532 réponses à ce sujet

[imbs]

Atakuma wrote...

imbs wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
If DA3 comes out and we get something anywhere near the reaction we saw with ME3, where the parent company EA is voted the worst in the world, I can't imagine they wouldn't begin taking hard looks at Bioware as a developer and evaluating in a very harsh light their value to the EA organization.

You talk as though EA care about any of that. The bottom line is that ME3 made them money, and as long as bioware continues to make profitable games, they will be fine.

yeah man I'm sure EA don't care squiddly squat about being labled the worst company in America (or was it the world? i forget) - No such thing as bad publicity, right? riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight?

I'm starting to understand why EA think they can get away with audacious practises such as microtransactions in single player 60 dollar games, selling people action bars in an mmo, Day 1 DLC, On-disc unlockable DLC. It's because they actually can. I think you and every other EA fanboy are correct. The hate on EA is misplaced; it should be on the muppet fans who not only partake in their own being screwed over willingly, but also do their darndest to defend such practises as well. The whole thing is just hilarious.

Calm the hell down kid. I'm not defending anything, just stating facts.

"you mad" "kid" "facts" - ugh.

1. There wasn't a single fact in your post. It was actually just naive and wrong.
2. You were indeed defending EA/Bioware.
3. Whilst I quoted you my post wasn't only about you, an idea I didn't write down as I assumed you would realise that - my bad.

Modifié par imbs, 02 mars 2013 - 02:36 .

[Roflbox]

imbs wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

imbs wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
If DA3 comes out and we get something anywhere near the reaction we saw with ME3, where the parent company EA is voted the worst in the world, I can't imagine they wouldn't begin taking hard looks at Bioware as a developer and evaluating in a very harsh light their value to the EA organization.

You talk as though EA care about any of that. The bottom line is that ME3 made them money, and as long as bioware continues to make profitable games, they will be fine.

yeah man I'm sure EA don't care squiddly squat about being labled the worst company in America (or was it the world? i forget) - No such thing as bad publicity, right? riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight?

I'm starting to understand why EA think they can get away with audacious practises such as microtransactions in single player 60 dollar games, selling people action bars in an mmo, Day 1 DLC, On-disc unlockable DLC. It's because they actually can. I think you and every other EA fanboy are correct. The hate on EA is misplaced; it should be on the muppet fans who not only partake in their own being screwed over willingly, but also do their darndest to defend such practises as well. The whole thing is just hilarious.

Calm the hell down kid. I'm not defending anything, just stating facts.

"you mad" "kid" "facts" - ugh.

1. There wasn't a single fact in your post. It was actually just naive and wrong.
2. You were indeed defending EA/Bioware.
3. Whilst I quoted you my post wasn't only about you, an idea I didn't write down as I assumed you would realise that - my bad.

Atakuma is a child.

[Allan Schumacher]

imbs wrote...

"you mad" "kid" "facts" - ugh.

1. There wasn't a single fact in your post. It was actually just naive and wrong.
2. You were indeed defending EA/Bioware.
3. Whilst I quoted you my post wasn't only about you, an idea I didn't write down as I assumed you would realise that - my bad.

While I can't talk on behalf of ALLLLLLLLL of EA, I'd like to address point #1.

ME3 has been a very successful game.  Stating that it's been successful is neither naive, nor wrong.

I'm not particularly concerned with the "Worst Company in America" award.  For me, it's a matter of convenient timing in that that poll was available while a highly mobililized, highly connected, and highly motivated contingent of internet users used it to register varying levels of disappointment with EA, largely fueled by backlash in ME3.

If you honestly feel that EA is the Worst Company in America, I take this time to remind you that we make a luxury good of which there is ample competition to which if we did not exist your basic needs in life would not be affected.

If we're the absolute worst company in all of America, life must be pretty good.

[IanPolaris]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

imbs wrote...

"you mad" "kid" "facts" - ugh.

1. There wasn't a single fact in your post. It was actually just naive and wrong.
2. You were indeed defending EA/Bioware.
3. Whilst I quoted you my post wasn't only about you, an idea I didn't write down as I assumed you would realise that - my bad.

While I can't talk on behalf of ALLLLLLLLL of EA, I'd like to address point #1.

ME3 has been a very successful game.  Stating that it's been successful is neither naive, nor wrong.

