134 réponses à ce sujet

[bluewolv1970]

devSin wrote...

David has said in the past that the novels are separate. He has to write them on his own time (even though they stick their logo on the front cover, undeservedly).

I don't know if the comic is in the same boat. And the anime has nothing really to do with BioWare.

Mike Laidlaw is responsible for DA2. This influences what he will or will not communicate. He is not responsible for the anime, or the book, or the comic, no more than he is responsible for the DA-themed t-shirts they sell.

You can argue that corporate is turning the team leads into franchise pimps, but it's not coming at the expense of the game. If BioWare chooses to rush a game again, they will do it because they think they can get away with it, not because everybody was busy on all the tie-in material.

Yet there he is promoting it, while he cannot even admit Dragon Age 2's problems let alone work on  a fix...

Yes you could argue that actually - and that is what is frustrating...

I guess I should clarify that my frustration is with the shameless marketing on the heels of a less than stellar effort on the core game - that said I agree completely that dragion age 3 will not be influenced good or bad by tie in products.

[devSin]

Like you note, he's only saying good things about the movie (which may turn out to not even be good).

It's his job to want it to succeed. So of course he'll promote it. Just like he promoted DA2, and just like he'll promote DA3.

But they're not going to have a discussion with you (or anyone) about where DA2 went wrong. Not now, and probably not ever (although I'm sure it will come up in some form in DA3 discussions, when the publicity period for that kicks in).

I agree it can get annoying having to listen to all the fluff in between the things that you actually care about (the games), but the fact is that if the movie and books and whatever else didn't exist then you wouldn't be hearing anything at all. You still wouldn't be hearing anything bad about DA2, nor would you be hearing anything good about anything.

Modifié par devSin, 06 février 2012 - 11:57 .

[SkittlesKat96]

I haven't even read the responses in this thread but I'm too afraid too because it will be full of:

'so they can cash out on money so they can buy fancy cars and wallow in their rich people greed'

'Dragon Age 2 was a commercial failure for Bioware so they need to make money fast'

and etc.

[Fast Jimmy]

SkittlesKat96 wrote...

I haven't even read the responses in this thread but I'm too afraid too because it will be full of:

'so they can cash out on money so they can buy fancy cars and wallow in their rich people greed'

'Dragon Age 2 was a commercial failure for Bioware so they need to make money fast'

and etc.

Actually, money concerns really weren't raised that often in the thread. Its mostly been discussing if resources and time was limited for DA2, why is anyone at Bioware working on anything other than a DA2 X-pack or DA3, instead of using said time and resources to create other media. People in the thread get that some of the other mediums (like the anime and the web series) aren't even revenue generated for Bioware.

So... way to be a troll and not read a topic before you post.

[Realmzmaster]

As far as the comic is concerned David Gaider is writing the story Dark Horse is doing all the rest of the work. Just like Mr. Gaider did the books on his own time, he is doing the comic. Bioware gets to place it logo on the comic and the book because Bioware owns the IP. since Mr. Gaider developed it for Bioware.

Green Ronin Press devloped the pen and paper RPG based on the mechanics of the game. Again Bioware had oversight, but the work was done by Green Ronin.

Bioware has oversight over the other tie-ins to make sure the tie-ins remain consistent with the IP. Much like George Lucas has oversight and control over all things Star Wars ( which included everyting from luch boxes to comic books to video games). The tie-ins are good for Bioware and Dragon Age because it builds awareness of the IP.

Yes, it also may raise revenue which is never a bad thing. If awareness can be raised it may or may not translate into sales of the next installment of Dragon Age.

It is not the first time that Bioware has had tie-ins to its games. Baldur's Gate had a book written about the events in the game.

Before then Interplay had books written about the Bard's Tale.

As far as the average gamer not into comics and books are you kidding me? Walk into any comic shop and ask how many play video games, rpgs etc, most of the hands will go up or say yes.

Quite a few forum-mates have bought Mr. Gaider books. I have the books and the comic by Orson Card. I will be purchasing the series by DarkHorse and I am not unusual.

[Chuvvy]

cephasjames wrote...

Hmmm. To bring awareness to their product? To attempt to make Dragon Age a "household" name like D&D? To make more money so they can make more Dragon Age products? Etc, etc, etc?

First of all, I wouldn't call D&D a houshold name, secondly DA isn't near big enough yet, and if they keep cranking out gems like DA2, it won't ever be.

