20 réponses à ce sujet

[Farbautisonn]

Im asking this question because:

I would like to know. I think it would be interesting to hear from the dev team and the writers, what, if anything, they learned from DA2 (everything in between) to ME3. I want to know how precisely you plan to avoid the critizism/discourse, that followed these games. I am genuinely interested. There must be some things you learned, some things you will not do, some things you will do again and expand upon.

But mostly I want to know because, whilst I am critical, I do want DA3 to succeed for you guys.

[Fiddzz]

Farbautisonn wrote...

Maclimes wrote...

Watch one of the panels they did, in which the lead developers specifically mention the lessons they learned from previous games, especially DA2.

Here's the PAX Panel: 

And here's another small panel from the NYCC:

There. OP's question actually answered.

Nope. Not answered. What I got out of that was alot of noncommital "Might" and "watch us". Whilst I really and truely appreciate the latter bit, its not reassuring given the recent history. I simply do not trust Bioware to deliver, despite their wellmeaning words.

I know that the DA3 team isnt = the ME3 team, and that they cannot be "held accountable" for ME3. But... They delivered DA2. They delivered rehashed level designs and (in my opinion) not very well thought out DLC for DA:O and a DA2 that was not really what alot of DA:O afficionados were looking for. 

I didnt create this thread to slam the DA3 team. Im sure they are doing the best within the constraints of their budgets, time and planning. And I think most loved DA:O. Some even enjoyed the DA2 DLC. I never got around to it. I tired of DA2 20 minutes into the gameplay. I was never really able to enter what writers call "suspension of disbelief" and feel that the toon was "mine". Im not the only one with that experience.

I am however very concerned with "streamlining" and the effect it has on "storytelling". Streamlining has so far ment that the storytelling has been on the backburner for action and nice visual effects. Both for DA2 and for ME3. And its been a hefty staple of the DLC. More action and hefty effects to gloss over a story that was less than up to par when compared to DA:O. I see little evidence and I have heard few (if any) statements that would cause me to reevaluate my presumption that DA3 will  be "more of the same" rather than "a return to old values".

I would like for the Dev team to try to dispell my concerns. They are, after all, concerns shared by many.

It seems like what you want from us is "the game" or atleast a detailed list of all the features, story plots, artwork, videos etc etc to prove its a good game... which we can't do at this time.

We can't say more than what has already been released in Marks Blog, as well as the few tidbits that are said in twitter feeds or at con's, etc.

If what has already been stated doesnt dispell your concerns, then sorry, you will have to wait for the announce and eventual release of the game before that will happen.

There seems to be a lot of negitivity on these forums, whether true or not, thats what it looks like from a dev's perspective.  People are assuming that we arn't trying to make an amazing game or something, I really don't know.

What I can say for fact, (I don't know if it will quell anyones concerns or not) is that walking down these halls, seeing the passion, and excitement everyone has for this game, the extra hours, hard work, and effort that is being put into it... Sends chills up my spine sometimes.  

It's going to be an amazing game and we can't wait to share it with our fans, who are just as passionate as us.

[David Gaider]

Galactus_the_Devourer wrote...
I'm obviously not the OP but... I do want certain details about the game, mostly mechanics-side (asking you to spoil the story would obviously be a bad idea for all sorts of reasons ) The problem is that the amount of info we have to go on at the moment amounts to... Just about nothing. That is worrying, because it either means that you haven't done any work yet (which makes any kind of even tentative deadline very worrying) or that there are other reasons for not responding on these issues (I hardly see questions about the types of camera being in to be particularly vital, and even then a simple "We haven't actually decided yet." would be less worrying than the kind of evasiveness we've had thus far)

There is no evasiveness. We're not being vague in the slightest. We've said, straight up, that we're not talking about the game until we can (and are willing to) show it. All we've done at this point is stated that DA3 exists.

It's fine if you want to know more, but being concerned as if we're keeping information you need from you is perhaps getting a bit ahead of yourself-- you don't need it. You can't pre-order the game, never mind buy it, and we're not yet at the point where we've even shown a trailer... the game has not been "launched", so to speak.

