141 réponses à ce sujet

[Placeholder1]

UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...

what is so bad about EA....they
dont make the games they just supply money for bioware...dont you people
WANT your favorite company to make money and be succsesful...and whats
so bad about " makeing games for a wider audience"...they just want to
make their games to more people so more poeple can enjoy their
games....has no one thought about this

EA owns Bioware it's not like the executives at EA just hand the developers at Bioware a blank check and let them develop games as they see fit, it's EA desire to capture the Call of Duty audience that lead to games like Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 2.

Bioware was perfectly capable of supporting itself before EA came along and forced them to "streamline" their games in order to appeal to a wider audience.

Doctor Moustache wrote...

The argument that "they are abandoning me for a wider audience" is rubbish.

First
of all, Bioware have to aim for success.  They cant just make niche
games and hope to survive.  Anybody who wants that is just asking them
to drown themselves  Is that what you want?  I don't.  I would rather
they continue making creative games built for success then one out there
niche game that 100 people will play and then they go bankrupt and
loose everything. 

Second, just because they are turning towards
developing there games in a wider appealing way doesn't mean they arent
still great games.  I hate the mentality that if its not indie or not
made purely on an artistic basis and not on a product basis then that
means its automatically bad.    The mentality that a game can't be both
artistic and commercial at the same time is bull****.  If you really
believe that then your not a gamer at all because, news flash, 99% of
games are made to be commercially successful. 

Times change. 
Bioware changes.  They can't keep making the old games just because you
liked them better.  They have to do what is commercially successful. 
Otherwise there is no Bioware at all. 

RPG's are hardly niche titles Fallout 3, New Vegas, DA:0, ME1, Oblivion, etc all sold incredibly well it may be true that RPG's don't achieve the same numbers as pure shooters but they don't perform so poorly as to be categorized as "niche" games.

[Vegos]

Neurotics wrote...

I wish I had a "rid the world of pions" button but alas...

Now what have those poor mesons with zero spin ever done to you?

Also, getting rid of them would likely cause a lot of chaos, with the nuclei of all atoms suddenly going all crazy.

Modifié par Vegos, 07 novembre 2011 - 02:41 .

[shep82]

Such a lovely thread full of maturity. /end sarcasam

[Annihilator27]

Selene Moonsong wrote...

This isn't a new when compared to the original BioBoards, there were disappointments over NWN and the subsequent entries to the series. The tendency to disapprove of how things are going in pre-release forums has grown immensely over the years, and it isn't just on BSN.

DA II wasn't well accepted and was a bit of a disappointment to many. Much of that is a result of individual expectations, some so extreme that they claim the developers had broken their promises, except that the developers never make such promises. So, hey, they tried something different and it didn't work out too well. The last I saw, there isn't a AAA developer out there who's every single title is up to fan expectations.

ME 3 looks to me like they are working very hard on releasing a very smooth and polished finale to the ME trilogy from what I have seen in the unfinished and unpolished beta that got leaked and spread like wildfire on the Web.

I miss the old days.

[1136342t54_]

greengoron89 wrote...

A fair and well-founded analysis of the game - and one I wish I'd see more often on the forums.

Thanks I personally like DA2 for what it is but it just get annoying to have to say DA2 isn't a failure constantly and explain the reasons why.

It's a shame, really - this sort of topic has some potential for being a meaningful discussion. Sadly, it has dilapidated into a dung-throwing contest without any sort of direction or rationale - as it almost always does. <_<

Wel this was bound to happen. To many people love to hijack thread on here and basically troll the **** out of each other.

[Vegos]

1136342t54 wrote...

Thanks I personally like DA2 for what it is but it just get annoying to have to say DA2 isn't a failure constantly and explain the reasons why.

For what it is, DA2 isn't bad, but for what it could have been...yes, it is bad.

That doesn't say BioWare are suddenly the worst RPG developer in the world, but it does say something about the direction they're heading in, when you take everything else into account.

