232 réponses à ce sujet

[LegendaryBlade]

LegendaryBlade wrote...

So lets get on with the massive topic edit, I didn't expect this thread to expand like it did but if it's going to be discussed, it needs an OP that really opens up discussion.

Mike Laidlaw said in an interview with Gamespot that a return to the RPG style of Dragon Age: Origins is unlikely, proclaiming "The big key is to not adjust 180 degrees again, because we've done this."
- http://www.gamespot....oughts-6305575/  There's a few other snippits in there that are worth reading.

Dragonage III is going to be a failure for just this reason, at very least in my opinion. We already know that Dragonage II did not reach the critical acclaim of it's predeccessor, sitting a full nine points lower than it on Metacritic (91 vs 82), which is up from 79 that it was a bit earlier this year. It's no secret that a lot of Origins fans were dissapointed in DA2.

More specificaly, fans of DA:O who are hoping that we will get the proper sequel we wanted in DA3 are more than likely going to be sorely dissapointed. The idea that "DA3 will be what DA2 should of been" is already spreading, and we hardly have any other proof beyond the vague promises that that's going to be the case. I don't have the article link here with me(I will find it later), but in a later article to the one I posted Bioware said that RPGs in that older style are less relevant on the market(despite reception showing the opposite). DA3 will be more of what DA2 was, and that's fine for people who enjoy DAs(Regardless of how they felt about DA:O)

But it should go without saying that if you love DA:O and hate DA2, you will hate DA3 unless steps are taken by the developing staff to greatly improve it over 2.

EDIT: Overhaul Games is releasing an "Enhanced Edition" of Baldur's Gate 1 & 2 later this year (Summer 2012) with hopes to make enough money to build Baldur's Gate 3 in the true spirit of the games that preceed it. If you like DA:O I highly suggest you support them. 

New edit, I hope this invites more discussion and less attacks.

Modifié par LegendaryBlade, 21 mars 2012 - 06:31 .

[Kinkaku]

I think what Mike is trying to say is that going with the same formula over and over again isn't what is going to progress the franchise or series in anyway, hence saying why it won't be like Origins.

That's also to mention that what he wishes - from what I've read from him - to do is take what made Origins great and DA2 great and then add whatever they might have planned to the "future game".

I also think that there really isn't much room to say that DA3 will be a failure when there has been no "official announcement" or anything on the game in detail.

[LegendaryBlade]

Filament wrote...

I have faith that if they get enough time and resources to work on DA3, they can win back the size of audience they had with DAO (or more, gasp). People can draw all the damning conclusions they want about the sales figures, but I believe if they simply had more time and resources to work on DA2, we might be looking at a much different story here. The game's story could have been more cohesive and less absurd and nonsensical, choices could have been more meaningful, the design changes could have been better polished to be more palatable even for those who didn't like them, they wouldn't have had to reuse assets ad nauseam, they wouldn't have had to cut certain plots or gameplay elements for lack of time and resources to play test, etc. Because DA2 really was rushed out the door, unfortunately.

Since they've already had almost as much time as DA2 got, and they've barely announced the Next Thing yet, I'm hopeful enough. Of course, I liked DA2 anyway, so what do I know, I'm naive and have low standards.

Forgive me if i'm mistaken, but wasn't one of the most common complaints/accusations on the forums after launch that the game was "Rushed" and "Didn't have the budget it deserved"? I remember that being a big focus of the argument, with defenders of the game saying that wasn't the case and that the game is as intended and what not.

If 'rushed' and 'too small of a budget' are really significant reasons why DA2 was so...medeocre, then I certainly hope a lot more time and financial effort is applied to DA3

[MaxQuartiroli]

T3HB3N wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

T3HB3N wrote...

Don't knock it 'til you've tried it.

That theory doesn't work with the current BioWare. They seem to be on a losing streak as of late. Not trying to be a hater, but very hard to maintain faith in them. 

I don't blame you and you're absolutely right, but you CAN'T judge a game before you've tried it. You have no idea what's to come. You can anticipate and expect and want, but you just can't judge.

/agreed

I think that what will make DA3 a successful game or not will be just DA3 itself and nothing else. 
DA2 had a huge amount of preorders thanks to DA:O. But after the release sales dropped immediately because of bad reviews and fans rage. Now DA3 will probably have a smaller amount of preorders because of DA2. But if the game will be good people will know about it and then will just buy it after the release. 
Reputation and previous games can only have an influence on preorders, not on the final result.

