599 réponses à ce sujet

[dreamgazer]

No, but the past ten months or so sure have. Fans' rage has been exaggerated, irrational and acidic, which is somewhat unavoidable given the genre Mass Effect fits into, but the way the staff have navigated valid concerns with their narrative on a fundamental level doesn't bode well for their creative path and pursuits.

[dreamgazer]

Lathrim wrote...

It doesn't work like that. I don't "trust" a company. BioWare will develop their games, I will pay attention to it like I do with just about every RPG I hear of, and if what I see satisfies me, I buy it. If not, I don't. There is no trust here. I look at it on a game-by-game basis when it's about this sort of thing, not on their history as a whole.

Well, it depends on how you look at "trust", and how it differs from "blind faith".

I don't have blind faith in any production house, really, but given some of the issues with ME3---how they handled previous decisions like the rachni and proclaimed their importance, opting for a news reporter based on an IGN employee and killing off one already established in-universe via Twitter, how multiplayer factored into an "optimal ending", etc.---my capacity to trust BioWare at their word has certainly dwindled.  

How they've addressed said concerns in a public fashion hasn't helped.

[Benchpress610]

Lathrim wrote...

It doesn't work like that. I don't "trust" a company. BioWare will develop their games, I will pay attention to it like I do with just about every RPG I hear of, and if what I see satisfies me, I buy it. If not, I don't. There is no trust here. I look at it on a game-by-game basis when it's about this sort of thing, not on their history as a whole.

All valid points. However in the case of Mass Effect the “game by game” approach is not valid as there is a track record of two previous games that were good if not great. There were expectations for the third game. Let’s call it “trust” in a development team that so far had not disappointed.

[spirosz]

txgoldrush wrote...

iPoohCupCakes wrote...

I don't think it's Bioware, I think it's more of EA (Not saying that Bioware is innocent)
But after SWTOR and Dragon Age 2, I had a feeling that Bioware was slowly slipping away then BAM! Mass Effect 3.

And yet ME3 has over 70 perfect scores and over 20 GOTY awards including Game Informer, and was a sure nomination in most places.

Hell, it picked up reader awards and nearly beat Far Cry 3 on Gamespot, while winning reader's choice at Gamesradar and Escapist.

A lot of mainstream artists sell and make more money than people with talent and passion in the underground, what's your point?   

[spirosz]

frudi wrote...

And you bring up an excellent point I forgot to mention - the lack of defence of their fans. When the gaming "journalists" from all over the web were mocking and ridiculing the most dedicated and passionate fans of both Bioware and Mass Effect, what did Bioware do? Absolutely nothing.

To be fair, a lot of fans were horrible to Bioware, there was great criticism from many of us, but most got ignored from the hordes of hate.  

[clennon8]

Perhaps "trust" is the wrong word. "Good will" might be more appropriate. I would say I have quite a bit less good will toward Bioware than I used to. They will not be getting very much, if any, of my money moving forward.

[Dwailing]

If BioWare doesn't do something IT related (Which is to say, if they didn't intend it, since I know they won't change their plans because Artistic Integrity), they'll probably lose a lot of my business. I mean, I'll look at ME4 and DA3, but I won't preorder, and I'll wait to see what the reaction is.

[happy_daiz]

If they put out games that interest me, I'll buy them. I've just had to back off from the anger and disappointment, and lower my expectations for the future. Remove the pedestal, if you will.

My expectations of ME3 were not realistic, and I have to weigh that along with everything else.

Modifié par happy_daiz, 04 janvier 2013 - 04:27 .

[LinksOcarina]

Outsider edge wrote...

Xellith wrote...

Stuff like this kinda makes me not wanna buy full price games.  I pretty much get 2nd hand and sale only now.

