634 réponses à ce sujet

[John Epler]

Skelter192 wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

KingJason13 wrote...

With the direction EA/Bioware have been heading over their last several games, I fully expect the DA3 sh*tstorm to be as large as the DA2 storm AND ME3 storm COMBINED!!!

Am I wrong?

No.

Fixed.

Consider this a future ban on any 'fixed' posts. If you have a point to make, do it with your own words, not changing someone else's.

[Aravius]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

greengoron89 wrote...

Ouch, those two posts about as bitter and condescending as I've ever seen - even more so than self-anointed real fans. Not sure that does much to help... whatever message it was you were trying to get across.

The message was:

For whatever reason, BioWare no-longer makes games for you.  Stop taking it so personally, just move on.

It's hard to please everryone. I personally found ME1, ME2, and DA:O brilliant, but struggled with DA2 and the end of ME3. Bioware has provided me with some great moments, during hours of gameplay. I hope they do it again. I'm one of the people that disliked the ME3 ending, because I cared so much about the franchise up until they made something the disagreed with me personally. I hope that I can connect in the future, as much as I have in the past. We'll see.

[upsettingshorts]

greengoron89 wrote...

I myself don't expect BW to cater to my or anyone else's tastes other than their current target audience ("casuals" as some call them) - hence my low expectations towards DA3 and disinterest in anything further ME3 related

That's part of my problem, though, dismissing anyone who might approve of a particular set of features in DA2 as casual gamers.

BioWare games have always offered some A and some B.  Now they emphasize a better experience for A at the expense of players who prefer B.  That's all there really is to it.

If you like A, you're on board with DA2, warts and all.  This is me.  
If you like B, well.. the writing is on the wall.

Anyone telling you anything else is letting their agenda get in the way of their analysis.  

Personally, I am excited to see what they'll be able to do when they aren't forced to put together a game in just 10 months.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 11 mai 2012 - 09:29 .

[KingJason13]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

KingJason13 wrote...

Aren't you defending them? I mean... you're acting like people who have paid for, yet disliked, DA2 aren't allowed to have an opinion... AND isn't one of the main arguments against DA2 the fact that Bioware WAS "playcating" to a certain crowd of people, just not their regular customers?

Mindlessly defending Bioware is of as little value to them as mindless bashing is...

It depends what we're talking about.  I'll defend cinematics and the voiced protagonist, sure.  Would I defend the encounter design?  No, I'm one of its biggest critics.  However, most of my problems with DA2 were very likely the result of the short development window and lack of polish, not intentional designs that are likely to repeat themselves in future installments.

I've also - at tedious length - argued against that interpretation, that BioWare's direction has changed dramatically to placate a certain crowd, and I don't really want to hijack this thread with yet another explanation of it.  The short version is that for some old fans, the changes BioWare has been going through are natural progressions, and for other old fans they're a betrayal.  My position is that since they are both regular customers, any pretension to "real fannery" is nonsense.  Put another way, until DA2 and ME1, there had always been two ways to play a BioWare game.  Now, there is only one.  It just happens to me compatible with the one I've been employing since BG1.  It's not the same for everybody.

My defense of BioWare is not mindless, it has a reasonable and clear justification.  When people attack BioWare for doing things I like they are by implication also attacking me and my preferences.  Often, this goes beyond implication and into explicit ad hominem.

Needless to say, this is not my first rodeo.

termokanden wrote...

I'd post about why I think DA2 has moved in the wrong direction but... It's been said and ignored. I'll just be labeled a "real fan" anyway by people thinking I just want a BG remake.

Ignored by others, but perhaps not by me.  I've drawn an explicit distinction between people who want BG remakes and other critics before. 

You called the people discussing their worry over DA3 on this thread " self-anointed "real fans""... said " they're an albatross"... You made an Ad Hominem attack on people with differing opinions than yours because "When people attack BioWare for doing things I like they are by implication also attacking me and my preferences. Often, this goes beyond implication and into explicit ad hominem".  Attacking with an Ad Hominem because you don't like Ad Hominem attacks makes very little logical sense. (Are you a Reaper!? jk)

People disliking something you like IS NOT an attack on you. Unless it's made personal... it's not personal.

I've liked Bioware games since near their beginning... yet, I don't need endless retreads of Baldur's Gate to be happy. I just want quality games. They've set the bar incredibly high for themselves, with their previous output, and any dip in form was bound to recieve attention. For me personally, that "dip in form" is largely due to EA's money making, market hopping (read: money making), urges... Imho, DA2, AND ME3, both suffer from shortened development cycles (more output = more money), changes to gameplay style (to attract the more mainstream gaming market & make more money), and budget resources diverted away from the main game, such as MP in ME3, or Facebook / iOs games(to attract the more mainstream gaming market & make more money).

I don't care if EA/Bioware want to change markets, or make more money... that's their right. I do, however, care that those attempts are lessening the quality of their final product. (And ocassionally involves ethically questionable business practices).

