215 réponses à ce sujet

[MerinTB]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
Geez. I thought Gibeau was being dense as a rock when I read this... but apparently, people who don't understand anything about basic business concepts are actually the dense ones for agreeing this is even remotely true or possible.

Everytime I wonder how marketing people still have jobs, how anyone educated in the age of the internet can fall for buzzwords and demographic targetting...

I can see people buying rhetoric and blatantly misleading statements hook, line and sinker.

In Exile wrote...
I won't disagree that it's a new use
of the words IP in the video-game industry, but IP was never used
correctly in the video-game industry. So from my POV, someone is just
using an equally wrong but new meaning for the phrase. 

Are you now going to say "it depends on what the word IP is", President Clinton?



Is Intellectual Property suddenly "a label" tossed into the ever growing dictionary of words that "we just can't define" so people can use them to mean WHATEVER?

Modifié par MerinTB, 24 août 2013 - 03:17 .

[stormhit]

Marketing to "gamers" isn't hard, you just have to constantly state how important gamers are to your company and how important they were to your philosophy when designing a product. Gamers crave being directly marketed to above all things. Just keep saying that over and over and never mention any other groups-- or really much of anything else. Because any pitch that isn't directly reassuring gamers of how important they are is clearly evidence of either a betrayal or evil corporate overlords trying to screw gamers out of their money, and cause for internet rage.

[Angrywolves]

Frank Gibeau is dense.
Enough said.

[happy_daiz]

 I think Gibeau's point was that they were treating DAI like it's a new IP. But the rest of it did sound like he didn't actually understand the meaning of IP.

I'm surprised that Marketing types are still able to confound me, but they do. This is the same type of crap I hear from the Marketing dept. where I work. They seem to lack understanding of how things actually work, and really don't care. 

They just meet their buzzword quota, and feel satisfied that their bosses don't know any better. 

[In Exile]

MerinTB wrote...
Are you now going to say "it depends on what the word IP is", President Clinton?

 

That depends on the meaning of "it depends". 

Is Intellectual Property suddenly "a label" tossed into the ever growing dictionary of words that "we just can't define" so people can use them to mean WHATEVER you want to win a debate on the internet?

Fixed. 

Modifié par In Exile, 24 août 2013 - 04:05 .

[Deverz]

Yeah, it's marketing, they're "reinventing". But from what we've seen so far it seems to ring at least partially true. Combat looks a lot different from DAO and DA2, they're adding horses, larger worlds, changing the look of elves. Who knows what else they haven't revealed yet. So yeah, it might very well be a "reinvention" of the IP. At the very least I expect them to continue the story, tie up loose ends and bring back characters from previous games that needs more fleshing out.

These kinds of statements brings out hyperbole easily. They're reinventing so it must mean they're dumbing it down to the CoD audience. Maybe it's just a marketing shtick. Maybe he's telling the truth. Who knows.

[dreamgazer]

Well, yeah. After the black eye left by Dragon Age 2, deserved or not, the bean counters and marketers should "treat it" as its own separate entity, especially since it'll be BioWare's first game on next-gen consoles.

[Dieb]

Translation: You can enjoy this as a new player.

Ray Muzyka once said, their biggest mistake with Dragon Age 2 was calling it Dragon Age *two*.

[MarchWaltz]

I feel sorry for bioware for having to put up with this bull.

[ObserverStatus]

ElitePinecone wrote...
EA executive Frank Gibeau made those comments recently to CVG.
He also said that despite DA:I being a sequel, they're "reinventing" the series.
What does this mean, even in the context of corporate-exec-speak?
 

Eh, I doubt this means anything at all, probably something he just made up to appease EA's shareholders.

[Allan Schumacher]

Given that he uses the word "we" he's could also be talking about internally in terms of things like investment, time, focus, etc, as well as a host of other things from an internal perspective.

Though I'm not privy to how the executive team assesses "new" vs "old" IP, so it seems as though he is making a comparison to me, though I don't know in what ways.

[Sifr]

Morocco Mole wrote...

Baelrahn wrote...

Translation: You can enjoy this as a new player.

Ray Muzyka once said, their biggest mistake with Dragon Age 2 was calling it Dragon Age *two*.

I'd say their biggest mistake would be rushing it out in 11 months. But to each their own.

Well, both of those things.

As much as I love DA2, it's clear that the executives should have left it as a a Sidequel as was intended and given it more time in development, instead of having to rush it out in the door to capitalise in the wake of Origins massive popularity.

I feel sorry for the guys Bioware having to deal with this kind of thing from "Extraneous Advisory".

[jamskinner]

QuinP2B wrote...

I  just hope this is not the "new IP" Casey Hudson is supposed to work on .

