199 réponses à ce sujet

[Grudge_NL]

Cyne wrote...

2. gamers are more passionate about games than the people who create them.

No. 

1.Game Developers are gamers.
2. Just because gamers have a lot of  'ideas' for their favourite franchise, doesn't mean the people who make them didn't have those ideas themselves. Neither does it make developers less pationate.


It's always easy for a gamer to overlook Game Development in general, when they 'obviously' never worked in these kind of companies before.


Which is all fine to me. Just don't make weird assumptions based on nothing.

Modifié par Grudge_NL, 23 avril 2012 - 08:57 .

[Eain]

Alright so I guess Vigil Games is a company much like Bioware. And they just spent four years building Darksiders 2. I mean if you wanna build good sequels that's the time you should be given and it seems like THQ gives them that time.

Then there's Gears of War 3, which came out three years after Gears 2. Now Epic is for the most part an independent studio that relies only a contract with Microsoft for individual titles as I understand it (as in, their relation with MS is not like Bioware being a division of EA). But again, all quality games.

I often wonder why Bioware became a part of EA, I have to admit. I still don't see the advantages. All you get a rushed release schedule and pressure. EA was supposed to make funds available for Bioware to do cool things with, but instead their greater budget seems to have been blown on hollywood explosions in favour of core gameplay mechanics. If these others publishers can give their devs the time they need, why can't EA?

[Shaoken]

karek wrote...

Shaoken wrote...

Vasparian wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

That Video Games shouldn't have time constraints put on them.

That's an ideal, but I'm curious how you would reconcile it with the demands of reality.

You ask blizzard and rockstar how they release such kick ass games and don't  fall back on TIME CONSTRAINTS.. They just relesae when ready. 

Blizzard has WoW to pay the bills. Rockstar I have no clue of.

The end result is that in order to avoid time constraints you have to have a consistant source of income to keep the company in business. You litterally have to be able to afford to take your time.

That's not quite true considering WoW has some of the most active and one of the largest dedicated development teams out there. The way you get around worrying about time constraints is by not blowing your budget on high profile voice actors and instead spending that time on actually quality producing aspects of the game like, I don't know, writing so you aren't missing something a important as the conclusion to your game on the first announced release date.

As for Rockstar, same reasoning, they make games that sell by spending time and budget actually developing their games. It's one of those wonderful practical things you usually find in studios that make profitable games that are generally liked, common sense priorities.

So they [Bioware] screwed themself over in 2 by casting Big names?

Also even then, EA set the deadline and were apparantly not going to budge on the first one, which limited what Bioware could do with the ending (or so I heard).

But I guess your point is split between Bioware and EA, since Blizzard and Rockstar last time I checked control the budget themselves but also determine how to use it.

[Shaoken]

Eain wrote...

I often wonder why Bioware became a part of EA, I have to admit. I still don't see the advantages. All you get a rushed release schedule and pressure. EA was supposed to make funds available for Bioware to do cool things with, but instead their greater budget seems to have been blown on hollywood explosions in favour of core gameplay mechanics. If these others publishers can give their devs the time they need, why can't EA?

The way I heard it was that EA essentially bought the company out from under their noses, so Bioware didn't get a choice in the matter. I only heard it on these forums though.

[Aggie Punbot]

Is it wrong that I thought the body of the original post was going to say:

'Always wear sunscreen.'

[Gruzmog]

Did Bioware have public shareholders before EA? Can't by something out from under you if only the founders own the company, but I am not sure if Bioware had shareholders pre EA.

[Spatchmo]

People complaining about video game companies having deadlines to produce their games need to remember three words. Duke Nukem Forever. There comes a point where companies have to give a bottom line. Video games are fun, they can be art, and for the developers they are a time investment. At the same time, making video games is a business. You can't expect developers to be able to work at their own pace without a source of steady income.

[Shaoken]

@Guz - Like I said, it was something I heard on these forums, I have no clue how Bioware got bought out by EA.

@ Spatchmo, exactly. It's finding that balance between a reasonable time frame and having a guarantee of a return of investment.

[Zefurious]

The problem here is not the deadline or the lack thereof.

