778 réponses à ce sujet

[bEVEsthda]

BobSmith101 wrote...
Never underestimate marketing. Plenty of good games have sunk like a rock because they were unknown in wider circles.

This is absolutely true. And I assure you I know it well.

However, it doesn't stop a couple of hundred other things from also being true, and I'm absolutely certain that you don't mean that EA swelling their marketing, with development money, would be a good idea.

I don't really recollect that any bad games have sold well due to massive marketing? Certainly, some games have sold much more than deserved, but "bad"?
In any way, massively advertising a bad product, will have repercussions for your brand name. EA probably already has as negative value as is possible, though.

[Fallstar]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

But EA's marketing department probably wouldn't have greenlit Skyrim.  That's my point.

And it's not like Skyrim had shipped over 10 million retail units half a year ago, in addition to at least 5 million Steam users (they had 5 million online at one time, so there was at least 5 million Steam sales of Skyrim). Obviously a VP is required to get COD magnitude sales. 

Seriously though, EA owned companies tend to produce 'safe' sequels that are similar to the original with a few changes here and there, a different location perhaps. So, I think many of the changes in DA2 (which were considerably more drastic) were actually thought to be good ideas at the time by the devs. 

Whilst you might be able to blame EA for setting a tight deadline leading to a lack of polish and the absence of most of Act 3, the actual changes in the game's design and the improvements and negatives that lead to can be attributed to Bioware. I am under the impression EA doesn't have a whole lot of creative influence, they just set the limits.

[Cimeas]

Oh I think EA marketing would have greenlit Skyrim, much like they greenlit ME3.

[David Gaider]

Sorry, folks, but we're not dropping the focus on cinematics. This is just what we do, and while it may not be everyone's cup of tea (and may lead to dramatic pronouncements regarding our prospects) it's something we think works. So while many things are up for discussion, this isn't one of them.

[Welsh Inferno]

What kind of things are up for discussion?

Just wondering as it seems most discussions on what fans want in the DA boards get shot down by staff. Would be easier for people to know what they can actually have an impact on is all i'm saying.

[David Gaider]

Welsh Inferno wrote...
What kind of things are up for discussion?

Just wondering as it seems most discussions on what fans want in the DA boards get shot down by staff. Would be easier for people to know what they can actually have an impact on is all i'm saying.

That depends on what you mean by "discussion".

There are some things we know for certain, because they're fundamental design decisions. If you guys start throwing around these things as if they're up for discussion, we'll step in and say "no, that's not something we're going to change" as there's no point in having you run around in circles regarding things that simply are never going to happen. Not that this will stop you from running around in circles regardless (as there's evidently a certain attraction to doomsaying in these parts), but I don't see a problem in bringing it up in the few places where the knowledge is a given.

For most other things, you're free to discuss them however you like, as usual-- this isn't a committee. Occasionally we might bring up a particular topic and ask for feedback... and that'll become more likely as we proceed, especially after we have the chance to show what we're actually up to. Until that point, after all, all the fans have to do is discuss what they did or didn't like about DA2 and conjecture.

Modifié par David Gaider, 09 juillet 2012 - 04:02 .

[Wulfram]

David Gaider wrote...

Sorry, folks, but we're not dropping the focus on cinematics. This is just what we do, and while it may not be everyone's cup of tea (and may lead to dramatic pronouncements regarding our prospects) it's something we think works. So while many things are up for discussion, this isn't one of them.

Is the degree of focus set in stone yet?

I mean, I'd say that the DA and ME series are all cinemetic games, but It would appear to me that ME3 is more focused on it than DA2 and ME2, which were more cinematic than DA:O.

[David Gaider]

Wulfram wrote...
Is the degree of focus set in stone yet?

I mean, I'd say that the DA and ME series are all cinemetic games, but It would appear to me that ME3 is more focused on it than DA2 and ME2, which were more cinematic than DA:O.

I don't think DA has ever been as cinematic-oriented as ME, and that's unlikely to change. Whether it's as cinematic as some here might like is a different question, but I'm afraid it's not an approach we're going to alter based on forum feedback.

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Never underestimate marketing. Plenty of good games have sunk like a rock because they were unknown in wider circles. Plenty of bad games have sold because they were marketed to the n'th degree.

I'm not denying the value of marketing.  I'm questioning the sense in letting marketing people decide what your product is.

[Sylvius the Mad]

David Gaider wrote...

Sorry, folks, but we're not dropping the focus on cinematics. This is just what we do, and while it may not be everyone's cup of tea (and may lead to dramatic pronouncements regarding our prospects) it's something we think works. So while many things are up for discussion, this isn't one of them.

But hopefully you'll attempt to restore a level of player agency closer to that of your unvoiced games.

I'm not saying you need to scrap the cinematics.  I'm saying you need to find a way to make the cinematics work.

[Cimeas]

David Gaider wrote...

Sorry, folks, but we're not dropping the focus on cinematics. This is just what we do, and while it may not be everyone's cup of tea (and may lead to dramatic pronouncements regarding our prospects) it's something we think works. So while many things are up for discussion, this isn't one of them.

