14 réponses à ce sujet

[marktcameron]

I would rather you would cater to one group so it doesn't end up being like resident evil 6

[Allan Schumacher]

Just as an observation, I think a game like Baldur's Gate 2 appeals to a wide range of people, and I think we see some of it as some of the discussions between Project Eternity fans that disagree what it means to capture the spirit of the Infinity Engine games.

[Allan Schumacher]

BG2 even though it had mass appeal for it time was never something other then a bunch of people trying to make a great game, less politics and ect(the nature of the industry has obviously changed). This isnt to say that you guys dont do this now, but I doubt there was near as much "focus testing" and ect.

I don't know for certain what happened during BG2's development, so I can't really comment unfortunately.

I just used it as an example because it's typically considered the shining example and often apex of BioWare's gaming library, but when one person discusses it I find often there's an assumption regarding consensus over what makes it great. (I go into much more detail in the Project Eternity forum on the Off Topic board. Don't want to go too off topic but I did want to clarify why I used the example).

[Allan Schumacher]

The passive aggressiveness isn't necessary.

If you feel our games are nothing more than railroading with a linear story and you're convinced that that is what we're intent on focusing on, I'm not getting the impression that you're actually that interested in having any sort of discussion but rather have a bone to pick.

[Allan Schumacher]

It's one thing to not like the direction that the company has gone. Coming in with a snide remark is counterproductive and makes us prone to ignoring commentary from posters that do it a lot in future interactions (simply because it's not worth getting myself frustrated over).

State what you want in the upcoming game and the thing you did and did not like in previous games in one thing.


I know I've seen posters on this board that say the only game they like is BG1/2 and they hang around hoping that we'll go back to that and want to be a voice for it, which is fine. But if you're hoping for that and are bitter because we aren't doing it and then manifesting that bitterness in snarky way, it's way less productive and often just outright adversarial.

[David Gaider]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...
On a serious note, I think it's difficult to remain confident in Dragon Age 3 after watching the PAX panel. You guys addressed some of the key issues with DA2, but failed to say what people wanted to hear: less like DA2, more like Origins.

All the 'in defense of DA2' Mike Laidlaw interviews and articles out there certainly don't help. It's one thing to take pride in your work, but it's quite another to claim that it's great and that people just don't get it. When a game needs to be defended by one of it's lead designers, it's not a good game.

Mike said that we will end up somewhere between DAO and DA2. Why some people would interpret that as "oh, so you're going back to DAO style then?" I'm not really sure. Perhaps because they want it to? If you intend to interpret us believing DA2's direction was a good thing even if there were parts of it that need work or even a complete rethinking as "DA2 was awesome and everybody loved it"... that's not really going to help your argument. Nor is "every fany hated DA2", as that's also not true.

In the end, DA3 will have elements of both DAO and DA2. Yes, it may have elements of DA2 you think we should just abandon. It is definitely not going to go back to everything that DAO had. If that's a deal-breaker for you right there, then there you go. If you would prefer to wait until we show you what we have in mind, or come back once that's happened, that's great too. Undoubtedly not everyone will be happy with every single choice we're making for DA3, but that's rather inevitable at this point considering all the different opinions even here on the forums (as much as some people try to claim that there's a consensus).

And... is it frustrating to keep hearing that? I imagine so. Everyone wants to know RIGHT NOW. But you're likely going to be waiting a while for more info.

Modifié par David Gaider, 04 octobre 2012 - 06:12 .

[David Gaider]

Stippling wrote...
I understand and respect this, and I know that most companies keep their cards close until it's time to reveal. BUT (and perhaps I interpretted the message poorly) I was under the impression from the rhetoric presented  to us from Bioware was one of community interaction. I thought it was going to be more like, "here's what we're working on, how does it look so far?".

We will get to that point-- probably in the form of developer diaries and so forth. Until that point, discussions with the community are limited to things we've already revealed, which are very few. Ideas presented here by fans may also influence us, but that depends both on how reasonably they're presented and how fundamental the idea is to the design we already have. We don't expect you to know which is which, of course, unless we come in and tell you so. And fair enough on that point.

And, like I said, we get that people want to hear more. Some people really do seem to take the stance of "it is obviously going to be like this until you tell me otherwise"... or seem to suffer from the notion that angry demands will make us more amenable to make the game more for them. And if we're not making it for them, it's noted with despair that this must be because we don't care about them as a group and want "the CoD crowd" (sic).

We know that the crowd here on our forums is not the majority of DA's fanbase. That's also not a big deal. This is the crowd that is willing to offer us feedback, which is useful-- the so-called "silent majority" is simply silent and neither you or I know exactly what they want (and it undoubtedly isn't the same thing for all of them as it isn't the same thing for everyone here). So we will show you more of our cards in due course... I'm simply suggesting that people take a breather and stick to saying what they personally would like to see. It's perfectly fine if you're not speaking for "everyone" or trying to. You don't need to play amateur economist to convince us that your opinions are valid.

Modifié par David Gaider, 04 octobre 2012 - 07:51 .

[Allan Schumacher]

ianvillan wrote...

The devs seem fine to mention features of DA2 that are returning, but are quiet about any Origins features that might be coming back.

Before DA2 was released we heard how it would have all the best of Origins, now Bioware says how the next game will have elements of both games and will mention DA2 systems returning but no Origins systems, it makes me wonder what Origin features Bioware think were any good and if DA2 already had everything that was good about Origins already what is left to add.

Part of this is actually in an effort to help inform you guys so you can manage your expectations.

If there were groups of fans adamantly talking about how they just hated some element of DAO that we were definitely going to put in for DA3, there's a bit more incentive to talk about it just as an "FYI" so that you aren't punched in the gut when a month before release we say "Oh yeah, this other feature is back in now too."

