942 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

adlocutio wrote...

These examples are fascinating.  More would be welcome.

Unfortunately, I gave up on DA2 before running many characters through it.

In my last attempt I built Hawke just like an NPC from DAO.  I hoped BioWare would be more likely to support a character design they themselves had written, so I picked one I thought would be interesting to play, and I designed that Hawke to be very much like Avernus from the Warden's Peak DLC.  But that didn't work,either, because Hawke simply wasn't allowed to be that driven and single-minded about anything.  In this case, the serial killer bore a closer resemblance to the character I was trying to play than Hawke did.

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Just because there's only one option available doesn't mean you have to choose it.

Actually, sometimes the game chooses for you, if you don't make a choice. I remember that this was specifically explained about dialog in DA:O.

I don't recall such a thing happening.  I'm not even sure how it could have, given the dialogue system.

There were times when quests would appear in the journal without my consent (DA2 does this incessantly), but that doesn't mean the Warden accepted those quests or agreed to help with them.

[TEWR]

John Epler wrote...

We were proud of the work we'd done thus far on Exalted March, much as we were proud of the work we'd done on the DA2 DLCs. In an ideal world, we would have liked to release it - however, we decided that the allotment of resources was, at the end of the day, not the allocation of resources we felt made the most sense for the Dragon Age franchise as a whole.

I don't know, I must be missing something here. Most likely I am, as I won't profess to know what goes on in a game studio when it's developing something -- be it a game, DLC, expansion, cunning traps, or potato salad.

But I have to wonder just what this means. Why halt production on something that was well liked amongst yourselves, where you thought the work done so far was grand? Why begin working on the next big thing so soon?

And so on and so forth with the related questions.

You can say "It wasn't the best way to handle things for the series" -- and I realize vagueness is part and parcel to Bioware -- but I just don't understand why something that was going great -- for a game that despite how bad it was (IMO) had DLC that sold well -- would be shut down.

I also realize you -- a Bioware "you" here -- said that parts of Exalted March would be incorporated into "The Next Big Thing", but I don't know how well that would work.

I guess it all depends on what parts, which in the end leads me right back to what I said earlier: I'll wait and see what's in store and decide then if what they're doing is right for me.

So.... wasted post I guess?

[Sylvius the Mad]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Even if they;'re not unassailable core issues, they might have had an impact at any previous point during the game.  Would Hawke have behaved differently at any previous point had you had this new character design from the start?  How do you know?

It's my Hawke. I know.

Are you claiming a priori knowledge now?  What if there are contradictions?  If your Hawke's new behavior is internally contrtadictory, don't you care?  How can you make decisions for him if his own opinions are incompatible with each other?

As long as the characteristic that you care about isn't one BioWare foresaw, then the paraphrases are consistenly useless.

You've been over this before. Bioware's position hasn't changed. The ability to play Who's Line with the protagonist of their game is something they are willing to sacrifice.

First, I've said before that David is simply incorrect about the content of his earlier games.

Second, your response here has no relevance at all to what I said.  David was describing the lost ability (he denies it was ever there - that's where I think he's wrong) to have the PC say things in ways the writers didn't intent.  I'm talking about the player's inability to discern what the paraphrases mean.  That's a completely different issue.

The more I deal with DA2's dialogue system, the more I realise that the paraphrases are a much bigger problem than the voice.  The voice still sucks, yes, but the voice is manageable.  But not being able to see what it is I'm choosing is not a surmountable barrier.  for these games to be playable for me, they need to do a vastly better job of letting me know what my character is actually going to say.  The literal content.  The denotative meaning.  That's what the player needs in order to choose the corect option.

Yes, the presence of the voice does dramatically reduce the range of things the PC can say, but the paraphrase prevents the player from choosing within even that range by hiding the options.  How anyone can think RPG dialogue seelction that resembles Let's Make A Deal is a good thing I have no idea.

The standard extablished by BioWare's unvoiced games was certainty.  The player knew with certainty what his character was going to say.  That should be the goal of any "improvement" of the system.

Skelter192 wrote...

No it's Bioware's Hawke you gave them a name, a face but ultimately it's a set protagonist.

If BioWare ever told me this, I would stop expecting otherwise from their game.

[John Epler]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

John Epler wrote...

