138 réponses à ce sujet

[David Gaider]

Realmzmaster wrote...
As I say to anyone Show me the numbers. Until someone goes out and does a definite survey of all 2 million plus owners of DA2 no one can say a large portion of anything one way or the other.  A fact is something that can be back up with empirical data. Otherwise it is just opinion.

I wouldn't sweat it.

We're well aware that people will tend to inflate their own opinion-- particularly on forums, where people will naturally seek out others who reflect that opinion back at them. It's human nature, both with regards to the positive and the negative.

It can also be very tempting to look around you in that circumstance and get the impression that what you see is all there is. "There are hundreds of people here all complaining! Holy cats, it's a tsunami of outrage!" ...never mind that hundreds, or thousands, of people is barely a drop in the bucket in terms of the overall picture. It's also not really a good argument when someone says "other forums I've visited feel the same way!" either... many of these posters are, in fact the same people. Even if they weren't, all forums work similarly. It's a self-selecting group.

Which is not to say that such opinions aren't representative of a larger audience, necessarily. Just because the vast majority aren't electing to present their opinions onlines doesn't mean they don't feel similarly.

But I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that the most ardent, dedicated fans and the more casual players don't have a lot in common-- by design. Which makes it a bit awkward when the ardent fan tries to co-opt them-- who are you kidding? I'm not sure why the ardent fan would even want to, other than that they think their opinion has more weight when backed up by numbers... combined with a lingering resentment, perhaps, that their share of the audience is slowly shrinking. The ardent fan has plenty of worth, as an evangelist and consumer both-- not to mention as someone capable of expressing a very informed opinion. These things are incredibly valuable to a developer.

But people will do what they're gonna. So try your best to read between the lines and get what value out of the interaction that you can-- ideally we'll do that and hopefully make a better product in the end for it.

Modifié par David Gaider, 26 mars 2012 - 05:51 .

[Meris]

Thor Rand Al wrote...

Meris wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

2. I was stating a fact. You're stating an opinion. And no, I don't share your opinion.

Then tell me, why do you think it these forums full of threads on the one issue the devs cannot make a compromise? (Silence versus Voice).

I for one liked voice better then silent, I go bk to playin a silent protag who lacks what Hawke had/did and I have a hard time getting into the game.  I'm trying NWN again, not sure if I'll succeed or how far I'll get but after playing with Hawke I really do have a hard time with a silent, dull, boring protag.

While I firmly disagree that a silent protagonist is dull or boring, as it hasn't been for decades, the issue here isn't wether one way is better than the other but rather that yes, a lot of people prefer the other way. That is why every poll on the issue ends up 50/50 or why these forums are full of threads on the issue.

These forums aren't really the full picture though, and its perfectly valid to say that whatever poll we get here is isn't true to reality. But the hardcore community, all of us here, is important because its we who actually make people buy the game, its Bethesda's loyal and solid fanbase that made Skyrim what it is and even the designers seem to agree.

At this point, I believe, though admittedly with less numbers than I am comfortable with but with numbers, that the dedicated fanbase is split when it comes to the presentation and perspective of the protagonist. I also believe that there's no possible compromise between radically different forms of roleplaying. So its up to BioWare choose which side to favour and which side to forgo - but I refuse to believe that my side of the table is small by any means.

Modifié par Meris, 26 mars 2012 - 06:00 .

[Realmzmaster]

David Gaider wrote...

Snip

Sorry to snip your wise words, but I want to avoid a pyramid quote. I have been cided about them. I voice only my own opinion and I state it as such. When posters start saying a large majority as if it is fact without the numbers to back it up I will call them on it. A poster here can speak for hisself/herself and that is all. 

As  I have stated I like DA2. DA2 had its problems which I talked about in the constructive criticism thread. I applaud you for your work and for taking the heat of criticism. It has been a pleaure communicating with the Bioware team since BG1. I look foward to a most excellent Next Thing.

[twincast]

Maria Caliban wrote...

twincast wrote...

nedpepper wrote...

My real fear is that in trying to please everyone, they will end up pleasing no one.

You mean, again?

You know quite well that some people were pleased with DA II because you've argued with them on several occasions.

Oh come on, "no one" is hyperbolic by design and we all know it. Everything always pleases *someone*.

[Merci357]

Meris wrote...

