Which will be acheived by them doing what you want them to, and not what others want them to, which is exactly sandalisthemaker's point.greengoron89 wrote...
What I want is for Bioware to get back on track and put out a worthy follow-up to DA:O.
Modifié par Ryzaki, 07 septembre 2013 - 05:08 .
Guest_LindsayLohan_*
TheBlackBaron wrote...
Plaintiff wrote...
That's not how media development works. Generally speaking, the developer goes to the publisher and says "We want to include feature XYZ and here's why we think you should give us the money for it."
The publisher says "That is a convincing argument, you can has dis moneez" or, alternatively "That is not a convincing argument, we keep dis moneez".
If the developer decides to then cut that feature, they do not get to just keep the money and spend it on whatever the hell they like. That money doesn't belong to them. It belongs to the publisher.
Or, just thinking out loud here, they might consider justifying using money that would have gone into the romances to instead enhance feature XYZ.
LindsayLohan wrote...
TheBlackBaron wrote...
Plaintiff wrote...
That's not how media development works. Generally speaking, the developer goes to the publisher and says "We want to include feature XYZ and here's why we think you should give us the money for it."
The publisher says "That is a convincing argument, you can has dis moneez" or, alternatively "That is not a convincing argument, we keep dis moneez".
If the developer decides to then cut that feature, they do not get to just keep the money and spend it on whatever the hell they like. That money doesn't belong to them. It belongs to the publisher.
Or, just thinking out loud here, they might consider justifying using money that would have gone into the romances to instead enhance feature XYZ.
wooooah logic!!!
Guest_greengoron89_*
Plaintiff wrote...
Which will be acheived by them doing what you want them to, and not what others want them to, which is exactly sandalisthemaker's point.greengoron89 wrote...
What I want is for Bioware to get back on track and put out a worthy follow-up to DA:O.
Your idea of a "worthy follow-up" to DA:O is not objective or uncontestable.
Guest_Morocco Mole_*
Ryzaki wrote...
LindsayLohan wrote...
TheBlackBaron wrote...
Plaintiff wrote...
That's not how media development works. Generally speaking, the developer goes to the publisher and says "We want to include feature XYZ and here's why we think you should give us the money for it."
The publisher says "That is a convincing argument, you can has dis moneez" or, alternatively "That is not a convincing argument, we keep dis moneez".
If the developer decides to then cut that feature, they do not get to just keep the money and spend it on whatever the hell they like. That money doesn't belong to them. It belongs to the publisher.
Or, just thinking out loud here, they might consider justifying using money that would have gone into the romances to instead enhance feature XYZ.
wooooah logic!!!
Yep might go into improving multiplayer instead.
It's feasible, sure. But if the publisher already gave them money for feature XYZ, they might very well say no. If I was a publisher I would want to know why my developers suck so much at estimating how much money they need to polish a feature to an acceptable standard.TheBlackBaron wrote...
Plaintiff wrote...
That's not how media development works. Generally speaking, the developer goes to the publisher and says "We want to include feature XYZ and here's why we think you should give us the money for it."
The publisher says "That is a convincing argument, you can has dis moneez" or, alternatively "That is not a convincing argument, we keep dis moneez".
If the developer decides to then cut that feature, they do not get to just keep the money and spend it on whatever the hell they like. That money doesn't belong to them. It belongs to the publisher.
Or, just thinking out loud here, they might consider justifying using money that would have gone into the romances to instead enhance feature XYZ.
Modifié par Plaintiff, 07 septembre 2013 - 05:11 .
Ryzaki wrote...
Da hell?
There was more than one romance option in BG2 (Jaheira, Viconia and Aerie is three). It was only females that were stuck with one boring aggravating POS option.
And honestly I wouldn't buy the game if we returned to the BS days of male PC's getting 3 options while females got 1.
TheBlackBaron wrote...
Plaintiff wrote...
That's not how media development works. Generally speaking, the developer goes to the publisher and says "We want to include feature XYZ and here's why we think you should give us the money for it."
The publisher says "That is a convincing argument, you can has dis moneez" or, alternatively "That is not a convincing argument, we keep dis moneez".
