312 réponses à ce sujet

[Milan92]

No its not gonna suck. Something can only suck when it has a opening that creates vacuüm.

[Icinix]

Milan92 wrote...

No its not gonna suck. Something can only suck when it has a opening that creates vacuüm.

So...

We've gone from suck to blow?

[Milan92]

Icinix wrote...

Milan92 wrote...

No its not gonna suck. Something can only suck when it has a opening that creates vacuüm.

So...

We've gone from suck to blow?

Uhm no....

[Shevy]

Want it to suck? Why would I? I love the Dragon Age universe and a well made game like Origins would be perfect.

Expect it to suck? Kind of, because after DA II, the possibility is definitly there. So I advice you, DA team, to disappoint me in this expectation!

[Icinix]

Milan92 wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Milan92 wrote...

No its not gonna suck. Something can only suck when it has a opening that creates vacuüm.

So...

We've gone from suck to blow?

Uhm no....

Spaceballs quote.

[dancarrero]

ME3 was a really good game with definite flaws.It didnt live up to the hype and it didnt deserve the critical acclaim it received.It was a thumb in the eye of those of us that played the first two games from when they came out.It catered to the first person shooter crowd and abandoned the RPG fans to a secondary level.The endings were poor and left as many plot holes as those it closed.All in all it didnt deserve the hate it has received, either.Given my experience with the deep flaws of DA2 from when it came out, if it is as good as ME3 it would be a big step up.I'm hoping it exceeds ME3 quality and that Bioware has learned that it shouldnt make multiplayer  necessary for single player campaign.Only a fool wants DA3 to fail.Very few companies are making good single player RPGs.If you love that kind of game you want DA3 to be successful and huge.

Modifié par dancarrero, 20 octobre 2012 - 02:59 .

[TheChris92]

Hurbster wrote...

He also was head writer for DA2 as well, yes ? That plot .... wasn't so good.

He was also the lead writer of DA:O, should one forget.

As for the topic at hand. Given that I didn't dislike any of the previous 2 installments in this franchise I can't really say I'd want it to 'suck' at all.

Modifié par TheChris92, 20 octobre 2012 - 03:02 .

[legbamel]

deuce985 wrote...
Depends on who you're talking about...

This forum definitely has trolls.

I don't give a **** who owns Bioware. I'm going to support ANY dev that makes a great game. I don't care what publishing umbrella they sit under. I would hope everyone shares the same sentiment...

This.  I want to play a great game and I'm not going to punish myself by missing out on one because I'm mad at some company that owns another.  They are few enough that I'm not about to deprive myself of the ones that do come out, and BioWare has made most of my favorites.

EA publishes a lot of dreck I don't even bother trying, and that's fine with me.  Obviously, other people like them and if it keeps the company afloat so that BioWare can keep doing their thing I'm just as happy to let them.

ETA that I've been playing the heck out of SWTOR and enjoying it a great deal, so I've got lots of BioWare goodness to fill my gaming time between now and whenever DA3 is released.  That and full replays of the DA games to get just the perfect import make it much easier to be generous with my patience.  Take all the time you need, BioWare, and make something filled with role-playing wonderfulness, please.  

Modifié par legbamel, 20 octobre 2012 - 03:12 .

[jillabender]

Wozearly wrote…

People who loved the DA2 changes understandably don't want to see them destroyed by (what they often perceive as) a small minority of fans who didn't like them. Likewise, fans who had more fundamental gripes with DA2 than "too many recycled areas and wave combat" don't want to have their concerns ignored because (what they often perceive as) a small minority of fans loved the game.

I do get the sense that some fans worry a great deal that BioWare will change a game in ways they don't want because of feedback from fans whose preferences they don't share. When they don't like some of the changes made, their first inclination is to assume that BioWare changed the series at the whim of some other group of fans, at their expense.

I can't speak for BioWare, but from what David Gaider and other developers have said, it sounds to me as though they make decisions about game features on a case-by-case basis based on what they think worked or didn't work in previous games, and what they think will work most effectively in the next one.

I suspect that many fans prefer to believe that changes they dislike were somehow brought about by other fans (even though that's not likely to be the case) rather than the vision of the developers, because the alternative might mean admitting that the developers didn't necessarily like the same things about their previous games that they did – and that can be hard to swallow.

