26 réponses à ce sujet

[mademan2]

I have read on various website that there are surveys of some kind, in which Bioware is asking fans what they would appreciate in Dragon Age 3. Apart from twitter which i do not own and do not want to own, i dont know where i could sumbit my take on things, any ideas? 
I do not want to get into it here, as it is clearly forum for DA II.
Thanks  

[Allan Schumacher]

To the OP, this is as good of a place as any to discuss what you'd like from the future of DA.

I don't really visit the other forums, but this one is about the game setting in general so have at 'er.

[Allan Schumacher]

When I said "here is as good a place as any" I didn't necessarily mean this thread specifically... HAHAHA.

Oh well at least they are all kept together, though I might have to change the title of this thread...

[Allan Schumacher]

Sylvianus wrote...

If Bioware still need feedbacks like we are seeing in this thread, I do not know what to say.

It's less an issue of "Bioware needs the feedback" and more an avenue of "Put your feedback here."  As much as anything it lets posters share their views which presumably is something they feel important enough to do.  No fault in that.

[Allan Schumacher]

swinging twohanders like featherdusters

To be fair, I have always loathed how cumbersome games have made two handed swords. A well crafted, and well balanced two hander is still a surprisingly agile and capable weapon. DA2 did it too fast (especially when factoring in combat balance... the real reason for two handers always being slow), but DAO's was equally absurd in the wrong direction.

In the end, I feel gameplay trumps realism and if slower two handers makes for a superior game, then let them be the anvils that they are

[David Gaider]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...
I think they definitely need to bare in mind the fans opinions.

I also think they need to have a focussed vision of what they want to achieve creatively and don't let that be compramised just because of fan views.

Yep. The eternal struggle.

The comment I would make is that some people seem to think the only fans we should be listening to are the fans who liked DAO but didn't like DA2-- not the fans who liked DA2 and not DAO or the fans who liked both. Or people who were fans of neither. There are lots of justifications offered for this, from pointing at sales figures to perceptions of "all fans" being represented by those who are still present here on the BSN or who speak out on other websites (all different people, one would assume) to forecasts of doom and gloom should we not heed those who were displeased because they all want exactly the same things rectified.

It may seem like I'm being sarcastic on that front (and I am, but that's primarily because I'm a writer and I'm speaking and thus it's my default tone on almost any topic), but there's an element of truth in all those things. Unlike what most would have you believe, however, it's only an element. The way people talk on the internet you would think that only extremes are possible-- it's all-or-nothing-- when things generally exist in the middle ground.

Thus, inevitably, we will try to listen to as many  different fans as we can-- and those fans (primarily the loudest) will struggle to ensure they're the only ones we listen to. We will also try to keep to our own vision of what we want Dragon Age to become... and that will include elements from both DAO and DA2, as well as some from neither.

What exactly those will be is something we won't talk about much until we can show it-- as those of you who are most invested in seeing a change have no reason to believe what we say until we do so, and fair enough. If someone's default position, however, is that a future DA game should be exactly like DAO and nothing like DA2, no matter how it's refined, and that anything else is just evidence of us not listening to the right fans... well, I think we'd be awfully sorry you feel that way, and while we'd be glad you liked DAO that much we're probably going to proceed with the plan.

Hopefully when we finally show what we've been working on, you'll see what we're doing and why and understand that the plan includes you in addition to others who might not be interested in the same things you are-- but undoubtedly there will be many people who just won't feel that way whenever we make any change. Some people will feel like they're being ignored even when they're not. But there you go.

Modifié par David Gaider, 13 septembre 2012 - 03:26 .

[David Gaider]

jackofalltrades456 wrote...
That's fine in all, but every feature that you've announced so far were features purely from Dragon Age 2.

We've mentioned the things we're certain about-- and the ones that are easiest to talk about at this point are the ones that aren't changing... and that's ignoring the fact that some of those are still being refined, but we aren't going to talk about how until we can show it.

Eventually we will. Right now people here seem to be treating the lack of information as confirmation of its non-existence. As if this was an announced game that they just hadn't received sufficient information on yet, and we were remiss in providing it. So they raise a panic and dare us to contradict their conjecture, and when we don't treat their conjecture as the truth... which, fair enough. That's how the internet likes to roll. But we're just not going to do it until we're ready to talk. Sorry.