[Stanley Woo]

devSin wrote...

But they're not going to have a discussion with you (or anyone) about where DA2 went wrong. Not now, and probably not ever

Strange. We've had several such discussions about some of the less popular features and aspects of DA2 since the game was released, and Mike Laidlaw even participated in one or two of them. They were great discussions, with community members offering some great comments and criticisms and getting some insightful and sometimes rather candid responses in return.

i'm surprised more people don't participate in those discussions when they come up.

[devSin]

Talking about features that don't work is not the same as talking about why you didn't fix those features before you rushed the game out the door (i.e., "where DA2 went wrong").

Yes, we know having companions that you couldn't equip was a bad idea. Yes, we know having paratroopers descend from nothingness was a bad idea. Yes, we know using the same map a hundred different times was a bad idea. Yes, we know pasting a plot together from a bunch of unrelated and under-implemented story points was a bad idea.

No, we don't know why a company typically so great seemed to get stuck with a number of bad ideas that they didn't bother to fix. Either you're so far gone that you didn't even know they were horrible, or you have so little control that it no longer matters. (Those are purposely extreme because you cannot and have not offered anything in defense, and I don't like your attempt to make it seem like anybody from the team actually has.)

Are you really suggesting that that is a conversation that Mike Laidlaw has had here?

I promise you that if he had I would definitely remember it. Mike has not once clued anyone here into why they didn't feel it was necessary to finish the game before releasing it, and like I said, I really believe he never will. Nor will you or anybody else who actually knows the truth.

Modifié par devSin, 07 février 2012 - 11:09 .

[bluewolv1970]

devSin wrote...

Talking about features that don't work is not the same as talking about why you didn't fix those features before you rushed the game out the door (i.e., "where DA2 went wrong").

Yes, we know having companions that you couldn't equip was a bad idea. Yes, we know having paratroopers descend from nothingness was a bad idea. Yes, we know using the same map a hundred different times was a bad idea.

No, we don't know why a company typically so great seemed to get stuck with a number of bad ideas that they didn't bother to fix. Either you're so far gone that you didn't even know they were horrible, or you have so little control that it no longer matters.

Are you really suggesting that that is a conversation that Mike Laidlaw has had here?

Exactly - and to tie it in with my original post, when you hear him espousing the next great thing (in the dawn of the seeker promo)  it is even more frustrating.   In fact, David Gaider to his credit is the ifrst person, employed by Bioware  (that I am aware of) who actually admitted the game was rushed and the story was affected...

[Firky]

I think Mr Woo phrasing it as "less popular features" is a good choice of words. If anyone from BioWare said, "DAII is horrible," where does that leave those of us who genuinely thought it was a great game?

I'm not going to defend recycled areas, for one thing, but they didn't detract from my enjoyment of the game, either. If other people hate them, I get that too. Was it a bad idea? How do we know the thought processes behind the decision? Recycled areas were OK (if not ideal) with me.

As to the OP. Isn't most of the book/anime stuff outsourced to other people/companies? With the possible exception of the books. (I'm halfway thru Asunder and I'm enjoying it immensely.)

[devSin]

I don't begrudge his diplomacy. I just don't think it was a fair response to the part of my statement he quoted.

As for liking DA2, that's not an issue. I like DA2. I think it has some of the best characters to ever come out of the company's best writing team. I think the combat is fun (more so than Origins). Nick's voice is music. (I'd probably play it more if it actually worked on my 5870 with any version of AMD drivers released in the last 6 months.)

But I don't think you can say that the presentation isn't off. You may not care that the suck is there, but are you truly blind to it? Whatever BioWare usually does to make great games, they apparently didn't do everything on that list this time.

And Mike Laidlaw, and anybody who is currently employed by BioWare, will not now or ever say whether they only skipped a few steps or threw out the whole playbook, nor why they chose (it was a choice) to do so.

[Deadmac]

bluewolv1970 wrote...
when the game itself is was rushed, still needs patching ( a year later,) and resolution to a bizzare and incomplete ending...I mean it is great that david gaider is writing comics and doing interviews (where it is admitted the game was rushed) and yet no one is writing the clean up to the mess that was/is act three...

"Dragon Age: The Stolen Thrown" and "Dragon Age: The Calling" are prequels to "Dragon Age: Origins".

"Dragon Age: Asunder" is a sequelish story to "Dragon Age II".

