204 réponses à ce sujet

[Fast Jimmy]

^

They could always just scrap the Save Import.

[Steppenwolf]

They already said they're not going to do that.

[Fast Jimmy]

They could always scrap the Save Import FILES.

[Looper128]

According to allot of sources and a statement from EA themself it looks like we sadly wont see DA: I on the current gen consoles.

Sources:

http://www.ign.com/a...aiming-for-2014

http://www.gamefront...-consoles-only/

http://www.nowgamer....gen_rumour.html

http://www.polygon.c...soles-according

EA's statment: http://www.ign.com/a...s-late-in-cycle

[Steppenwolf]

Lopper128 wrote...

According to allot of sources and a statement from EA themself it looks like we sadly wont see DA: I on the current gen consoles.

Sources:

http://www.ign.com/a...aiming-for-2014

http://www.gamefront...-consoles-only/

http://www.nowgamer....gen_rumour.html

http://www.polygon.c...soles-according

EA's statment: http://www.ign.com/a...s-late-in-cycle

All of those articles site a single source. It doesn't matter if a lot of different outlets are reporting that because they're all using a single(dubious) source. And that statement from EA has no relevance since Dragon Age is already an established franchise.

[Atakuma]

Ninja'd

Modifié par Atakuma, 03 janvier 2013 - 01:41 .

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

No way of knowing and BioWare isn't telling.

My guess is that it will probably be available for current gen, but I am basing this on a few factors which may prove to be completely irrelevant:

1) Frostbite 2 can run on current gen systems. It is scalable, meaning it can be adapted for current as well as next gen consoles.

2) EA and BioWare are interested in maximizing their profits, as companies are intended to. Making the game available on as many platforms as possible (PC, current gen consoles, next gen consoles) helps to maximize their profits.

3) BioWare has, at least from what I've seen, been about making games that have tight production values and look good, while not necessarily aiming for bleeding edge visuals; DA:I is a BW RPG, not the next installment in the Crysis series.

4) Counting on all of us who own DA:O and DA2 on console just throwing up our arms and shelling out money for a newly minted console just to play DA3 is a pretty big gamble, and not all of us are willing or financially able to do it. Personally, I'd prefer to play it on my old 360, which is solid and reliable, versus a newly released 720, which like the 360 upon initial release, is going to have kinks the system, defects yet to be discovered. I bought my current gen console a few years after its initial release, but I remember the horror stories some friends told me about their brand new XBoxes back in 2005-2006.

Like I said, though, I could be way wrong, and we'll just have to wait and see...

Modifié par The Teryn of Whatever, 03 janvier 2013 - 04:12 .

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

BasilKarlo wrote...

All of those articles site a single source. It doesn't matter if a lot of different outlets are reporting that because they're all using a single(dubious) source. And that statement from EA has no relevance since Dragon Age is already an established franchise.

I think if they do go strictly next gen on the console front, they'll end up pissing a lot of people off.
Doubly so if BioWare end up not finding a way to successfully transfer files between current gen and next gen systems. I know I'll be mad if that happens, and does BW really need more backlash?

Modifié par The Teryn of Whatever, 04 janvier 2013 - 06:56 .

[Steppenwolf]

Worse than agitating their user base by forcing them to buy a next-gen console for a game that was developed on current-gen consoles is knowingly reducing sales of a game that's make or break for the entire franchise. Going next-gen only makes zero sense. And releasing on current-gen and next-gen makes very little sense considering the investment required.

[XX-Pyro]

BasilKarlo wrote...

Worse than agitating their user base by forcing them to buy a next-gen console for a game that was developed on current-gen consoles is knowingly reducing sales of a game that's make or break for the entire franchise. Going next-gen only makes zero sense. And releasing on current-gen and next-gen makes very little sense considering the investment required.

Sums up my thoughts as well. Although there are some slight benefits to making it appear on both generations of consoles.

Current gen- obviously if they have any plans on profiting from this game it will appear on this iteration of consoles.

Next gen- they have to start sometime, and honestly porting it over and at the same time learning how to navigate the new systems might be better done here than with a completely new game. However, if we are arguing solely based off of profits, I'd agree that having it next gen at all would be a poor investment decision in all regards.

[Doctoglethorpe]

Still ignoring the benefits of being a launch title I see. This thread is going absolutely no where.

[Steppenwolf]

Doctor Moustache wrote...

Still ignoring the benefits of being a launch title I see. This thread is going absolutely no where.

