108 réponses à ce sujet

[Cutlass Jack]

LinksOcarina wrote...

To be fair though, the KoA demo did do it's job correctly then, since it gave you the taste of what to expect. And it seemed to work out fine. I was on the fence with the game and when I played the demo, I was actually impressed, even though it felt like a single player MMO. And when I did my official review, it gave me a good bedrock to start with on it.

Well not entirely. If it did its job correctly it would have me excited about preordering the game at the full $60 price. Not wait until it went on sale for $19 a few months after its creators went bankrupt and had to lay everyone off.

But yes it did give me a taste of what to expect.

[Icinix]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Icinix wrote...

I actually thought the DA2 demo was very accurate representation of the final game.

Indeed there was very little that changed between the demo and the final game.

The documentation did.

When playing the demo, I had no idea what the conversation icons meant.  When playing the game, I had short descriptions which helped quite a lot.

Oh sure, there were some little changes.

But the demo was still a very accurate representation of the final game.

After the demo, when I got the full game - it was pretty much what I was expecting.

[Fast Jimmy]

Wulfram wrote...

Peoples unreasonable panic provoked by Bioware's two recent demos has proved quite justified with hindsight.

Which I guess means they were good demos

I find this a compelling accurate, but it makes me feel jaded saying that.

[marshalleck]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Peoples unreasonable panic provoked by Bioware's two recent demos has proved quite justified with hindsight.

Which I guess means they were good demos

I find this a compelling accurate, but it makes me feel jaded saying that.

If you've been a gamer for at least a couple years and you're only jaded, I'd say you're coming out ahead. 

[LinksOcarina]

marshalleck wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Peoples unreasonable panic provoked by Bioware's two recent demos has proved quite justified with hindsight.

Which I guess means they were good demos

I find this a compelling accurate, but it makes me feel jaded saying that.

If you've been a gamer for at least a couple years and you're only jaded, I'd say you're coming out ahead. 

But that jaded feeling is what is causing a lot of the ire at the same time. The developers and publishers make mistakes and are not blameless, but the fans needs to share the brunt too when they are wrong. And let's be honest, fans can be wrong most of the time. 

[deuce985]

Well, I also remember console gamers complaining about an auto-attack toggle in DA2 demo. I don't think they had one in the demo, so they just kept smashing A to attack. That's why people got the impression it was pure hack'n'slash. I didn't play it on console, so I have no idea. They put a auto-attack toggle in retail didn't they? That's just an example of why they're bad marketing tools. They're not a final respresentation of what the product is. I still can't for the life of me see why publishers allow demos to be released when they're usually builds from beta.

I don't think I've ever played a demo and just went "wow, amazing".

DA2's demo is probably better than most but I can think of many demos that didn't do a good job representing the final product. It just goes to show you how easily some people can get the wrong idea about something. Everything John/Allan said is the right way to approach it. But even then, you're still going to get people who have the wrong idea...always happens.

At least now we can see some planned features and give our feedback on what we think about them.

Modifié par deuce985, 25 septembre 2012 - 10:45 .

[wsandista]

LinksOcarina wrote...

But that jaded feeling is what is causing a lot of the ire at the same time. The developers and publishers make mistakes and are not blameless, but the fans needs to share the brunt too when they are wrong. And let's be honest, fans can be wrong most of the time. 

If the developers make a product that isn't desirable, then they deserve all of the ire they get.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Icinix wrote...

Oh sure, there were some little changes.

But those little changes might be really important to some players. 

I don't usually play demos, because they tend to contain spoilers, but I played the DA2 demo specifically because I wanted to see how the dialogue system worked.  I knew I hadn't liked the voice+paraphrase in ME and ME2, but DA2 was doing some things differently (with the tone icons), so I wanted to see the improvement.

But I didn't see any improvement at all, because the tone icons were undocumented.

[Sylvius the Mad]

deuce985 wrote...

Well, I also remember console gamers complaining about an auto-attack toggle in DA2 demo. I don't think they had one in the demo, so they just kept smashing A to attack. 

Actually, the auto-attack toggle wasn't in the console versions of DA2 even at release.  It was patched in later.

But spamming the attack button was actually in the PC demo, and without any animation time.  In DA2's demo, you could attack more often just by pressing R faster.

[LinksOcarina]

deuce985 wrote...

DA2's demo is probably better than most but I can think of many demos that didn't do a good job representing the final product. It just goes to show you how easily some people can get the wrong idea about something. Everything John/Allan said is the right way to approach it. But even then, you're still going to get people who have the wrong idea...always happens.

At least now we can see some planned features and give our feedback on what we think about them.

The key to that though is to realize that yes, we can give feedback, but it shouldn't dictate the development fully. 