Pardon me if I am skeptical of an employee of EA saying that an EA game has been successful.  I seem to recall that many Bioware reps still claim that DA2 was a sucessful game too.

I am not saying this is wrong.  I guess I am saying it depends on how one defines "success" which makes the claim less helpful than it might seem.  For example, if  one were to claim that the MP side of ME3 has beaten expectations and that the microtransaction model for ME3 has by and larged worked, I won't argue.  Is that enough to make ME3 a successful game?  I don't think so since I've never been a fan of multiplayer.  Others views may differ.

I would submit that even if one calls ME3 successful, it did so appealing to a completely different audience and different style of play than ME1 and ME2, which is why I don't think it's a very good benchmark.

-Polaris

[DragonMage95]

Roflbox wrote...

imbs wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

imbs wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
If DA3 comes out and we get something anywhere near the reaction we saw with ME3, where the parent company EA is voted the worst in the world, I can't imagine they wouldn't begin taking hard looks at Bioware as a developer and evaluating in a very harsh light their value to the EA organization.

You talk as though EA care about any of that. The bottom line is that ME3 made them money, and as long as bioware continues to make profitable games, they will be fine.

yeah man I'm sure EA don't care squiddly squat about being labled the worst company in America (or was it the world? i forget) - No such thing as bad publicity, right? riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight?

I'm starting to understand why EA think they can get away with audacious practises such as microtransactions in single player 60 dollar games, selling people action bars in an mmo, Day 1 DLC, On-disc unlockable DLC. It's because they actually can. I think you and every other EA fanboy are correct. The hate on EA is misplaced; it should be on the muppet fans who not only partake in their own being screwed over willingly, but also do their darndest to defend such practises as well. The whole thing is just hilarious.

Calm the hell down kid. I'm not defending anything, just stating facts.

"you mad" "kid" "facts" - ugh.

1. There wasn't a single fact in your post. It was actually just naive and wrong.
2. You were indeed defending EA/Bioware.
3. Whilst I quoted you my post wasn't only about you, an idea I didn't write down as I assumed you would realise that - my bad.

Atakuma is a child.

You know, one good thing about the Bioware Media Silence is how it brings people together. 

[Allan Schumacher]

Pardon me if I am skeptical of an employee of EA saying that an EA game has been successful. I seem to recall that many Bioware reps still claim that DA2 was a sucessful game too.

Pardon me if I'm skeptical of a fan that really wants the game to not be successful being skeptical at my statements. You're welcome to not believe my statements if you want, but it's up to you to decide whether or not your motivations are influenced by a want of the game to be less successful simply because you didn't care for it.


You are correct, however, in that success was not really defined. The original poster specifically stated "profitable." So I'll elaborate: ME3 was profitable (so was DA2). So, stating that ME3 is profitable is neither naive, nor wrong.

[IanPolaris]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Pardon me if I am skeptical of an employee of EA saying that an EA game has been successful. I seem to recall that many Bioware reps still claim that DA2 was a sucessful game too.

Pardon me if I'm skeptical of a fan that really wants the game to not be successful being skeptical at my statements. You're welcome to not believe my statements if you want, but it's up to you to decide whether or not your motivations are influenced by a want of the game to be less successful simply because you didn't care for it.

You can be skeptical all you like.  All I'll say, is that I was a very loyal Bioware fan going back to Baldur's gate.  Please note the tense.  That's all I'll say about that on this topic anyway except to add that I want RPGs that I like to be successful whether by Bioware or someone else.  I am not convinced that Bioware is interested in what I would consider an RPG any more.

You are correct, however, in that success was not really defined. The original poster specifically stated "profitable." So I'll elaborate: ME3 was profitable (so was DA2). So, stating that ME3 is profitable is neither naive, nor wrong.

Perhaps, but I would question whether short term profit should be equated with success.  I think we both know that DA2 was profitable because costs were cut to the bone (and frankly it showed).  I doubt too many people outiside of Bioware/EA would call DA2 successful (and the fact that the DA2 expansion was cancelled speaks for itself).

-Polaris

[Steppenwolf]

David Gaider wrote...

BasilKarlo wrote...
Then you, Laidlaw and Darrah should get on the same page. They've said several times that the game will be revealed when it's ready.

When it's at the stage we feel it's ready to show, then we'll be ready to show it.

