360 réponses à ce sujet

[megamacka]

http://t3.gstatic.co...vdOqaZKc_TKNB2Q

Ser pounce-a-lot simply must return!

[Mulsanne Blue]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

This is pretty much a known truth. I don’t know why people
assume that the loudest automatically equals the majority. Ever heard the saying “The squeaky wheel gets the grease?” People think that if they complain long enough or loud enough, they will get what they want. When you see product reviews, you either see that people love it or they hate it (mostly people displeased with some feature or another). Very rarely do you see people posting pros and cons. Back to gaming, I feel that this mostly applies. What bugs me the most is that a VOCAL majority (notice that is a qualitative adjective and not a quantitative one) seems to resist change. Yes some things did not quite work out as Bioware had envisioned (and yes there were some things I did not like). Does that mean that they can't take these things and improve them? No. I do agree that the potential for further muck ups does exist, but such is the case with trial and error processes. I feel as though we as a community (one that is lucky the devs take the time to interact with us) should give them a chance and reserve judgment until we have something concrete to discuss. And I know there will be some naysayers who will point out that Bioware has been given plenty of chances already and they don’t deserve another….but I digress:innocent:

EDIT- sorry for the kooky formatting from my paste from Word!

Modifié par Agent599xx, 14 septembre 2012 - 12:59 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

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.

That's malicious.

That other people can get something you can't have doesn't affect you at all.  Nothing's being done to you.  Nothing has been taken from you.  Why does modding bother you at all?

Your desire to ban modding would cause demonstrable harm to some people, while benefitting no people.  There can be no justification for such a desire save malice.

Malice is pretty much the only thing that I count as unequivocally evil.

[SomniariKess1124]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

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.

That's malicious.

That other people can get something you can't have doesn't affect you at all.  Nothing's being done to you.  Nothing has been taken from you.  Why does modding bother you at all?

Your desire to ban modding would cause demonstrable harm to some people, while benefitting no people.  There can be no justification for such a desire save malice.

Malice is pretty much the only thing that I count as unequivocally evil.

*sigh* i thought we dropped this topic?
http://t2.gstatic.co...AaOHumtUMkVx4N4

I'm all out of speeches for today, so i'll just let the picture talk.

Modifié par SomniariKess1124, 14 septembre 2012 - 01:08 .

[Darth Death]

Agent599xx wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

This is pretty much a known truth. I don’t know why people
assume that the loudest automatically equals the majority. Ever heard the saying “The squeaky wheel gets the grease?” People think that if they complain long enough or loud enough, they will get what they want. When you see product reviews, you either see that people love it or they hate it (mostly people displeased with some feature or another). Very rarely do you see people posting pros and cons. Back to gaming, I feel that this mostly applies. What bugs me the most is that a VOCAL majority (notice that is a qualitative adjective and not a quantitative one) seems to resist change. Yes some things did not quite work out as Bioware had envisioned (and yes there were some things I did not like). Does that mean that they can't take these things and improve them? No. I do agree that the potential for further muck ups does exist, but such is the case with trial and error processes. I feel as though we as a community (one that is lucky the devs take the time to interact with us) should give them a chance and reserve judgment until we have something concrete to discuss. And I know there will be some naysayers who will point out that Bioware has been given plenty of chances already and they don’t deserve another….but I digress:innocent:

EDIT- sorry for the kooky formatting from my paste from Word!

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.  

Modifié par Darth Death, 14 septembre 2012 - 01:47 .

[TEWR]

Regarding what I'd like to see in DA3, DLC that doesn't corrupt game files.

PS3 users are, apparently, still suffering from this even after the patch that supposedly "fixed" it.

I know, as I'm one of them.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 14 septembre 2012 - 02:12 .

[Mulsanne Blue]

Darth Death wrote...

Agent599xx wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

This is pretty much a known truth. I don’t know why people
assume that the loudest automatically equals the majority. Ever heard the saying “The squeaky wheel gets the grease?” People think that if they complain long enough or loud enough, they will get what they want. When you see product reviews, you either see that people love it or they hate it (mostly people displeased with some feature or another). Very rarely do you see people posting pros and cons. Back to gaming, I feel that this mostly applies. What bugs me the most is that a VOCAL majority (notice that is a qualitative adjective and not a quantitative one) seems to resist change. Yes some things did not quite work out as Bioware had envisioned (and yes there were some things I did not like). Does that mean that they can't take these things and improve them? No. I do agree that the potential for further muck ups does exist, but such is the case with trial and error processes. I feel as though we as a community (one that is lucky the devs take the time to interact with us) should give them a chance and reserve judgment until we have something concrete to discuss. And I know there will be some naysayers who will point out that Bioware has been given plenty of chances already and they don’t deserve another….but I digress:innocent:

EDIT- sorry for the kooky formatting from my paste from Word!

