599 réponses à ce sujet

[Optimus J]

Xx_Belzak_xX wrote...

I shouldn't be surprised by what Bioware has become. Really. Every gaming company that becomes as successful as Bioware and EA eventually forget that we the fans MADE THEM. They become so successful, that they become arrogant, viewing their customers as little more than pawns to be tossed aside as they see fit. The responses and actions Bioware has taken this last year are truly abhorrent. At this point, they are no better than EA.

I used to love Bioware, just as I used to love Square Soft/Enix, Capcom, etc, etc. But after this last year, I feel comfortable to say this; I will thoroughly enjoy watching both EA and Bioware crash and burn. Unless they turn their acts around, that is their eventual destination; an impact crater in a firey explosion. When you **** on the people who practically made you, you deserve to fail.

Not EVERY Company. Blizzard for instance had his game director purposely sabotaging his own game in the Cataclysm expansion, so he could prove to the part of the development that was siding with people complaining about the great days of the past, they were wrong.

And I like to remember the guys that sabotaged their own game, in order to have assets to define how to shape it from then on, were former Ubisoft. Thing is the game is recovering steadily.

Still in Blizzard, let's get another of their 3 main IPs: Diablo 3. That game followed closely the Bioware style of construction. Eliminated "videogamey" features, was build around monetization and DRM,and spent way more resources in looks and marketing, than in program systems. And we all know how it ended.

And I have to remember they too isolated themselves and blamed the players until Mike Morhaime got angry and not only said to them fix it, but also designated people from WoW and SC2 to watch over D3. I bet the next move is to announce that together with the first expansion they will release an offline patch, just as people is asking, at Blizzcon 2013. Unlike Muzyka and Zeschuk that quit.



Since it seem there is a few people here that really read and pay attention I'll give my 2 cents on WHERE it originates on EA:
The problem not only on Bioware, but in ALL EA is the same that hit Hollywood as waves from time to time....
Someone create a hit. It's a huge success. People wanting easy money, take the reason of that success out of context and make a shallow parody of that, and then sit on their hands waiting the same results, and a lot of money.

Are you people noticing how the games on EA are all homogenized? Everything is with unnecessary always online DRM,sending reports of every action of the player to Origin, with micro-transations, and forced co-op, making you HAVE to count on strangers to unlock features on you single-player game. On EA, not only Bioware. And how the development cycles are becoming shorter an shorter and everything end being released incomplete, with DLCs completing in-disc content that were cut?

Every single characteristic of the last paragraph can be tracked on a competitor as source of inspiration, but not example of execution. The copy is always shallow.

So, or EA change or Developers deny the shackles that being "yes-men" put on then. I guess none of the option have the slightest chance of develop.

[crimzontearz]

Epök wrote...

TheRealJayDee wrote...

Epök wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
2: Stan, I like your new approach but you are cherry picking

While I disagree with Stan, at least he takes his time and he is really constructive. This part of the forum desperately needed it.
But that kind of stuff should be the job of the Community Team, not him.

That's the thing: it's great of him to come here and talk with us, I honestly appreciate it and I think he's a really nice guy and his post can be very informative about the procceses involved in making a game. But in the end it's kind of the same as before - what good does it bring? He can't really do anything about the major problems some of us have. Imo by far the most constructive and sincere looking attempts here on the ME3 section of the BSN (other than multiplayer stuff) at communicating with us about what went wrong came pretty late and not from the ME team or even the community managers but from 1) Allan Schumacher, a dev from the DA team hanging out with us in his spare time and 2) Stan, who doesn't even work at Bioware anymore and just moderates the forums because he likes it here (fool! ^^). It shouldn't be this way, I believe. 

I know it won't help, but that's a start. The lack of communication beetwen the fanbase and the community team is not good at all. I know they don't want to answer for now, but at some point, they'll have to. It's this, or they'll lose their fanbase (or what's left of it)
Besides, Stan provides some insight regarding game development. So yeah, I'll take it. For now. 

