299 réponses à ce sujet

[Ponendus]

I am personally grateful that they are at least planning on delivering a fusion of the two. It's certainly better than just another DA2. My prediction is that this new fusion will be an improvement and then they will probably refine it into a spectacular game in DA4.

The dev's have hinted that they want the series to be long and beyond a trilogy. As long as they keep making these games I'm happy to wait for them to get the balance right.

[Firky]

I'm not disagreeing with this approach.

But, when people talk about taking "best of both worlds" etc, I always think of the Heroes of Might and Magic series.

To me (and many) 3 was the pinnacle - but there were only really conservative changes made to the first 2, just adding more candy, really. HOMM4 was quite different, mechanically, and many players were really unhappy. (I wasn't. It was no HOMM3, but there was some cool new ideas.)

So, 5 essentially did a total backflip and went back to 3's gameplay, but with a couple of ideas from 4 preserved. But, 4 had changed me and my expectations - especially with regards to difficulty and certain elements of strategy, even though I preferred 3, and 5 always felt like a massive step back, for me.

What's the message? I don't know. But, much as I loved Origins, DAII has changed my expectations in ways I'm not entirely sure of even. Even Legacy seemed a little too easy, in parts, without the "waves of enemies." That kind of stuff.

(Oh, and I've been playing the Heroes VI beta. Whoa. Is it radically different from the entire series or what? Stuff like global recruitment and town portal for all. But, lots of really thought provoking changes, design wise. I'm not sure if they're entirely good, for my style of play, but we'll see - next week?)

[Terror_K]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Terror_K@

Consider, moving from DA2 to something fusing DA2 and Origins would seem to be a movement towards the direction you want. Bioware does not view RPG features and features of other genres as incompatible.

A fusion or marrying of DAO and DA2 still misses the point though. It will still just be BioWare trying to have their cake and eat it too, still a case of them pandering to the masses instead of just making a good RPG for RPG fans, and still just be a watered-down half-and-half affair that lacks identity and definition because its trying to spread itself too thinly to cover too many bases at once. They've changed the formula with DA2 and simply want to tweak the changed formula a little more, when they should be throwing it out and going back to what worked for the most part. In many ways DAO was already a mix of the old and the new: it was a full-on, proper epic fantasy RPG and a return to their roots, but was still not as deep or involved as BG or NWN and was still very much modernised in many facets, but in the right areas and without sacrificing what it was. They had the recipe right then, and trying to half-and-half between DAO and DA2 may result in something better than DA2, but it will still have too much DA2 in it. Put it this way: if DAO is the original Star Wars Trilogy, and DA2 is the prequel trilogy, then a marriage of the two would simply be the new blu-ray remastered Star Wars Trilogy: comtaminated by something that should be ignored and basically ruined for it.

What matters to BioWare these days when making RPGs isn't the same as it once was, and they seem to focus too much on only the narrative and cinematic nature of their games these days rather than the core RPG mechanics, which they don't seem to care about much at all. When you've got Laidlaw stating things such as a silent protagonist in his mind being an archaic device that's best left in the past when it actually facilitates roleplaying far more than a voiced one it just illustrates that BioWare no longer really wants to make RPGs at all, but merely story-driven, cinematic action games with some customisation sprinkled here and there and very light RPG mechanics. It's all well and good to say things like, "perhaps if we can bring in people who normally don't play RPGs we can use games like this to wean them onto the hardcore stuff" like I've seen them say on the forums in the past (mostly during ME2's development), but when they no longer are even making the hardcore stuff, what exactly is there to wean these new fans onto without them having to play older titles?

Again, if BioWare want to create hybrids to branch out, then they can do so. I have no major issues with that in principle. But when they're hijacking their existing IPs that are designed to be proper RPGs and watering them down like this it shows a complete lack of IP integrity, consistency and overall lack of regard for their old-time fans. Create new IPs for such hyrbid, simple action-RPG ventures, or at the very least a spin-off. Don't deliberately sabotage and screw with much-loved existing IPs like Dragon Age and twist them into something they're not just to pander to the casual gaming mainstream for the sake of $$$. They spent all that time and effort creating a great universe set up for a deep, epic fantasy RPG series the likes of which hadn't been seen for almost a decade, then Laidlaw and co. completely ruin and squander the whole thing by near-on completely rebooting the thing in the first follow-up.

Ponendus wrote...

I am personally grateful that they are at least planning on delivering a fusion of the two. It's certainly better than just another DA2. My prediction is that this new fusion will be an improvement and then they will probably refine it into a spectacular game in DA4.