You (or some people here, at any rate) seem to be taking us saying we're not ready to show it as in the game is at some early stage where we can't possibly get it ready by our planned release... whenever that is. Honestly, I'd just suggest you let us worry about that. When we reveal, there will be plenty of information.

All due respect, that's just doublespeak. Laidlaw and Darrah have said that the game will be unveiled when it's, but then you said that the game will be unveiled when you all feel ready, but now you're saying that you will feel ready to unveil it when it's ready to be unveiled.

David Gaider wrote...

Since when is the point of trailers quashing speculation?

Teaser trailers just get people excited. I'd say our fanbase is at a point where they'd like to see something solid. I wouldn't say that everyone doesn't trust us, but possibly enough that it will take something concrete to alleviate the inevitable doomsayers who would run amuck saying how we couldn't possibly deliver on anything at all. At the very least, it might be nice to offer the more reasonable folks out there something with which to counter that.

Or that is, at any rate, my presumption. My knowledge of marketing plans is limited, if better than a fan's.

Fair enough, but aren't new customers the primary focus of trailers?

David Gaider wrote...

Where did I suggest that you're not doing anything? Please don't put words in my mouth.

Some people on this thread have clearly said that. If you're not one of them, then what is the concern? That we won't be able to sell enough copies? That our advertising can't gain the attention of enough people? That's incredibly gracious of you, but if you're already paying attention I doubt you'll miss the news once it comes out.

I am concerned that not enough people will buy the game. I want the series to continue as long as possible. I was not a big fan of DA2, but DA2 is IMO better than 95% of modern RPGs. I would rather have more mediocre Dragon Age than no Dragon Age at all. If that's somehow out of bounds then excuse me all to hell.

[Fast Jimmy]

Huh, well there was an interesting tweet a few hours ago that ties into an earlier post of mine...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
Bioware went to PAX (Penny Arcade eXpo, for the record) East (the one they have in Boston, as opposed to LA) last year and, more or less, announced DA3. The kept referring to it as "The Next Big Thing" and "The Next Content Coming for the DA series" (which, at that point, the DA2 Expansion had already been cancelled, so everyone knew they were talking about DA3). ... Part of me almost suspects they will actually reveal DA3 info at PAX East again this year (slated for March 22-24), despite the fact that they are saying they aren't. After all, they didn't say anything before last year's PAX East about discussing their next game yet they did.

But if not, then I think they are missing a prime time to reveal a game, at an expo that is well attended and covered which has little to no reveals that we know of, before the Microsoft Durango (still the worst code name, EVER) reveal in April and the E3 hype that will follow all the way into June.

Dragon Age ‏@dragonage

We're going to be attending PAX East and look forward to seeing you all there! Who's going to be there with us? http://bit.ly/13tkep9

Mark Darrah ‏@BioMarkDarrah

@dragonage I'll be there. #DA3? We'll see

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 02 mars 2013 - 04:52 .

[IanPolaris]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Huh, well there was an interesting tweet a few hours ago that ties into an earlier post of mine...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
Bioware went to PAX (Penny Arcade eXpo, for the record) East (the one they have in Boston, as opposed to LA) last year and, more or less, announced DA3. The kept referring to it as "The Next Big Thing" and "The Next Content Coming for the DA series" (which, at that point, the DA2 Expansion had already been cancelled, so everyone knew they were talking about DA3). ... Part of me almost suspects they will actually reveal DA3 info at PAX East again this year (slated for March 22-24), despite the fact that they are saying they aren't. After all, they didn't say anything before last year's PAX East about discussing their next game yet they did.

But if not, then I think they are missing a prime time to reveal a game, at an expo that is well attended and covered which has little to no reveals that we know of, before the Microsoft Durango (still the worst code name, EVER) reveal in April and the E3 hype that will follow all the way into June.

Dragon Age ‏@dragonage

We're going to be attending PAX East and look forward to seeing you all there! Who's going to be there with us? http://bit.ly/13tkep9

Mark Darrah ‏@BioMarkDarrah

@dragonage I'll be there. #DA3? We'll see

That is interesting.  I would say that futher info on DA3 at PAX East just went from "no" to a resounding "maybe".

-Polaris

[Steppenwolf]

Fingers crossed.

[imbs]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

imbs wrote...