[bEVEsthda]

I think here might be some confusion about budgeted and paid working hours on some project, sheduled development, and other time, such as sleeping, eating, holiday and other spare time?

It's just a wild guess, but I think D.G. might start with an estimate of how many hours his writing team have to complete something? I don't think they can just coast along until they think they're ready. There would always be a budget somewhere.

[Firky]

devSin wrote...

But I don't think you can say that the presentation isn't off. You may not care that the suck is there, but are you truly blind to it? Whatever BioWare usually does to make great games, they apparently didn't do everything on that list this time.

And Mike Laidlaw, and anybody who is currently employed by BioWare, will not now or ever say whether they only skipped a few steps or threw out the whole playbook, nor why they chose (it was a choice) to do so.

*shrugs* I just don't really get why an explanation would be warranted, or the kind of "admission of culpability" some seem to want. I do get the "stab in the back" feeling that comes with modern gaming. (I've played lots of RPGs, past and present, and concepts like worldbuilding and exploration are pretty key.) Combat and characters carried DA2 for me, well.

I guess I think there's a vast difference between official language which says, "Yes, we deliberately tried to fool you into swallowing recycled areas because we wanted your dough" and "We prioritised other areas of design because we believed it would work well, over the course of the game, and in context with other changes. It pissed many people off, though. We're now re-evaluating these decisions."

I don't believe the first one. If someone from BioWare actually said that, I'd probably be a bit shocked and insulted. As someone who liked the game, I can dig the second one. It also sounds like the truth, to me. And I think that's how they've framed it, from what I've seen on the boards. I tend to think that how they make their decisions is their business, too, though.

It's a tricky one.

[Stanley Woo]

devSin wrote...

But I don't think you can say that the presentation isn't off. You may not care that the suck is there, but are you truly blind to it? Whatever BioWare usually does to make great games, they apparently didn't do everything on that list this time.

I have, in the past, said that the game won't be to everyone's tastes. I (and Mike Laidlaw) have also admitted that we did a poor job in managing our customers' (your) expectations in the weeks and months leading up to the game's release. We failed to let you guys know just how different the game was to what you were expecting it to be (ie. "Dragon Age Origins 2"). That's the kind of conversation we will have with you regarding the things you don't like about the game.

"Are you truly blind to the suck?" type attitudes are hyperbolic and counterproductive, as we tend to ignore the kinds of arguments that are not grounded in the real. We can't answer "Are you truly blind to the suck" and statements like that provide no foundation to work from. How do you begin to improve on "the suck"? How do we get "unblind" to it so that we can improve on future projects? This is precisely the reason why we encourage constructive criticism rather than emotional outbursts and the kind of "sensationalist hyperbole" you normally see on internet message boards.

When you say something like "Whatever BioWare usually does to make great games, they apparently didn't do everything on that list this time.," devSin, that's when we get into the kind of discussion territory that we can begin to work with. And you're absolutely right when you say that. We didn't do a bunch of the stuff on that list. For one thing, there were other priorities that we focused on that were new to that list and we chose to work on some of those this time around, namely things like faster combat and preventing dialogues from halting story momentum and flow. That's one reason why DA2 was so different from DAO.

And Mike Laidlaw, and anybody who is currently employed by BioWare, will not now or ever say whether they only skipped a few steps or threw out the whole playbook, nor why they chose (it was a choice) to do so.

As we are not beholden to you (ie. you are not our bosses or business partners or anywhere within our chain of command or communication during development), there are necessarily going to be parts of our business that you will never be a part of. That includes, at various times, reasons for some of the decisions we make, story plotting, character development, marketing direction, the number of plots or romances we include, etc. Almost all of it is behind-the-scenes stuff, and while we may choose to share some of it with you--either in bonus videos, website features, or in conversation here--it won't always be possible to give you the answers that will satisfy you.

If our discussions with you focused more on how to make future games better than continually harping on "you did something I didn't like," you would likely feel better about our answers. If you want your disappointment or dislike justified by some kind of apologetic begging for forgiveness or specific promises, then you're likely to be more upset by our answers, since we can no more promise not to disappoint you than you can promise to always like our games.

So no, we will never have certain conversations with you. But yes, we do try to be as open and honest with you guys as we can be, while taking into account your lack of knowledge about the way our industry works and how we work within it. i hope that, in the long run, it's enough.

[Wulfram]

Stanley Woo wrote...