The dev's have hinted that they want the series to be long and beyond a trilogy. As long as they keep making these games I'm happy to wait for them to get the balance right.

Again, there shouldn't need to be a balance, because DAO already nailed it in pretty much every regard. DA2 isn't improving the RPG for RPG fans, it's watering it down to branch out to the masses who usually stay clear of such games because they're too involved, complex, etc. DA2 seemed made far more for people who were put off the original game than for those who became fans of it, and that's just wrong, IMO. Improving a game should always be the focus of a developer, but who are they improving it for exactly? There's a difference between improving a game by developing it in-line with what it's supposed to be and improving it to be better at that and attempting to simply shift the focus and style of it in a direction that simply appeals to more people. That's not improvement: that's pandering and selling out. And that's what DA2 was. BioWare aren't improving their games, they're simply trying to make them appeal to more people, and in the process dumbing them down into genericism to do so, because today's mainstream gamer wants things fast, simple and visceral. It's no longer about quality with BioWare, it's about quantity. Quantity of sales that is. It's just that DA2 backfired on them. Again, if it hadn't and the CoD and Gears audiences had lapped it up like they had hoped, they would never have admitted to its failings.

Modifié par Terror_K, 08 octobre 2011 - 07:43 .

[Ponendus]

Terror_K wrote...

Ponendus wrote...

I am personally grateful that they are at least planning on delivering a fusion of the two. It's certainly better than just another DA2. My prediction is that this new fusion will be an improvement and then they will probably refine it into a spectacular game in DA4.

The dev's have hinted that they want the series to be long and beyond a trilogy. As long as they keep making these games I'm happy to wait for them to get the balance right.

Again, there shouldn't need to be a balance, because DAO already nailed it in pretty much every regard. DA2 isn't improving the RPG for RPG fans, it's watering it down to branch out to the masses who usually stay clear of such games because they're too involved, complex, etc. DA2 seemed made far more for people who were put off the original game than for those who became fans of it, and that's just wrong, IMO. Improving a game should always be the focus of a developer, but who are they improving it for exactly? There's a difference between improving a game by developing it in-line with what it's supposed to be and improving it to be better at that and attempting to simply shift the focus and style of it in a direction that simply appeals to more people. That's not improvement: that's pandering and selling out. And that's what DA2 was. BioWare aren't improving their games, they're simply trying to make them appeal to more people, and in the process dumbing them down into genericism to do so, because today's mainstream gamer wants things fast, simple and visceral. It's no longer about quality with BioWare, it's about quantity. Quantity of sales that is. It's just that DA2 backfired on them. Again, if it hadn't and the CoD and Gears audiences had lapped it up like they had hoped, they would never have admitted to its failings.

I agree with you that DA2 is certainly not an improvement on DAO, and I could even go so far as to agree that it is a sell-out (although I don't think it really is only that motivation). However, I think your characterisation that Bioware 'isn't improving their games' is a little unfair. They seemed to me to be genuinely surprised that the fan-base did not enjoy DA2; and since then they have made proven steps to improve and take feedback into account.

I highly doubt that with people's careers and reputation on the line they are going to completely backflip and make DA3 exactly the same style as DAO. These things just don't happen in reality. The fact that they have openly admitted that they are intending to begin 'walking it back' is really the best we can expect right now.

I just think that at this point we have no evidence to say that Bioware isn't completely aware that DA2 was the wrong direction to move in. Why not give them a chance to find the balance between what we (and 'we' are really only the die-hard fans here - the average person that just enjoys the game for what it is probably isn't as vocal about things as we are) want and what they perceive to be what the rest of their market wants? Already they have shown a better direction with what they did in Legacy. Granted, there is a long way to go, but I wouldn't lose hope just yet.

[Lux]

So, the EA division, BioWare, decided to release a product with a short development cycle while at the same time trying something new and ambitious (can only imagine the amount of pressure for anyone involved in the project).

Certainly that corporate rationale can make wonders, with plenty of data analysis and logical decisions, making possible the quick release of an average game. And there's nothing wrong with change, but this attempt on innovation, besides upsetting those who disliked radical changes, showed an awful lack of polishness and plenty of WTF moments in game progression.

Where was the vision and attention to detail from other BW games? Are they gone from the equation for more streamlined and quickly-made products? As an RPGer and as a customer, I can't help but compare DA2 with other RPGs. This product turns out to be more expensive with the base game and DLCs, but less satisfying in the experience. Other RPGs are prettier, more polished, more consistent with choices made, better fusing lore with game mechanics, and more mature (I find that I have less patience for whining characters or characters aimed at a teen-interpretation of sexuality).

