171 réponses à ce sujet

[Johnny20]

Here is a little trivia which I suspect will turn out to be true. Dragon Age 3 will be better then DA:II, but still pale in comparison to Origins greatly. That is not because Origins is some "holy unbeatable masterpiece" (though I hold it in the highest regard, personally), it's because I cannot see BioWare ever putting in as much time, effort and care into Dragon Age 3, or any other squeals in the series.

It will be good compared to DA:II, I think, but don't ever expect a massive, epic long game, with massive non-linear story and masses of dialog choices, etc. Even if races return (doubted), they'll be stripped bare, more then likely.

Feel free to prove me wrong. I hope I am, sincerely.

Modifié par Johnny20, 05 janvier 2012 - 01:43 .

[In Exile]

LinksOcarina wrote...
We all hold George Lucas accountable for ruining Star Wars.

There's a significant difference with Lucas. One, we know how involved he was in the movies that were good (e.g. he wasn't the director for Empire). We know when he was the director and screenwriter, and how much creative control he had at which point in what movie.

How is it different exactly for stating Mike Laidlaw did his job poorly as the project head? Not that I think that, I persoanlly felt he did ok, i'm just saying we should be allowed to blame people for mistakes they make, even if its harsh criticism.

The difference is the creative control. As in, Mr. Laidlaw is not, in my view, reasonably responsible for DA2 alone. Whereas we can say that Lucas, based on the relative amount of control he had over the project, was.

Oh, and one more thing, your cynicism is showing, and considering the fact that a traditional RPG for a video game console is what Dragon Age II is by mechanics and design...I think a reevaluation is in order.

? I don't like traditional RPGs that much. But Bioware never really made those.

[In Exile]

Brockololly wrote...
Right, my guess (and its just that) is that in early 2009/maybe even late 2008, as Origins was mostly done on PC and subsequently delayed for consoles, Zeschuk/Muzyka saw how successful ME was and since DAO had been in development for so long, they got cold feet on how well it could do. Thus, at this time they went forward with taking DA2 into more of a console friendly, action RPG, ME style cinematic game. Knowles didn't like it and left, along with Exec. Producer Dan Tudge; then Darrah and Laidlaw take their positions.

We already know that BioWare started work on DA2 waaay before Origins was even out. Just look at Brent Knowles' blog on DAO and then this interview here with Laidlaw from after DA2 came out. I would just guess that BioWare did not think that DAO would do very well, when it in fact went on to be their best selling game to date. But at that point in time when Origins was already out as of November 2009, they had already sunk in a bunch of high level work on changing the fundamentals of everything for DA2, from the art redesign to the adoption of faster combat and voiced PC. They did all that without even seeing the response to DAO.

That's my guess as well. And I honestly think Bioware would have been fine, and they actually done a good job of making a game.

The faster combat and the voiced PC, IMO, would not have created the widespread ire they did on the forum if the overall game was TW2 (which has both, even going farther in both directions) but happen to be technologically and structurally a better game.

[Fast Jimmy]

Realmzmaster wrote...

google_calasade wrote...

Ystitans78 wrote...

You can't really compare Dragon Age 2 to football team that had a bad season and here's why: Dragon Age 2 was deemed a sucuss it sold over 2 million units that's like a football winning a division or going to the playoffs. Secondly all of us here on these forums make up a very small amount of the people that bought Dragon Age 2. I liked Dragon Age 2 and alot of people on these forums liked DA 2 I don't think it's fair to call DA 2 a failure just because a small amount of people that bought the game didn't like it.

I would say the people on these forums extrapolate to those who do not comment in these forums.  Visit the Facebook page for Dragon Age sometime, and you'll see a striking similarity there to what goes on here.

Putting personal likes and dislikes aside...yours and mine included, the facts are that Dragon Age 2 sold less than half of its predecessor when it was supposed to sell more than the original.  It polarized the fanbase.  It lost a myriad of customers for Bioware/EA.

