333 réponses à ce sujet

[eroeru]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

eroeru wrote...

Now bring out a discussion that doesn't follow these rules.

Look at any discussion involving multiplayer or a voiced protagonist.

Aah, ok, those "discussions"...

I'm getting a better understanding of what's the problem now. But still, this (type of) topic should address those MP and silent protag complaints more specifically is what I'm thinking... (and not imitate more in-depth threads)

Modifié par eroeru, 22 janvier 2013 - 08:45 .

[74 Wrex]

mousestalker wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

I am actually very interested in seeing how a BioWare-designed armchair would feel.

Probably much like the Sharper Image massage chairs but with a random groping feature.  <_<

Weirdo Alert! Weirdo Alert! 

[74 Wrex]

eroeru wrote...

Aah, ok, those "discussions"...

I'm getting a better understanding on this now. But still, this (type of) topic should address those MP and silent protag complaints more specifically is what I'm thinking... (and not imitate more in-depth threads)

True Blue Bro

[Ladybright]

eroeru wrote...

Ladybright wrote...

Most major game developers do keep their 'ears to the ground.' This thread isn't about banning all requests and suggestions, it's about making more constructive dialogue by not participating armchair game development. Suggestions and requests like you mention are not targeted by the original post at all, and are actually encouraged later in the thread.

I'm still confused as to what is the difference between armchair game development and ok-suggestions.

Armchair game development would be when fans make arguments for or against features using knowledge they couldn't possibly have about the development, like when anyone invokes financial figures or user data as 'proof' or ammo in an argument. It's when things like protagonist voice-over toggles are suggested 'because it would be easy to implement' when the fan making the suggestion (1) has no development experience, and so could not actually say whether or not it is 'easy to implement' and (2) is not privy to the development of DA:I, and so could not actually say whether or not it is 'easy to implement' within the confines of DA:I.

In these discussions, if you (general you) are not a dev, and are only a fan -- like most of us here, myself included -- the only thing you can actually be an expert on is your own reaction to the game, and that information is much more helpful to devs than any speculation you might have about what X feature costs to implement, or how to implement it. Devs want feedback on what worked for us and what didn't, not feedback on development practices. They are devs. It is their job to make the game, and they know how to make games better than most of their audience. Good games, bad games, who knows, but making games is what game devs do. Implementation of an idea is entirely up to them.

What is at the base of suggestions like 'toggles!!' is a simpler idea: "I like silent protagonists" or "I dislike the combat because it felt too slow" or "I didn't like the elf redesign." Say that, and then elaborate on why you feel that, if you want.

For instance, I make a post: "I greatly disliked the outfits and armors in DAO. They were alternately bland and strange, and almost all of them were unflattering."

Now, this post could go a couple ways: 

• Left as is. Hey! A data point that is not bogged down by baggage, potshots, or misunderstandings! Cool. 
• "bla bla unflattering. Bioware should have take some money from the cinematics division and given it to the artists to make better clothes. Bioware had five years to make this game, which is plenty enough time to make it look better. X other game was better looking and made in half the time." Any one of these sentences would damn a post, since all of them betray ignorance of actual game development in one way or another. Also, all of these sentences are coming from a fan who had no inside knowledge of the making of DAO. Why should I speculate on the ins, outs, and politics of making DAO? Without information and the framework to understand that information, any assertions I have will only make me look foolish. They also drag down my point, which is that I don't like the outfits. Presumably, I also want to add make them better or don't do them again.
• "bla bla unflattering. As an artist, this was a bit of a sticking point for me. I found some distracting because they seemed like they were made of brightly-colored plastic, and others because I don't really care for armors with low cut necklines. I very much enjoyed the game otherwise, but I had trouble taking characters seriously sometimes because of the outfits. It'd be great to see an improvement in future." This response avoids hypothesizing or advising about development, and instead focuses on my reactions and the reasons why that aspect bugged me. As I type this I am also adding on a silent prayer to never ever see those mage hats again in any form.  It's also not particularly rude, and it mentions several specific aspects of my dislike -- the colors and textures of the clothes didn't strike me as believable cloth, some of the armor unfortunately reminded me of boob plate and chainmail bikinis, and the art style seemed inconsistent. There's even a link to some of the offending clothes.

