360 réponses à ce sujet

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

No doubt about it. I know I would be more reserved in BioWare's house. It's just good manners.

Do you let them play the games one at a time in a seperate room or all in one room? I think that can actualy have an effect on the player's mood before he or she even starts playing the game. I know when I play a RPG at a friend's house I don't feel the same way or enjoy it as much as I do at home.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 16 septembre 2012 - 04:22 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Do you let them play the games one at a time in a seperate room or all in one room? I think that can actualy have an effect on the player's mood before he or she even starts playing the game. I know when I play a RPG at a friend's house I don't feel the same way or enjoy it as much as I do at home.

I've never actually seen how they are done so I don't know. I just know that they are done.

[Sarcastic]

It took me awhile to really nail down what I did not like about DA2 but for me it was the main story. In fact if it had not been for the sidekicks I would have given the game a failing grade.

My issues with the story,
1. The protagonist is in a situation caused by one of the unavoidable events in DA:O.
2. The protagonist goes from a really bad situation to a better situation in a bad place.
3. The main story felt as though it would have played out in the same way if the protagonist did not exist at all.
4. The protagonist felt like a villain in the end, regardless of choice.

[eroeru]

The Grey Nayr wrote...


Maybe to the money grubbing suits that run the corporation, but the developers themselves seem wholly satisfied with Dragon Age II.

1. You don't know that.

2. Your "points" reek of a biased mind. Sales do matter. It's just that it should be put into context. They aren't all there is.
Your "point" of people scaring away DA2 buyers being unjust - that's just bollocks. Why would people need to spend 60$ in order to decide if a game is good or not? People buy only games they think are good. And most of the utmost negative feedback of DA2 was sincere, explained and valid.

3. Yes I said Morrowind twice. 
If you'd properly played the game, you'd say Morrowind twice. 

Modifié par eroeru, 16 septembre 2012 - 09:27 .

[eroeru]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Do you let them play the games one at a time in a seperate room or all in one room? I think that can actualy have an effect on the player's mood before he or she even starts playing the game. I know when I play a RPG at a friend's house I don't feel the same way or enjoy it as much as I do at home.

I've never actually seen how they are done so I don't know. I just know that they are done.

From what's my take on it, suboptimally. 

[eroeru]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

That's indeed very true. Would be more silent and at-loss-for-words myself when meeting You guys directly. Would be in awe actually.

[nightscrawl]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

Some great stuff in this thread.

I focused on this specifically because I've often wondered about this. How do you guys do testing? When you send to "external groups" do you ask them to look for specific things, OR do they just play though and report any issues?

It really seems to me that some issues are caused by the fact that you all (the devs) know how a game component works. You designed it, you talk about it in meetings, you tweak it as the need arises during development and so forth. Then the game is released and there is some player confusion on said component and it seems like the devs just can't understand why the players look at it that way. I liken it to writing something, reading it over several times, and then showing it to someone with fresh eyes and a fresh mind who says "I don't understand what this part means," or "This section came out of nowhere and doesn't seem connected to the rest."

I've seen David post a few times with that kind of thinking concerning the perception that rivalry is/was bad, and it was very frustrating that he didn't seem to understand what may have led players to think/feel that. -- This isn't a knock on David specifically, but the F/R mechanic is one that I am very interested in and enjoyed how it impacted the game, so I tend to focus on it. And it would be incredibly unfortunate if the reason you all might go back to a DAO-style relationship meter was because of the players that didn't understand how rivalry worked.


Of course, this isn't really limited to devs either. Players are also guilty of not trying to understand why a dev would design something in a certain way. They don't like it, so it's bad, and the devs are stupid/lazy/should be fired.

Btw, to your earlier WoW reference... I haven't actively read the WoW forums for over three years, perhaps longer. Not only do they move at lightning speed, making them difficult to follow, but the general atmosphere is negative. People make snide comments about the BSN, but it's a wonderful environment compared to the WoW forums.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 16 septembre 2012 - 10:05 .

