123 réponses à ce sujet

[jkflipflopDAO]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

Look, they don't need a bunch of maroons white knighting them.

Why not?  They've certainly got several hundred bunches of maroons dumping on them.  And being maroons, their feedback isn't particularly useful, despite how frequently it comes up in even the most innocuous of threads they risk poking their head in, lest jkflipflopDAO be about.

In any case, you're inventing both a problem and a cause out of nothing but your own flawed reading of what they've said here and your own assumptions.  This is true regardless, and any white knighting on my part of anyone else's is simply a side effect of pointing this out.

Fact is they said they do play them, but their perspectives - working on it day in and day out for months and years - is so far removed from our experience as gamers that it's difficult for them to see it as a game rather than a collection of compromises.  This would seem to be true of any game, regardless of how it is received by customers or the media.  Furthermore, your assumption that the handful of writers are all BioWare has to provide credible criticism of the finished product is absurd on its face.

Derp derp you must be a genius.

[Pseudo the Mustachioed]

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

Look, they don't need a bunch of maroons white knighting them.

Things that look good on paper and should logically work in sequence A B C sometimes don't go as planned. If you just assume ABC all work together without actually experiencing the intended result, then how do you know something there isn't off? How do you know that variable Q way over there hasn't wrecked your entire atmosphere you were going for?

Because there are a dozen people constantly checking all of these things, including the people responsible for the content as well as team leads, QA, focus groups, beta testers, and anyone who manages to see the content long enough to form an opinion.

Really, 'maroons'?

Modifié par Pseudocognition, 30 septembre 2012 - 07:24 .

[upsettingshorts]

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

Look, they don't need a bunch of maroons white knighting them.

Why not?  They've certainly got several hundred bunches of maroons dumping on them.  And being maroons, their feedback isn't particularly useful, despite how frequently it comes up in even the most innocuous of threads they risk poking their head in, lest jkflipflopDAO be about.

In any case, you're inventing both a problem and a cause out of nothing but your own flawed reading of what they've said here and your own assumptions.  This is true regardless, and any white knighting on my part of anyone else's is simply a side effect of pointing this out.

Fact is they said they do play them, but their perspectives - working on it day in and day out for months and years - is so far removed from our experience as gamers that it's difficult for them to see it as a game rather than a collection of compromises.  This would seem to be true of any game, regardless of how it is received by customers or the media.  Furthermore, your assumption that the handful of writers are all BioWare has to provide credible criticism of the finished product is absurd on its face.

Derp derp you must be a genius.

Surely you mean by comparison only.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 30 septembre 2012 - 07:24 .

[jkflipflopDAO]

Pseudocognition wrote...

Because there are a dozen people constantly checking all of these things, including the people responsible for the content as well as team leads, QA, focus groups, beta testers, and anyone who manages to see the content long enough to form an opinion.

But those people are the very ones in question. The team leads, those responsible for the content, the QA, and the alpha testing guys are the ones that are "immune" to the story elements. They're the ones that have been playing it for years and seeing the same things over and over.

Is this really so difficult to understand or have you all just decided to "gang up on the badguy" because you think I'm somehow "attacking" bioware? 

[LolaLei]

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

Look, they don't need a bunch of maroons white knighting them.

Ok, great. So why don't you **** off, leave the forum and go play some games that you actually enjoy, instead of b!tching like a girly man in here.

Don't let the door hit you on your way out.

[jkflipflopDAO]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

Look, they don't need a bunch of maroons white knighting them.

Why not?  They've certainly got several hundred bunches of maroons dumping on them.  And being maroons, their feedback isn't particularly useful, despite how frequently it comes up in even the most innocuous of threads they risk poking their head in, lest jkflipflopDAO be about.

In any case, you're inventing both a problem and a cause out of nothing but your own flawed reading of what they've said here and your own assumptions.  This is true regardless, and any white knighting on my part of anyone else's is simply a side effect of pointing this out.

Fact is they said they do play them, but their perspectives - working on it day in and day out for months and years - is so far removed from our experience as gamers that it's difficult for them to see it as a game rather than a collection of compromises.  This would seem to be true of any game, regardless of how it is received by customers or the media.  Furthermore, your assumption that the handful of writers are all BioWare has to provide credible criticism of the finished product is absurd on its face.