While I firmly disagree that a silent protagonist is dull or boring, as it hasn't been for decades , the issue here isn't wether one way is better than the other but rather that yes, a lot of people prefer the other way.

Not that I disagree with you in general - there seems to be a 50/50 split in the fanbase, and BioWare already stated they go voiced protagonist again.

However, for the bolded part, I'm not aware my C64 or Amiga were capable of games with voice over at all. So it's not a question of boring or dull that way back then - it's the only option games had during that time, and not by choice. So, yes, my SSI Gold Box games, or Bard's Tale (or what have you) had a silent protagonist. But those technical limitations that existed decades ago make for a very weak argument that games need to stay this way in this day and age.

Modifié par Merci357, 26 mars 2012 - 06:17 .

[Realmzmaster]

If all your have ever had for decades is a silent protagonist no it would not be perceived as dull or boring until something different comes along then the perception can change. One of my friends would not play crpgs because she said your character never speaks in DAO. The PC does not voice the line you choose, but every one else speaks. She asked Why?
I went own to explain that you could roleplay the voice and tone of voice in your head since you create the PC.
She saw me playing DA2 and was interested because the PC spoke. She now has her own copy of DA2 and is quite happy playing it. I loaned her my copy of DAO. (I have both the original Collectors version and Ultimate.) She gave that back after trying it.

In her opinion she could not deal with the silent PC and the combat was not to her liking. She has since bought all the dlc for DA2 and is quite unhappy with the cancellation of the expansion. She is waiting for the Next Thing, but not if the PC is silent.

I also sure there are gamers on the other side of the coin who do not want a voiced PC and like the combat in DAO, but if you are going to attract new blood you have to do something different. Change can be good or bad, Just like the change from BG to DAO and BG from previous crpgs. If Bioware had not tried something different from other crpgs there would be no BG or NWN.

[NedPepper]

The Confidence-Man wrote...

They had no problem telling DA:O fans to f-off with DA2, I don't see why they can't just tell DA2 fans to f-off now and go back go Origins. It's only fair.

This is what I'm talking about....sigh.  I like both games.  It doesn't have to be one versus the other.  The heart of Dragon Age remained the same.  Same characters.  Same themes.  It was an experiment from a narrative standpoint, but the HEART of the game remained.  Everything else was cosmetic.

[Realmzmaster]

Merci357 wrote...

Meris wrote...

While I firmly disagree that a silent protagonist is dull or boring, as it hasn't been for decades , the issue here isn't wether one way is better than the other but rather that yes, a lot of people prefer the other way.

Not that I disagree with you in general - there seems to be a 50/50 split in the fanbase, and BioWare already stated they go voiced protagonist again.

However, for the bolded part, I'm not aware my C64 or Amiga were capable of games with voice over at all. So it's not a question of boring or dull that way back then - it's the only option games had during that time, and not by choice. So, yes, my SSI Gold Box games, or Bard's Tale (or what have you) had a silent protagonist. But those technical limitations that existed decades ago make for a very weak argument that games need to stay this way in this day and age.

I agree the microcomputers now are more powerful and capable than computers of yesteryear. In fact no one spoke you have to read everything. The only sound was music and sound effects. In fact the first crpg that actually attracted more than just the p n p role playing public was BG1. One of the reason was the NPCs were voiced and would complain when tired or said funny things like Boo go for the eyes. The complaints back then were still why could not the PC be voiced. There were still limitations that did not make it possible. Technology wise it is now possible. The only constraints you have now are finanicial.

One of my favorite cRPGs is still Alternate Reality (city and dungeon). No one spoke. Any lines were delivered in a text box at the botton of the screen. Same with choices. Only sounds were music. Sinister music would play at an encounter and happy music when you entered the Tavern. You also had to worry about eating/drinking and weather conditions had an effect. Your attributes dropped if tired, hungry or thirsty. You could die from thirst or stravation. You could get a job at the INN while not adventuring. The game had banks to deposit you r money that paid interest. I would like to see a remake of that series with voices for both NPCs and PC.

[NedPepper]

cJohnOne wrote...

Did it ever occur to you that some people didn't like DAO after they got it and didn't want the next one. I always believed this to be true.

I am aware of that.  But....if they're looking for feedback from the fanbase....why would they listen to people who have no interest in the franchise at all?

[Realmzmaster]

The Confidence-Man wrote...