If the developer decides to then cut that feature, they do not get to just keep the money and spend it on whatever the hell they like. That money doesn't belong to them. It belongs to the publisher.
Or, just thinking out loud here, they might consider justifying using money that would have gone into the romances to instead enhance feature XYZ.
Morocco Mole wrote...
I hope there are co-op romances
Modifié par ScarMK, 07 septembre 2013 - 05:12 .
Ryzaki wrote...
Da hell?
There was more than one romance option in BG2 (Jaheira, Viconia and Aerie is three). It was only females that were stuck with one boring aggravating POS option.
And honestly I wouldn't buy the game if we returned to the BS days of male PC's getting 3 options while females got 1. I rather no one got any options at all tyvm.
You don't "know" anything. Your personal taste is just that. Personal.greengoron89 wrote...
Plaintiff wrote...
Which will be acheived by them doing what you want them to, and not what others want them to, which is exactly sandalisthemaker's point.greengoron89 wrote...
What I want is for Bioware to get back on track and put out a worthy follow-up to DA:O.
Your idea of a "worthy follow-up" to DA:O is not objective or uncontestable.
I know it doesn't involve placating <insert Bioware character here>mancers at every turn.
And that's more than you seem to know.
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
This man is ahead of his time. Dat revolutionary thinking.Morocco Mole wrote...
I hope there are co-op romances
Modifié par J. Reezy, 07 septembre 2013 - 05:13 .
Morocco Mole wrote...
I hope there are co-op romances
Modifié par LethesDeep, 07 septembre 2013 - 05:14 .
Plaintiff wrote...
It's feasible, sure. But if the publisher already gave them money for feature XYZ, they might very well say no. If I was a publisher I would want to know why my developers suck so much at estimating how much money they need to polish a feature to an acceptable standard.TheBlackBaron wrote...
Plaintiff wrote...
That's not how media development works. Generally speaking, the developer goes to the publisher and says "We want to include feature XYZ and here's why we think you should give us the money for it."
The publisher says "That is a convincing argument, you can has dis moneez" or, alternatively "That is not a convincing argument, we keep dis moneez".
If the developer decides to then cut that feature, they do not get to just keep the money and spend it on whatever the hell they like. That money doesn't belong to them. It belongs to the publisher.
Or, just thinking out loud here, they might consider justifying using money that would have gone into the romances to instead enhance feature XYZ.
I didn't give them the money to fix a feature that shouldn't need fixing. I gave it to them for a new feature. They've already spent some of my money on that new feature, that I will now never get back. Why should I let them keep it to spend on something else entirely?
Modifié par TheBlackBaron, 07 septembre 2013 - 05:15 .
J. Reezy wrote...
This man is ahead of his time. Dat revolutionary thinking.Morocco Mole wrote...
I hope there are co-op romances
AresKeith wrote...
Quiet you
TheBlackBaron wrote...
Sorry, I probably wasn't clear earlier, I meant post-BG2, pre-JE, i.e. NWN and KotOR.
I agree, women got kind of a crap deal with BG2.
And honestly the whole Bastila Carth thing had its own issues (Bastila iakus wrote...
It is a shame that Haer'dalis and Valgyar weren't made romancable as intended.
Plaintiff wrote...
You don't "know" anything. Your personal taste is just that. Personal.greengoron89 wrote...
Plaintiff wrote...
Which will be acheived by them doing what you want them to, and not what others want them to, which is exactly sandalisthemaker's point.greengoron89 wrote...
What I want is for Bioware to get back on track and put out a worthy follow-up to DA:O.
Your idea of a "worthy follow-up" to DA:O is not objective or uncontestable.
I know it doesn't involve placating <insert Bioware character here>mancers at every turn.
And that's more than you seem to know.
Guest_Morocco Mole_*
Guest_greengoron89_*
Plaintiff wrote...
You don't "know" anything. Your personal taste is just that. Personal.
Modifié par greengoron89, 07 septembre 2013 - 05:25 .
Morocco Mole wrote...
There will be double teaming in the future
Morocco Mole wrote...
There will be double teaming in the future
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut