216 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

Xewaka wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...
The likely reason we have to do so

But that's only happening because you're wasting resources on things like voice acting and cinematics.

It is only a waste if you don't consider them to be relevant to the main target audience. I would wager the main target audience Bioware was going for would see such things as either welcome or indispensable.

But that's the broader audience.  It's a self-fulfilling prophecy that if you insist on targetting the broader audience that you need to include features that they like.

Older games clearly demonstrated that a smaller audience will accept cheaper games (at a higher priec - corrected for inflation game prices are less than half of what they were 25 years ago).

[hoorayforicecream]

Xewaka wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...
The likely reason we have to do so

But that's only happening because you're wasting resources on things like voice acting and cinematics.

It is only a waste if you don't consider them to be relevant to the main target audience. I would wager the main target audience Bioware was going for would see such things as either welcome or indispensable.

Like most consumers, the only main target audience Sylvius cares about is himself. There's nothing wrong with this, but at the same time one cannot fault the standard response - just say "tell us what you liked and disliked, and leave it up to us to make the next game".

I wouldn't really take advice on production from a community message board anyway.

[hoorayforicecream]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Older games clearly demonstrated that a smaller audience will accept cheaper games (at a higher priec - corrected for inflation game prices are less than half of what they were 25 years ago).

Proof?

Edit: Are you talking about porting old games to new platforms and reselling them, or the creation of new games in the vein of old ones, and selling those?

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 11 octobre 2011 - 06:17 .

[Gunderic]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

"we think a lot more about the commercial elements than we used to," Zeschuk explained.

The likely reason we have to do so

EDIT: I think I fixed it

And that's working well, I take it? As opposed to focusing on creating a quality product?

[Akka le Vil]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

"we think a lot more about the commercial elements than we used to," Zeschuk explained.

The likely reason we have to do so

EDIT: I think I fixed it

As it's a pet peeve of mine, I'll bite :

Lots of these increased costs come DIRECTLY from publicity, merchandising and other such crap (this go as far as TWO THIRDS of the whole budget for some games, in fact, which means that the game itself isn't that more expensive than some years ago, it just has a completely inflated merchandising). Yes, the same ones that butcher games by saying "dumbing down games sell more, you must do it !".
So the guys and mentality who ruin games to supposedly make them sell more, are the same ones who actually make the game require to sell more because of increased costs.

So where exactly is this supposed to become justified and acceptable ?

[Gotholhorakh]

@cruelgretchen

I think honestly that at this point there's little that can be achieved through complaining to BioWare about this issue - we have to decide what our next purchasing decision will be governed by, that's where we have a say in the matter.

For my part, I have said I wish I hadn't bought DA2, and after a great deal of time playing it and thinking about/discussing it, yes I resent the money spent because it wasn't like Dragon Age but it was badged as a sequel, and to me that's a bad thing.

I also think that in terms of the game's quality, Dragon Age: Origins doesn't look out of place on the game shelf next to Baldur's Gate, Half-life, Morrowind, Max Payne, Deus Ex etc., while DA2 is clearly quite something else in terms of popular opinion.

I would certainly rather have the money in my pocket, but there was a process and I decided to buy it, I have reconciled myself with wanting to support BioWare generally. I think that'll continue for now, because like Bethesda they are prepared to make games with a little complexity and intelligence, aimed at people like the mythical "us" we all imagine exists. That doesn't mean I'll buy DA3 automatically though - once bitten, twice shy and I will opt out of it if it isn't my bag.

I think what happens next is that BioWare try to follow the money and the fans with the franchise as they see fit, if they change it beyond recognition and lots of people like it then they are ultimately getting through to people and being successful, whether you and I and a couple of million other RPG fans like it, or not.

It's hard to begrudge them that, if that's what they want to do, that's what they want to do, and if they're successful with it the decision is vindicated. It is clearly the right thing to do from their perspective if that happens.