"Michael Pachter said

The industry should give customers what they want, but it should not manage to the highest common denominator,” said Pachter. “The reason we get games like Max Payne and Alan Wake only every six years or so is that the developers strive for perfection, and whiny gamers are only going to cause their beloved games to take even longer between episodes. The BioWare guys are prolific, but if they slow down development of future games to make sure that everybody is happy, consumers will have even fewer choices, and will have something new to complain about. Game development is a balance between delighting consumers and making a profit, and if everyone focuses on guaranteeing 100 percent satisfaction, development costs will rise unacceptably, and nobody will make any money.”

You have to be careful about who you buy from.  Some are just in it for the money.  Thats how Mass Effect 3 came accross.  With EA pushing the release date to get it out as quickly as possible.  Bioware = slave of EA and EA wants your money.

Then you get something like the DayZ.  They are working on a standalone.  It was meant to be out in december, but they pushed back its release date so they could continue to improve it.  To attempt to guarantee an amazing experience.

I just dont see Bioware as being a company that cares anymore.  I see them as a company that wants money.  Mass Effect 3 needed at LEAST another 6 months development.  At LEAST.

I'd rather have a small selection of games avaliable and have each game be awesome, than have a lot of games avaliable and most of them not worth buying.

Hmm not too derail this topic too much but are u really pointing too the developers of  DayZ as a good example for Bioware?

The Developers that outright lied too customers, released an utterly broken product filled with bugs, threatened paying customers reporting bugs with bans, etc etc. Not too mention their project lead publicly lashing out at paying customers.

This is a game that actually got suspended from Steam because of it's fallout. You can say alot about Bioware and Mas Effect 3 but saying DaysZ is better is utterly ludicrous.

First, it was War Z,not  Day Z that was screwing over customers. So you are wrong in that criticism. 

Second, Day Z is a mod and should have no bearing in the discussion because its an unofficial game. When it does get released we shall see if its good or not, fan reaction is always saying yes though, and that is all that matters in the end right, a sort of "feel good" story regarding ARMA 2, a game only PC nerds likely played before. 

And Xellith, stop the drama with BioWare being an EA slave. BioWare is a branch of EA, if anything its mutual symbiosis. As much as I begrudge patchers choice of words, he is basically right in the core sense of what game development should be, it should be a balance between making consumers happy and gaining a profit so the company can keep making games. 

The trick is to find the balance, BioWare apparently didn't do that yet, or tried to and no one cared. Thats the biggest rub of all, isen't it? 

[crimzontearz]

Lathrim wrote...

Benchpress610 wrote...

Lathrim wrote...

It doesn't work like that. I don't "trust" a company. BioWare will develop their games, I will pay attention to it like I do with just about every RPG I hear of, and if what I see satisfies me, I buy it. If not, I don't. There is no trust here. I look at it on a game-by-game basis when it's about this sort of thing, not on their history as a whole.

All valid points. However in the case of Mass Effect the “game by game” approach is not valid as there is a track record of two previous games that were good if not great. There were expectations for the third game. Let’s call it “trust” in a development team that so far had not disappointed.

That much is true, I'll give you that. What I find strange is that mentality "Dragon Age II was crap so Mass Effect 3 will be crap", or, something more recent, "ME3 sucked and so will Inquisition". Honestly? I find it stupid. Both franchises have different teams, and other than a few key similarities are quite different from each other.

dreamgazer wrote...

Lathrim wrote...

It doesn't work like that. I don't "trust" a company. BioWare will develop their games, I will pay attention to it like I do with just about every RPG I hear of, and if what I see satisfies me, I buy it. If not, I don't. There is no trust here. I look at it on a game-by-game basis when it's about this sort of thing, not on their history as a whole.

Well, it depends on how you look at "trust", and how it differs from "blind faith".

I don't have blind faith in any production house, really, but given some of the issues with ME3---how they handled previous decisions like the rachni and proclaimed their importance, opting for a news reporter based on an IGN employee and killing off one already established in-universe via Twitter, how multiplayer factored into an "optimal ending", etc.---my capacity to trust BioWare at their word has certainly dwindled.  

How they've addressed said concerns in a public fashion hasn't helped.

