429 réponses à ce sujet

[Yrkoon]

Wait, Like the vast majority of gamers, I'm the type who buys games so that he can go home and play them...and enjoy them.

I should care about Cosplay because.... ?

[thats1evildude]

Yrkoon wrote...

Wait, Like the vast majority of gamers, I'm the type who buys games so that he can go home and play them...and enjoy them.

I should care about Cosplay because.... ?

You don't have to care one whit. But why do you have a problem with other people cosplaying and making fan art?

Modifié par thats1evildude, 09 octobre 2011 - 02:46 .

[csfteeeer]

thats1evildude wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Wait, Like the vast majority of gamers, I'm the type who buys games so that he can go home and play them...and enjoy them.

I should care about Cosplay because.... ?

You don't have to care one whit. But why do you have a problem with other people cosplaying and making fan art?

Because:

Game Mechanics > Cosplay

[Yrkoon]

thats1evildude wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Wait, Like the vast majority of gamers, I'm the type who buys games so that he can go home and play them...and enjoy them.

I should care about Cosplay because.... ?

You don't have to care one whit. But why should you have a problem with other people cosplaying?

I don't.     And anyone who has trouble Cosplaying Lelianna  (despite the fact that she can wear any thing in the game)... well that's their own problem.  Lelianna  (and Alistair, and Sten, and Zevran) are iconic  (and even iconic looking) because of who they are, not what clothes they're wearing.

Enough of this noise.  The Cosplay argument is nonsense  in this discussion.  We're talking about GAME features, not costume parties  that serve no purpose but to help Bioware promote one of their games.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 09 octobre 2011 - 02:50 .

[thats1evildude]

[quote]csfteeeer wrote...

Game Mechanics > Cosplay[/quote]

1) That sentence is meaningless. Instituting iconic armor is in itself a game mechanic. Upgrading said armor sets is a game mechanic.

2) If that were the sole reason for instituting the iconic looks, I might agree with you. But the permanent armor sets have gameplay benefits, as I highlighted in an earlier post.

[quote]Yrkoon wrote...

Enough of this noise.  The Cosplay argument is nonsense  in this discussion.  We're talking about GAME features, not costume parties  that serve no purpose but to help Bioware promote one of their games.
[/quote]

Hey, dude, you mentioned it first. Here's what you said about 10 posts ago:

[quote]Yrkoon wrote...

Benefits of Iconic companion looks, as stated by Chris Priestly himself: It facilitates Cosplay at promotional events like Game-cons.

And we're all little teenage groupies who value real life costume contests over decent, choice-based gameplay in the video game we bought..[/quote][/quote]

No one said a word about cosplay until you did.

Incidentally, why do you have a problem with other peoples' hobbies again? Did a cosplayer murder your family or something?

Modifié par thats1evildude, 09 octobre 2011 - 03:01 .

[Yrkoon]

thats1evildude wrote...


Honestly, it can be a pain in the ass in Origins if you're trying hard not to have your party dolled up like rainbow-coloured pimp.

And this stands in stark contrast to having your melee party members look like a half-dressed   Wh*res?

Check that. It's a huge contrast. At least in Origins, you can change your companion's outfits if  you don't like them.

thats1evildude wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Enough of this noise. The Cosplay argument is nonsense in this discussion. We're talking about GAME features, not costume parties that serve no purpose but to help Bioware promote one of their games.

Hey, dude, you mentioned it first.

I mentioned it as a NONSENSE argument, "dude".

Modifié par Yrkoon, 09 octobre 2011 - 03:03 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Christ. Iconic looks. Again.

If there ever has been a less important aspect of RPGs that has been overblown in proportion by both fans and developers trying to justify their tastes (cosplayers vs dollplayers) in a manner which makes them feel superior, I have yet to see it.

Let's stay on topic.

[csfteeeer]

thats1evildude wrote...

csfteeeer wrote...

Game Mechanics > Cosplay

1) That sentence is meaningless. Instituting iconic armor is in itself a game mechanic. Upgrading said armor sets is a game mechanic.

2) If that were the sole reason for instituting the iconic looks, I might agree with you. But the permanent armor sets have gameplay benefits, as I highlighted in an earlier post.

1) Better Gameplay Mechanics > Cosplay

It's Fixed now.

Stats > Looks

2) Interchangable Armor Set and Pieces can give far more benefits than a Set Armor.

EDIT: ****.

