181 réponses à ce sujet

[ziloe]

Obviously you are well aware of the mixed reactions you will receive over the next while, good and bad , but as a person who has remained hopeful for this newest installment and been following what little word we've gotten, I do remember distinctly noting Bioware being hopeful for a Fall of 2013 release. So... what changed? 

A lot of my time is spent attending skillswapsalongside other developers big and small, etc. Talking with these passionate people, I understand just how hard it can be to create a game. My small University group makes all sorts of games, some that never even see the light of day. So many fantastic ideas dropped because of time constraints and so on. Withsomething like Dragon Age, I’m sure it must be tough to both make a great, creatively
compelling game while still remaining faithful to your fan's expectations too. Not to mention, if you tried to make it absolutely perfect, it would probably never be released, haha.

A year is quite a while away, though, I guess it also means plenty of more hype as well. Still, as a fan I
can’t say I’m not somewhat disappointed. But I think if we understood the reasoning behind it, it might make things a little more acceptable, especially if knowing it’s only to be sure the game is at its best. 

Modifié par ziloe, 10 juin 2013 - 09:29 .

[Tenshi]

because they dont want another DA2.

[ziloe]

xxx2emo4Uxxx wrote...

because they dont want another DA2.

Of course, but this has been in the works for awhile now. They were already well aware of the fan's outcry. This may more have to do with the mechanics or completely shifting the engine into something more hightech, etc.

[wolfsite]

Better to delay the game and polish it till it shines rather then release a game that still has a lot of rough edges.  They can take all the time they want as far as I am concerned, if they are building a more open world game akin to games like Skyrim the more time you take the better as it helps breath life in the environment.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

If it leads to a better game then its fine,

[Beerfish]

It's being delayed so they can add the multi player part. (Figure I'd be the first to say this.,)

[Cutlass Jack]

What changed is they got a proper amount of development time to try and do the game justice. This is a good thing.

Nothing went wrong. Something went right.

Modifié par Cutlass Jack, 10 juin 2013 - 09:34 .

[IanPolaris]

wolfsite wrote...

Better to delay the game and polish it till it shines rather then release a game that still has a lot of rough edges.  They can take all the time they want as far as I am concerned, if they are building a more open world game akin to games like Skyrim the more time you take the better as it helps breath life in the environment.

If that's what they are doing fine, but I agree with the OP.  I have to wonder if something badly slipped in production somewhere and I wonder what that might have been.  IF so, this wouldn't be the first time a game was delayed without actually giving it more time to polish it (Master of Orion 3 and Nuke Dukem I am looking at you).

-Polaris

[Jadebaby]

I'm not complaining in the slightest. The more time the game gets the more relaxed I am. I don't want another DA2 or ME3.

[frostajulie]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

What changed is they got a proper amount of development time to try and do the game justice. This is a good thing.

Nothing went wrong. Something went right.

+1

[Killer3000ad]

"A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad."
-Shigeru Miyamoto

Of course there are outliers like Duke Nukem Forever, but it's a given that rushed games are more likely to be bad than delayed ones.

[IanPolaris]

frostajulie wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...

What changed is they got a proper amount of development time to try and do the game justice. This is a good thing.

Nothing went wrong. Something went right.

+1

I hope this is in fact the reason, but bumping the release date a FULL YEAR this late (apparently) in the dev cycle (and DA:I had been worked on for sometime now) doesn't inspire me with confidence.

-Polaris

[Ridwan]

Dear Bioware, please.. don't listen to the people that want you to spit out a game in less than 2 years. Take your time and perfect the game instead, the fans complaining will just have to wait and they'll buy it anyway once it's out.

Don't screw it up, we still... sort of love you... like the way you love your dog after it ****s inside your expensive shoe... just don't screw it up.

[Darth Death]

ziloe wrote...

But I think if we understood the reasoning behind it, it might make things a little more acceptable, especially if knowing it’s only to be sure the game is at its best. 

Play DA2 & you'll find your answer. Waiting is a good thing in this instance. 

[Catsith]

Next gen engine and tech, first open world game, strong competition, mixed reception of DA2... just some of the reasons they are taking their time to get it right and keep the franchise running strong for next gen.

[IanPolaris]

Killer3000ad wrote...

"A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad."
-Shigeru Miyamoto

Of course there are outliers like Duke Nukem Forever, but it's a given that rushed games are more likely to be bad than delayed ones.

