227 réponses à ce sujet

[cJohnOne]

I remember my first playthrough of DAO. I couldn't find the Darkspawn blood vials in the Korcari wilds because I didn't check the bodies of everything I killed.

[Allan Schumacher]

I have never finished Skyrim; even though I have played that game, everyday, since it came out, at least an hour or so, on average (usually late at night, to wind down).

Bethesda's games are the worst games for assessing quality based on whether or not someone completed the main plot. I'd argue the main plot for those types of games are included simply for the people that find a game lacking if it doesn't have one.

[Cutlass Jack]

I'm with Alan on that one. I cant remember the last time I've finished a Bethesda game. I find the 'plot' about the least intersting part of them.

[Sharn01]

MichaelStuart wrote...

It's very possible that most people just didn't like the Dragon Age Origins enough to want to finish it.
If this is the case, why bother making game for the people who are likely not going to buy the sequels.

Or its more likely that most people who buy any game no matter what it is never finish them.

Actually, thats a fact, most people who buy video games never finish them no matter what the game is unless its an extremely short game.

[SpEcIaLRyAn]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I have never finished Skyrim; even though I have played that game, everyday, since it came out, at least an hour or so, on average (usually late at night, to wind down).

Bethesda's games are the worst games for assessing quality based on whether or not someone completed the main plot. I'd argue the main plot for those types of games are included simply for the people that find a game lacking if it doesn't have one.

I agree. The story for Skyrim can be completed in about 5 hours. But yet the game has 100s of hours worth of content. What does that tell you?

Also I find the story in a Bethesda game such as Skyrim to be just another sequence of quests that can be completed. Its all in good fun to me. The game would feel lacking without a mainplot however. There would be no motivation to do anything if they just threw you in the world and said "Heres some quests. Have fun!"

[frostajulie]

I spent 12 complete playthrus on Xbox 1 summer before I got the PC versions and lived on that with mods for 3 years. I had so many complete playthrus that I had to delete older characters to make room for new characters. I would still play it except that as much as I love the characters, the mods, the story I hate the fighting style. I'm a self admitted button masher I also like fancy effects The fight style was my favorite thing about DA2 and the only improvement on Origins I liked.

I have also started many characters only to stop playing when I go to Orzammar. The dark gives me a headache, I turn up the gamma and that helps a bit but eventually I just restart the game so I can do Ostegar and the brecilian forest again.

[upsettingshorts]

Lightning Cloud wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...

Lightning Cloud wrote...

Wait a second... Did someone say Origins had an art style?

Well I guess "Generic Fantasy" is still technically a style, so I'll let you guys have that one.

There's nothing wrong with generic. For one thing it's familiar and thus easier to get people into it.

That doesn't mean I don't want to see something a touch outside of 'medeval Europe' from time to time. But modern fantasy tropes and Europe are really tightly tied together, ya know?

Making something that's truly unique is almost legitimately impossible, but an effort should at least be made. Origins is brown, and murky, and everything looks like it came straight from a Tolkein novel. That's not something people should be proud of creating. They should be praised for making something that looks like their own. 

Dragon Age II did a much better job of that. Sure, some of the elves were ugly, and the Darkspawn looked a little silly, but at least it was setting itself apart from everything else out there. 

Origins really has no uniquness in it's art at all. Nothing about it says "Dragon Age". It all says "Generic Fantasy", and for me, that's an issue.

I don't know, the nonsensically designed, acid-trip colored noble clothes are pretty recognizably Dragon Age.

On topic though, I'm pretty sure Bioware's internal metrics can tell them what players who didn't finish the game did in their playthroughs, when they stopped, etc.  It's hardly a total information/feedback loss.

[Realmzmaster]

One problem that I see is that the posters on the BSN do not even represent the gamers who finished the game once. I will use VGChartz numbers for DAO as a starting point. VGChartz says that DAO sold 4.32 million copies. If one assumes that the 36% completion rate is correct only 1.56 million completed the game. There is no where near 1.56 million unique posters on the BSN. In fact the same names keep coming up in most of the threads like Fast Jimmy,eyeofthestorm, Melca36,StM, Foolsfolly, Rawgrim, Dhiro, LinksOcarina and a host of others (myself included).

We represent a very small minority in that vast silent majority. If Bioware made the game I wanted. I am sure it would appeal to some of us, but making the game I want would probably have Bioware ending up doing a different series. So Bioware has to take into account that silent majority that purchased its game before.
I could use DA2's numbers 2.06 million copies sold which means 844,600 completed the game. Still far more than the names that show up here. So Bioware cannot just rely on the BSN for input.

We may buy the game but if it has no mass appeal those sales would pale in comparison to even DA2.

It is not a matter of most gamers being lazy. I can devote more time to my gaming hobby because I am entering the twilight of my career. I have more disposable time. My son of the other hand use to be an avid gamercompleting all his games in his high school days and college days. He is now in the workforce as a teacher of fourth grade, Gone are those disposable hours and gone is the ability to always see games to completion. In fact he does not buy as many as he used to because he cannot finish them and perform his teaching duties while having a semblance of life.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 28 novembre 2012 - 10:31 .