Our most powerful influence in this will be to vote with our wallets. Of course, none of this is to dismiss ongoing discussion of the issues with DA2, because this is how you make the developer aware of things and express how you would like things to improve - and it's also the sort of thing we do as a community, the existence of which is healthy and ultimately probably useful for feedback and stuff.

Just... don't hold your breath for your desired outcome when it comes to Dragon Age, because I think it isn't going to happen.

Modifié par Gotholhorakh, 11 octobre 2011 - 07:50 .

[Stanley Woo]

Nice post, Gotholhorakh. While I might disagree with you, you've expressed yourself very well. Thank you.

[Sylvius the Mad]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Older games clearly demonstrated that a smaller audience will accept cheaper games (at a higher priec - corrected for inflation game prices are less than half of what they were 25 years ago).

Proof?

The pre-1990 gaming market.  Games then cost a lot more (adjusted for inflation game prices then were 2-3 times higher than they are today), and they were profitable despite having much lower sales totals.  Because they cost a lot less to make.

Edit: Are you talking about porting old games to new platforms and reselling them, or the creation of new games in the vein of old ones, and selling those?

I'm talking about creating new games that don't cost so bloody much to make.  They didn't cost this much to make in 1997.  There's no reason why they have to cost this much to make now.

[Sylvius the Mad]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Like most consumers, the only main target audience Sylvius cares about is himself.

But I recognise that I was the median consumer is a small gaming market.  Only this broader market marginalises me.

[Xewaka]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
But that's the broader audience.  It's a self-fulfilling prophecy that if you insist on targetting the broader audience that you need to include features that they like.
Older games clearly demonstrated that a smaller audience will accept cheaper games (at a higher price - corrected for inflation game prices are less than half of what they were 25 years ago).

I know it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. If I were to have it my way, cRPGs would still be turn-based and voiceless, because I find turn-based combat inmensely more fun and engaging and lack of voice usually means more elaborated writing.

[ElitePinecone]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

"we think a lot more about the commercial elements than we used to," Zeschuk explained.

The likely reason we have to do so

EDIT: I think I fixed it

Thanks for fixing the link, Mr Woo. 

You're right, of course - it's impossible to ignore the commercial side of the business, given ballooning development costs. And we (as in, fans) aren't even privy to the number-crunching inside Bioware, so we don't know how a game's profitability measures up against its sales data. 

But I'd wonder whether it's a sustainable business practice to do something like DA2 - with hugely polarising reactions and rampaging fans on the forums - where we've seen a genuine fall in overall sales numbers (a quite dramatic fall) and melodramatic posts from people who say they'll never buy another Bioware game again, etc. 

Some of this is self-important hyperbole, but I'd suggest that some segments of Bioware's "core fans" (as one of the Doctors termed them/us) won't be so willing to pre-order any future content.

Clearly this wasn't the intended effect of DA2, but I'd wonder whether it's worth arguably alienating some portions of your playerbase just to meet commercial pressures which would seem to be fairly flexible. We don't know why the development of DA2 worked as it did, or what concerns had to be met in terms of time or budgets, but I'd hope that taking some more time in the future for planning and polishing content is pretty high up on the list of future priorities.

Edit: Just to add, I loved Legacy and MotA - they're exactly the sort of quality content I like playing. It'd be excellent if this level of polish were applied to something larger, or was the standard for DA3. 

Modifié par ElitePinecone, 11 octobre 2011 - 10:47 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The pre-1990 gaming market.  Games then cost a lot more (adjusted for inflation game prices then were 2-3 times higher than they are today), and they were profitable despite having much lower sales totals.  Because they cost a lot less to make.

Edit: Are you talking about porting old games to new platforms and reselling them, or the creation of new games in the vein of old ones, and selling those?

I'm talking about creating new games that don't cost so bloody much to make.  They didn't cost this much to make in 1997.  There's no reason why they have to cost this much to make now.