We were proud of the work we'd done thus far on Exalted March, much as we were proud of the work we'd done on the DA2 DLCs. In an ideal world, we would have liked to release it - however, we decided that the allotment of resources was, at the end of the day, not the allocation of resources we felt made the most sense for the Dragon Age franchise as a whole.

I don't know, I must be missing something here. Most likely I am, as I won't profess to know what goes on in a game studio when it's developing something -- be it a game, DLC, expansion, cunning traps, or potato salad.

But I have to wonder just what this means. Why halt production on something that was well liked amongst yourselves, where you thought the work done so far was grand? Why begin working on the next big thing so soon?

And so on and so forth with the related questions.

You can say "It wasn't the best way to handle things for the series" -- and I realize vagueness is part and parcel to Bioware -- but I just don't understand why something that was going great -- for a game that despite how bad it was (IMO) had DLC that sold well -- would be shut down.

I also realize you -- a Bioware "you" here -- said that parts of Exalted March would be incorporated into "The Next Big Thing", but I don't know how well that would work.

I guess it all depends on what parts, which in the end leads me right back to what I said earlier: I'll wait and see what's in store and decide then if what they're doing is right for me.

So.... wasted post I guess?

Well, there's really not a whole lot I can add to this - my vagueness is intentional, unfortunately, and there's a very fine line we have to walk when we're interacting in public in a non-planned environment (outside of interviews and the like, I mean). At the end of the day, there are only so many resources available in any one studio, and when you have a studio that handles multiple projects at once, that number becomes even lower. Particularly when you're talking about the 'core' team - a lot of staff is shared between all projects, with the notable exception of writing and some of the art teams. I think I just made it even vaguer, so let me retrace. The stuff we'd done on Exalted March was, at the end of the day, something we were proud of. But there are all sorts of considerations when working on a game, and when it's DLC there are even more things to keep in mind.

And I highly encourage waiting and seeing. I believe most people will enjoy what we're doing. Some will not. That's life, and while it would be wonderful if we could make everyone happy, there are enough incompatible ideas and beliefs even within seeming homogenous groups that it'll never happen. But I -can- say that I've never been quite so excited to be a part of this franchise.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

John Epler wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

John Epler wrote...

We were proud of the work we'd done thus far on Exalted March, much as we were proud of the work we'd done on the DA2 DLCs. In an ideal world, we would have liked to release it - however, we decided that the allotment of resources was, at the end of the day, not the allocation of resources we felt made the most sense for the Dragon Age franchise as a whole.

I don't know, I must be missing something here. Most likely I am, as I won't profess to know what goes on in a game studio when it's developing something -- be it a game, DLC, expansion, cunning traps, or potato salad.

But I have to wonder just what this means. Why halt production on something that was well liked amongst yourselves, where you thought the work done so far was grand? Why begin working on the next big thing so soon?

And so on and so forth with the related questions.

You can say "It wasn't the best way to handle things for the series" -- and I realize vagueness is part and parcel to Bioware -- but I just don't understand why something that was going great -- for a game that despite how bad it was (IMO) had DLC that sold well -- would be shut down.

I also realize you -- a Bioware "you" here -- said that parts of Exalted March would be incorporated into "The Next Big Thing", but I don't know how well that would work.

I guess it all depends on what parts, which in the end leads me right back to what I said earlier: I'll wait and see what's in store and decide then if what they're doing is right for me.

So.... wasted post I guess?

Well, there's really not a whole lot I can add to this - my vagueness is intentional, unfortunately, and there's a very fine line we have to walk when we're interacting in public in a non-planned environment (outside of interviews and the like, I mean). At the end of the day, there are only so many resources available in any one studio, and when you have a studio that handles multiple projects at once, that number becomes even lower. Particularly when you're talking about the 'core' team - a lot of staff is shared between all projects, with the notable exception of writing and some of the art teams. I think I just made it even vaguer, so let me retrace. The stuff we'd done on Exalted March was, at the end of the day, something we were proud of. But there are all sorts of considerations when working on a game, and when it's DLC there are even more things to keep in mind.

And I highly encourage waiting and seeing. I believe most people will enjoy what we're doing. Some will not. That's life, and while it would be wonderful if we could make everyone happy, there are enough incompatible ideas and beliefs even within seeming homogenous groups that it'll never happen. But I -can- say that I've never been quite so excited to be a part of this franchise.