It's good that BioWare has a good amount of independence in making decisions, but where is it going? Is it all about the money now?

[Terror_K]

Ponendus wrote...

I agree with you that DA2 is certainly not an improvement on DAO, and I could even go so far as to agree that it is a sell-out (although I don't think it really is only that motivation). However, I think your characterisation that Bioware 'isn't improving their games' is a little unfair. They seemed to me to be genuinely surprised that the fan-base did not enjoy DA2; and since then they have made proven steps to improve and take feedback into account.

But they're still making the same mistakes. They're only backtracking because the gamble didn't pay off. Given some of the reactions prior to launch they must have been blind to the fanbase. If they were actually surprised, they must not have been paying attention in the slightest.

I highly doubt that with people's careers and reputation on the line they are going to completely backflip and make DA3 exactly the same style as DAO. These things just don't happen in reality. The fact that they have openly admitted that they are intending to begin 'walking it back' is really the best we can expect right now.

It's not good enough. And that's why the series will clearly remain dead to me. DA2 was something that should be wiped from existence, not built upon. It was a travesty and betrayal, and an affront to everything the original game stood for. It was an abomination, and finding a mid-way point between the original and an abomination will still result in half an abomination. It will still have Dragon Age contaminated by something that shouldn't have been. Again, it would result in a Dragon Age 3 that's like the blue-ray Star Wars trilogy: unplayable/watchable.

I just think that at this point we have no evidence to say that Bioware isn't completely aware that DA2 was the wrong direction to move in. Why not give them a chance to find the balance between what we (and 'we' are really only the die-hard fans here - the average person that just enjoys the game for what it is probably isn't as vocal about things as we are) want and what they perceive to be what the rest of their market wants? Already they have shown a better direction with what they did in Legacy. Granted, there is a long way to go, but I wouldn't lose hope just yet.

For one thing, I've quoted people in this article not just from here, but from CVG and PSU.com that have shown similar feelings. It's not just these forums that are seeing that BioWare is traveling fastly down a slipperly slope lately. Plenty of gamers out there are disappointed with the direction BioWare is going.

As for giving them a chance, that would all be well and good had they made a mistake with DA2, but as I've said, it was a deliberate piece of saboutage on the part of the developers. On top of that, they're showing no signs of truly learning and are just trying to adjust to the same "have their cake and eat it too" model they've taken on lately. Quite frankly, I'm sick of feeling stabbed in the back by these guys after buying almost all of their games and being loyal after so many years. I know some people enjoyed Legacy, but I'm not giving them anymore money after DA2, so I'm not going to be trying it. I doubt it fixes that many of my issues anyway.

It's BioWare's attitude lately that gets me, and it doesn't seem to be changing, despite the backlash. It's akin to going back to a high school reunion and discovering your best friend from then suddenly talking and laughing with all the idiot jerks you hated back then, and when you try and approach him he acts almost nervously embarrassed to be associated with you, but still kind of tries to be your friend and act like nothing has changed at the same time. It feels the same way when they built this great IP to finally bring back a strong, epic fantasy RPG with some depth to it, only to toss it all away with the sequel to make it like everything else out there today. It's like they said, "we spent 6+ years developing Dragon Age to fill the epic fantasy RPG PC gamers have missed for so long and get back to our roots, and now in less than a year after that we ****** it all away by making the sequel not only nothing like that, but damn near on the very opposite of it."

[ElitePinecone]

Terror_K wrote...
It's not good enough. And that's why the series will clearly remain dead to me. DA2 was something that should be wiped from existence, not built upon. It was a travesty and betrayal, and an affront to everything the original game stood for. It was an abomination, and finding a mid-way point between the original and an abomination will still result in half an abomination. It will still have Dragon Age contaminated by something that shouldn't have been. Again, it would result in a Dragon Age 3 that's like the blue-ray Star Wars trilogy: unplayable/watchable.

It's this kind of ranty language that would make me give up on a fanbase entirely, if I were a developer at Bioware. 

If the options you're presenting to Bioware are your way or no way, you're going to be sadly disappointed. They don't have any particular obligation to do anything fans want, let alone people who are determined to throw around words like "sabotage" or "betrayal". If you can't even approach their recent humbleness in good faith then why on earth would they think you're the type of fan they want to keep around? 