Modifié par csfteeeer, 09 octobre 2011 - 03:50 .

[Zanallen]

csfteeeer wrote...

1) Better Gameplay Mechanics > Cosplay

It's Fixed now.

Stats > Looks

2) Interchangable Armor can give far more benefits than a Set Armor.

And with DA3 you will get full stat customization again. Therefore the debate is "I want to dress up my companions how I see fit" versus "I want my companions to have their own unique bodies and armor sets".

[Lux]

Not for kids, but definitely teenage oriented. If I want mature (as in how actual adults would act in a medieval dark fantasy setting) I'm better off playing TW2. *shrugs*

[Stanley Woo]

Yrkoon wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...
If I'd had the internet when I was a kid, heck, I might have been in his shoes.

F**king Troll.  Basically calling someone you disagree with a kid.  Last time *I* did that, I got a 24 hour ban.  Where's Epler when we need him?

You put the emphasis on the word "I," implying that I'm calling someone else a "kid" for disagreeing with me. I put the emphasis on "kid," implying that that's when I played a whole bunch of videogames and had a whole lot of ideas on what I liked and didn't like and wish I'd had a forum like this in which to talk/rant/rave/complain about them.

Honestly, Yrkoon, thought we don't often agree on issues, I expected better of you.

EDIT: Childish bickering removed. Let's please cut out the swearing and personal attackes. Thank you.

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 09 octobre 2011 - 07:19 .

[Pygmali0n]

Ah, come on, taking the moral high ground against a post made after an afternoon down the pub isn't hard. You should all be so well-behaved in that state. Besides that and despite the frustration it wasn't meant to be bad-humoured, even if, drawn from an opposing point of view and several pints, it didn't come across well, sorry. Filament's also putting strange words into my mouth and attitudes I can't see were ever expressed.

But it's right that it doesn't help that when bEVEsthda or anyone else makes a good reasonable point, it goes unacknowledged on a forum that seems to have been set up for constructive criticism (even when apparently you might agree). But then a mod backs-up a cheerleader who reframes what was said to suit the opposing point of view. It might be some kind of corporate policy, but when you have such a large disgruntled fanbase you need to throw them bones with the occasional scrap of meat left on them.

Selecting your own ground against easy targets might be a good tactic in war and make you feel good, it's just annoying when you don't engage people on equal terms against the harder targets and shoot them down when they do the same thing.as you..

Note that I try to limit anything negative to behaviour. Not going to reread my posts but things I write usually are 'what you did was daft', not 'you are daft', and should be read as such, even if I've been careless with my English.

Modifié par Pygmali0n, 09 octobre 2011 - 08:07 .

[Stanley Woo]

Pygmali0n wrote...

Ah, come on, taking the moral high ground against a post made after an afternoon down the pub isn't hard. You should all be so well-behaved in that state. Besides that and despite the frustration it wasn't meant to be bad-humoured, even if, drawn from an opposing point of view and several pints, it didn't come across well, sorry. Filament's also putting strange words into my mouth and attitudes I can't see were ever expressed.

But it's right that it doesn't help that when bEVEsthda or anyone else makes a good reasonable point, it goes unacknowledged on a forum that seems to have been set up for constructive criticism (even when apparently you might agree). But then a mod backs-up a cheerleader who reframes what was said to suit the opposing point of view. It might be some kind of corporate policy, but when you have such a large disgruntled fanbase you need to throw them bones with the occasional scrap of meat left on them.

Selecting your own ground against easy targets might be a good tactic in war and make you feel good, it's just annoying when you don't engage people on equal terms against the harder targets and shoot them down when they do the same thing.as you..

Note that I try to limit anything negative to behaviour. Not going to reread my posts but things I write usually are 'what you did was daft', not 'you are daft', and should be read as such.

Sorry, but as the one against the horde, it's to my advantage (and my prerogative) to pick and choose what I respond to. I'm not as free to speak as you are, and you don't have the same perspective on the subject that I do. That puts us on very unequal footing. It also seems a tad unfair that y'all seem to want to catch me up in some kind of lie or contradiction that will fully justify all the negative feedback Dragon AGe II has gotten since release. I don't play that way.