Whether you or I like it does not help quantify whether DA 2 was a success or failure in light of the above facts.

Sales and profitability are not one and the same. DA2 is a commercial success and it made a profit. That is a success no matter what definition you choose to use. Did it have as many sales as DAO? No. The point of a businesses is to make profit. Development costs must be taken into consideration. For example if it cost Bioware $200 million to make DAO in development cost over five years and it makes 240 million in sales that is a net profit of $40 million. 
If DA2 cost $95 million to make and gets sales of $135. Net profit is $40 million. I make the same profit. DA2 is a commercial success, but not a popular success. Note numbers for development costs are imaginary since I do not know what they are.

Not to mention that in business there is the concept of consumer confidence. While DA2 did sell 2 million copies, the vast majority of these were pre-orders. Once fan reviews and word-of-mouth began to spread, the sales rapidly dried up. So while sales-wise, it did not do horrible, I can guarantee it fell far below EA/Bioware projections in their business planning.

Back to my mention of consumer confidence, the internet and these very forums were abuzz with discussion about DA2 and the world of Thedas, with great anticipation for anything Dragon Age related coming out. Now? 75% of the posts are negative in the DA2 forums. The majority of threads are either discussions on what people viewed as wrong with DA2 or where the development team can draw inspiration from other games to get the series back to an enjoyable expereince.

DA2 may have made a financial profit, but it suffered huge net losses in consumer confidence. Bioware, once lauded as a company with almost god-like abilities to make games that fans loved, now stands as the butt of jokes, such as the Awesome Button or ninja-dropping waves. The cost of THIS is nearly incalculable, but is much more devastating than 2 million in sales, which may have not resulted in much of a net profit, given the large amount of changes involved with implementing new features in DA2.

Point being, no one is saying you can't like DA2. But many people did not, and very few new players were attracted by the new direction. Which means that DA2 did more damage than it created benefit, which would make it a failure, objectively speaking. They say the hardest thing to earn in business is trust once it is lost. I think Bioware is unfortunately learning that lesson the hardest way possible with the Dragon Age franchise.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

And Co-founder Ray Muzyka acknowledge the lost of customers in public is not a good sign for successful business.

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 05 janvier 2012 - 02:26 .

[Zanallen]

Morducai wrote...

I did not see anything that constituted as a direct insult or even indirect insult. I was merely giving my logical conclusion as to why Mr. Laidlaw gets a promotion while Mr. Knowels gets buried. If that means you outright threatening to ban then so be it. But just to be clear, you ban me from the forums not from my account as I noticed that in the past those lines are kinda blurred. However, I do thank you for making me see where people stand here. For what it's worth I apologize for my words. 

Brent didn't get buried. He quit. He decided to give up the opportunity to work on DA2. However, Bioware didn't have any other lead designer positions open, as ME and TOR LD positions were already filled and Bioware wasn't about to start a new RPG to give him a position, so he was religated to other things. As such, he quit to work on his writing.

Mr. Laidlaw received a promotion because DA2, despite selling less than DAO, was a financial success.

[Aaleel]

I wonder who came up with the whole "Awesome Button" thing. That one will be a thorn in their side for a while lol.

[Atakuma]

Aaleel wrote...

I wonder who came up with the whole "Awesome Button" thing. That one will be a thorn in their side for a while lol.

It could be worse, they could have continued to use the term "hot rod samurai"

[Zanallen]

Imperium Alpha wrote...

Hmmmmm ?

Ah yes, herp derp the youtube video. It wasn't funny the first time it was posted. The thousandth time still isn't funny.

[eyesofastorm]

Zanallen wrote...

Imperium Alpha wrote...

Hmmmmm ?

Ah yes, herp derp the youtube video. It wasn't funny the first time it was posted. The thousandth time still isn't funny.

I didn't think it was funny either... but it was saddening the first time I saw it and I still find it saddening.  

[Zanallen]

eyesofastorm wrote...

I didn't think it was funny either... but it was saddening the first time I saw it and I still find it saddening.  