If any attempt to improve on DA2 - which was still a commercial success - is labelled 'not good enough', what do you want them to do? Give up entirely? Spend five years making another Origins? Scrap the bits of DA2 that people loved, or that worked better? 

Be realistic. Or if you can't be realistic, at least be reasonable. 

Clearly - since you're still posting here - you want DA3 to succeed, or you're interested in the franchise. Fine. Good. But approaching the second game as a betrayal is ridiculously oversensitive. You're going to be endlessly disappointed in the future of gaming if anything that doesn't conform to an idealised RPG utopia counts as "sabotage". 

I had a lot of issues with DA2, but I'm not so jaded that I suspect Bioware of something malicious in creating it. They tried something new, it probably failed. What they do with DA3 is up to them, but it's at least better than nothing that they're trying to engage with fans and work out what needs to be improved. 

You could at least meet this engagement with civility, if you can't do it with optimism. 

[Terror_K]

ElitePinecone wrote...

It's this kind of ranty language that would make me give up on a fanbase entirely, if I were a developer at Bioware. 

If the options you're presenting to Bioware are your way or no way, you're going to be sadly disappointed. They don't have any particular obligation to do anything fans want, let alone people who are determined to throw around words like "sabotage" or "betrayal". If you can't even approach their recent humbleness in good faith then why on earth would they think you're the type of fan they want to keep around?

Humbleness?Hah! That's a joke. Again, they've only backtracked as much as they have because their gamble didn't pay off. A lot of the complaints that came out of DA2 beyond recycled areas and story execution were prevalent prior to launch, but they just seemed to turn their noses up at people and insisted they had a strong RPG that stayed true to their vision. Brent Knowles and Dan Tudge are about the only major Dragon Age developers I feel have any real integrity or respect for any more, and that's because both got out when it was the right time to. I've become a huge fan of Brent's after reading when and why he left.

And again, why should I have faith in a group of people who I feel have stabbed me in the back and sold me out for another audience? Why should I support a company and group of developers whom I've expressed concerns about for years regarding them heading down this path like so many others before them when all they're doing as time goes on is proving my suspicions more and more correct? The DA2 team are pretty much the Arl Howe of the gaming world for me. I find it hypocritical that a company that prides itself on creating games surrounding things like morality, loyalty and trust are so cavalier with their treatment of longtime fans and are willing to sell out in a heartbeat.

If any attempt to improve on DA2 - which was still a commercial success - is labelled 'not good enough', what do you want them to do? Give up entirely? Spend five years making another Origins? Scrap the bits of DA2 that people loved, or that worked better?

For starters, how much of DA2 being a "commercial success" was due to pre-orders and early buyers who loved Origins and ended up disappointed? Sales do not automatically determine quality, or even success, if the end-product isn't up to snuff. Secondly, yes, I really would prefer them spend a good deal of time making another Origins than push out another product even remotely like DA2. Thirdly, apart from a few technical improvments and skill trees, I don't think DA2 improved on anything really. Perhaps a little better at being cinematic, but if the cost comes at forcing a character on me rather that truly letting me roleplay and giving me proper customisation, then count me out. While it was nice to see a few more personal moments with companions and a story that wasn't the standard formula, the execution was extremely questionable.

Be realistic. Or if you can't be realistic, at least be reasonable. 

Clearly - since you're still posting here - you want DA3 to succeed, or you're interested in the franchise. Fine. Good. But approaching the second game as a betrayal is ridiculously oversensitive. You're going to be endlessly disappointed in the future of gaming if anything that doesn't conform to an idealised RPG utopia counts as "sabotage".

Actually, no. I've already said that Dragon Age as an IP is dead to me. I posted here about it after a few comments from Laidlaw in the ME3 Gameinformer pretty much were the last straw. I'm only here again because I see BioWare continue to make mistake after mistake after mistake and illustrate that they're not learning, and to express my feelings on the matter. As far as I'm concerned with Laidlaw in charge and the attitude BioWare have lately Dragon Age 3 can crash and burn for all I care. They murdered the IP with DA2 and it's basically tainted beyond redemption, IMO.

I am disappointed with the future of gaming lately, because its leading us to everything becoming the same brown mush of story-driven, semi-cinematic action games with light RPG elements. That's 90% of AAA titles these days, and BioWare is now just doing the same thing. This is the same mentality that's giving us reboots of Syndicate and X-Com that are just gritty brown shooters and a gritty, edgy emo Tomb Raider that takes itself too seriously, etc.