So we're not trying to actively assuage anyone's concerns... yet. We don't expect anyone to take our statements at face value until we can back them up, as Blair stated. Until we do that, yes, it's perfectly fine to reserve judgement... or, if you prefer, go ahead and declare your skepticism until proven otherwise. The time for that will be once the game actually launches.

Modifié par David Gaider, 31 octobre 2012 - 06:25 .

[David Gaider]

Farbautisonn wrote...
Sir, Thats grand. You have told us you wont show or tell till you have something to show and tell. We undestand. However... that does little in the way of ensuring you have learned from DA2 and ME3 and everything in between. Infact it only makes us more insecure, more sceptical.

If that's the case, then prepare to be insecure and skeptical for some time to come. If we were simply to say "we've learned this", chances are that a skeptical person still wouldn't believe us until and unless we had something to back up such statements... indeed, we have talked about some of these things already at several of the con presentations, and if you consider those things irrelevant it's not like more along the same line will actually help you any.

[David Gaider]

Rudy Lis wrote...

<rudeness cut>

Firstly, the DA3 team is not the ME3 team. Secondly, no matter how upset ME3 might have made you, that does not excuse speaking to myself or any member of the development team in such a disrespectful manner. I suggest you consider your words more carefully before posting again.

[David Gaider]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...
When would be the best time to ask about the possibility of a demo?

I would at least wait until we've actually revealed something about the game. I suspect the answer even then would be "we'll see", as demos aren't something we generally deal with until late in the process. I have no insight on one, myself.

[Allan Schumacher]

This is a fantastic tangent that isn't relevant to the topic at hand!

[David Gaider]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
To the OP's point (which, granted, could have been conveyed with a bit more diplomatic tone, instead of snarky - should have used more blue responses instead of purple), we have heard that the DA team has been listening and taking fan complaints into consideration, but often we aren't given exact complaints that are being considered.

You want a laundry list? "We are dealing with X complaint"? The problem with that, to be perfectly honest, is how people would interpret 'dealing with'. Unless there is something we can say with 100% clarity, as in we're simply not doing it or we're doing it as we did before, it's going to be something that requires showing exactly what we mean... otherwise your average forum-goer is likely to imagine it as something other than what it is and set themselves up for disappointment.

See the backgrounds thing as an example. I mentioned them at the Edmonton Expo, and now I'm either left with the choice of breaking down exactly what that entails and answering the hundred questions that have arisen (long before I'm actually ready to do so) or letting peoples' imaginations run away with them as they conjure images of implementations which could only work if those backgrounds were the entire game. Far better had they simply not come up yet at all.

The things that drove me crazy about the game was the lack of engaging narrative, the focus on combat all the time, the change to an action-oriented combat that quickly became mind-numbing, companions which seemed very one-dimensional in their scope, choices that rarely impacted how anything played out aside from two seconds after I made said choice and an ending that gave any sort of closure or explanation to why Hawke was important or what happened to everyone involved.

We've mentioned many times that combat is one of the primary focuses for the team-- indeed, it's Mike's #1 goal. He's even talked about it here, a bit. Evidently that's not something everyone has paid attention to... possibly because just talking about it doesn't really reach people. Combat is something that has to be shown.

We've also said that having more choice is something we're going to do. Again, apparently something you did not hear. I suppose because the response would naturally be-- how much choice? When? What will it affect? All of these are good questions... for that period after we've shown the game and started talking about it.

In light of that kind of logic, can the writing/dev team shed any light on the creation mindset/philosophy for DA3? There's no need to reveal spoilers, nor any gameplay functions/elements, but any feedback on some of the actual writing aspects that people found fault with in the two most recent releases would be very interesting and satisfying to see.

And, as I've already said in this thread, that's not going to happen. What you're asking for is all the information we're going to give after we've launched the game. The only way to address all those questions is to go into them in detail, as every question we answer just engenders a dozen more... and just talking about it is evidently not enough.

[David Gaider]

Maclimes wrote...

I'm not sure I understand the need for these questions to be addressed NOW. I get why you would want to know, "Did you guys fix X that I hated in DA2?". But I don't understand why you need the answer this very second.

You can't buy or even pre-order the game yet. What good is that information to you? What if they come out in six months to a year, and say, "Yes, we fixed X. Here's the in-game video footage to prove it." Would you just, "Nope! I don't care anymore! You wouldn't answer my question a long time ago!" ?

