333 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

More on topic, did I read Short's reply earlier correctly? Did I win my validity to post against the Save Import?

That we're nitpicking over what constitutes an acceptable exception to the argument posed is a testament to its strength.

That said:

Look, if we're talking about posts that either heavily cite and/or make consistent direct reference to specific statements on the exact subject being discussed by actual BioWare developers, that constitutes an exception.  Meet those standards and sure, suggest what you like.  I won't complain.  At least you've made the effort, and if, "I should do my best to learn what developers have actually said about this before posting my idea" is what people take away from this thread, I'd personally be okay with that.  Of course I can't speak for anyone else.  

That said, posters should still be prepared to accept that fact they still don't really have all the information.

Wulfram wrote...

People exposing their mistaken assumptions allows Bioware or others to address them, and thus potentially make them more accepting of the decisions that are made.

And the day BioWare decides to employ a "Head of BSN Education" that will be a valid counterargument.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 23 janvier 2013 - 08:45 .

[Fast Jimmy]

And the day BioWare decides to employ a "Head of BSN Education" that will be a valid counterargument.

One could, possibly, make the argument that since the BSN is a Community and that education is one part of Management, that the role could fall instead to a group of people who Manage the Community. Community Managers, we could call them.

[nightscrawl]

Pseudocognition wrote...

The baseless insistence that the presence of MP MUST somehow be affecting SP is armchair-developing.

I think that for the most part that people are afraid that the debacle with ME3 will repeat itself. Sure, they have the DLC now that fixes it, but it doesn't change the fact that it was released that way. I don't think they will make the same mistake again, but I do believe it has cast a pall on any MP plans Bioware has for Dragon Age, especially because there is barely any information available about the game as a whole, much less its MP feature.

I haven't played any of the ME games, but I did follow the asset problem closely. I have no interest whatsoever in MP. I played NWN, all of its expansions, and several player made modules and never once touched its MP feature. It didn't impact me at all, but other people enjoyed it. After ME3 there was talk about including MP for Dragon Age. Was I concerned because of ME3? Of course.

My concerns aren't over production values or zots being taken away from SP to go to the MP. I view that as back end stuff that doesn't concern me. I care about being forced to use a feature that I don't want because it somehow influences my SP game. That's ALL. Again, you can throw out the DLC all you want, it doesn't change the fact that the game was released that way.

People's MP fears don't exist in a vacuum. Until there is actual concrete information on the type of MP that DA3 is going to have, people will continue to be concerned.

[upsettingshorts]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

And the day BioWare decides to employ a "Head of BSN Education" that will be a valid counterargument.

One could, possibly, make the argument that since the BSN is a Community and that education is one part of Management, that the role could fall instead to a group of people who Manage the Community. Community Managers, we could call them.

Ask Chris Priestly if educating the BSN on the realities and nuances of game development is part of his job description or mandate.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 23 janvier 2013 - 08:51 .

[addiction21]

Wulfram wrote...

People exposing their mistaken assumptions allows Bioware or others to address them, and thus potentially make them more accepting of the decisions that are made.

I call bull on this. Maybe occasionally for someone here or there that actually happens. For the most part the person puts their fingers in their ears and mumbles "that developer is wrong or lying" and continues to repeat their baseless assumptions.
Just as in the thread where "The list provided more options then the dialogue wheel" that was thoroughly debunked by the professional developer and then most all of those either tried to ignore it or just wandered off. To pretend as if that never happened and repeat themselves later when the subject came up again.

[Pseudo the Mustachioed]

nightscrawl wrote...

I think that for the most part that people are afraid that the debacle with ME3 will repeat itself. Sure, they have the DLC now that fixes it, but it doesn't change the fact that it was released that way. I don't think they will make the same mistake again, but I do believe it has cast a pall on any MP plans Bioware has for Dragon Age, especially because there is barely any information available about the game as a whole, much less its MP feature.

I haven't played any of the ME games, but I did follow the asset problem closely. I have no interest whatsoever in MP. I played NWN, all of its expansions, and several player made modules and never once touched its MP feature. It didn't impact me at all, but other people enjoyed it. After ME3 there was talk about including MP for Dragon Age. Was I concerned because of ME3? Of course.

My concerns aren't over production values or zots being taken away from SP to go to the MP. I view that as back end stuff that doesn't concern me. I care about being forced to use a feature that I don't want because it somehow influences my SP game. That's ALL. Again, you can throw out the DLC all you want, it doesn't change the fact that the game was released that way.

People's MP fears don't exist in a vacuum. Until there is actual concrete information on the type of MP that DA3 is going to have, people will continue to be concerned.