I have, in the past, said that the game won't be to everyone's tastes. I (and Mike Laidlaw) have also admitted that we did a poor job in managing our customers' (your) expectations in the weeks and months leading up to the game's release. We failed to let you guys know just how different the game was to what you were expecting it to be (ie. "Dragon Age Origins 2"). That's the kind of conversation we will have with you regarding the things you don't like about the game

edited to hopefully be less snarky:  This "admission" really gets on my nerves.  I really can't see what it serves apart from being an excuse for ignoring criticism of the actual game.

People knew about the changes before the release.  They were criticizing them before the release..

Modifié par Wulfram, 08 février 2012 - 01:07 .

[devSin]

Stanley Woo wrote...

I have, in the past, said that the game won't be to everyone's tastes. I (and Mike Laidlaw) have also admitted that we did a poor job in managing our customers' (your) expectations in the weeks and months leading up to the game's release. We failed to let you guys know just how different the game was to what you were expecting it to be (ie. "Dragon Age Origins 2"). That's the kind of conversation we will have with you regarding the things you don't like about the game.

I had no expectations. At all. I barely followed DA2 development. I did not pay attention to any of the press.

In fact, I hadn't heavily played Origins until after Dragon Age II was released (I purchased my Origins CE on release day, of course, but busy-busy-busy). Go find a post where I really ever talked about playing Origins and having so much fun and thinking it was so great. You won't, because I didn't.

You may think you know me, you may think you have a handle on my criticisms, but clearly you don't.

I have no issue with Dragon Age II because it's so much different "to what you were expecting". I didn't know what to expect. I had better things to do than even know where Origins was good and where Origins was bad, much less where Dragon Age II could have done better or was likely to do worse.

I have issue with Dragon Age II because it wasn't well done. And I blame you (BioWare) for not doing a good job, not for not telling me in advance what exactly you were (or weren't, as it were) doing.

Stanley Woo wrote...

"Are you truly blind to the suck?" type attitudes are hyperbolic and counterproductive, as we tend to ignore the kinds of arguments that are not grounded in the real. We can't answer "Are you truly blind to the suck" and statements like that provide no foundation to work from. How do you begin to improve on "the suck"? How do we get "unblind" to it so that we can improve on future projects? This is precisely the reason why we encourage constructive criticism rather than emotional outbursts and the kind of "sensationalist hyperbole" you normally see on internet message boards.

I think you're shutting down because of the word used, and now you're talking to me like I said it to you (it was a question to another user).

I'm sure I could have been far less sensationalistic and far more verbose when asking whether Firky truly does not see any difference in quality and overall fit and finish than virtually any previous BioWare game. But it was mostly a rhetorical question, and I try not to be too much responsible for making the BSN any more a dull place than it already is. (And who in real life says things like "the suck". I mean, it's OK to smile every so often, you know. It doesn't have to be all-serious all-the-time.)

If I'm totally seeing things that really aren't there, even though I have a history of judging all BioWare games as some of the greatest ever made, I'd very much like to hear about it. Am I delusional?

I seem not to be, with the number of corresponding opinions, but I very much could be. But no one from your company has told me this is the case, so I have to believe either you can't talk about it or that you agree. (Well, actually, it's more like that they never read and don't feel obligated to respond to random grumpy forum poster, but I don't think they'd respond even were the situation different.)

I am not a video game designer. I could not make a fun game, even if I could make Mike Laidlaw design it for me and make David Gaider write it for me. That's your job. I can tell you roughly how DA2 measures up to all the games you've made that I've truly enjoyed (read: all of them), and you could probably entice some specifics from me if you really got me to think about it, but I do not have the secret recipe that you have to follow to make a game that I consider worthy of your studio. That is your recipe, and it's secret, and I don't have a clue what you put in it.

If you were to ask me, how can we improve our next dish, I would tell you to make sure you set the oven this time. Because Dragon Age II has what I think are some of the finest ingredients you have at your disposal (not the crusty stuff from the back of the pantry that you used in Origins), but y'all forgot the part at the end where you have to cook it.

Because Dragon Age II has very much a raw-dough taste to my palate.

Modifié par devSin, 08 février 2012 - 01:51 .

[devSin]

Wow, it got a little lengthy. I finished my playthrough of ME last night (I wanted to wait until after the demo, but I got bored), and I'm trying to wait a bit to start ME2. It looks like the forums got caught in the middle. ;-)

Stanley Woo wrote...