I never found it sad either. It is four interview clips taken out of context flanking a bunch of pointless whining about tie-in and mostly free DLC items. Boo freakin' hoo.

[PsychoWARD23]

Atakuma wrote...

Mike has been promoted to Creative director, someone else will be the lead on DA3.

I still don't understand why. Creative director?

[eyesofastorm]

Zanallen wrote...

eyesofastorm wrote...

I didn't think it was funny either... but it was saddening the first time I saw it and I still find it saddening.  

I never found it sad either. It is four interview clips taken out of context flanking a bunch of pointless whining about tie-in and mostly free DLC items. Boo freakin' hoo.

Then you either completely missed the point or the point doesn't concern you.  That doesn't mean that there is no point or that the point isn't valid to persons who are not you.  As such, you might consider observing the point even if you disagree with it rather than belittle it.  Jus sayin'.

Modifié par eyesofastorm, 05 janvier 2012 - 03:06 .

[PsychoWARD23]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

And Co-founder Ray Muzyka acknowledge the lost of customers in public is not a good sign for successful business.

Oh really? Besides having your lead director of your highest selling game ever leave and complain about the direction, and the majority of fans responding very poorly to it.

[MerinTB]

I would love to see Mike's take on a different game. He's so genuine and enthusiastic about his vision that I'm sure he's got a great game in him.
Trying to transform Dragon Age from Origins to that vision just... well, it didn't quite make it there. I think he'd even admit that much.

I'm not condemning DA3 until I start getting information about it, however... they can course-correct to awesome again, even if it's an awesome unlike it's two predecessors.

[DreamwareStudio]

LinksOcarina wrote...

That said, I think that Bioware as a company needs to shape up a bit...or at least convince EA to give them time to do stuff.

Bioware and EA are the same company...

[eyesofastorm]

MerinTB wrote...

I would love to see Mike's take on a different game. He's so genuine and enthusiastic about his vision that I'm sure he's got a great game in him.
Trying to transform Dragon Age from Origins to that vision just... well, it didn't quite make it there. I think he'd even admit that much.

I'm not condemning DA3 until I start getting information about it, however... they can course-correct to awesome again, even if it's an awesome unlike it's two predecessors.

That was masterful Mr. TB.  I'm not sure that I regret not personally having your graciousness, but I can appreciate it nonetheless.  

[Zanallen]

eyesofastorm wrote...

Then you either completely missed the point or the point doesn't concern you.  That doesn't mean that there is no point or that the point isn't valid to persons who are not you.  As such, you might consider observing the point even if you disagree with it rather than belittle it.  Jus sayin'.

I suppose I just don't see the point. Or that its just stupid and just meant to bash Bioware. But let's break it down:

A system that really encourages you to be consistent: No problems there.

Press a button and something awesome has to happen. Button = awesome: Marketing speech. I could do without David Silverman's marketing approach, but whatever. And it basically refers to more responsible combat, which I approve of.

Strategically cut pause to make dev look stupid: *Chortle chortle chortle* How "clever"!

Cue whining about primarily free DLC, price of game (Set at standard price for new games, btw), tie-in DLC: Ridiculous. Granted, I have never understood some people's obsessive need to have every minute weapon and armor DLC, so maybe it has something to do with that. Regardless, I have no problems with prerelease weapon and armor DLC. It takes very little time and resources to make and, as mentioned, was for the most part absolutely free.

Hepler talking about the range of love interests; the characters spanning from virginal next door type to promiscuous and sexy: I still have no problems. Different love interests should be different. What's the issue with it?

[Zanallen]

MerinTB wrote...

I would love to see Mike's take on a different game. He's so genuine and enthusiastic about his vision that I'm sure he's got a great game in him.
Trying to transform Dragon Age from Origins to that vision just... well, it didn't quite make it there. I think he'd even admit that much.

I'm not condemning DA3 until I start getting information about it, however... they can course-correct to awesome again, even if it's an awesome unlike it's two predecessors.