Modifié par David Gaider, 13 septembre 2012 - 04:00 .

[David Gaider]

ianvillan wrote...
There is a saying of action speaks louder than words, and to me the way DA2 sold less than DAO says that Bioware went in the wrong direction in trying to appeal to the masses.

Personally, I wish fans would stay away from trying to bring economics into their arguments. Because most of you suck at it, and muddy your own arguments by doing so.

You want to talk economics? Then talk about profit. Talk about how other games are selling, instead of ignoring them like they don't exist. If you don't, then you make it plainly obvious you're only paying attention to the part of the data that supports your own agenda, the very thing you're accusing the industry of doing. Or that you're treating this argument as valid only when it appears to support your stance-- because I'm certain nobody who talks about these figures also brings up games they think were high-quality but didn't sell or games they think were low-quality but sold gangbusters, and how there can be a lot of reasons why each of these things occur.

Talk instead about why you like a game and would like to see more games like it. That, at least, is a subject on which a fan can speak with authority.

[Allan Schumacher]

jackofalltrades456 wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

We will also try to keep to our own vision of what we want Dragon Age to become... and that will include elements from both DAO and DA2, as well as some from neither.

That's fine in all, but every feature that you've announced so far were features purely from Dragon Age 2.

1. Voiced Protagonist.
2: Dragon Age 2 Combat
3: Dragon Age 2 Art
4:Dialogue Wheel
5. Iconic appearances
6. Focus on cutscenes

We're also trying to be, frankly, a bit more open.  We've mentioned those things specifically because they are issues that frequently come up and after some fans feeling duped with DA2, I think it's important to be straight up with some of the stuff and be more: "We're not looking to remove these features because we want to iterate on them and improve them."


And since there are those that seem curious, I do feel that Dragon Age is a better game than DA2 is.  That doesn't mean I didn't like some of the ideas DA2 wanted to implement (some more successfully than others).

[Allan Schumacher]

Darth Death wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

The loudest are not the majority, they are simply the loudest.They drown out everyone else's opinion with their incessant screaming and ranting.

He didn't directly address the question, so again no real confirmation. This is just your interpretation on what you think he means.

For reference sake, I avoided the forums after the release of DAO (aside from what mandatory stuff I needed to do as part of my job) because of the frothing rage I was seeing.

I literally had someone tell me the wish I had been aborted as a fetus so that someone more competent could take my place in QA so BioWare would stop releasing buggy pieces of trash.


If I go to virtually any game forum of any large developer, the most common thing is people visibly upset and even hating the product.  Only in smaller games (especially ones that cater to one very specific audience) will I see more unwavering support, and even then it's often in an "us vs. them" mentality where they'll even defend everything and anything about the game.

[Allan Schumacher]

But those are all the worst parts of DA2, not the best parts from both games. I haven't even seen you guys mention the presence or nonpresence of a tactical camera going forward. If you can't even pull that from DA:O, then go ahead and tell us now so we aren't wasting each other's time.

If you think about it, this is WHY they are being mentioned. First, I disagree that they are the worst parts (and believe it or not, a lot of other people will as well), but they are definitely things that people such as yourself bring up all the time.


On the other hand, if we straight up state we're doing whatever superbly awesome thing that you really really want us to do, and then for some reason we're not able to actually deliver it THEN what are you going to think of us when you play the next game?  Now we've become liars that will say and do anything to make a buck.  Personally I think there's been (intentionally) little information, but if you'd prefer we could just keep silent about all the stuff, even the things you don't want to hear?

We're being stingy on what we state will be in the game because fans see announcements as commitments, and I'd personally rather do some fans a service and state "I know this isn't what you want to hear, but we're looking at still keeping this feature that you aren't too keen on just so that there are no surprises."

We don't do this just to be obstinate and to ****** off fans though. It may be hard to believe, and this is what Gaider indicates when talking about the "loudest" group, but every single one of those features mention DOES have fans that really enjoy having it in the game. And we certainly do look at ways to improve it, while at the same time still making the game that we want to make.