Not liking an aspect of the final product and expressing that dislike is not armchair development... as has been stated multiple times in this thread.

[hoorayforicecream]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

But again, we are back to a point you and I were discussing yesterday.

It is fear that drives these posts. Fear from the player. Because if you say "I don't want SP to interact with MP, I don't want MP to have RNG microtransactions stores and that Horde mode in a DA MP does not sound at all appealing" Bioware, just may, listen to you and make a game that does all of the following. However, what if they DO cut the budget on the SP player because of it, where the story is rushed or the gameplay suffers?

It's not just the developer's fault or their mess to clean up. It's the players who are let down and see their favorite series go down the tubes. A bad business decision may not be something the average gamer can have any knowledge too, but that doesn't mean that game companies don't make them or that they don't hurt the players.

Saying "I don't want the budget of SP to be affected by MP" may not be an argument your average gamer can make, but that doesn't make it not any of their concern. Bad business decisions get made daily... HOURLY, even. Just because someone doesn't have a Ph.D in economics, a graduate degree in Computer Science and twenty years in the gaming industry doesn't mean they aren't afraid a bad business decision will get made by a game developer. Expressing that fear and concern shouldn't be banned or discouraged. Maybe phrased better or even framed better, sure.

But saying "you're not an expert, therefore you have nothing to worry about" is a silly mentality to promote in ANY industry.

Adding uninformed, baseless speculation will never help.

[Fast Jimmy]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

And the day BioWare decides to employ a "Head of BSN Education" that will be a valid counterargument.

One could, possibly, make the argument that since the BSN is a Community and that education is one part of Management, that the role could fall instead to a group of people who Manage the Community. Community Managers, we could call them.

Ask Chris Priestly if educating the BSN on the realities and nuances of game development is part of his job description or mandate.

I would highly doubt it is. But maybe it should be? Integrating the BSN in with all Bioware fan communication efforts might even make this possible, instead of having a fractured, divided front to address questions, concerns, company updates, etc. 

But that is quite a different topic. 


I would say that, in theory, your entire OP is a good concept. 

But the problem is that even if you were to get every person on the BSN today to agree to it and adhere to it, there are more and more people joining every day, and many more who already joined and only poke in when major events happen.

Nothing is going to stop them from going back to these same old habits. And once someone sees another person engaging in a bad habit, it becomes less of a barrier to doing the same, even if they know better. 


So... instead of trying to get all of the BSN on board with a certain behavior, wouldn't it make more sense to try and arm the average BSN member with the tools, knowledge and information to make an informed critique instead of giving them nothing and then be surprised when they draw inaccurate conclusions?

The real problem is that only Bioware could do that. And since they haven't done it date, I don't see them picking up the trend out of the blue. 

[nightscrawl]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

One could, possibly, make the argument that since the BSN is a Community and that education is one part of Management, that the role could fall instead to a group of people who Manage the Community. Community Managers, we could call them.

How would this work exactly? Would there be elaborate sticky posts in the General Discussion forum? Would the CMs have open chats where they answer questions? Might they produce PowerPoint presentations?

It's not their job to educate us about game design. It is however, up to us, the players, to not presume we know more than the actual people who get paid for being a game designer.

[Fast Jimmy]

Adding uninformed, baseless speculation will never help.

Aside from pointing out, over and over and over (as I have seen people in this thread do many times) that people don't have truly pure, clear, empirical evidence that could only actually be obtained by a (rather high-ranking) Bioware dev, maybe we could instead try and deliver more information? Because repeatedly saying to posters "you don't know what you are talking about" doesn't seem to discourage the number of these posts, the attitudes of the posters or the mentalities of those who are doing the correcting.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 23 janvier 2013 - 09:09 .

[upsettingshorts]

Moved your words around a bit to better address them:

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I would highly doubt it is. But maybe it should be? Integrating the BSN in with all Bioware fan communication efforts might even make this possible, instead of having a fractured, divided front to address questions, concerns, company updates, etc.

So... instead of trying to get all of the BSN on board with a certain behavior, wouldn't it make more sense to try and arm the average BSN member with the tools, knowledge and information to make an informed critique instead of giving them nothing and then be surprised when they draw inaccurate conclusions?

The real problem is that only Bioware could do that. And since they haven't done it date, I don't see them picking up the trend out of the blue. 

Look around.

I doubt Chris has the time to get everyone up to speed on everything.

It'd have to be something they decided to throw themselves into.  And honestly?  Why should our education cost them money?  If we really care, we can go to game dev school.  Or continue to rely on those who voluntarily share their knowledge and experience with us in their free time, which can only be encouraged by valuing that knowledge and experience as something we don't presume to possess.