[Allan Schumacher]

I focused on this specifically because I've often wondered about this. How do you guys do testing? When you send to "external groups" do you ask them to look for specific things, OR do they just play though and report any issues?

Both. There are some groups that check specifically for localization issues. Was the text/VO properly translated and whatnot. Some focus more on art assets and whatnot, or make sure level geometry/physics is solid. I think mostly it's "general playthrough" though (it's the easiest to manage IMO).

It really seems to me that some issues are caused by the fact that you all (the devs) know how a game component works. You designed it, you talk about it in meetings, you tweak it as the need arises during development and so forth. Then the game is released and there is some player confusion on said component and it seems like the devs just can't understand why the players look at it that way.

Certainly a concern. The Tech QA team (that I am on) does try to make sure we do have other people look at other people's systems. We also do code reviews and stuff of each other's work not only to ensure accuracy but to get an idea of what is being done.

Btw, to your earlier WoW reference... I haven't actively read the WoW
forums for over three years, perhaps longer. Not only do they move at
lightning speed, making them difficult to follow, but the general
atmosphere is negative. People make snide comments about the BSN, but
it's a wonderful environment compared to the WoW forums.

Agreed.  I don't enjoy the Blizzard forums at all.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 16 septembre 2012 - 10:19 .

[eroeru]

Maybe there's a lack of extensive and comprehensive internet-based feedback?

I mean, in order to get an understanding of any differences in play in players' feedback it would be good to test the game by 1. a group of players who give online feedback in closed forums 2. online feedback via surveys (more people to involve) 3. data collected from players who can give both online AND on-spot feedback 4. on-spot exclusive group.

[Alias Oddvar]

I would like fewer monsters per encounter. Make them stronger so that they do not get 1 shot killed.
Maybe look at increasing Potion cooldowns on the higher difficulties.
Also i would personally prefer if % decreases (resistances) worked multiplicatively and not substractive with a cap. Positve bonuses need to work additively as allways.
Also i would prefer if to hit chance was calculated like this. Attack of attacker +Defence of defender=x Take a random number up to x per attack. If the number is lower then attack you hit if not you miss. It has the atvantage of scaleing well into the endgame. % chance to hit is then Attack of attacker/ (Attack of attacker + Defence of defender).

PS could you scale item quality to difficulty. As in higher quality items on the lower difficulties and less on the higher difficulties. Some games do the opposite, but that sort of negates the rise in difficulty.

[ElitePinecone]

eroeru wrote...

Maybe there's a lack of extensive and comprehensive internet-based feedback?

I mean, in order to get an understanding of any differences in play in players' feedback it would be good to test the game by 1. a group of players who give online feedback in closed forums 2. online feedback via surveys (more people to involve) 3. data collected from players who can give both online AND on-spot feedback 4. on-spot exclusive group.

Too many sources of feedback might bring in questions of triaging or prioritising it all, not to mention the risk of design by committee. 

That said, it'd be interesting to run an experiment to see what "internet feedback" is like in isolation (one person writing their thoughts) without the groupthink and mob behaviour of forums. There's a kind of fascinating sociology about fandoms (Jessica Merizan mentioned it after ME3's launch and the feedback there), and I'd be interested to see if moderate positive or negative feelings about a game really are focused and magnified by an atmosphere online. In ME3's case, the "instant group analysis/tearing story apart in search of plotholes" attribute of the forums went into overdrive, and I think some of the more dire interpretations of the endings ("everyone starves", "the galaxy explodes") simply wouldn't have occured to a lot of the people that subsequently became outraged about them, if they hadn't had the forums as a sort of focal point of ending criticism. 

Ultimately the devs have the final decisions about game design choices, and they (quite understandably) defer to their own judgement or their peers' when it comes time to actually implement things.

I'm just interested in what contingency planning studios like Bioware do - despite the tinderbox atmosphere, the developers and some EA execs (I think it was even one of The Doctors) still said they were surprised by the intensity of fan reactions to some parts of DA2 and ME3. 

[EpicBoot2daFace]

eroeru wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

That's indeed very true. Would be more silent and at-loss-for-words myself when meeting You guys directly. Would be in awe actually.