"you mad" "kid" "facts" - ugh.

1. There wasn't a single fact in your post. It was actually just naive and wrong.
2. You were indeed defending EA/Bioware.
3. Whilst I quoted you my post wasn't only about you, an idea I didn't write down as I assumed you would realise that - my bad.

While I can't talk on behalf of ALLLLLLLLL of EA, I'd like to address point #1.

ME3 has been a very successful game.  Stating that it's been successful is neither naive, nor wrong.

Yeah was my bad I should probably have reread his post before writing "wasn't a single fact... etc" - I was mainly alluding to the part about "EA not caring" which is obviously not a clear cut fact like he was making out.

[KiwiQuiche]

I wouldn't mind feasting on the eyes of the EA administration.

But in regards to media silence- eh they blew ME3 way out of proportion and the game was crap. Hopefully they won't waste loads of money on advertizing with DAI and funnel it back into the actual damn game, so I'm fine with media silence at the moment.

[Conduit0]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Huh, well there was an interesting tweet a few hours ago that ties into an earlier post of mine...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
Bioware went to PAX (Penny Arcade eXpo, for the record) East (the one they have in Boston, as opposed to LA) last year and, more or less, announced DA3. The kept referring to it as "The Next Big Thing" and "The Next Content Coming for the DA series" (which, at that point, the DA2 Expansion had already been cancelled, so everyone knew they were talking about DA3). ... Part of me almost suspects they will actually reveal DA3 info at PAX East again this year (slated for March 22-24), despite the fact that they are saying they aren't. After all, they didn't say anything before last year's PAX East about discussing their next game yet they did.

But if not, then I think they are missing a prime time to reveal a game, at an expo that is well attended and covered which has little to no reveals that we know of, before the Microsoft Durango (still the worst code name, EVER) reveal in April and the E3 hype that will follow all the way into June.

Dragon Age ‏@dragonage

We're going to be attending PAX East and look forward to seeing you all there! Who's going to be there with us? http://bit.ly/13tkep9

Mark Darrah ‏@BioMarkDarrah

@dragonage I'll be there. #DA3? We'll see

You know I was thinking about that not to long ago, and I would say the worst console codename ever was Project Dolphin, Game Cube's codename. I mean seriously, what does an aquatic mammal have to do with a home gaming console?


On a slightly more serious note, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they did do the reveal at PAX East, since the one who denied it was Chris Priestly. No offense to Priestly, but he has in the past denied rumors and speculation that ultimately proved to be true. Kind of makes you think he's intentionally throwing out false information to keep the rumor milling running in the wrong direction.

[JWvonGoethe]

@Conduit - I noticed Chris Priestly seems to have become more active on the DA3 forums as of late (even if he is mostly just closing threads.) To my crazed fan mind, caught up in a frenzy of rabid speculation, this is explicit confirmation that DA3 info will be flooding in shortly.

Well, OK, just call it a hunch...

[Renmiri1]

Guys be nice to Allan, he is one of the good guys.

[KiwiQuiche]

Renmiri1 wrote...

Guys be nice to Allan, he is one of the good guys.

I'm leaving his eyes alone and unfeasted.

[Dean_the_Young]

BasilKarlo wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

BasilKarlo wrote...
Then you, Laidlaw and Darrah should get on the same page. They've said several times that the game will be revealed when it's ready.

When it's at the stage we feel it's ready to show, then we'll be ready to show it.

You (or some people here, at any rate) seem to be taking us saying we're not ready to show it as in the game is at some early stage where we can't possibly get it ready by our planned release... whenever that is. Honestly, I'd just suggest you let us worry about that. When we reveal, there will be plenty of information.

All due respect, that's just doublespeak. Laidlaw and Darrah have said that the game will be unveiled when it's, but then you said that the game will be unveiled when you all feel ready, but now you're saying that you will feel ready to unveil it when it's ready to be unveiled.

Double speak is when two statements are mutually incompatible yet both accepted as true. What you just described is nuance, which is the expectation of explanation.

David Gaider wrote...

Where did I suggest that you're not doing anything? Please don't put words in my mouth.

Some people on this thread have clearly said that. If you're not one of them, then what is the concern? That we won't be able to sell enough copies? That our advertising can't gain the attention of enough people? That's incredibly gracious of you, but if you're already paying attention I doubt you'll miss the news once it comes out.