When you say something like "Whatever BioWare usually does to make great games, they apparently didn't do everything on that list this time.," devSin, that's when we get into the kind of discussion territory that we can begin to work with. And you're absolutely right when you say that. We didn't do a bunch of the stuff on that list. For one thing, there were other priorities that we focused on that were new to that list and we chose to work on some of those this time around, namely things like faster combat and preventing dialogues from halting story momentum and flow. That's one reason why DA2 was so different from DAO.

You know very well that there's a difference between a feature you choose to implement and a feature you choose to do correctly, and you know that I'm talking about the latter when I talk about how BioWare chooses to make games.

You don't have some master playbook about what a game must and must not have. That's your business, and as long as it's fun, knock yourselves out.

But there must have been some underlying principle that led to you making the best CRPGs I've ever played (and I use that term broadly, because Jade Empire and Mass Effect are right alongside Baldur's Gate and Origins in that list, so your talk of specific features you wanted in DA2 has nothing to do with it). The best games, in fact, RPG or otherwise.

And what I'm saying, and what I think you know I'm saying but that you seem to really want to sidestep or direct the conversation away from, is that you seemingly abandoned that principle, at least in part (I believe I can see some of the effort, just not always the result), when making Dragon Age II.

Maybe that principle is no longer feasible (I'm pretty sure it isn't) or the people who carried it no longer work there. Or maybe everybody came down with the flu in the middle of development and they couldn't finish the game.

But unless you're going to tell me that I'm wrong, that DA2 is no different in terms of quality and magic and polish and care and wonder and awesome than the long list of games your company has produced (in other words, unless you're saying the differences are solely technical, a checklist of features that are or aren't present), then it's not really fair to keep posting about how you wanted to concentrate on specific features, and if I don't like the game as much as I like every other BioWare game, then it's because you must have chosen to not concentrate on only the features I personally want.

I'll accept the blame for maybe not being clear about it in the above posts, though. Probably I should make more effective use of the quote feature, but it's nice sometimes to have timing work out that you can just have sequential posts and not a ton of disjointed replies, so I usually try to get the response directly after if I can (but then you have to read the whole thread to get the context).

Stanley Woo wrote...

As we are not beholden to you (ie. you are not our bosses or business partners or anywhere within our chain of command or communication during development), there are necessarily going to be parts of our business that you will never be a part of.

Unless you're stating that your bosses or business partners or anything anywhere within your chain of command or communication during development had nothing whatsoever to do with the perceived state of DA2 (which to my knowledge has never been disputed by BioWare, which is why I usually just treat it as an actual state; i.e., that DA2 is a lesser game, albeit with much fun, and everybody knows it), then you're basically just making the exact same statement I did. "We can't say what went wrong, because it's not your business. We can try to do better, but because you can't be told where responsibility actually lies, our statements really don't mean much. You'll have to wait for our next game to judge."

You do see that it is a reasonable reaction, don't you? If you can't tell somebody that something is even wrong, nor what caused the problem, there's nothing you can say to convince anybody that things will ever get better.

Modifié par devSin, 08 février 2012 - 03:01 .

[GithCheater]

I agree with Stanley's quote and find it refreshingly hilarious ... so much so that I made it my "siggy"

[HolyAvenger]

DA2 was undercooked and rushed out of the door. The closest I've heard anyone come to admitting that was the latest Gaider interview.

Thats what I find sad about DA2. There was a lot of potential there for a great game. It just didn't get executed properly.

[Yrkoon]

Realmzmaster wrote...
As far as the average gamer not into comics and books are you kidding me? Walk into any comic shop and ask how many play video games, rpgs etc, most of the hands will go up or say yes.

Aah, but that's the thing.  You act as if Comic shops are  a regular fixture in the commercial sector... like Walmart or Mcdonalds.  They're aren't.  I live in St. Louis.  There's like  3 comic shops in the entire city.  And they're all tiny little holes in the wall that you'll miss.    If I were  to go to all three of them and ask the customers there if they're Gamers, and 100% of them said yes,   I'd still only be looking  at about 10 people saying Yes.   And that's if I go on a Saturday afternoon.

And while everyone watches movies, I stopped watching Anime about 20 years ago.  And even if I was still a raving Anime fan, I can think of nothing more corny than My dragon age characters  showing up in an Anime.  (Ugh!)