Derp derp you must be a genius.

Surely you mean by comparison only.

Yes, because telling me I'm wrong and then in the next breath saying back to me the exact thing you just told me is wrong makes you a bonafide brainiac. Good job.

[Pseudo the Mustachioed]

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

But those people are the very ones in question. The team leads, those responsible for the content, the QA, and the alpha testing guys are the ones that are "immune" to the story elements. They're the ones that have been playing it for years and seeing the same things over and over.

Gonna agree with Shorts here in that you seem to be making up a problem.

Have fun with that.

[upsettingshorts]

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

But those people are the very ones in question. The team leads, those responsible for the content, the QA, and the alpha testing guys are the ones that are "immune" to the story elements.

How do you figure? Your follow ups make even less sense in context of what the BioWare writers actually said in this thread than your first post does.  

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

Is this really so difficult to understand or have you all just decided to "gang up on the badguy" because you think I'm somehow "attacking" bioware? 

Straw man.

[Anarya]

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

Pseudocognition wrote...

Because there are a dozen people constantly checking all of these things, including the people responsible for the content as well as team leads, QA, focus groups, beta testers, and anyone who manages to see the content long enough to form an opinion.

But those people are the very ones in question. The team leads, those responsible for the content, the QA, and the alpha testing guys are the ones that are "immune" to the story elements. They're the ones that have been playing it for years and seeing the same things over and over.

Is this really so difficult to understand or have you all just decided to "gang up on the badguy" because you think I'm somehow "attacking" bioware? 

So the focus groups and beta testers count for nothing...?

[upsettingshorts]

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

Yes, because telling me I'm wrong and then in the next breath saying back to me the exact thing you just told me is wrong makes you a bonafide brainiac. Good job.

No, I said you were wrong and then summarized all they actually said.

Let's take a look at what you wrote again:

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

. . . So who there actually DOES play these things through and says if the game as a whole is actually fun or not? Do you not even bother thinking in that matter because you feel that you know it inside and out? That's a big mistake. Do you have a bunch of intern kids that are afraid to tell you that the end of your trilogy sucks eggs? That's a big problem, too.

They said nothing of the sort.  You made this entire conclusion up out of nothing.  You're so imaginative. Good job. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 30 septembre 2012 - 07:33 .

[jkflipflopDAO]

Anarya wrote...

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

Pseudocognition wrote...

Because there are a dozen people constantly checking all of these things, including the people responsible for the content as well as team leads, QA, focus groups, beta testers, and anyone who manages to see the content long enough to form an opinion.

But those people are the very ones in question. The team leads, those responsible for the content, the QA, and the alpha testing guys are the ones that are "immune" to the story elements. They're the ones that have been playing it for years and seeing the same things over and over.

Is this really so difficult to understand or have you all just decided to "gang up on the badguy" because you think I'm somehow "attacking" bioware? 

So the focus groups and beta testers count for nothing...?

Well I suppose they would. . . and that would help answer my original question. Are there even any focus groups? Beta testers? TOR is the only Bioware game I recall there being a big beta test.

[Anarya]

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

Well I suppose they would. . . and that would help answer my original question. Are there even any focus groups? Beta testers? TOR is the only Bioware game I recall there being a big beta test.

An open beta, which is why you knew about it. We don't get to hear about stuff that goes on that's bound by NDA, but that leaked survey is concrete evidence of focus testing, and I'm certain beta testing happens behind closed doors before they put a multimillion dollar game out into the wild. 

[David Gaider]

jkflipflopDAO wrote...
 . . So who there actually DOES play these things through and says if the game as a whole is actually fun or not? Do you not even bother thinking in that matter because you feel that you know it inside and out? That's a big mistake. Do you have a bunch of intern kids that are afraid to tell you that the end of your trilogy sucks eggs? That's a big problem, too.