You also won't see me bashing or dismissing my employer, my friends, my game, and the hard work of scores of talented, hard-working people around the world who helped to bring the game to you. I'm here because I believe in the work that we do, the work that I do, and generally agree with the direction of the game's creative team and project management. I'll say what I think, as openly and honestly as I propriety and policy permit, but since the ultimate response to any of "why was the game this way?" is "because that's how it turned out," I'm trying to keep us from hitting that point for as long as there's positive, constructive discussion going on and questions that I can answer.

So of course I'm goign to agree with a "cheerleader" of the game. I'm a cheerleader of the game as well! What did you expect to find here?

[Pygmali0n]

Filament wrote...

Pygmali0n wrote...
Filament's also putting strange words into my mouth and attitudes I can't see were ever expressed.

When you say, "It's a shame then Versago that Bioware worship Mammon, not God. ... Mammon = money. God = the belief that right is on our side," you're implying they're acting on greed instead of doing what's 'right,' whatever the heck that means for a video game company, and that this is somehow immoral. If that was an erroneous conclusion, then I suppose I apologize, but it seems to me the problem lies in how you expressed it, not how I understood it.

You're right, it is a weighted term and shouldn't have been used, I was just going with the theme presented. Nothing wrong with a company trying to make money btw.

[DarkSun522]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Pygmali0n wrote...

Ah, come on, taking the moral high ground against a post made after an afternoon down the pub isn't hard. You should all be so well-behaved in that state. Besides that and despite the frustration it wasn't meant to be bad-humoured, even if, drawn from an opposing point of view and several pints, it didn't come across well, sorry. Filament's also putting strange words into my mouth and attitudes I can't see were ever expressed.

But it's right that it doesn't help that when bEVEsthda or anyone else makes a good reasonable point, it goes unacknowledged on a forum that seems to have been set up for constructive criticism (even when apparently you might agree). But then a mod backs-up a cheerleader who reframes what was said to suit the opposing point of view. It might be some kind of corporate policy, but when you have such a large disgruntled fanbase you need to throw them bones with the occasional scrap of meat left on them.

Selecting your own ground against easy targets might be a good tactic in war and make you feel good, it's just annoying when you don't engage people on equal terms against the harder targets and shoot them down when they do the same thing.as you..

Note that I try to limit anything negative to behaviour. Not going to reread my posts but things I write usually are 'what you did was daft', not 'you are daft', and should be read as such.

Sorry, but as the one against the horde, it's to my advantage (and my prerogative) to pick and choose what I respond to. I'm not as free to speak as you are, and you don't have the same perspective on the subject that I do. That puts us on very unequal footing. It also seems a tad unfair that y'all seem to want to catch me up in some kind of lie or contradiction that will fully justify all the negative feedback Dragon AGe II has gotten since release. I don't play that way.

You also won't see me bashing or dismissing my employer, my friends, my game, and the hard work of scores of talented, hard-working people around the world who helped to bring the game to you. I'm here because I believe in the work that we do, the work that I do, and generally agree with the direction of the game's creative team and project management. I'll say what I think, as openly and honestly as I propriety and policy permit, but since the ultimate response to any of "why was the game this way?" is "because that's how it turned out," I'm trying to keep us from hitting that point for as long as there's positive, constructive discussion going on and questions that I can answer.

So of course I'm goign to agree with a "cheerleader" of the game. I'm a cheerleader of the game as well! What did you expect to find here?

I for one appricate all the hard work that BioWare emploies put into their games.

[Pygmali0n]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Pygmali0n wrote...

Ah, come on, taking the moral high ground against a post made after an afternoon down the pub isn't hard. You should all be so well-behaved in that state. Besides that and despite the frustration it wasn't meant to be bad-humoured, even if, drawn from an opposing point of view and several pints, it didn't come across well, sorry. Filament's also putting strange words into my mouth and attitudes I can't see were ever expressed.

But it's right that it doesn't help that when bEVEsthda or anyone else makes a good reasonable point, it goes unacknowledged on a forum that seems to have been set up for constructive criticism (even when apparently you might agree). But then a mod backs-up a cheerleader who reframes what was said to suit the opposing point of view. It might be some kind of corporate policy, but when you have such a large disgruntled fanbase you need to throw them bones with the occasional scrap of meat left on them.

Selecting your own ground against easy targets might be a good tactic in war and make you feel good, it's just annoying when you don't engage people on equal terms against the harder targets and shoot them down when they do the same thing.as you..

Note that I try to limit anything negative to behaviour. Not going to reread my posts but things I write usually are 'what you did was daft', not 'you are daft', and should be read as such.