Modifié par Vegos, 07 novembre 2011 - 02:57 .

[CARL_DF90]

greengoron89 wrote...

1136342t54 wrote...
This. Dragon Age 2 is regarded by everyone generally as game that isn't as good as DAO and didn't necessarily live up to general expectations. Honestly I can accept that because DA2 could have been a great game like most Bioware totals (excluding NWN)

Now when people go on about "it was a complete fail." or "It was a disaster." That is when I just stop listening because DA2 was a good game but it felt rushed and to limited. Even the story while interesting could have been much more better if they spent time on it. DA2 was basically what many of the critics needed to attempt to prove that Bioware has become the worst RPG developer in actuality it isn't. DA2 was a game that just simply wasn't a game you'd expect from bioware which means it isn't great.

A fair and well-founded analysis of the game - and one I wish I'd see more often on the forums.

1136342t54 wrote...

CARL_DF90 wrote...

*sighs*
Keep on topic people. ANy more personal attacks/arguing and someone
might come around and shut this thread down. Good grief. How Bioware
puts up with this garbarge is beyond me. It would take the patience of
Saints.

Topic really isn't related to ME3 so it may get locked soon anyway.

It's a shame, really - this sort of topic has some potential for being a meaningful discussion. Sadly, it has dilapidated into a dung-throwing contest without any sort of direction or rationale - as it almost always does. <_<

I know, right? It's almost as if it is utterly impossible to have a sensible conversation around here. *sighs* More is the pity.

[1136342t54_]

Vegos wrote...

For what it is, DA2 isn't bad, but for what it could have been...yes, it is bad.

Not really. A game developer can make a bad game but then make another great game since most of their games are usually good. Pleny of people did not like NWN or the second one. The only reason people suddenly thinks this is such a damn shock is because EA own Bioware for now.

That doesn't say BioWare are suddenly the worst RPG developer in the world, but it does say something about the direction they're heading in, when you take everything else into account.

Not necessarily. ME series has always been a Action/RPG. It getting more and more over the top and adding more action to it would make sense. Actually ME3 looks like it has a better level progression than ME2 (its basically more detailed) and from what I heard some of the things you did in the previous games can possibly decide the fate of the galaxy.

[Vegos]

1136342t54 wrote...


Not really. A game developer can make a bad game but then make another great game since most of their games are usually good. Pleny of people did not like NWN or the second one. The only reason people suddenly thinks this is such a damn shock is because EA own Bioware for now.

Second place is good but if you knew you could have won, you'll be disappointed. Same here, DA2 was good, but knowing that it could have been a lot better if they tossed in more story and less parachuting mooks, made it disappointing.

Not necessarily. ME series has always been a Action/RPG. It getting more and more over the top and adding more action to it would make sense. Actually ME3 looks like it has a better level progression than ME2 (its basically more detailed) and from what I heard some of the things you did in the previous games can possibly decide the fate of the galaxy.

Well I suppose I'm a bit on a different track here, since demos and trailers never seemed relevant to me because watching them never tells me anything about the actual experience of playing the game. Sure I watch trailers and try demos, but in the end, I've consistently realized that I might have as well not done that and have the same opinion about the real thing anyway.

[xentar]

Of course not! Faith can be very destructive.

[Complistic]

THE SKY IS FALLING!!

[Niddy']

No.

Faith is for religious people, not concerned customers with invested interest. If the beta was intentionally leaked or not there should be some type of acknowledgement and reasonable questions/concerns about the game answered.

That's HR/PR 101 yo.

[1136342t54_]

Niddy' wrote...

No.

Faith is for religious people, not concerned customers with invested interest. If the beta was intentionally leaked or not there should be some type of acknowledgement and reasonable questions/concerns about the game answered.

That's HR/PR 101 yo.

Faith isn't solely religous. You can believe somone will do their job competently based on previous performance.

[Vegos]

1136342t54 wrote...

Niddy' wrote...

No.

