181 réponses à ce sujet

[devSin]

It gives David time to write Shale into the game again.

DO IT! DO IT NOW!

[bzombo]

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.

No complaints here. Smart move. This also reminds me of the anticipation leading up to Origins. I'm excited.

[Korusus]

 I am 100% in favor of this decision and I think it shows a remarkable 180 from Dragon Age 2's release.  I have been hoping for a while now that DA:I would be delayed.  BioWare seems much more aware of the importance of a good reputation this time around.

[Rhazesx]

 The look at the delay as good news. Hopefully, it means we won't get a game like DA2 or an eding like ME3.

[Travie]

I can hardly express how happy I am they are taking the time to produce a quality release this time around.

I might even reconsider my stance on never preordering a Bioware game after the horrible ME3 end and half done DA2.

[Legenlorn]

Well lets see. First BioWare (If I saw and hear on the E3 conference right) is making DA:I using Frostbite 3. It's a new system so they have to learn what they can do with it. Just how fare can they go with it and DA:I. Second they obviously don't want to make something like DA2. (Was not all that bad but yeah you get the picture) Third they have a huge competition out there (Wither 3, Skyrim), so they have to make something equal or better (prefer better definitely). Also, they want to make sure that what they have already done is working properly (maybe it need something more, maybe they can change something to make it look better, feel better idk). Now there is also the economic side (at least that is what I think and might not be true at all). If it is Fristbite 3 they are using then they need to use the new consoles right? Many ppl have complained over the internet about not being able to buy the consoles right now. So if they have a release date set for next year then that just gives ppl time to buy those said new consoles and also upgrade ones PC. So at that time ppl will have the tech to play the game. Well that is what I think.
Yeah so I hope no one takes this against them.

[Whitering]

JerZeyCJ2 wrote...

So EA is learning then?

It was this or the game fails and they shutter yet another once previously amazing Dev they paid good money for. I've never understood that at all. Do the devs not care because they got a fat cheque for joining up with the empire anyway?

I don't have any games grabbing me at the moment, I played a trilogy of Eria Reed episodes last weekend, and this weekend I reinstalled DAO (takes a long time because I run 200 mods or something) because I accidentally updated to 1.05. I started my new playthrough, just at the point where I get to start kicking NPCs into Lake Callenhad (thanks Firinneach).

[Urazz]

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.

Yeah but wasn't Duke Nukem Forever tossed from developer to developer and rebuilt repeatedly?  It was time badly spent if I recall.

It's one thing to delay a game to add in polish to the game and make sure everything is good but it's completely different if they delay a game for the same reasons Duke Nukem Forever was delayed for.

[llandwynwyn]

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.

Please do.

[Browneye_Vamp84]

My first thought about the date was 'Oh, hey, maybe they are working on some expansion for DA2.' A girl can dream, I can dream. lol

I'd like that it's going to be out next fall. Enough to learn and prepare my body for what's to come. Plus, save some $$ in case we decide to purchase a new console or pc. ^__^

[Spedfrom]

Even though I am underwhelmed by the teaser trailer, I like the fact that they removed the 3 from the title. It burdened the game with all that came before, the good of DAO and the bad of DA2 (or the other way around if you're so inclined).

[Ninja Stan]

IanPolaris wrote...

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

Note that Chris said "amazing" and "better," not "perfect" or "better than you thought DA2 was" or "just as good as you thought DA: Origins was" or "exactly what you expect it to be." This will be important later when the BSN starts asking why they still didn't like the game even though BioWare and EA gave it more time than they initially did.

[Herr Uhl]

Ninja Stan wrote...

Note that Chris said "amazing" and "better," not "perfect" or "better than you thought DA2 was" or "just as good as you thought DA: Origins was" or "exactly what you expect it to be." This will be important later when the BSN starts asking why they still didn't like the game even though BioWare and EA gave it more time than they initially did.

Semi-confirmed, DA3 will suck.

[KiwiQuiche]

I don't mind them taking more time so we have a better product.

[Angrywolves]

Oh we got Priestly back. Welcome back oh great and wonderful Jedi Master. Bows Deeply.
Hmmm. Brent Knowles and Drew K. Sorry about the last name. If I could become the new CEO of EA I would offer them whatever it takes to get them back at Bioware. Just my opinion.
We hope the people who are still at Bioware can still get the job done but I feel less confident after the trailer.

[ziloe]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

Note that Chris said "amazing" and "better," not "perfect" or "better than you thought DA2 was" or "just as good as you thought DA: Origins was" or "exactly what you expect it to be." This will be important later when the BSN starts asking why they still didn't like the game even though BioWare and EA gave it more time than they initially did.

Semi-confirmed, DA3 will suck.