The thing is, DA2's biggest failing is the intent and the fact it was trying to be Dragon Age 2, while a the same time rebooting itself for a different audience. It turned its back on the principles the original was made for and the fans it was made for. Jade Empire is technically a weaker RPG on a technical level for example, but it's a better game largely because it only ever was what it was trying to be and was an action RPG from the start. Dragon Age was designed to be a proper, epic fantasy RPG for PC gamers with the express intent to get back to BioWare's RPG roots and not be what DA2 ended up being: a simple, console-oriented action RPG.

I had a lot of issues with DA2, but I'm not so jaded that I suspect Bioware of something malicious in creating it. They tried something new, it probably failed. What they do with DA3 is up to them, but it's at least better than nothing that they're trying to engage with fans and work out what needs to be improved. 

You could at least meet this engagement with civility, if you can't do it with optimism. 

They aren't really trying at all, because they're still stuck in this "have our cake and eat it too" mindset where they feel they have to branch out to the casual, mainstream gamer. Until they put DA2 behind them almost entirely and realise that they should be making Dragon Age as a proper epic, deep fantasy RPG for RPG fans instead of being so caught up in trying to grow the brand then they're wasting their time and not really going to improve enough to make a difference. They need to lose the attitude and mindset and get back to building proper RPGs, at least when it comes to Dragon Age. There's no point in giving them answers to "what can we do better?" when they just outright aren't going to listen to the ones that contradict their new direction and they refuse to stop walking down a path they insist on going down. When I say, "I want no anchovies on my pizza" I'm not going to accept "how about less, but still some, 'cause some people like them?" as an answer.

[Heimdall]

Terror_K@

I get it, you think DA:O was perfect and hey should make clones of it in the future. I disagree as do many others. They tried something different and you condemn them. Understandable, but clearly you want to deny that DA2 had any merit whatsoever. I don't accept that, I enjoyed the game as many did and thought it had many good ideas DA:O lacked (Granted, do to the rushed nature of the game many of them were poorly implemented). You see DA2 in its entirety as a mistake. I don't, and Bioware doesn't and I don't think they should. They acknowledge that the pure DA2 experience was a bit off the mark with fans like you, so I don't understand why you insist that they are just trying to "Have their cake and eat it too".

You are really dramatizing this whole "Betrayal" thing. Bioware has and never had any obligations to you, or any particular audience. They make the games they want to make. When you don't find yourself being able to enjoy those games, though many others do, you can bow out and stop buying from Bioware. It really is that simple.

[Terror_K]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Terror_K@

I get it, you think DA:O was perfect and hey should make clones of it in the future. I disagree as do many others.

DAO was not perfect, and I don't think they should make exact clones of it in the future. But it's a deep, epic, fantasy RPG, and that's what Dragon Age should be. It should also simply remain consistent with its original vision and form and not get twisted and bent out of shape just to suit a newer, hipper audience. DAO was a breath of fresh air in a time of shallow, action-oriented games, so even if it wasn't entirely original, it was definitely something different as of late. DA2 just moved towards genericism and, again, represented almost everything the original game set about to put behind it.

They tried something different and you condemn them. Understandable, but clearly you want to deny that DA2 had any merit whatsoever. I don't accept that, I enjoyed the game as many did and thought it had many good ideas DA:O lacked (Granted, do to the rushed nature of the game many of them were poorly implemented). You see DA2 in its entirety as a mistake. I don't, and Bioware doesn't and I don't think they should. They acknowledge that the pure DA2 experience was a bit off the mark with fans like you, so I don't understand why you insist that they are just trying to "Have their cake and eat it too".

Because they are. They've said so themselves... constantly. That they want to grow the brand and expand their audience, that they want to bring in the CoD audience and branch out to people who normally wouldn't play RPGs, etc. DA2's major problem is that it's made more for these "potential fans" than it is for the existing ones. Instead of building on what made DAO strong, they rebooted into a short, shallow action RPG they spit out in a year. The major platform changed, the targeted audience changed, etc. And at the same time they keep saying that they want to keep their old fans and take them along for the ride. I'm going to quote Ray Muzyka again:-

Ray Muzyka said...

"The vision for us is a broadening of the genre. We see a lot of other genres incorporating features of RPGs and in turn RPGs are incorporating features of other genres. There are more action elements, there’s different ways to tell a story, there’s different ways to have characters interact for adventure games, action games, shooters, and that’s exciting to us. It’s actually making a lot of other games more engaging in the same way we could make RPGs more engaging and successful … by incorporating features that are popular in different genres. But we want to bring our core fans along with us on that journey too, so it’s not always easy to get a balance that does both, but we’re striving to do that."