Not to mention, if BioWare started either compelling their devs to post at length here, or hired specific people to do the educating, the cries of "stop wasting time/money trying to educate the BSN and just make games" would be deafening.

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I would say that, in theory, your entire OP is a good concept.

That's all I ask.  Short of shouting down everyone who dared violate the principle, a power that in BioWare's hands would be oppressive, and in mine simply comical, effectively executing the theory was never really an option.

But then, how many threads around here actually accomplish anything?  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 23 janvier 2013 - 09:12 .

[nightscrawl]

Pseudocognition wrote...

Not liking an aspect of the final product and expressing that dislike is not armchair development... as has been stated multiple times in this thread.

You accused people of that based on their "baseless insistence that the presence of MP MUST somehow be affecting SP," and my response was to show that is in fact, not baseless, that the fears are grounded in reality, and based on Bioware's own past actions.

[Ladybright]

The tools, knowledge, and information required to give an informed critique could not possibly be covered in a BSN education program. I think a concerted effort would mostly lead to a lot of posters who think they know more than they do, even if they are arguing in good faith. There's a lot of knowledge and practical experience that comes with game development (in any of the branches) that would be very difficult to encapsulate in a series of forum posts.

Modifié par Ladybright, 23 janvier 2013 - 09:19 .

[Pseudo the Mustachioed]

nightscrawl wrote...

Pseudocognition wrote...

Not liking an aspect of the final product and expressing that dislike is not armchair development... as has been stated multiple times in this thread.

You accused people of that based on their "baseless insistence that the presence of MP MUST somehow be affecting SP," and my response was to show that is in fact, not baseless, that the fears are grounded in reality, and based on Bioware's own past actions.

The ME3 MP issue is not an example of MP affecting SP's development.

[Firky]

I still don't really understand this thread.

If DA2 is perceived as a rush job, for example, or MP is perceived as taking resources from SP, I'd have thought that was valuable feedback in of itself, even if it's incorrect. (I was making this point in another thread, about dialogue, that if DA2 was perceived to have less dialogue options, even if it didn't, that was valuable, but people kept telling me BioWare wasnt' responsible for the stupidity of player.)

There may be reasons why one or the other assumption isn't the case, but people who play games hold all sorts of opinions on how games are made. I'd guess a (large?) proportion of them aren't ever interested in transcending their experience and perceptions. They know what they want to play and want to play it.

The idea that a forum, or designer, has to educate people on design seems bizarre to me, as well as the idea that a person shouldn't post whatever they like (breaches of forum rules, like abusive language notwithstanding.)

Purely as a forumite, I got called variations on "idiot" for liking DA2, in a (hopefully) very non abusive to others way. That's not right, and it's horrible, but it's also really interesting, in my opinion; that people would be expected to justify enjoying a game, that people who don't like a game would try to silence discussion.

(And, there was a fair bit of the opposite going on, too, I"m not saying one side is right, just that all discussion - short of being abusive - is interesting, to my mind. I'd expect that BioWare would be interested in perceptions as well as feedback based on knowledge of design, but I'd be happy to be told that's not the case ... )

[Fast Jimmy]

Or continue to rely on those who voluntarily share their knowledge and experience with us, which can only be encouraging by valuing that knowledge and experience as something we don't presume to possess.

If this information and experience was collected in an easy to reference manner, it would be more valuable than just saying something and hoping someone like hooray is on and will admonish us for saying something wrong. A stickied thread where we could collect good blog posts like hooray's explanation of a video game engine's function would be in good form. Except we'd need more posts/information. Perhaps threads where the devs have come in and delivered some pertinent information (like Gaider proving the wheel offers more numerical choices) would be nice.

Of course, we'd need A) such information to be collected/written it organized into a thread and C) a mod putting it as a sticky.

Otherwise, what will happen is that this thread will sink into obscurity in a week and nothing will change, except I will occasionally get to make a snarky joke about a post violating the USFEO of 2013 and give myself a laugh.

But then, how many threads around here actually accomplish anything?

Lots of threads accomplish things. Both of the threads in my sig accomplished exactly what I had hoped they would.

The Save Import thread (started by someone else, but which I had a lot of input in the discussions) had many BSNer's who would have vehemently defended the import feature question if it was really as good as they had thought and if the costs (in terms of writer freedom, not budget) were possibly not outweighed by what it brought to the table. The very chance that someone would evaluate he import as a feature and not as a golden idol is all I wanted to accomplish. I know Bioware would change nothing in their games because of it, but it was never about convincing Bioware. It was about getting someone, ANYONE, who would say "never take the Import away!" To saying "the import is cool, but it has its limitations." If enough people say that, then I feel confident Bioware will look at the feature objectively as something that does or doesn't do what they had planned it could. If they think it does, then good. If they think it doesn't, that's good too. But at least they won't be clinging to it because they are afraid every fan will lynch them if they changed it.