I disagree.  A rushed game may generally be bad.  I don't disagree there, but just because a game is delayed doesn't mean it'll be polished or good.  That depends on WHY it was delayed thus getting back to the OP's question (which I'd like an answer to as well).  If the game got delayed because there was a catastrophe somewhere in production (Master of Orion 3 for example), that does not mean the extra time will actually make for a better game (just as one example).

-Polaris

[Chris Priestly]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

What changed is they got a proper amount of development time to try and do the game justice. This is a good thing.

Nothing went wrong. Something went right.

Yeah, this.

It wasn't that anything went wrong. The date was changed to make Dragon Age: Inquisition better by giving it the time needed to make it amazing.

[IanPolaris]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...

What changed is they got a proper amount of development time to try and do the game justice. This is a good thing.

Nothing went wrong. Something went right.

Yeah, this.

It wasn't that anything went wrong. The date was changed to make Dragon Age: Inquisition better by giving it the time needed to make it amazing.

Quoting the Cerberus Scientist Jana:  "I'll hold you to that, sir"

-Polaris

[Ridwan]

IanPolaris wrote...

Killer3000ad wrote...

"A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad."
-Shigeru Miyamoto

Of course there are outliers like Duke Nukem Forever, but it's a given that rushed games are more likely to be bad than delayed ones.

I disagree.  A rushed game may generally be bad.  I don't disagree there, but just because a game is delayed doesn't mean it'll be polished or good.  That depends on WHY it was delayed thus getting back to the OP's question (which I'd like an answer to as well).  If the game got delayed because there was a catastrophe somewhere in production (Master of Orion 3 for example), that does not mean the extra time will actually make for a better game (just as one example).

-Polaris

You make it sound like every delayed game is bad.

[Savber100]

The last time I saw Bioware rush a game (ME3 an DA2) we hated them for it.


Take.Your.Time.Bioware.

[IanPolaris]

M25105 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Killer3000ad wrote...

"A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad."
-Shigeru Miyamoto

Of course there are outliers like Duke Nukem Forever, but it's a given that rushed games are more likely to be bad than delayed ones.

I disagree.  A rushed game may generally be bad.  I don't disagree there, but just because a game is delayed doesn't mean it'll be polished or good.  That depends on WHY it was delayed thus getting back to the OP's question (which I'd like an answer to as well).  If the game got delayed because there was a catastrophe somewhere in production (Master of Orion 3 for example), that does not mean the extra time will actually make for a better game (just as one example).

-Polaris

You make it sound like every delayed game is bad.

I don't mean to and if I am giving that impression, I apologize.  Often delay can be a good thing.  It depends on WHY the time-table was delayed really, and it's very hard to know unless you are actually on the inside in many cases.  I am just being my annoyingly cautious, skeptical, even contrary self.

-Polaris

[Doctoglethorpe]

I do think it was foolish of them to ever give a date that was likely to change (and now has), but that said I never really had much faith in it to begin with.  I knew it would get delayed even before the rumor hit, so it doesn't surprise me.  I'm a little surprised its fall and not spring, but either way. 

Its really only good news if you can get past the difficulty of antisipation, which any seasoned gamer should be able to do. 

Why they are still aiming for 360 and ps3 is beyond me though.  I mean I get the profit motive, and that would of made more sense if it really was a 2013 launch, or even early 2014, but a full year into the next gen seems to be pushing reason to me. 

[TMB903]

What savber said...I certainly don't want another rushed game after DA2 and ME3.

[Killer3000ad]

IanPolaris wrote...

Killer3000ad wrote...

"A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad."
-Shigeru Miyamoto

Of course there are outliers like Duke Nukem Forever, but it's a given that rushed games are more likely to be bad than delayed ones.

I disagree.  A rushed game may generally be bad.  I don't disagree there, but just because a game is delayed doesn't mean it'll be polished or good.  That depends on WHY it was delayed thus getting back to the OP's question (which I'd like an answer to as well).  If the game got delayed because there was a catastrophe somewhere in production (Master of Orion 3 for example), that does not mean the extra time will actually make for a better game (just as one example).

-Polaris

And that's why I said there are outliers and used the word 'likely'. I never said it was an ironclad guarantee a delayed game would be good. But I don't want to get into argument with you mang, given how little info there is. I can only say that delaying the game means more development time which increases the likelihood the game will be better, especially when compared to how rushed DA2 was.

Modifié par Killer3000ad, 10 juin 2013 - 09:48 .