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.  

Perhaps the problem we are all having is the generalization of the "loudest." Not everyone that is complaining/discussing issues are talking about the same things. As I stated before, it seems to be those unhappy with something that tend to be the most vocal, whether they are a numerical majority or not. I just feel that those that have positive things to say are beng dismissed as the minority. I never meant to imply that some of the concerns were not legitimate. Some have a solid basis and some seem so ridiculous. But that is really human nature. We can't all like the same things, can we? Such is the difficulty the devs have to face and I do not envy them in the least. I guess what I am trying to say is that I feel (and "I feel" is the key as these are my personal feelings on the matter) that a large portion of the vocal critics of DA2 (and ME3 for that matter - and I do agree with some of the concerns of both games) feel that their opinion of the gameplay is how everyone should feel. People are not seeming to take well to those that disagree, even when it is done in a civil manner.  And I don't understand why people think that Bioware is catering to those that praise them and apathetic to those that disagree or point out game flaws as I have seen several members of the DA team post in various threads acknowledging that some of the concerns are legit and will be addressed in future games. It doesn't make sense for Bioware to ignore those unhappy with aspects of the game, especially if you consider yourself a vocal majority in this community. I think I have lost my train of thought....but I appreciate the opportunitiy to intlligently discuss this with you in a civil manner (and that is not sarcasm).

[Mulsanne Blue]

^oh the spelling errors.... **sigh**

[Darth Death]

I've never liked the word "loudest", it certainly comes off as an insult (intended or not from Gaider), but indeed, you've posted well. And the pleasure is mine.

[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 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

This is absolutely true.  Allan is clearly willing to engage with anyone who engages in discussions that are both intelligent and polite.

But lacking those, I can see why he might otherwise be reluctant.

edit: Note, I said anyone, not everyone.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 14 septembre 2012 - 03:31 .

[TEWR]

Darth Death wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Is it bad that I feel kinda apathetic about posting what I'd like DAIII to have/do/focus on, considering that's all I've done for the last... year and a half, I guess?

Or maybe deep down you feel it's a futile effort.

I wouldn't say it's necessarily a futile effort nor that I feel it as being such. Not at this point in time anyway, though the future would answer that question. Really, I just don't feel like once again typing out long-winded posts on what I'd like to see done in the future, for a few reasons:

1) It starts to hurt my hand after a while.
2) I've done it a lot in the past, so part of me is hopeful that Bioware read it and is discussing it. The other part of me -- the cynical part I guess -- is just not really interested in it.
3) I wouldn't even know where to start in this thread.
4) Really, all we're doing is just discussing the same old stuff until Bioware reveals something more. I think that's why I'm just not up to it. Not that I feel it's futile or something else entirely, but just that it's ground I've already covered in a lot of depth.

Still, give me a good starting point -- and maybe a Subway Sub along with a few hours to kill -- and I could probably get interested again. I think it's more that today, my mind was just not into it, when on other days I'll go off for hours and hours about things.

=========================================================================

And to the topic itself, I'd say a good portion of what I'd like to see in DA3 can be found here, where in my post I talk about some of the things I feel should be done and link to other threads -- some that I've made.

Bear in mind my opinions on DAII's combat are a lot different then what that post would have you believe. I'd recommend reading my blog on the matter to really understand my views on that.

Then there's this thread on the matter of the visualization of Elven culture.

[Darth Death]

Allan Schumacher wrote...
Snip

You can't fight fire with fire, it only causes a bigger flame, but thankfully to Agent599xx's humble post I've already made my peace with the subject. I really don't care if you feel that way about me, I only care if BioWare can live up to their previous reputation. After all I'm paying for your games, so that's as far as our relationship goes. If you can't retain your prestige, then your words hold no significance to me.  