My second sig thread set out to accomplish some silly fun. I think it did.

[upsettingshorts]

I think we're using different definitions of accomplish. By the definition you seem to be using for the Save Import thread, I can satisfactorily say that this thread accomplished what I wanted it to.

Likewise, I agree that the BSN could use a more efficient and useful dev tracker system. The BSN is, feature wise, a complete mess.

[Wulfram]

addiction21 wrote...

I call bull on this. Maybe occasionally for someone here or there that actually happens. For the most part the person puts their fingers in their ears and mumbles "that developer is wrong or lying" and continues to repeat their baseless assumptions.
Just as in the thread where "The list provided more options then the dialogue wheel" that was thoroughly debunked by the professional developer and then most all of those either tried to ignore it or just wandered off. To pretend as if that never happened and repeat themselves later when the subject came up again.

1.  The response may or may not change the views of the person directly addressed.  But it's got a decent chance of reaching some of the people on the thread.  And even if it doesn't lead to the person agreeing, it may lead to greater understanding.

2.  Even if I accepted it was pretty useless, it's not like supplying feedback such as this thread advocates has any greater success rate.  Particularly at this stage in the development cycle, when all the big decisions have already been made and yet players know too little about the next game to address any smaller issues.

If someone really wishes to affect the future development of the Dragon Age series, and that is why they are posting, then the only honest advice to give them would be to give up and do something more worthwhile.  Maybe dump a post in the "5 things I want" thread first, but certainly not waste any more time.

[Fast Jimmy]

Pseudocognition wrote...

nightscrawl wrote...

Pseudocognition wrote...

Not liking an aspect of the final product and expressing that dislike is not armchair development... as has been stated multiple times in this thread.

You accused people of that based on their "baseless insistence that the presence of MP MUST somehow be affecting SP," and my response was to show that is in fact, not baseless, that the fears are grounded in reality, and based on Bioware's own past actions.

The ME3 MP issue is not an example of MP affecting SP's development.

The game's SP had one of the largest fan backlashes and outcries in gaming history. I don't think you know enough about the development process to say that wasn't affected by the creation of MP, just like I don't have enough information to say it did. 

For instance, the argument could be made that the SP aspect wasn't ready, but since the MP department was totally complete and couldn't stand for any more delays without wasting money, the game was shipped as is. Is this true? How would I know? But you don't know it's not, either. 

[Pseudo the Mustachioed]

Wulfram wrote...

2.  Even if I accepted it was pretty useless, it's not like supplying feedback such as this thread advocates has any greater success rate.  Particularly at this stage in the development cycle, when all the big decisions have already been made and yet players know too little about the next game to address any smaller issues.

This is not necessarily true, and helpfully presented feedback is always useful to devs regardless of whether they have the time to change something based on that feedback.

[upsettingshorts]

Fast Jimmy, I'm entirely certain the correct response to "we don't know what happened" is not to just make something up.

I think we blow people's issue with ME3 multiplayer way out of proportion.  I'll explain, though it's sort of offtopic:

What do people complain about? Not having enough EMS to get the Shepard Lives Easter Egg from single player alone. This was, without getting into the whys of development, simply a question of having one integer being too high.  You could unlock all three primary endings, if not said Easter Egg, without ever touching multiplayer.

The vast majority of negative feedback about the integration of multiplayer in ME3 would have been prevented by changing an integer.

We know this, and I'm not armchair developing, because that's exactly what BioWare did as part of the Extended Cut update.  

Now if we want to get into an argument about multiplayer issues such as microtransactions, that's a different thread. But it's also an issue totally isolated from the single player experience. I didn't touch multiplayer in ME3 once, and I made exactly zero microtransactions. So... speaking from experience.

So, if we take all of that into consideration, in what way did the problems with ME3 MP compromise the development of ME3 SP?  Nobody here can actually answer that question.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 23 janvier 2013 - 09:39 .

[nightscrawl]

Firky wrote...

I still don't really understand this thread.

If DA2 is perceived as a rush job, for example, or MP is perceived as taking resources from SP, I'd have thought that was valuable feedback in of itself, even if it's incorrect. (I was making this point in another thread, about dialogue, that if DA2 was perceived to have less dialogue options, even if it didn't, that was valuable, but people kept telling me BioWare wasnt' responsible for the stupidity of player.)

