135 réponses à ce sujet

[EricHVela]

John Epler wrote...

Oh hey, someone's misrepresenting the CoD statement again.

Time to take a shot.

For the record - the statement was, essentially, 'some of the people who almost exclusively play CoD games might enjoy the kinds of games we make and just not know it, so we'd like to entice them in by showing them what we offer'.

But, you know, if you'd rather say 'THEY'RE JUST GOING TO MAKE CALL OF DRAGON AGE AND IGNORE US', that's certainly an interpretation of reality you're allowed to make.

Yet, how do you entice them with something that hasn't yet interested them?

If the commonality that DA and CoD share wasn't enough, what will it take? What does DA lose of its former self to appeal to them?

That's what's got people worried.

In the end, DA will become what it needs to survive or it will not. (It's not unlike Disney. Without Eisner's unpopular influence, there wouldn't be a Disney for today's kids to enjoy.)

Modifié par ReggarBlane, 04 octobre 2012 - 05:59 .

[Vandicus]

ReggarBlane wrote...

John Epler wrote...

Oh hey, someone's misrepresenting the CoD statement again.

Time to take a shot.

For the record - the statement was, essentially, 'some of the people who almost exclusively play CoD games might enjoy the kinds of games we make and just not know it, so we'd like to entice them in by showing them what we offer'.

But, you know, if you'd rather say 'THEY'RE JUST GOING TO MAKE CALL OF DRAGON AGE AND IGNORE US', that's certainly an interpretation of reality you're allowed to make.

Yet, how do you entice them with something they hasn't yet interested them?

If the commonality that DA and CoD share wasn't enough, what will it take? What does DA lose of its former self to appeal to them?

That's what's got people worried.

In the end, DA will become what it needs to survive. (It's not unlike Disney. Without Eisner's unpopular influence, there wouldn't be a Disney for today's kids to enjoy.)

Have you actually, you know, read the quote? Why aren't you complaining about the possibility of enticing AC or Fallout players by emulating elements of that?

Really the idea behind the statement was something along the lines of  "CoD, Fallout, and AC all have rpg elements that people enjoy. We might be able to use that to get them."

[Maclimes]

Vandicus wrote...

Maclimes wrote...

John Epler wrote...
So what I'm hearing is that you want Ewoks.

Ewoks who follow the Qun.

As a member of the Episode 1 ending fanbase I propose gungan blood mages instead.

[EricHVela]

Vandicus wrote...

ReggarBlane wrote...

John Epler wrote...

Oh hey, someone's misrepresenting the CoD statement again.

Time to take a shot.

For the record - the statement was, essentially, 'some of the people who almost exclusively play CoD games might enjoy the kinds of games we make and just not know it, so we'd like to entice them in by showing them what we offer'.

But, you know, if you'd rather say 'THEY'RE JUST GOING TO MAKE CALL OF DRAGON AGE AND IGNORE US', that's certainly an interpretation of reality you're allowed to make.

Yet, how do you entice them with something they hasn't yet interested them?

If the commonality that DA and CoD share wasn't enough, what will it take? What does DA lose of its former self to appeal to them?

That's what's got people worried.

In the end, DA will become what it needs to survive. (It's not unlike Disney. Without Eisner's unpopular influence, there wouldn't be a Disney for today's kids to enjoy.)

Have you actually, you know, read the quote? Why aren't you complaining about the possibility of enticing AC or Fallout players by emulating elements of that?

Really the idea behind the statement was something along the lines of  "CoD, Fallout, and AC all have rpg elements that people enjoy. We might be able to use that to get them."

If the commonality that DA and CoD share wasn't enough, what will it take? What does DA lose of its former self to appeal to them?

That's what's got people worried.

[Vandicus]

ReggarBlane wrote...

Vandicus wrote...

ReggarBlane wrote...

John Epler wrote...

Oh hey, someone's misrepresenting the CoD statement again.

Time to take a shot.

For the record - the statement was, essentially, 'some of the people who almost exclusively play CoD games might enjoy the kinds of games we make and just not know it, so we'd like to entice them in by showing them what we offer'.

But, you know, if you'd rather say 'THEY'RE JUST GOING TO MAKE CALL OF DRAGON AGE AND IGNORE US', that's certainly an interpretation of reality you're allowed to make.