@ Crimzontearz :
Oh don't worry, I believe you. A development is never easy and in this case, it is clear that there's been a lot of debate inside the team. 

 
Well let me tell you this then. Apparently Casey always argued strongly for a happy ending as an option....it never made it to the final game.

I still wonder WTF happened

[Optimus J]

crimzontearz wrote...
Well let me tell you this then. Apparently Casey always argued strongly for a happy ending as an option....it never made it to the final game.

I still wonder WTF happened

Being extremely dry on that: the happy ending MADE into the game.

The end of Mass Effect 3 is that perfect homage to Casey's favorite game (Deus-Ex), that he always wanted. Happy...Ending...

Modifié par Optimus J, 05 janvier 2013 - 02:05 .

[Outsider edge]

All that Blizzard love above. Unfortunately you don't have a single piece of evidence too back up your statements. Blizzard is nickle and diming people aswell even too this day. The influence of Activision is easily noticable in their efforts for these last 3 years or so. Cataclysm was just halfarsed. That expansion went on for 10+months without any new content. For a subscription MMO that's atrocious. MoP is having the same problems now but at least Blizzard got better at throwing up illusions. So you have heavy gating through daillies too artificially prolong content and Cross Ream Zones too give the impression of a active gameworld.

Diablo 3 was primarily build around the real money AH so they could rake in more cash. The actual game was halfarsed aswell. It was essentially Diablo 2 with better graphics but less features and a ton of bugs at release. Not too mention the always online DRM that introduced lag in a singleplayer game...

Modifié par Outsider edge, 05 janvier 2013 - 02:13 .

[crimzontearz]

Optimus J wrote...

Xx_Belzak_xX wrote...

I shouldn't be surprised by what Bioware has become. Really. Every gaming company that becomes as successful as Bioware and EA eventually forget that we the fans MADE THEM. They become so successful, that they become arrogant, viewing their customers as little more than pawns to be tossed aside as they see fit. The responses and actions Bioware has taken this last year are truly abhorrent. At this point, they are no better than EA.

I used to love Bioware, just as I used to love Square Soft/Enix, Capcom, etc, etc. But after this last year, I feel comfortable to say this; I will thoroughly enjoy watching both EA and Bioware crash and burn. Unless they turn their acts around, that is their eventual destination; an impact crater in a firey explosion. When you **** on the people who practically made you, you deserve to fail.

Not EVERY Company. Blizzard for instance had his game director purposely sabotaging his own game in the Cataclysm expansion, so he could prove to the part of the development that was siding with people complaining about the great days of the past, they were wrong.

And I like to remember the guys that sabotaged their own game, in order to have assets to define how to shape it from then on, were former Ubisoft. Thing is the game is recovering steadily.

Still in Blizzard, let's get another of their 3 main IPs: Diablo 3. That game followed closely the Bioware style of construction. Eliminated "videogamey" features, was build around monetization and DRM,and spent way more resources in looks and marketing, than in program systems. And we all know how it ended.

And I have to remember they too isolated themselves and blamed the players until Mike Morhaime got angry and not only said to them fix it, but also designated people from WoW and SC2 to watch over D3. I bet the next move is to announce that together with the first expansion they will release an offline patch, just as people is asking, at Blizzcon 2013. Unlike Muzyka and Zeschuk that quit.



Since it seem there is a few people here that really read and pay attention I'll give my 2 cents on WHERE it originates on EA:
The problem not only on Bioware, but in ALL EA is the same that hit Hollywood as waves from time to time....
Someone create a hit. It's a huge success. People wanting easy money, take the reason of that success out of context and make a shallow parody of that, and then sit on their hands waiting the same results, and a lot of money.

Are you people noticing how the games on EA are all homogenized? Everything is with unnecessary always online DRM,sending reports of every action of the player to Origin, with micro-transations, and forced co-op, making you HAVE to count on strangers to unlock features on you single-player game. On EA, not only Bioware. And how the development cycles are becoming shorter an shorter and everything end being released incomplete, with DLCs completing in-disc content that were cut?