Why would you be in awe? They're gamers themselves. The only difference is, they also make games.

I really believe this sort of thinking stems from how disconnected we are from the people who make the games we play. Yes, we chat with them on here, but it's still impersonal. We never get to meet them in person and make that connection and realize they're people like us.

[eroeru]

I wasn't as serious as one might expect from that. But I would indeed be in awe of the games they've made, and of the oppurtunity. Most probably I wouldn't be able to concentrate and be hones(ly brutal) as well as when at home, at a computer, given time and impersonality.

Overall, I just meant to confirm the thought, and that it would be great to be invited on a testing to Bioware, too much so in fact. I'm just the type that would be hyped by the oppourtunity to give straight feedback (though I'd guess it would hold me down).

edit: what I wanted to express is that this "awe" I mentioned comes down to thankfulness, or gratefulness. Which isn't any good - and can be harmful even - for good criticism.

Modifié par eroeru, 16 septembre 2012 - 10:24 .

[Rinshikai10]

I guess I'll throw in my two cents for this discussion.

Exploration:
This is pretty self explanatory at this point. Less recycled environments, and more diversity to make places feel different.

Locations I would like to see:
If given the chance I would like to be able to go to the Anderfels to see Weisshaupt Fortress. Mainly because I find the idea of the location so interesting, given how little is known about it and the people that live there.

Are they cold people who see others as soft southerners?

How much power do the Grey Wardens have?

Do they have Spies across Thedas? (They seem to know quite a bit every time we see them)

Is Weisshaupt Fortress (White Head) like Mina Tirith in any way?
Combat:
I don’t mind DA2 combat but some of it is a little too basic I believe a combination of DAO and DA2 combat would be the best. Dragon age 2 field maneuvering and Origins strategy

Cameos:
I am personally for cameos if they serve more than just fan service. If Leliana and Cassandra return I want to be able to interact with them for more than just one conversation. An example could be doing missions for or against them, allowing multiple meeting to happen.
Given the chance I would like to be able to influence them as I was able to do with some party member in Origins.

Rune system:
The DA2 rune equipping system was one of the biggest problems I had with the game. I can understand a risk vs reward situation where once something is equipped to gear it can’t be unequipped. However, if I find something slightly better I don’t want to destroy a good rune just to equip the new one.

Skills Interface:
When comparing the skill interface systems between the two games I found Origins to be better. The reason is because when I wanted to unlock a ability it told me exactly how much of a certain skill I would need in order to level it up (example Lock picking it was all visually there showing how much cunning was needed). DA2 was a little too simplified for my taste; all I had was the skills displayed but not told how much was needed to unlock the next level for a skill.

Modifié par Rinshikai10, 17 septembre 2012 - 12:39 .

[Cygnus x1]

How about a a camp,at night with a camp fire.

[eroeru]

^ Statistics say that 86% of all players weren't interested in camping, and were there only for the sex and drama. So Bioware needs to take away all that unneeded crap from the 90's and give us a shortcut to what players want.

Please add an option to disable all dialogue but sex and madness. Sarcasm is also good, but the world should be full of it as is - all dialogue when exploring should be snide remarks and one companion owning another.

Modifié par eroeru, 17 septembre 2012 - 10:27 .

[Gibb_Shepard]

Allan Schumacher wrote...



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).

Holy crap. I didn't even know employees were allowed to give their opinion on which of their games is better. That's pretty refreshing to hear (Not that you prefer DAO, but that you are so candid with your opinions).

[SpunkyMonkey]

That's something I'd like to see - a more lively camp.

DA:O's was more than fine (excellent atmosphere.....amazing music), but they still could have done more with it. These companions are your mates, your buddies - yes engaging them 1-on1 is cool and a necessity, but a drinking competition cut-scene/mini game where you end up stripped naked and dumped in a lake, or wake up in bed with a non-romance same sex member and no memory of what happened etc. would be nice.

Seeing relationships blossom between other characters may be an option too. Also a few disputes over who sleeps in who's tent, who snores, etc. - just a few bits of icing on the campfire cake.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 17 septembre 2012 - 10:42 .