[silentassassin264]

 I want Bioware to focus more on making an experience than trying to make you feel something.  Since that is rather vague, I will explain.

-Mass Effect 3 spoilers-

 In ME3, the child at the beginning of the game is pushed on you through nightmares and eventually culminating with being the appearance of the catalyst based off of some idea that you should feel sad that you couldn't save this kid.  The kid becomes symbolism for all the people Shepard couldn't save, etc. etc.  The problem is this is the same game that allowed you to be a renegade with the philsophy that you are fighting for those left standing.  That makes the nightmares and then the catalysts appearance at the end seem really really out of place and forced.

That was not just the ME team though.  In DA2, the Qunari were not allowed to be agreed with.  One of the devs who posted here, I am guessing Laidlaw but it probably wasn't him, said that they want the Quanri to be mysterious and alien.  For their logic to sometimes seem circular and kind of crazy.  I didn't feel that.  When the Arishok asked me about Kirkwall, I was thinking the place was hell on Earth with criminals controlling the streets at night, rampart political corruption, blood mages and abominations everywhere (including your party), templars more focused on keeping the nobility in check than doing their jobs (ie keeping said blood mages in check).  To me, if anywhere in Thedas could have used the order and assurance of the Qun, it was Kirkwall.  Instead, you are forced to disagree and at best become willing rivals.

 In other words, the entirety of Act 2 was lost on me because rather than trying to just make an experience, you were trying to make me feel something and failed.  With that failure, it becomes very hard to connect to rest of that storyline.  I couldn't help but lose any since of immersion by thinking how stupid the conflict was because I was forced into this situation that was brought about because how I "should" feel instead of how I felt.  

This is why I play WRPGs over JRPGs.  I still play JRPGs (I really like Devil Survivor on the DS), but the story is often linear and choices are not nearly as meaningful.  The central conflict in DA2 was fleshed out with the mages versus the templars and taking sides and stuff and avoided the "but thou must" unless you were trying to stay neutral.  But the Qunari scenario was just bad because you are forced into actions based on feelings the game is desperately trying to force on you but there is no real reason you should have.  Please avoid this in DA3.

Modifié par silentassassin264, 14 septembre 2012 - 04:06 .

[Darth Death]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Is it bad that I feel kinda apathetic about posting what I'd like DAIII to have/do/focus on, considering that's all I've done for the last... year and a half, I guess?

Or maybe deep down you feel it's a futile effort.

1) It starts to hurt my hand after a while.
2) I've done it a lot in the past, so part of me is hopeful that Bioware read it and is discussing it. The other part of me -- the cynical part I guess -- is just not really interested in it.
3) I wouldn't even know where to start in this thread.
4) Really, all we're doing is just discussing the same old stuff until Bioware reveals something more. I think that's why I'm just not up to it. Not that I feel it's futile or something else entirely, but just that it's ground I've already covered in a lot of depth.

Yes, I think I can relate to this in more ways than one, but nevertheless I was wrong in my assumption. 

[silentassassin264]

Well I am cynical and don't expect them to listen to me but I still post. Same with voting. I don't think any of the candidates are particularly great and I know they will not do what I want but I still vote. At the very least expressing my opinion makes me feels slightly better if only for a couple of minutes.

[General User]

One of the features I really liked from Origins that also had some representation in DA2 was the option to dismiss companions. To tell them "thanks, but no thanks. I'm sure you're a swell person but I have no use for you." I feel it really added to a sense of player agency.

I'd really love to see that concept expanded upon with different consequences for having or not having certain characters in one's party.

And not always negative either! I'd like to see characters who are generally upstanding fellows go on to do generally upstanding things even apart from the divine light that is the player character.

[Darth Death]

silentassassin264 wrote...

Well I am cynical and don't expect them to listen to me but I still post. Same with voting. I don't think any of the candidates are particularly great and I know they will not do what I want but I still vote. At the very least expressing my opinion makes me feels slightly better if only for a couple of minutes.

lol I understand this well. It's my passion for Origins that keeps me around & gives me hope. Maybe it's the same passion that's driving me to madness:blink:. And I agree that expressing your opinion does make a person feel better. I also think when bumping into a poster who's generally sincere is another plus. They're few in number, but worth the encounter.   

[StElmo]

Keep the DA2 artstyle, but make more unique areas. This game is far less generic then DA1

[isaa109]

Remember how Oghren named his child after the warden (sacrifice)?
Why not have him/her as a companion?
Also, please let him/her have the same love for drinks as Oghren does.