  Don't get me wrong.  I think its cool that  We're seeing Dragon Age in our Facebooks, and comics and TVs.  Sure wish that kind of time and energy would be going into the Game itself though.  People on this forum are asking for another DLC.  Where is it?  Oh yeah, it's not there.  But  hey, stay tuned for  the new episode of Redemption!  Or the Comic book or whatever.... instead

Modifié par Yrkoon, 08 février 2012 - 07:25 .

[Thiefy]

bluewolv1970 wrote...

 when the game itself is was rushed, still needs patching ( a year later,) and resolution to a  bizzare and incomplete ending...I mean it is great that david gaider is writing comics and doing interviews (where it is admitted the game was rushed) and yet no one is writing the clean up to the mess that was/is act three...

different people work on different aspects of the franchise.

It seems weird to me that some people think Bioware = Mike Laidlaw or Bioware = David Gaider

One individual encompasses the entire company makes absolutely no sense to me.

As far as the rest of the question, maybe they are pimping out the DA franchise to, idk, make money? seems logical. Swag is a pretty good way to make income once something becomes popular. Look at DC and Marvel - their stuff stopped making sense years ago but people love buying Batman and Spiderman goodies, even if they aren't comic book readers.

[DreamwareStudio]

Stanley Woo wrote...

devSin wrote...

But they're not going to have a discussion with you (or anyone) about where DA2 went wrong. Not now, and probably not ever

Strange. We've had several such discussions about some of the less popular features and aspects of DA2 since the game was released, and Mike Laidlaw even participated in one or two of them. They were great discussions, with community members offering some great comments and criticisms and getting some insightful and sometimes rather candid responses in return.

i'm surprised more people don't participate in those discussions when they come up.

True.  While I can't give any kudos to DA 2 as a quality game, I can give kudos for this.  I started participating in the DA 2 forums towards the end of last year (late to the game).  Since then, I've been in discussions with both Mike Laidlaw and John Epler about what DA 2 lacked and what should be added.  I don't know what DA 3 will be like, but I can appreciate the fact people have taken time from their busy schedules to message about what may or may not be included in DA 3.

Modifié par google_calasade, 08 février 2012 - 09:04 .

[Pzykozis]

Yrkoon wrote...

  Don't get me wrong.  I think its cool that  We're seeing Dragon Age in our Facebooks, and comics and TVs.  Sure wish that kind of time and energy would be going into the Game itself though.  People on this forum are asking for another DLC.  Where is it?  Oh yeah, it's not there.  But  hey, stay tuned for  the new episode of Redemption!  Or the Comic book or whatever.... instead

This seems to be a really common misunderstanding, but these things really, really don't come at the expense of the main product, aside from Gaider doing some writing for the comic and I'd assume Laidlaw is overseeing the general jist of the other projects to solidfy brand identity / lore continuity and stuff the core of the team isn't working on those projects, programmers and artists and designers aren't creating an anime nor are they drawing/inking//lettering comics...

There is no 'instead' these are tangential projects. The reason we haven't been told on what they're working on is simply because marketing don't want anyone to know yet.

[LinksOcarina]

I see it as a simple factor of, if you do it right, it will be worth the time to read. But for Bioware to do it right, the works in question must always be supplemental.

For example, the Halo Franchise had I think 3-4 books based off of it, as well as a ton of machinma and an anime release. The problem is, the books gave backstory and characterization that was needed to understand some parts regarding the main Halo trilogy. The first game we know nothing about the Covenant except the name only, and that fact that they are fanatical organization. We know little about the UNSC and what Master Chief is, the Sparta program, and the state of Earth.

The novels do that backstory for us. games like Halo Reach, which came out after the main trilogy is a supplemental game in the grand scheme of things, did that well. But the fact that it was a forced requirement to read the novels and comics to understand basic stuff as well as motivations in Halo 1 is a mismanagement of resources and a poor reason to make a novel.

What we see with the stuff in Dragon Age and Mass Effect is different, because it is all backstory material that is insignificant to the overall plot, but expands the world. The comics for Mass Effect are side stories at the moment giving us extra info on characters; the books for Dragon Age are their own canon and showcase a sort of "what if" scenario going on based on the authors chosen story arc. That provides richness to the settings, not information we need.

So for me, it's all worth it, and i'm kind of glad they are handling it correctly. Except the new Mass Effect novel, that can be burned.