If DA2 / ME3 had been a stellar KICK ASS games, none of this would be a major issue (for some, yes, of course... but for most , no)... but they're are not. Hence the backlash (and my original post).

Modifié par KingJason13, 11 mai 2012 - 09:43 .

[upsettingshorts]

KingJason13 wrote...

People disliking something you like IS NOT an attack on you. Unless it's made personal... it's not personal.

It depends how they say it.

If they say a game is low quality, that means I like low quality games.
If they say only casual gamers (code for "stupid" around here) like the game, that means I'm one of them.
If they say real fans are being betrayed, that means I'm not a real fan.

If they say, "I really don't like feature X because Y.  I really preferred Z."  Then I have no problem with them.

Guess what the bulk of the comments on the BSN are?  How should I interpret a thread expecting more backlash when a game hasn't even been announced yet?

KingJason13 wrote.

budget resources diverted away from the main game, such as MP in ME3, or Facebook / iOs games

It doesn't work that way.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 11 mai 2012 - 09:44 .

[Nerdage]

I think it'll be pretty good.

There was a fair bit wrong with DA2, but given what they had to work with the DLC was great, and they've been saying all the right things about the next game so far (not mentioning spartans has been a good start). So their "direction", if only instantaneously, is good.

That said, there will be backlash, it follows Bioware around like a shadow these days.

[upsettingshorts]

greengoron89 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Personally, I am excited to see what they'll be able to do when they aren't forced to put together a game in just 10 months.

And that is part of my problem - EA (I assume they're the culprits) is trying to turn BW's games, which had traditionally spent a few years in the oven (and were by far better products for it), into annual releases a la Madden - and so despite BW's attempts to "streamline" their games, these last two games (not counting TOR, as I haven't played it) have come out feeling ramshackle, as I put it earlier.

I don't expect things to be any different for DA3, sadly - as I mentioned, BW aims to develop multiplayer for the next DA, which wastes time and resources that I feel would be better spent just focusing on the single-player, as had been the focus of DA:O and even DA2 before it.

EA does this one time (DA2) and suddenly its a trend?  If DA3 was going to follow a similar pattern, it'd have to be released in something like 6-8 months from now.  It isn't even announced yet.

Furthermore, once again, "diverting resources" that's not how it works.  They get additional resources for the express purposes of using them on multiplayer.  They were never going to be allocated anywhere else.

That said, if you put together a list of BioWare games with multiplayer and those without, it'd be a lot more mixed than you're implying.  Finally, if multiplayer is making them money, then it is objectively not a waste.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 11 mai 2012 - 09:57 .

[KingJason13]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

KingJason13 wrote...

People disliking something you like IS NOT an attack on you. Unless it's made personal... it's not personal.

It depends how they say it.

If they say a game is low quality, that means I like low quality games.
If they say only casual gamers (code for "stupid" around here) like the game, that means I'm one of them.
If they say real fans are being betrayed, that means I'm not a real fan.

If they say, "I really don't like feature X because Y.  I really preferred Z."  Then I have no problem with them.

Guess what the bulk of the comments on the BSN are?  How should I interpret a thread expecting more backlash when a game hasn't even been announced yet?

KingJason13 wrote.

budget resources diverted away from the main game, such as MP in ME3, or Facebook / iOs games

It doesn't work that way.

Agreed... it's all in how it is said. I still think you are taking things a little too personally...

For instance: Let's say, hypothetically, that you liked ME3's ending, when I didn't...

If I said, "ME3's ending was retarded". I'm in NO way insulting you, as it can be chalked up to difference of opinion. That's my opinion. Not neccesarily yours...

However, if I said, "Only retards could like ME3's ending"... than YES I am indirectly, or directly, insulting you.

At least that's how I see it...



As for your latter opinion... we'll have to agree to disagree.

[upsettingshorts]

KingJason13 wrote...

As for your latter opinion... we'll have to agree to disagree.

It's a fact, though.  The idea that there's this pile of Zots that you just grab handfulls out of piecemeal and distribute them across development is simplistic nonsense.  

In ME3 for example, the multiplayer component was done with its own budget by its own development studio thousands of miles away.

greengoron89 wrote...

They did it with ME3 as well - so I'm going to assume it's the direction they aim to take BW in with all of their games. If I am wrong, then great - if not, at least I won't feel too disappointed.

And I would hope it's more than just additonal funding - additional time and personnel to work on the multiplayer would be swell. Otherwise, I will continue to not look too fondly on the idea of multiplayer.

Mass Effect 3 was delayed, not pushed forward.   

ME1:  November, 2007
(26 months pass)
ME2:  January, 2010
(27 months pass)
ME3:  March, 2012

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 11 mai 2012 - 10:02 .

[termokanden]

I have a hard time believing there's no connection at all between the singleplayer and multiplayer efforts. The point is that we don't really know since we don't work there (well I don't anyway, maybe you all do ).