Yet, how do you entice them with something they hasn't yet interested them?

If the commonality that DA and CoD share wasn't enough, what will it take? What does DA lose of its former self to appeal to them?

That's what's got people worried.

In the end, DA will become what it needs to survive. (It's not unlike Disney. Without Eisner's unpopular influence, there wouldn't be a Disney for today's kids to enjoy.)

Have you actually, you know, read the quote? Why aren't you complaining about the possibility of enticing AC or Fallout players by emulating elements of that?

Really the idea behind the statement was something along the lines of  "CoD, Fallout, and AC all have rpg elements that people enjoy. We might be able to use that to get them."

If the commonality that DA and CoD share wasn't enough, what will it take? What does DA lose of its former self to appeal to them?

That's what's got people worried.

So your conclusion, based off a statement that they were attempting to market to people who enjoyed rpg elements in games that don't self-identify as rpgs, is that they will change DA3 to attract these markets?

Please tell me how they would go about making Modern Fallout Creed.

[EricHVela]

Vandicus wrote...

ReggarBlane wrote...

Vandicus wrote...

ReggarBlane wrote...

John Epler wrote...

Oh hey, someone's misrepresenting the CoD statement again.

Time to take a shot.

For the record - the statement was, essentially, 'some of the people who almost exclusively play CoD games might enjoy the kinds of games we make and just not know it, so we'd like to entice them in by showing them what we offer'.

But, you know, if you'd rather say 'THEY'RE JUST GOING TO MAKE CALL OF DRAGON AGE AND IGNORE US', that's certainly an interpretation of reality you're allowed to make.

Yet, how do you entice them with something they hasn't yet interested them?

If the commonality that DA and CoD share wasn't enough, what will it take? What does DA lose of its former self to appeal to them?

That's what's got people worried.

In the end, DA will become what it needs to survive. (It's not unlike Disney. Without Eisner's unpopular influence, there wouldn't be a Disney for today's kids to enjoy.)

Have you actually, you know, read the quote? Why aren't you complaining about the possibility of enticing AC or Fallout players by emulating elements of that?

Really the idea behind the statement was something along the lines of  "CoD, Fallout, and AC all have rpg elements that people enjoy. We might be able to use that to get them."

If the commonality that DA and CoD share wasn't enough, what will it take? What does DA lose of its former self to appeal to them?

That's what's got people worried.

So your conclusion, based off a statement that they were attempting to market to people who enjoyed rpg elements in games that don't self-identify as rpgs, is that they will change DA3 to attract these markets?

Please tell me how they would go about making Modern Fallout Creed.

How many more "common threads" do those games have with each other that they do not currently share with DA?

If the commonality that DA and CoD share wasn't enough, what will it take? What does DA lose of its former self to appeal to them?

That's what's got people worried.

[Allan Schumacher]

The important thing to remember is that even if fans are relatively unified in being upset at something, their reasons for feeling that way may not be.

Some of championed the kickstarters of PE and WL2 as being "true RPG experiences" and whatnot, but I stopped frequenting the WL2 forums because of all the bickering over what truly made Wasteland (and to an extent Fallout) a great game and how it should do. I'm seeing it with Project Eternity too.

There's this idea that people have that there's consensus: people want an Infinity Engine style game, and the reasons must be for the same reasons that I want one. Except they often aren't.

I saw this a lot with the Mass Effect 3 endings as well, where people would always state "we want these specific changes" and so forth.

Fan feedback can be useful, but distilling a consensus can be problematic. If you have 50% that think we should have a dialogue wheel and 50% that don't, it's tough to reconcile. (Note that simply providing an option to have both in this case is actually very time intensive for QA, so it's not a cheap/free thing to implement).

More on this later but I'm off to lunch!

[Vandicus]

ReggarBlane wrote...

How many more "common threads" do those games have with each other that they do not currently share with DA?

If the commonality that DA and CoD share wasn't enough, what will it take? What does DA lose of its former self to appeal to them?

That's what's got people worried.

We've been given no statement to indicate that they're trying to emulate any of the aforementioned games, only that their fanbase was being marketed to. Also we aren't aware of the market demographic involved in DA2 sales. For all we know they might've picked up a few hundred thousand players or more from those particular markets.