I very much doubt that wanting to cater specifically to a particular group of gamers plays any major role in their decisions – they're probably aware of which fans will probably like certain features, and which ones won't, but that's not the same thing. If they choose to implement a certain feature in the knowledge that some fans won't like it (something that's inevitable with any game), I doubt it's because they've decided to disregard the preferences of those fans as such – it's more likely that they've simply decided that certain ideas don't fit with their overall vision.

Even though it isn't always what I'd like to hear, I appreciate that the developers are honest about not being able to please everyone, and that they're candid enough to say things like "We'll do our best to make the most enjoyable game possible, but if 'x' is really important to your enjoyment, you might be disappointed." They're not always going to agree with our feedback, and they're not always in the position of being able to implement our feedback – and if they led us to believe otherwise, they would be doing us a disservice.

Modifié par jillabender, 19 décembre 2012 - 04:32 .

[SpEcIaLRyAn]

I just hope they bring back the RPG in Dragon Age. Bioware has made some of my favorite RPGs and I would like to be able to say when DA3 comes out that it was worth the money.

Modifié par SpEcIaLRyAn, 20 octobre 2012 - 03:40 .

[Aolbain]

dubble post.

Modifié par Aolbain, 20 octobre 2012 - 03:44 .

[Aolbain]

Aolbain wrote...

Aolbain wrote...

DarkKnightHolmes wrote...

No but not all of us are blind optimists.

Nor are all of us cynics that enyoj to dwell in misery and hate.

Rather be a cynic who'll end up surprised by a game rather than a optimist who will end up extremely disappointed.

I dont count myself as a cynic but bioware have yet to disappoint me in any major way. Bet each for his/her own I guess.

[LilyasAvalon]

Icinix wrote...

Milan92 wrote...

No its not gonna suck. Something can only suck when it has a opening that creates vacuüm.

So...

We've gone from suck to blow?

IDIDN'TTHINKDIRTYTHOUGHTS,ISWEAR!

Anyway, yes, I kind of do think people just... expect DA3 to suck, and kind of want it to, because, let's face it, who likes to be wrong? That doesn't necessarily mean that it will, but I'm personally not keeping my hopes up, EA is still publishing this after all...

[Terrorize69]

Gotta love the haters at times lol, "Derp derp BW/EA sucks durr and cause I hate it so much I will continue to devote my time to paying them attention and waiting with anticipation for their next game derp derp"

[XCelfa]

I really enjoy the community feel that this company maintains and especially the fact that I can follow the writers on twitter and be tossed a breadcrumb to puzzle over every now and again. I think sometimes that forum-goers forget that it's not just a company, though. It's a lot of people, individuals working together, and a lot of the things said on this forum are pretty offensive to those who make their living creatively and I understand, to a MUCH lesser extent, as someone that dabbles in graphic design and illustration for the occasional commission.

It'skind of baffling when you've made a product that someone [the client, or the audience] had a different "vision" of to begin with and they get irritated. But oftentimes, what the client wants does not always make sense. Sometimes it doesn't appeal to many other people. Sometimes it isn't economical. Sometimes it isn't linear. Sometimes... sometimes, it's just not pretty. There's a bucketful of reasons that some things just don't work, and it is not some random chucklehead on a forum's job to pick and choose. Bioware's job- that they have likely, individually, been educated on and trained for and have experience and are paid to do- is to decide these things...

Anyway. point being. If I'm designing a logo, I respect the input of someone that sells insurance for a living, but I don't have to take it. kwim

Modifié par XCelfa, 20 octobre 2012 - 04:09 .

[Adanu]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

FlamingBoy wrote...

MushroomMagic wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

I hope it ends up being the best crpg ever made. I doubt it will be, of course, but i am still having hopes.

As for EA getting hatred...its well deserved.

Dragon Age III still deserves a fair chance regardless of what people think of EA.  However, I do not think most fans will do that because they want Dragon Age III to suck because they want to see EA suffer not taking into consideration that it is Bioware who will suffer far worse.

honestly... its in all gamers interest if ea is wiped from the map and its actually worth losing, the now souless, studio bioware to achieve that aim

Hmmm, as a gamer, it'd certainly not be in my best interests to be unemployed as that'd certainly undermine my ability to purchase new games!

Jokes aside, wishing for me and my colleagues to become unemployed isn't really a productive perspective on these forums and I'd encourage those that want to see us burn to just move along since in the long run I can't see much productive coming out of sticking around.

