112 réponses à ce sujet

[deuce985]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I don't know if the lack of used games is confirmed or just a rumor.

I think it's a very bold move though with a fair amount of risk.

I posted about this earlier. I think corporations like EA are making mistakes by claiming used games or rentals hurt the industry severely when they have no proven market research.

What about young people in the industry who started out by renting games or buying cheap games? I was like that. I can say for sure I wouldn't be the gamer I am today if I didn't get that opportunity. I doubt my parents would constantly buy me $50 games back in the day. I can say for sure it would've lowered my interest in gaming and I wouldn't be who I am today. I lived at rental stores when I was too young to hold a job and it opened my gaming tastes up because of it...

Where is that market research EA...or any corporations complaining about it.

I'm not disputing used games/piracy/rentals hurt the industry in some way but I think it's overly exaggerated in some claims too.

So while publishers might get more revenue, they take major risks are shrinking the market by not exposing it enough to new gamers? Now, they can offset this by doing things like say--Sony/M$ use a digital rental service like Onlive. This would be healthy for Bioware/EA too because they'd have to buy publishing rights to the games. So you'd get a piece of that too, sorta like how Netflix does. This would also keep gaming exposure high because new people in the industry could rent games at ease...

Why is gaming so exempt from everything else that works similar? Do people sell used cars? Does the car industry go nuts and try to find ways to block used cars? No.

Personally, I buy all my games new, as I like to support the devs. But I can definitely sympathize for the people who are upset at companies trying to block used games. And I do understand some exploit that fact and are cheap.

Modifié par deuce985, 16 juin 2012 - 06:55 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Loss of sales is only one reason video game companies want you to play online. The other big aspect of it (especially according to EA CEO John Riccitiello) is that they want you hooked up online to pay for microtransactions, where in the heat of the moment, a player will shell out money in an impulse buy.

If they can get you hooked into a story game, then pop up a requirement to pay $1.99 for a conversation, series of dialogue, quest, etc., how many people would buy it? What if DA:O came out with a standard ending, but paying an extra $1.99 through XBox Live, Steam or the PSN allowed you to perform the DR, or ask for a boon to give the dwarves, or crown Allistair king?

I'm not saying EA is going to implement any model anywhere near this in future games. But as a person who has never done a P2P feature for a game, I would be tempted with this type of approach for storytelling... even if I think it is dishonest at best, con-artist behavior at worst.

Its a way for the company to make money (potentially, a lot of it). But it can only happen if they force everyone online. Even if they let you set up an online account for a used or rented game copy, they can still track your behaviors for market research and, of course, have your information logged into their system and have a microtransaction only a button push away.

THAT'S when they've got you.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 16 juin 2012 - 08:35 .

[Maria Caliban]

Teddie Sage wrote...

Just read that on wikipedia. Probably false. But whaaaaaaaat? *heartbroken*

I'll take "fan speculation" for $500, Alex.

It will come out before then.

[Darth Wolfenbarg]

thats1evildude wrote...

Melca36 wrote...
The longer they spend on the game, the better.   It means less people will complain.

That's perfectly logical. After all, Duke Nukem Forever spent over a decade in development and we all know how well that game was received. 

Origins was announced at E3 2004, back when Bioware was still riding on the success of Knights of the Old Republic. It didn't come out until 5 and a half years later and enamoured most people on this board. Duke Nukem Forever is a pretty terrible example when we already know that this team can deliver when they aren't put on such a strict time crunch.

[Great_Horn]

And maybe there will be a cross promotion again. Buy Dead Space 3 and get DA 3 for free.
 
Speaking about release dates is causally determined by whatever graphics engine they will use. And of course changes to game play, like tactical view. I definitely hope for a new engine which actually delivers the promised super hot graphic. So I’m fine if DA3 is released mid to end 2014. Or according to Blizzard, it’s done when it’s done. 

Modifié par Great_Horn, 17 juin 2012 - 09:50 .

[Jerrybnsn]

Darth Wolfenbarg wrote...

Origins was announced at E3 2004, back when Bioware was still riding on the success of Knights of the Old Republic. It didn't come out until 5 and a half years later and enamoured most people on this board.

Do you have a link?  I searched the web for E3 2004 and I only saw rpgs announced like Paper Mario 2, Dungeons Lords, Final Fantasy XII, Jade Empire,  Tales of Symphonia (a GameCube exclusive).

This is where I got my information from on regards to the DA:Origins developement time 

And you can see he states in the fall of 2008 all that was left on Origins was bug fixing and polishing the game while the discussion on DA2 began.  blog.brentknowles.com/2010/08/15/bioware-brent-year-10-fall-2008-summer-2009/

"Could I be the lead designer on such a title? Certainly… though if I were going to work on a game adopting a set-in-stone protagonist I’d rather work on something lighter, like a shooter."