Sorry, but as the one against the horde, it's to my advantage (and my prerogative) to pick and choose what I respond to. I'm not as free to speak as you are, and you don't have the same perspective on the subject that I do. That puts us on very unequal footing. It also seems a tad unfair that y'all seem to want to catch me up in some kind of lie or contradiction that will fully justify all the negative feedback Dragon AGe II has gotten since release. I don't play that way.

You also won't see me bashing or dismissing my employer, my friends, my game, and the hard work of scores of talented, hard-working people around the world who helped to bring the game to you. I'm here because I believe in the work that we do, the work that I do, and generally agree with the direction of the game's creative team and project management. I'll say what I think, as openly and honestly as I propriety and policy permit, but since the ultimate response to any of "why was the game this way?" is "because that's how it turned out," I'm trying to keep us from hitting that point for as long as there's positive, constructive discussion going on and questions that I can answer.

So of course I'm goign to agree with a "cheerleader" of the game. I'm a cheerleader of the game as well! What did you expect to find here?

Well put, I can understand all of that. With the uneven ground on both sides it kind of does need to be expressed, people usually understand if you explain. We don't expect you to bash your employer and your friends but more ways of acknowledging disagreements with something like 'good idea, but we chose this instead' would be appreciated.

Apologies for any bashing, while I generally only comment on the forums for occasional bursts of a week or two, I think the continued bashing is borne out of people feeling that they still have not been listened to, also that many feel and have expressed that they were misled into buying the game by the marketing of the game. Not to mention what they see as the loss of a type of game they loved. Change can be good or bad, and change into console elements that already existed elsewhere did not seem to gain anything against the loss.

[Yrkoon]

Pygmali0n wrote...
also that many feel and have expressed that they were misled into buying the game by the marketing of the game.

Oddly enough, We weren't misled in the slightest  with the marketing  

 I'll bash my "own side" now.   We were blind.    We didn't see the plain obvious when it was right in front of our faces for 3 straight months.   The marketing of DA2 was  dead-on accurate.   The  Language used  for the whole campaign was decidedly teen-based  on every level (button-Awesome!;  pre-order now and get "cool swag"!)  Even the demo ended with Isabela looking straight at the player and saying "hey, I've got a room at the Hanged man, come see me later, wink wink)

Then there was the whole  "if we get a bajillion "likes" on facebook, we'll give you magic items!"

We should have put 2+2 together.  Unfortunately,  We were so spellbound by how dark and classy DA:O was, that we didn't care about all of the above, so we didn't pay closer attention.


Of course, this most definitely won't ever happen again.  Not with me at least.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 09 octobre 2011 - 09:04 .

[Stanley Woo]

Pygmali0n wrote...
Well put, I can understand all of that. With the uneven ground on both sides it kind of does need to be expressed, people usually understand if you explain. We don't expect you to bash your employer and your friends but more ways of acknowledging disagreements with something like 'good idea, but we chose this instead' would be appreciated.

Fair enough.

Apologies for any bashing, while I generally only comment on the forums for occasional bursts of a week or two, I think the continued bashing is borne out of people feeling that they still have not been listened to, also that many feel and have expressed that they were misled into buying the game by the marketing of the game. Not to mention what they see as the loss of a type of game they loved. Change can be good or bad, and change into console elements that already existed elsewhere did not seem to gain anything against the loss.

Now that I can't do anything about. Despite all of our reassurances, despite all the interviews, despite Mike Laidlaw and David Gaider both being very responsive to various threads since release, despite our continued participation in the forums, despite releasing DLC with some of the issues being addressed, people (and I'm talking the DA community here) still don't feel like they're being listened to? I can certainly understand specific individuals feeling that way, since they may not have been around at the time or haven't bought the DLC or didn't read specific threads, but I think that our community as a whole is here partly because developers participate in discussions and listen to feedback.

[Fast Jimmy]

Yrkoon's above comments remind me of the midnight release I went to for DA2. 

I had done some homework about what the game was going to be like and was hanging out with other fanboys, most of which had done a media blackout or were picking up the game without hearing a thing about DA2, strictly from how much they liked DAO.

When I started telling them things like how there would be no origins stories, how the entire game would take place 95% of the time in one city, how the Qunari were retconned (a pittance of a complaint, in retrospect) and how the game's combat was going to be much more action oriented, with ninja flips being seen in the demo, they didn't believe me. One uninformed fan boy said "No, I heard that you have the option of visiting a location in each of the continents of Thedas in DA2." Oh poor fan boy... I hope your disappointment wasn't too heartbreaking.