[SilentK]

I've replayed my BioWare games many many times, from start to finish. But there are perhaps 2-3 PT over all these games that have been left unfinished. That's when something in real life came up and I couldn't continue gaming. Prefer to play quite a bit when I got a new character started, to keep a feeling for her. Sometimes I lose the sense of that person, how she felt to me, and then I find it more fun to start a new character. You never know why people leave games unfinished.

Skyrim I left unfinished, after going over the entire map once I left it and that was that, haven't played it since. Somehow I couldn't get into the game again. Guess I leave different games for different reasons.

[Kahpya]

sorry double post

Modifié par nikihap, 28 novembre 2012 - 10:42 .

[Kahpya]

Viktoria Landers wrote...

I was just reading some statistics which I was unaware of and I thought to share my views with you guys. Apparently only 36% of the people who played Dragon Age Origins ever completed it, a game that was named Game of the Year, was highly praised and it was the first of the DA series.

What does this number show us? That number shows that all of us who completed DAO even once are in fact a minority. And those who played a second walkthrough, in order to choose different choices this time and obviously experience the RPG to it's full potential are even less. Probably less than 10%

That means there is the majority of players behind every game who buy the video game and probably some extra DLCs, play a little with it and eventually get bored and drop it. Subsequently they are also not involved afterwards in the forums or anywhere else, that's why they are silent too.

So when corporations produce video games and seek to have big sales (that's not a bad thing of course), they want their product to appeal to their potential customers and the silent majority will obviously give them the biggest part of the revenue. That means the game needs to be mostly appealing to their needs which is often not a good thing.

That's why I think they are doing a disservice to us, who love these series and desperately want it to be something good.

(I haven't read all the pages)

Okay first statistics is very subjective, what I mean by that is - since you haven't given us any form of link as where you got it, 
we can't deside for ourselves if what you are stating is true or holds any ground on reality.

What kind of group did they ask, did they ask a group of school kids or was it an adult group? Was it from biowares own statistics or was the group taken complelety random? 
Besides in which way did they conduct their research; how did they ask the questions, where did they do it (internet, magasine?) and which party stood for the research?
Some people don't connect to the internet other than to register the game so they can play it. Which means they never updated their achievement list to their account. So even biowares own statistics might not give the real reality.

All the above has influence on how we interpret the 36% as a reality.

And since I can't see any answer to any of these questions and the only statment that this discussion is based on is baseless then this discussion hold no ground on reality and I think you are worrying in vain.

If i've come on to hars it wasn't my intention only to make people of this forum see that you can't take for granted that the 36% (where the rest of the OPs discussion is based on) is based in reality.

And if the OP has indeed provided prof of all of this then i apologize for not having read the whole discussion. 

Modifié par nikihap, 28 novembre 2012 - 10:43 .

[Navasha]

Hmm... I guess that puts me in about a 0.0001%. I have played DA:O 17 times through from beginning to end. I think I have finally experienced every possibility in the game, though I am still itching to play again

[OdanUrr]

@OP: I wouldn't trust those numbers if I were you.

[Maria Caliban]

The ending to Origins was wave after wave of mook combat.

In my case, swarms of invincible mooks as the shear number of creatures on the screen plus the fire slowed my PC down until I had to wail on a darkspawn for about half a minute before it went down and by then a dozen of its buddies had killed one of my characters.

The only reason I managed to get through the end was through runscript_killallhostile.

I don't understand why games make you slog through the most boring combat in the game for an hour before reaching the boss.

[rapscallioness]

What I'm understanding from the OP is that they are asking why would a game dev go outta their way to work to "cater" to those who do not even finish their games, as opposed to those that do finish it (and also buy dlc/comics/books/general swag).

Personally, I think it is important for a creator to ask "what happened here? Why were we unable to retain the audience's attention?" It could really be any number of things that have nothing to do w/the game. It could also be something really..amiss..with the game.

They should ask that question. For me, w/DAO, it was the combat. I stopped playing because I really did not like the combat. I traded the game in, Later, I picked it up again--cuz of You guys! going on abt how much you liked it--and once I accepted the combat clunk, I Luvd the game.

If it had not been for you guys, I would not have looked twice at the game, and I would have missed out on a great game experience.

So, I think dev companies must walk a fine line. They need to self examine. They need to draw in more potential customers. However, they run the risk of straying too far from their base. It's a trick to it. No doubt.

I feel, however, that your base is like...the roots of a tree. You need those roots in order to stay alive. It's well and good to branch and bloom. In fact, that's beautiful.

But if you lose your roots, if you allow your roots to die...well, then the whole thing is just gonna fall over dead. Some kinda rot, you know. And that's a sad day in hell right there.

But if your roots are strong, no matter what storm comes to rip apart the branches and bloom, you will live to blossom again.

so..yeah...