[slimgrin]

Blastback wrote...

Personally, I'm hoping that Bioware has learned from their recent missteps, and avoids making the mistakes they have recently.

Not misteps so much as targeting a different crowd. Action games sell wayyyy more than RPG's. Especially action games with smarmy romance, meaningless choice and consequence, paratrooper enemies dropping from the sky, and God of War inspired animations. And let's not forget the 'we're so dark and adult as long as you're a teenager' mentality in the story telling.

Modifié par slimgrin, 11 mai 2012 - 10:07 .

[upsettingshorts]

Heck lets throw in older games - DAO excepted as it was clearly stuck in development hell - just to show that there's no new pattern:

BG1: November, 1998
(22 months pass)
BG2: September, 2000
(22 months pass)
NWN: July, 2002
(12 months pass, guessing there's an explanation for this)
KOTOR: July, 2003
(20 months pass)
JE: April, 2005

*All numbers approximate

[upsettingshorts]

termokanden wrote...

I have a hard time believing there's no connection at all between the singleplayer and multiplayer efforts. The point is that we don't really know since we don't work there (well I don't anyway, maybe you all do ).

Mass Effect 3's single player was developed in Edmonton, multiplayer at Montreal.

greengoron89 wrote...

A few months delay didn't seem to do much good - the game still felt very rushed, especially compared to ME2. I suppose part of it was a further attempt to "streamline" the ME series (even though I think ME2 had already done that perfectly well), but the result was still pretty ramshackle if you ask me.

You're moving the goalposts.

Rushed does not equal "felt rushed."  Dragon Age 2 was objectively rushed, the distinction is important when it comes to framing DA2 as being a combination of intended features and forced compromise.

Mass Effect 2 didn't do anything perfectly well, there were a lot of complaints about it, and the forums were flooded with them for yes, two years.  ME3 fixed quite a few of the issues in fact.  That ME3 introduced a host of its own is nothing new.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 11 mai 2012 - 10:14 .

[Rockworm503]

Cant possibly be bigger than the ME3's backlash. Than again it doesn't look like their learning. Multiplayer already announced? They know no one who buys DA3 wants that.
My days of giving Bioware the benefit of the doubt are over and ME3 has given me such a sour taste in my mouth that I'm afraid nothing can get me excited for anything they push out.

[Morroian]

slimgrin wrote...

Not misteps so much as targeting a different crowd. Action games sell wayyyy more than RPG's. Especially action games with smarmy romance, meaningless choice and consequence, paratrooper enemies dropping from the sky, and God of War inspired animations. And let's not forget the 'we're so dark and adult as long as you're a teenager' mentality in the story telling.

Romances are no different to any going back to BG2.
Meaningless choice equally applies to the illusion of choice in DAO and the spin about it being dark fantasy when it really isn't also applies to DAO.

[termokanden]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

termokanden wrote...

I have a hard time believing there's no connection at all between the singleplayer and multiplayer efforts. The point is that we don't really know since we don't work there (well I don't anyway, maybe you all do ).

Mass Effect 3's single player was developed in Edmonton, multiplayer at Montreal.

And they use completely disjoint sets of skills and mechanics?

In ME3 the modes are actually very well separated (and that is a big plus in my book). But imagine making a game with PvP that uses the same skill set in singleplayer and PvP. They could choose to give spells different functionality in both parts, but in some games they are the same, which means the most obvious harassment skills would either be left out or could ruin PvP.

I'm speaking in general terms now. Although ME3 the separation is not complete, it is clear and I did not once feel bothered by it during the singleplayer campaign. So I'm not complaining about that.

Modifié par termokanden, 11 mai 2012 - 10:18 .

[upsettingshorts]

Just the passing of time between games. I don't have specific knowledge on development that I can share.

It's not that they feel half baked - DA2 excepted, and possibly DAO... because development hell - it's that they are emphasizing features that aren't things you value or appreciate while de-emphasizing ones you do.

I mean sure ME3's ending is terrible, and I hated it, but I didn't think for a second before it that ME3 didn't feel polished and well-done. While it might retroactively cause players, myself included, to go back and start writing off what the game does well, I can't deny that I was having a blast through most of it, and it had done away with a lot of the problems I had with ME1 and ME2. That isn't to say it didn't have issues of its own, but that happens in every game, and for a thorough discussion of those... we'd need to be on a different subforum.

If DA2's lack of polish and clear examples of fudged compromises to get the game out to stores (see repeated environments, enemies jumping from the sky, etc) bothered you most, then giving DA3 a fair chance would be wise. However, if you're one to dislike the voiced protagonist or companion outfits being relatively fixed... then it might be time to move on. It depends.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 11 mai 2012 - 10:25 .

[termokanden]

Agree about ME3 feeling polished by the way. If anything felt rushed, maybe it was the ending. And then again maybe not. It's entirely possible I just plain didn't like it and that's it.