[Wulfram]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Loss of sales is only one reason video game companies want you to play online. The other big aspect of it (especially according to EA CEO John Riccitiello) is that they want you hooked up online to pay for microtransactions, where in the heat of the moment, a player will shell out money in an impulse buy.

If they can get you hooked into a story game, then pop up a requirement to pay $1.99 for a conversation, series of dialogue, quest, etc., how many people would buy it? What if DA:O came out with a standard ending, but paying an extra $1.99 through XBox Live, Steam or the PSN allowed you to perform the DR, or ask for a boon to give the dwarves, or crown Allistair king?

I'm not saying EA is going to implement any model anywhere near this in future games. But as a person who has never done a P2P feature for a game, I would be tempted with this type of approach for storytelling... even if I think it is dishonest at best, con-artist behavior at worst.

Its a way for the company to make money (potentially, a lot of it). But it can only happen if they force everyone online. Even if they let you set up an online account for a used or rented game copy, they can still track your behaviors for market research and, of course, have your information logged into their system and have a microtransaction only a button push away.

THAT'S when they've got you.

They rather tried this in Origins.  What with that guy in the camp with the big excamation mark shilling Warden's Keep, and that guy in the forest where you have to buy Return to Ostagar or leave him to bleed to death.

But, to their credit I guess, Bioware do seem to have realised that this sort of thing wasn't OK and haven't done it again.

Modifié par Wulfram, 17 juin 2012 - 10:45 .

[Jerrybnsn]

Wulfram wrote...


They rather tried this in Origins.  What with that guy in the camp with the big excamation mark shilling Warden's Keep, and that guy in the forest where you have to buy Return to Ostagar or leave him to bleed to death.

But, to their credit I guess, Bioware do seem to have realised that this sort of thing wasn't OK and haven't done it again.

I admit that when Witch Hunt came out I was aware of all the negative reviews from fans and game reviewers.  GameInformer even used Witch Hunt as an example on "How not to do DLC".  And yet I purchased it anyway, and yes, everyone was correct on how useless it was.  But I was drawn to the chance to continue the Morrigan story with my Warden.  I'm shameless.

I swear if Bioware opens up with the trailer to DA3 with Morrigan and her speaking...I'll go against every rational judgement I've made so far about this series and run to Gamestop to preorder right away.  I'm so shameless.

[Androme]

I swear if Bioware opens up with the trailer to DA3 with Morrigan and her speaking...I'll go against every rational judgement I've made so far about this series and run to Gamestop to preorder right away.  I'm so shameless.

This! This I've been thinking about a long time, no matter what ANYONE says about DA3, gameplay, animations, graphics, bugs, whatever. If I hear what you just mentioned, I'll be preordering the game without a seconds thought.

[Dakota Strider]

The longer Bioware waits to release DA3, the better I will feel about buying it. Even if those that claim that BW can rush out a game in a year or two and it will be high quality, are correct (I disagree), not even they can dispute that the more time BW has to make the game, the more content they will be able to put into it. Waiting for 2014, or later, will mean a high quality game, that should have much more content than was available in DA2.

[schalafi]

All this talk of waiting until 2014/15 is making me nervous. What if they take that long to finish it and then it suks? Then people are really going to be hopping mad! Somehow equating time of development = good game isn't a guarantee that it will be great. I wonder how long it took to develop Balder's Gate SOA, or KotOR?

I wish I liked other games besides Bioware, then I'd have something to play for however long DA3 takes.

[Teddie Sage]

Exactly. Waiting longer doesn't necessarily means it will be good. They could recruit people from the Kingdoms of Amalur team to assist them, since that company shut down.

[Dakota Strider]

All we have to go on, is Bioware's history. Dragon Age Origins was released 5 years after it was first announced, and we do not know how long before that, they were working on it. DA2 came out two years later. While in Bioware's early history, they were able to publish games much quicker, the engines they had to work with were much simpler, and they kept all the game mechanics the same from one chapter of a game to another.

Since today's game engines and graphics call for much more man-hours to produce a game, trying to release a quality time, now takes much longer. Especially since most agree that DA2 needs an overhaul of game mechanics. Unless they simply go back to making everything exactly like DAO, which is highly unlikely.

And while there is no guarantee that giving Bioware more time will allow them to create a better game, even though that has been their past history, it is almost assured that if they are given too little time, they will produce a game that leaves most players with a feeling it is incomplete. This is true of all game publishers, not just Bioware.