Point is... even if you didn't look, watch or see any of the marketting hype, players were STILL misled by how completely off-base DA2 was from the original. Other fans of the DAO at the store (of which there was over 30 at this one location) could hardly suspend their disbelief at the obvious lies I was spouting, which turned out to be the truth. I had convinced myself that if there was a company who could pull all of these controversial game changes, create a new art style and add a completely voiced protagonist, it was Bioware. And I think that is still true today. However, in this case, I'd wager that the majority of those 30 fan boys I stood with until midnight were let down. Many of them may have come around to the concepts put forth in DA2, but many may just as likely have shook their head in disappointment.

Even if the marketing campaign had been completely upfront and open about DA2 being a totally  new direction that many old fans would not necessarily recognize... they would have STILL had tons of fan backlash, because DAO sold by one way alone: word of mouth. They weren't fans constantly on the Bioware  forums, they didn't read Game Informer or other gaming magazines, they didn't Google game info every other week to see if there were new announced Love Interests or First Day DLC gear... they were gamers whose friends said "Hey, check this game out. It is awesome." It became a bonding experience, sharing in a new game and world that showed the best RPGs of old yester-year had to offer, but with new features, polish and unprecedented options.

There's the old saying "You don't have to sell crack. Crack sells itself." Marketing campaigns and buzz generation and exclusive interviews and content... that's not what sells a great game. That's what sells trash movies or a new Apple product. Good gaming is an experience. I had friends who I knew would love DAO, other friends I didn't even bother with. It wasn't for everyone. But those who did enjoy it did so immensely and wanted to share it with others just as much as I did.

Long story short: Bioware - go back to making crack. You'll find you can shave a ton off your marketing budget that way and use those resources better.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 09 octobre 2011 - 09:37 .

[Pygmali0n]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Now that I can't do anything about. Despite all of our reassurances, despite all the interviews, despite Mike Laidlaw and David Gaider both being very responsive to various threads since release,

Do you mean this Stan?
http://social.biowar...5/index/7475089

Unfortunately it wasn't reassuring for me and many others. I've written a fair few responses to complaints in my time and the language both expressed and inbetween the lines was not reassuring. I can understand that there are limits on what can be said or is wanted to be said.

I've not seen any Mike Laidlaw interviews later than the disastrous early post-DA2 release ones. Google certainly isn't listing them.

Another unfortunately: there is no listing of forum posts by Mr Laidlaw on his profile, only the 3 threads he started.

I've enjoyed David Gaider's work enormously, but he reassured me and others after Witch Hunt about DA2. Again, unfortunately, he or I were mistaken. And very few forum posts can be gleaned from his profile.

So believe me when I say that people feel that they've not been listened to, and there's plenty of evidence on the webs besides myself.

[Pygmali0n]

Yrkoon wrote...

Pygmali0n wrote...
also that many feel and have expressed that they were misled into buying the game by the marketing of the game.

Oddly enough, We weren't misled in the slightest  with the marketing  

 I'll bash my "own side" now.   We were blind.    We didn't see the plain obvious when it was right in front of our faces for 3 straight months.   The marketing of DA2 was  dead-on accurate.   The  Language used  for the whole campaign was decidedly teen-based  on every level (button-Awesome!;  pre-order now and get "cool swag"!)  Even the demo ended with Isabela looking straight at the player and saying "hey, I've got a room at the Hanged man, come see me later, wink wink)

Then there was the whole  "if we get a bajillion "likes" on facebook, we'll give you magic items!"

We should have put 2+2 together.  Unfortunately,  We were so spellbound by how dark and classy DA:O was, that we didn't care about all of the above, so we didn't pay closer attention.


Of course, this most definitely won't ever happen again.  Not with me at least.

Totally right actually, I must have been thinking of forum reassurances from developers. I believed being Bioware it would all turn out right in the end (see I was a cheerleader once too Stan, though it may have been off-forum and based on buying all the games (twice when old operating systems became obsolete) and telling my friends).

[Fast Jimmy]

"I am absolutely aware of the concerns voiced here. Issues like level re-use, the implementation of wave combat, concerns about the narrative and significance of choice and so on have all been not only noted, but examined,
inspected and even aided me (and many, many others on the team) in formulating future plans. Further, I'm not only aware of the concerns, but I agree that there are aspects of DA II that not only can but must be improved in future installments. And that is precisely our intent."