For example, I bought into the Project Eternity kickstarter, and one of the aspects of their game that I am not looking forward to is how the companions are going to be treated, which they say are basically auxillary style characters that are always optional in the sense that you don't need them to beat the game, and serve the purpose of helping you out without strong characterization to get in the way (so that they don't upstage the player character, which is fine, but the impression is that the characters will be flatter than say what BioWare does.) 

I personally do not like that approach, but they made it clear that this is their intention, and if thats the case so be it, I won't stop them from trying to change it. But they spelt it out and I still bought into the project because they were clear on what their intent was, and that the only thing we can really control is the type of companions and classes we will see added, if the kickstarter is to be believed.

So it should be made clear intent as well, so that when we offer feedback we know what we can give, and respect that the developers are in charge in the end. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 25 septembre 2012 - 10:50 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

LinksOcarina wrote...

The key to that though is to realize that yes, we can give feedback, but it shouldn't dictate the development fully. 

For example, I bought into the Project Eternity kickstarter, and one of the aspects of their game that I am not looking forward to is how the companions are going to be treated, which they say are basically auxillary style characters that are always optional in the sense that you don't need them to beat the game, and serve the purpose of helping you out without strong characterization to get in the way (so that they don't upstage the player character, which is fine, but the impression is that the characters will be flatter than say what BioWare does.) 

That's actually the opposite of my understanding of the Project Eternity companions, but this might be a function of us wanting different things.

My understanding is that Obsidian wants to write deep companions, which is why they're not writing many of them.  And while, yes, they will all be optional, they'll be important enough that Obsidian isn't letting us create more than one party member ourselves (something I would like to do).

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 25 septembre 2012 - 10:52 .

[LinksOcarina]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

The key to that though is to realize that yes, we can give feedback, but it shouldn't dictate the development fully. 

For example, I bought into the Project Eternity kickstarter, and one of the aspects of their game that I am not looking forward to is how the companions are going to be treated, which they say are basically auxillary style characters that are always optional in the sense that you don't need them to beat the game, and serve the purpose of helping you out without strong characterization to get in the way (so that they don't upstage the player character, which is fine, but the impression is that the characters will be flatter than say what BioWare does.) 

That's actually the opposite of my understanding of the Project Eternity companions, but this might be a function of us wanting different things.

My understanding is that Obsidian wants to write deep companions, which is why they're not writing many of them.  And while, yes, they will all be optional, they'll be important enough that Obsidian isn't letting us create more than one party member ourselves (something I would like to do).

Maybe I read the updates and the Obsidian blogs wrong, I got the impression that it was more about the companions being auxilerary and just giving you lore and quest info, over being complex characters that can do the same thing.

But even then, that is the kind of transparency i'm talking about.

[Sylvius the Mad]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

The key to that though is to realize that yes, we can give feedback, but it shouldn't dictate the development fully. 

For example, I bought into the Project Eternity kickstarter, and one of the aspects of their game that I am not looking forward to is how the companions are going to be treated, which they say are basically auxillary style characters that are always optional in the sense that you don't need them to beat the game, and serve the purpose of helping you out without strong characterization to get in the way (so that they don't upstage the player character, which is fine, but the impression is that the characters will be flatter than say what BioWare does.) 

That's actually the opposite of my understanding of the Project Eternity companions, but this might be a function of us wanting different things.

My understanding is that Obsidian wants to write deep companions, which is why they're not writing many of them.  And while, yes, they will all be optional, they'll be important enough that Obsidian isn't letting us create more than one party member ourselves (something I would like to do).

Maybe I read the updates and the Obsidian blogs wrong, I got the impression that it was more about the companions being auxilerary and just giving you lore and quest info, over being complex characters that can do the same thing.

But even then, that is the kind of transparency i'm talking about.

Yes.  Obsidian is being quite transparent.

I actually did read Obsidian's info wrong, originally.  I pledged partly because I expected to be able to create the entire party myself (I had a similar expectation of Drakensang, and was similarly disappointed).  Then it turned out I couldn't do that (at least, that's not their core design).

In a way, though, we agree.  We both want the game to be more party-focused rather than PC-focused, and we both think Obsidian isn't doing that.

[Fast Jimmy]

LinksOcarina wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Peoples unreasonable panic provoked by Bioware's two recent demos has proved quite justified with hindsight.

Which I guess means they were good demos

I find this a compelling accurate, but it makes me feel jaded saying that.

If you've been a gamer for at least a couple years and you're only jaded, I'd say you're coming out ahead. 

But that jaded feeling is what is causing a lot of the ire at the same time. The developers and publishers make mistakes and are not blameless, but the fans needs to share the brunt too when they are wrong. And let's be honest, fans can be wrong most of the time. 