The very last line of his almost directly translates into, "We want to have our cake and eat it too."

You are really dramatizing this whole "Betrayal" thing. Bioware has and never had any obligations to you, or any particular audience. They make the games they want to make. When you don't find yourself being able to enjoy those games, though many others do, you can bow out and stop buying from Bioware. It really is that simple.

And I will. But not without letting them know why. It's fans that get a company or creator or anything else where they are in the first place though. When you create an IP and start making fans out of it, then you should at least try to create your IP consistent and made primarily for those fans. They're fans for a reason. And what's the point of being a fan of something when it can so readily change from something you adore to something you hate simply because the developers see dollar signs in their eyes?

On top of that, I'm rapidly running out of developers to look up to and games I truly enjoy because of this same bullcrap happening over and over. I thought BioWare were better than this and had more integrity. I guess I was wrong, but the fact is, there's very little to turn to these days. The gaming industry, even the entertainment industry as a whole, is becoming stale and stagnating because everybody is going for the same piece of pie and appealing to the masses. Art is gradually fading and being replaced by generic and formulaic dross to fill pockets. I used to consider BioWare artists, but now they're just peddlers. It's hurting the company, and I'm complaining not so much due to hate, but due to love. Or former love. BioWare used to be a company I loved and respected that made games I loved and considered works of art. No longer it seems, and that's sad. It's sad to see them falling into the same trap. I'm just trying to let them know, but they don't seem to want to hear it. I guess the millions of yells of the mainstream gamer has drowned out the few who got them where they are today.

Modifié par Terror_K, 08 octobre 2011 - 01:02 .

[ElitePinecone]

"I'm just trying to let them know, but they don't seem to want to hear it."

Perhaps a good way to start letting them know would be to drop words like betrayal and compromise a little. Being completely unreasonable is never a good way to interact with anybody.

Why would they listen to someone who admits they aren't going to buy any more of their games, but feels the need to scream from the rooftops that they feel victimised by one failed experiment in game design? As if every game design decision was a personal, targeted, vindictive and malicious stab in the back? It wasn't, stop pretending that it was.

If you aren't going to buy any future games, or even concede for a second that the company could reverse its errors, filling up this board with walls of text is a waste of everyone's time - especially yours.

If you think Bioware is beyond recovery, don't post here. It's an exercise in self-promotion and does nothing constructive to help the studio improve any future content. The best way to make DA3 a better game is to approach it constructively. If you don't think it's even worth it, posting on this forum is pointless.

[Heimdall]

Bioware has not changed. They still make the games they want to make and that is not doing the same thing over and over again.

And you think they should not strive to attract more fans? Bioware is and always has been a business. There's no sell out, that's what every business does and has to do to become more successful. I just think your sense of entitlement on the matter is extraordinarily arrogant, like you feel you are owed for each of Bioware's previous successes.

It is not a mistake for Bioware to try to give a larger audience what they want. In fact, your DA3 argument amounts to "I want Bioware to make games for me and X smaller group, but those other people who want something different, they don't get what they want. Because I want something different. Minority over majority". I don't get where you dig up the logic that somehow Bioware should make games geared towards you and ignore what another group want while you claim that's exactly what their doing to you.

[TheJediSaint]

The accusation that Bioware, a privately owned for-profit company, is a selling out is oxymoronic. They don't make RPG for the art, they make RPGs because they a good enough at it to make money.

[addiction21]

chitek23 wrote...

TheJediSaint wrote...

The accusation that Bioware, a privately owned for-profit company,[...]

BioWare is, since several months, a division of Electronic Arts and no longer an independent company.

Not months, a few years.

[ElitePinecone]

chitek23 wrote...

TheJediSaint wrote...

The accusation that Bioware, a privately owned for-profit company,[...]

BioWare is, since several months, a division of Electronic Arts and no longer an independent company.

The point was: they aren't a charity and they aren't an artists' collective. 

Most if not all people at Bioware are there to make video games because they love making video games, but if they put all commercial concerns aside they'd be bankrupt. 

"Selling out" is a nonsense phrase, all game design (all entertainemnt design, come to think of it) is a balance between maintaining a creative vision and satisfying enough of what customers want to make them purchase something. Often these two things work together. It's why we call games "art" while acknowledging that they sell millions and are a commercial product. 

