAO formula. Maybe they just figure the Golden Goose game, ala Modern Warfare 2, is more likely to come from a shooter?

Despite it's sucess (it sold over 5 million copies) it's no COD and that's what they want. But it's not going to happen.

Not to stall this thread for the runtime of this video but...
http://www.escapistm...to-EA-Marketing

EA has no shame, and will not resort to making a good game in order to gain financial success.

I hate Dead Space and The Escapist(mainly because that runonsentence guy said something racists) But this is dead on, that scare your mother ad was a major tun off. Dante was a waste of a great idea.

[Sarevok Synder]

Bcuz wrote...


Not to stall this thread for the runtime of this video but...
http://www.escapistm...to-EA-Marketing

EA has no shame, and will not resort to making a good game in order to gain financial success.

Please don't get me started on EA.

[Sepewrath]

Icinix wrote...
WWIII didn't happen because DA2 went against the Status Quo.
WWIII happened because DA2 was poorly executed.

It must have been, because Origins is a greatly flawed product itself but you wouldn't think so, given the fan response. But when you look that reaction to DA2, its not DA2 is bad game, its "DA2 is not Origins" people can try and claim otherwise, but go look at the Dragon Age boards, read what people say and that is the only message you will get.  People do not like change and its not like thats unique to BSN, but BSN is the place where people try to deny that its the reason their upset. At least Smash Brothers fan say "I don't like Brawl because its not Melee" Its the same with ME2, people are upset that its not ME1, that there was no Saren to chase, that you couldn't carry 50 armors and 80 guns like ME1. People say otherwise when their called on it, but otherwise during their standard complaining, that's all they say.

[Mike2640]

Sepewrath wrote...

Icinix wrote...
WWIII didn't happen because DA2 went against the Status Quo.
WWIII happened because DA2 was poorly executed.

It must have been, because Origins is a greatly flawed product itself but you wouldn't think so, given the fan response. But when you look that reaction to DA2, its not DA2 is bad game, its "DA2 is not Origins" people can try and claim otherwise, but go look at the Dragon Age boards, read what people say and that is the only message you will get.  People do not like change and its not like thats unique to BSN, but BSN is the place where people try to deny that its the reason their upset. At least Smash Brothers fan say "I don't like Brawl because its not Melee" Its the same with ME2, people are upset that its not ME1, that there was no Saren to chase, that you couldn't carry 50 armors and 80 guns like ME1. People say otherwise when their called on it, but otherwise during their standard complaining, that's all they say.

Well atleast you've got an open mind.

I didn't like DA2 because it was a bad game, not because it wasn't Origins. You can say i'm lying, or just disagree, or i'm in denial, but that still wouldn't make you right, and that doesn't make DA2 less of a bad game.

[LPPrince]

*Waits for someone to discuss DXHR again*

[Sepewrath]

This conversation has nothing to do with open or close minds, I do a lot more reading on this board than I do writing. And I simply telling you what I see, if you don't believe, hey that's your business, but like you said, doesn't make it any less true.

[Bcuz]

Il Divo wrote...

Bcuz wrote...

Well, choose your own mission makes it an actual RPG, where you play the role of Shepard, not just playing on a one way traintrack down the game. So I wouldn't say "choose your own mission" is a gimmick.

Personally, I disagree. Planescape Torment is a wonderful example of a game with a fairly linear narrative, but it's regarded as one of the best in gaming. And (to my knowledge), few have doubted Planescape's status as an RPG. I think players would care less about what order they complete main quest missions in, as long as they are still able to engage in dialogue and make meaningful decisions.

The problem with the "Choose your mission" format is that less plot development typically can happen over the course of any individual mission, since all threads have to connect to a similar end. This is best seen with KotOR, Dragon Age: Origins, and Mass Effect 2, where every mission has only a distant connection to the main plotline. It's not clear why the PC has to collect 4 star maps; it's an arbitrary decision the developers made because that's how many planets they wanted.

The thing is, having stats and inventory and gold and whatnot DOES NOT MAKE IT AN  RPG the reason they are so heavily associated with the term is because back in the days of D&D there was no better way to keep things orderly while the player went about their lawful good or chaotic evil business.

There is no RP there, the charicters experience reletively the same things every time your play their responces are the same, their emotions are the same, their motives are their own, YOU are not the charicter, the charicter is his own person.
Whereas in the case of Bioware's games, you ARE the charicter and what you choose to do (within sanity of the reletive narrative) and your reasons for doing them are your own. Story heavy =/= RPG.