[SpunkyMonkey]

Allan Schumacher wrote...



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).

I think that's massively commendable and the right approach for success - both  from a creative and financial standpoint.

The one key thing I'd say that came across as the difference between DA:O and DA:2 was that DA:2 just felt as if it'd forgot what it was trying to be in the first place - a fantasy tactical RPG. DA:2 felt more like a track & field JRPG and I feel it would be far better for the series to return to it's more grandure-based DA:O roots than it's throw away "everything now!" DA:2' one.

Mass Effect is for people who prioritize big explosions and fast, trigger-happy action above RPG elements, Dragon Age and fantasy RPGs in general aren't and unless you can switch fantasy games to constantly ranged/cover based combat I don't think it'll ever work as well.


It's all about feeling for me and that's what needs looking at - mages are often deemed as the most fun class because of the explosions etc. but that doesn't tell me that the combat system needs to be watered down as it was in DA:2, it just tells me that Rogues need to feel stealthier and Warriors more powerful. Having rogues jump around like ninjas DA:2 stylee was just weak, for me Rogues should be about stealth combos - eg go into stealth, setup a trap behind an enemy, backstab the enemy for lots of damage, trip the enemy backwards into the trap and attack whilst vulnerable.

Warriors just need for those big blows to feel heavy and powerful to be as much fun as mages. Give them crippling blows which remove limbs and hinder opponents, strength so extreme they can rip a dragons neck off or sink a blade so deep that we see blood spurt out wounds much like when using Dark Sustenance.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 17 septembre 2012 - 11:03 .

[Uccio]

Please do not make all renegade mages/blood mages insane demon infested abdominations like in DA2. Who in their right mind would let themselves be possessed by a demon even for the blood magic when the result is:

1. Demon takes over the mages body.
2. Mage becomes insane and attacks anyone on sight.
3. Mage become megalomaniacs who think they will rule the world when infact they are hiding in the sewers.
4. mage transforms into some toxic avenger type of creature.

I mean please.

[GardenSnake]

All I want is a return to the conversation system of old. Already a reason why I'm skeptical about DA3.

Bioware will do what they want in the end, it's their game.

[Rawgrim]

Making combat more "realistic", like in DA:O would go a very long way. And make sure the elves don`t look like freaks this time.

[Renmiri1]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...



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).

Holy crap. I didn't even know employees were allowed to give their opinion on which of their games is better. That's pretty refreshing to hear (Not that you prefer DAO, but that you are so candid with your opinions).

Refreshing yes. Dissapointing ? Yes.

DA2 did a lot to shake the tried and endless repeated trope of "gathering a party to defeat eeeevil". It succeeded briliantly in some aspects, failed in some but for a game developed in 11 months it was nothing short of a miracle. And a lot more fun to play than DAO, to me and many. 

[Sagekat]

This will be my only DAII complaint in this thread:I don't want everything to be set around a color theme. Almost everything in DAII was painted red and white. The deep roads,the elven tree in the alienage, Hawke's family crest, the city banners, the qunari.....

If there are multiple cities I would like to be able to trade. For example it doesn't make sense that an item would cost the same in one city to the next. In a city controlled by templars they would have a potion shortage, and in a mage controlled city they would be in need of lyrium since the chantry controls the lyrium trade. You're going to find that I am a big Suikoden fan here...

Customizing my home base. If I have a house I want to add my personal touch. Nothing drastic like  a room here with purple tapestries and orange rugs and blue throw pillows...just would like to place nick naks and things about the place to make it my PC's home and not an occaisional place I go to further the story line.

More puzzless are nice. Mini games are better. It would have been pretty
cool to start up a card or dice game in the Hanged man or to actually
play a game against Isabelle in DAO. It would be a nice way to earn (or
lose) some sovereigns.

I understand that having that in DAII the developers wanted to make conversations with companions more intimate by moving the conversation into the companion's home. However, much of the relationship between the companion and the pc was hampered by this. You could only talk to the companion when he/she wanted to talk to you and only about what they wanted to talk about. How about a compromise where there are several conversations you can have any time any where, and personal conversations that occur in private. I liked that I could talk to party members in DAO at any time and get information about the world and get their input on things. But I also liked that you could sit down and chat with them in DAII and just talk about life.