In Bioware's case, they make RPGs because RPGs sell well and because they have employees who are some of the best in the industry at making them. 

[Joy Divison]

Lord Aesir wrote...

And you think they should not strive to attract more fans?

No they shouldn't.  Whenever companies/artists' motivation is to "strive for new fans" rather than producing quality products the result sucks.  That's the very definition of a sell out.

It is not a mistake for Bioware to try to give a larger audience what they want.

Yes it is.  They don't know what we want.  They think they do.  They have this vision of the "modern gamer" and the "old school gamer" and whatever as if we fall into neat little categories which they can cater to.  Just introduce some action components for the "modern gamer" and combined them with RPG elements for the "old school gamer" and you'll expand your auidence by getting the best of both worlds, right?  No, you get a half-baked scheme lacking in any depth or quality that was haphazzardly thrown together.

With all the business acumen being displayed on this board, no wonder why the economy is tanked.

Modifié par Joy Divison, 08 octobre 2011 - 02:22 .

[Heimdall]

Joy Division@The very fact that many enjoyed the DA2 experience destroys your argument. If you think Bioware wasn't striving for a quality product in DA2, I must laugh at you. They tried out new ideas that they had not done before and unfortunately didn't have enough time to do as good a job as they might have. Attracting fans is the point of creating a quality product. Don't claim I lack business acumen if you really believe the two are disconnected.

Some people on this board really want Bioware to be their gaming company and only theirs. They want a wider fan base. Since this wasn't happening before apparently, they needed a change. This isn't hard to wrap your head around.

[Joy Divison]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Joy Division@The very fact that many enjoyed the DA2 experience destroys your argument.

Really?  Did the fact that "many" people liked the Edsel mean it wasn't a colassal flop?  Or the "new" coke?  Star Wars: Episode 1?  You are just like Bioware's marketers: only look at half the facts and use equivocal words to put a positive spin on ******-poor results.

You claim "many" people enjoyed the DA2 experience.  Well, "many" more did not www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-ii

If you think Bioware wasn't striving for a quality product in DA2, I must laugh at you.

I didn't say that.  I said they strove to widen their fanbase and wound up making a mediocre product.

Attracting fans is the point of creating a quality product.

Not necessarily.  When the Beatles wrote Sergent Pepper's, the point wasn't attracting new fans.  When Francis Ford Coppola made Godfather II, he did not try to expand the demographic appeal of the franchise.

When "attracting fans" becomes a priority and a stated goal, any artistic or creative venture will suffer because art gets sacrificed for expediency and convenience.

[addiction21]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Some people on this board really want Bioware to be their gaming company and only theirs. They want a wider fan base. Since this wasn't happening before apparently, they needed a change. This isn't hard to wrap your head around.

I still hold a grudge with BW going from Shattered Steel to BG... damn them for attracting RPG fans /sarcasm

[Heimdall]

Joy Divison wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

Joy Division@The very fact that many enjoyed the DA2 experience destroys your argument.

Really?  Did the fact that "many" people liked the Edsel mean it wasn't a colassal flop?  Or the "new" coke?  Star Wars: Episode 1?  You are just like Bioware's marketers: only look at half the facts and use equivocal words to put a positive spin on ******-poor results.

You claim "many" people enjoyed the DA2 experience.  Well, "many" more did not www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-ii

  Not really seeing  your point.  Metacritic user reviews don't
impress me.  Few online reviews do.  In my experience it is primarily
those who feel a need to complain that try to plaster their opinion all
over the internet.

Your arguments is that DA2 was essentially a flop and lacked any redeeming features.  I vehemently disagree and so do others.  Many enough that Bioware has good reason to believe DA2 was NOT just a huge mistake and has ideas worth holding onto.

If you think Bioware wasn't striving for a quality product in DA2, I must laugh at you.

I didn't say that.  I said they strove to widen their fanbase and wound up making a mediocre product.

Attracting fans is the point of creating a quality product.

Not necessarily.  When the Beatles wrote Sergent Pepper's, the point wasn't attracting new fans.  When Francis Ford Coppola made Godfather II, he did not try to expand the demographic appeal of the franchise.

When "attracting fans" becomes a priority and a stated goal, any artistic or creative venture will suffer because art gets sacrificed for expediency and convenience.

No you said they traded the goal of a quality product for widening the fanbase as if they were mutually exclusive.  A video game company is not a band.  Bioware never has been an enclve for artists seeking to make their video game visions a reality.  It is a business, and a business expands by creating quality products that can be enjoyed by more and more customers.  Nothing has changed.