That is a different thing, I think. I honestly expect to find myself skeptical to believe anything BioWare says about future Mass Effect titles ever since Casey Hudson (I think, please correct me if it was someone else) stated the endings would not be "A, B and C", only for us to find that is exactly what they are.

Moreover, if they were to announce the next ME game will continue Shepard's story (yes, I know this most likely won't happen, 'tis just an hypothetical situation), I would most likely not buy the game for the singleplayer... simply because I do not find myself interested in that storyline anymore, due to the way Mass Effect 3 ended.

But if it is a different storyline (or franchise, such as their next game - DA:I), I do not think ME3 will affect my take on it at all.

you are missing part of the equation on your first response.

The problem is not that DA2 sucked thus ME3 will or ME3 was awful thus DA:I will too


 
It's more DA2/ME3 were given barely two years of dev cycle which resulted in awful shortcomings one right after the other...unless we see proof of this trend changing chances are ME4 and DA:I will suffer the same fate

[spirosz]

ME3 was given the same development time as ME2, did it not? Yet, ME2 felt way more polished.

[spirosz]

Lathrim wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

you are missing part of the equation on your first response.

The problem is not that DA2 sucked thus ME3 will or ME3 was awful thus DA:I will too
 
It's more DA2/ME3 were given barely two years of dev cycle which resulted in awful shortcomings one right after the other...unless we see proof of this trend changing chances are ME4 and DA:I will suffer the same fate

Perhaps. But honestly, I don't believe that is how the posts I read were meant to be seen.

It was a simple "X sucked, therefore so will Y". Believing the next game will fail because you noticed a trend in more than one of their recent games is perfectly okay, even if it is nothing but an assumption. However, thinking something will be awful because the previous did not satisfy you, assuming they are parts of different franchises and developed by different teams, quite ridiculous.

To be fair, you don't think EA gives the same type of limitations/budget to each team?  That can be a huge factor to how the game gets released.

Modifié par spirosz, 04 janvier 2013 - 04:34 .

[LinksOcarina]

spirosz wrote...

ME3 was given the same development time as ME2, did it not? Yet, ME2 felt way more polished.

Actually Mass Effect 3 Got more development time.

They began Mass Effect 2 in Early 2008 after BioWare was purchased by EA, and it came out in Jan of 2010. 

Production of Mass Effect 3 began in November of 2009, and was released in March of 2012. 

So just by the dates, Mass Effect 3 had at least six months extra development time. 

[crimzontearz]

Lathrim wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

you are missing part of the equation on your first response.

The problem is not that DA2 sucked thus ME3 will or ME3 was awful thus DA:I will too
 
It's more DA2/ME3 were given barely two years of dev cycle which resulted in awful shortcomings one right after the other...unless we see proof of this trend changing chances are ME4 and DA:I will suffer the same fate

Perhaps. But honestly, I don't believe that is how the posts I read were meant to be seen.

It was a simple "X sucked, therefore so will Y". Believing the next game will fail because you noticed a trend in more than one of their recent games is perfectly okay, even if it is nothing but an assumption. However, thinking something will be awful because the previous did not satisfy you, assuming they are parts of different franchises and developed by different teams, quite ridiculous.

I am not assuming...math and public statements are on my side. Sure his post was crudely put but after reflection there is truth to it.

[spirosz]

LinksOcarina wrote...

spirosz wrote...

ME3 was given the same development time as ME2, did it not? Yet, ME2 felt way more polished.

Actually Mass Effect 3 Got more development time.

They began Mass Effect 2 in Early 2008 after BioWare was purchased by EA, and it came out in Jan of 2010. 

Production of Mass Effect 3 began in November of 2009, and was released in March of 2012. 

So just by the dates, Mass Effect 3 had at least six months extra development time. 

If ME3 was released in it's original date, would it of been the same?  Strange, I thought I remember hearing a quote from the ME3 app that this was their shortest development with the most ambitious project yet. 