[BostonVamp]

DA2 was an okay game - nothing spectacular and nothing that was ground-breaking or made it any different than lots of other games out there. DA was groundbreaking, imho and DA2 was not. With the direction the franchise and the company seems to be going these days and a severe lack of trust on my part, I will wait and see. I have hope that BW will pull something amazing out of this, but the fiasco with ME3 makes that hope dwindle every day. If there is a market for true, "old-style" RPGs, someone will tap it and then BW wil have lost a portion of their consumer base that will most likely not come back.

[Vincentdante]

I agree with OP really. I was very disapointed with DA2 and told myself I should be very skepticle of DA3 whenever we start to see what it has to offer. I'll follow it, I'll play any demos but I won't buy it unless I am convinced that it can offer me an experience akin to DA origins.

I loved origins. I played it for almost a year solid then DA2 came along and changed the entire system which made DA unique to me, and that is the least of my complaints. But it's my oppinion and it is pretty moot now.

The salt in this wound is the fact that I was one of the people defending it saying the usual "wait and see it might surprise you" out of my own fanboyism and excitement. Not this time.

[LegendaryBlade]

Vincentdante wrote...

I agree with OP really. I was very disapointed with DA2 and told myself I should be very skepticle of DA3 whenever we start to see what it has to offer. I'll follow it, I'll play any demos but I won't buy it unless I am convinced that it can offer me an experience akin to DA origins.

I loved origins. I played it for almost a year solid then DA2 came along and changed the entire system which made DA unique to me, and that is the least of my complaints. But it's my oppinion and it is pretty moot now.

The salt in this wound is the fact that I was one of the people defending it saying the usual "wait and see it might surprise you" out of my own fanboyism and excitement. Not this time.

This is more or less my sentiments exactly. I felt bad for everytime I said "No guys, DA2 will be great, just you wait" only to be presented with what is possibly the most medeocre game i've ever played. Hopefully, Bioware will take notice of how much better DA:O was received both critically and financially and wisen up.

[starscreamerx31]

I agree. Im gonna wait like 2 weeks before it comes out and read fan reviews this time i sick of game breaking bugs. On another note i was shocked by the repeated dungeons lack if character development as well as the comple change to da2.

[attend]

LegendaryBlade wrote...

Filament wrote...

I have faith that if they get enough time and resources to work on DA3, they can win back the size of audience they had with DAO (or more, gasp). People can draw all the damning conclusions they want about the sales figures, but I believe if they simply had more time and resources to work on DA2, we might be looking at a much different story here. The game's story could have been more cohesive and less absurd and nonsensical, choices could have been more meaningful, the design changes could have been better polished to be more palatable even for those who didn't like them, they wouldn't have had to reuse assets ad nauseam, they wouldn't have had to cut certain plots or gameplay elements for lack of time and resources to play test, etc. Because DA2 really was rushed out the door, unfortunately.

Since they've already had almost as much time as DA2 got, and they've barely announced the Next Thing yet, I'm hopeful enough. Of course, I liked DA2 anyway, so what do I know, I'm naive and have low standards.

Forgive me if i'm mistaken, but wasn't one of the most common complaints/accusations on the forums after launch that the game was "Rushed" and "Didn't have the budget it deserved"? I remember that being a big focus of the argument, with defenders of the game saying that wasn't the case and that the game is as intended and what not.

If 'rushed' and 'too small of a budget' are really significant reasons why DA2 was so...medeocre, then I certainly hope a lot more time and financial effort is applied to DA3

Those are common complaints to justify why they knowingly released a product that was not ready.  It reminds me of the child who sweeps all the dirt in the corner hoping you won't notice.  They had a great idea and did only the minimum to get it out.  Bioware could have fought for more time to release a better product but they did not bother.  They just gave excuses afterwards.  I sadly believe it is all about making the most money for minimum effort now.  Bioware can rage at me all they want but as the end user who provides the money to buy their product, I believe it is up to them to restore my faith.  
 
None of us should have lower our expectations for a quality product.  They are well educated, intelligent people who need to remember this is not the sixth grade science fair and I am not buying your cup of dirt.  TO Bioware... Use common sense.  People do not have dead bodies lying around for ten years.  A companion does not say the same thing over and over every time your character see them,  Caves are not all alike.  A passageway that leads to the character's basement does not later become the demon's hidden lair.  People do not wear the same thing for ten years.  Enemies do not fall out of the sky.  Humans can not contort their bodies to do even half of the fighting moves you provided (A flip before disappearing? Really?). I could go on for several pages but I won't.  None of the things mentioned  are game breaking and yet they are.  It was sloppy work and all of you could have refused to release the game in that state, but you didn't.  Bioware knows it and we know it.

Hopefully the employees pulled to the new project are there to ensure an epic game.  Since that is what we are being told already, we the buyers will be expecting that.  No excuses this time.  We are now checking the corners. 

Modifié par attend, 22 mars 2012 - 02:58 .

[Cyne]

I think at the very least da3 will be better than da2, it's not hard to see where they can easily improve, and there ARE some aspects like combat which are better in DA2 than DA:O. Plus nobody wants a repetition of the DA2 fiasco. If they could convince Brent Knowles to come back to lead the team so much the better. Something like that will renew the fans' faith.

[tariq071]

Cyne wrote...

I think at the very least da3 will be better than da2, it's not hard to see where they can easily improve, and there ARE some aspects like combat which are better in DA2 than DA:O. Plus nobody wants a repetition of the DA2 fiasco. If they could convince Brent Knowles to come back to lead the team so much the better. Something like that will renew the fans' faith.

Brent Knowles has no intention on going back, at least according to his blog.And that's not because of good or bad reason, he simply moved on with his personal projects.Sad for fans who like true writing , but good for him, and i don't blame him.

But you are right, one of the reasons for DA II less then stellar showing was atrocious writting, that needs somehow to change if they want any chance to bring back at least some of DA:O fans.

[craigdolphin]

Yeah, BK is happy in his new thing it seems from reading his blog. I hope the execs and producer take this opportunity to reflect on his leaving and the conversations they must have had with him at the time about their new vision for the franchise. I suspect that much of what they need to know about where they went wrong was mentioned during those discussions as they apparently contributed to hs deciding not to be lead for da2, and ultimately why he left Bioware too. Note this is not intended to be in any way, shape, or form, blaming Mike Laidlaw for anything. He only implemented the vision he was given. And to be fair to ML, he did a good job with Jade Empire IMO so I'm not counting him out just yet. But I do think some reflection at the top about what they changed in the vision for the franchise between dao and da2 would be time well spent. Still, seeing mark Darrah participating directly in the forums is a good sign to my mind.

[Realmzmaster]

tariq071 wrote...

Cyne wrote...

I think at the very least da3 will be better than da2, it's not hard to see where they can easily improve, and there ARE some aspects like combat which are better in DA2 than DA:O. Plus nobody wants a repetition of the DA2 fiasco. If they could convince Brent Knowles to come back to lead the team so much the better. Something like that will renew the fans' faith.

Brent Knowles has no intention on going back, at least according to his blog.And that's not because of good or bad reason, he simply moved on with his personal projects.Sad for fans who like true writing , but good for him, and i don't blame him.

But you are right, one of the reasons for DA II less then stellar showing was atrocious writting, that needs somehow to change if they want any chance to bring back at least some of DA:O fans.

The lead Writer on both DAO and DA2 was David Gaider. Brent Knowles did not do any of the writing for DAO. In fact David Gaider was also lead writer and senior designer for BG2: Throne of Bhaal. The same writing team was used in both DAO and DA2. So how do you suggest improving the writing?

Do you dump the writing team including the writer (David Gaider) who created most of the DA universe?

[xnode]

There is no discussion really, the thing everyone seems to be missing was, DAO was a great success and DA2 did well , but not as well as DAO. The issue isn't ignoring the fanbase or a genre base, they are attempting to broaden that base. If you remember, a long time ago when DA2 was being announced and discussed. One of the topics was "we really want to reach a broader fanbase" , see Skyrim and now you understand. It's not that they don't want to do an older rpg, but I have no doubt that DAO didn't do as well as Skyrim did.

I love everything that DAO was , but I understand why they won't go back to it, rpg crowed is out there and it can be a picky crowed, so when you make something you want to reach the broadest appeal you can, how do you that? You innovate and attempt to improve what you have to make it better. DA2 , attempted this, but failed with a few reasons (no need to go threw them again) but alas, that's really it. It comes down to a broader player base.

EA wants mass sales just like Skyrim, I get it, I might not like it, but in the end the general population in gaming has spoken again and again. See Skyrim, See other RPG's , just saying, the old system where great, but sadly they just don't have the fandom beyond a certain number that players like EA wants to market too.

Nitch genre is great if your a lower end developer you can get into it easier that way, when your a huge developer/publisher the stakes are way higher for many reasons.

[kingtigernz]

Well I am not going to pre order the game that is for sure.I will most likely give it a couple of weeks and read reviews(customer reviews) to see what it's really like.I do not want to repeat the mistake I made last time,that said I hope it's more in the style of Origins.

[tariq071]

Realmzmaster wrote...

tariq071 wrote...

Cyne wrote...

I think at the very least da3 will be better than da2, it's not hard to see where they can easily improve, and there ARE some aspects like combat which are better in DA2 than DA:O. Plus nobody wants a repetition of the DA2 fiasco. If they could convince Brent Knowles to come back to lead the team so much the better. Something like that will renew the fans' faith.

Brent Knowles has no intention on going back, at least according to his blog.And that's not because of good or bad reason, he simply moved on with his personal projects.Sad for fans who like true writing , but good for him, and i don't blame him.

But you are right, one of the reasons for DA II less then stellar showing was atrocious writting, that needs somehow to change if they want any chance to bring back at least some of DA:O fans.

The lead Writer on both DAO and DA2 was David Gaider. Brent Knowles did not do any of the writing for DAO. In fact David Gaider was also lead writer and senior designer for BG2: Throne of Bhaal. The same writing team was used in both DAO and DA2. So how do you suggest improving the writing?

Do you dump the writing team including the writer (David Gaider) who created most of the DA universe?

You don't need to (or have to) replace anyone, i see no reason for it. What needs to happen is that upper brass lets them do their best instead of telling them "we want you to make something like Mass Effect , aka Dragon effect and we want you to target specific consumer population",.

That's a lot of limitations, specially when your main fanbase is not not consistent mostly of that targeted population group.

Let them write their best and even though result may or may not be bestseller, it sure will be better then what was in DA II.

@xnod EA wants sales like Skyrim now, but when DA II was in development they wanted them to mimic Mass Effect success.That's frequent change of direction, which just doesn't work, set one direction and stick with it.

Copy is never good as original, not to mention that Skyrim(and Mass effect) is completely different type of game and that Bethesda never steped away from their fanbase in order to make extra buck.

Modifié par tariq071, 22 mars 2012 - 12:02 .

[LegendaryBlade]

xnode wrote...

There is no discussion really, the thing everyone seems to be missing was, DAO was a great success and DA2 did well , but not as well as DAO. The issue isn't ignoring the fanbase or a genre base, they are attempting to broaden that base. If you remember, a long time ago when DA2 was being announced and discussed. One of the topics was "we really want to reach a broader fanbase" , see Skyrim and now you understand. It's not that they don't want to do an older rpg, but I have no doubt that DAO didn't do as well as Skyrim did.

I love everything that DAO was , but I understand why they won't go back to it, rpg crowed is out there and it can be a picky crowed, so when you make something you want to reach the broadest appeal you can, how do you that? You innovate and attempt to improve what you have to make it better. DA2 , attempted this, but failed with a few reasons (no need to go threw them again) but alas, that's really it. It comes down to a broader player base.

EA wants mass sales just like Skyrim, I get it, I might not like it, but in the end the general population in gaming has spoken again and again. See Skyrim, See other RPG's , just saying, the old system where great, but sadly they just don't have the fandom beyond a certain number that players like EA wants to market too.

Nitch genre is great if your a lower end developer you can get into it easier that way, when your a huge developer/publisher the stakes are way higher for many reasons.

That's just the thing though, the way to improve sales isn't to abandon your original target audience in lew of a bigger audience. What made the Elder Scrolls series such a success is that, even though each game is different from the last, they retain many of their core elements. Especially the combat, and the way you interact with the world. 

Maybe I have no right to speak on the subject as i'm not in the field, but it seems to me that they would have gone a long way to retain the Origins system, but polish it. Improve it. Make it something new but recognizable and pull in those few wrpg straglers that felt that Origins still wasn't enough of what they wanted. 

[Sith_exar_kun]

I will definitely not preorder the game as I did with DAII, I will at least wait for some gameplay video AND for opinions form the fanbase.

[Maria Caliban]

I'm perfectly comfortable judging a game prior to playing it.

After all, how do you think I decide what games to play or not?

[Lux]

LegendaryBlade wrote...

Mike Laidlaw said in an interview with Gamespot that a return to the RPG style of Dragon Age: Origins is unlikely, proclaiming "The big key is to not adjust 180 degrees again, because we've done this."
- http://www.gamespot....oughts-6305575/  There's a few other snippits in there that are worth reading.

Dragonage III is going to be a failure for just this reason(...)

Well, if they improve the artstyle, have a great story, make the setting more varied and detailed, tweak the quicker combat to a more realistic context, allow DAO's companion customization (while preserving the cosplay thing) and drop the JRPG influence, DA3 would be what DA2 should've been (IMO).

But yeah, I'll definitely be careful before commiting to a purchase.

Modifié par Merkar, 22 mars 2012 - 05:29 .

[Leafs43]

Maybe I am in the minority, but I just don't see why people think DAO was so engaging.

The story just seemed so scattered. Each major plot quest had a tiny plot twist at the end but you can kind of see it coming. The only companions with real personality seemed to be Morrigan, Lelliana and Shale.


Otherwise it just followed the base Bioware RPG formula.

[bEVEsthda]

tariq071 wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

tariq071 wrote...

Cyne wrote...

I think at the very least da3 will be better than da2, it's not hard to see where they can easily improve, and there ARE some aspects like combat which are better in DA2 than DA:O. Plus nobody wants a repetition of the DA2 fiasco. If they could convince Brent Knowles to come back to lead the team so much the better. Something like that will renew the fans' faith.

Brent Knowles has no intention on going back, at least according to his blog.And that's not because of good or bad reason, he simply moved on with his personal projects.Sad for fans who like true writing , but good for him, and i don't blame him.

But you are right, one of the reasons for DA II less then stellar showing was atrocious writting, that needs somehow to change if they want any chance to bring back at least some of DA:O fans.

The lead Writer on both DAO and DA2 was David Gaider. Brent Knowles did not do any of the writing for DAO. In fact David Gaider was also lead writer and senior designer for BG2: Throne of Bhaal. The same writing team was used in both DAO and DA2. So how do you suggest improving the writing?

Do you dump the writing team including the writer (David Gaider) who created most of the DA universe?

You don't need to (or have to) replace anyone, i see no reason for it. What needs to happen is that upper brass lets them do their best instead of telling them "we want you to make something like Mass Effect , aka Dragon effect and we want you to target specific consumer population",.

That's a lot of limitations, specially when your main fanbase is not not consistent mostly of that targeted population group.

Let them write their best and even though result may or may not be bestseller, it sure will be better then what was in DA II.

@xnod EA wants sales like Skyrim now, but when DA II was in development they wanted them to mimic Mass Effect success.That's frequent change of direction, which just doesn't work, set one direction and stick with it.

Copy is never good as original, not to mention that Skyrim(and Mass effect) is completely different type of game and that Bethesda never steped away from their fanbase in order to make extra buck.

On Knowles:
Brent Knowles was the lead designer of the original PC-game Mk1 Dragon's Age: Origins. We don't know the details of this game, other than that the eventually published Mk2 DA:O was a year later (dumbed down?) variation of this game that had been changed, so it would also play on the consoles. But possibly it was virtually identical.

That doesn't mean that DA2 would have been any different, had Knowles stayed on as lead designer. This has been explained in various ways many times, and D.Gaider has left us further information about how Bioware see these games, from top level downwards, and where they are going and intend to go.
What kind of game DA2 was going to be, was a collective, senior decision. (From what I can read between the lines of various discussion, this decision hasn't changed at all, despite the failure of DA2. What is on the table now, is what they can do to make this new DA3 game work for those who didn't like DA2.)

As I remember it, Knowles explicitly said that he early on knew he didn't want to do that game. But that wasn't the only stated reason he left. He also said something about that the new Bioware wasn't the right place for him any longer. He had other plans. Just like many others decide in their lifes, on occasion.


On the success of Skyrim:
What must be remembered when considering the success of Skyrim, is that it follows in the footsteps of many similar games: Morrowind, Oblivion, FO3.  These games have progressively made gamers recognize the name Bethesda. They have also taught more and more gamers the gaming paradigm, and got them used to how it works. This is important, and takes time and successive games. The typical gamer will otherwise just want the new game to work exactly as whatever he is used to or likes.
 
Bethesda have a good idea and they persist with it. Eventually gamers comes to understand it and appreciate the subtle, good things about it. And the game market is not just composed of slightly retarded 14y old males. If you just publish games directed towards them, you might always get an initial, early success. But in reality, you are artificially shrinking your potential market.

Bethesda wasn't as successful from the start. And IMO that is not due to the games individual quality. IMO, Morrowind deserved bigger success than Skyrim, for instance. It's just that in the days of Morrowind, most gamers didn't "get it". They complained about all sorts of things, "boring", Cliffracers, "what am I supposed to do?", etc.
Skyrims success is due to the increased mindshare for these games that has been created over time.

Bioware, by comparison, always seem to copy gameplay ideas and action from someone else: Diablo, Dungeon Siege, WoW, Final Fantasy, Dynasty Warriors,... Ever since they abandoned BG.

So Bioware are jealous of Skyrim's sales?  I wonder where Bioware had been today, had NWN been a more true successor of BG? ...And if they had just continued on that track?

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 22 mars 2012 - 06:21 .