130 réponses à ce sujet

[Nokturnal Lex]

RockGnasher wrote...

I'm not such a big fan of graphics either... I'm more about gameplay and how well everything fits together. Solitaire is a good game. They keep amping the graphics but fewer people are able to drive the games with their older machines. With the crash of the economy maybe we will see game play catch up with graphics as people cannot afford new machines to drive new games.

I think there are a lot of games that do not really need better graphics just more well designed content. That could save a lot of dough, paying the rogue scholars peanuts to come up with interesting stories, if only people running business had any creative integrity left these days.

So true, sad to see the most brilliant minds in gaming are working for free just due to their love of good games to play.

Counter-Strike was one of the best mods I've ever played for an FPS, completely free when it first came out for Half-Life (people praise HL, but I found half-life to be boring and Team Fortress got old when I used to play it with Quake)

I can't even count how many free mods there are for Oblivion that make gameplay 10x better.

Why can't people realize grapihics < gameplay/content/everything else about a game that makes it fun.

Graphics cause so many more problems in games and even prevent people from buying new games. (Personally I've been playing games since back in the days of Frogger and Twilight 2000) But lately I haven't updated my PC in so long and I downloaded borderlands to my PC only to find out that even though I can play TF2 just fine my graphics card lacks a shader model that allows borderlands to play and graphics cards are the most expensive part on a computer. So now I gotta save up for a new graphics card and have a game sitting on my harddrive I can't play or even return until I update my PC. I miss the days of good ole fun with horrible looking games. Some of the best games I've ever played were like FF2 and FF3 and those games had 16 bit graphics.

[Bryy_Miller]

Nokturnal Lex wrote...

RockGnasher wrote...

I'm not such a big fan of graphics either... I'm more about gameplay and how well everything fits together. Solitaire is a good game. They keep amping the graphics but fewer people are able to drive the games with their older machines. With the crash of the economy maybe we will see game play catch up with graphics as people cannot afford new machines to drive new games.

I think there are a lot of games that do not really need better graphics just more well designed content. That could save a lot of dough, paying the rogue scholars peanuts to come up with interesting stories, if only people running business had any creative integrity left these days.

So true, sad to see the most brilliant minds in gaming are working for free just due to their love of good games to play.

Counter-Strike was one of the best mods I've ever played for an FPS, completely free when it first came out for Half-Life (people praise HL, but I found half-life to be boring and Team Fortress got old when I used to play it with Quake)

I can't even count how many free mods there are for Oblivion that make gameplay 10x better.

These people are not doing it because they love putting out free content, I assure you. They are doing it because they either are building a resume for the gaming industry or they have jobs that can support their hobby.

Don't be so naive as to actually believe that in a world run on currency, people are willing to slave away from free without any means of support.

Modifié par Bryy_Miller, 12 décembre 2009 - 02:32 .

[Hizoka003]

graphics should be secondary to gameplay but they are not....







the reason graphics is put infront of gameplay is because of xbox/playstation... they are more about how a game looks then how it plays... and if the gaming market share shows anything its that people want gameplay over graphics, that is why there are more people with Wiis then 360s and PS3s combined...







the sad thing is nearly every studio that puts gameplay before graphis has been bought out or merged... SquareSoft made FF7 which is arguably the best RPG ever made for a game system and it looked terrible but no-one cared.





Bioware made KOTOR I one of the best RPGs ever yet its sister company Obsidian was tasked with number 2 and Lucas Arts forced the release with 2 missing planets.





it seems that when companys care more about a game then the bottom line the bottom line always ends up fine... but worry about the botton line then they kill the game thus killing the bottom line....







DAO is pretty solid not major issues, you can tell this because the QQers are crying about icons not matching the actual artwork.... pretty small potatoes next to thing just not working at all

[Nokturnal Lex]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

These people are not doing it because they love putting out free content, I assure you. They are doing it because they either are building a resume for the gaming industry or they have jobs that can support their hobby.

Don't be so naive as to actually believe that in a world run on currency, people are willing to slave away from free without any means of support.

Actually when I was 16 I helped create DoTA for Warcraft 3 with it's original Author Eul, anyone familiar with the game might want to know that I created the Death Prophet along with pooling ideas of abilities and scripts with him. I'm currently not working in the gaming industry nor does putting "Helped create DoTA" on a resume help me what-so-ever. I'm sure there's alot of other modders out there who only want to add potential to great games that did not reach the potential they should have. Not everyone is only out for the money. Well I'm sure the people behind counter-strike were hoping to make it big and make money but a lot of the oblivion modders probably made their mods as side projects to add something to the game that they wanted in it without hoping for anything in return other then the ability to enhance the game and share it among fellow gamers.

Modifié par Nokturnal Lex, 12 décembre 2009 - 04:33 .

[Bryy_Miller]

Of course nobody will care if you made Dota.
What they will care about is the skills you used and learned.
As for the "not everyone is out for money" commnt, did you even read my reply? It was about financial support. That is something COMPLETELY different from doing things just for money.

Modifié par Bryy_Miller, 12 décembre 2009 - 06:00 .

[Lucy Glitter]

Of course EA had a bad influence! It's EA!



(Obviously hasn't read any of the replies)

[spernus]

EA isn't as bad as it used to be,since the company wouldn't be able to survive otherwise.

The working condition were awful and they probably lost a lot of talent over the years.It probably explain why they had a streak of releasing one mediocre game after another. NHL is now as good as it's ever been(on console).The quality of most of their sport title is on the rise,exception being Madden of course.

Dragon age hasn't been affected by EA taking over,even if the DLC tactics seem suspect. Mass effect 2 seems like a vast improvement over the first one.The typical trademark of Bioware are still there,so I doubt EA did anything to alter the vision of the developer.

As for EA forcing a developer to release a buggy or unfinished game,I take a case by case approach.Mythic releasing Warhammer in it's state fall first and foremost on their shoulders,not EA.I never considered Mythic to be in Blizzard league and they confirmed my stance on them with Warhammer online.They do not have the ressources or the skill to compete head to head with Blizzard( a 60+ million budget was unjustified for Warhammer when Mythic never proved that they could reach out the casual/mainstream gamers).

Given the amount of time Bioware had to finish Dragon age,there's no excuse to have this many bugs or blatant mistakes.It rest on the shoulders of Bioware to improve their Q&A,game testing and game design in general.I still feels that Bioware would benefit from having stronger game design skills.I see them making too many mistake unexcusable for an AAA developer like screwing up an item inventory UI(Jade empire,Mass effect and Dragon age are a mixture of great and awful game design & ideas).

[Maconbar]

spernus wrote...

EA isn't as bad as it used to be,since the company wouldn't be able to survive otherwise.

The working condition were awful and they probably lost a lot of talent over the years.It probably explain why they had a streak of releasing one mediocre game after another. NHL is now as good as it's ever been(on console).The quality of most of their sport title is on the rise,exception being Madden of course.

Dragon age hasn't been affected by EA taking over,even if the DLC tactics seem suspect. Mass effect 2 seems like a vast improvement over the first one.The typical trademark of Bioware are still there,so I doubt EA did anything to alter the vision of the developer.

As for EA forcing a developer to release a buggy or unfinished game,I take a case by case approach.Mythic releasing Warhammer in it's state fall first and foremost on their shoulders,not EA.I never considered Mythic to be in Blizzard league and they confirmed my stance on them with Warhammer online.They do not have the ressources or the skill to compete head to head with Blizzard( a 60+ million budget was unjustified for Warhammer when Mythic never proved that they could reach out the casual/mainstream gamers).

Given the amount of time Bioware had to finish Dragon age,there's no excuse to have this many bugs or blatant mistakes.It rest on the shoulders of Bioware to improve their Q&A,game testing and game design in general.I still feels that Bioware would benefit from having stronger game design skills.I see them making too many mistake unexcusable for an AAA developer like screwing up an item inventory UI(Jade empire,Mass effect and Dragon age are a mixture of great and awful game design & ideas).

Isn't Mythic part of EA? Saying its Mythic's fault not EA's doesn't make much sense to me.

[Dragon Age1103]

My main point is this guys...If we(PC gamers) lose PC only titles aside from Blizzards cartoon MMO's we are losing much more than I think people realize. We're losing the quality of our games. Perfect example DX10 was rarely ever used for any gamers...AoC recently got a patch to implement DX10 features. Now the basics real quick to help make my point, most devs are still using DX9 especially since that is what consoles are using. So my point is with a game like AVP beign cross-platform developed I truly doubt a dev team will say "hey lets develop this new game in DX9 & they'll pull some of our team over to the PC team to develop that version in DX11 so we can take our own personal time away from work to learn its new features & implement them into the game" I'm just saying that on paper DX11 gives us the visual quality of DX10 but with the requirement of lower PC horsepower so to say of DX9 but honestly how many games will fully use DX11 to its advantages if they have pressing release dates & 1 or 2 teams working on 3 platforms? That was my main point, I'm not trying to bash EA a thousand times over again. I do not like them at all but I am just saying I feel they had a negative effect on the game but there is really no way to know for sure unless someone can present a cold hard fact filled article with quotes of Bioware stating they always intended to make it single player & cross-platform. It's really not a huge deal b/c I love the game just finished my 2nd play through minutes ago that took 67 hours. I was just trying to make the PC community aware of what could end up happening slowly over time. This is just my opinion no cold hard facts to back it up just past game examples of DX9 & DX10.

[AbsolutGrndZer0]

sinosleep wrote...

Um, if you haven't noticed, practically every review of the game has flat out said Dragon Age is better on the PC. And yes, that includes console specific reviews.

Right, because it's moddable on the player's end, and probably more hotkeys.  I still would rather have the Xbox version, because I don't need more than the 8 hot keys you have, nor do I care about user-end modding.

[deadrockstar]

Washell wrote...

Just turn on your brain for once, google "rising cost of game development" and consider the cost of ignoring the 58 million PS3/360 market vs the PC game market, which consistently shows lower sales for the same titles. Or, look at the credit lists of Tomb Raider 1 vs TR: Underworld, C&C vs Red Alert 3, Prince of Persia '89 vs Prince of Persia '08. Almost everyone on those lists draws a salary. Draw your own conclusions on units sold vs breaking even/profit with game prices staying the same per unit.

I've been gaming for over 20 years. Here is my perspective on the price of video games, given in chronological order.

At the beginning of my gaming career I bought PC games (C64) for 50p. I don't think I'm looking back with rose-coloured specs as I was 5 years old and that was my weekly amount of pocket money. I bought a game every week for years - I probably have near to 1000 C64 games (or it'd take me around 6months simply to load them all in turn, if you prefer )

My next system was a Master-System. Games were £5, but then that was a hefty cartridge with a PCB inside.

Then back to the PC (386 I think), games were usually around £4 at the beginning of the 90s.

They steadily increased towards the end of the decade to around £15 - by that time I had a Playstation and games for that were usually at least £20.

Within the space of a few years the price of console games had rocketted to almost £40 and, when I saw I'd have to be spending upwards of £50 for AAA titles on my new Playstation2, I focused entirely on PC from there on. I still have my Playstation2 boxed with nothing more than the games that came with it, if anyone wants to take it off my hands

Nowadays PC games can usually be picked up for £25 on release, with the RRP normally being far higher (~£35). I actually paid £60 a few months ago for an indie-mmorpg. Consoles games can cost you up to £60. Although, with the explosion of the internet and online retailers, nobody should be spending that amount. So perhaps in the last 5 years there has been a dip in the price of games, but that is down to massive retailing empires buying in bulk at discounted per unit prices. Also, the market is a lot more competitive now - nobody needs to rely on that little independant shop which is the only gaming shop for 30 miles.

I understand perfectly the rising cost of game development, but anyone who says consumers have not been funding this (through a rise in unit prices) is deluded. Even with the slight dip in the past 5 years, distribution networks are now more condensed and further-reaching, so a lot of cost is saved there. Publishers have simply not frozen their prices as a favour to gamers, in spite of rising development costs. Now that publishers have their networks, production and businesses streamlined, they are turning their focus onto developers to find savings (or are agressively buying up publishers and runing them to ruin to cut their own costs).