You can't simply transplant the pre-1990 game market and assume all factors to be the same in 2011. If markets were that easily transplanted, then hair metal bands would still be the most popular music, we ladies would still be wearing leg warmers, and we'd all be piling into the theaters for movies in the vein of John Hughes.

Things change. The market for games has gotten bigger and evolved, just like the markets for other forms of entertainment. I'm not saying that games aren't becoming too expensive (they are, and that's one reason why we see paid DLC, as well as smaller XBL/PSN style games), but I don't think that your idea of simply regressing back to the pre-1990s model of game development works. Just because there was a market for carphones at one point in time doesn't mean producing them is a viable business plan today.

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 11 octobre 2011 - 10:43 .

[Stanley Woo]

ElitePinecone wrote...

You're right, of course - it's impossible to ignore the commercial side of the business, given ballooning development costs. And we (as in, fans) aren't even privy to the number-crunching inside Bioware, so we don't know how a game's profitability measures up against its sales data.

All statements by a lot of those armchair executives to the contrary, lol. I have learned a lot about the industry, about game development, and about marketing and big business in my 10 years with BioWare.

But I'd wonder whether it's a sustainable business practice to do something like DA2 - with hugely polarising reactions and rampaging fans on the forums - where we've seen a genuine fall in overall sales numbers (a quite dramatic fall) and melodramatic posts from people who say they'll never buy another Bioware game again, etc. 

Well, for one thing, you don't make a project to have polarizing reviews or to anger fans. Most projects are made with the best of intentions and with the hopes of not only wowing the existing audience, but bringing in people from a different audience as well. There's no way you can guarantee that a project will be a success, no matter how successful the project looks or sounds or however much market research or focus testing you do.

Some of this is self-important hyperbole, but I'd suggest that some segments of Bioware's "core fans" (as one of the Doctors termed them/us) won't be so willing to pre-order any future content.

Clearly this wasn't the intended effect of DA2, but I'd wonder whether it's worth arguably alienating some portions of your playerbase just to meet commercial pressures which would seem to be fairly flexible. We don't know why the development of DA2 worked as it did, or what concerns had to be met in terms of time or budgets, but I'd hope that taking some more time in the future for planning and polishing content is pretty high up on the list of future priorities

Despite a lot of self-admitted ignorance of internal business practices, policies and decisions, many are more than willing to condemn us or EA for any perceived fault in their much-anticipated game. i can't blame people for feeling strongly about the games we make, but I do wish folks would dial it down to a wary skepticism or cagey optimism instead of falling into internet stereotypes. i've often said that I don't care whether you agree with us, or even like us or our games, just talk to us in a civil, constructive manner and we can hash out much more than if everyone's raging so loud their ears and their brains have shut off!

I would hope that the steps we've taken to address some of DAII's concerns in Legacy and Mark of the Assassin will show very obviously that we are listening to the community's concerns and we can deal with our differences without resorting to insults or name-calling or, as I like to call it, "sensationalist hyperbole."

We can't (and shouldn't have to) tell you everything we're doing or why we're doing it, but several of our developers do their darnedest to be as open and honest as they can about our business and our games, despite people shouting them down and calling for their heads. Mike Laidlaw actually comes in to talk to the community, and he's the franchise creative director! David Gaider spends as much time with you guys as he is able, and he's the Lead Writer of the franchise. John Epler takes time out of Cinematics Design to both discuss things with the community and Moderate. And I find it therapeutic to come here on my breaks from QA testing. Heck, most of our writing department is here in one capacity or another! So yeah, you guys get a lot of attention from a bunch of us developers, so you have many different perspectives on the same issue.

Awesome comments, ElitePinecone. Thank you, and please let me know if you have any further questions or if there's anything I can help clarify.

[GithCheater]

Stanley Woo wrote...

And I find it therapeutic to come here on my breaks from QA testing.

You have a strange notion regarding therapy.

I always put on a straight jacket before reading and replying to these forums.