Every single characteristic of the last paragraph can be tracked on a competitor as source of inspiration, but not example of execution. The copy is always shallow.

So, or EA change or Developers deny the shackles that being "yes-men" put on then. I guess none of the option have the slightest chance of develop.

I want to add to this.


 
Always online DRM reports of players gaming habits can be insanely detrimental for large companies. Don't get me wrong I understand it is a fine thing to spot inconsistencies and what not like "uh guys...95% of players only use the shotgun in MP...we might need to nerf it" but large companies are using this data to find out what is a sure sale given players current preferences and canning the rest.


 
Here is a scenario, let us say Portal was never released (I know, heresy). An upstart developer goes to EA and says "hey I got this idea about an FPS puzzle game where you use a blue/orange portal gun to bend space and physics to your will to progress from puzzle to puzzle."...and EA response might very well be "well there is no data as per how such game would be received....so...nope sorry, not a sure sale"


 
See where I am going?

Modifié par crimzontearz, 05 janvier 2013 - 02:11 .

[Xx_Belzak_xX]

Optimus J wrote...

Xx_Belzak_xX wrote...

I shouldn't be surprised by what Bioware has become. Really. Every gaming company that becomes as successful as Bioware and EA eventually forget that we the fans MADE THEM. They become so successful, that they become arrogant, viewing their customers as little more than pawns to be tossed aside as they see fit. The responses and actions Bioware has taken this last year are truly abhorrent. At this point, they are no better than EA.

I used to love Bioware, just as I used to love Square Soft/Enix, Capcom, etc, etc. But after this last year, I feel comfortable to say this; I will thoroughly enjoy watching both EA and Bioware crash and burn. Unless they turn their acts around, that is their eventual destination; an impact crater in a firey explosion. When you **** on the people who practically made you, you deserve to fail.

Not EVERY Company. Blizzard for instance had his game director purposely sabotaging his own game in the Cataclysm expansion, so he could prove to the part of the development that was siding with people complaining about the great days of the past, they were wrong.

And I like to remember the guys that sabotaged their own game, in order to have assets to define how to shape it from then on, were former Ubisoft. Thing is the game is recovering steadily.

Still in Blizzard, let's get another of their 3 main IPs: Diablo 3. That game followed closely the Bioware style of construction. Eliminated "videogamey" features, was build around monetization and DRM,and spent way more resources in looks and marketing, than in program systems. And we all know how it ended.

And I have to remember they too isolated themselves and blamed the players until Mike Morhaime got angry and not only said to them fix it, but also designated people from WoW and SC2 to watch over D3. I bet the next move is to announce that together with the first expansion they will release an offline patch, just as people is asking, at Blizzcon 2013. Unlike Muzyka and Zeschuk that quit.



Since it seem there is a few people here that really read and pay attention I'll give my 2 cents on WHERE it originates on EA:
The problem not only on Bioware, but in ALL EA is the same that hit Hollywood as waves from time to time....
Someone create a hit. It's a huge success. People wanting easy money, take the reason of that success out of context and make a shallow parody of that, and then sit on their hands waiting the same results, and a lot of money.

Are you people noticing how the games on EA are all homogenized? Everything is with unnecessary always online DRM,sending reports of every action of the player to Origin, with micro-transations, and forced co-op, making you HAVE to count on strangers to unlock features on you single-player game. On EA, not only Bioware. And how the development cycles are becoming shorter an shorter and everything end being released incomplete, with DLCs completing in-disc content that were cut?

Every single characteristic of the last paragraph can be tracked on a competitor as source of inspiration, but not example of execution. The copy is always shallow.

So, or EA change or Developers deny the shackles that being "yes-men" put on then. I guess none of the option have the slightest chance of develop.

Yeah, poor choice of words on my part. Not every company is like that, but it's easy to forget when you've seen so many companies go the same way.
And yes, I know all about EA. Bioware never should have signed up with them in the first place though, but from a business perspective, I can understand it; EA has money. Despite this, joining EA was like selling your soul to the devil. 