Hoorayforicecream's posts gave good examples of feedback posts a few pages back.

It should also be noted that there is a difference between feedback and discussion. I am specifically talking about feedback aimed at Bioware. Edit: I think the previous sentence distracted from my point.

Also, I just want to say when I first clicked this thread I thought I'd be reading a discussion of props and art direction with some egregious/gorgeous armchair prop as an example. Heh.

Modifié par Ladybright, 22 janvier 2013 - 09:16 .

[eroeru]

I do feel promoting the idea of toggles of silent protag was justified by talking about game-experience from previous games, and in form of a discussion (which is what most feedback becomes here anyway). Yes, I've suggested those ideas myself, maybe with unfettering words - I *have* said SP toggle would be easy from current stand-point. To which David Gaider replied in a definite way, and I at least saw my idea was heard/discussed/answered. I couldn't have wanted more.


But did I do wrong in suggesting a silent protag toggle? I think not.

Modifié par eroeru, 22 janvier 2013 - 09:25 .

[FedericoV]

Honestly, I don't believe that the climate of the BSN has anything to do with the way people express their opinion on the forums since everywhere is the same on the web (vitriol, insults, personal attacks, non constructive posts, negativity: signal me a forum that doesn't have such kind of posts and that it's not a very small or semi-dead forum). Those things have become a problem only when Bioware games has started to go less well than expected in terms of sales and overall fan reception.

It has even less to do with posters playing the part of the game designer. As a lurker of the old Bioware forums since the times of Baldur's Gate, I must say that there has always been a lot of "let's play the game designer" posts even in the past (I guess it has something to do with Bioware's RPG roots and the way nerds like me experienced their hobbies back then).

And the climate of the forums was almost very good. So good that the writers could use the nick of some posters on the board like good old Gronmir (a great poster who wrote every post in third person) to name the various enemies of the Bhaalspawn in ToB. I remember that at the time Gaider was very active on the forums. He wrote even in the RPG codex.

In my opinion, the level of discussion has deteriorate because Bioware's fanbase has deteriorated. Why? I don't know. It has deteriorated for many different reasons and while I can't blame Bioware for every little thing, I must say that it's basically their fault since they shifted the nature of their games and business practices to attract a lot more people and rarely quality and quantity collide.

Back then it was a community. Now it's just another loosy social network where the most popular discussions are about boning virtual charachters. I understand why Fast Jimmy's interesting post seems out of context in a social network that produces the Talimancers. But we should stop and think a moment who is doing more harm to the level of discussion.

At least if Bioware really values a lively and genuine community of fans as an important asset. It does not mean much if the discussions about game design are usefull or not for their games. They already have all kind of metrics, poll and focus groups for that kind of feedback. Those discussion are important to build a better community.

If EA and Bioware just want a bunch of drones who assume the "party escort submission position" and post their "likes" or "dislikes" like all good costumers should behave, I have a better idea: just close the forums and change the BSN in to something like Twitter where the interaction is more channeled and marketing friendly. Ouch.

Modifié par FedericoV, 22 janvier 2013 - 09:42 .

[nightscrawl]

mousestalker wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

I am actually very interested in seeing how a BioWare-designed armchair would feel.

Probably much like the Sharper Image massage chairs but with a random groping feature.  <_<

And a retractable vial to collect fan tears.

[Fredward]

I'm getting this weird mental picture of some people in this thread stalking into an office, hurling themselves down on one of those big tables in the middle of a meeting, flailing their arms and shrieking "I'M IMPORTANT! I'M IMPORTANT!" XD


This only REALLY gets under my skin when people repeatedly forward their ideas even AFTER a dev has EXPLICITLY told them that it ain't feasible and then they get all sulky and pouty that Bioware refuses to listen, and implement, their brilliant ideas. -coughtogglecough-

[MerinTB]

John Epler wrote...
Easy rule to make sure devs read your post? Don't be an ass.

Read your post. Ask yourself 'if this were directed at me, how would I feel?' You can be as critical as you like but as soon as you drag in insults, attacks and attempts to tell us how much better you'd be able to do our job and why we're terrible people for X reason, we're going to be skimming past that post pretty quickly.

