134 réponses à ce sujet

[WaPuS]

ShandraLover wrote...

Considering they want to draw inspiration off Skyrim, I'd think they'd need 4 years or so, especially if they really want that open world type deal going on, and if they are checking out Skyrim aggressively they'll need at least that long if they want something close to that.

I'm sure they are looking at Skyrim for ideas, but they won't make it as "open" as Skyrim is. Bioware has a pattern for their "open" games, it has locations that you can explore not a whole world. This pattern is alright and has worked for them before in Star Wars KotOR, DA:O, the first two ME's, and is currently working for them in DA2, Star Wars toR, and Mass Effect 3... so why change something that works great. What they needed i think most and probably would have been solved with more time is the locations, they needed more. At least they could have added an extra city like Starkhaven to resolve Sebastian's plot more directly or a Tevinter Imperium locale for Fenris's plot.

It took Bioware only a year to make a whole area with two cities and lots of surrounding locations that they didn't reuse any dungeons in DA:O Awakening. To say another year on DA2 and they wouldn't have achieved anymore then they had already developed is foolish. To those that argue that another year wouldn't have made a difference I have a question for you ...

What would have Bioware done with an extra year or so if not more development?

Modifié par WaPuS, 22 février 2012 - 08:13 .

[DarkAmaranth1966]

All I have to say is : EA DO NOT run the Dragon Age saga into the ground with rapid fire additions like you did The Sims - just go to the Sims 3 Forum and you will see the largest sections are those dealing with bugs, glitches and problems - DON'T DO THAT TO DRAGON AGE.

Modifié par DarkAmaranth1966, 23 février 2012 - 09:34 .

[Mabaker]

 There definitely should be more time tiken for Dragon Age 3. I really doubt they can redeem themselves after the absolute and utter disaster of the shallow hack n slash shooter that was Dragon Age II. 

[didhedie]

DA3 will need a few years if it's going to be anywhere near as good as DA:O.
Maybe they could make DA2 noncanon, and get some new (better) writers + dev teams.

[WaPuS]

Well it's had a development time as long as the Mass Effect games, so maybe if they gave DA3 the kinda time and attention that the Mass Effect trilogy had just maybe we will see the sequel to DA:O that we should have seen. Until I see details about the game I have a pretty optimistic view for DA3 because of the successful development time they have given to Mass Effect.

Modifié par WaPuS, 28 février 2012 - 08:12 .

[WaPuS]

Mabaker wrote...

 There definitely should be more time tiken for Dragon Age 3. I really doubt they can redeem themselves after the absolute and utter disaster of the shallow hack n slash shooter that was Dragon Age II. 

I think they have learned a few lessons. I'm hoping that it's definitely not another hack n slash.

[phimseto]

I wouldn't count on it. The market model has been to jam these things out roughly every two years. The best we can hope for is a late 2013 release.

[BomimoDK]

didhedie wrote...

DA3 will need a few years if it's going to be anywhere near as good as DA:O.
Maybe they could make DA2 noncanon, and get some new (better) writers + dev teams.

Hehehe. That's cute, that is. I totally know what part of society you come from now. Pompous just can't be faked.

[Game_Fan_85]

I REALLY doubt that BioWare will let EA bully them into rushing DA3 after what happened with DA2. I doubt EA will want to rush them again either. I would not expect DA3 until next Feb/March. EA has set a trend of releasing big games in the first 3 months of the new year and I think DA3 will be their choice for next year. I am hoping for a reveal at E3.  It could even end up being a late 2013 game.  BioWare don't have anything lined up after ME3 (finally) launches (right?) so they should have plenty of time.

Modifié par Game_Fan_85, 01 mars 2012 - 06:35 .

[DiTHmaphacks]

They have the C&C:Generals+SWTOR but i dont see how those 2 cant leave a bit space for a 3rd game. The problem is EA always wants more money and they will push it so they will use the same engine a bit modified only.I believe that engines,even heavily modified cant last more than 8 years,before you need to go to new one.So if they started working on it they going to release it until end of 2013.

On the other hand,DA is not a trilogy like ME,so you dont have to push the next game fast to keep fans occupied.They can make a new IP first and then go into DA3.

[Game_Fan_85]

DiTHmaphacks wrote...

They have the C&C:Generals

I don't count that as a real BW game because it's being made by an existing team with the BW name tacked on by EA.

[Fast Jimmy]

Game_Fan_85 wrote...