Jade Empire.

[MerinTB]

In Exile wrote...

Brockololly wrote...
Right, my guess (and its just that) is that in early 2009/maybe even late 2008, as Origins was mostly done on PC and subsequently delayed for consoles, Zeschuk/Muzyka saw how successful ME was and since DAO had been in development for so long, they got cold feet on how well it could do. Thus, at this time they went forward with taking DA2 into more of a console friendly, action RPG, ME style cinematic game. Knowles didn't like it and left, along with Exec. Producer Dan Tudge; then Darrah and Laidlaw take their positions.

We already know that BioWare started work on DA2 waaay before Origins was even out. Just look at Brent Knowles' blog on DAO and then this interview here with Laidlaw from after DA2 came out. I would just guess that BioWare did not think that DAO would do very well, when it in fact went on to be their best selling game to date. But at that point in time when Origins was already out as of November 2009, they had already sunk in a bunch of high level work on changing the fundamentals of everything for DA2, from the art redesign to the adoption of faster combat and voiced PC. They did all that without even seeing the response to DAO.

That's my guess as well. And I honestly think Bioware would have been fine, and they actually done a good job of making a game.

The faster combat and the voiced PC, IMO, would not have created the widespread ire they did on the forum if the overall game was TW2 (which has both, even going farther in both directions) but happen to be technologically and structurally a better game.

I agree with much of this as well.  As much as you can agree with speculation.

But I also think DA2 would have been better fan-received had the marketing not made such a big deal of trying to downplay, even denegrate, Origins' success in order to try and get people excited about the changes DA2 would bring.

Bethesda recoved from Battlespire and Red Guard to be bigger and better than ever.  BioWare CAN overcome DA2.

Zanallen wrote...

MerinTB wrote...
I would love to see Mike's take on a different game. He's so genuine and enthusiastic about his vision that I'm sure he's got a great game in him.
Trying to transform Dragon Age from Origins to that vision just... well, it didn't quite make it there. I think he'd even admit that much.

I'm not condemning DA3 until I start getting information about it, however... they can course-correct to awesome
again, even if it's an awesome unlike it's two predecessors.

Jade Empire.

Eh.  Okay, maybe I WOULDN'T love to see Mike's take on a game.

But BioWare went from Jade Empire to Mass Effect and Dragon Age: Origins.... so, see, they CAN course correct. :innocent:

JE was... alright.

Modifié par MerinTB, 05 janvier 2012 - 03:26 .

[eyesofastorm]

Zanallen wrote...

eyesofastorm wrote...

Then you either completely missed the point or the point doesn't concern you.  That doesn't mean that there is no point or that the point isn't valid to persons who are not you.  As such, you might consider observing the point even if you disagree with it rather than belittle it.  Jus sayin'.

I suppose I just don't see the point. Or that its just stupid and just meant to bash Bioware. But let's break it down:

A system that really encourages you to be consistent: No problems there.

Press a button and something awesome has to happen. Button = awesome: Marketing speech. I could do without David Silverman's marketing approach, but whatever. And it basically refers to more responsible combat, which I approve of.

Strategically cut pause to make dev look stupid: *Chortle chortle chortle* How "clever"!

Cue whining about primarily free DLC, price of game (Set at standard price for new games, btw), tie-in DLC: Ridiculous. Granted, I have never understood some people's obsessive need to have every minute weapon and armor DLC, so maybe it has something to do with that. Regardless, I have no problems with prerelease weapon and armor DLC. It takes very little time and resources to make and, as mentioned, was for the most part absolutely free.

Hepler talking about the range of love interests; the characters spanning from virginal next door type to promiscuous and sexy: I still have no problems. Different love interests should be different. What's the issue with it?