A negative of a weak deadline is the example of Duke Nukem which had been delayed for over 10 years as far as i know.
While a negative of a strict deadline is the fact that programers will cut corners and release an unfinished program.

What should exist is a flexible deadline. If the programers are releasing a sub standard program then you MUST enure that the deadline is moved a certain amount to ensure that the problems are tackled correctly.

What i really hated about ME3 is that people claim that the developers had been rushed to meet the deadline. Now what strikes me in this is that they had a separate team working on the day 1 DLC while they seemed to need help with the main game. Why i ask you had they not delayed the DLC and refocus their efforts on the main game and then release the DLC like a month later during the PAX...

But of course my bachelors degree in information systems management does not allow me to comprehend the overlords tactical and strategic decisions.

All hail the Hypnotoad!

[count_4]

Spatchmo wrote...
People complaining about video game companies having deadlines to produce their games need to remember three words. Duke Nukem Forever. There comes a point where companies have to give a bottom line.

And part of the publishers job is to determine a reasonable deadline. EA became pretty good at messing this part up.

[SaladinDheonqar]

Perhaps not lying through your teeth and using unbelievably lame PR should be on the list as well.

[count_4]

Shaoken wrote...
@Guz - Like I said, it was something I heard on these forums, I have no clue how Bioware got bought out by EA.

This should give some insight: www.marketw*tch.com/story/ea-makes-largest-acquisition-in-vg-holding-buyout
Basically Bioware and Pandemic joined forces in a holding, funded by Elevation Partners. Then EA came along and bought the holding from EP.
Interesting side note. The current EA CEO was CEO of the holding and managing director of EP during that time. And although he claims it to be otherwise, I think it's a safe bet to assume there was more to the deals than meets the eye...

edit: lol, word filter censored the URL. Replace the * with an a. Boy, this is stupid...

Modifié par count_4, 23 avril 2012 - 11:00 .

[nitefyre410]

That EA is not a good publisher they try to fit everything on the Madden/FIFA timetable because those too games are there biggest revenue drivers.

Darksiders 2 was delay till august and I have no Idea when Persona 5 is coming out but its coming what I do know is that I can trust Atlus to put out the best game they possibly can.

Bioware not so much - is the all Bioware's fault... yes and no. It just is what it is.

[karek]

Shaoken wrote...

karek wrote...

Shaoken wrote...

Vasparian wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

That Video Games shouldn't have time constraints put on them.

That's an ideal, but I'm curious how you would reconcile it with the demands of reality.

You ask blizzard and rockstar how they release such kick ass games and don't  fall back on TIME CONSTRAINTS.. They just relesae when ready. 

Blizzard has WoW to pay the bills. Rockstar I have no clue of.

The end result is that in order to avoid time constraints you have to have a consistant source of income to keep the company in business. You litterally have to be able to afford to take your time.

That's not quite true considering WoW has some of the most active and one of the largest dedicated development teams out there. The way you get around worrying about time constraints is by not blowing your budget on high profile voice actors and instead spending that time on actually quality producing aspects of the game like, I don't know, writing so you aren't missing something a important as the conclusion to your game on the first announced release date.

As for Rockstar, same reasoning, they make games that sell by spending time and budget actually developing their games. It's one of those wonderful practical things you usually find in studios that make profitable games that are generally liked, common sense priorities.

So they [Bioware] screwed themself over in 2 by casting Big names?

Also even then, EA set the deadline and were apparantly not going to budge on the first one, which limited what Bioware could do with the ending (or so I heard).

But I guess your point is split between Bioware and EA, since Blizzard and Rockstar last time I checked control the budget themselves but also determine how to use it.

http://en.wikipedia....ries_characters 

So yes, more than a little considering after 2 they doubled the VO time budget. Also, as far as Bioware and EA, no, the point is not split at all, they're one linear company with a specific creative team given a reasonable starting budget, and in the case of this game in particular a pretty massive one. As they're owned by their own production company they actually have MORE wiggle room with production timetables than they otherwisewould and guaranteed market entry at that and EA has MORE incentive to pay for high profile advertisment than companies like Rockstar or Blizzard(notice how Activision notably doesn't do this for them except on WoW) who can't guarantee release timelines until they know they can meet them. Diablo 3 is just one example of this, it was announced as definitely coming out on the same day ME3 was but Blizzard can't risk ME3's shifting release dates.