[cruelgretchen]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Nice post, Gotholhorakh. While I might disagree with you, you've expressed yourself very well. Thank you.

 
he banned me  24 , you wrote this , now hes happy

edit :
ok , some stuff i wrote was stupid from me ...but i still i feel kinda cut out  with my critic voice .

Modifié par cruelgretchen, 12 octobre 2011 - 12:12 .

[ElitePinecone]

GithCheater wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

And I find it therapeutic to come here on my breaks from QA testing.

You have a strange notion regarding therapy.

This.  Thanks for the reply. 

I guess that by this point after DA2's release people who post on the forums usually do so constructively rather than ranting. Even if the reaction is less than glowing, it's mostly civil. 

Didn't mean to imply Bioware actively set out to make something polarising - nobody plans a maelstrom - and I accept that there was genuine surprise at the level of dissatisfaction. People who entertain conspiracy theories about developers feigning penitence to win back fans will never be satisfied; if there were no response they'd accuse you of hubris or arrogance, but anything less than public self-flagellation is seen as insincere.

I'm personally very optimistic about future content (even if I can't understand the mindset behind some of DA2), and I hope the fan feedback and sales for MotA are enough to justify the investment of this level of quality in the future. 

[Tantum Dic Verbo]

GithCheater wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

And I find it therapeutic to come here on my breaks from QA testing.

You have a strange notion regarding therapy.

I always put on a straight jacket before reading and replying to these forums.

Maybe he meant therapeutic in a "Good God, I'm glad I'm not one of those mouth-breathers!" sort of way.

[Stanley Woo]

ElitePinecone wrote...
I guess that by this point after DA2's release people who post on the forums usually do so constructively rather than ranting. Even if the reaction is less than glowing, it's mostly civil. 

Most of it, yes. We still get the occasional new player who's late to the game and decides that he's goign to be clever and come in here to bash the game... with months-old tropes that have since been addressed.

Didn't mean to imply Bioware actively set out to make something polarising - nobody plans a maelstrom - and I accept that there was genuine surprise at the level of dissatisfaction. People who entertain conspiracy theories about developers feigning penitence to win back fans will never be satisfied; if there were no response they'd accuse you of hubris or arrogance, but anything less than public self-flagellation is seen as insincere.

Exactly. They want us to admit we were wrong. And for some things, yes, we were. We knew we were doing things differently than with Origins--in many cases, out of necessity--and one of the things we did very wrong was that we failed to adequately prepare the community for just how different DAII was going to be from Origins. We mentioned some of the differences, but at that point, people still thought "oh, it's going to be similar to Origins but for these differences." We were neither loud enough, articulate enough, nor persistent enough in managing the community's extremely high expectations. Being too good at what you do--first world problems, right?

I'm personally very optimistic about future content (even if I can't understand the mindset behind some of DA2), and I hope the fan feedback and sales for MotA are enough to justify the investment of this level of quality in the future. 

One day, maybe we'll be able to talk about some of it, but rest assured, at no time are we merely sitting on our laurels or coasting on past successes. We are always looking for ways to make our games better overall. it's just that people are far less forgiving of a corporate game developer (like EA BioWare) than they are of a plucky underdog studio (like independent BioWare). And so it goes.

[Stanley Woo]

Tantum Dic Verbo wrote...

GithCheater wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

And I find it therapeutic to come here on my breaks from QA testing.

You have a strange notion regarding therapy.

I always put on a straight jacket before reading and replying to these forums.

Maybe he meant therapeutic in a "Good God, I'm glad I'm not one of those mouth-breathers!" sort of way.

That's rather insulting towards the folks who might not have the same level of verbal/written articulation as we do. Sure, there'll always be folks on an internet message board that we don't like or that we think is a loser. but that's the same kind of knee-jerk, reactionary thinking that many of us argue against.