It is all about profitability.

[AtreiyaN7]

The game was pretty brilliant, so I guess EA didn't have some evil, bad influence on them? I don't really give a damn about who the publisher is and their alleged corrupting influences. I expected excellence and got it as far I was concerned - another BioWare game that lived up to the high standards that I pretty much have when it comes to BioWare games.

As for patches, two patches so far, and I never even experienced anything game-breaking (at all) before the patching - just a DLC issue that's fixed by reloading my game. I know there are some bugs that messed things up for other people like the Oghren thing/Orzammar quests however, but overall the entire game was clean & smooth (for me anyway).

If BioWare were sucking (and they're not), then you should complain about them, not EA. Maybe the DLC advertising isn't exactly tasteful, and that is on BioWAre. I think that that particular point is valid (just not the other retarded crap I had to read). I don't like immersion being broken that way either, but since I got the DLC in the first place it was a moot point for me. Perhaps BioWare could come up with a more tasteful way to do it like an update bulletin at the main menu screen announcing that there is new content for sale, but it's your choice to buy it or not buy it. This is extra content for people who want it - you don't have some kind of right entitling you to get everything for free just because you feel you should. It's business.

"Blah blah, this should have been included in the first place, blah blah, whine whine" - seriously, that kind of stuff is just getting old. Don't mistake me for some kind of sycophantic BioWare fangirl though, because the day that I play one of their games and find that it sucks, I'll be there telling them how dreadfully disappointed I am. Meanwhile though, I haven't been disappointed yet & don't really foresee that happening (who knows though).

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 13 décembre 2009 - 08:21 .

[Dragon Age1103]

My main point is this guys...If we(PC gamers) lose PC only titles aside from Blizzards cartoon MMO's we are losing much more than I think people realize. We're losing the quality of our games. Perfect example DX10 was rarely ever used for any gamers...AoC recently got a patch to implement DX10 features. Now the basics real quick to help make my point, most devs are still using DX9 especially since that is what consoles are using. So my point is with a game like AVP beign cross-platform developed I truly doubt a dev team will say "hey lets develop this new game in DX9 & they'll pull some of our team over to the PC team to develop that version in DX11 so we can take our own personal time away from work to learn its new features & implement them into the game" I'm just saying that on paper DX11 gives us the visual quality of DX10 but with the requirement of lower PC horsepower so to say of DX9 but honestly how many games will fully use DX11 to its advantages if they have pressing release dates & 1 or 2 teams working on 3 platforms? That was my main point, I'm not trying to bash EA a thousand times over again. I do not like them at all but I am just saying I feel they had a negative effect on the game but there is really no way to know for sure unless someone can present a cold hard fact filled article with quotes of Bioware stating they always intended to make it single player & cross-platform. It's really not a huge deal b/c I love the game just finished my 2nd play through minutes ago that took 67 hours. I was just trying to make the PC community aware of what could end up happening slowly over time. This is just my opinion no cold hard facts to back it up just past game examples of DX9 & DX10.

[Bryy_Miller]

I think that is more a technology problem than a Publishing one.

[Soretooth]

This is only my opinion based on playing other EA games and reading other game forums, including developers' complaints.



It seems EA has it's own schedule regarding when games hit the shelves, and the developing companies be d***ed.



EA is apparently in the gaming industry for the bucks only, period. They're akin to a big government program taking over and then mismanaging the simplest things.



However, the developers probably wouldn't sell as many games by themselves without EA, so it's a double-edged sword.



Again, my opinion -- nothing here is based on fact -- and I've tried to make it conjectural just putting some pieces together from what I've read over the years. My opinion is like an arse hole -- everyone has one and they all stink.

[Curadorf]

I find myself playing more and more quality games with EA's brand on them. That's what matters to me at the end of the day.



Now, if I was an accomplished gamestudio with a brilliant idea for a new game that involved a large and sustained budget I would have a limited option to how I went about getting it financed. Particularily in todays tight financial climate I would say that it's a strenght to have a wealthy uncle you can turn to who have faith in you and your ideas. But in the end we might be better off having a future where games are produced the way movies are made today, where you invest in intellectual property and not the people behind the intellectual property.