I understand you're excited. Me too. But try to keep it all in perspective.

This isn't particularly new. At this stage it's "why aren't you telling us anything?". Once the marketing campaign is launched, it'll be "why aren't you telling us everything?". Once the campaign is well underway and we're repeating information for those who don't spend time on our forums, it'll be "why aren't you telling us anything new... we've already seen this!"

Look on the bright side: the time between DAO being announced and the launch of the marketing campaign was about three years. You probably won't have to wait that long this time.

[Fiddzz]

astreqwerty wrote...

Blair Brown wrote...

Farbautisonn wrote...

Maclimes wrote...

It seems like what you want from us is "the game" or atleast a detailed list of all the features, story plots, artwork, videos etc etc to prove its a good game... which we can't do at this time.

We can't say more than what has already been released in Marks Blog, as well as the few tidbits that are said in twitter feeds or at con's, etc.

If what has already been stated doesnt dispell your concerns, then sorry, you will have to wait for the announce and eventual release of the game before that will happen.

There seems to be a lot of negitivity on these forums, whether true or not, thats what it looks like from a dev's perspective.  People are assuming that we arn't trying to make an amazing game or something, I really don't know.

What I can say for fact, (I don't know if it will quell anyones concerns or not) is that walking down these halls, seeing the passion, and excitement everyone has for this game, the extra hours, hard work, and effort that is being put into it... Sends chills up my spine sometimes.  

It's going to be an amazing game and we can't wait to share it with our fans, who are just as passionate as us.

lol? Are you being serious?Nobody wants you to fail especially the people bothering to post here. It is just that many have lost faith in you and and not a thing you say can reverse that. We need solid proof that you are still worth our attention (and money, if that eludes you) and many have concerns regarding biowares numerous past mistakes. I think thats at least to be expected

Like I stated above, whether its actualy true or not, there seems to be lots of negitivity from a dev's perspective.  Key word, dev's perspective.  Reading the forums can be quite disheartening sometimes, but then we goto the con's or see some cool fan art and its a nice reminder that our fans are super passionate about our games.  Which is why there a threads like this, you guys care and we love that. 

In response to "we need solid proof your game will be awesome", the OP, a lot of the other posts on this thread, and to echo Dave, the solid proof is the game.

When we say anything on the forums or at con's etc etc, skeptics respond with "well i'll wait and see" and believers with "sounds good, can't wait"

People keep asking "tell me something that will put my concerns aside"  We keep stating we are going to show, not just tell, when we are ready. Just have some patience. It's seriously going to be worth it.

--edited for too many quotes

Modifié par Blair Brown, 01 novembre 2012 - 07:39 .

[Allan Schumacher]

BioWare's biggest fans and largest praise has never come from people lauding their combat systems. Yes, there has been some enjoyable combat and some really memorable battles in various games, but I (and many others) loved DAO in spite of the fact that I can only remember a few key battles throughout the entire game. I can remember a number of boss fights from DA2 as well, but I don't do so in a "that was really awesome" kind of way. The only boss fight I remember liking was the end of the Deep Roads expedition, a lot of the others were simply tactically annoying due to design.

I just want to comment that it's very difficult to ascertain consensus on what exactly it was that makes our games good in the eyes of some people.

For some people combat is THE most important thing, several times over. I think it's easy to go "We all like the game. It must be for the same reasons" (I saw those balloons burst on the WL2 and PE forums when people suddenly realized other fans of the same games felt certain features were irrelevant/mandatory in order to capture the spirit of those games).

Even to use your case, when you say you loved DAO in spite of the combat, can still send the message "Everything else you do is fine as is. Just work on the combat since I find that lackluster" coming from a different poster that fundamentally sees things the same as you but words it differently.

[Fiddzz]

AmstradHero wrote...

David Gaider wrote...
We've mentioned many times that combat is one of the primary focuses for the team-- indeed, it's Mike's #1 goal. He's even talked about it here, a bit. Evidently that's not something everyone has paid attention to... possibly because just talking about it doesn't really reach people. Combat is something that has to be shown.

We've also said that having more choice is something we're going to do. Again, apparently something you did not hear. I suppose because the response would naturally be-- how much choice? When? What will it affect? All of these are good questions... for that period after we've shown the game and started talking about it.