Modifié par Bcuz, 23 août 2011 - 03:39 .

[Kusy]

Sure, uninspired maps repeating in every single sidequest, ninja animations, story that made no sense at all, duckloads of bugs - some game breaking, enemies respawning on player's eyes, sometimes in places they have no right to be, no separate item names in inventory...

game was ducking brilliant.

[Mike2640]

Sepewrath wrote...

This conversation has nothing to do with open or close minds, I do a lot more reading on this board than I do writing. And I simply telling you what I see, if you don't believe, hey that's your business, but like you said, doesn't make it any less true.

I think you're painting a very large community with a very wide brush. Sure, some people probably wish it was Origins.  I think it's more accurate to say that people would like it to be more like Origins than it was, but that's neither here nor there because it's still easy to criticize DA2 on it's own. You think it's more likely someone doesn't like it because it's not Origins rather than the multitude of documented flaws and problems with DA2?

EDIT:

Mr.Kusy wrote...

Sure, uninspired maps repeating in every
single sidequest, ninja animations, story that made no sense at all,
duckloads of bugs - some game breaking, enemies respawning on player's
eyes, sometimes in places they have no right to be, no separate item
names in inventory...

game was ducking brilliant.

My point exactly.

Modifié par Mike2640, 23 août 2011 - 03:42 .

[Gatt9]

Rockworm503 wrote...

KaidanWilliamsShepard wrote...

Weiser_Cain wrote...

After Bioware's dead we're all going to look back and wonder how we didn't see it coming.

Alot of us see it coming, its just that no one will listen...including Bioware.

LOL you guys sound like the end of the world people.  Mark your calenders December 21st I think?
The END IS NIGH SHOOTERS ARE A BLIGHT!

I don't mean this to sound like a flame,  though I think it will and I apologize in advance...

You really don't get what's happening right now.

This is a bit old,  but still relevant,  and *really* good place to start understanding what's happening and why.

http://www.firingsqu...ent/default.asp

Publishers call the shots,  what they want is what gets produced.  Publishers aren't interested in making quality games,  they're interested in making big selling games,  and so all they're interested in is the games the genres that have traditionally sold the best.  This is why all the other genres are dead,  this is why ME is now a TPS,  and why Ubisoft is declaring all strategy dead.

It's not because there's any truth in it,  10 seconds of investigating Pokemon's sales blow all the assertions out of the water (TB RPG,  sold more units than any other series ever except maybe Mario).  It's because all they care about is the biggest profit margin.

This is not healthy.  Imagine if all Hollywood made was Harry Potter and Pirates clones,  all TVLand did was American Idol clones.  People wouldn't continue watching it long,  same thing happens with games,  keep making the same game and people eventually quit buying it,  much faster when you've coalesced the entire industry into one genre.

Then consider,  EA spent 700 million for Bioware,  a habitual 2-3 million unit studio,  they spent 1 billion buying Popcap years after Bejeweled ran it's course.  They're desperate because they know that EA wasn't going to last without doing something,  which is also why they're throwing darts at every current trend that might be related to gaming.  Zenimax's no better,  they borrowed a ton of cash to buy studios except Bethseda's the only studio brining in revenue. 

After reading the article,  go to Gamespot and seach "NPD (Insert month)" for 2010 and 2011,  look at the percentage drops. 

Then I'll make alot more sense to most of you.

I get that many of you don't like me,  set it aside for 5 minutes,  read the article.  I promise you,  the gaming industry will make *alot* more sense to you when you get to the end of it.  In honesty,  that's probably the single best piece of gaming journalism in a decade,  and no,  nowhere in it does it rely on,  or even bring up controversial topics.

Keep in mind though,  the article was written before the EA purchases,  and the Zenimax purchases,  and before Activision lucked into Blizzard,  which changes some conclusions.  Activision moves up,  EA and Zeni have more problems.

[Bcuz]

Weiser_Cain wrote...

I hate Dead Space and The Escapist(mainly because that runonsentence guy said something racists) But this is dead on, that scare your mother ad was a major tun off. Dante was a waste of a great idea.

The extra credits guys aren't so bad, and are about as anti-racist as you can be. As well as having strong, intellegent, and contructive views on gaming.

[Kusy]

Like there's anything wrong with good, old fashioned, healthy racism.

Modifié par Mr.Kusy, 23 août 2011 - 03:45 .

[Bcuz]

Mr.Kusy wrote...

Like there's anything wrong with good, old fashioned, healthy racism.

Steriotypes, maybe.
Straight up blatent racism? No.