Err... first off, we do play our games. Probably more than the vast majority of the fans who end up buying them. Our experience in doing so is quite different, however, as the game is largely unfinished right up until the very end. The only people who get a sense of the "fun" (at least insofar as the end user would experience it, as opposed to our own evaluation based on experience) are probably QA and more likely the focus testers. Playing it after release is quite a different story-- at least for me, personally. Mary and Sheryl are weirdos.

And, incidentally, knock off the insulting language. You may think that calling people "derp derp maroons" is just static and shouldn't affect your point, but it does. And this is a warning that keeping it up will earn you a quick trip off these forums. Got it?

Modifié par David Gaider, 30 septembre 2012 - 07:42 .

[LolaLei]

Hehehe "maroons".

[Zanallen]

I prefer macaroons. And I bet David plays nothing but dwarves and romances everyone he can get his hands on.

[jkflipflopDAO]

David Gaider wrote...

jkflipflopDAO wrote...
 . . So who there actually DOES play these things through and says if the game as a whole is actually fun or not? Do you not even bother thinking in that matter because you feel that you know it inside and out? That's a big mistake. Do you have a bunch of intern kids that are afraid to tell you that the end of your trilogy sucks eggs? That's a big problem, too.

Err... first off, we do play our games. Probably more than the vast majority of the fans who end up buying them. Our experience in doing so is quite different, however, as the game is largely unfinished right up until the very end. The only people who get a sense of the "fun" (at least insofar as the end user would experience it, as opposed to our own evaluation based on experience) are probably QA and more likely the focus testers. Playing it after release is quite a different story-- at least for me, personally. Mary and Sheryl are weirdos.

And, incidentally, knock off the insulting language. You may think that calling people "derp derp maroons" is just static and shouldn't affect your point, but it does. And this is a warning that keeping it up will earn you a quick trip off these forums. Got it?

So who are these focus testers? Do you guys hire a 3rd party agency of "pro" powergaming uber testers or do you just invite stoner kids in off the street or what? Maybe PM invite to some of the community? How do you guys normally get your bearing of what's really working together? 

This is the entire point I was getting at. I'm glad at least you understand.

[Anaeme]

David Gaider wrote...
And this is a warning that keeping it up will earn you a quick trip off these forums. Got it?

Hmm...the ban hammer is now officially positioned above jkflipflopDAO. 

[David Gaider]

jkflipflopDAO wrote...
So who are these focus testers? Do you guys hire a 3rd party agency of "pro" powergaming uber testers or do you just invite stoner kids in off the street or what? Maybe PM invite to some of the community? How do you guys normally get your bearing of what's really working together?

That isn't the subject of the thread, so I'll not answer your questions and promote further hijacking-- other than to say we have focus testers, both internal and external, that test any content which is in a state to actually play.

[LolaLei]

Anaeme wrote...

David Gaider wrote...
And this is a warning that keeping it up will earn you a quick trip off these forums. Got it?

Hmm...the ban hammer is now officially positioned above jkflipflopDAO. 

I haven't heard that term in a while!

[Anaeme]

This thread answers a few questions though...I always wondered why none of the developers had high level characters on their profiles

[ShaggyWolf]

Sheryl Chee wrote...

What? I thought we had something, Shorts. I'm wounded. Wounded to the core.

On-topic, I played Origins, even after having worked on it for several years. I actually stayed up till 4 am, playing Origins. I played a city elf warrior who romanced no one, and was friends with everyone else.

I can't romance anyone in the games. It just feels a little wrong. 

Nice! (Valadras approves +50)

City elf warrior's my main character and my most favorite origin. Alienage life aint easy!  

[Allan Schumacher]

I feel a need to interject into this thread since I am a member of the group that DOES play through the game and provide feedback on said content.

Pretty much the first thing any new QA member does is play through what content is there. We recognize that we only get one shot at the "fresh perspective" with a new tester. Now there's a window when this is most useful: Too soon and you don't really have systems in place and not much iteration has happened. Too late and stuff is locked down and simply cannot be changed unless it's a breaking issue.


Now, since someone asked, allow me to share:

I started on DAO in June 2009, which was towards the end of the project. So my job for two weeks was literally "Play DAO." Which was a bit surreal (I'm getting paid for this!) but it makes sense, as they need me to know what someone is talking about when they say "Nature of the Beast."