This here is what concerns me the most. This is exactly the kind of mentality that got us "button awesome" respawning waves, and hyperspeed combat. Yes, the DAO shuffle of combat was very ordinary, but you know how many players simply didn't care because the game was simply so enjoyable otherwise. I know as Creative Director (that was his title last time I saw) has a lot of things to manage for a project, but prioritising combat (and based on DA2's marketing, it was apparently the #1 focus in that by a significant margin) over other design aspects is potentially concerning as a long term fan.

BioWare's biggest fans and largest praise has never come from people lauding their combat systems. Yes, there has been some enjoyable combat and some really memorable battles in various games, but I (and many others) loved DAO in spite of the fact that I can only remember a few key battles throughout the entire game. I can remember a number of boss fights from DA2 as well, but I don't do so in a "that was really awesome" kind of way. The only boss fight I remember liking was the end of the Deep Roads expedition, a lot of the others were simply tactically annoying due to design.

BioWare's biggest praise has always come from the way that they engaged the players within a setting and a story. The lore, the characterisation, the narrative, the ability to roleplay and make the player feel as though they had choices and agency. Having a reputation and a good track record on delivering on these aspects doesn't mean fans don't want to be reassured that these are still getting all the attention that they want them to receive. Yes, these are hard things to talk about and advertise during development, but these have typically been the reasons that people flock to BioWare games - not the combat, and everytime combat gets mentioned as a key focus of the game, I'd wager that a lot of fans become a little more cautious about handing over their money.

Over reaction to one sentence Dave Gaider makes is why we are trying to say as little as we can, and be as specific as we can while talking about the game, and keep insisting to please wait for us to SHOW you.  

Dave says "We've mentioned many times that combat is one of the primary focuses for the team-- indeed, it's Mike's #1 goal. "  and everyone suddenly applies their own context to it.  

Maybe its Mikes goal right now because fans are clamoring for more tactical and better combat than what was in DA2, and they're trying to figure that out? Maybe he is focusing more on that specific thing because the writing team is knocking it out of the park? Or insert any other hypothetical reason, etc etc.

Making a broad assumtion of what the creative direction of this game is, off of one sentence Dave says with no context, shouldn't be a launching point to say what you think is and is not happening during the development of DAIII, as if it is fact.

[Fiddzz]

Maclimes wrote...

But making ill-informed broad assumptions is what we do best!

[Fiddzz]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Blair Brown wrote...

Over reaction to one sentence Dave Gaider makes is why we are trying to say as little as we can, and be as specific as we can while talking about the game, and keep insisting to please wait for us to SHOW you.  

Dave says "We've mentioned many times that combat is one of the primary focuses for the team-- indeed, it's Mike's #1 goal. "  and everyone suddenly applies their own context to it.  

It's been a page since David made that comment. All of one person has responded to Mike being foremost interested in combat and you're saying everyone is.

For someone worried about over-reaction, that's rather hyperbolic.

I was useing that as an example as to how people are reacting when we say anything.

[Fiddzz]

Twisted Path wrote...

Blair Brown wrote...

Maybe its Mikes goal right now because fans are clamoring for more tactical and better combat than what was in DA2, and they're trying to figure that out?

I know I'm overanalyzing one sentence just like you're talking about but:

This sentence actually IS reassuring.

There is a reason I put "maybe" and "hypothetical" all over that paragraph, no one knows what goes on in that mind of his 

But like i've said in previous threads, we are definatly listening to the fans (one example for me personally is combing through the 'top 5 things you want in DA3 thread', absorbing that information and passing it along to the big decision makers like mike and mark, so they can take that into account)

[Fiddzz]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Korusus wrote...

Also Blair, from a Dev's perspective, isn't it possible that level of negativity that you perceive has a lot to do with...I don't know...DA2 being bad?

This type of comment helps nothing and only seeks to alienate the very devs and game makers who DO dare to post here. 

I'm not sure why anyone is surprised why they view the forums as being hostile or overly negative.


One thing I have enjoyed is just talking with the devs about games. Not games they are even making, neccessarily... just gaming in general. I have to assume they love it, given that they have devoted their lives to it and would have a unique perspective to the conversation.

Blair, do you have a weigh in on what you believe the value of story in video games is? Or how things like choice or the endings plays into that?

Korusus wrote...

Also Blair, from a Dev's perspective, isn't it possible that level of negativity that you perceive has a lot to do with...I don't know...DA2 being bad?

To answer that first,

A) it is your opinion
other people have different ones, (i liked DA2 before i started working here)
C) as I said in previous posts, its perception, when you work very hard all day trying to make an amazing game for our fans to enjoy, and then hop on the forums to 30 threads of FOR EXAMPLE "no human protagonsit?, im not going to buy this game, you have lost all of my loyalty BioWare, me and all my friends will not support this."  It can be a bummer
D) BUT like I said, you goto the Con's, or see fan art and it's like no, they're just very passionate because they're so emotionally attached to what we are doing, and it refuels the, "man i gota work harder to live up to this"

As for fast jimmys question,

I'm a huge fan of games, all games, so for me it is completly dependant on the game.  I'm heavily into competitive online games like LoL and Starcraft 2, so for those I'm not looking for story, nor care if there is one, its all about balance and the competitive excitement.  But on the completly other end of the spectrim some of my favorite games are FF7 and chrono trigger, which is almost 100% linear story, so it better rock, but then Might and Magic 6 almost has no main story or story telling and I can replay it over and over as well.

For me it pretty much comes down to this, when I sit down to play a game I decide what I want to do (do I want to be engrossed in a deep story, grinding, some online PvP, do a raid with some friends etc etc) and just choose the game that suits the mood.

To weigh in from a much higher perspective of "the gaming industry" I think video games are the greatest form of entertainment we have right now, you can get absolutly lost in them.  Story is a HUGE part of that (i always think to how Half-life changed the industry by making a FPS have a story) so it's very important.  Peoples expectations are getting very high as well as to what good quaility story telling is, which is a good thing, it makes everyone have to push harder to make better games.

Choices are a different thing for me, I do like to have to make them, and have them have consequences, but not overly so.  When I sit around with some friends and we are all talking about the same game, I love the moments where we're all "oh yeah that part with the thing and the other things happening that was AWESOME" and we can all relate.  I wouldnt wan't choices/consequences to be so severe that our coverstaion goes more like "oh yeah that part with the thing and other things happening was awesome right?" ... "oh, no one else did that? cause we all chose different paths.. oh ok, nevermind"

I think dishonored has a nice balance for me, you all end up killing the same guy, but friend A killed him this way, and friend B did this, and I setup a sweet trap etc etc.

Kind of a long post that probably didn't awnser any questions, but I like talking about games 

[Fiddzz]

Bernhardtbr wrote...

Blair Brown wrote...

There is a reason I put "maybe" and "hypothetical" all over that paragraph, no one knows what goes on in that mind of his 

But like i've said in previous threads, we are definatly listening to the fans (one example for me personally is combing through the 'top 5 things you want in DA3 thread', absorbing that information and passing it along to the big decision makers like mike and mark, so they can take that into account)

Oh that´s awesome, so if we insist a lot that we want griffins and Megatron-like evil golems we will get them?

You heard it from the man people, LET`S DO IT!

always a possibility!  I LOVE GRIFFINS!

[Fiddzz]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

obibenjedi wrote...

Has anyone officially said why the endings are so different from the rest of the game/ previous games?

I'm not sure what the question here is. Are you asking why the endings for DA2/ME3 were so different than, say, DA:O and ME1?

I am also a bit confused as to the question.

[Fiddzz]

AmstradHero wrote...

Blair Brown wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...

David Gaider wrote...
We've mentioned many times that combat is one of the primary focuses for the team-- indeed, it's Mike's #1 goal. He's even talked about it here, a bit.

This here is what concerns me the most. This is exactly the kind of mentality that got us "button awesome" respawning waves, and hyperspeed combat. Yes, the DAO shuffle of combat was very ordinary, but you know how many players simply didn't care because the game was simply so enjoyable otherwise. I know as Creative Director (that was his title last time I saw) has a lot of things to manage for a project, but prioritising combat (and based on DA2's marketing, it was apparently the #1 focus in that by a significant margin) over other design aspects is potentially concerning as a long term fan.

Over reaction to one sentence Dave Gaider makes is why we are trying to say as little as we can, and be as specific as we can while talking about the game, and keep insisting to please wait for us to SHOW you.  

Dave says "We've mentioned many times that combat is one of the primary focuses for the team-- indeed, it's Mike's #1 goal. "  and everyone suddenly applies their own context to it.  

Maybe its Mikes goal right now because fans are clamoring for more tactical and better combat than what was in DA2, and they're trying to figure that out? Maybe he is focusing more on that specific thing because the writing team is knocking it out of the park? Or insert any other hypothetical reason, etc etc.

Making a broad assumtion of what the creative direction of this game is, off of one sentence Dave says with no context, shouldn't be a launching point to say what you think is and is not happening during the development of DAIII, as if it is fact.

My apologies if I've come across as assuming that combat is the primary focus and everything else has fallen by the way-side. I don't assume that's the case at all, but I do feel there was an over-emphasis on combat in DA2 compared to DAO that played out in both pre-release dicussion and marketing, and I felt that was also reflected in the final product. Hence me raising this concern.

I do think that the combat needs focus, and for one I'd love to see more "utility" introduced into the combat rather than a pure DPS based system which I really think is a detriment to overall combat complexity, especially in a party-based environment. I'm just raising the point that for me (and based upon my broader discussions with others on BioWare games, this applies for many other people as well), combat has never been the primary reason people play a BioWare game. Yes, it helps if it's fun and mentally engaging, but narrative is the real reason why people flock to BioWare games.

In short, I've been a long time BioWare fan, I just want to see the team deliver something that I can really love and rave about to all my friends. I couldn't do that with DA2, but I hope I will be able to do so with DA3.

That's what we're all working for,   I want to be able to rave about it to my friends too! 

I agree with the combat points you brought up, for an RPG I prefer more "utility" as you put it, than a pure DPS system.  As for the story, I agree, people flock to our games and know us for that deep and rich story telling with interesting companions, and that will never change, our writing team is top notch.  Now if we can bring up all the other parts of our games (combat, immersion in the world, customization, graphics etc etc) to that level.. well now were talking about a truly amazing gaming experience. 

So when you hear dave or someone else say "mike is focusing on 'x' feature right now" don't think other things are getting left behind, it's quite the opposite, it means were bringing 'x' feature up to the next level 

[Allan Schumacher]

slimgrin wrote...

At every step they deny doing anything poorly, that they ever screw up. Judging from the their response to criticism, it's the fans at fault not them. They've exhibited zero humility. As my old art teacher used to say, there's no remedy for that type of attitude only repeating past mistakes. So expect more DA2 and ME3. 

Only to those that skip over it.  I've come out and stated several times that we could have done better with DA2, and there are issues we could have done better (most already beaten to death on these boards: there's the obvious low hanging fruit like repeated levels, and so forth).

Heck, Gaider has even discussed faults he's seen with DAO, the game that was better received than DA2!  And those are just from his posts that I've seen!

If you think we're just being arrogant and that we feel we never make mistakes, then you're just not paying attention.

Frankly, it sounds like someone needs to take a break and recognize there's more to life.  Sitting around grinding axes and picking bones is as much a negative reflection on yourself as it is justified for whatever slights we may have caused against you with our video games....

This is true. Bioware doesn't take crticism well at all and often either
overreact and start cutting features, or they just blame the consumers
for not liking the game. This is a very poor attitude to adopt in any
field, but especially in a very creative field like the game industry.
No rational person expects perfection, but it isn't wrong to expect
competence and the ability to take criticism. It also doesn't hurt to
admit you make mistakes.

Honestly, I don't have high hopes for
whatever Bioware does next. They seem to be driven by motives other than
making great games.

Seriously, if this is the way you feel please just leave.  Reading crap like this just pisses me off and if you think I'm just spending time here because I'm just looking to make a buck, well it's pretty damned disheartening.  Poor attitudes indeed....

What you're doing with this post isn't criticism.  It's grinding an axe.  For all of our apparent failures to accept criticism, you've demonstrated a heck of an inability to get over it and move on.  Which is worse?  (Rhetorical question)

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 04 novembre 2012 - 09:58 .

[John Epler]

I think we're done here.