Cinematics are great, but are you planning on making Cinematics more interactive.   So insted of being a 'choose your own custscene' they actually happen ingame.  Kind of like how in Alpha Protocol you could still move around the room when you were getting mission briefings.   The thing is that I find myself space-barring through some dialogue nowadays in Bioware games, because there's just so much of it.     That's why I love the background banter during missions, because I can enjoy the conversation while actually doing something, ie. running to a questgiver.   Locking everyone into set cutscenes is great when they involve movement (being knocked down) or a big exposition, or are being used to draw the player's attention [SPOILER](Anders blowing up the Chantry), but when I hand back a mission or chat to a companion, Im not sure if the player needs to be locked into a cinematic, as it were. 

[David Gaider]

Cimeas wrote...
Cinematics are great, but are you planning on making Cinematics more interactive.   So insted of being a 'choose your own custscene' they actually happen ingame.  Kind of like how in Alpha Protocol you could still move around the room when you were getting mission briefings.   The thing is that I find myself space-barring through some dialogue nowadays in Bioware games, because there's just so much of it.     That's why I love the background banter during missions, because I can enjoy the conversation while actually doing something, ie. running to a questgiver.   Locking everyone into set cutscenes is great when they involve movement (being knocked down) or a big exposition, or are being used to draw the player's attention [SPOILER](Anders blowing up the Chantry), but when I hand back a mission or chat to a companion, Im not sure if the player needs to be locked into a cinematic, as it were.

I think there is some effort to have more of what we call "ambient cinematics", which means cinematic elements (and dialogue) that don't remove player control while they are underway, but exactly how we're doing this is in flux. So until it's set it's not something we'll discuss very much.

[coles4971]

Just curious, but if future DA games will continue this cinematic approach, will you guys be adding more animations in to cutscenes? For example, if you compare the animation in say, Mass Effect to Dragon Age, while the former seems to have countless amounts of them, DA will use the same ones more often, take Origins for example where there would be quite basic arm/hand gestures, but since DA is now moving from the talking anywhere you like approach to more scripted scenes, maybe it would be possible then to increase the number of animations since the characters will be interacting with their environment some more ... ?

[Cimeas]

David Gaider wrote...

Cimeas wrote...
Cinematics are great, but are you planning on making Cinematics more interactive.   So insted of being a 'choose your own custscene' they actually happen ingame.  Kind of like how in Alpha Protocol you could still move around the room when you were getting mission briefings.   The thing is that I find myself space-barring through some dialogue nowadays in Bioware games, because there's just so much of it.     That's why I love the background banter during missions, because I can enjoy the conversation while actually doing something, ie. running to a questgiver.   Locking everyone into set cutscenes is great when they involve movement (being knocked down) or a big exposition, or are being used to draw the player's attention [SPOILER](Anders blowing up the Chantry), but when I hand back a mission or chat to a companion, Im not sure if the player needs to be locked into a cinematic, as it were.

I think there is some effort to have more of what we call "ambient cinematics", which means cinematic elements (and dialogue) that don't remove player control while they are underway, but exactly how we're doing this is in flux. So until it's set it's not something we'll discuss very much.

Thanks, that's really good to know.  Kind of like how you hand back pick-up quests in DA2 and ME3, but that element expanded I guess.  

[Sylvius the Mad]

David Gaider wrote...

I think there is some effort to have more of what we call "ambient cinematics", which means cinematic elements (and dialogue) that don't remove player control while they are underway, but exactly how we're doing this is in flux. So until it's set it's not something we'll discuss very much.

I'd love to see the return of dialogue that doesn't remove player control.  We haven't seen that since NWN.

[wsandista]

David Gaider wrote...

There are some things we know for certain, because they're fundamental design decisions.

I assume that Voiced PC and cinematic driven story telling are two of these certainties? If it isn't too much trouble could you post(or direct me to) a list of what things are certain for DA3?

[Sylvius the Mad]

wsandista wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

There are some things we know for certain, because they're fundamental design decisions.

I assume that Voiced PC and cinematic driven story telling are two of these certainties? If it isn't too much trouble could you post(or direct me to) a list of what things are certain for DA3?

They probably won't do that.  They've said explicitly that they don't want to talk about any features until they can show us those features, or at least show us something.

Sort of like how they showed the concept art for companion armour customisation.

Listing features now with nothing (yet) to show would violate that previously stated plan.

I look forward to them showing us their improvements to the paraphrase system.  They've said there are improvements that can be made; I very much want to examine them.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 09 juillet 2012 - 06:51 .

[wsandista]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

They probably won't do that.  They've said explicitly that they don't want to talk about any features until they can show us those features, or at least show us something.

Well if they know something will certainly be in DA3 I assume that they have a way to implement it. I don't want a list of ideas on what they are thinking of doing at this point, I desire a list of what will absolutely be in DA3.

I look forward to them showing us their improvements to the paraphrase system.  They've said there are improvements that can be made; I very much want to examine them.