I played through DAO as a Male Human Noble Rogue. I found it fun, though perhaps more challenging until I got Wynne (I went to the Circle second). I try to playthrough in a "logical" manner, in that if I have Objective A and Objective B and A is on the way to B on the world map, I go to A first (Redcliffe).

In general, I prefer to play martial classes, so while running around in the DA games, I usually default to either the rogue or the warrior. Though I do mix it up more now since there's advantages to me seeing how it all works for all classes (note: I'm not actually a content tester, so any time I spend in game doing this stuff is typically while verifying something systemic and so forth. I'm not the type of QA that gets paid to just playthrough the game and provide feedback on the content, though I will send writing and design feedback if I notice anything ).


It CAN be tricky though, because not only when you play through the same content repeatedly skew your perspective on whether or not something is "fun" (it may be fun to start, but is it still fun the 100th time you've run through it?), there is also issues with understanding the motivations behind particular decisions.

I have no doubt that, compared to some, I am able to appreciate DA2 more simply because I know what was trying to be done in a particular situation, skewing my perspective on the actual system as it's in place. It's a challenge, and it is an effort to make sure things don't become pure autopilot. To say otherwise is just disingenuous.

Since I'm a Tech QA, I do have the advantage of being able to be surprised since I spend less time doing actual content. And, for example, I have given feedback on encounters that I find tedious when playing through the game. Where I could have done better was exploring the game more fully (I saw Act 1 waaaaaaay more than any of the other Acts, simply because when testing a system in game I knew where to find thorough tests of the system in a variety of places). There was some stuff that I definitely wish I had seen earlier in the dev cycle because when I finally experienced some of it, it was while reproducing critical issues during cert. Far too late to actually enact any changes.

Note that this is also why we do things like focus tests (which seem to be a curse word on these forums and many seem to think we shouldn't do them because they prevent true RPGs). There's also no shortage of people just in the company (there's a lot of people that work here) that don't typically play the game. I know many people on DA team that took part in ME3 playthroughs (I played through the first 30ish minutes in front of all the senior devs for it, and pointed out a lot of issues that I struggled with in terms of GUI and it was great to see them get remedied in the final project), and a lot of us actually took part in ME3 MP testing (to the point where it wasn't uncommon for people to just stay late and play it for fun).

But I digress....

I romanced Morrigan and in general got along really well with my party in both games. I never actually did a full "proper" playthrough of DA2 (I only did one of DAO, when I first started at BioWare), though I tended to gravitate towards sarcastic Hawke and Isabela as a romance (Isabela is my favourite NPC in the DA universe).

I'm usually the hero type that tries to save the day, but when push comes to shove I am able to make hard decisions and if someone wrongs me I can let my emotions get the better of me (i.e. punching Admirals in ME3). Speaking of ME3, I chose destroy. Though it'd probably be easier to look up one of my rather lengthy posts detailing why I liked it as an option and why I thought it was actually emotionally powerful. I say this with the belief that I found the endings to ME3 disappointing too.


That being said, while the repetition can sap some of the fun, seeing some stuff for the first time can be really freaking awesome. Crafting for DA3 has me super giddy. There's my tease for this post

[Allan Schumacher]

Is this really so difficult to understand or have you all just decided to "gang up on the badguy" because you think I'm somehow "attacking" bioware?

You weren't attacking BioWare. You attacked the posters in this thread specifically when you stated they were just a bunch of maroons white knighting us.

You shouldn't be surprised that your posts in this thread end up seeing resistance as a result, similar to how you're now speaking up as you are feeling slighted.

I'm willing to chalk it up as a poor choice of words and thing people should just keep a cool head. I have no issues discussing the actual methods of how we experience content, if that's what you would like to do.

[Dave of Canada]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I'm usually the hero type that tries to save the day,

Dammit, Allan. I hate the idealist hero point of view, always never doing the ha-

but when push comes to shove I am able to make hard decisions

Dammit.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 30 septembre 2012 - 09:52 .

[Allan Schumacher]

For reference sake:

Isolde is dead, while Connor is alive