Off topic but I dont see why he gets bagged on so much.  Ya he helped mess up the end of ME3.  But without
him it wouldn't exist.  He also lead the Kotor team and I don't hear anyone complaining about how that
game turned out.

[In Exile]

jamskinner wrote...

QuinP2B wrote...

I  just hope this is not the "new IP" Casey Hudson is supposed to work on .

Off topic but I dont see why he gets bagged on so much.  Ya he helped mess up the end of ME3.  But without
him it wouldn't exist.  He also lead the Kotor team and I don't hear anyone complaining about how that
game turned out.

James Ohlen was the lead designer on KoTOR from what I recall. 

Modifié par In Exile, 24 août 2013 - 05:12 .

[Cainhurst Crow]

It could be the new approach they're giving it, could be the new engine, could be just marketing.

Who knows? Who cares?

[Allan Schumacher]

James Ohlen was the lead designer on KoTOR from what I recall.

Casey was the Project Director of KOTOR (the same title he had for the Mass Effect games).

Lead Designer for KOTOR was Ohlen. Preston Watamaniuk was the lead designer for all 3 Mass Effect games.

[Han Shot First]

I'm not sure how to feel about it.

Reinvention was part of the problem with DA2. Bioware ignored the old adage that if it isn't broken, don't fix it. Unnecessary changes were made between DA:O and DA2 and most did not work at all. The new art design for armor, weapons, and elves and such was also mostly awful. The only thing I thought was kind of an improvement was the Qunari. What exactly are they planning to reinvent for DA:I?

That being said, some reinvention might be needed following DA2. We've already seen a glimpse of that, with a redesign of the elves that has them looking more DA:O than DA2.

[In Exile]

Han Shot First wrote...

I'm not sure how to feel about it.

Reinvention was part of the problem with DA2. Bioware ignored the old adage that if it isn't broken, don't fix it. Unnecessary changes were made between DA:O and DA2 and most did not work at all. The new art design for armor, weapons, and elves and such was also mostly awful. The only thing I thought was kind of an improvement was the Qunari. What exactly are they planning to reinvent for DA:I?

That being said, some reinvention might be needed following DA2. We've already seen a glimpse of that, with a redesign of the elves that has them looking more DA:O than DA2.

The most obvious gameplay element is exploration, via the mode of travel, map scope, and random dungeons. That's what we've seen so far. For all we know they're changing the combat too. 

[ElitePinecone]

In Exile wrote...

James Ohlen was the lead designer on KoTOR from what I recall. 

Yeah, but Casey was the project director, the same position he had for Mass Effect. He was ultimately charge of the overall direction of the game.

Deverz wrote...

Yeah, it's marketing, they're "reinventing". But from what we've seen so far it seems to ring at least partially true. Combat looks a lot different from DAO and DA2, they're adding horses, larger worlds, changing the look of elves. Who knows what else they haven't revealed yet. So yeah, it might very well be a "reinvention" of the IP. At the very least I expect them to continue the story, tie up loose ends and bring back characters from previous games that needs more fleshing out.

I'm certainly in favour of re-invention (and in DA:I's case, the results are looking pretty impressive and spectacular even from the small amount we've seen), but the wording of calling it 'a whole new approach' does make me wonder about the parts of DA:I that *are* intended to be radically different and, well, new. Quibbling about the term 'IP' aside, (genuinely) treating DA:I as if they're starting from scratch with a game series has got to mean some fundamental rethinking about the design and systems.

I understand that in all likelihood it's 'just' a marketing statement, but even so it's an insight into the way the publisher is looking at DAI internally. Perhaps they have much higher expectations for it now, sales wise, given the longer period for development and the resources EA has invested in getting Frostbite to work well. 

[dreamgazer]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Who cares?

Serious business, DB. Get with it.

[In Exile]

ElitePinecone wrote...
Yeah, but Casey was the project director, the same position he had for Mass Effect. He was ultimately charge of the overall direction of the game.

I wasn't trying to minimize Casey's role. I didn't know he was project director. Edit: Or, honestly, what a project director was until I googled it. I work in a very different professional industry. 

Modifié par In Exile, 24 août 2013 - 05:33 .

[Allan Schumacher]

I'm certainly in favour of re-invention (and in DA:I's case, the results are looking pretty impressive and spectacular even from the small amount we've seen), but the wording of calling it 'a whole new approach' does make me wonder about the parts of DA:I that *are* intended to be radically different and, well, new.

Well, unlike other sequels BioWare has made, this one IS being made on an entirely new engine which certainly necessitates "a whole new approach."

Come to think of it, none of BioWare's sequels have done something like this before.