[Rylor Tormtor]

StElmo wrote...

Keep the DA2 artstyle, but make more unique areas. This game is far less generic then DA1

See, I don't get this complaint, and it is something that even the devs (or the marketing department) ennunciated in the build up to DA2. DAO was supposed to be a return to a traditional fantasy environment with a dark twist. It was in many ways supposed to be gritty and dirty, people walking around in muddied and rusty armor trying to survive an invasion of mindless evil that is bent on the destruction of all the peoples of Thedas. You are not super heroes in spandax tights, and if you are dumb enough to walk about in bare feet you should step on a rusty and die a horrible lingering death. 

Also, how can having 3 or 4 of the same archetypes of enemies, no matter what the specific enemies are, be anything BUT generic? You can be fighitng demons, quanari, templers, blood mages, and random thugs and you are always facing mooks, assassins, commanders, casters. All with almost all the same abilities and only different skins. Why should a rage demon and a templer assassin act the same way? In many ways this was my biggest disappointment with DA2, that all the fights and enemies were exactly the same with no variation, and combat was basically a burn down of the same targets in the same order in order to spawn the next wave. 

[StElmo]

Rylor Tormtor wrote...

StElmo wrote...

Keep the DA2 artstyle, but make more unique areas. This game is far less generic then DA1

See, I don't get this complaint, and it is something that even the devs (or the marketing department) ennunciated in the build up to DA2. DAO was supposed to be a return to a traditional fantasy environment with a dark twist. It was in many ways supposed to be gritty and dirty, people walking around in muddied and rusty armor trying to survive an invasion of mindless evil that is bent on the destruction of all the peoples of Thedas. You are not super heroes in spandax tights, and if you are dumb enough to walk about in bare feet you should step on a rusty and die a horrible lingering death. 

Also, how can having 3 or 4 of the same archetypes of enemies, no matter what the specific enemies are, be anything BUT generic?

I'll stop you there, again, you've crossed the concept of over used assets with "generic" style.

The assets and creatues ARE overused and variety absolutely must be implemented.

The aesthetic, however, is completely awesome. And while I like the gritty idea you just discussed in terms of DA:O - DA:O does not really show this. I have no problem with them making the DA2 art style a bit more dirty,(adding mud decals, richer blacks etc.) but the aesthetic itself is stunning and should be kept over the very generic fantasy style I have seen in 100's of other RPG';s/

[FieryDove]

PinkDiamondstl wrote...

If you were a console player you might feel differently.We are stuck with our ugly gear and birght hair colors. No toolset ,no wedding for my warden queen ,My Gregoire is still dead,my Jowan quest is still jacked up.We have to take our games as is. Does that seem fair to you? I was just being honest I did't wanna start anything . If that makes me  selfish so be it.

Nope...I would never remain...passive. As long as consumers don't speak up to Sony and MS things will never change. If enough people stood up and spoke you better believe they would start allowing mods since part of standing your ground is not to purchase anymore of the products at all until whatever need is satisfied.

[eroeru]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

snip

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."


snip


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 first quoted paragraph:
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 would of course be intelligent enough to think of well-explained criticisms (but I don't mean this ability to criticize as exclusive to this group) - i.e. the people who's opinion should actually matter more. 
What I'm saying is that there I see two criteria for the criticism that should be taken into account: firstly, the demographic has a strong connection to previous titles in the series, or similar games; and secondly, they need to be able to explain their criticism and think of implications their "ideas" would have. The expanding of the criticism is much more important than the criticism itself.

Directors of the Saw franchise definitely wouldn't hear the vast criticisms of film critics. And they're right to do so - if they'd do an art-flick in the same franchise, the people would be upset and the franchise ruined.

I may allow for the possibility of me not "getting" DA2 exactly - but in a general sense I cannot see any merit or logical continuity in the actual changes. And I'm not as blind as to misassess this.


@the second quoted paragraph
 That's very well said and written, save the DA:O part. It was not as heated and low-rated as ][, which you maybe haven't realized if you'd not follow these posts. 

Otherwise, great post, and thank you again.


edited for clarifying a thing or two.

Modifié par eroeru, 14 septembre 2012 - 10:17 .

[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 .