I am concerned that not enough people will buy the game. I want the series to continue as long as possible. I was not a big fan of DA2, but DA2 is IMO better than 95% of modern RPGs. I would rather have more mediocre Dragon Age than no Dragon Age at all. If that's somehow out of bounds then excuse me all to hell.

Where did he say it was out of bounds?

Perhaps you shouldn't put words in his mouth.

[Steppenwolf]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

BasilKarlo wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

BasilKarlo wrote...
Then you, Laidlaw and Darrah should get on the same page. They've said several times that the game will be revealed when it's ready.

When it's at the stage we feel it's ready to show, then we'll be ready to show it.

You (or some people here, at any rate) seem to be taking us saying we're not ready to show it as in the game is at some early stage where we can't possibly get it ready by our planned release... whenever that is. Honestly, I'd just suggest you let us worry about that. When we reveal, there will be plenty of information.

All due respect, that's just doublespeak. Laidlaw and Darrah have said that the game will be unveiled when it's, but then you said that the game will be unveiled when you all feel ready, but now you're saying that you will feel ready to unveil it when it's ready to be unveiled.

Double speak is when two statements are mutually incompatible yet both accepted as true. What you just described is nuance, which is the expectation of explanation.

Doublespeak- noun- language used to deceive usually through concealment or misrepresentation of truth; see also: goddledygook

Dean_the_Young wrote...

BasilKarlo wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

Where did I suggest that you're not doing anything? Please don't put words in my mouth.

Some people on this thread have clearly said that. If you're not one of them, then what is the concern? That we won't be able to sell enough copies? That our advertising can't gain the attention of enough people? That's incredibly gracious of you, but if you're already paying attention I doubt you'll miss the news once it comes out.

I am concerned that not enough people will buy the game. I want the series to continue as long as possible. I was not a big fan of DA2, but DA2 is IMO better than 95% of modern RPGs. I would rather have more mediocre Dragon Age than no Dragon Age at all. If that's somehow out of bounds then excuse me all to hell.

Where did he say it was out of bounds?

Perhaps you shouldn't put words in his mouth.

His last sentence there, the one where he gets sarcastic and essentially tells me to mind my own business.

[Volus Warlord]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Pardon me if I am skeptical of an employee of EA saying that an EA game has been successful. I seem to recall that many Bioware reps still claim that DA2 was a sucessful game too.

Pardon me if I'm skeptical of a fan that really wants the game to not be successful being skeptical at my statements. You're welcome to not believe my statements if you want, but it's up to you to decide whether or not your motivations are influenced by a want of the game to be less successful simply because you didn't care for it.

You are correct, however, in that success was not really defined. The original poster specifically stated "profitable." So I'll elaborate: ME3 was profitable (so was DA2). So, stating that ME3 is profitable is neither naive, nor wrong.

Can you understand why I HATE that viewpoint though?  I know the bills must be paid, yadda yadda, but still.  It just seems to suck the soul of out gaming. The whole "money is the ultimate view of success" view is pretty much the polar opposite to "the game must be polished and show attention to detail and be something we take pride in."  It is viewing your work from primarily a shareholder's perspective rather than a fan's perspective. 

I don't want any more "shareholder first" studios. 

[Renmiri1]

I would say that shareholders are what keep studios employed but they are indeed a fickle bunch and seem to have decided video games aren't worth the risk,

Vivendi is being pressured by Wall street to sell it's World of Warcraft unit (Activision). The game is wildly successful with 10 million users and no competitor in sight but has no "growth potential" according to shareholders so.. sell it and goodbye.

Shareholders are killing the golden goose that gives them the precious eggs because the goose isn't giving them enough "growth". They will move to another area and ran it into the ground too. It is the true "toxic environment". The only thing in nature that grows without stopping is cancer.

Modifié par Renmiri1, 02 mars 2013 - 09:30 .

[Steppenwolf]

"Growth" is the grand myth of economics. Investments are judged based on growth potential because the way the stock market was designed, but it's all built upon the notion that growth is infinite. There is a finite amount of currency in the world, but investors, banks and most economists choose to live with the delusion that the opposite is true. It might be a way to cope with extreme greed, propagating the BS ideology that the uber-wealthy controlling 90% of the wealth doesn't reduce the wealth pool for the rest of us.