As an anecdote, just among my own personal circle of friends the most frequent complaint I heard about Dragon Age Origins was the way the PC was silent and how the conversation system seemed rather archaic especially after playing Mass Effect. They liked the changes made to that system in DA2, even ultimately enjoyed the entirety of DAO more than DA2. Which is just as valid of a feedback to the game as any other as far as I'm concerned.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 13 septembre 2012 - 05:00 .

[David Gaider]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

DuskWarden wrote...

Since we don't know how much profit DA2 made, or similar games, about the only data we have to go on is sales figures from an unreliable website. People might draw bad conclusions from that data, but the only reason those conclusions are bad is because the data is bad. Garbage in, garbage out. You might say "Don't try to draw conclusions then" but people will inevitably try.

This is Gaider's point. Arguments of this nature are built on incomplete information when they shouldn't be. Gaider is suggesting that you should analyze within a scope that you do have complete information - what you, personally, liked or disliked about the game, rather than making it an economic analysis. It helps him and other devs a lot more when you do that than when you try to make it about economics.

The general problem with this is that many want to make their opinion seem stronger than simply their opinion, and thus present (incomplete) economic data as evidence that further supports their opinion. Unfortunately, this line of thinking doesn't work on a developer, because they have access to much more information than you do (the wonders of telemetry data, among other things) but are constrained for legal/professional reasons from divulging to the general public. Additionally, the people to whom the economic arguments would be effective aren't likely to be reading the forums either. Writers, animators, programmers, designers, artists, and the like aren't involved in the funding decisions of their games.

What the developer cares about is what you liked or disliked and why. That's all. You don't need to prove to him or her that it will make them more money in the long run, nor do you need to support it with sales figures from other games. All the developer cares about is the what and the why, because then they will then bring it up at a design meeting, usually starting off with something like "Someone on the forums said this, and I thought it was a really interesting point."

Well said, hoorayforicecream, and all true.

Modifié par David Gaider, 13 septembre 2012 - 08:10 .

[Allan Schumacher]

PinkDiamondstl wrote...

To start with they should ban modding.

I'd argue we could probably spend the time actively preventing modding doing something else that'd be more productive.

Why do you suggest this?

[Allan Schumacher]

PinkDiamondstl wrote...

I just think that it's unfair. From the start they get little extras that comes with their games like 
facial expressions for their in game avatars. That they could have been added [/i]easily. And now we have modders that can change their characters from head to toe.And we have to spend $$$ on the DLCs. Maybe I'm just bitter but I still believe that it should be banned.

Eh... PC gaming has taken it on the chin from console gaming for years now.  I know, as I am a PC gamer.


My big issue for spending time to actively prevent modding would not be a productive use of time and I'd rather work on something else.

[Allan Schumacher]

Darth Death wrote...

Only one person assumed this. Also, are the "loudest" that way simply to be loud or do they have legitimate concerns? I highly doubt they're that way for the sake of it, and who knows, there may be a good amount of people who share their point of view, so BioWare can't just be like, "The "loudest" are annoying & we're going to be dismissive of their concerns since we don't like them". There's repercussions to that decision. You can't just run away & hope the situation will get better, if anything the antithesis happens. BioWare should have engaged the "loudest" before their hearts could harden. Now some people are holding grudges against BioWare for their cold absence, seeing it as a sign that BioWare doesn't care about them.

Ask yourself this, are a doctor's concerns for the healthy or are they for the sick? Surely a good doctor cares for the sick first. The problem I can see now is that BioWare (out of self-defense or what have you) caters to fans who praise them & are apathetic to the fans who've criticized them. If there's any needs to be met, it's the "loudest" & not the complacent.  

I highly doubt they are loud just for the sake of it as well.  And no, we don't ignore them either.  Heck, I'm engaging with one that is right now.

I have no doubt that "the loudest" people have genuine concerns.