I have no beefs with criticism (no game is perfect).  Criticism is okay and encouraged.  Coming around to tell me you wish I was out of a job because you think it's in your best interests as a gamer, not so much.

You misunderstood him. He didn't say he wishes you were out of a job. He says he wishes that EA would fail, and unfortunately that would also have the effect of breaking Bioware up if they are intertwined too much.

Considering how completely out of touch with reality the decision makers at EA seem to be, I'm forced to reluctantly agree. There's a reason they're almost universally hated.

[TheRealJayDee]

I was extremely hyped for DA2 and ME3 because of my love for the previous games, preordered the CEs for both games, and was pretty disappointed with both. I didn't intend to hate them, quite the opposite, especially concerning ME3, which should have been one of the greatest games ever.

I haven't really followed DA3 so far, because I honestly don't care that much about it and don't want to get too excited and hopeful again. I definitely don't want it to suck, I like the DA universe and want it to thrive. Because of DA2 I'm just not sure DA is taking a direction I want to follow. I'll wait until I've read user reviews after the game is released, and if it's good and to my liking I'll be delighted to visit Thedas again.

[LobselVith8]

hhh89 wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Some people read how the developers are following the same patterns as Dragon Age II for Inquisition - paraphrasing dialogue, auto-lines, the dialogue wheel, fixed companion armor, prohibiting the protagonist from being atheist - and they think it's a mistake. More than a few people disliked Dragon Age II. Some people also believe the developers are diverting the franchise from the appeal of Origins, which was made to appeal to old school fans.

Do you mean auto-dialogue? DA2 wasn't that bad, expecially in comparison of ME3. Considering how bad it was in ME3, I'd be fine with DA2-level of auto-dialogue (though I'd prefer to have the least quantity of it).
About the companion's armor, the concept they shown seemed different from DA2. Companions would've acced to various armours (which will not exclusive for that companion) which will have a different look for every companion, based on certain condition (a warrior being as GW, a Seeker or a Templar). While we don't know if this approach will be present in the game, or how much armour every companions will have, I don't think the concept is bad. If a companion have access to every armours the PC can (although restricted to his class, which I don't like much), but with a different look from the PC's armour, I think it'd be great. I don't have a problem with companions having a distint look, if they have access to various armours and that armours look differently from each others. 

I wasn't a fan of the approach taken in Dragon Age II when it came to the paraphrasing, the auto-lines, and the dialogue wheel. If I'm given dialogue options, I prefer the protagonist to say the dialogue I chose, rather than something entirely different. I never knew what Hawke was going to say, and it could veer off into entirely different directions than I anticipated. It often frustrated me, because choosing certain dialogue (such as Hawke discussing how he wanted to kill all the templars or his desire to overthrow the templars) was contradicted by later dialogue, which made Hawke come across as inconsistent and even insane.

The fixed personality traits, where Hawke spoke with the dominant personality tone, was religiously Andrastian, and spoke outside my control with the auto-lines, also bothered me. It made me feel like Hawke wasn't really my character.

There is also a lack of choice in the narrative, and the last two Dragon Age II DLCs (that were made after Mike Laidlaw's "Thank You" thread) leave me thinking that it'll be more of the same: the player is given a choice, and both choices end up with virtually the same conclusion. Hawke was overly passive; there were often times when the plot of Dragon Age II prevented me from having Hawke take certain action - he was prevented from killing Petrice when she admitted she was going to murder innocent people to start a religious war, he did nothing when two templars came to take Bethany away, he was prevented from doing anything about the possessed Warden when it was obvious Corypheus possessed them, and he did nothing for three years while Meredith became the de facto Viscount of Kirkwall.

The fixed companion armor doesn't seem to really make any sense. If the player is playing as a mage, but ends up getting excellent armor for a warrior or a rogue, the player is prevented from using this armor for his respective companions because they have fixed armor. In Origins, I could give Oghren the Legion of the Dead armor, I could give Sten the Juggernaut armor, and I could give Alistair the Dragonscale armor. I had choices in Origins, while I have none in Dragon Age II. Inquisition seems to be no different, with fixed companion armor, with no choice in giving them different armor that might be more efficient than the fixed armor they have.

[Palipride47]

Samudo wrote...