[LinksOcarina]

spirosz wrote...

Lathrim wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

you are missing part of the equation on your first response.

The problem is not that DA2 sucked thus ME3 will or ME3 was awful thus DA:I will too
 
It's more DA2/ME3 were given barely two years of dev cycle which resulted in awful shortcomings one right after the other...unless we see proof of this trend changing chances are ME4 and DA:I will suffer the same fate

Perhaps. But honestly, I don't believe that is how the posts I read were meant to be seen.

It was a simple "X sucked, therefore so will Y". Believing the next game will fail because you noticed a trend in more than one of their recent games is perfectly okay, even if it is nothing but an assumption. However, thinking something will be awful because the previous did not satisfy you, assuming they are parts of different franchises and developed by different teams, quite ridiculous.

To be fair, you don't think EA gives the same type of limitations/budget to each team?  That can be a huge factor to how the game gets released.

I think there are limitations yes, but they are reasonable ones. At least, they will be reasonable ones after the criticism Dragon Age II received. 

Got to remember Mass Effect 3 was delayed a few times before it was released. And considering Dragon Age: Inquisition is under wraps for the most part and is guarenteed a 2 and a half year development time at this point before going gold, id say the limits are increasing.

That said, it is hard to gague how long is too long, or too short. People would shout that RPGs need longer development times, but honestly Dragon Age: Origins is the exception to the rule for a 5-7 year development cycle, most games in that time fail miserably. 

[crimzontearz]

LinksOcarina wrote...

spirosz wrote...

ME3 was given the same development time as ME2, did it not? Yet, ME2 felt way more polished.

Actually Mass Effect 3 Got more development time.

They began Mass Effect 2 in Early 2008 after BioWare was purchased by EA, and it came out in Jan of 2010. 

Production of Mass Effect 3 began in November of 2009, and was released in March of 2012. 

So just by the dates, Mass Effect 3 had at least six months extra development time. 

which were added at the end to shoehorn the MP component. And I still think that is really not enough for a game like this

[LinksOcarina]

spirosz wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

spirosz wrote...

ME3 was given the same development time as ME2, did it not? Yet, ME2 felt way more polished.

Actually Mass Effect 3 Got more development time.

They began Mass Effect 2 in Early 2008 after BioWare was purchased by EA, and it came out in Jan of 2010. 

Production of Mass Effect 3 began in November of 2009, and was released in March of 2012. 

So just by the dates, Mass Effect 3 had at least six months extra development time. 

If ME3 was released in it's original date, would it of been the same?  Strange, I thought I remember hearing a quote from the ME3 app that this was their shortest development with the most ambitious project yet. 

I don't have the APP so I don't know. But crunching the months based on the timetable the logical conclusion is that, unless they began Mass Effect 2 back in the summer of 2007, which would be interesting because the company was financially strapped at the time and was going through the buy with EA. 

Most ambitious I can agree with though, regardless of opinions. but I don't know if it would have been the same, thats a what if well never know. Maybe, maybe not. 

[LinksOcarina]

crimzontearz wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

spirosz wrote...

ME3 was given the same development time as ME2, did it not? Yet, ME2 felt way more polished.

Actually Mass Effect 3 Got more development time.

They began Mass Effect 2 in Early 2008 after BioWare was purchased by EA, and it came out in Jan of 2010. 

Production of Mass Effect 3 began in November of 2009, and was released in March of 2012. 

So just by the dates, Mass Effect 3 had at least six months extra development time. 

which were added at the end to shoehorn the MP component. And I still think that is really not enough for a game like this

Yeah...you have no proof of that. So don't say it. 

[estebanus]

Not ME3 itself, no. I think one of the things that mostly impacted my view of them was their reaction to the fan outcry.
Plus, my opinion of them also changed when EA bought them, and heavily when DA2 and SWTOR was released,

[crimzontearz]

No proof..but theory fits the evidence

Especially after the recent EA boasts

And as I said even with the extra six months? Not enough time