283 réponses à ce sujet

[IanPolaris]

krul2k wrote...

i loved DA2 an so did many others your opinion is just that yours so dont try an throw it out that da2 was bad or a failure because it wasnt

Um considering the sales figures and how Bioware has handled DA2, I think it's very fair and very objective to say that it was in fact a failure whether you personally liked it or not.

-Polaris

[NovaBlastMarketing]

IanPolaris wrote...

terdferguson123 wrote...

DA2 was a great game and i think most people believe that.

I dispute that.  In fact if you look around even Bioware/EA is now admitting that DA2 simply wasn't very good.  Why else would you cancell the planned expansions and DLCs?  Sure DA2 has some people that liked it (almost all games do), but given the sales record and how it's been reviewed and treated over the past year, I think it's safe to say that DA2 is generally regarded as a mediocre game at best (and usually is regarded as a poor one especially by Bioware standards).

-Polaris

Unless you havean actual quote of them saying that   all you have is theary and opinion.

I  agree with the above poster   Da2 was a  great  game  in fact  I enjoyed  parts of it more than origins and actually think they made some improvements from the first one

Modifié par NovaBlastMarketing, 19 mars 2013 - 07:55 .

[Renmiri1]

IanPolaris wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
I dispute that.  In fact if you look around even Bioware/EA is now admitting that DA2 simply wasn't very good.

So which is it, then? Do I think that DA2 was a great game (which you say I'm on record as believing), or do I think DA2 simply wasn't very good? Please, by all means, speak for both myself and BioWare in general. I'd like to hear it.

If Bioware thought DA2 was good, then the expansion wouldn't have been cancelled.  You aren't the only one in Bioware.  I have already expressed my concerns that if an author feels a game was a great game (when it wasn't), then that author would be less inclined to fix the mistakes from said game.  That is all.

-Polaris

Oh please, how old are you? Have you never worked at any company ever besides McDonalds ? Projects get cancelled or consolidated all the time for all kinds of reasons. Including the fact that the developers  time would be better used to make a new product, rather than just add on to the old.

Wall Street treasures growth and more sales, add ons and DLCs are not as profitable as new games. No mistery or conspiracy theory involved.

DA2 is my favorite Bioware game so far, Granted, I haven't played the older ones like Baldurs Gate or Jade Empire. But it surpasses ME3 by billions of miles, ME2 by a lot and even DAO, KOTOR. Just because YOU hate something it doesn't mean everyone will.

Modifié par Renmiri1, 19 mars 2013 - 07:53 .

[BeatoSama]

IanPolaris wrote...

Um
considering the sales figures and how Bioware has handled DA2, I think
it's very fair and very objective to say that it was in fact a failure
whether you personally liked it or not.

-Polaris

What do you mean by failure?

Financial?
While it certainly didn't sell as well as origins it was also much cheaper to produce which means that it might have been more profitable than Origins in the end.
The DLC didn't sell very well that's true but Awakening didn't either.

Critical?
It was not as well received as Origins but it wasn't universally panned or anything.

Modifié par BeatoSama, 19 mars 2013 - 07:54 .

[David Gaider]

IanPolaris wrote...
If Bioware thought DA2 was good, then the expansion wouldn't have been cancelled.  You aren't the only one in Bioware.  I have already expressed my concerns that if an author feels a game was a great game (when it wasn't), then that author would be less inclined to fix the mistakes from said game.  That is all.

I see. So canceling the expansion was just because we thought DA2 wasn't good. And I think it's awesome... why, I'm not sure. Maybe it's because I (or other DA2 devs) don't care to slag our own game for the interest of the fans? Or because we don't bow our heads and go, "Yep, yep, you're so right. Wow, did we screw up. Man, what a turd."

If you feel that way, great. If you expect us to feel that way, you're mistaken. Every project we've worked on has mistakes we regret and things we thought we did well-- I know it's an incredible blow for anyone who places DAO up on a pedestal, but it was no different. It's possible (for most people, anyhow) to like something a great deal despite its flaws... in fact, speaking personally, that would have to be true or I'd like no game at all.