I also look forward to it, but I can't see a possible way to give the player adequate control over the PC with paraphrases. Perhaps if they replaced the paraphrases with "intent" icons it would be a bit smoother? I would be more satisfied with options such as "Intimidate", "Lie", or "Apologize" than three word options that often fail to reflect what line will be spoken.

[Sylvius the Mad]

wsandista wrote...

Well if they know something will certainly be in DA3 I assume that they have a way to implement it.

But they might not know with certainly how they will implement it, which means they couldn't show it to us.

I also look forward to it, but I can't see a possible way to give the player adequate control over the PC with paraphrases.

Neither can I.  That's why I'm looking forward to it.  BioWare is probably better at making games than I am, so hopefully they've thought of some innovative solution that hasn't occurred to me.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 09 juillet 2012 - 07:15 .

[Fast Jimmy]

I think intent clarifications may work better. After all, a paraphrase that is vague in its words and is accompanied by an equally vague icon, such as the diamond to indicate 'charming' ...wtf?... is pretty horrible. I'm no longer deciding which choice I want to do for my character, I'm deciding what my choice through the dialogue wheel will result in my character saying.

And that's bad, m'kay?

[Realmzmaster]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

wsandista wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

There are some things we know for certain, because they're fundamental design decisions.

I assume that Voiced PC and cinematic driven story telling are two of these certainties? If it isn't too much trouble could you post(or direct me to) a list of what things are certain for DA3?

They probably won't do that.  They've said explicitly that they don't want to talk about any features until they can show us those features, or at least show us something.

Sort of like how they showed the concept art for companion armour customisation.

Listing features now with nothing (yet) to show would violate that previously stated plan.

I look forward to them showing us their improvements to the paraphrase system.  They've said there are improvements that can be made; I very much want to examine them.

The problem with creating a list is that gamers get the preception that the items on the list will appear in the game which may not be the case. So unless the list is constantly updated with additions and removals it is better to list nothing. The problem of additions and removals is that gamers would want an explanation of why the feature the gamer wanted was removed and this other feature added. It is far better that Bioware shows us what it is doing.

[Fast Jimmy]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

wsandista wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

There are some things we know for certain, because they're fundamental design decisions.

I assume that Voiced PC and cinematic driven story telling are two of these certainties? If it isn't too much trouble could you post(or direct me to) a list of what things are certain for DA3?

They probably won't do that.  They've said explicitly that they don't want to talk about any features until they can show us those features, or at least show us something.

Sort of like how they showed the concept art for companion armour customisation.

Listing features now with nothing (yet) to show would violate that previously stated plan.

I look forward to them showing us their improvements to the paraphrase system.  They've said there are improvements that can be made; I very much want to examine them.

The problem with creating a list is that gamers get the preception that the items on the list will appear in the game which may not be the case. So unless the list is constantly updated with additions and removals it is better to list nothing. The problem of additions and removals is that gamers would want an explanation of why the feature the gamer wanted was removed and this other feature added. It is far better that Bioware shows us what it is doing.

I concur. A list would only result in gnashing of teeth about things either on it or not on it, not very much discussion of what that will mean for the gameplay. Which will happen anyway, but there is no need to get all that started at this stage of things, when the list can be suspect to change, either in items on it or how they will play out.

[jillabender]

wsandista wrote…

Sylvius the Mad wrote…

I look forward to them showing us their improvements to the paraphrase system. They've said there are improvements that can be made; I very much want to examine them.

I also look forward to it, but I can't see a possible way to give the player adequate control over the PC with paraphrases.

I think it depends on what kind of control you're looking for. I can't help but think that anyone looking for the same kind of control over a voiced protagonist that they had over a silent one like the Warden will probably be disappointed. However, someone who's willing to try a game that offers a new approach to player agency with a voiced protagonist might be satisfied with improvements to the dialogue wheel system. To be honest, I'm not quite sure yet which category I fall into – I'll have to wait for Dragon Age 3 to find out.

No game can satisfy everyone, but my hope is that Bioware will improve the dialogue wheel system in order to offer a new kind of satisfying experience with a voiced protagonist.

David Gaider wrote…

I think there is some effort to have more of what we call "ambient cinematics", which means cinematic elements (and dialogue) that don't remove player control while they are underway, but exactly how we're doing this is in flux. So until it's set it's not something we'll discuss very much.

That sounds intriguing – I think that ambient cinematics could add a lot of atmosphere to the game. I'm looking forward to hearing more once production is further along!

Modifié par jillabender, 09 juillet 2012 - 07:58 .

[Fallstar]

Yes, I also like the idea that the world doesn't go for a tea break because I'm having a conversation. Having the player interact in party banter for example. And I mean the player interacting here, not watching the PC pipe up with something without getting the player involved.

[David Gaider]

jillabender wrote...
I think it depends on what kind of control you're looking for. I can't help but think that anyone looking for the same kind of control over a voiced protagonist that they had over a silent one like the Warden will probably be disappointed.

I'd say this is correct. If someone expects that we will spend out time trying to "fix" the dialogue system to satisfy those whose problems with it are fundamental, especially by weakening the strengths of that approach, that's simply not going to happen.