They had no problem telling DA:O fans to f-off with DA2, I don't see why they can't just tell DA2 fans to f-off now and go back go Origins. It's only fair.

It is fair only in your mind. I liked DAO and I like DA2. I like certain changes that were made from DAO to DA2. I am a fan of both DA2 and DAo. So I guess Bioware can do without my money and all the money of people who like DA2  if they go back. That would be fair. No?

[eyesofastorm]

David Gaider wrote...

I'm not sure why the ardent fan would even want to, other than that they think their opinion has more weight when backed up by numbers... combined with a lingering resentment, perhaps, that their share of the audience is slowly shrinking. 

You mentioned biased arguments, and I think you demonstrated for us here.  Is "our" share of the audience really shrinking or does it just look small next to the 7 billion people who aren't gamers but might be if you successfully guess the formula that will attract them?  I get that 7 billion is a much more attractive than maybe 1 million.  But I think you are going about it backwards.  You can roll the dice on the 7 billion and what they want and hope its a hit with them.  Or you can focus on the 1 million whose tastes you know intimately and whose loyalty you had spent a decade earning and hope for another few million in incidental sales from the other 7 billion people on the planet.  I think you did one of those with DA:O and another with DA2.  I know you don't get to make this decision anyway DG, but this is how I frame the situation in the light of your comment about my shrinking demographic.  

[Realmzmaster]

nedpepper wrote...

cJohnOne wrote...

Did it ever occur to you that some people didn't like DAO after they got it and didn't want the next one. I always believed this to be true.

I am aware of that.  But....if they're looking for feedback from the fanbase....why would they listen to people who have no interest in the franchise at all?

They could ask the question why they did not like it? You can learn more from how you fail someone than how you succeed.

[David Gaider]

eyesofastorm wrote...
You mentioned biased arguments, and I think you demonstrated for us here.  Is "our" share of the audience really shrinking or does it just look small next to the 7 billion people who aren't gamers but might be if you successfully guess the formula that will attract them?  I get that 7 billion is a much more attractive than maybe 1 million.  But I think you are going about it backwards.  You can roll the dice on the 7 billion and what they want and hope its a hit with them.  Or you can focus on the 1 million whose tastes you know intimately and whose loyalty you had spent a decade earning and hope for another few million in incidental sales from the other 7 billion people on the planet.  I think you did one of those with DA:O and another with DA2.  I know you don't get to make this decision anyway DG, but this is how I frame the situation in the light of your comment about my shrinking demographic.

Mmm I don't mean that the hardcore audience is shrinking. I mean that the overall audience is expanding.

Games are also becoming more expensive to make, primarily because it's now possible to reach a larger audience than before. Targeting 1 million sales is fine, but it no longer means what it once did. For the average game 10 years ago, 1 million sales was phenomenal. These days, it's very much not-- when compared to the costs associated with making a game of "acceptable" quality comparable with other triple-A titles.

Should we be making games cheaper, and be satisfied with the same sales we got 10 years ago? Maybe. Maybe there's no chance of reaching a larger audience with the type of games we make, and it's a futile effort. Maybe it's irrelevant, since the fans (even the hardcore ones) will compare the games we make to other triple-A games made with bigger budgets regardless of the sales. Like you say, it's not really up to me to make these decisions... but the overall trend is something anyone can get wind of if they pay attention. The amount of folly inherent in any given approach is mostly debateable, and no doubt the "accepted wisdom" will remain true until someone else rolls along and proves it false.

Modifié par David Gaider, 26 mars 2012 - 06:49 .

[Realmzmaster]

eyesofastorm wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

I'm not sure why the ardent fan would even want to, other than that they think their opinion has more weight when backed up by numbers... combined with a lingering resentment, perhaps, that their share of the audience is slowly shrinking. 

You mentioned biased arguments, and I think you demonstrated for us here.  Is "our" share of the audience really shrinking or does it just look small next to the 7 billion people who aren't gamers but might be if you successfully guess the formula that will attract them?  I get that 7 billion is a much more attractive than maybe 1 million.  But I think you are going about it backwards.  You can roll the dice on the 7 billion and what they want and hope its a hit with them.  Or you can focus on the 1 million whose tastes you know intimately and whose loyalty you had spent a decade earning and hope for another few million in incidental sales from the other 7 billion people on the planet.  I think you did one of those with DA:O and another with DA2.  I know you don't get to make this decision anyway DG, but this is how I frame the situation in the light of your comment about my shrinking demographic.  

His agrument is not biased. Note that he uses the word perhaps which means maybe or a possibility. He did not state that it was shrinking that would require data. He suggests that maybe the ardent fanbase feel that their numbers are shrinking. That is a perception.

No company the size of EA can follow you line of reasoning and stay in business. Small independents may be able to do that and even they wish to grow. If you only focus on the present audience with no thought of the future audience you doom the company to stagnant sales and little or no profits. Becuase eventually that one million you state are going to dwindle in number with out someone to replace them. Companies have to live in the now and plan for the future.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 26 mars 2012 - 06:53 .

[eyesofastorm]

David Gaider wrote...

Mmm I don't mean that the hardcore audience is shrinking. I mean that the overall audience is expanding.

Ah!  Fair enough then.

[Mr Fixit]

David Gaider wrote...

Mmm I don't mean that the hardcore audience is shrinking. I mean that the overall audience is expanding.

That's why I think that the Age of HardcoreTM is bound to return.

Not only is the audience expanding, but also the age of an average gamer is likely rising. Games aren't seen as the folly of the young anymore. And you know what they say, older people are more conservative, not so ready to keep up with the times. That way, some gaming niches will be an increasing market in the years to come. RPGs included.

[bEVEsthda]

Merci357 wrote...
 But those technical limitations that existed decades ago make for a very weak argument that games need to stay this way in this day and age.

But there are so much better arguments, which have been aired frequently, so you don't have a point here.
I would say the reverse is true. That it's possible to have a voiced protagonist, is not a reason.
The question is of what worth it is.  And what it breaks.

Bioware is going with voiced. There doesn't seem to be much we can do to stop that. So the question now is only how game-breaking it's going to be. - Oh, it's not going to affect you, of course. But DA2 was quite bad, so hopefully they're not repeating it exactly like that.

I'll say this about the "50/50" poll. It's not. I never voted in this poll. I've never regarded it as representative. And it's clearly not relevant since Bioware's decision is foregone.

I'm very critical of DA2. Contemptous of, even. And the reasons we were given for some of the redesigns were pretty horrid. One has to hope they lied to us. And that there really were valid, rational reasons, which they don't want to tell us.

Maybe the game design doesn't work like that with Bioware anymore. Everything having become bigger. But I've always thought game designers need to personally know and understand why a game idea will be good. If they can't do that, the game won't be any good anyway.

So there's ultimately no point in us fans "telling" Bioware exactly how it should be.
If they can't see why it's a good idea, it's no use anyway.
...And we can't see the picture.  ...Before the game is released. After the DA2 experience, that thought no longer carries either confidence or hope, but it's still true.

Feedback is aboout telling how we feel. It must be valuable some way. If Bioware cannot make it valuable, then it's their funeral.

[Realmzmaster]

bEVEsthda wrote...

Merci357 wrote...
 But those technical limitations that existed decades ago make for a very weak argument that games need to stay this way in this day and age.

But there are so much better arguments, which have been aired frequently, so you don't have a point here.
I would say the reverse is true. That it's possible to have a voiced protagonist, is not a reason.
The question is of what worth it is.  And what it breaks.

Bioware is going with voiced. There doesn't seem to be much we can do to stop that. So the question now is only how game-breaking it's going to be. - Oh, it's not going to affect you, of course. But DA2 was quite bad, so hopefully they're not repeating it exactly like that.

I'll say this about the "50/50" poll. It's not. I never voted in this poll. I've never regarded it as representative. And it's clearly not relevant since Bioware's decision is foregone.

I'm very critical of DA2. Contemptous of, even. And the reasons we were given for some of the redesigns were pretty horrid. One has to hope they lied to us. And that there really were valid, rational reasons, which they don't want to tell us.

Maybe the game design doesn't work like that with Bioware anymore. Everything having become bigger. But I've always thought game designers need to personally know and understand why a game idea will be good. If they can't do that, the game won't be any good anyway.

So there's ultimately no point in us fans "telling" Bioware exactly how it should be.
If they can't see why it's a good idea, it's no use anyway.
...And we can't see the picture.  ...Before the game is released. After the DA2 experience, that thought no longer carries either confidence or hope, but it's still true.