If you'd prefer, we could keep dead silent about what we've decided on some of the controversial hot topics from DA2, only for you to find out about the fact that they're still in when you actually start playing the game.


I'd rather not go into overhype mode at this point (when we haven't even really shown something) while at the same time being straight up and honest with the fanbase that some of the divisive issues for DA2 that groups here speak out against are still going to be in.

If DA3 turns out to be an amazingly awesome game that ianvillain loves, I'd much rather he start out cynical and skeptical with no uncertain expectations about some features he may not care for, and then as more information comes out (and more decisions finalized) ianvillain goes "Hmmm, maybe I'll pick up this game after all.  Some of this stuff does seem pretty neat."

It doesn't do any fan any good if we are evasive about some of these answers because then it just comes off like we're trying to sell it purely on the potential that it might be different, provide a false hope, only to have you be disappointed because the feature is still present.

[Allan Schumacher]

DuskWarden wrote...

ReggarBlane wrote...

I still find the CoD statement to be rather telling. Folks playing CoD aren't even thinking of DA. How are you supposed to get their attention with a product that hasn't held their interest previously?

I play COD, I've bought all of them since COD3 and I still play MW2 online multiplayer and BO zombies. I think they're great fun. I'm also a massive fan of DA, all the FOs, NWN, TES and a couple of MMOs. The two markets are not mutually exclusive. They aren't even two separate markets. If a COD players wants to play a game like COD, guess what they do. Play COD. The idea of streamlining your game to appeal to another audience is silly.

To be fair, looking at it from another perspective, there are games that I play simply because they DO have RPG elements.  I played the first Gran Turismo simply because I liked the progression system of the game which I considered to be similar to many things I like in RPGs.  I felt that Deus Ex (arguably an RPG anyways) and System Shock 2 (same deal) were great games that started to genre blur FPS with RPG.

I'm eagerly awaiting NBA 2k13 since the "MyCareer" mode is basically an RPG sports game.  Even a game like NOLF 2 was enhanced simply by having elements of character progression to allow me to differentiate playthroughs and this idea that I'm defining a character that becomes more badass as I play the game.


Some of these games (NBA 2k13 in particular) are games I wouldn't pick up if said feature didn't exist at all.

[Allan Schumacher]

marktcameron wrote...
sorry but you don't make any sense at all no one buys a game because it has a little bit of  rpg elements in it.

Are you insinuating that I am picking up NBA 2k13 for some other reason?  (Because that doesn't make any sense at all)

Or do you feel that I do not find those games I listed superior because of said RPG features, and that they would have been lacking without them?


With respect to NBA 2k13, I simply would not purchase the game if it's MyCareer mode did not exist, however.

It's a great basketball game, but in general I don't find sports games worth my time as much anymore unless there's some sort of MyPlayer/Be A Pro type mode (or Be a GM, but 2k's Association mode just isn't quite my cup of tea).

[Allan Schumacher]

To pour gasoline on the fire:

I have actually purchased games I wouldn't have (Saints Row The Third) simply because it had a co-op mode!

The game by myself just doesn't appeal to me. But playing it with my best friend leads to some freaking hilarious moments that we share. And some awesome moments.

My favourite was when there was a mission that we needed to assassinate some guy, and the cover was that I would pick him up as a helicopter pilot and he'd come out to the helipad. So I went in the civilian chopper and he came walking out, as my friend hid just over the ledge in an attack helicopter.

When the guy got into my helicopter, I got out and sprinted to the edge, base jumping off, as my friend came up in the helicopter and rocketed the entire helipad into oblivion. I am very sad we didn't actually record it for others to see.


I would have loved to see the look on that NPC's face XD

[Allan Schumacher]

marktcameron wrote...

Yea but many people would pick it up if MyCareer mode did not exist its  not the features but the game it self and the target audience its intended for.

I think you're being inconsistent in how you're applying this.


I've stated straight up that 2k13 had gained a sale simply by adding this feature (earlier you stated that "no one" does this).  You're correct that many people would pick it up if MyCareer mode did not exist.

But given how they have only continued to grow the career mode more and more each of the last 3 seasons, I don't know if I'd say that I'm not necessarily a part of their target audience.

I'm sure they'd be quite understanding if I didn't purchase the game because they cut ou the MyCareer mode, but it's definitely a feature that draws in people that might otherwise not purchase the game.


There are plenty of good games that I don't buy, simply because they do not have features that appeal to me.  With MyCareer mode, NBA 2k13 is a game that has a feature that appeals to me.  Yes, I'd still not buy the game if the basketball mechanics itself was crap (though it's not perfect by any means) because the gameplay wouldn't be satisfactory and would take away from my experience playing MyCareer mode.


The ideas of character progression can certainly be an element that tips the scale for whether or not I do or do not purchase a game.  I don't buy games simply because they have character progression (there's a lot of games I just don't like), so you're right in that simply possessing an RPG like feature isn't enough to purchase the game.

But has anyone actually argued otherwise?  I must admit I'm starting to get lost with the direction of this conversation since I certainly wasn't indicating that I would buy ANY game simply because it had some RPG elements.

[Allan Schumacher]

Note: IMO attempting to define what an RPG must or must not be is not productive, since the quotation given is so unbelievably open to interpretation that it tends to not really go anywhere.

I'd rather this thread not get derailed THAT far.

[John Epler]

marktcameron, this is a discussion board.

Part of a discussion involves giving other people's opinions more of a chance than 'NOPE YOU'RE WRONG'. If you're not willing to do that, then I'd ask you recuse yourself from the thread.

[Allan Schumacher]

I think Vandicus was just ensuring Godwin's Law was achieved since thread closure was "imminent."

In any case, things are getting a bit off topic now. So feel free to brings things back on course