EA and Activision are both cancer, but like I said, it's up to them and everyone like them, to get their acts together or they will eventually fail. Companies that turn their backs on their fans and/or treat them like crap deserve to fail.

[The Spamming Troll]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

Now, to be fair, no one is forcing anyone to play anything now, ten months after release. I understand why a minority is so disappointed, but to be quite honest, I think it might be time to move on. There's a lot of good RPGs out there at the moment you could all try out, in my opinion.

I'm not telling that this is what you should do, I'm simply trying to help you all, and to be fair, I think that's pretty noble of me. If any of you wants to talk about the ending, you can always send me a PM. I'm fair and balanced, so if you want to talk, hit me up.

In my opinion.

i bet you havent once changed someones mind about ME3s awfullness.

youve obviously done a great job convincing yourself that your right tho.

[crimzontearz]

Optimus J wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
Well let me tell you this then. Apparently Casey always argued strongly for a happy ending as an option....it never made it to the final game.

I still wonder WTF happened

Being extremely dry on that: the happy ending MADE into the game.

The end of Mass Effect 3 is that perfect homage to Casey's favorite game (Deus-Ex), that he always wanted. Happy...Ending...

let me rephrase, the actual statement from the dev said "a happy non messianic sacrifice ending"


 
Better?

[Optimus J]

Outsider edge wrote...

All that Blizzard love above. Unfortunately you don't have a single piece of evidence too back up your statements. Blizzard is nickle and diming people aswell even too this day. The influence of Activision is easily noticable in their efforts for these last 3 years or so. Cataclysm was just halfarsed. That expansion went on for 10+months without any new content. For a subsription MMO that's atrocious. MoP is having the same problems now but at least Blizzard got better at throwing up illusions. So you have heavy gating through daillies too artificially prolong content and Cross Ream Zones too give the impression of a active gameworld.

Diablo 3 was primarily build around the real money AH so they could rake in more cash. The actual game was halfarsed aswell. It was essentially Diablo 2 with better graphics but less featured and a ton of bugs at release. Not too mention the always online DRM that introduced lag in a singleplayer game...

OK, I guess that earnings call with one expansion peaking at 12 million subscribers, then bleending to 8 million, and then in a "farse of gated artificial content" recovering to 10 million and growing, with complains  such as "new models for raids bosses because Dragon Soul sucked" being fully addressed is just a bunch of made up stuff.

Yeah, no evidence around...


Well, perhaps one day they will be so good as SWTOR... Who knows....

[Optimus J]

Xx_Belzak_xX wrote...

Yeah, poor choice of words on my part. Not every company is like that, but it's easy to forget when you've seen so many companies go the same way.
And yes, I know all about EA. Bioware never should have signed up with them in the first place though, but from a business perspective, I can understand it; EA has money. Despite this, joining EA was like selling your soul to the devil. 

EA and Activision are both cancer, but like I said, it's up to them and everyone like them, to get their acts together or they will eventually fail. Companies that turn their backs on their fans and/or treat them like crap deserve to fail.

No, they weren't a poor choice. You just skimmed and missed important points such as:

Optimus J wrote...

And I like to remember the guys that sabotaged their own game, in order to have assets to define how to shape it from then on, were former Ubisoft. Thing is the game is recovering steadily.

[Brovikk Rasputin]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

Now, to be fair, no one is forcing anyone to play anything now, ten months after release. I understand why a minority is so disappointed, but to be quite honest, I think it might be time to move on. There's a lot of good RPGs out there at the moment you could all try out, in my opinion.

I'm not telling that this is what you should do, I'm simply trying to help you all, and to be fair, I think that's pretty noble of me. If any of you wants to talk about the ending, you can always send me a PM. I'm fair and balanced, so if you want to talk, hit me up.

In my opinion.

i bet you havent once changed someones mind about ME3s awfullness.

youve obviously done a great job convincing yourself that your right tho.

Now, to be fair, I'm always right.

In my opinion.

[Xx_Belzak_xX]

Optimus J wrote...