I REALLY doubt that BioWare will let EA bully them into rushing DA3 after what happened with DA2. I doubt EA will want to rush them again either. I would not expect DA3 until next Feb/March. EA has set a trend of releasing big games in the first 3 months of the new year and I think DA3 will be their choice for next year. I am hoping for a reveal at E3.  It could even end up being a late 2013 game.  BioWare don't have anything lined up after ME3 (finally) launches (right?) so they should have plenty of time.

I think you are completely, 100% wrong. EA didn't bully Bioware to do jack with DA2. Bioware came out to to EA and gave the aggressive time tables and development job. They wanted to show EA that they were profitable and could pump out more than one AAA game a year, proving their worth.

While I don't like EA or EA's design or marketing tactics, I think they get the blame incorrectly for DA2. Bioware was the new kid on the EA block and said "We can make Mass Effect 2 AND Dragon Age 2 IN THE SAME YEAR. And they'll both be tweaked to bring in a fanbase bigger than Call of Duty! And we'll make everyone a boatload of cash! Doesn't that sound awesome, EA? Huh? Huh? Will you accept my Facebook friend request if we do that?"

Okay, maybe more than a fair share of hyperbole there. But I see the rush dev cycle coupled with the insanely ambitious changes in design as nothing more than an attempt by Bioware to rebrand the series and show EA that they can make games people will buy in droves in their sleep.

Never mind that ME2 and DA2 were assaulted by fans for deviating from their predecessors entirely too much and removing most of the core RPG elements. Or that DA2 sold almost half of DAO (not including returned or unpurchased copies, which the developer has to eat in costs). Never mind all of that. They sure showed EA what they can do!

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 02 mars 2012 - 01:04 .

[bEVEsthda]

My perspective have always been that the biggest problem of DA2 was the type of game it wanted to be (and was).
For me it wouldn't have been a better (much) game if it had been more polished and detailed. It would still fail to offer me any gaming experience that I'm interested in. It would still depict a taste of style, that I would find it easy to hold in contempt. Particularly since DA:O did so many of these things so much more,.. well,.. sincere, serious, dignified.

What I think I've seen, is that it's mainly people who basically likes DA2, who feels DA"'s only main problem was that it was "rushed".
DA2-defenders of course acknowledge and recognice many flaws in DA2. However, listening only to them, only to the complaints which people who liked DA2 agrees with, will result in a total disaster for DA3.

[jackofalltrades456]

+5 years would be ridiculous. It shouldn't take them more than two and half years to make it and still give us a polished game. I think that was the dev time for Mass Effect 2 and it did pretty well.

I'm tired of people pointing back and forth on whether it was EA or Bioware's fault for the mistakes made in DA2. The damage has been done and all we can do hope is that they've learned from them and not repeat them in the future.

[Ciryx]

I am all for a longer production time. Tbh you can really see the difference between a Witcher 2 with 4 years dev time and DA2 or even ME2.
I dont want to know now which game you like better. Just pointing out that the latter two had much more recycling then Witcher 2. In terms of gameplay as well as in terms of Leveldesign/Art etc. For an RPG a world that feels unique and not repetetive is key for how much I can immerse myself into the world.
Sure, Story, good VO etc etc helps. But the worlddesign is one of the most important things still.

[Zanallen]

Less time. That's the key. EA really needs to light a fire under Bioware. Give them 6 more months to release DA3 and it has to outsell DAO and DA2 combined or else the franchise is going to be dropped and the team is going to be relegated to making a Teletubbies game.

Modifié par Zanallen, 03 mars 2012 - 07:29 .

[NelsonYoung]

I totally agree, I am a PC gamer so I prefer DAO's PC based control rather than DA2's console based control. Because I like Baldur's Gate style it's more tactical and with more fun.
DAO almost found the right direction just not enough and DA2 ruined almost everything except the combat.
What I hope for DA3 is with epic combats and epic reward just like Baldur's Gate. And a better graphic engine with an open world which can provide more areas to explore. DA series should be Bioware's new "Baldur's Gate" series just like they promised us a few years ago. I don't want to see it becomes a simple money machine,

[Korusus]

phimseto wrote...

I wouldn't count on it. The market model has been to jam these things out roughly every two years. The best we can hope for is a late 2013 release.

Two years?  Heck, Dragon Age 2 was out way under two years from DA:O ... waaaay under.  It was more like a year and a few months.

 Whenever this topic comes up I like to point out just how ridiculously short DA2's development time really was.  Dragon Age Origins just turned 2 this last December.  TWO!! Think about that.  DA:O turned 2 just before SWTOR came out and DA2 is already a year old...