I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that making a game more similar(putting it in competition with) another game is something that they would pursue. As it stands DA is different enough from all three of those games such that when buying it, its not a one or the other choice(unlike Battlefield 3 and CoD, where most players play one or the other because they're substitute products). To attempt to make it into a substitute product for any one of those games, let alone all three simultaneously, has no visibile financial benefit.

Not to say that there's nothing useful to be drawn from the various games. Missions for minions from AC could fit well into the Inquisition plotline. Prestiging from CoD(aka NG+ in rpgs) is something that fans have been asking for DA. I'm sure Fallout has something good too, but I've never really read reviews of it nor have I played it(AC is the only one of these 3 that I played).

[EricHVela]

Whatever DA becomes, I'll accept it on that game's own merits and not the merits of previous DA games.

What we're seeing are episodes similar to other entertainment media. Some episodes are good. Some are bad. Many of them feature different writers and directors.

This one will feature differences just as the other two did.

Yet, it seems that people will not ignore the reasons behind the differences, especially if the changes will force them to face something unknown.

DA3I is an unknown, but it's not worth discounting because of that. If anything, it should be more intriguing. Yet, people fear to lose what they love when it changes because of other, new people that do not share their collective interests. They want the second DA or DA:O. They don't want what it'll take to appeal to the new crowds.

Me? It's fine. It'll change. I'm merely stating what is causing the fear (and resistance) among many around here. It's understandable.

[Medhia Nox]

Bioware is an excellent company - though I believe their "Falling Actions" need a LOT of work.

The endings of both Dragon Age 2 - and Mass Effect 3 - were, in my opinion, technically poor in a storytelling sense.

Now - I believe that Bioware should listen to what I have to say on the matter - but I don't want them to obey me.

I believe that video games have the chance of being the first truly interactive art form (the first of its kind in human history) - I also believe it's far away from that - if it's even a goal. But Bioware has touched on greatness to be sure.

But - like ALL art forms - they do not ask their audience about how to create their art. An artist will take criticism - an artist will take suggestion - and all artists crave limitations (which spawn creativity) - but no artist is going to be told how to do their art by a novice (which we all are - at the very best).

I'm disappointed that it seems some of the Bioware staff have buckled to the heavy criticisms of their latest works - for as any artist will attest - only those who persevere beyond the critics will go on to make great art. (Again - if that's even the goal. Another goal is entertainment - which is NOT the same.)

SO - listening good - obeying bad.

[ianvillan]

Medhia Nox wrote...

Bioware is an excellent company - though I believe their "Falling Actions" need a LOT of work.

The endings of both Dragon Age 2 - and Mass Effect 3 - were, in my opinion, technically poor in a storytelling sense.

Now - I believe that Bioware should listen to what I have to say on the matter - but I don't want them to obey me.

I believe that video games have the chance of being the first truly interactive art form (the first of its kind in human history) - I also believe it's far away from that - if it's even a goal. But Bioware has touched on greatness to be sure.

But - like ALL art forms - they do not ask their audience about how to create their art. An artist will take criticism - an artist will take suggestion - and all artists crave limitations (which spawn creativity) - but no artist is going to be told how to do their art by a novice (which we all are - at the very best).

I'm disappointed that it seems some of the Bioware staff have buckled to the heavy criticisms of their latest works - for as any artist will attest - only those who persevere beyond the critics will go on to make great art. (Again - if that's even the goal. Another goal is entertainment - which is NOT the same.)

SO - listening good - obeying bad.

What about Origins it seems that Bioware buckled to criticisms of the game and changed most of there artistic vision for a totally different one, you said only thoses who persevere beyond the critics will go on to make great art so that could be the reason that DA2 was not as well recieved as Origins was.

[shedevil3001]

da2 ending was bad ? i didnt think it was bad, it wasnt mind blowing like dao or the first 2 mass effects but it certainly wasnt bad, it didnt have much of a different outcome depending on your choices, both lead to pretty much the same thing, but it was done well, the only thing i found silly was the bit with orsino, that made no sense when siding with mages, as for listening to the fans, bioware do listen to the community, but if they used everything everyone asked for in their game, well it would need a super computer to run it, and the cost would be scary, the best bioware can do is if they see some useful ideas that stand out, they could possibly use some, then again some people are still going to complain no matter what, thats just the way it goes in the gaming community, you cant make everyone happy

[Medhia Nox]

@shedevil3001: You're aware that you're an observer to the important events at the end of DA 2 right?