[fchopin]

I think the figures are wrong.

The reason it shows only a small percentage of people finished the game is because people played the game many times but only completed the game some of the times.
I played the game about 20 times, finished the game about 7 times, about 7 times stopped playing before the final mission and the other times trying different origins.

So if you take my score i have 7 finishes and 14 not finished.

For me that means that the game was good and was replayed a lot but not finished every time.

The bad games are not replayed many times so have a higher completion rate.

Modifié par fchopin, 28 novembre 2012 - 11:53 .

[Maria Caliban]

Viktoria Landers wrote...
What does this number show us? That number shows that all of us who completed DAO even once are in fact a minority. And those who played a second walkthrough, in order to choose different choices this time and obviously experience the RPG to it's full potential are even less. Probably less than 10%

Okay, I follow you so far. People who finished it once are a minority and people who finished it twice, and I never did this, are an even smaller minority.

That means there is the majority of players behind every game who buy the video game and probably some extra DLCs, play a little with it and eventually get bored and drop it.

Yes.

Subsequently they are also not involved afterwards in the forums or anywhere else, that's why they are silent too.

I disagree. You have no evidence of this. Lots of people post on internet forums about games they’ve played, even if they don’t finish the game. Every new release has a spate of new posters who log on just to express dissatisfaction (or sometimes pleasure) about an aspect of the game. We have no idea how many of them later finish it.

Personally, I express options about games I haven’t finished all the time.

So when corporations produce video games and seek to have big sales (that's not a bad thing of course), they want their product to appeal to their potential customers and the silent majority will obviously give them the biggest part of the revenue.

Yes.

That means the game needs to be mostly appealing to their needs which is often not a good thing.

This is where the argument falls apart. There’s no evidence that games which appeal to people who aren’t you are inferior in quality. You can only think so if your definition of quality is simply ‘what I, and people like me, enjoy.’

I hate coffee and beer. The majority of people drink and enjoy those beverages. Should I suggest making those beverages isn’t a ‘good thing?’ Every year, a bunch of blockbuster films come out that I’m not interested in. Does my lack of interest mean those films are bad?

That's why I think they are doing a disservice to us, who love these series and desperately want it to be something good.

Except there are a large number of people on the BioWare forums who love BioWare games. Heck, if you take away the ending, the vast majority of posters loved ME 3. Opinion on DA 2 is split, so you can’t even say that your displeasure is that of the ‘unsilent minority’ that makes up the forums.

[Maria Caliban]

fchopin wrote...

I think the figures are wrong.

The reason it shows only a small percentage of people finished the game is because people played the game many times but only completed the game some of the times.

The figure is whether someone finished the game or not. You can't say 'the figure is wrong' and then complain it measures the wrong thing.

They know if someone finished the game or not.
They know if someone quit the game and then restarted.
They know where people quit the game.

[Sylvius the Mad]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Just because someone doesn't complete the game doesn't mean he doesn't replay it. Nor does it mean he moves on to something else.

The OP's analysis is shallow.

There's some truth to that, Sylvius, but--have you ever completed it? Surely at least once?

I expect it doesn't matter so much whether I have ever completed it, but whether I completed it in a timely manner.  The OP's quoted stats were produced at a specific time.  Anyone who hadn't completed the game yet would have been counted and someone who never completed it.

And that's simply not accurate.

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Be careful taking one's own experiences and ascribing them to other people, however.

My own experiences are irrelevant to my point.  The OP made an unsupported inference, and then based her analysis on it.

Take this as you will, but I consider you very unique among the gaming population (based on my interactions with them for the better part of 15 or so years).

They'll come around eventually.

[fchopin]

Maria Caliban wrote...

fchopin wrote...

I think the figures are wrong.

The reason it shows only a small percentage of people finished the game is because people played the game many times but only completed the game some of the times.

The figure is whether someone finished the game or not. You can't say 'the figure is wrong' and then complain it measures the wrong thing.

They know if someone finished the game or not.
They know if someone quit the game and then restarted.
They know where people quit the game.

To be correct it would have to show how many times each unique serial number game was completed and only counted one time even if that unique game had several completions.
 
How do you know what system was used to do the counting?

Modifié par fchopin, 29 novembre 2012 - 12:22 .

[withneelandi]

Its an odd one, personally I'd completed DAO multiple times before I even had an xbox live or BSN log in, so how do people like me factor into those stats?

I am sceptical about how that figure could be accurately measured and a little concerned about the sort of design decisions it might be used to justify. (the majority won't play this twice, why bother with replay value?) Probably a massive over simplification of the issue, but you get the point.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Lightning Cloud wrote...

Wait a second... Did someone say Origins had an art style?

It's called "Realist".  I really like it.

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Bethesda's games are the worst games for assessing quality based on whether or not someone completed the main plot. I'd argue the main plot for those types of games are included simply for the people that find a game lacking if it doesn't have one.

I would argue that all roleplaying games are similar in this regard.  Whether someone completes the main plot tells us nothing of value.