If someone tells me 'I really didn't like DA2, and here are the reasons' without vitriol or taking little potshots at us, I'm going to read that post. If someone says 'I liked most of DA2, but I hated X, and X was just an example of you guys being lazy - I could've done it better' then I'm probably going to glance at that post, sigh, and keep reading.

So, common courtesy. And if a dev tells you 'actually, it's because of X reason', I might avoid countering with 'stop lying you lying liar'. I mean, that's your prerogative, but as I assume that most people post on these forums because they want to be heard, avoiding that would aid in that goal.

How do you read any gaming journalism reviews?  Has it not  be de rigueur for the last decade or so that reviews have to be overly smart-assed and full of more snark than Isengard was full of Uruk-hai?

And don't you think that maybe too many gamers reading too much of that journalism has colored how they react to games?

(I know, I know, "blame the internet")

Not defending that kind of criticism--at all--just pointing out that without the little potshots, you'd lose Zero Punctuation and 90% of all game reviews.

[eroeru]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

I'm getting this weird mental
picture of some people in this thread stalking into an office, hurling
themselves down on one of those big tables in the middle of a meeting,
flailing their arms and shrieking "I'M IMPORTANT! I'M IMPORTANT!" XD


This
only REALLY gets under my skin when people repeatedly forward their
ideas even AFTER a dev has EXPLICITLY told them that it ain't feasible
and then they get all sulky and pouty that Bioware refuses to listen,
and implement, their brilliant ideas. -coughtogglecough-

Ok, saying toggles would be "simple" isn't a good way to go about it - but promoting the idea, not because of feeling important, but because you simply believe it an interesting and possibly good idea to support is the same thing as saying "I like SP, I'm sure I would like toggles". Now of course repeating this over a long course of time is nonsense if you've received definite negative feedback from the dev - but stating a preference is still not in any way harming to anyone or anything.

Modifié par eroeru, 22 janvier 2013 - 09:30 .

[XX-Pyro]

The problem with BSN is the vast majority of us have superiority complexes and that is quite evident when we argue with each other.

[Ladybright]

I'd think floating the idea of features is fine, but there's a difference in asking "Could we get a SP toggle y/n? Why?" (or even making a case for a SP toggle) and armchair developer-ing. They don't necessarily involve one another.

[Thomas Andresen]

eroeru wrote...


Yeah, though between what can be thought of as insulting, and what simply as (justified) venting is a thin line I'd think.

That line shouldn't be thin. It's not supposed to be thin. If you get too angry about something to talk civilly about something then don't. The way I see it, BSN seem to be thriving on hate, and there's nothing rational about hating any feature in a video game.

Ladybright wrote...

I'd think floating the idea of features is fine, but there's a difference in asking "Could we get a SP toggle y/n? Why?" (or even making a case for a SP toggle) and armchair developer-ing. They don't necessarily involve one another.

Not necessarily, but typically they do.

Modifié par Thomas Andresen, 22 janvier 2013 - 10:54 .

[Addai]

FedericoV wrote...

At least if Bioware really values a lively and genuine community of fans as an important asset. It does not mean much if the discussions about game design are usefull or not for their games. They already have all kind of metrics, poll and focus groups for that kind of feedback. Those discussion are important to build a better community.

If EA and Bioware just want a bunch of drones who assume the "party escort submission position" and post their "likes" or "dislikes" like all good costumers should behave, I have a better idea: just close the forums and change the BSN in to something like Twitter where the interaction is more channeled and marketing friendly. Ouch.

All of this was well said.  It seems to be that this is what Josh Sawyer, Brian Fargo, etc. stress about the Kickstarter approach.  They value the feedback aspect but moreso the built-in community.  Though we have yet to see how that will work out in the actual games they're making.

[Masha Potato]

MerinTB wrote...

How do you read any gaming journalism reviews?  Has it not  be de rigueur for the last decade or so that reviews have to be overly smart-assed and full of more snark than Isengard was full of Uruk-hai?

And don't you think that maybe too many gamers reading too much of that journalism has colored how they react to games?

(I know, I know, "blame the internet")

Not defending that kind of criticism--at all--just pointing out that without the little potshots, you'd lose Zero Punctuation and 90% of all game reviews.

Tongue in cheek isn't exactly equal to being an ass

[FedericoV]

Addai67 wrote...

