Well apparently they have a good deal of Dragon Age secrets looked away in the developer wiki which can only certain things can be viewed by certain people.
*Puts on black gloves* We need to infiltrate BioWare. Quick we need a team of elite disfunctional fans!
Be careful... several of us are Tower Defense experts...
Um... I know I'm public facing but I'm not sure if my personal tweets between friends is really relevant to this thread?
Ben Gelinas always makes me think of Brangelina. I bet he gets that a lot, though.
/off-topic.
I do. Also, when Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez were a thing, a lot of "Bennifer." 
While I tend to be pretty lenient (maybe too lenient) towards conversations that evolve from DAI related tweets, I am starting to hide links to tweets that are just "BioWare developer tweets something" as well as "Person with no more than X degrees separation from BioWare tweets something" as well, when the tweets don't have anything to do with DAI.
Twitter is free to sign up, and you don't need to actively post or anything to follow people, and I'd prefer that this thread not just become some generalized thread that shares anything twitter related. I appreciate that people may find them funny and whatnot, but this thread is also useful for people as a quick reference to DAI things that are discussed, including some of the stuff that we do on twitter, or even tumblr and other social media stuff, related to DAI.
New party members won't be coming to Dragon Age: Inquisition after it launches: http://bit.ly/1lSZMr7 For good reason.
Which, of course, also means "no new party members, period".
As an example: if Shale hadn't been completed in DLC, Shale would simply have never existed insofar as the fans are concerned. Perhaps some people are happier with that, I'm not sure. All I'm saying is that there are two sides to every coin.
I'm disappointed because I just didn't feel those complaining were particularly justified. Yes, the content was on the disc, but it was created with resources that wouldn't be available without supplementary income to the game. Thus, you have to pay extra to have access to this extra content that, otherwise, wouldn't be on the disc and no one could use. I thought that was a perfectly reasonable arrangement already. I don't blame Bioware, but I'm a bit disappointed in the fanbase for making them do this.
With respect to a party member, it's more a function of "we have more time to work on the game so that party member can now fit within release schedule."
For us to have a DLC companion after the time extension would have required us spending time creating a new companion. Basically the time extension has simply meant "free DLC for everyone that is perfectly integrated into the game!" if you want to look at it that way.
I took from David Gaider's commentary for it to be that no DLC character just mean one less character, so it's a bit confusing compared to what he said.
It's more just that the nature of how party members work, if we don't create content for those party members that already litter the base game, we're limited in what we do with those party members.
It's a bit like why there's not much for DLC party members beyond the day one DLC party members in our games.
Rereading David's post, I also think there's a degree of frustration with people that go "yay no DLC characters" without fully realizing what exactly that means.
I mean, all you have to go on is my word that there isn't actually a character that's been cut and people will just never know, right?
Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 10 avril 2014 - 08:39 .
It's not that I'm not willing to take your word for it, it was just that the last post by David Gaider made it sound, to me, like "no DLC character" just meant "we're going to create less characters". I was just making comments based on what he said. I didn't mean to come across as accusing you of lying about it, if it seemed like that. I would just be disappointed if we lost a character like Shale in the future over the issue, like he said we would have without DLC in Origins. I'm willing to totally accept that nobody got cut and no concepts were heavily in the works for this project to fill that gap this time.
Going forward, it means that characters that cut will stay cut, yes. Assuming we stick with this forever and beyond DAI.
What I mean by "you'll have to take my word for it" was more "you'll never know if something was cut and never added later in DLC," not that I felt accused of lying.
Situations like Shale, however, would not happen for future games. And yes, I agree with you that this is unfortunate because that content, by its nature of being more integrated into the whole game, is innately more interesting for me.
Allan, do you think you could ask the relevant members of the team if post launch integration is a feasible endeavor for future projects? Or perhaps a clarification on what it is about integrated character content that makes it difficult to implement post launch, because I can't for the life of me figure out why this is such an issue? As an artist, I'm not particularly knowledgeable about programming/engine limitations, but I was the best out of the artists in terms of understanding programming principles in my obligatory coding class, so if a technical explanation was available, I'd appreciate it, as it would help me more fully understand this limitation.
I actually know the answer.
To integrate DLC content into main content requires the main content to be patched in order to support that content. The more the content is integrated, the more patching is necessary. This creates a risk because every time you change something, there are potential knock on effects that might not be properly known. This will affect people that have no interest in the DLC, since the patch must be deployed to the main game and cannot be something that is only applied to people that own DLC. This goes beyond simply "it's a nightmare to try to support multiple versions in the wild," but is also the type of thing that First Party certification isn't very keen on us even allowing (for many of the same reasons).