I don't know... I wouldn't expect the Lead Designer of a game to say anything much more reconciliatory or deprecating than this. I think it was an excellent show of how Bioware has heard the main complaints and will not repeat them in the future.

It may not give you, personally, the warm fuzzies, but I think it was a well crafted mass response to a lot of the frustration on the forums. I mean, he actually named problems, instead of saying a vague "bad player response" or something. He actually nailed down some issues, like weak narrative and choice impact, as well as wave combat and level recycling. Find a lead designer who will announce to the world their game did anything wrong in a public venue just a few months after its release and... well, I'll give you a shiny nickel or something.

Point being... if this didn't reassure you that Laidlaw is taking notes of what was and is being said, then maybe you may want to assess exactly what you'd like to hear. Because unless it is something specific or directed to you personally, I think this is far and away the best you are going to get, not just from Bioware, but from any company, ever.

[bEVEsthda]

Zanallen wrote...
Just because you don't understand or refuse to acknowledge the benefits of unique companion looks doesn't mean there aren't any.

If I hadn't stopped foaming in the mouth by now, my response would have started with something different. But now I'm nice again.
There has never been stated any tangible benefits. Stanley Woo have previously tried to "explain" this to me but all he has to say in the end only amounts to: "the kind of communication and presentation that companies aim for in their products."
Which is exactly the same I've always said and always known: Just marketing religion!
Religion in the sense that it's not based on realities, but just superstitious mind figments and priesthood dogma. Beliefs.

It brings nothing to the game. Nothing to gameplay. It only removes. And iconic looks is somewhat on topic here because the actual iconic looks they will be trying to sell, and are trying to sell, Isabela, Fenris, Flemeth,.. are also targeted at pre-teens and early teens.

There was nothing unique nor original about Origins' style.

Has been said a lot. Still: where's the game that looks like Origin?
And that's not even the point. There's nothing wrong with good ol' "generic fantasy". It was and is a fine place to be in. To own, even.
The point was that the change to DA's style was said to be done to make it more unique. It accomplishes the exact opposite. Coming from Final Fantasy and being breast fed on spikes, feather adournements, horns and antlers, fluffy hairdos, you might be somewhat blind to this, but check out recent and upcoming Fantasy RPGs. They all look like DA2. DA2's style is ultra-cliché.


And it's so very obvious speculation. A soulless mash of borrowed elements in a strained attempt to be "kewl".

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 09 octobre 2011 - 10:30 .

[bEVEsthda]

In my estimate, Bioware had something really huge by the tail, with DA:Origins. Had DA2 been a reasonable sequel to Origins, the franchise would have grown substantially. Even more so with DA3. The buzz was out. And what is happening in cases like this, is that a lot of people who didn't buy or play the game, have heard of it. And have noted that is was "big" and a great game. So they will pick up the "2" when it arrives, trusting that it will be more modern and maybe even an improvement. This is exactly what happened to ME2. ME2 is not a better game than ME. On the contrary, but it has a bigger mindshare, which in turn was created by ME. The same with the CoD franchise really.

You stay your coarse, when you're on to something good. That's how you make it big.

But it's like big corporations like EA aren't happy if what they're doing isn't looking like someone elses stuff. They're unable to believe in anything which is not a soulless copy-mix of others successes. You often see this in the movie industry too. EA doesn't have any success, except others already successful franchises which they have purchased. And then they unwaveringly ruins them. Mediocres them. Why and how? EA's CEO is well aware of the problem and has spoken rather freely about it and repeatedly stated that he is committed to change this. EA's CEO seem to be an intelligent person. He has also revealed that he understands that things like the early success of DA2 was due to the reputation of it's prequel. And that DA3 will suffer from DA2's failure. So he seem to have a clue.

Yet it goes on.

Why did Dragon Age suddenly need to be re-aimed for children? (pre-teen and early teens are children)
Did Origins fail in the market? No. On the contrary.
Would the changes result in a bigger potential market? That seem to have been the clueless expectation. And being this kind of stupid (sorry, it's not polite, but there's no other word for it) is something I've learned to expect from EA marketing.
But really, if you look at this from a thinking perspective, it's easy to see that the knowledge is that teens usually like what grown-ups like. But the opposite is definitely not true.