[Faerloch]

Teddie Sage wrote...

Skyrim and storytelling don't get along. The Last of Us looks interesting but it isn't an RPG. Resident Evil 6 neither. The only reasy I play Skyrim is because of the open world and freedom it has but its gameplay is outdated.

I totally agree. Skyrim had some of the worst voice acting I've ever experienced, too. The four people they hired to do hundreds of voices weren't very talented, in my opinion. I'm also a huge fan of cutscenes and enjoy any cinematic progressions, and the game lacked that.

[Allan Schumacher]

Teddie Sage wrote...

Exactly. Waiting longer doesn't necessarily means it will be good. They could recruit people from the Kingdoms of Amalur team to assist them, since that company shut down.

There's the idea of diminishing returns too though.  Having "too many cooks in the kitchen" can be a bad thing.

Just as waiting longer doesn't mean a game will be good, throwing a ton of people at a game doesn't mean it's going to be good either.

[schalafi]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Teddie Sage wrote...

Exactly. Waiting longer doesn't necessarily means it will be good. They could recruit people from the Kingdoms of Amalur team to assist them, since that company shut down.

There's the idea of diminishing returns too though.  Having "too many cooks in the kitchen" can be a bad thing.

Just as waiting longer doesn't mean a game will be good, throwing a ton of people at a game doesn't mean it's going to be good either.

I assume Bioware beta tests  it's games,  how close to finishing the game does that happen?

[LolaLei]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Wulfram wrote...


They rather tried this in Origins.  What with that guy in the camp with the big excamation mark shilling Warden's Keep, and that guy in the forest where you have to buy Return to Ostagar or leave him to bleed to death.

But, to their credit I guess, Bioware do seem to have realised that this sort of thing wasn't OK and haven't done it again.

I admit that when Witch Hunt came out I was aware of all the negative reviews from fans and game reviewers.  GameInformer even used Witch Hunt as an example on "How not to do DLC".  And yet I purchased it anyway, and yes, everyone was correct on how useless it was.  But I was drawn to the chance to continue the Morrigan story with my Warden.  I'm shameless.

I swear if Bioware opens up with the trailer to DA3 with Morrigan and her speaking...I'll go against every rational judgement I've made so far about this series and run to Gamestop to preorder right away.  I'm so shameless.

If it makes you feel any better, I'd pre-order DA3 if they told me Cullen would be in it, even if the game was a heap of sh!t lol.

[rapscallioness]

Dakota Strider wrote...

The longer Bioware waits to release DA3, the better I will feel about buying it. Even if those that claim that BW can rush out a game in a year or two and it will be high quality, are correct (I disagree), not even they can dispute that the more time BW has to make the game, the more content they will be able to put into it. Waiting for 2014, or later, will mean a high quality game, that should have much more content than was available in DA2.

I agree with this. However, what makes me nervous is that the DA team might not be using the extra time to work on the mythical DA3. Instead, it will be delayed because they're working on something else.

So, they wouldn't actually be putting more dev time into DA3, but putting it off

[Teddie Sage]

I just really feel bad about the Kingdoms of Amalur staff. Sorry about that, Allan.

[deuce985]

Teddie Sage wrote...

I just really feel bad about the Kingdoms of Amalur staff. Sorry about that, Allan.

Most of those guys already rebounded. Epic went in and gave most of that staff jobs...so they have a happy ending to that story.

[rapscallioness]

deuce985 wrote...

Teddie Sage wrote...

I just really feel bad about the Kingdoms of Amalur staff. Sorry about that, Allan.

Most of those guys already rebounded. Epic went in and gave most of that staff jobs...so they have a happy ending to that story.

That's good to hear.

[LolaLei]

So has it been confirmed that it'll be released in 2014? Or is it still just speculation stemming from that analyst bloke who randomly popped out of the woodwork.

[ajbry]

LolaLei wrote...

So has it been confirmed that it'll be released in 2014? Or is it still just speculation stemming from that analyst bloke who randomly popped out of the woodwork.

As we all know, there's been no confirmation of anything. How could a game that doesn't exist have a release date? For all we know, BW could be working on Dragon Age: Miami Heat Edition, which will be released in July on Sega Dreamcast.

[LolaLei]

ajbry wrote...

LolaLei wrote...

So has it been confirmed that it'll be released in 2014? Or is it still just speculation stemming from that analyst bloke who randomly popped out of the woodwork.

As we all know, there's been no confirmation of anything. How could a game that doesn't exist have a release date? For all we know, BW could be working on Dragon Age: Miami Heat Edition, which will be released in July on Sega Dreamcast.

If this was it's theme tune, then I'd totally buy it: