244 réponses à ce sujet

[saintjimmy43]

i don't think we should condescend to the writers of our favorite franchises...not unless we want to see the Templar-Mage war ended by Starkid.

[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 .

[AmstradHero]

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.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 01 novembre 2012 - 08:03 .

[Bernhardtbr]

Agree 100%. Doesn´t mean combat shouldn´t be enjoyable since it´s what you do 50% of the time or more (and it´s one of the reasons I hate TES games: their "click on enemy until dead, guzzle potion/heal and run if YOU are almost dead" or "shoot arrows and run" gameplay.

Modifié par Bernhardtbr, 01 novembre 2012 - 08:08 .

[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.

[Maclimes]

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

[Wozearly]

Blair Brown wrote...

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. 

Can't emphasise enough your point that devs should never mistake negativity for a lack of passion for what you do.

I freely admit I'm one of DA2's most resolute and regular critics. I even recorded a rather, erm, unflattering song about it that I don't think will ever make the DA Facebook page (although it did, ironically, make it onto the highest rated comments in the PC Gamer DA2 review).

But I also spent 2 weeks working on, testing, collating and explaining unofficial workarounds to solve unusual and frustrating installation errors at DA:O's launch before the EA support team were able to nail a consistent fix. That made a whole string of problem-ridden, hyped-to-crazy fans very happy and people still PM me from time to time to ask for help if they run into the issue, which I continue to give freely.

No matter how negative my views about DA2 might be, I'm no less a Bioware fan because of it. Nor are a lot of others, even if we are sometimes a bit less constructive and diplomatic than we should aspire to be...

[Fiddzz]

Maclimes wrote...

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

[Nerevar-as]

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.  

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.

Well, you have to understand we only have your past actions to extrapolate from. A lot of valid concerns were made about DA2, all were adressed with wait and see. We waited and saw, and many of us felt our fears had fell short. So getting the same answer again isn´t helping to reassure us.

[Fredward]

Nerevar-as wrote...
Well, you have to understand we only have your past actions to extrapolate from. A lot of valid concerns were made about DA2, all were adressed with wait and see. We waited and saw, and many of us felt our fears had fell short. So getting the same answer again isn´t helping to reassure us.

My feels on this kind of view.

[Nerevar-as]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...
Well, you have to understand we only have your past actions to extrapolate from. A lot of valid concerns were made about DA2, all were adressed with wait and see. We waited and saw, and many of us felt our fears had fell short. So getting the same answer again isn´t helping to reassure us.

My feels on this kind of view.

That kind of describes how I felt after finishing DA2 (and falls very short of ME3). This time around I´m getting sure my money will be spent rather than wasted.

[Darth Death]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...
Well, you have to understand we only have your past actions to extrapolate from. A lot of valid concerns were made about DA2, all were adressed with wait and see. We waited and saw, and many of us felt our fears had fell short. So getting the same answer again isn´t helping to reassure us.

My feels on this kind of view.

Kind of looks like my 3rd grade teacher, except it was a woman.

[Maclimes]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Well, you have to understand we only have your past actions to extrapolate from. A lot of valid concerns were made about DA2, all were adressed with wait and see. We waited and saw, and many of us felt our fears had fell short. So getting the same answer again isn´t helping to reassure us.

Wait, I'm confused. You waited and saw? What did you see? There hasn't been anything after DA2.

[LinksOcarina]

Nerevar-as 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.  

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.

Well, you have to understand we only have your past actions to extrapolate from. A lot of valid concerns were made about DA2, all were adressed with wait and see. We waited and saw, and many of us felt our fears had fell short. So getting the same answer again isn´t helping to reassure us.

They do understand that. That's why they are saying so little. 

I mean, there was a PR guy for Blizzard who said in an interview for fans to not have high expectations for Diablo III (and by high expectations, I mean pie in the sky, game of the year material stuff), and people laughed at that as being silly.

And we saw how that went....

I mean, they said clearly that they are not going to reassure anything right now to get expectations high. So I am still flummoxed to the fact that people are expecting answers so quickly.

All the speculation right now makes good conversations, but we keep getting side-tracked from topics such as this. 

[TheJediSaint]

Maclimes wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...

Well, you have to understand we only have your past actions to extrapolate from. A lot of valid concerns were made about DA2, all were adressed with wait and see. We waited and saw, and many of us felt our fears had fell short. So getting the same answer again isn´t helping to reassure us.

Wait, I'm confused. You waited and saw? What did you see? There hasn't been anything after DA2.

He may be refering to the Legacy and MOTA dlc, which do address one of the major issues with the game (reused areas).

[Nerevar-as]

Maclimes wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...

Well, you have to understand we only have your past actions to extrapolate from. A lot of valid concerns were made about DA2, all were adressed with wait and see. We waited and saw, and many of us felt our fears had fell short. So getting the same answer again isn´t helping to reassure us.

Wait, I'm confused. You waited and saw? What did you see? There hasn't been anything after DA2.

I referred to how devs said we should wait to see the final product, how it actually playing it felt a lot like Origins, and so on.

I got Legacy, was an improvement but didn´t finish it by how horrible the final fight was. I decided not to buy MotA after seeing the design of those goblin like things. Was it otherwise good?

[Maria Caliban]

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.

[LinksOcarina]

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.

So are half of the accusations against them. 

I say its fair game. 

[Twisted Path]

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.

[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.

[Maclimes]

Nerevar-as wrote...
I referred to how devs said we should wait to see the final product, how it actually playing it felt a lot like Origins, and so on.

I got Legacy, was an improvement but didn´t finish it by how horrible the final fight was. I decided not to buy MotA after seeing the design of those goblin like things. Was it otherwise good?

Ah, I see what you mean now. You were talkign about DA2 DLC?

As for Legacy, yeah, that final fight sucked. Otherwise, I enjoyed it.

As for MotA, I think it was a lot of fun. And the ghasts (the little goblin-like things) were fine. I had no problem with them. It obviously didn't address every single complain people had about DA2. That would be absurd, since they clearly weren't going to remvoe the dialogue wheel or add in the option to play as a dwarf in a DLC mission. But I can say that if DA2 had been like MotA from the beginning, there would have been a lot less to complain about.

[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)

[Maclimes]

Tell your bosses you want your own avatar. I get you and Allan mixed up sometimes, and I'm sure you don't want that. 

[Nerevar-as]

Maclimes wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...
I referred to how devs said we should wait to see the final product, how it actually playing it felt a lot like Origins, and so on.

I got Legacy, was an improvement but didn´t finish it by how horrible the final fight was. I decided not to buy MotA after seeing the design of those goblin like things. Was it otherwise good?

Ah, I see what you mean now. You were talkign about DA2 DLC?

As for Legacy, yeah, that final fight sucked. Otherwise, I enjoyed it.

As for MotA, I think it was a lot of fun. And the ghasts (the little goblin-like things) were fine. I had no problem with them. It obviously didn't address every single complain people had about DA2. That would be absurd, since they clearly weren't going to remvoe the dialogue wheel or add in the option to play as a dwarf in a DLC mission. But I can say that if DA2 had been like MotA from the beginning, there would have been a lot less to complain about.

If I decide to get DA3 then I´ll probably get it when I do my import run. I guess we´ll need a save of the second game for that.