DA2 did have flaws-- big ones. Some in its execution, some in its design. Some couldn't have been helped, some could have been. What this would tell you, I can't imagine. Possibly we disagree on what those flaws were (big surprise), but I suggest you wait until you know more about DA3 before you start leaping to conclusions about whether we've addressed them sufficiently... as well as trying to support those conclusions by explaining how we feel about our own projects.

Until that point, I suggest you stick to something you know well-- your own opinions-- rather than flailing around trying to make your opinions seem more impressive by alluding to knowledge you simply don't have.

Fair enough?

Modifié par David Gaider, 19 mars 2013 - 07:54 .

[Renmiri1]

Don't worry, none of us is taking Polaris word on it anyway 

As for the OP, Beerfish is right: The mage x Templar conflict in Thedas seems quite a difficult nut to crack. I don't think we humans here on earth have done it yet and we don't even have our own "dangerous persons" throwing fireballs.

Will be interesting to see how the BW writers tackle that. Can't wait!

Modifié par Renmiri1, 19 mars 2013 - 08:01 .

[David Gaider]

Renmiri1 wrote...
As for the OP, Beerfish is right: The mage x Templar conflict in Thedas seems quite a difficult nut to crack. I don't think we humans here on earth have done it yet and we don't even have our own "dangerous persons" throwing fireballs.

Will be interesting to see how the BW writers tackle that. Can't wait!

I hope it will be interesting. I'm not sure why anyone imagines that we would have the entire game revolve around the issue-- as in every second of every minute, like Act 3 of DA2 stretched out over an entire game-- but I guess if that's the only thing one has to work with and they really wanted to imagine the worst possible continuation they could certainly do that.

And I suppose some people do certainly try.

[terdferguson123]

IanPolaris wrote...

terdferguson123 wrote...

DA2 was a great game and i think most people believe that.

I dispute that.  In fact if you look around even Bioware/EA is now admitting that DA2 simply wasn't very good.  Why else would you cancell the planned expansions and DLCs?  Sure DA2 has some people that liked it (almost all games do), but given the sales record and how it's been reviewed and treated over the past year, I think it's safe to say that DA2 is generally regarded as a mediocre game at best (and usually is regarded as a poor one especially by Bioware standards).

-Polaris

What? Where did Bioware/EA admit that it wasn't very good? Please provide this information. The cancelling of expansions and DLC has nothing to do with the success or failure of a project, this happens constantly in business.

Secondly, sales figures don't mean everything:

Sales figures need to be analyzed relative to their respective costs in order to find out if the game was a financial success, and I am betting that it was, although I cannot say for certian. What I can say for certain is that stating sales figures is a futile attempt at pointing out if a game was a financial success as that it only half of the equation.

Lastly, you mention "How the game was reviewed" . However, a quick look at metacritic shows an average 8.2 score, and by most review sites there scale goes as: 7 good, 8 great, 9 excellent etc. An 8.2 is in that "great" range, which was the original topic of this discussion right?

Modifié par terdferguson123, 19 mars 2013 - 08:10 .

[Wulfram]

For a AAA game, 82 on metacritic is pretty average no matter how it's described.

It's considerably worse than any other full Bioware RPG except the Jade Empire PC edition - of course that reflects Bioware's high standard for it's non-DLC releases

[Huntress]

BeatoSama wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Um
considering the sales figures and how Bioware has handled DA2, I think
it's very fair and very objective to say that it was in fact a failure
whether you personally liked it or not.

-Polaris

What do you mean by failure?

Financial?
While it certainly didn't sell as well as origins it was also much cheaper to produce which means that it might have been more profitable than Origins in the end.
The DLC didn't sell very well that's true but Awakening didn't either.

Critical?
It was not as well received as Origins but it wasn't universally panned or anything.

I think he means:


thats the first 10 weeks sales.

[Dutchess]

terdferguson123 wrote...

Lastly, you mention "How the game was reviewed" . However, a quick look at metacritic shows an average 8.2 score, and by most review sites there scale goes as: 7 good, 8 great, 9 excellent etc. An 8.2 is in that "great" range, which was the original topic of this discussion right?

Yeah, except the user score on metacritic for DA2 is a whopping 4.2. 

[Fraq Hound]

David Gaider wrote...