FedericoV wrote...

At least if Bioware really values a lively and genuine community of fans as an important asset. It does not mean much if the discussions about game design are usefull or not for their games. They already have all kind of metrics, poll and focus groups for that kind of feedback. Those discussion are important to build a better community.

If EA and Bioware just want a bunch of drones who assume the "party escort submission position" and post their "likes" or "dislikes" like all good costumers should behave, I have a better idea: just close the forums and change the BSN in to something like Twitter where the interaction is more channeled and marketing friendly. Ouch.

All of this was well said.  It seems to be that this is what Josh Sawyer, Brian Fargo, etc. stress about the Kickstarter approach.  They value the feedback aspect but moreso the built-in community.  Though we have yet to see how that will work out in the actual games they're making.

Yep, exactly. I don't know how it's going to work for Obsidian's PE. But it worked very well for DA:O and countless other projects.

[eroeru]

Thomas Andresen wrote...

eroeru wrote...


Yeah, though between what can be thought of as insulting, and what simply as (justified) venting is a thin line I'd think.

That line shouldn't be thin. It's not supposed to be thin. If you get too angry about something to talk civilly about something then don't. The way I see it, BSN seem to be thriving on hate, and there's nothing rational about hating any feature in a video game.

Ladybright wrote...

I'd think floating the idea of features is fine, but there's a difference in asking "Could we get a SP toggle y/n? Why?" (or even making a case for a SP toggle) and armchair developer-ing. They don't necessarily involve one another.

Not necessarily, but typically they do.

You might want to elaborate.
For example, again, what are criteria for "armchair developer-ing"? Does simply overconfidence in your knowledge constitute armchair-developing? How bad a (moral) error is it? How much weight and worry should one put behind pointing out armchair-developing?

Also, people aren't rational in so very very much. And it's good that way, I think. Though in *argumentation*, of course there's no place for unrationality, unrational venting out is sometimes needed, if not only for giving your opinion on something that's both sufficiently pressing and easy to voice out about. There could be some genuine interest involved as for the details behind said subject matter (game), and discussion on its nature (yes, all sorts of "ugly" epithets are allowed in common use of language, e.g. "dumb game", "dumbed-down game" etc).

Modifié par eroeru, 22 janvier 2013 - 11:14 .

[Malanek]

There is nothing wrong with suggesting things or saying how you would do something if you were in Bioware's position. Some of the most interesting games actually come out of developers with little or no previous experience. Sure they are often stacked with problems but there are also interesting and original ideas.

And people here are not entirely unqualified either because everyone here plays games (some probably significantly more than developers), which is actually a lot of knowledge. If you take competitive games like Magic the Gathering for instance, the better players around the world are much better at the game, and have a better understanding, than the developers. Although the players don't possess they same design knowledge, the designers spend a lot of time learning about the game from the players. It is the same for computer games like Starcraft. Just because DA is not competitive does not mean the same doesn't hold true.

There are some good ideas on BSN, there should be no expectation that suggestions should be adopted, or even replied to, but there is nothing wrong with making the suggestion.

[DarthPig]

hoorayforicecream wrote...
Tell them what you like. Tell them why you like it. Tell them what you dislike, and tell them why you dislike it. Be as specific as you can. Don't muddy it up with how you'd do it, or how they should do it, or what you'd rather have instead of this, or what you think about the development schedule.

This

[Allan Schumacher]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

We're not talking about finding the flaws. Finding the flaws is what the experts find useful from the forums - they know they can't catch everything. What we're talking about is when the novice tells the expert how to fix it. That isn't really helpful, and actually obscures the actual useful information.

This is sometimes an issue with some people that come through QA.

On the odd occasion I can dig a bit deeper and leverage my technical background to actually determine what the problem is and how to fix it, but 99% of the time I just stop at the what since the programmer/designer that actually investigates is going to take a better look at it than me.


It can be a tricky balancing act, however.  I find this happens most frequently with newer staff, and is mostly a reflection of their enthusiasm and desire to impress.  At the same time, for qualitative gameplay stuff, I think some people should be a bit more willing to make a suggestion, because at that point they are making the suggestion as a game player and less so as purely QA, and we all have experience to draw upon as game players.

[Orian Tabris]

AmstradHero wrote...