[badtim]

@deadrockstar: are you kidding me? really? crazy i should have been born in england



1980s - Atari carts were around $20. PC games, such as the Infocom classics, were around the same, next jump was to around $29.95 -- nothing new was ever near as low as you're talking about.



actually the price of PC games has fallen; generally you're talking $50 or so retail in the US; consoles are still around $60.



@Curadorf : if you had a brilliant idea for an actually "new" game, not something that has been done before, you'd be screwed. budgets are too high these days to take chances, nobody is going to devote $10-20m for a AAA title on the basis of anything other than a proven game model.

[Tiberias Lamelune]

In my mind, EA is trying to improve its policy. They will always harvest until death games like FIFA or NHL, but if people are suffienciently dumb to buy them, I do not see any problem with that, anybody would do the same, take easy money.

But really they tried to release new forms of their games : Mirror's Edge (EA D.I.C.E.) has really been one of my prefered games on the past year (Excellent Electronic music, innovative gameplay, interesting background, "Epurated" Design, Battlefield : Bad Company was a comic FPS (well, no inovation on gameplay or multiplayer, but still a great solo campaign), and Dead Space was a renewall on survival Horror, frankly better than RE:5 that has the most dated gameplay i have seen recently.

My only gripe on EA was their "Securom" (Sony) Crap, wich make me insane, i had to mail EA for activation of ME:PC I was owning (totaly insane situation). I heard about the rants on spore and the sims 3 but I don't tried them except on someone other computer. Happy they are getting back with simple cd-checks.



The 2 others publishers cited here, Blizzard - Activision and Valve? Valve has Steam to publish itself, so they are more independant. And Blizzard? Come on! They are selling the same story with all their games (Humanity being owned by A) Aliens B)Demons C) Demons possesing creatures , with some chick being possesed by A)Aliens Necromancy ). And WoW is not really great on art really, they are recycling over their own work ( I am not an blizzard hater, I play WoW, I loved starcraft and diablo, the sole blizzard game I don't enjoyed is WarCraft III.

[kesayo2]

The game seems fine to me. Not sure what you find so horrible about this game that you think EA ruined it.

[Dragon Age1103]

kesayo2 wrote...

The game seems fine to me. Not sure what you find so horrible about this game that you think EA ruined it.

lol from your extremely short response I imagine you didn't even take the time to read more than my title. I said nothing of them completely ruining it just that they could have a bad influence over all. Perhaps before launch or just after with the DLC. I'm sure Bioware rather work on 1 nice expansion that a $5 DLC every single month. lol. I wouldn't of responded to something from so long ago but just found the forums section of my profile that shows my activity. lol. sad i know!!

[DomerPyle]

EA is still the devil. just look at what they've done to Command and Conquer. *shudder*

[Demonic Spoon]

lol from your extremely short response I imagine you didn't even take the time to read more than my title. I said nothing of them completely ruining it just that they could have a bad influence over all. Perhaps before launch or just after with the DLC. I'm sure Bioware rather work on 1 nice expansion that a $5 DLC every single month. lol. I wouldn't of responded to something from so long ago but just found the forums section of my profile that shows my activity. lol. sad i know!!

Bioware released "premium modules" for NWN. They were doing DLC long before EA entered the picture.

[ash the rpgamer]

Dragon Age1103 wrote...

     Someone shed some light on this if my opinion is really off but I've always found EA to be a greedy company that will take an path to making a quick buck. Which is why i feel like EA publishing DA:O was a very bad thing, the 2nd patch should of been in the game from the start. Also sorry console gamers but thanks to EA liking money & making this cross platform PC gamers got screwed with a delayed game then a buggy game on launch which is to be expected on PC on a MMO or even a regular RPG but not this bad.
   I'm very thankful they listened to our outcries & corrected a lot of the flaws that the majority of the forums community pointed out. That being said I feel this should of been a PC game only, not trying to bash console just some games are not meant for console & I'm getting tired of Blizzard being the only true PC main stream well known developer left. PC gamers loose content & quality for these not ports but cross platform games sucking up resources that should of been invested in a PC game only.
     Fable, Oblivion, Champions of Norrath, Demon Souls, Two Worlds...consoles can have those but some of the best PC games were PC only for a reason. Even when GB2 was ported to PS2 & Xbox it was fun but no where near the level that the PC original was. It's just sad to see greed taking over the gaming industry, i understand making a profit but do they have to condemn all decent PC games in the process??? Just saying I feel like EA most likely had a negative influence on this title.