To be fair John you guys were proud of Dragon Age II as well, with all it's recycled areas, disjointed feeling story (mostly imo due to the intended framed narrative to begin with) design decisions to remove most of the player customization for companions Removal of a tactical over head camera, imo at least the list of questionable design decisions trails a mile long. To top it off it was pushed out the door in about 18 months. Which for a game of this genre isn't very much time, especially when you bring up the topic of polish.

I'm sure you can't answer the question I'm about to ask, but heck I'll ask anyway. Can you give a time frame for DA3 development? This isn't going to be another one of those 18 month cram whatever parts you guys liked from the canceled expansion pack, into something else you just throw together in order to recoup some of the investement made on said canceled expack I would hope?

If indeed the next step is a full fledged Dragon Age 3, what are the chances that those of us who were very fond of Origins and not at all fond of DA2 have a bone tossed our way?  High? Moderate? No chance in hades?

[Artemis_Entrari]

Adanu wrote...

DOn't speak for me, ****.

You have Origins. It worked for what it was. They aren't going back to that 'idea'. I found DA:O to be tedious gameplay wise especially compared to DA2.

DA2 with a bit of DA:O thrown in would be a good hybrid.

I'm kind of leaning toward this.  As a whole, I liked a lot of what Origins did.  I liked the more open adventure feel of it (ie. not all confined to one city), and I liked the party interaction anywhere, anytime.  Origins just felt like a much bigger, much more epic game in scope than DA2.

However, I found myself having a difficult time going back to Origins when it came to the combat.  I'm usually not an "action" guy, but I found DA2's combat simply more fun than Origins.  I also had no issue whatsoever with the first two chapters of DA2's story.

So while I overall preferred Origins, I think DA2 did enough stuff right that, if they incorporate a more open, epic feel of Origins, as well as some tweaks to how many choices we got in Origins as compared to the ending of DA2, I'd be thrilled with the outcome.

[Realmzmaster]

Until it gets closer to fruition it more like No chance in Hades. There is only so much the developers can say or reveal due to non-disclosure agreements. So vagueness is all that we will get for the present moment. I can live with that because I know what kind of constraints the developers are under. I have worked under those conditions before.

[Maria Caliban]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

John Epler wrote...

We were proud of the work we'd done thus far on Exalted March, much as we were proud of the work we'd done on the DA2 DLCs. In an ideal world, we would have liked to release it - however, we decided that the allotment of resources was, at the end of the day, not the allocation of resources we felt made the most sense for the Dragon Age franchise as a whole.

But I have to wonder just what this means. Why halt production on something that was well liked amongst yourselves, where you thought the work done so far was grand? Why begin working on the next big thing so soon?

I have no idea what the situation is at BioWare, but I could easily come up with a scenario that justifies dropping the expansion.

For example, imagine that 15 people worked on Dragon Age II. The current expansion was being made by 10 people while the other 5 were shuffled off somewhere.

ME 3 comes out, and it had 20 people working on it. Those 20 now need to be reallocated.

Someone says, "We were going to stick all 20 of ME 3's people to Project X, but DA is our only visible IP at this time. Instead, why not give 10 of the ME 3 people to the DA team?"

Someone else runs the numbers and says, "Expansions just aren't that popular and the projected release date is after a hypothetical profit window from the release of the main game."

Important people sit in a meeting and decide that instead of 10 people working on an expansion to come out in 2013, it's better to have 25 people working on a new game to come out in 2015.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 28 mars 2012 - 07:07 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Maria Caliban wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

John Epler wrote...

We were proud of the work we'd done thus far on Exalted March, much as we were proud of the work we'd done on the DA2 DLCs. In an ideal world, we would have liked to release it - however, we decided that the allotment of resources was, at the end of the day, not the allocation of resources we felt made the most sense for the Dragon Age franchise as a whole.

But I have to wonder just what this means. Why halt production on something that was well liked amongst yourselves, where you thought the work done so far was grand? Why begin working on the next big thing so soon?

I have no idea what the situation is at BioWare, but I could easily come up with a scenario that justifies dropping the expansion.