I hope it will be interesting. I'm not sure why anyone imagines that we would have the entire game revolve around the issue-- as in every second of every minute, like Act 3 of DA2 stretched out over an entire game-- but I guess if that's the only thing one has to work with and they really wanted to imagine the worst possible continuation they could certainly do that.

And I suppose some people do certainly try.

To be fair...

It was a pivitol part of the story in DA2 that we were being constantly reminded of. We are introduced to it within the first 10 minutes of the game by Bethany and Aveline's husband.

Neither game revolves around it (though DA2 comes pretty dang close) but it definitely plays a very large role in both games. DA2 pretty much ended with the Circle and the Templar's in open war.

At least that's what I remember. It was so abrupt and I was so disappointed that I don't remember much.

I can understand why some people are getting tired of it or are afraid that it's going to be the main focus of DA3.

[LinksOcarina]

renjility wrote...

terdferguson123 wrote...

Lastly, you mention "How the game was reviewed" . However, a quick look at metacritic shows an average 8.2 score, and by most review sites there scale goes as: 7 good, 8 great, 9 excellent etc. An 8.2 is in that "great" range, which was the original topic of this discussion right?

Yeah, except the user score on metacritic for DA2 is a whopping 4.2. 

And how many of those actually played the game?

Or were being honest in their reviews? 

Data can be shaped in any sort of way, especially aggregate scores. That just gives you a house of cards of a point of view. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 19 mars 2013 - 08:27 .

[Fredward]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
See? That's exactly what I think will actually happen.

A Big Bad will be manipulating both sides, with some key players in the Mages and the Templars secretly helping the Big Bad. If you side with Mages, you will root out the Mage traitor, leaving the Templars hurting and ultimately releasing the Big Bad to wreck havoc on the world. Vice versa if you side with the Templars. 

Once the Big Bad is out, both sides realized they have been duped and work together to bring down the enemy. Once the dust settles, they realize that they had more in common than they thought and a truce is made, where Mages can be free from the Circle, but Templars are there to help those who wish to train and keep safe from Abominations/Demons. 

The whole reason the topic even comes up is that the devs wanted a way to have mages roam the world. Running across a random mercernary group that has a mage should, in the game's lore, be an extremely rare thing. But it limits encounter design. If mages are free to be out in the world once they have passed their Harrowing, then there is no reason why the player couldn't encounter them later on.

I see this situation much more likely than Bioware respecting anything as vastly different as "all mages are still locked in towers" and "mages have the right to be anywhere in the world they want." They are too different outcomes to account for with the Save Import. Therefore, it will be somet type of railroaded outcome, where the mages have freedom, since that is the "better" outcome in terms of creating future content and encounter designs.

God that is painfully contrived. Yet so very common these days. Really hope it won't be happening.

[Vilegrim]

David Gaider wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...
As for the OP, Beerfish is right: The mage x Templar conflict in Thedas seems quite a difficult nut to crack. I don't think we humans here on earth have done it yet and we don't even have our own "dangerous persons" throwing fireballs.

Will be interesting to see how the BW writers tackle that. Can't wait!

I hope it will be interesting. I'm not sure why anyone imagines that we would have the entire game revolve around the issue-- as in every second of every minute, like Act 3 of DA2 stretched out over an entire game-- but I guess if that's the only thing one has to work with and they really wanted to imagine the worst possible continuation they could certainly do that.

And I suppose some people do certainly try.

and here was me hoping to spend a productive game burning templars and looting chantries.

[Ser Landry]

David Gaider wrote...
Or because we don't bow our heads and go, "Yep, yep, you're so right. Wow, did we screw up. Man, what a turd."

I don't think anyone expects that? But why not make it clear who your product is aimed at? It's like an auto company that used to make world #1 pickups one day releasing a minibus (to a 'mixed' reception) and then asking for blind deposits on Future Model X Which We Won't Say If Pickup Or Minibus.

As it is, I don't know if you think the minibus was fine, but the doors needed tweaking, or whether you're back into pickups having realized that minibuses were a misguided concept as a whole.

That's why it would be cool to see what you thought was done right/wrong with DA2. Believe it or not, I'd have no pleasure in rubbing your nose in it a-la your quote.

It's basically DA2 misaligned expectations 2.0. in the sense that previously 'fans' expected DA:O 2 and were in for a shock, whereas today you have 'fans' expecting any combination of elements from both games, with a bit of Skyrim thrown for extra spice.

[BeatoSama]

Huntress wrote...

BeatoSama wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Um
considering the sales figures and how Bioware has handled DA2, I think
it's very fair and very objective to say that it was in fact a failure
whether you personally liked it or not.

-Polaris

What do you mean by failure?

Financial?
While it certainly didn't sell as well as origins it was also much cheaper to produce which means that it might have been more profitable than Origins in the end.
The DLC didn't sell very well that's true but Awakening didn't either.

Critical?
It was not as well received as Origins but it wasn't universally panned or anything.

I think he means:
snip

thats the first 10 weeks sales.

My point was that Dragon Age 2 had much lower production costs and therefore didn't have to sell as much to be as profitable as Origins.

Modifié par BeatoSama, 19 mars 2013 - 08:29 .

[LPPrince]

Fraq Hound wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

I hope it will be interesting. I'm not sure why anyone imagines that we would have the entire game revolve around the issue-- as in every second of every minute, like Act 3 of DA2 stretched out over an entire game-- but I guess if that's the only thing one has to work with and they really wanted to imagine the worst possible continuation they could certainly do that.

And I suppose some people do certainly try.

*snip*

I can understand why some people are getting tired of it or are afraid that it's going to be the main focus of DA3.

Yep. The Mage/Templar conflict in DAO was my least favorite of the story arcs.

Then DA2 went ahead and focused on it. /huge bummer for me

So any time I hear about that plot going even further I'm like GAAAH, WHHHY

Of course others enjoy it, so more to them. I just want something different to deal with.

Doesn't have to be another Blight or Archdemon approach, but something, anything else.

So if the Mage/Templar thing isn't going to be the main focus, I'm cool with that. If its just another side thing and there's more stuff going on, grander stuff, then I want in on THAT.

[LinksOcarina]

BeatoSama wrote...

My point was that Dragon Age 2 had much lower production costs and therefore didn't have to sell as much to be as profitable as Origins.

So what was Dragon Age 2's budget compared to Origins? 

Do we have that data to prove profitability? Or how about DLC sales as well.

No offense, but such a statement without evidence is kind of hollow. 

[LPPrince]

BeatoSama wrote...

My point was that Dragon Age 2 had much lower production costs and therefore didn't have to sell as much to be as profitable as Origins.

That only goes so far though.

In a very highly exaggerated example-

A. Something costs $100 to make, you end up with $500. Cool.
B. Something costs $10 to make, you end up with $100. Also cool.

A was profitable, five times as much as was spent in dev, while B was way more profitable in comparison to its dev cost but in the end made far less money.

So I think when people look at it that way, they see two different things. Or there's two sides that see one thing a piece.

[Huntress]

terdferguson123 wrote...

.. a quick look at metacritic shows an average 8.2 score, and by most review sites there scale goes as: 7 good, 8 great, 9 excellent etc. An 8.2 is in that "great" range, which was the original topic of this discussion right?

That's because they purged the negative reviews.

[addiction21]

Huntress wrote...

BeatoSama wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Um
considering the sales figures and how Bioware has handled DA2, I think
it's very fair and very objective to say that it was in fact a failure
whether you personally liked it or not.

-Polaris

What do you mean by failure?

Financial?
While it certainly didn't sell as well as origins it was also much cheaper to produce which means that it might have been more profitable than Origins in the end.
The DLC didn't sell very well that's true but Awakening didn't either.

Critical?
It was not as well received as Origins but it wasn't universally panned or anything.

I think he means:
cut

thats the first 10 weeks sales.

And that means nothing since you do not know how much was invested into the game monetarily. That's the bottom line into the black.

Yes it failed to meet my expectations but using ignorance of sales to validate your opinion that it was a commercial failure with out the important information is sad.

And with the whole "EA is the greedy horrible devil" DA2 clearly did well enough to keep the franchise running and OMFG a longer better development time.

Modifié par addiction21, 19 mars 2013 - 08:38 .