im shedding some light, because yes imo your view is completely off

i am primarily a ps3 gamer, i used to play pc games all the time but pc's outdate fast, to run even a simple game my pc would have to be upgraded or i'd have to get a new 1 often every year, especially if i wanted to enjoy the game at its full optimum settings. That was fine when i was younger however when its you that has to pay for it, your opinion soon changes.
the ps3 on the other hand(with hdtv) has excellent graphics, good frame rate and its still as fantastic as on pc. it also lasts, i might have to buy the next ps3 every 5/6 years but in comparison to the costs of a pc its alot less

fact is for me anyway i cannot afford to have a pc that can run games like my ps3 can and to upgrade it all the time, the fact EA and so many others now offer games across all platformers is excellent and allows everyone to enjoy their great games
personally i do agree that some games are best on pc, i.e. real time strategy but games like RPG's are just as fantastic on console

all i know is without EA and others doing this i wouldn't be able to play games like dragon age or oblivion.

[LynxAQ]

EA are evil. The devil in any other clothing is still the devil. That is what that company is. It is the devil, a blight on the gaming industry. Dragon Age was the first game branded with that revolting EA sign I have bought in many many years (I bought it very begrudgingly and only because I wanted to support Bioware). My girlfriend wanted me to buy her Sims 3 holidays or some sort of expansion (Probably got the name wrong, game doesnt interest me, but the latest Sims 3 expansion), and I said no. I refuse to hand over my hard earned money to these fiends. She ended up bullying me for my debit card and buying it anyway, but it wasnt me handing over my money, it was her.



I still think within a year, like Westwood and the rest that have been bought and conquered by EA, Bioware will cease to exist soon and EA will move onto its next small game developement studio. The fact is, it is profittable to buy up and sell off small companies. There are loads of companies who ruthlessly do this in almost every market, EA is doing it in the gaming market, at producing **** games whilst doing it.

Ofc as long as the lemmings continue to buy these crappy EA titles, EA will continue to do what they do best. Destroying great developing studios.

[ash the rpgamer]

LynxAQ wrote...

EA are evil. The devil in any other clothing is still the devil. That is what that company is. It is the devil, a blight on the gaming industry. Dragon Age was the first game branded with that revolting EA sign I have bought in many many years (I bought it very begrudgingly and only because I wanted to support Bioware). My girlfriend wanted me to buy her Sims 3 holidays or some sort of expansion (Probably got the name wrong, game doesnt interest me, but the latest Sims 3 expansion), and I said no. I refuse to hand over my hard earned money to these fiends. She ended up bullying me for my debit card and buying it anyway, but it wasnt me handing over my money, it was her.

I still think within a year, like Westwood and the rest that have been bought and conquered by EA, Bioware will cease to exist soon and EA will move onto its next small game developement studio. The fact is, it is profittable to buy up and sell off small companies. There are loads of companies who ruthlessly do this in almost every market, EA is doing it in the gaming market, at producing **** games whilst doing it.
Ofc as long as the lemmings continue to buy these crappy EA titles, EA will continue to do what they do best. Destroying great developing studios.

what aload of bogwash, crappy EA titles? last time i checked DAO was EA and its fantastic, its not the company that makes the game its the individual people, whether they work for bioware/EA or whatever they still have their talents and skill at creating such great titles as this.
EA work for a profit and credit to them, but if they make bad games, people won't buy them and they will lose money, ive only bought good games with high review ratings and a number of them are from EA, they may be money obsessed but so long as the games they make are good i and many others will still buy them and happily purchase the DLC.