Look at the positive effect of some of those excitable people. If they like something, their enthusiasm is very evident. They feel very strongly about things, which is why, when they don't like something, you're sure to hear it. But, like all of us, they have a great passion for the game. They identify with it, they are moved by it, they have a very strong connection fo that BioWare game experience. Their feedback, while possibly harder to get at, is no less valuable than yours or mine. We should be trying to get at the core of their complaints or issues rather than belittling them or making fun of them. Part of having such a great community as ours is the willingness of perfect strangers to help out.

So let's not sink to the level of people we profess to hate, and cut it out with the name-calling, please. Thank you.

[wowpwnslol]

Obviously a lie. DA2 has EA stench all over it. I refuse to believe a company that excelled in making excellent PC RPG games has gone from best RPG since Baldur's Gate 2 to a fiasco called Dragon Age 2. Catering to noobs, casuals and consolers is the name of EA's game in order to maximize profits and the spirit of Bioware has been completely gone from their latest console action game... excuse me "RPG". It's 100% about money now, not love of the art of making great RPGs.

"Every time you press a button, something cool has to happen" - is the new motto of the EA corrupted Bioware.

[TheJediSaint]

wowpwnslol wrote...

Obviously a lie. DA2 has EA stench all over it. I refuse to believe a company that excelled in making excellent PC RPG games has gone from best RPG since Baldur's Gate 2 to a fiasco called Dragon Age 2. Catering to noobs, casuals and consolers is the name of EA's game in order to maximize profits and the spirit of Bioware has been completely gone from their latest console action game... excuse me "RPG". It's 100% about money now, not love of the art of making great RPGs.

"Every time you press a button, something cool has to happen" - is the new motto of the EA corrupted Bioware.

/ sacasm on

This statement is not at all elitest, hyperbolic, or melodramatic.

/ sarcasm off

[addiction21]

TheJediSaint wrote...

/ sacasm on

This statement is not at all elitest, hyperbolic, or melodramatic.

/ sarcasm off

That account has been blowing the same smoke since DA:O. Ignore him.

[wowpwnslol]

addiction21 wrote...

That account has been blowing the same smoke since DA:O. Ignore him.

What are you talking about?

I've always praised DA as a masterpiece amidst all the flaming by the consolers how it's "too difficult" and "complicated".

I put 200+ hours into the game playing solo and with party. I loved the game.

It's the new philosophy to dumb down games with dialogue wheels, anime combat and next to zero replayability is what I always had problem with.

Bioware had a gem on their hands with Dragon Age and a huge potential to fill a missing niche in a sorely lacking RPG market - instead they were forced by EA to go for mass appeal, destroying everything that made the first game great. The DA universe had huge potential, now it's a laughing stock.

[Britic]

For what it's worth here are my two cents:

I've come to the conclusion that part of the backlash to DA2 and EA in general is stems directly from Bioware's interactions with the fans, specifically their reactions to the detractors of DA2.

Rather than let the first impression bile, fade over time they took a very proactive and opinionated stance which only served to drive more fans away. To some it hammered home the idea that Bioware would rather turn on it's fans then accept the possibility of failure, with such incidents as:

The metacritic review that a Bioware employee made that insisted that the game was great and that the fans were being ungrateful.

Mike Laidlaw's early comments in regards to the game.

And, yes I'm aware it's not in the best taste, but Mr. Woo's own involvement in the incident regarding a fan's inability to use a product he rightfully paid for.

Perhaps some of this rejection is well deserved.

[Imrahil_]

Stanley Woo wrote...
Well, for one thing, you don't make a project to have polarizing reviews or to anger fans. Most projects are made with the best of intentions and with the hopes of not only wowing the existing audience, but bringing in people from a different audience as well. There's no way you can guarantee that a project will be a success, no matter how successful the project looks or sounds or however much market research or focus testing you do.

Stanley, your posting style is, IMO, much more engaging & less confrontational nowadays, so fwiw, I feel like it's more of a discussion.  Thank you for that.  Sincerely.