For example, imagine that 15 people worked on Dragon Age II. The current expansion was being made by 10 people while the other 5 were shuffled off somewhere.

ME 3 comes out, and it had 20 people working on it. Those 20 now need to be reallocated.

Someone says, "We were going to stick all 20 of ME 3's people to Project X, but DA is our only visible IP at this time. Instead, why not give 10 of the ME 3 people to the DA team?"

Someone else runs the numbers and says, "Expansions just aren't that popular and the projected release date is after a hypothetical profit window from the release of the main game."

Important people sit in a meeting and decide that instead of 10 people working on an expansion to come out in 2013, it's better to have 25 people working on a new game to come out in 2015.

Honestly, and this is just me being my usual pessimistic self, the way the bolded section is worded, it sounds like it was going to be another DAII where they don't get enough of a dev cycle to do what they wanted to do. Bioware really needs to tread carefully with this going forward. DA2 sales wise tappered off very quickly due to word of mouth not being exactly sunshine and roses. I actually recently read a GI article where they have one of those year end Top lists in different catagories, and DAII is listed as one of the top ten disappointments just as an example.

Throw in the ME3 ending fiasco they're currently dealing with, which also quite possibly could be due to time constrants and you have to wonder just how much Bioware titles will suffer quality wise going forward since EA doesn't exactly have a "When it's Done" track record on release schedules.

EA has no issues closing studios that don't make them enough projected income. I don't see that happening with Bioware right away, but if they continue to stumble in crucial areas in regards to key factors in titles. I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility to see Bioware end up another Origin/Bullfrog/Westwood/Pandemic etc down the road.

As one of the few remaining companies that produces titles in a genre that I happen to like quite a bit, namely party based CRPG's, I certainly wouldn't want to see it happen.

[JediHealerCosmin]

John Epler wrote...

And I highly encourage waiting and seeing. I believe most people will enjoy what we're doing. Some will not.

I recall you posting the same thing a few hours before DA2 was offcially announced all that time ago  

Also, to add to the topic: most of the time we have no fricking idea what the hell we want.

Modifié par JediHealerCosmin, 28 mars 2012 - 08:50 .

[Tyrium]

Sometimes I don't know why I come here, let alone bother to respond.

I loved DA2, better than DAO, though I loved that too. I also loved ME3. Yeah, I wish the ending was a bit different, but that's not the point.

I certainly don't want more Baldur's Gate, I want more Dragon Age. I'd have loved an expansion, and was very upset to find out it was cancelled, but I'm looking forward to DA3.

David Gaider, your response on the first page was wonderful.

[Mr Fixit]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Are you claiming a priori knowledge now?  What if there are contradictions?  If your Hawke's new behavior is internally contrtadictory, don't you care?  How can you make decisions for him if his own opinions are incompatible with each other?

What part of "strict-adherence-to-your-definition-of-roleplaying-isn't-all-one's-looking-for-in-an-RPG" you don't get?

You can continue down this path for the rest of eternity, it won't change how other people approach their games and their characters.

Modifié par Mr Fixit, 28 mars 2012 - 09:14 .

[AkiKishi]

Mr Fixit wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Are you claiming a priori knowledge now?  What if there are contradictions?  If your Hawke's new behavior is internally contrtadictory, don't you care?  How can you make decisions for him if his own opinions are incompatible with each other?

What part of "strict-adherence-to-your-definition-of-roleplaying-isn't-all-one's-looking-in-an-RPG" you don't get?

You can continue down this path for the rest of eternity, it won't change how other people approach their games and their characters.

Progress is the enemy of Sylvius.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
The more I deal with DA2's dialogue system, the more I realise that the paraphrases are a much bigger problem than the voice.  The voice still sucks, yes, but the voice is manageable.  But not being able to see what it is I'm choosing is not a surmountable barrier.  for these games to be playable for me, they need to do a vastly better job of letting me know what my character is actually going to say.  The literal content.  The denotative meaning.  That's what the player needs in order to choose the corect option.

Yes, the presence of the voice does dramatically reduce the range of things the PC can say, but the paraphrase prevents the player from choosing within even that range by hiding the options.  How anyone can think RPG dialogue seelction that resembles Let's Make A Deal is a good thing I have no idea.