[Joy Divison]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Not really seeing  your point.  Metacritic user reviews don't
impress me.  Few online reviews do.  In my experience it is primarily
those who feel a need to complain that try to plaster their opinion all
over the internet.

You see it plain as day.  You just chose to ignore it and the evidence which substantiates it because it does not conform to your opinion.  If Metacritic is truly the place for "those who feel a need to complain," then Origins must be even better than is claimed considering its very good score www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-origins

Your arguments is that DA2 was essentially a flop and lacked any redeeming features.

 

When looking at the those two user-review scores, that looks at lot more like a flop than a first-rate high quality game.

And I didn't say it lacked any redeeming features.  I said it was ill-conceived because it sought to expand its fanbase which made for predictable results: a mediocre game lacking the depth and the je ne sais quoi that its predecessor had that made it stand out.

No you said they traded the goal of a quality product for widening the fanbase as if they were mutually exclusive.

And I stand by that assertion.  Why don't you come up with enough examples in art and entertainment where a conscious attempt to widen the fanbase resulted in excellence in its respective medium to prove me wrong?

A video game company is not a band.  Bioware never has been an enclve for artists seeking to make their video game visions a reality.

Maybe it should be.  We might get better Dragon Age games in the future.

  It is a business, and a business expands by creating quality products that can be enjoyed by more and more customers.

Yes.  And businesses shoot themselves in the foot by trying to reinvent the wheel to create products when the goal of expanding thier customer base assumes too much priority.

Modifié par Joy Divison, 08 octobre 2011 - 04:00 .

[Heimdall]

Joy Divison wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

Not really seeing  your point.  Metacritic user reviews don't
impress me.  Few online reviews do.  In my experience it is primarily
those who feel a need to complain that try to plaster their opinion all
over the internet.

You see it plain as day.  You just chose to ignore it and the evidence which substantiates it because it does not conform to your opinion.  If Metacritic is truly the place for "those who feel a need to complain," then Origins must be even better than is claimed considering its very good score www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-origins

I disregard it because I don't trust internet reviews.  I don't deny more people have more to complain about in DA2, largely because it differed sharply from it's predecesor.  That there will be legions of people screaming about not getting the clone of Origins they wanted was always inevitable and thats what I see in most of those reviews, not judgements of the game based solely on itself.  I'm not sure what you want me to argue with here.  Do you think it was universally hated?  It was not.  Far from it.  Do you think that those of us who enjoyed it don't deserve to get the games we like as much as you?

Your arguments is that DA2 was essentially a flop and lacked any redeeming features.

 

When looking at the those two user-review scores, that looks at lot more like a flop than a first-rate high quality game.

And I didn't say it lacked any redeeming features.  I said it was ill-conceived because it sought to expand its fanbase which made for predictable results: a mediocre game lacking the depth and the je ne sais quoi that its predecessor had that made it stand out.

  Seeking to expand the fanbase did not lead to the issues it had by defalt.  It had issues, but all those I had a problem with probably could have been much better if the game had spent six more months in development, not a radical change in the game direction.  It probably helped that I approached the game as something other than a sequel to Origins, rather than ladening myself with that expectation when I already knew it was a very different game.  I have very multi-genre tastes, that probably helped as well.

No you said they traded the goal of a quality product for widening the fanbase as if they were mutually exclusive.

And I stand by that assertion.  Why don't you come up with enough examples in art and entertainment where a conscious attempt to widen the fanbase resulted in excellence in its respective medium to prove me wrong?

IThe goal of widening the appeal is a difficult one, and it is dependent on creating a quality product.  I'm not saying Bioware was wildly successful with it. am only trying to say that there were those of us who liked it, many in
fact, and I'm trying to understand by what logic you believe a company
should not try to sell more of it's product. 

A video game company is not a band.  Bioware never has been an enclve for artists seeking to make their video game visions a reality.

Maybe it should be.  We might get better Dragon Age games in the future.

  But it is not, and never has been.  You attach expectations to it as if it were.

  It is a business, and a business expands by creating quality products that can be enjoyed by more and more customers.

Yes.  And businesses shoot themselves in the foot by trying to reinvent the wheel to create products when the goal of expanding thier customer base assumes too much priority.

So they shouldn't try new things or attempt to innovate?  They should just do the same old thing with a vaguely different twist each time?  And here I thought you wanted them to be artists...

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 08 octobre 2011 - 04:47 .