[karek]

Also as a side note, Duke Nukem Forever is actually an example of what can happen if you upset your production company. It got canned so many times in part because production companies kept backing out.

[fchopin]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

That Video Games shouldn't have time constraints put on them.

That's an ideal, but I'm curious how you would reconcile it with the demands of reality.

I believe there should be time constrains but they should be realistic so developers have enough time to do what is required.
 
If some things are not complete then try and do them after the game is out for free if possible or in to a DLC if lots of time is required.

[Valorefane Dragonwinter]

Here's the problem without deadlines and with unrealistic deadlines.

No Deadlines
You need to build a boat.
You take so long building it that eventually it ends up being Las Vegas; big, useless and in the middle of a desert.

Unrealistic Deadlines!
You need to build a boat.
You build 90% of it, but it's got no rudder and holes in the hull.  You spend all your time going nowhere and bailing water to keep from sinking.

You can't really NOT have deadlines, but it's just as damaging, if not more so, to have unrealistic ones.
Bioware should have stood up to EA and told them to sod off and release it when it was done instead of this boat fiasco.

We're on a boat.

[Ajna]

I remember the announcment that Blizzard were to merge with Activision, I heard hearts breaking all around the world...one of them was mine.

[esideras]

Didn't someone warn the video game industry some years ago of the direction it was headed? And look at them now, video game hollywood. Well dumb people will be dumb people.

[krayt298]

ediskrad327 wrote...

i learned something, every series you love will be destroyed

It seems.

[Shaoken]

Ajna wrote...

I remember the announcment that Blizzard were to merge with Activision, I heard hearts breaking all around the world...one of them was mine.

At least in that case Blizzard has been kept as a seperate branch from Activision, so they keep their integrity and their profits seperate. I am so damn thankful for that I could kiss that Kerrigan statue they keep somewhere in their HQ. Either her, Nova or Tyrael, which I think would be awkward becuase the guy doesn't have a face.

On the note of their aqquistion by EA, so something I heard from this forum turned out to be true!

But damn, that blows for Bioware; they didn't want to become apart of EA, but put their faith in the wrong people and were betrayed (a bit dramatic I admit)...

[Bourne Endeavor]

I learned Artistic Integrity is the new buzz word companies will now hide behind whenever fans have complaints.

[tango jack]

There has been many classic games like Mass effect, splinter cell chaos theory,  call of duty 4 modern warfare and in there repective genres these are considered something special. It seems though that there a giant hand that gets a grip on these titles and just rides there names until nothing is left but debris.

I know i,m sounding pesemistic but the gaming industry is going the way of hollywood where a classic movie is made and instead of letting it age with dignity and be rememebered fondly they make as much money of its name as they can.

'sigh'

[Ajna]

Shaoken wrote...

Ajna wrote...

I remember the announcment that Blizzard were to merge with Activision, I heard hearts breaking all around the world...one of them was mine.

At least in that case Blizzard has been kept as a seperate branch from Activision, so they keep their integrity and their profits seperate. I am so damn thankful for that I could kiss that Kerrigan statue they keep somewhere in their HQ. Either her, Nova or Tyrael, which I think would be awkward becuase the guy doesn't have a face.

On the note of their aqquistion by EA, so something I heard from this forum turned out to be true!

But damn, that blows for Bioware; they didn't want to become apart of EA, but put their faith in the wrong people and were betrayed (a bit dramatic I admit)...

Yeah if true then *sad panda face*, Blizzard were my no.1, BioWare were always nipping at their heels, now they're level pegging.  My two favourite developers...I, I think I need to be alone with my thoughts for a while...*insert dramatic exit*

[Surprise Guest]

It reaffirmed how terrible gaming press is. With all its sexism, hypocrisy and corporate fetishism the controversy only further showed it has absolutely no integrity.

It also made me think less of the medium in general, the endings just seem so shallow and poorly thought out that it reflects badly on the capabilities of game writing.