You're aware the game severely railroads you into a desired outcome yes?

I'd personally add "Hawke Deserverse a Better Ending" to your little message.

====

@ianvillain: Perhaps I should have said only those who persevere "can" go on to make great art.

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

daaaav wrote...

Umm, what precisely are you advocating they take from fable?

Dont be so quick to dismiss the Fable series as completely worthless, sure the Fable games will never be considered among the best CRPGs ever made but just because you dont like a game doesnt mean you should blind yourself from any wisdom the game has to offer.

[rapscallioness]

yes, they should listen to fans. Of course not everything, but they really do need to know when something is not working.

That guy at Blizzard--the VP? I think? said something about devs and creative vision and how that can't really be...reconciled..with such varying views as you find from fans.

But! the thing is, creative vision, or no, you need and must have feed back. You cannot live in a creative bubble. You have to make sure that what you're envisioning is actually being effectively communicated to your audience.

That goes for the whole team and creative vision. They all have an idea about how it's supposed to look and come out, so it's like their brain fills in the missing info. Then the audience sees it, without benefit of knowing anything that's going on, and it makes no sense to the audience.

Devs need to know what new/old features are working for the fans. They need to know what mechanics may not be working smoothly; or are confusing; or silly.

What I'm really curious about is if any fan suggestions made it into DA2?

[NovaBlastMarketing]

Blair Brown wrote...

John Epler wrote...

NovaBlastMarketing wrote...

Well if  they don't  listen  we will get  another ending  like ME3. I Guess It  is more of a matter of which  fans do you listen to ?  

 I have made my views clear  and they are contrary to others .

I can not  really answer that question because there are people  on here  that  I hope Bioware listens to  including myself  and there are some  I really wish I  could take the delete button to.

I am sure there are those who feel the same way about me .

On a side  note I don't know why people bash DA2 in some ways  i enjoyed it better than  origins they  are both  good games.

Although  I do think the  writing team needs to watch Return of the Jedi again... that's a Proper way to do an ending.

So what I'm hearing is that you want Ewoks.

 ....i want ewoks. 

Ewoks are  uber cool !! ...archer or mage mabey?


........ .But As I am sure you are aware  was  not  the point I was getting at ... ,,,on a serious note ... really  watch  Return of the Jedi  from the death of the emperor   to the end  again  and then  watch t he end  of  DA2 and ME3.... see a difference here ?  

Jedi  ending        Your  endings..........

Modifié par NovaBlastMarketing, 04 octobre 2012 - 09:18 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

The important thing to remember is that even if fans are relatively unified in being upset at something, their reasons for feeling that way may not be.

Some of championed the kickstarters of PE and WL2 as being "true RPG experiences" and whatnot, but I stopped frequenting the WL2 forums because of all the bickering over what truly made Wasteland (and to an extent Fallout) a great game and how it should do. I'm seeing it with Project Eternity too.

There's this idea that people have that there's consensus: people want an Infinity Engine style game, and the reasons must be for the same reasons that I want one. Except they often aren't.

I saw this a lot with the Mass Effect 3 endings as well, where people would always state "we want these specific changes" and so forth.

Fan feedback can be useful, but distilling a consensus can be problematic. If you have 50% that think we should have a dialogue wheel and 50% that don't, it's tough to reconcile. (Note that simply providing an option to have both in this case is actually very time intensive for QA, so it's not a cheap/free thing to implement).

More on this later but I'm off to lunch!

Too many cooks spoil the broth as they say. Solution, only listen to moi.

Personally I think most discussion on major elements have already been decided about how Bioware will create DA3 at this stage. Based on feedback recieved after DA2's initial release and DLC's. I imagine only the minor details are actually open to discussion that could result in change but all the major factors have already been decided, whatever those decisions may have been.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 04 octobre 2012 - 08:42 .

[Iakus]

John Epler wrote...

NovaBlastMarketing wrote...

Well if  they don't  listen  we will get  another ending  like ME3. I Guess It  is more of a matter of which  fans do you listen to ?  

 I have made my views clear  and they are contrary to others .