I disagree that I cater to fans that praise us.  I respond to posters like Batlin, Sylvius, Fast Jimmy and a host of others, even though in some cases my perspective of what makes a good RPG completely doesn't align with said posters.  They certainly have had no shortage of criticisms towards our recent releases.  In fact, I try to make a point of specifically engaging fans that have have issues, and I can see from this forum that Gaider does too.  I jumped right into ME3 threads that were accusing BioWare of being outright hacks regarding ME3, and I got scorched and burned in them by some very upset fans as a result.

The problem becomes when many start to beat the same drum over and over (which actually is counter productive), and then when they don't get their own way start to post snide things.  I have a good memory, and when I see the same poster repeatedly start threads regarding the same issues, or trying to whip other people up into a frenzy with certain posts (this happened a lot on the ME3 boards), it becomes clear that interacting with that person is not particularly productive.  In fact, when I see a post like this my immediate thoughts is that this is a gamer that is so jaded that he is actively trying to persuade others into his line of thinking.  Seriously, a post like that is in no way conducive to discussion and just comes across as passive aggressive, so when I see other posts I'm immediately disinclined to post any other follow ups because as BioWare has apparently put you in a jaded mood, posts like that put me in one.

What motivation should I, as a developer, focus my attention on someone that doesn't even seem to have legitimate greivances in his posts, but is rather just so jaded that he comes in with little quips like that that basically just conveys that he's in a sour mood and at least in some ways it appears to be our fault.


However, catering to the loudest is not necessarily a good thing either, and from a different perspective I know you agree.  In many ways the changes that we made from DAO to DA2 were influenced by fan feedback.  It's just that most people overlook the greivances of others when they don't coincide with the same ones you have.  People getting upset at the generic art style, or the typical "the player character is some sort of chosen one."

Like I said, if I take the forums to heart immediately after release for DAO, the game is a steaming pile of dung that destroys lives, that is no where near the successor to Baldur's Gate that it claimed to be.  In fact, one of the things I learned from DAO's release (my first release) is that I need to temper what it is that I read on the forums.  When the same thing happened with DA2, I didn't come away vindictive towards the fanbase.  Looking at other forums, it's clear World of Warcraft is one of the worst, most unbalanced and POS MMOs inexistence.  No one likes Call of Duty at all, and Nickelback must play in all those concerts for free because no one likes them either!

The internet has created a soapbox for people, and it's a lot easier to notice the guy filling a complaint with the FTC than a poster that pauses to make well reasoned arguments, and especially the poster that feels he's going against the grain saying "You know I kind of like some of the stuff in this game."


This is also why there's often a delay in reaction to outcries.  There's that pause of "is this a small group of disgruntled gamers that have a beef" or "is this a wider scale issue that is affecting more people?"  Many times (DAO) it's just a group of (rightly) upset people that are mad because they have issues with the game they really want to play and they want them fixed.  Other times (ME3), it's a reflection of a larger group of individuals and when triaging (to use the doctor reference) it's recognized as a more serious issue that should more readily be addressed.  It's impossible to kneejerk react to every issue that is risen.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 14 septembre 2012 - 03:16 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Did people really get as upset about those complaints as they've gotten now? I may be mistaken, but I think those complaints could mostly come from a vastly different audience than the ones who really loved your first game and are also intelligent enough to think of well-explained criticisms - i.e. the people who's opinion should actually matter more.

It's hard to really characterize the group of people that "really loved the first game." Obviously you're in that camp, but that doesn't preclude someone that maybe became a BioWare fan with Mass Effect from also really loving Dragon Age. I don't think that a prerequisite for having Dragon Age be your favourite game is to have a history of playing BioWare's similar style games like Baldur's Gate or maybe even KOTOR.

I think it's also important to note that many of our fans have only played BioWare games on the console, and I could see there being a stronger affinity to how the wheel plays out from a usability perspective than maybe a PC gamer (just speculation on my part).


Not that I think you were doing this, but make sure you're not categorizing someone that felt DAO should have had a voiced PC and the dialogue wheel isn't someone that loves DAO and is intelligent enough to think of well explained criticisms.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 14 septembre 2012 - 10:15 .

[Allan Schumacher]

When most people think of organizations like the Knights Templar, they think of things like this.

The devout crusader that possessed high martial skill with devout religious fervour.

[Allan Schumacher]

Wulfram wrote...