More dialogue choices than just the three. I kind of liked the dialogue tree in DAO over the wheel in DAII. I liked not knowing where exactly the conversation was goind to go or what it's outcome would be.

I would like to see the lost but newly found dwarven city they talked about in passing in DAO.

Add dwarven women in the background. It was strange there were all these dwarvem men in DAII and no women. There also was only a few women in DAO above ground.

No FADE. I hate fade sequences. The fuzzy edges hurt my eyes which in turn makes by stomach queezy and my head ache. I shouldn't need pepto bismol and aspirin to play the game.

[PPF65]

My Wishes: Part One

1. Bring Felecia Day back as Tallis as a full time and romanacable companion. I ♥ that woman

2. Strike a balance between DA:O and DA2 as far as comabt is concerned. It was more tactical in Origins, but faster in 2. There needs to be a happy medium. Please find it.

3. NO MULTIPLAYER! Just... No...

4. Make the main storyline longer. Significantly longer. Like, make this game huge. I don't care if it takes 5 discs to install or 8 hours to download on Steam (although it wouldn't be ideal), but make it huge. Like, an 80 hour playthrough, if you ONLY to the main questline.

5. Don't rush it. Take your time and make it right.

6. No "Day 1 DLC," unless its free for everyone. Seriously, its so uncool to do this Bioware/EA. Just don't do it.

7. Customizable player housing. When I say this, I don't mean I want to be playing the Sims with my home in game. More like Crossroads Keep in Neverwinter Nights 2, except give us more than one option for different parts of the house. Lots of different styles, you know? And give it some utility too. Chests to store things in, places to make potions and the like.

8. Romance that last through the entire game. Obviously, we shouldn't have "Companion X" fall head-over-heels in love with us as soon as we meet. But it would be nice if wwe were officially "together" before the halfway mark. That kind of ties into the 80 hour main quest line, because then it would be reasonable by 40 hours in for you to have a real relationship. Also, once that point has been reached, keep it interesting. Throw wrenches into the romance. Love triangles. LET US HOOK OUR COMPANIONS UP WITH ONE ANOTHER, OR WITH NPC's... Please?

9. Bring back elves and dwarves as playable characters. Also, make the elves pretty again. They were kind of ugly in DA2... I'm not saying the have to look like pointy eared humans... Just make them less ugly

10. Give us all of our companions as early as possible. Mass Effect (the first one), is the best example of this. The only person you didn't get almost immediately was Liara, and that was because she was pretty much the most important companion there was, and thus justified having a main storyline quest focusing on getting her.

11. A good, branching ending, please. I hated how in DA2, no matter who I sided with, I had to kill Orsino and Meredith at the end. Meredith deserved to die, which is all well and good, but Orsino forced you to kill him because he arbitrarily lost it. Not cool. Bad story telling...

12. Don't have every companion hit on you, and then get pissed at you when/if you reject them. I'm fine with them all being possibly romanced by either a male or female player character, but I was never interested in romancing Anders, which made becoming friends with him more difficult than it would have been if I just let him jump into my pants.

13. Don't have endless waves of enemies spawn during boss fights. Seriously, if you're going to have waves spawn, set a specific number, like three. And have them appear at specific times, like every time "Boss 49" loses a quarter of his maximum health, a handful of his minions spawn to attack you. Don't have them just keep coming in over and over again. Its dumb and annoying.

14. Female Hawke with the "witty" personality would be an excellant example of a companion character who would be entertaining to romance. Male Hawke just didn't have as good a voice, unfortunately... he was so overly dramatic, imo. My ponit is that we want good voice actors in every role that actually gets a voice. I think Jennifer Hale would do a really good Female Kossith companion...

15. Darkspawn in DA:O looked better than in DA2. Especially the Ogres. Just saying...

That's all for now. I'm sure I'll have more at a later time.