I don't understand this hatred of EA and other big publishers, if a game is good then a game is good, I don't give a rats ass on who is publishing it.

http://en.wikipedia....Electronic_Arts

Yeah, I got nervous reading it. 

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...

jillabender wrote...

Wozearly wrote…

People who loved the DA2 changes understandably don't want to see them destroyed by (what they often perceive as) a small minority of fans who didn't like them. Likewise, fans who had more fundamental gripes with DA2 than "too many recycled areas and wave combat" don't want to have their concerns ignored because (what they often perceive as) a small minority of fans loved the game.

I do get the sense that some fans worry a great deal that BioWare will change a game in ways they don't want because of feedback from fans whose preferences they don't share. When they don't like some of the changes made, their first inclination is to assume that BioWare changed the series at the whim of some other group of fans, at their expense.

I can't speak for BioWare, but from what David Gaider and other developers have said, it sounds to me as though they make decisions about game features on a case-by-case basis based on what they think worked or didn't work in previous games, and what they think will work most effectively in the next one.

I suspect that many fans prefer to believe that changes they dislike were somehow brought about by other fans (even though that's not likely to be the case) rather than the vision of the developers, because the alternative might mean admitting that the developers didn't necessarily like the same things about their previous games that they did – and that can be hard to swallow.

I very much doubt that wanting to cater specifically to a particular group of gamers plays any major role in their decisions – they're probably aware of which fans will probably like certain features, and which ones won't, but that's not the same thing. If they choose to implement a certain feature in the knowledge that some fans won't like it (something that's inevitable with any game), I doubt it's because they've decided to disregard the preferences of those fans as such – it's more likely that they've simply decided that certain ideas don't fit with their overall vision.

Even though it isn't always what I'd like to hear, I appreciate that the developers are honest about not being able to please everyone, and that they're candid enough to say things like "We'll do our best to make the most enjoyable game possible, but if 'x' is really important to your enjoyment, you might be disappointed." They're not always going to agree with our feedback, and they're not always in the position of being able to implement our feedback – and if they led us to believe otherwise, they would be doing us a disservice.

Great post .

Agree with what you say jilla. A dev cannot just cater to all the fans whims, it has to have his own view and plan for the game. If that plan works out it will show in the copies sold and as what Wozearly wrote in the reply you qouted the approval (or not) of people who played the game on sites like metacritics.

At PAX they did give some information about what they do want to change for DA3 compared for DA2. The thread that was opened for forumites to give their preferences and questions has been read and commented on and there are things that will change according to what David Gaider and Mike Laidlaw said back then. But as you say those were things that they had thought about themselves. The forum is a soundboard. At least imho, to check out if something will work out well or not. This does not mean that if the overall opinion is not very positive it will not be implemented in the game. The people on the forum are just a fraction of the total amount of people that buy and play the game.

Actually, understanding that it wasn't the COD fanboys that decided to add fetch quests or jRPG hack-n-slash (which I didn't like when I did the demo, but gulped down any nervousness because I didn't want to cancel my preorder so late) actually makes it easier for me to enjoy what is worth preserving in DA2.

When developers you respect put something in a game, you (at least, I) try to roll with the punches and play to understand it (if that makes sense) and sometimes, I end up liking prefering someone I thought I hated when I go back to DAO (the personality based persuasions are superior, imo, but I sure didn't like them on the first playthrough). It is easy to just be dismissive of whatever a develop put in a game and maybe why they did it when you think they did it at the behest of some 20-yr old COD frat douche who says "that's gay" way too much and crushes Bud cans on his head for lulz. 

[Realmzmaster]

Adanu wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

FlamingBoy wrote...

MushroomMagic wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

I hope it ends up being the best crpg ever made. I doubt it will be, of course, but i am still having hopes.

As for EA getting hatred...its well deserved.

Dragon Age III still deserves a fair chance regardless of what people think of EA.  However, I do not think most fans will do that because they want Dragon Age III to suck because they want to see EA suffer not taking into consideration that it is Bioware who will suffer far worse.

honestly... its in all gamers interest if ea is wiped from the map and its actually worth losing, the now souless, studio bioware to achieve that aim

Hmmm, as a gamer, it'd certainly not be in my best interests to be unemployed as that'd certainly undermine my ability to purchase new games!