As a game designer, I get what he's saying. There are only so many things you can do, even with a fantastic engine. Programming and animating, etc, cost a lot of time, money and resources such as various available employees, etc. Especially when you get into heavy graphics like this and so forth.
There's no doubt they won't please everyone, because that would be impossible, but every game designer really hopes you will enjoy it, because this is why they got into the industry in the first place.
Sure making money is great, but the time and effort is demanding as all hell, and this can lead to a very short life span as a developer due to being burnt out, etc, so they do the best they can with what time and manpower they have.

Modifié par ziloe, 10 juin 2013 - 11:44 .

[duckley]

xxx2emo4Uxxx wrote...

because they dont want another DA2.

They may get that anyway - maybe they hope to minimize the negativity. I have come to the conclusion that Biware cannot please everyone, so they might as well please the majority and themselves...

[Ninja Stan]

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.

Creative people are well known for their uncanny ability to use more time than what they're given to finish a project. There is no such thing as a "proper" amount of development time, as if a game that takes 3 years to build is always better than a game that takes 2 years, or a game that takes 120 person-years to build is always worse than one that takes 240 person-years.

The math doesn't work that way. A game schedule is decided at the beginning based on estimates by the developer and agreed upon with the publisher's input. Usually, developers will receive payment after certain milestones are met, such as "playable game" or "tech demo" or "all hats modeled" or whatever. If, down the line, the developer needs more time (for whatever reason, and it's almost never "incompetence," "greed," "too many martinis" or "we need to insult the fans"), they need to make a case to the publisher to give them that time. More time means more money is being spent, so the developer needs to make a really good case for their game. If the publisher agrees that, yes, more time will make the game better and sell as many or more copies than we'd like it to, they will usually grant that request.

A game developer's schedule, in my experience, is not usually dictated to the developer, but agreed upon by both parties. Granted, I've only worked at BioWare, but since that's who we're talking about here, I figure it'll apply.

Even with this extra time, there is no guarantee that the game will be successful, to your taste, or meet your expectations. BioWare can make as good a game as they have time for, and then it's up to the gamers to decide if they like it. That's how it's always worked, that's how it will always work.

[Althix]

IanPolaris wrote...
 "I'll hold you to that, sir"

you can't do that.

[ChocolateSauce]

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.

I'm all for waiting to be honest. I seriously don't mind aslong as the character development/interactions/romance stuff is really well done like in the Citadel DLC. It was the major thing I didn't like about DA2 (No Varric love interest ). The story already seems pretty nailed down - so far from what I've put together, huge sh*t happens, and you're the big hero like DA:O did. It'll really just be the minor things that need alot of attention (and will obviously take along time). I hope Bioware keeps us updated on alot of things aswell, and be open to feedback.
Also, I hope Steve Blum comes back. We miss Oghren.

[Stjerne]

If it were up to me, I'd have them delay it to 2015. The longer the better.

[ziloe]

Ninja Stan 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.

Creative people are well known for their uncanny ability to use more time than what they're given to finish a project. There is no such thing as a "proper" amount of development time, as if a game that takes 3 years to build is always better than a game that takes 2 years, or a game that takes 120 person-years to build is always worse than one that takes 240 person-years.

The math doesn't work that way. A game schedule is decided at the beginning based on estimates by the developer and agreed upon with the publisher's input. Usually, developers will receive payment after certain milestones are met, such as "playable game" or "tech demo" or "all hats modeled" or whatever. If, down the line, the developer needs more time (for whatever reason, and it's almost never "incompetence," "greed," "too many martinis" or "we need to insult the fans"), they need to make a case to the publisher to give them that time. More time means more money is being spent, so the developer needs to make a really good case for their game. If the publisher agrees that, yes, more time will make the game better and sell as many or more copies than we'd like it to, they will usually grant that request.

A game developer's schedule, in my experience, is not usually dictated to the developer, but agreed upon by both parties. Granted, I've only worked at BioWare, but since that's who we're talking about here, I figure it'll apply.

Even with this extra time, there is no guarantee that the game will be successful, to your taste, or meet your expectations. BioWare can make as good a game as they have time for, and then it's up to the gamers to decide if they like it. That's how it's always worked, that's how it will always work.

Thanks, I definitely appreciate your input.

Still, asking for an extension, if this was the case, is why I was curious as to what needed a years worth of extra time. This is of course assuming it wasn't in pre production this whole time. One person mentioned MP as a possibility, and though that might make sense, I'd rather not make too many assumptions.

Modifié par ziloe, 11 juin 2013 - 12:14 .

[BouncyFrag]

This is the best thing I got out of E3 today! Plenty of great games until we get the five star, four course meal of gaming goodness in DA3 in 2014.

[Zack_Nero]

Am personal glad that it is being held back. Yea it will be harder to wait for it, but I think it will be worth it.