There are no benefits. It would mean reduced sales. Any benefits you think being a launch title garners are automatically moot.

[XX-Pyro]

Doctor Moustache wrote...

Still ignoring the benefits of being a launch title I see. This thread is going absolutely no where.

There are none, especially not to the RPG crowd.

I guess there are three fathomable situations we can debate here.

1) The game is sold solely on the current generation. 

To me, this makes the most sense. They maximize development time as well as profits, due to the fact that they don't have to worry about porting it to the new console (despite how rigged with complications that would be regardless). Time is money, and this way they get the most time to perfect their game before it is released.

Players also don't have to go out and buy a new console- which only an insiginificant amount would compared to the amount still playing on the current generation.

2) The game is crosses both this generation of consoles and the next.

Here are the drawbacks;

The first is that it cuts development time in a significant manner for a very low benefit. More importantly, however, if the game is available on the current generation, this effectively decreases the sales they would make from the iteration of the game that is sold on the next generation of consoles. Why would I go out and buy a PS4 for DA:I when I can play it on my PS3? No reason whatsoever. This option solely depends on the next generation of consoles having a decent library of games and solid consumer base (which, it won't). I wouldn't stake my profits on the hopes that other developers are making games for next generation consoles as well and that those games will sell.

3) The game is sold solely on the next generation.

They lose a huge chunk of profits. Absolutely no logical reason behind this option. The amount of people willing to buy release consoles is miniscule, especially after the troubles the 360 gave people when they bought them. People generally wait a bit before shelfing out 300-400 dollars only to have it blow up in their face.

Modifié par XX-Pyro, 03 janvier 2013 - 06:04 .

[Peer of the Empire]

Zippy72 wrote...

The next gen hasn't even been announced yet. Who knows? My best guess would be it makes little financial sense to develop exclusively for platforms that might not even materialise by the time you're ready to launch.

I foresee a great era of stagnation for Mankind

[The Spirit of Dance]

Doubt it. I mean think of all those importable save files of DA:O and DA2 that me and many other console players have.

[Bfler]

supremebloodwolf wrote...

Doubt it. I mean think of all those importable save files of DA:O and DA2 that me and many other console players have.

I still wonder how they will do the import. A developer once said, that DA2 doesn't use DLC flags of Origins and with an import into Awakening the game also "forgets" some flags.

So either all the decisions are irrelevant for DAI or you will need a pure Origins save + a save after the DLC's + a save after DA2.

Modifié par Bfler, 03 janvier 2013 - 06:59 .

[Doctoglethorpe]

XX-Pyro wrote...

Doctor Moustache wrote...

Still ignoring the benefits of being a launch title I see. This thread is going absolutely no where.

There are none, especially not to the RPG crowd.

Guess I'll just repost this and then say no further questions your honor. 

Doctor Moustache wrote...

People underestimate the
advantages to being a launch title. Lots of people looking for good
games to take their shiny new machine for a test drive with. Pretty
much guaranteed to stand out in a sparse pack, thus little in the way of
competition and easiest access to pick up new audiences. Not to
mention I'm sure in these times it will come with a healthy bonus from
the console manufacturers since the games being exclusive promote
incentive for upgrading.

And lets not kid ourselves, after
DA2's lackluster performance, the game NEEDS to stand out and reach a
larger audience. Being at the rear end of a dying generation wouldn't
help towards that at all.

Personally I still suspect it will be
released across both gens, just because thats EA's MO. Definitely not
less. But next gen exclusivity wouldn't really be that surprising if
they plan to make good use of it. Hard to tell with EA, they are chlk
full of bad decisions, but making DA3 exclusively next gen wouldn't be
one.

As much as you guys may naturally be conservative on the
topic, most of you will inevitably upgrade to next gen and buy the game
regardless. Maybe not day 1, but it'll happen. You're just fighting
change, as our species so effortlessly does. Its cute.

tl;dr: Good launch titles are a huge deal for multiple reasons and DA3 needs to stand out to succeed.  Put two and two together. 

As for releasing it solely on current gen, thats a terrible terrible idea.  All media attention will be focused on next gen, it will fall completely under the radar and fail.  Again, especially after DA2, Inquisition MUST stand out, and being a next gen launch title will give it exactly that. 

Modifié par Doctor Moustache, 03 janvier 2013 - 07:19 .

[Steppenwolf]

Launch titles NEVER sell as well as titles released later in a console's lifecycle. Most gamers don't buy new consoles in the launch window and sales data shows that launch titles don't maintain launch-window sales for more than a few weeks. By the time most gamers get around to buying the new console there are plenty of games to choose from and those launch titles are uglier and less impressive by that point.
Standing out in a launch library gains Bioware/EA nothing. They will sell more copies of DA3 releasing it on current-gen consoles.

[Steppenwolf]

Rubios wrote...

So there are no benefits on being the only (let's hope) good WRPG on a platform.

Cool story bro.

Yeah, being the only CRPG on the block for the period of any console's lowest software sales sure does sound appealing. Where's the eyeroll emoticon?

[XX-Pyro]

Media attention does not necessitate profit. And for the record I have read your posts I don't usually like arguing blindly, if I'd agreed I'd have said so. You it seems, did not read mine.

Since I can't be bothered reposting what I've said or even quoting it (yes, I'm that lazy), here's a TLDR version. Basic business and economic understanding, as well as the average understanding of previous console release history (read: 360 melting discs and fan problems) leads to the conclusion that releasing it on the current generation of consoles would maximize profits.

That's obviously a simpler analysis since quite obviously I have no clue what every factor Bioware or EA considers when making such a decision. Being a good launch title for a new generation of consoles however, in no way increases their profit margins. The people who buy new consoles at first release is incredibly minimal- and these "standout launch titles" would appeal to even less of them (considering the RPG market on consoles is vastly lower than that of on PC).

Can you read more than one line of my post next time?

Also, as a disclaimer, I'm not trying to parade this opinion as fact. I am however trying to argue that it is the most logical.

[Emzamination]

This thread is interestingly educational.

[Robhuzz]

Rubios wrote...

The Teryn of Whatever wrote...
3) BioWare has, at least from what I've seen, been about making games that have tight production values and look good, while not necessarily aiming for bleeding edge visuals; DA:I is a BW RPG, not the next installment in the Crysis series.

No. Just no.



Made by a smaller studio with a much lower budget, you can compare it to the beautiful DA:2 face from above and cry.

As much as I love CDP and am looking forward to their next game, let's not forget they are a Polish company. Their budget for TW2 was much lower than any 'Triple A' game but wages in Poland are also A LOT lower than those in Canada. They could maybe hire 3 or 4 times as many people for the same amount of money. And that'll definitely show.

They also got their priorities straight, there was little marketing for TW2, no lame marketing stunts like putting chobot in the game or the space edition BS that undoubtedly cost a lot of money that should've gone to game development instead. Two weeks after release I learned about it when people started talking about how good it was, then I bought it anyway.

Worse than agitating their user base by forcing them to buy a next-gen console for a game that was developed on current-gen consoles is knowingly reducing sales of a game that's make or break for the entire franchise. Going next-gen only makes zerosense. And releasing on current-gen and next-gen makes very little sense considering the investment required.

By that logic every game in the shifting phase should be made for both old and new consoles, still not utilizing the newer hardware. Where do you draw the line? When the next gen consoles have been out for a full year? Two years? When an established franchise is finished completely? Only starting completely new franchises every console generation?

I get that people have little incentive to buy a new console when there's still so few games for them but this industry has been standing still hardware wise for so long. Of course it's going to reduce sales at first since not everyone will buy a next gen console right of the bat but that's what they (developers and consumers) signed up for when they got into consoles imo.

Modifié par Robhuzz, 03 janvier 2013 - 10:54 .

[Noviere]

Lopper128 wrote...

According to allot of sources and a statement from EA themself it looks like we sadly wont see DA: I on the current gen consoles.

Sources:

http://www.ign.com/a...aiming-for-2014

http://www.gamefront...-consoles-only/

http://www.nowgamer....gen_rumour.html

http://www.polygon.c...soles-according

EA's statment: http://www.ign.com/a...s-late-in-cycle

Well, it's not a lot of sources, actually... It's one source, that has been reported by a lot of sites.

For those that didn't read the articles, the source is the LinkedIn profile for the "lead level designer for the EA Shanghai team" who worked on the game for 6 months, converting concept art into game levels.... or something like that. I'm not sure why he broke news of a release date delay/platform change on his resume...

As for EA's statement... It's talking about how they are only releasing sequels for the current gen, because they are saving new IPs for the next gen. Dragon Age 3 is obviously a sequel, not a new IP.

Modifié par Noviere, 03 janvier 2013 - 11:23 .