With that said, I have a few disagreements (I'll give you a few seconds for the shock to wear off)...

it's just that people are far less forgiving of a corporate game developer (like EA BioWare) than they are of a plucky underdog studio (like independent BioWare).

Despite a lot of self-admitted ignorance of internal business practices, policies and decisions, many are more than willing to condemn us or EA for any perceived fault in their much-anticipated game.

To be honest, isn't that a good thing?  The EA part, I mean?  As much as the company line might be "Bioware = EA now!", isn't it a good thing *for Bioware* that people are putting the blame on EA?  Meaning they still mostly trust Bioware, if only tEvil EA hadn't Borg'd them?  Feel free not to answer, due to being Borg'd. 

Stanley Woo wrote...
Exactly. They want us to admit we were wrong. And for some things, yes, we were. We knew we were doing things differently than with Origins--in many cases, out of necessity--and one of the things we did very wrong was that we failed to adequately prepare the community for just how different DAII was going to be from Origins. We mentioned some of the differences, but at that point, people still thought "oh, it's going to be similar to Origins but for these differences." We were neither loud enough, articulate enough, nor persistent enough in managing the community's extremely high expectations. Being too good at what you do--first world problems, right?

Yes, but I think that if you had been loud enough & articulate enough, your pre-sale numbers wouldn't have been nearly as good as they were.  If more people understood what DA2 was going to be, your sales would have suffered.  I was put off by the trailers & what I read about it, so I think I can vouch for that.  If I hadn't investigated the game beforehand, I'd have been in the "bought it, disappointed" column, instead of the "didn't buy it" column.

Which is why I think you're addressing the wrong problem, really.  If you'd succeeded at what you say you failed at, you'd have less sales.  Because the game wasn't what people wanted.   If you'd made people more aware of that, well, I honestly think the Week 1 sales would have been lower, & the Week 1 sales carried the bulk of the DA2 sales figures.  Once people knew what DA2 was, the sales tanked, so, again, I think you're addressing the wrong problem in this paragraph.

Look at the positive effect of some of those excitable people. If they like something, their enthusiasm is very evident. They feel very strongly about things, which is why, when they don't like something, you're sure to hear it. But, like all of us, they have a great passion for the game. They identify with it, they are moved by it, they have a very strong connection fo that BioWare game experience.

I am glad that at least someone on Bioware's team recognizes this.  I don't come to a site of a game I didn't buy 7 months after the game I didn't buy came out to express my opinion for the heck of it.  I do it because I care about the game.  I care about a game I would love to play & was looking forward to playing, if only it hadn't turned out to be a game I don't want to play.

Xewaka wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...
The likely reason we have to do so

But that's only happening because you're wasting resources on things like voice acting and cinematics.

It is only a waste if you don't consider them to be relevant to the main target audience. I would wager the main target audience Bioware was going for would see such things as either welcome or indispensable.

Ok, this is where I still completely disagree with you (or, I guess, the sentiment originated from you, expanded on by Xewaka).

Here's how I see it, as a consumer: DA:O was great.  Not awesome, because I expressed my criticisms of it as well back when DA2 was a twinkle in your collective eye.  It needed improvements, expansions, tweaks, what-have-you.  You added voice acting, dialogue wheel, more cinematics, less customization, etc.

You literally lost half your customer base.  In regards to those things you "added", your current customer base is again, quite literally, split 50-50 on whether they like those "features".  Pretty much on everything I listed before "etc.", & I bet "etc." wouldn't fare well either in a poll.

So if you keep those things, you're catering to a quarter of your original DA:O fans.  I just don't get it.  Why the insistence, in the face of all evidence, of keeping those things that have split your already split fanbase?  You had a successful formula that drew in RPG fans & non-RPG fans.  Criics praised it.  Fans wrote 300-post threads on the characters.  Why the dogmatic insistence on keeping features that a quarter of your original audience like?

Modifié par Imrahil_, 12 octobre 2011 - 03:11 .