Xx_Belzak_xX wrote...

Yeah, poor choice of words on my part. Not every company is like that, but it's easy to forget when you've seen so many companies go the same way.
And yes, I know all about EA. Bioware never should have signed up with them in the first place though, but from a business perspective, I can understand it; EA has money. Despite this, joining EA was like selling your soul to the devil. 

EA and Activision are both cancer, but like I said, it's up to them and everyone like them, to get their acts together or they will eventually fail. Companies that turn their backs on their fans and/or treat them like crap deserve to fail.

No, they weren't a poor choice. You just skimmed and missed important points such as:

Optimus J wrote...

And I like to remember the guys that sabotaged their own game, in order to have assets to define how to shape it from then on, were former Ubisoft. Thing is the game is recovering steadily.

No, it was a poor choice of words. I need to remember that not all companies are the same. Also, I didn't skim, and that point has nothing to do with my choice of words. 

[adneate]

Short answer, yes completely destroyed the company, it's image and any goodwill I ever had towards them.

Long answer, it's less the game itself and the stupid ending that makes no sense and more the reaction to the backlash by EA and it's BioWare surrogates. Endings are hard and sometimes they suck or don't make sense, Battlestar Galactica's ending is stupid but I still love episodes like Exodus, You Can't Go Home Again and 33 they are amazing even knowing where it all ends up. Fallout 3 has a crappy ending that makes no sense, the reason I didn't swear a blood oath of vengeance upon the dev team and their children was because after release Todd Howard and lead writer Emil Pagliarulo did an in depth interview with 1up.com where they talked about stuff that worked and things that didn't like the stupid ending. They explained what they tried with the ending and that it didn't work too well judging by the reaction.

That's what was needed, someone asking tough questions about the game and it's ending and customers and fans getting some honest answers. If you screwed up or tried something and failed just explain to me what you were trying to do and admit it didn't work and move on. Don't tell me it's actually awesome but I have to buy it and play it to find out! Frak you I already bought it, almost a year later I don't get it and I don't want to hear some fan tell he what he or she thinks it means. I want the lead writer to tell what the hell this is, what everything means, why he thought it was a good idea and what in holy hell he was thinking when he ended the franchise with a magical seven year old.

Until I get that things with BioWare or EA written on them couldn't be less appealing to me if they were covered in dead plague rats and used hypodermic needles.

[Outsider edge]

Optimus J wrote...

Outsider edge wrote...

All that Blizzard love above. Unfortunately you don't have a single piece of evidence too back up your statements. Blizzard is nickle and diming people aswell even too this day. The influence of Activision is easily noticable in their efforts for these last 3 years or so. Cataclysm was just halfarsed. That expansion went on for 10+months without any new content. For a subsription MMO that's atrocious. MoP is having the same problems now but at least Blizzard got better at throwing up illusions. So you have heavy gating through daillies too artificially prolong content and Cross Ream Zones too give the impression of a active gameworld.

Diablo 3 was primarily build around the real money AH so they could rake in more cash. The actual game was halfarsed aswell. It was essentially Diablo 2 with better graphics but less featured and a ton of bugs at release. Not too mention the always online DRM that introduced lag in a singleplayer game...

OK, I guess that earnings call with one expansion peaking at 12 million subscribers, then bleending to 8 million, and then in a "farse of gated artificial content" recovering to 10 million and growing, with complains  such as "new models for raids bosses because Dragon Soul sucked" being fully addressed is just a bunch of made up stuff.

Yeah, no evidence around...


Well, perhaps one day they will be so good as SWTOR... Who knows....

So subscription numbers went up after the release of a new expansion pack what a surprise. Now watch those numbers at the next earnings call and see if they can keep them.

Also there's is something especially blizzdrones never seem too understand. The bulk of the subscribers aren't even real subscribers. They play in Asia on a pay2play basis which generates alot less revenue since they only pay when they actually play the game. Not like in EU/US were u have tons of people still suckered into an annual pass that haven't logged in months among others. It's about a 7/3 ratio nowadays between the Asia model and the old subscription model still active in the EU/US.