Internally, development is not as seamless as if it exists from the start, because you have to keep the packaging separate otherwise we'll make things even more complicated during development. If we don't keep a distinct "patched version of the game" and "DLC focused content" and just start adding that new content and merging it in with the main game's content going forward, it means we'll need to spend a fair amount of time trying to decouple "patch content" from "DLC content." I cannot overstate that his is NOT a pleasant task for whichever poor source control expert gets saddled with it. We actually had something similar happen to one of the builds on DA2, where it wasn't properly archived. Patch content kept happening on that content, but once we realized the archive was missing a programmer literally spent days ensuring that not a single thing that existed in the release build was missing, and that not a single thing that existed after the release build was present, because it'd cause serious issues as we'd be attempting to build a patch on a build that didn't actually exist in the real world.
Depending on how we do our bundling, this can really explode patch size requirements if lots of different aspects of the game end up getting touched that otherwise wouldn't be.
Does that mean no future DLC? Or possibly a more focused effort towards expansions?
DLC would just contain different content aside from a permanent party member that can be used throughout the game.
This doesn't prevent it from being like Citadel, Lair of the Shadow Broker, Mark of the Assassin, or Legacy.
Ah, ok. So this means we won't have a Javik situation then?
Nor Shale or Sebastian, but yes.
You know, one day I would like to see a video "behind the scene" showing someone doing cinematic. Sort of like we get those sometimes for artists or level designers.
Mostly cursing, followed by brief moments of inspiration.
I'd love to know some more about how Skyhold is gonna work. But I suppose that info is still too important. Alas. Have we totally ruled out someone breaking into the Edmonton office and stealing the dev wiki?
You'll have to get past the defenses (which includes bees... 
)
Just to provide some different perspective from the PAX East comments, it's something that I got when I was lucky enough to go to PAX Prime. The outpouring of support is soooooooooooooooooo flattering and I think it can be easy for me to take it for granted when I just see it as text on the screen. People coming up with big smiles and almost tangible enthusiasm was rather infectious, in a good way!
I wasn't mandated to stay at the BioWare base the WHOLE time... but with the panels and discussions I had with fans, I actually didn't find too much motivation to go elsewhere barring a few edge cases. Which was pretty awesome.
Seeing a full line of people with amazing cosplay posing for pictures was just 
Then came the "postive feedback loops"
"You inspire us!"
"No you inspire us!"
"No no nono, you inspire us!"
"Oh man hearing that inspires us more!"
"WELL I AM EVEN MORE INSPIRED NOW"
So thanks! 
Are you thinking of going to PAX South this January Allan?
Haven't given it much thought, to be honest. Post ship I'm tentatively slated to get some surgery to correct an overbite and that'll affect both my physical ability to travel, as well as my bank account.
"at least" implies one or more. If Mike is being intentionally ambiguous then he shouldn't be irritated that people assume the possibility of more than one.
This is petty and the "sheesh" is unnecessary tbh.
Looking at the original question that he was answering, yes it was intentionally ambiguous. My question is more: "It's so intentionally ambiguous in the answer, why do people think that asking further questions will accomplish anything more?"
At least does indeed imply "one or more." To continue prodding for more information than that also implies that people find his answer unacceptable. It's ambiguous because he doesn't want to confirm anything more than that.
I'm definitely sad to hear stuff is getting cut.
Stuff gets cut throughout the project.
MESSAGE POPULAIRE !
It's sad, but remember that sometimes cuts can be to the benefit of a project.
The babies must die so that puppies may live.
You will like the puppies. They're cute. Once all the blood is washed off, I guess.
at least this time around stuff that is getting cut is stuff that wasn't mentioned to the public since their policy is now of only showing off things that Will be in the game.
i hope that is the case at least.
Oh, you sweet summer child.
The main difference is that this conversation occurs:
"You think we should cut this? We've already mentioned it to the fans. They'll be upset."
"They'll be more upset if the game doesn't ship."
"Err...true. Cutting ahoy!"
That's perfectly fine. It's, obviously, well within your rights to withhold information we have no business knowing just yet. I was just confused by the apparent anger in the tone of the response. Don't you expect these questions from your rabid fanbase?
I think Mike's just getting a bit frustrated that people seem to think Twitter is the best way to ask a million questions--like a hydra, answering a question only seems to spawn ten more. He's pretty patient overall, considering. More than I am.
Exactly so I will never probably know what was cut and I will be wondering about this with no answers forever.
Part of me wanted to post "some fans should probably consider that the next time they ****** about DLC".
But then I thought better of it.
It's generally about "stuff/content getting cut" rather than a character, I think?
Yes. There's no indication of what has been cut.
He didn't outright confirm details, but he gave a example situation of something that actually occurs in development:
"You think we should cut this? We've already mentioned it to the fans. They'll be upset."
Retour en haut