I can not  really answer that question because there are people  on here  that  I hope Bioware listens to  including myself  and there are some  I really wish I  could take the delete button to.

I am sure there are those who feel the same way about me .

On a side  note I don't know why people bash DA2 in some ways  i enjoyed it better than  origins they  are both  good games.

Although  I do think the  writing team needs to watch Return of the Jedi again... that's a Proper way to do an ending.

So what I'm hearing is that you want Ewoks.

Ewoks are I price I'm willing to pay...

[Kail Ashton]

yes & No, they should listen to our unified cries of FREAKING GAME RAGE over DA2's bull, which to biowares credit the DA2 dlc & the "if we can derpity derpitz into DA3 we'll do this" stuff, they understand what to do to not ****** us the hell off this time, maybe >__>;

Conversly they should NOT listen to the majority of fan sugestions for a few reasons, 1 - there's some technical legaly sorta issues with use'n the proposed ideas of others without compensation or credits, how technical i can't say 2- the majority of sugestions are based on what THAT person wants, not the gaming fan base, sugestions primarily focus on selfish, self entitled "i know better then everyone else despite accomplishing nothing to prove it" types, they don't and can't think of the whole and when you need to ship 2 million copies to break even, that's a guarenteed retail death (i could write a book about japanese game leads who did similar and failed amazingly, sega in particular) this mentality works for niche indie stuff primarily

[Savber100]

John Epler wrote...

Oh hey, someone's misrepresenting the CoD statement again.

Time to take a shot.

For the record - the statement was, essentially, 'some of the people who almost exclusively play CoD games might enjoy the kinds of games we make and just not know it, so we'd like to entice them in by showing them what we offer'.

But, you know, if you'd rather say 'THEY'RE JUST GOING TO MAKE CALL OF DRAGON AGE AND IGNORE US', that's certainly an interpretation of reality you're allowed to make.

Bioware's PR really should comment about that when you market DA3... The whole "RPG are not revelant" and other miscommunicated thoughts did not really endear Bioware to the gaming community. 

[Darth Death]

ReggarBlane wrote...

Whatever DA becomes, I'll accept it on that game's own merits and not the merits of previous DA games.

I feel this mentality is a cheap tactic to give undeserved credit to a product for the sake of praises. I don't mean to insult you by any means, so please don't take offense, but I believe a sequel should always be judge by what its predecessor had established. That's where progression is most evident to the audience to determine a good secondary product. Without that, progression & innovation will be reduce to vague terms. It's not unfair to compare DA2 or DA3 (when it comes out) to Origins since after all, they do take place in the same world & is made by the same company. I'll evaluate BioWare's progression by the games that made them who they are, & what decisions that follow. 

[Dragoonlordz]

I think all games should be judged on their own merits, but they should be open to comparison to other games specially prequels. It can be judged a good game despite not being as good as the one before or as good as the one after etc.

[Sejborg]

John Epler wrote...

Oh hey, someone's misrepresenting the CoD statement again.

Time to take a shot.

For the record - the statement was, essentially, 'some of the people who almost exclusively play CoD games might enjoy the kinds of games we make and just not know it, so we'd like to entice them in by showing them what we offer'.

But, you know, if you'd rather say 'THEY'RE JUST GOING TO MAKE CALL OF DRAGON AGE AND IGNORE US', that's certainly an interpretation of reality you're allowed to make.

What a funny sentiment. The games are nothing alike.  Sounds like a really good strategy though.

[DarkKnightHolmes]

I hope the people saying "I judge a game on it's own merit and not it's prequel" have never said "COD sucks because they're all the same every year".

[Darth Death]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

I think all games should be judged on their own merits, but they should be open to comparison to other games specially prequels. It can be judged a good game despite not being as good as the one before or as good as the one after etc.

Most things are judged by what came before: Children, adults, cars, graphics cards, movies, games, music, etc. Founding the goodies are humanly instinctive. We recognizes the foundation & increases the expectation. When a game is being reviewed, I want to know every single significant con & pro coexisting with that video game. If the game is a sequel, then I expect no hidden information from its predecessor. I want it all hanging out like a 600lbs woman trying to fit into conventional pantyhose. Everything must be taken into consideration for a healthy,competent opinion or review to have any profound value in my eyes.   

Modifié par Darth Death, 04 octobre 2012 - 11:00 .