Faith is for religious people, not concerned customers with invested interest. If the beta was intentionally leaked or not there should be some type of acknowledgement and reasonable questions/concerns about the game answered.

That's HR/PR 101 yo.

Faith isn't solely religous. You can believe somone will do their job competently based on previous performance.

That's not faith, that's trust.

[crimzontearz]

1136342t54 wrote...

Niddy' wrote...

No.

Faith is for religious people, not concerned customers with invested interest. If the beta was intentionally leaked or not there should be some type of acknowledgement and reasonable questions/concerns about the game answered.

That's HR/PR 101 yo.

Faith isn't solely religous. You can believe somone will do their job competently based on previous performance.

DA2..........................

[1136342t54_]

Vegos wrote...
Second place is good but if you knew you could have won, you'll be disappointed. Same here, DA2 was good, but knowing that it could have been a lot better if they tossed in more story and less parachuting mooks, made it disappointing.

I enjoy good things and DA2 was a bit of a dissapointment but not enough of one that I will constantly bring that up as a source of all evil that is Bioware.

You don't necessarily do that but others have.

Well I suppose I'm a bit on a different track here, since demos and trailers never seemed relevant to me because watching them never tells me anything about the actual experience of playing the game. Sure I watch trailers and try demos, but in the end, I've consistently realized that I might have as well not done that and have the same opinion about the real thing anyway.

Sure playing beta's or demos don't give you a perfect look at the game but you have to make judgements on information give and what you have seen.

[1136342t54_]

crimzontearz wrote...
DA2..........................

I like DA2 and I wasn't talking about Bioware sir.

[1136342t54_]

Vegos wrote...

1136342t54 wrote...

Niddy' wrote...

No.

Faith is for religious people, not concerned customers with invested interest. If the beta was intentionally leaked or not there should be some type of acknowledgement and reasonable questions/concerns about the game answered.

That's HR/PR 101 yo.

Faith isn't solely religous. You can believe somone will do their job competently based on previous performance.

That's not faith, that's trust.

Faith- confidence or trust in a person or thing. Faith in another's ability.

http://dictionary.re...om/browse/faith

[Dreadwing 67]

It tires me to see the same DA2 or appealing to the CoD audience arguments. It's always the same crap, and it saddens me these people even like ME1 and/or 2. all I have have to say is.....Come March 6, I will enjoy the conclusion to the most epic trilogy ever.....haters can hate else where

[Vegos]

Link dictionaries all you like, "Expectations based on previous performance" are not a matter of faith.

[crimzontearz]

1136342t54 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
DA2..........................

I like DA2 and I wasn't talking about Bioware sir.

true, for you, but objectively in the eye of the masses -apparently- and in the eyes of Inon Zur as well DA2 was a subpar rushjob compared to other Bioware productions

as for not talking about Bioware......well, the thread was about having faith in them right?? 

[1136342t54_]

crimzontearz wrote...

true, for you, but objectively in the eye of the masses -apparently- and in the eyes of Inon Zur as well DA2 was a subpar rushjob compared to other Bioware productions

as for not talking about Bioware......well, the thread was about having faith in them right?? 

DA2 is a good game in general but in comparison to DAO and the high expectations of DA fans (in large part due to its marketing) it was seen as a travesty by people on these forums and a a dissapointment but still fun game by players I know who don't lurk forums constantly (and many reviewers). 

I was correcting the person about the definition of faith.

[Niddy']

1136342t54 wrote...

Vegos wrote...

1136342t54 wrote...

Niddy' wrote...

No.

Faith is for religious people, not concerned customers with invested interest. If the beta was intentionally leaked or not there should be some type of acknowledgement and reasonable questions/concerns about the game answered.

That's HR/PR 101 yo.

Faith isn't solely religous. You can believe somone will do their job competently based on previous performance.

That's not faith, that's trust.

Faith- confidence or trust in a person or thing. Faith in another's ability.

http://dictionary.re...om/browse/faith

Everyone replys to the usage of 1 word and entire arguement is voided.

Forgot why I even come here.