And BioWare's biggest competition in the cRPG market is from companies with notoriously long development cycles.

[Fast Jimmy]

Korusus wrote...

phimseto wrote...

I wouldn't count on it. The market model has been to jam these things out roughly every two years. The best we can hope for is a late 2013 release.

Two years?  Heck, Dragon Age 2 was out way under two years from DA:O ... waaaay under.  It was more like a year and a few months.

 Whenever this topic comes up I like to point out just how ridiculously short DA2's development time really was.  Dragon Age Origins just turned 2 this last December.  TWO!! Think about that.  DA:O turned 2 just before SWTOR came out and DA2 is already a year old...

And BioWare's biggest competition in the cRPG market is from companies with notoriously long development cycles.

I find myself wondering what DA2 would have been like if it had come out this March, instead of last March. What a mysterious and magical world that would be...

[Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut]

Korusus wrote...

 Whenever this topic comes up I like to point out just how ridiculously short DA2's development time really was.  Dragon Age Origins just turned 2 this last December.  TWO!! Think about that.  DA:O turned 2 just before SWTOR came out and DA2 is already a year old...

And BioWare's biggest competition in the cRPG market is from companies with notoriously long development cycles.

[fluffywalrus]

I think some here are spot on about development time. 5 years isn't necessary. With the resources Bioware has, there's no reason a 2.5-3 year dev period isn't feasible to meet most of their goals.

I think DA2 was actually a good framework, but obviously rushed out the gate tremendously early. It needed more complex AI, less random encounters with mobs that meant nothing, less or no environment recycling, and some changes to environment over time. The game needed to be a little harder and definitely a bit more tactical regarding environment rather than just "use cool animation attack here". Some more freedom over changing of equipment would have been good too.

I personally didn't mind being stuck as human. I didn't mind the elf retcon. I cherished the idea of a game taking place in a single city, but the game just wasn't polished enough to pull it off. I loved most of the dialogue, even if there was bare bones outside quest and plot related dialogue. I didn't mind the new abilities. The main quest was very solid, despite the severe lack of polish, and the game had a lot of promise. I think more dev time would have seen a lot of improvements to the broken and unfinished areas in the game, and it could have been really well received. I still played it for about 70 or so hours, so I got my money's worth, though.

I would like a slightly more fleshed out story though, like the one in The Witcher. I think The Witcher is a better franchise for Bioware to take notes from than Skyrim. I play Skyrim to mod it and to explore. And then I'm done. I never play the often hollow main quest. The AI is terrible, the fighting has not improved since Morrowind(it's actually gotten worse in some areas imo). It's still a mind blazingly fun game, but it is not a game with a good narrative. I played and enjoyed DA:O and DA2 for its narrative first and foremost. The gameplay was a close second. I'd hate to see DA become a soulless husk that Skyrim is when it could be a fully fleshed game with fun gameplay and a compelling narrative like the Witcher 2 was.

[Huntress]

Mabaker wrote...

 There definitely should be more time tiken for Dragon Age 3. I really doubt they can redeem themselves after the absolute and utter disaster of the shallow hack n slash shooter..

 Shooter???
DA2 is not a shooter game! Now mass effect is a shooter in space.. i think.

[WaPuS]

I have got to say, I liked the feedback of this thread. Many of you have improved my view of the game, but at the same time improved my "resolve".

First off EA has a history of rushing games, Bioware does not have a history of rushing a game to please who ever. So what Fast Jimmy is saying then is so many other companies have done the same as Bioware when joining EA. There's a point when it stops being coincidence and starts being consistency.

Secondly I completely agree with fluffywalrus, while I still would have liked to explore all of the Free Marshes, DA2 has and is providing me hours and is more then made my money's worth. That being said it's recycled dungeons, waves , and too many cliff hangers hinder a great game. Compared to other fantasy RPG's there is very few if any that can compete with DA series, but I'm not comparing it to any of them, I'm comparing DA2 to its predecessor (DA:O) and that's where it disappoints.

Modifié par WaPuS, 18 mars 2012 - 08:25 .

[ta9798]

I think they should take their time and not be forced to a tight schedule. I have high hopes that they will have seen and heard the fan's reactions and learn and thus I'm willing to wait for a good game that has depth and quality 2014 is fine for me. If the game is rushed, like it was for Dragon age 2 just because it could run on the great success of Dragon age Origins, then I doubt I will purchase anymore games from EA/Bioware since it will appear like (EA and other management) does not care to let Bioware have the freedom and resources to create a quality game like Bioware has done in the past.