Orian Tabris wrote...
I try to educate people on facts, rather than on making their voice be heard (probably because most people ignore me anyways). I haven't seen anyone actually do what you've descirbed here, anyway.

I feel I have to get out my frustration at people who hate on Leliana, purely because they are ignorant and stupid .
...
I also have to defend Tallis, because people are uptight, and thus, can't help but look down on her character.

If you haven't seen what the OP is talking about, then you must not have ventured into threads on game design on these forums.

Furthermore, the concept of liking or disliking a character doesn't really involve game design per se, but is more a question of the personality of the characters involved. Liking or disliking these aspects is wholly subjective, and has nothing do with facts. Even things stated by these characters are not necessarily facts, as they may not be wholly accurate. Getting into specifics of characterisation and how this is achieved is perhaps more arguable, but again, this is very much an issue of personal preference and perception rather than facts.

I believe that most people's opinions on characters, are based on their own ability to tolerate them to whatever degree. This is more of a fact about the players than the actual characters. Tallis may have been designed fairly liberally, but people tend to be oversensitive to things.

I don't look down on characters, if the standard of writing is strong. Like, BioWare is indeed a strong company when it comes to well written characters, so I don't judge one as being bad if the writers are already credible.

Tallis' introduction is something a lot of people dislike about her (killing many enemies by herself), so immediately, she's in their bad books. Unless they are given substantial reason to change their opinions, they, as humans, will let their emotions (or hormones or something) control their opinions, thus they hate/dislike her.

I very much try to stay completely neutral about a new character (unless it's an attractive character, whereupon my hormones will make me like them), until I'm given something I believe is worth liking or disliking about them. While it is very much an issue of personal preference, as you said, personal preference is determined by our emotions or whatever that thing inside us is, that allows us to judge. My positive attitude makes me think positive, so I can like most any character. I don't know what that says about the majority of people who dislike her or others.

The phrase "slave to our emotions" came to my mind, as I typed that last sentence.

[Orian Tabris]

Emzamination wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
I don't disagree, but if fellow forumites start taking forum etiquette into their own hands, there will be war on our hands. 

We always get a toxic environment when someone opens with "here is why DA2 is crap and how you're a bad person for liking it."

That's not toxicity, that's passionate love. /no sarcasm

It's both, actually.

They're passionate love (and possibly their hateful ways), turns what they say into this toxic environment we all know and love/hate.

[Allan Schumacher]

AmstradHero wrote...

If you haven't done something and don't understand the in-and-outs of the practical application of the knowledge, it is very difficult to make an accurate comment on how things work. To quote: "In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not."

There's a similar effect called the Dunning-Krueger effect, which puts forth that the less experienced and knowledgeable someone is about a topic, the greater the likelihood they overestimate their own abilities and understate their own deficiencies. From this, I think it can extend to those that that make assumptions as to the complexity and opportunity cost for a particular feature.

Something may seem easy, but may have certain challenges (especially given the uniqueness of a particular game), or come with certain costs. In many ways feature development is just a large amount of small tasks, and it can be tricky to realize that asking for one simple and easy feature would also come at the cost of NOT spending time on some other simple and easy feature.

[Orian Tabris]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...

If you haven't done something and don't understand the in-and-outs of the practical application of the knowledge, it is very difficult to make an accurate comment on how things work. To quote: "In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not."

Something may seem easy, but may have certain challenges (especially given the uniqueness of a particular game), or come with certain costs. In many ways feature development is just a large amount of small tasks, and it can be tricky to realize that asking for one simple and easy feature would also come at the cost of NOT spending time on some other simple and easy feature.

And yet... we're getting multiplayer! Hooraaaaaay...

[Masha Potato]

Orian Tabris wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...

If you haven't done something and don't understand the in-and-outs of the practical application of the knowledge, it is very difficult to make an accurate comment on how things work. To quote: "In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not."

Something may seem easy, but may have certain challenges (especially given the uniqueness of a particular game), or come with certain costs. In many ways feature development is just a large amount of small tasks, and it can be tricky to realize that asking for one simple and easy feature would also come at the cost of NOT spending time on some other simple and easy feature.

And yet... we're getting multiplayer! Hooraaaaaay...

Way to demonstrate how relevant this thread is