So even their boasting about subscription numbers is something that needs further explanation. Not all subscribers are the same.

Asfor quality and quantity of people playing WoW. It's pretty obvious that game peaked in Wrath of the Lick King and has gone downhill ever since. Sure it can resurge once in a while due too a new expansion but the overall trend is downhill.

Modifié par Outsider edge, 05 janvier 2013 - 02:28 .

[Optimus J]

Xx_Belzak_xX wrote...
No, it was a poor choice of words. I need to remember that not all companies are the same. Also, I didn't skim, and that point has nothing to do with my choice of words. 

Well, then I have no other way to view it besides that you talk like EA and "never make mistakes". Because I see 2 huge contradictions, and 2 wrongs don't make a right.

My poor choice of words was to use Blizzard because they are related to Activision, and no matter the solid arguments on management, Blizzard still a poor choice because you don't like Activision for whatever?

And I just pointed that not all companies are the same and I'm wrong because you say not all companies are the same? What did I miss?

[Xx_Belzak_xX]

Optimus J wrote...

Xx_Belzak_xX wrote...
No, it was a poor choice of words. I need to remember that not all companies are the same. Also, I didn't skim, and that point has nothing to do with my choice of words. 

Well, then I have no other way to view it besides that you talk like EA and "never make mistakes". Because I see 2 huge contradictions, and 2 wrongs don't make a right.

My poor choice of words was to use Blizzard because they are related to Activision, and no matter the solid arguments on management, Blizzard still a poor choice because you don't like Activision for whatever?

And I just pointed that not all companies are the same and I'm wrong because you say not all companies are the same? What did I miss?

Ok, you seem intent on trying to start an argument here. So believe whatever you want, say whatever you want, I refuse to lured into a helmet and crayons match over the internet. Have a nice day.

[Optimus J]

Outsider edge wrote...
So subscription numbers went up after the release of a new expansion pack what a surprise. Now watch those numbers at the next earnings call and see if they can keep them.

No. Subscriptions numbers went DOWN after the release of an expansion, and kept dropping, as long as they insisted in listening to part of the customers. Which lead them to make a patch the stop the bleeding,and then a an expansion that recovered it, listening to the other portion of customers. Seriously it's like to feed pearls to the pigs.

Outsider edge wrote...
Also there's is something especially blizzdrones never seem too understand. The bulk of the subscribers aren't even real subscribers. They play in Asia on a pay2play basis which generates alot less revenue since they only pay when they actually play the game. Not like in EU/US were u have tons of people still suckered into an annual pass that haven't logged in months among others. It's about a 7/3 ratio nowadays between the Asia model and the old subscription model still active in the EU/US.

Something that Bio-drones never learn: Asking for SOURCES and establishing FACTS works both ways. It's just another tinfoil hat theory, until them. So, SOURCE?

Outsider edge wrote...
So even their boasting about subscription numbers is something that needs further explanation. Not all subscribers are the same.

Asfor quality and quantity of people playing WoW. It's pretty obvious that game peaked in Wrath of the Lick King and has gone downhill ever since. Sure it can resurge once in a while due too a new expansion but the overall trend is downhill.

Again, SOURCE since it's coming directly out of your mind, as it looks.
Mine can be found here. Unless you want to dispute that accusation on court, because this is watched by the national treasure.

Xx_Belzak_xX wrote...
Ok, you seem intent on trying to start
an argument here. So believe whatever you want, say whatever you want, I
refuse to lured into a helmet and crayons match over the internet. Have
a nice day.

Fine.You can keep BSN for yourself. I'm leaving again,

I finished what I wanted when I gave Stanley all the sources he challenged me to give. At least I helped one staff member know their people alittle better. It's a shame when so many many outsiders know them better than themselves.

KTHANXBYE

Modifié par Optimus J, 05 janvier 2013 - 02:45 .

[Outsider edge]

Optimus J wrote...