The point, I think in a nutshell, is that Bioware sold out.  I personally believe that they were a company that achieved greatness  (more than once) by taking the road less traveled.  The mistake I think they made (a common one it seems) is that, having tasted greatness, they wanted more greatness and began changing the things about themselves that made them great in the first place.  They commericalized basically.  And I know everyone will come in and say, "It's not a sin to want to be succesful/make money/have a bigger audience."  I agree with that sentiment.  But I do not believe that one *must* take the road "more traveled" to do so.  In fact, I think they will have hurt themselves in the long term by doing so and that they could have achieved even greater... greatness by continuing down that less traveled road and doing it better than anyone else ever had.  That's my piece.  That's what I take from that short clip.  I'm sorry if you cannot see that point, but I think you should at least try even if you don't agree with the assessment.  

[DreamwareStudio]

Zanallen wrote...

Morducai wrote...

I did not see anything that constituted as a direct insult or even indirect insult. I was merely giving my logical conclusion as to why Mr. Laidlaw gets a promotion while Mr. Knowels gets buried. If that means you outright threatening to ban then so be it. But just to be clear, you ban me from the forums not from my account as I noticed that in the past those lines are kinda blurred. However, I do thank you for making me see where people stand here. For what it's worth I apologize for my words. 

Brent didn't get buried. He quit. He decided to give up the opportunity to work on DA2. However, Bioware didn't have any other lead designer positions open, as ME and TOR LD positions were already filled and Bioware wasn't about to start a new RPG to give him a position, so he was religated to other things. As such, he quit to work on his writing.

Mr. Laidlaw received a promotion because DA2, despite selling less than DAO, was a financial success.

From what I read, Knowles relegated himself to debugging and testing because higher-ups wanted to take the Dragon Age series into a direction that Laidlaw was comfortable with and Knowles was not.  Knowles shortly thereafter decided to leave.

I think we can all safely assume that Laidlaw is not the only one responsible for the travesty that is DA 2.  However, as the lead he is one of the more responsible.

Another thing, you don't know that DA 2 was a financial success, nor could I or anyone say it was a financial failure.  None of us have access to cost vs. sales.  That said, even if it did make money in the short run, it has cost Bioware/EA far more regarding long-term success not only as an organization but also Dragon Age as a franchise.

Frankly, from what I've seen here and everywhere else on the net is that DA 2 and the way it was handled has tarnished Bioware's name, once a most unthinkable idea now unfortunately a reality.  I, for one, was astounded at the number of people I've seen post who say they will not only NOT preorder from Bioware/EA again but who may never buy another game sporting the label "Bioware".  Many of them are not fly-by-the-night one time customers but people who've stuck with Bioware for a number of years.

That is some serious business (or more likely, a diminishing of business/sales).

Modifié par google_calasade, 05 janvier 2012 - 03:30 .

[Zanallen]

MerinTB wrote...



Eh.  Okay, maybe I WOULDN'T love to see Mike's take on a game.

But BioWare went from Jade Empire to Mass Effect and Dragon Age: Origins.... so, see, they CAN course correct. :innocent:

JE was... alright.

Technically, DAO was announced before Jade Empire was released. So you can see the change in direction. DAO really was an older style Bioware game that was held back in development for so long that it came out after Bioware had changed focus.

[Zanallen]

eyesofastorm wrote...

The point, I think in a nutshell, is that Bioware sold out.  I personally believe that they were a company that achieved greatness  (more than once) by taking the road less traveled.  The mistake I think they made (a common one it seems) is that, having tasted greatness, they wanted more greatness and began changing the things about themselves that made them great in the first place.  They commericalized basically.  And I know everyone will come in and say, "It's not a sin to want to be succesful/make money/have a bigger audience."  I agree with that sentiment.  But I do not believe that one *must* take the road "more traveled" to do so.  In fact, I think they will have hurt themselves in the long term by doing so and that they could have achieved even greater... greatness by continuing down that less traveled road and doing it better than anyone else ever had.  That's my piece.  That's what I take from that short clip.  I'm sorry if you cannot see that point, but I think you should at least try even if you don't agree with the assessment.  

Bioware didn't sell out. Bioware failed as a company and was bought out. Bioware's financial decisions lead to it being purchased by EA.