The standard extablished by BioWare's unvoiced games was certainty.  The player knew with certainty what his character was going to say.  That should be the goal of any "improvement" of the system.

Seconded.

[Adanu]

Mr Fixit wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Are you claiming a priori knowledge now?  What if there are contradictions?  If your Hawke's new behavior is internally contrtadictory, don't you care?  How can you make decisions for him if his own opinions are incompatible with each other?

What part of "strict-adherence-to-your-definition-of-roleplaying-isn't-all-one's-looking-for-in-an-RPG" you don't get?

You can continue down this path for the rest of eternity, it won't change how other people approach their games and their characters.

He's just being an overanalytical troll who can't understand how to play within constraints. Ignore himm he's beenl ike this for years.

[Corto81]

Adanu wrote...


He's just being an overanalytical troll who can't understand how to play within constraints. Ignore himm he's beenl ike this for years.

You ever post an actual valid post? Or just badmouth people who voice their concern about the path the franchise's taking or how disappointed they were with the game?

Most criticism are framed in a constructive post - which you can agree with, or not; yet you keep replying with "you suck", "take a hike hater" and "lol, troll" masterpieces.

[Adanu]

Corto81 wrote...

Adanu wrote...


He's just being an overanalytical troll who can't understand how to play within constraints. Ignore himm he's beenl ike this for years.

You ever post an actual valid post? Or just badmouth people who voice their concern about the path the franchise's taking or how disappointed they were with the game?

Most criticism are framed in a constructive post - which you can agree with, or not; yet you keep replying with "you suck", "take a hike hater" and "lol, troll" masterpieces.

Sure I do... when it actually seems like people will listen and take what I say to heart.

More often people will just scream at each other because one sees Cerulean and another sees Ultramarine and they biterly debate it until the mods have to lock it.

SOmetimes people will be civil about it, like here, but it's the same premise.

He's never going to understand it because he doesn't want to understand it. He's just looking to debate everything you throw at him until you agree with him. I've seen it time and again. He won't accept that things change and some changes he can do nothing about.

I'm glad to discuss topics, but very few people are actually willing to discuss, and would rather argue.

For example, you have not proven that you cannot understand where I am coming from yet, unlike him, so I respond to you.

Personally, I hope Sylvius finds what he is looking for... it's probably not the DA series unless he can look past the flaws.

Probably best to stick to Tabletop DnD for him.

[K_Tabris]

I don't understand the issue behind recycled areas, especially since the entire game takes place in one city over a 7 year period.

[HanErlik]

NovinhaShepard wrote...

I don't understand the issue behind recycled areas, especially since the entire game takes place in one city over a 7 year period.

A cave in the wilderness and a tunnel to Mage Tower were the same, I think this cannot be explained by seven years argument. Killing the same spider in the same area in the same cave for ten times was not so fun.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Yes, the presence of the voice does dramatically reduce the range of things the PC can say, but the paraphrase prevents the player from choosing within even that range by hiding the options. How anyone can think RPG dialogue seelction that resembles Let's Make A Deal is a good thing I have no idea.

Guess the dialogue for the first time, for next playthroughs memorize them *troll face*

[AkiKishi]

NovinhaShepard wrote...

I don't understand the issue behind recycled areas, especially since the entire game takes place in one city over a 7 year period.

They may have gotten away with it if it was no so obvious. Take the cave for example.Cutting off certain areas with giant blocks of concrete is just silly on a lot of levels. You can reuse stuff TES games are based around it, but if you are obvious about it , expect to get called on it because it just makes you look lazy and half assed.

[Lotion Soronarr]

NovinhaShepard wrote...

I don't understand the issue behind recycled areas, especially since the entire game takes place in one city over a 7 year period.

Did your city remain completely static for 7 years?

[The Elder King]

NovinhaShepard wrote...

I don't understand the issue behind recycled areas, especially since the entire game takes place in one city over a 7 year period.

A city could change a lot in 7 years, and Bioware said during development that Kirkwall will change during years.
Plus, the problem with recycled areas isn't about the same area (example, Lowtown)  that remains the same during the years . It's that different areas in the game, in different part of Kirkwall or outside Kirkwall, are practically the same.

Modifié par hhh89, 28 mars 2012 - 12:56 .