I don't see how. The fans can have conflicted opinions, unclear demands, unrealistic expectations, sure... but none of that makes them wrong. That's the market demand and obstacles. No fan makes money by being any of these things. Bioware makes money by overcoming these things.

I have yet to see a fan say "this game is garbage" and be wrong about that opinion. You can't be wrong about an opinion. You can be unhelpful, uneducated and unclear, but its impossible to have a wrong opinion.

Unless you're saying that fans can overreact to news prior to a release? To which I agree wholeheartedly. But, at the same time, as people earlier said, almost every gloom and doom prophecy about both DA2 and ME3 seemed to come true. And it wasn't just a self-fulfilling prophecy - people new to the forums or new to Bioware games came back and gave some of the exact same feedback that longtime BSNers said about the games, and said they feared would be true based on their original speculations.

So fans can be totally off base with their assumptions... but they haven't been with many Bioware games as of late.

[Icinix]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Oh sure, there were some little changes.

But those little changes might be really important to some players. 

I don't usually play demos, because they tend to contain spoilers, but I played the DA2 demo specifically because I wanted to see how the dialogue system worked.  I knew I hadn't liked the voice+paraphrase in ME and ME2, but DA2 was doing some things differently (with the tone icons), so I wanted to see the improvement.

But I didn't see any improvement at all, because the tone icons were undocumented.

...so you're saying the DA2 demo wasn't a fair representation of the final DA2?

[Sylvius the Mad]

I'm saying that the DA2 demo could have given some players a mistaken impression of the final game by virtue of how it was provided to them (without documentation).

[Sylvius the Mad]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I have yet to see a fan say "this game is garbage" and be wrong about that opinion. You can't be wrong about an opinion. You can be unhelpful, uneducated and unclear, but its impossible to have a wrong opinion.

About their own preferences, yes.

About worldly facts, no.

[Dragoonlordz]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

-snip-

You can be unhelpful, uneducated and unclear, but its impossible to have a wrong opinion.

-snip

Just wanted to react to this one sentence. In my opinion a cow is part of the vegetable food group.

Of course I'm just messing with you, I know what you mean't even if did not come out the right way.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 26 septembre 2012 - 01:54 .

[eroeru]

I think people certainly don't argue here in order to arrive to an understanding that they haven't known well enough how to play their games. It's to understand better what constitutes their disappointment, and how the game can remedy itself. Simple as that.

People may talk astray of each other and be wrong about many a fact - but the fact of whether their criticism is genuinely founded or not lies more in the question of whether they've given the game enough playtime, and whether the problems are even solvable.

The main thing to be thinking about is not whether I was right or wrong in hating or loving the game - it's "what can be remedied, and how". This question requires an understanding of the nature of the things that felt wrong in the game.

[thenemesis1]

I just hope we all can try and undterstand what you guys/gals have to do and yea in the past I have been way over the top. I just hope you have the time to do your best and in that we will support you.

Hey I stll want some pics from your new engine that your useing..but that is when you can do so. I hope that people that buy this game also understand that the ones that make this game are people too..with orders and timedates and are also told what to do..just please keep that in mind..as I was one that didn't do that before and I'am sorry for that..all I want is a good story...and I know you all can do that..hell I know your working right now..don't give up.

[Direwolf0294]

I just hope we don't end up learning the entire plot, all our companion characters and key story points and fights before the game's even released.

[LinksOcarina]

Direwolf0294 wrote...

I just hope we don't end up learning the entire plot, all our companion characters and key story points and fights before the game's even released.

To be fair we learned who the companions were before the game was released last time...and the time before that.


Key story points though i doubt will be spoiled by the blogs. By other people maybe...

[Nashimura]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

There's also a problem in that you really only get one first impression. If we show you a feature that's not really done, and part of it doesn't look great - even if we show you that feature two months later and it looks significantly better, there's a chance that whatever your perception was of the feature initially is going to colour how you see it.

Just to echo John's perspective...

There are people (foolishly) raging over the XCOM demo because it was just the tutorial. Therefore, the ENTIRE game MUST be hand holding and railroaded linear missions.

Same thing happened with another game i look forward too, Hitman Absolution they showed a video of a linear mission and the whole fanbase went mad about how its been dumbed down and the series has been destroyed for evarrr...Took quite a bit of proven from the devs to turn people back around. So i get that you never want to make a bad first impression....

[hoorayforicecream]

Filament wrote...

John Epler wrote...
As has been mentioned previously by Mark and others, we're adopting a 'show, don't tell' approach for DA3

I wonder when was the last time someone actually set out to adopt a "tell, don't show" approach.

Every time Peter Molyneux talks to the press?