Jokes aside, wishing for me and my colleagues to become unemployed isn't really a productive perspective on these forums and I'd encourage those that want to see us burn to just move along since in the long run I can't see much productive coming out of sticking around.

I have no beefs with criticism (no game is perfect).  Criticism is okay and encouraged.  Coming around to tell me you wish I was out of a job because you think it's in your best interests as a gamer, not so much.

You misunderstood him. He didn't say he wishes you were out of a job. He says he wishes that EA would fail, and unfortunately that would also have the effect of breaking Bioware up if they are intertwined too much.

Considering how completely out of touch with reality the decision makers at EA seem to be, I'm forced to reluctantly agree. There's a reason they're almost universally hated.

What is the sense is wishing a company would fail? You mean someone is wishing close to 8000 people go unemployed? 
The assumption here is that if EA fails somehow the IP's EA holds reverts back to the owners? The IPs remain as assets of the company to be sold at auction with no gurantee that any employees from Bioware would be brought on by the buying company. Also considering how long it takes in the coursts to end a company many of the Bioware employees may already be employed in other capacities.

Also not counting the ripple effect in the industry that it may have. A lot more studios dependent on the EA distribution network may go under.

Gamers may not like the way EA does business, but I do not wish for it to fail. I wish to see Bioware employees continue to be gainful employed making the games I like.

I liked  DA2 and the other Bioware games I have played since BG1. EA also has made or published  some of my favorite games over the years. Games which would have never seen the light of day from MULE to Archon (1 & 2), Dungeon Keeper,  and Zany Golf.

So I do not have a hate for EA. EA is a business. EA makes business decisions. I do not have to like the decisions, but I have no wish for the company to fail.

[EmperorSahlertz]

scyphozoa wrote...

Yeah, I hate the cynicism and pessimism I see on all game forums. Its not just Bioware, its the same on Bethesda forums and Blizzard forums and other big game forums.

Frankly, video game customers are often young, unemployed children or adolescents. They think the world revolves around entertaining them and if it doesn't, then they get bitter and vindictive.

It is pretty obnoxious behavior, but it is common throughout the game industry. People didn't like Diablo 3 so they hated on Blizzard, people rage over Skyrim bugs and spew venom at Bethesda. In general, the players seem to think that they need to be personally catered to, or else they will lash back at developers for not providing adequate entertainment.

It would be nice to fast forward time 5-10 years so these people could mature out of their vindictive behavior, but frankly, selling video games to millions of adolescents means that having juvenile and vindictive customers is an occupational hazard that is never going away.

But but but... You don't understand, if I have spend 60$ on a game, the developers are obliged to entertain me with their product. And If their product doesn't live up to my very specific and unique expectations, it is most certainly because the developers and their publishers have actively tried to sabotage my enjoyment value. Right?

[DarkKnightHolmes]

scyphozoa wrote...

Yeah, I hate the cynicism and pessimism I see on all game forums. Its not just Bioware, its the same on Bethesda forums and Blizzard forums and other big game forums.

Frankly, video game customers are often young, unemployed children or adolescents. They think the world revolves around entertaining them and if it doesn't, then they get bitter and vindictive.

It is pretty obnoxious behavior, but it is common throughout the game industry. People didn't like Diablo 3 so they hated on Blizzard, people rage over Skyrim bugs and spew venom at Bethesda. In general, the players seem to think that they need to be personally catered to, or else they will lash back at developers for not providing adequate entertainment.

It would be nice to fast forward time 5-10 years so these people could mature out of their vindictive behavior, but frankly, selling video games to millions of adolescents means that having juvenile and vindictive customers is an occupational hazard that is never going away.

Yes because all those adolescents and unemployed people were the one's who gave $80,000 in that ME3 chairty thing and gave money to send all those cup cake to Bioware's office. Damn those teens and unemployed people with all their credit cards and money to waste away.

/sarcasm

Modifié par DarkKnightHolmes, 20 octobre 2012 - 07:20 .

[Palipride47]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

But but but... You don't understand, if I have spend 60$ on a game, the developers are obliged to entertain me with their product. And If their product doesn't live up to my very specific and unique expectations, it is most certainly because the developers and their publishers have actively tried to sabotage my enjoyment value. Right?

I KNEW IT!!!!! THATS WHY THEY MADE ANDERS GAY AND ISABELA DARK!!!! *rage*