The mere fact of an incorrect perception that is held by a large group can be helpful yes, as I've often said about the misperceptions revolving around friendship/rivalry in DA2. I believe that at some point you have to look at a misunderstood feature and wonder why it is misunderstood, rather than just blaming the confused people for their confusion.

However, if people have an assumption that putting in a feature is "easy," it is not a helpful discussion to then insist that the developers add said feature, because it is easy, and then be angry when the devs try to explain that it is not in fact easy.

Let's take the "show full dialog line" issue. People have thrown out various examples from other games in order to show that it can be done, so why doesn't Bioware just do that? According to David, "Displaying the full text of the line for a voiced PC does not work for us. We investigated it. We tried it out, and discussed it, and ultimately discarded the idea." I highly doubt they are going to elaborate more than that. We just have to take their word on it and wait to see the result of their paraphrase tinkering before we decide.

Unfortunately, there will still be people who insist that it can be done another way, even though they don't know why the devs "ultimately discarded the idea."

Modifié par nightscrawl, 23 janvier 2013 - 09:45 .

[Orian Tabris]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Orian Tabris, I'm going to skip your specific arguments because - as my thread topic points out and the replies have consistently reinforced - you don't have the first clue what you're talking about. I have a question you are fully qualified to answer, however:

Why is it so hard to admit that you do not know what you're talking about, when the subject is something nobody could actually reasonably expect you to know?

I'm not fully qualified to answer that, as I can admit that I have no idea about the topic. As far as I can tell, it's about people assuming to understand what game development entails.

I realised I was a bit off-topic, but I decided to steer clear of the exact things you mentioned in the OP, because I couldn't really comment on them, specifically. So I tried to stick with the general idea: that people assume they know how BioWare's job works (just trying to reiterate what I said, rather than just repeating it). Assuming I somewhat knew the idea behind this thread. I would have gone on-topic, but it seemed too difficult.

I was hoping that my time on this forum would end with Urzon's reply, because I have had enough. Also, I realised Allan does not intend to reply to my question that MP doesn't coincide with BW's vision . Then I see that you and Dragoonlordz have replied to me.

I can ignore Dragoonlordz's post, because Urzon summed up my thoughts on MP. I couldn't ignore you since I kinda had to defend myself against you, as you have pointed out that I am rather unclear as to the exact subject matter. Not replying is basically the same as refusing to reply.

In case you think I'm trying to tip-toe around your question: I, Orian Tabris, cannot pinpoint the exact point of this thread.

It doesn't bother me. Curiousity gets the better of me, and I felt the need to feel some gratification (thus I checked this thread this next day). The gratification that I'm not entirely useless at English (I was always in the bottom English class, due to "asbergus"). I'm not one of those people who think they know everything, in fact, I get somewhat jealous of those who don't proclaim that, but do show their intellect efficiently (for lack of a better word). They are the kind of people who probably did well in school. My asbergus let me down, those people do not suffer from it.

[Fast Jimmy]

Now if we want to get into an argument about multiplayer issues such as microtransactions, that's a different thread. But it's also an issue totally isolated from the single player experience. I didn't touch multiplayer in ME3 once, and I made exactly zero microtransactions. So... speaking from experience.

So, if we take all of that into consideration, in what way did the problems with ME3 MP compromise the development of ME3 SP?  Nobody here can actually answer that question.

I agree, the way people complain how MP was "forced" on them was over the top for how little (and useless, given that the ME team has practically disowned the significance of that scene now anyway) impact that Easter Egg had. 

But let's look at objective facts: ME3 was the first Bioware game to offer a large scale MP experience separate from the SP campaign. It also had a story in the SP which has been decried, insulted, hated and made such a fuss over that it attracted main stream news media outlets.

Let's look at another objective situation: Dragon Age 2 had a much reduced fan and critic response and review than DA:O. DA2 also had one of the shortest development cycles of any Bioware game to date.

Now, Bioware devs will admit today that DA2 was a bit of an experiment to see if they could create a worthy sequel in a short dev cycle. And that some of the loudest complaints, like level re-use, wave combat and a bit of a muddled story/cramped Act 3 could be tied to that shortened development.

Does that mean that Bioware's first game to have non-co-op MP resulted in MANY people complaining about the story department in the SP game is a direct result of said MP component that was implemented?

I don't know. You don't know. So saying that MP never affects the SP is just as reckless as saying that MP will ruin the SP. If anything, saying the two never touch seems to defy the only pure evidence that we have with ME3.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 23 janvier 2013 - 09:54 .