Feedback is aboout telling how we feel. It must be valuable some way. If Bioware cannot make it valuable, then it's their funeral.

There lies the problem some think a voice protagonist brings more for them to the table and others do not. So Bioware had to make the decision which is voiced. And as you state the fanbase cannot tell Bioware anything. We can suggest and then vote with our wallets.

[bEVEsthda]

David Gaider wrote...

Mmm I don't mean that the hardcore audience is shrinking. I mean that the overall audience is expanding.

But are you really targeting a wider audience? Or artificially shrinking your potential market, by making them less interesting and more,.. err,.. well, childish?

I mean, you may think it's just the exploration, but Skyrim didn't do that.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 26 mars 2012 - 07:13 .

[NedPepper]

Realmzmaster wrote...

nedpepper wrote...

cJohnOne wrote...

Did it ever occur to you that some people didn't like DAO after they got it and didn't want the next one. I always believed this to be true.

I am aware of that.  But....if they're looking for feedback from the fanbase....why would they listen to people who have no interest in the franchise at all?

They could ask the question why they did not like it? You can learn more from how you fail someone than how you succeed.

True.  But how do you reach those people?  I know some of them.  They all quit at Ostagar.  The reasons?  The game was tedious, boring, too slow, etc.  I couldn't understand why they couldn't stick with it a bit longer.  I argued.  But to no avail.(Hey, some even blamed me for overhyping it.)  These same people bought Skyrim too and  I'll tell you another thing.  They never finished that game either.  Why?  Same reasons.  Some gamers simply BUY EVERYTHING.  Especially if it has hype.  The question is how many acutally finish a game?  Then again, I think gaming has always been this way.  A lot of people simply never finish games.  You can tell that just by looking at X-Box Live friends lists and seeing how many games they own...where they have just a few achievments...or none at all.  I don't pretend to understand it.  Seems like a waste of money to me.  But, it may explain why some people didn't pick up Dragon Age 2.  It's just speculation on my part.

[Lord Gremlin]

Hm, so the question is - why exactly Bioware is collecting feedback? Some decisions are set in stone - such as voiced main character...
Nobody expect Bioware to try to obey fans. But usually feedback is collected when trying to determine what masses primarily like and hate.

[Thor Rand Al]

Mr Fixit wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

Mmm I don't mean that the hardcore audience is shrinking. I mean that the overall audience is expanding.

That's why I think that the Age of HardcoreTM is bound to return.

Not only is the audience expanding, but also the age of an average gamer is likely rising. Games aren't seen as the folly of the young anymore. And you know what they say, older people are more conservative, not so ready to keep up with the times. That way, some gaming niches will be an increasing market in the years to come. RPGs included.

Well I include myself in this group, funny thing was I was just recollecting on when the first video game came out and how much in the last --years they have literally come alive and some of us older generation gamers know of this.  I'm not the conservative type, I def keep up with times and because of this I see how far gaming has come and I can also see where gaming can go.  DA2 is a perfect example of how far we really have come as far as gaming.  I'm ready for change and that's from someone who was there when, we'll I don't need to get into specifics about age but I've been gaming for a lot of yrs lol.  We have come a long way.

[Pzykozis]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Hm, so the question is - why exactly Bioware is collecting feedback? Some decisions are set in stone - such as voiced main character...
Nobody expect Bioware to try to obey fans. But usually feedback is collected when trying to determine what masses primarily like and hate.

Even so they need to have a vision of their own otherwise they'd get mired in the void of the holy grail of concensus.

I'd be more concerned if they did just say they were open to anything and everything.

[David Gaider]

bEVEsthda wrote...
But are you really targeting a wider audience? Or artificially shrinking your potential market, by making them less interesting and more,.. err,.. well, childish?

That is the million dollar question, isn't it? In that respect, both sides are using divining rods to detect water, and nobody has a good answer. There are, however, many simplistic answers to go around.

I mean, you may think it's just the exploration, but Skyrim didn't do that.

This is one such. "More exploration" a la Skyrim is a simplistic answer, and it's not one we're suggesting. What was intended by that comment is to suggest that one of DA2's failings was that a player lacked the feeling of getting to explore... whether it be more varied environments, more of Thedas, or just a feeling of greater scope in the space offered.

It is not, however, "just" that. We don't think that, and neither do you.