Outsider edge wrote...
So subscription numbers went up after the release of a new expansion pack what a surprise. Now watch those numbers at the next earnings call and see if they can keep them.

No. Subscriptions numbers went DOWN after the release of an expansion, and kept dropping, as long as they insisted in listening to part of the customers. Which lead them to make a patch the stop the bleeding,and then a an expansion that recovered it, listening to the other portion of customers. Seriously it's like to feed pearls to the pigs.

Outsider edge wrote...
Also there's is something especially blizzdrones never seem too understand. The bulk of the subscribers aren't even real subscribers. They play in Asia on a pay2play basis which generates alot less revenue since they only pay when they actually play the game. Not like in EU/US were u have tons of people still suckered into an annual pass that haven't logged in months among others. It's about a 7/3 ratio nowadays between the Asia model and the old subscription model still active in the EU/US.

Something that Bio-drones never learn: Asking for SOURCES and establishing FACTS works both ways. It's just another tinfoil hat theory, until them. So, SOURCE?

Outsider edge wrote...
So even their boasting about subscription numbers is something that needs further explanation. Not all subscribers are the same.

Asfor quality and quantity of people playing WoW. It's pretty obvious that game peaked in Wrath of the Lick King and has gone downhill ever since. Sure it can resurge once in a while due too a new expansion but the overall trend is downhill.

Again, SOURCE since it's coming directly out of your mind, as it looks.
Mine can be found here. Unless you want to dispute that accusation on court, because this is watched by the national treasure.

Xx_Belzak_xX wrote...
Ok, you seem intent on trying to start
an argument here. So believe whatever you want, say whatever you want, I
refuse to lured into a helmet and crayons match over the internet. Have
a nice day.

Fine.

This is something that has been discussed too death on Blizzard's own forums. Asia has a different subscription model heck they even have a different subsidiairy handling the servers. In Asia they pay for the time they spend online. When those players are offline they don't pay money. This is different with the subscription model used in EU/US where people have a normal subscription where they pay regardless if they are online or not.

In the earnings statements and general PR boasting Blizzard simply adds all the different subscription models on one big pile. Pay2play, normal subscriptions, annual passes are all attributed too their current 10million subscribers number. The difference lays with it's total profits. For example 2 million EU subscribers will likely rake in more revenue that 4-5 million Asia subscribers.

The pay2play model does have it's advantages especially for consumers. They only pay for actual gametime and because of that can excert pressure on things they want changed. For example recently Korea servers saw a mass merger due too declining playing hours (is less players in the pay2play model).
This in stark difference with EU/US situation. EU for exampe is approaching 50% of all active servers being flagged low populated. In a pay2play model the loss of revenue would force Blizzard into mergers yet the subscriptionmodel here apparently still generates enough income too go with the Cross realm Zones illusion while keeping all those pretty much fully deserted servers active while still staying in the black.

Modifié par Outsider edge, 05 janvier 2013 - 03:05 .

[sparkyo42]

Ninja Stan wrote...

Dark_Caduceus wrote...

Mass Effect 3 completed the process that Mass Effect 2 began, I'm very unlikely to ever buy a Bioware product again.

This kinda leads to another question that I'm reticent to ask, but it's related:

This kind of sentiment is brought up quite a bit, and more power to you for doing so. But for people who claim to be huge fans who had faith in the company and trusted them to release product that you wouldn't be disappointed in, sometimes all it takes is one bad product to make you change your mind.

I know I won't get a complete answer right now, but if the next Mass Effect game does what the marketing claims, is as good as the hype says it is, receives many top marks, and is said by fans to be pretty darn good, would that be enough to change your mind and restore that trust you once had? Would ME3 (and maybe DA2, if you lean that way) then be seen as statistical anomalies in BioWare's gameography, or has the trust been well and truly severed and each good, worthy game becomes but a stepping stone to restoring that faith?

It's been a long time since I've been on the BSN, I left after EC and this is the first time back.