When I think of the Knights Templar I think of dumb conspiracy theories. And them getting filthy rich and then getting dissolved because the King of France wanted their stuff.

Hmm, I wonder if Celene might fancy nicking the Templars stuff?

I can think of that too... because of Deus Ex... lol.

Though I played enough Medieval: Total War to know how amazeballs the Knights Templar were that I loved using them hehehe.

[Allan Schumacher]

Isn't Assassin's Creed still literally set on Earth though? (In Italy I thought)

[Allan Schumacher]

Firstly, I would really hate to be part of the team working on DA3 (or any new game) because personally if I’ve worked hard to produce something that I’m proud of only to have it shot to pieces would be heartbreaking!

For myself, it entirely depends on how the feedback comes in. I don't expect every single person to love a game that I helped create, but when I see a well reasoned explanation for why a gamer is disappointed, I will make note.

If I see someone state that they feel my team is a bunch of yokels or (my biggest pet peeve) just outright lazy, then it can be harder to remain civil (an issue going back to my childhood... hated being called lazy).


That said, it DOES come with the territory. I really struggled with it on DAO, but I have gotten better and part of why I am engaging with the boards is to have a stronger connection so that (hopefully) I am better able to receive and deal with criticism without getting overly defensive.

[Allan Schumacher]

eggs on leggs wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Firstly, I would really hate to be part of the team working on DA3 (or any new game) because personally if I’ve worked hard to produce something that I’m proud of only to have it shot to pieces would be heartbreaking!

For myself, it entirely depends on how the feedback comes in. I don't expect every single person to love a game that I helped create, but when I see a well reasoned explanation for why a gamer is disappointed, I will make note.

If I see someone state that they feel my team is a bunch of yokels or (my biggest pet peeve) just outright lazy, then it can be harder to remain civil (an issue going back to my childhood... hated being called lazy).


That said, it DOES come with the territory. I really struggled with it on DAO, but I have gotten better and part of why I am engaging with the boards is to have a stronger connection so that (hopefully) I am better able to receive and deal with criticism without getting overly defensive.

That is the general gist of what I was actually trying to say but I’m not very good at getting my point across.... it always sounds great in my head but not so good when it comes out!

I think you said it fine.  I thought mine was a response to what you were saying.... hahaha.  Was just giving my perspective on the issue 

[Allan Schumacher]

eroeru wrote...

Will try to hold back on that front. I think it's a pet peeve for a good reason.

Sorry? 

I can understand why someone might say it.  Personally, I'm much more okay with "the thing you made was crap!" lol.  It's valid to not like the decisions we made.

It's okay though I just got 2000xp with my VK 3001 in World of Tanks so I'm in a good mood

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 15 septembre 2012 - 10:22 .

[Allan Schumacher]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

I think that may have to do with working in isolation. If you work for several years on a project that only gets feedback from a limited group, i.e. colleages, then chances are that you cannot connect to external feedback, because in those years you are convinced that you have done the right thing: You've never heard that feedback, so it must be wrong and one gets defensive.

We don't just get feedback from our colleagues in house, althoughthe point you raise IS valid.  I do know that just from a QA perspective, there were teams from Madrid, India, and Vancouver that all looked at the game.  There were other types of external groups used as well.  Though WHAT those people were responding to (i.e. technical issues, or "is this game fun?") is something I don't have any visibility into.

[Allan Schumacher]

I assume 'external groups' would be covered by the marketing side of things, or using focus groups - has the team ever considered getting some of their hardcore 'core' playerbase to sign NDAs and provide feedback?

External groups is often QA places among EA, so external in the sense that it's not BioWare.  I was speaking from a QA perspective so these are actually arranged by the QA department.  I'm sure marketing has their own stuff they do but I am much less aware of that stuff.

We do bring in groups of the hardcore to take a look at things and put them under NDA too though. Although I wonder if there's some level of people providing their feedback in perhaps less severe ways (i.e. toning it down) when interacting in person, though.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 16 septembre 2012 - 03:38 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Lord Aesir wrote...

People do tend to be more abrasive over the Internet...

True, but at the same time I think there's also a degree of inhibition that is removed.