Many others have said it better than I could, but I haven't touched a Bioware product since the EC and won't be. It doesn't matter to me that TOR has gone Free to play, it doesn't matter to me what other DLC is coming or what DA3 or ME4 will be as I won't touch them.

Actions have reprecussions and the after release conduct of Bioware has guaranteed that I'm not coming back to the company.

This is likely to be the last post but given that it's the first time I've seen a Mod asking this question I felt the need to respond.

[Femlob]

ld1449 wrote...

No.

Truth be told. Its not just Mass Effect 3's disasterous ending that broke my trust. It was more Bioware's response to it.

And sure you Stan can preach up and down that we the fans don't know the whole process, don't realize this or that going on behind closed doors and all the factors that come in to the decisions and thus can't get the full picture.

Well whoop-dee-doo.

That still doesn't change a very simple truth, that when this game went gold we were flat out lied to. I know that the rachni promise came no earlier than December, four months before the game went out. Casey Hudson's promise on the endings and how widely varried they were came out in january.

I don't know what happened behind closed doors, I don't know the factors for decisions made I don't have the full picture.

And quite frankly, I don't care because 1 I'm never going to have that full picture, and 2 there was never any sort of apology for these statements after the game went GOLD. I don't expect every promise even in the alpha stage of development to be carried through and to be apologized to when it falls out for whatever reason but after the game goes Gold with just 3 months before the release is inexcusable.

Then during the three months before the extended cut release you have Chris Priestly doing polls on "do you believe in the Indoc. Theory" not doing anything to rectify people getting their hopes up for the IT. Not even a statement at the begining. 

Another point where someone at Comic Conwas saying Gameplay elements are "most likely" going to be featured.

They screened questions at Comic Con

You have Merizian advertizing a world wide survey done by German fans on the ending only to discard the results which showed an overwhelming negativity/desire to cut the ending out, later when they supposedly didn't match up their own results (which they refused to release).

You then had Casey Hudson "interviewed" in house along with Mac walters in an interview that had NONE of the truly pertinent questions. Claiming that there was an "overwhelming" amount of people that did 'love' the endings.

So after you've given me a falsely advertized product, you hype the content up again, refuse to rectify the hype you've already built up, skirt away from fan questions at conventions, dismiss WORLD WIDE surveys that they advertize through twitter, Facebook, the BSN, Euro-gamer and IGN have an "in house" interview with soft ball questions and have the gall to lie practically to my face about how many people "loved" the ending? Even when they were hard wiring the extended cut content onto the Wii U versions to come with it automatically?

No. It wasn't the game that broke my trust. I could have forgiven that. I could have lived with that. Everybody makes mistakes we're all human.

It as the GROSS handling of the situation that broke my trust to the point  I won't even buy DA3 whenever it arrives. and even if the game lives up to be EVERYTHING promised (which you and I both know it will not) I wont purchase it. At best I'll borrow it. Even if I play it and LOVE it. I STILL wont Purchase it. Even if I play it Love it, and the company mannages to get through the third game without royally ****ing it up I STILL wont purchase it.

For me personally, somewhere down this road a line was crossed. And that is a very sad truth since Bioware has made several games that I play to this day.

Quoted for truth. A shitty game is one thing; lying your ass off, purposely evading the tough questions you know you have no sensible answer to and trying to blame your fans for your failure by claiming they're incapable of understanding and/or appreciating your genius is quite another.

There's a long list of BioWare figureheads who possess the incredible talent of constantly saying the wrong things at the wrong time and to the wrong people; it might not be such a bad idea to clean house before moving on from this clusterf*ck.

[crimzontearz]

Do not say that Femlob. It will earn you a ban

[Darth_Trethon]

I certainly feel the same way op. At the moment I still see hope that this next DLC, which has been announced to have all writers on it and plenty of VAs back to work, may do something for the endings. If they are reasonable and know what's good for them they'll fix the endings or at least make them better. They're not done with DLC yet and they stopped beating the "this is it, no more" drums months ago.

[MyAwesomeAfro]

I'd love to have another DLC that is actually good and influences the ending, Seriously.