101 réponses à ce sujet

[Ponendus]

So something came up while I was chatting to some friends...
Why aren't there games out there that at least remotely look like the 'BioWare formula'?

When you think about it, there a dozen 'WoW-clones', heaps of 'Open-world sandbox' style RPG's, a billion shooters etc.

BioWare does party-based, sweeping-story, epic cinematic, romance subplots and deep meaningful lore. All of these features are obviously very popular and I am just surprised there aren't more games like it. Is there any other studio that has tried to emulate the BioWare formula? Have I just missed it?

It came up because I was snooping around for something to play and I can't find anything remotely like what BioWare does. There is always something big missing like Skyrim not having a party and companions, or The Witcher having a fixed character (who I just don't like playing for some reason).

Is it too expensive to create or something? I dunno.
 

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Because that would be copying BW's formula? And then it would be a BW clone?

[Ponendus]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Because that would be copying BW's formula? And then it would be a BW clone?

Well, yes, but studios do that so often as far as I can see. Like I said there are lots of 'open world, sandbox RPG's' like Skyrim and lots of Shooters like [insert random shooter here]. So studios clearly borrow a 'formula' that works and crate their own spin on it. I just haven't seen anything close to the BioWare formula being used is all.

[IllusiveManJr]

Biowhat?

[Sigma Tauri]

The myriad of criticisms continuously spouting from this site alone states not every audience or market is satisfied with Bioware's formula.

[Ponendus]

monkeycamoran wrote...

The myriad of criticisms continuously spouting from this site alone states not every audience or market is satisfied with Bioware's formula.

I agree. But there clearly is a market that is satisfied. BioWare is a successful, large company and generates alot of interest (although yes, not from everyone obviously). Surely that means the market is there right?

[Sigma Tauri]

Ponendus wrote...

I agree. But there clearly is a market that is satisfied. BioWare is a successful, large company and generates alot of interest (although yes, not from everyone obviously). Surely that means the market is there right?

More factors exist than the appeal of a market that likes BioWare games.

[Ponendus]

monkeycamoran wrote...

Ponendus wrote...

I agree. But there clearly is a market that is satisfied. BioWare is a successful, large company and generates alot of interest (although yes, not from everyone obviously). Surely that means the market is there right?

More factors exist than the appeal of a market that likes BioWare games.

Hence my post. What are these factors?

[Sigma Tauri]

Ponendus wrote...
Hence my post. What are these factors?

I was thinking of how a particular company would be composed of, the resources they have, and things like publishers. Decision to adopt BioWare's formula is not an impossibility. Simply not a preferred approach.

Modifié par monkeycamoran, 03 janvier 2014 - 12:17 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Ponendus wrote...

monkeycamoran wrote...

Ponendus wrote...

I agree. But there clearly is a market that is satisfied. BioWare is a successful, large company and generates alot of interest (although yes, not from everyone obviously). Surely that means the market is there right?

More factors exist than the appeal of a market that likes BioWare games.

Hence my post. What are these factors?

Name recognition. Marketing. Underlying technological support.

Bioware has very expensive tools to make not-that-profitable games. RPGs tend to be very resource-intensive and the best selling Bioware games haven't come close to success other genres have. You have to have a huge amount of specific skill sets and connections to pull of a Bioware game. If it tanks, you are on the hook for tens of millions of dollars.

Simply put - developers aren't copying the Bioware model because it ISN'T successful. Not wildly successful, at least. Its easier for a fledgling developer to work in a smaller scale, like an indie scene or mobile/online platforms, which can be much more controlled and generate higher revenues for the money invested. And larger developer/publisher firms have their own RPG titles and, quite frankly, probably aren't interested in trying to replicate Bioware's success or market. 

[Ponendus]

 Hmmm, yes I suppose it all just comes down to there being nobody that really wants to, based on preference.
That's fair, I am just surprised some company hasn't seen the potential for $$$'s 

[Ponendus]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Simply put - developers aren't copying the Bioware model because it ISN'T successful. Not wildly successful, at least. Its easier for a fledgling developer to work in a smaller scale, like an indie scene or mobile/online platforms, which can be much more controlled and generate higher revenues for the money invested. And larger developer/publisher firms have their own RPG titles and, quite frankly, probably aren't interested in trying to replicate Bioware's success or market. 

Do you really think it isn't succussful? I confess I don't really know the financials, but surely a company that has as many studios running projects at the same time, number of employees etc that BioWare has must be doing something right. I mean, otherwise they wouldn't have the finances and motivation to keep on going would they?

You  make a really good point about the other stuff - it would definitely be easier to not make something with so many factors all working at once, and possibly more profitable, I don't know. I just wonder.

[Fast Jimmy]

Ponendus wrote...

 Hmmm, yes I suppose it all just comes down to there being nobody that really wants to, based on preference.
That's fair, I am just surprised some company hasn't seen the potential for $$$'s 

Eh.

4.5 million unit sales isn't that impressive. That's ME3 and DA:O's rough sales numbers. 

Dead Space 3 was deemed a failure as a game for 3 million. The new Tomb Raider reboot did not hit the targeted sales Square Enix was looking for with 4 million units sold. 

If the best Bioware has sold (not considering the slumps like DA2 or some of the pre-EA aquisition sales like Jade Empire) is enough to have other franchises shut down - franchises which are not nearly as intricate or resource-heavy as the cinematic, party-driven, non-set protagonist genre - then who says developers are looking at Bioware and even seeing any $$$?

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 03 janvier 2014 - 12:24 .

[Steelcan]

Given their recent history no one is going to try and emulate them. Have they had any good press since ME2?

[Ponendus]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

If the best Bioware has sold (not considering the slumps like DA2 or some of the pre-EA aquisition sales like Jade Empire) is enough to have other franchises shut down - franchises which are not nearly as intricate or resource-heavy as the cinematic, party-driven, non-set protagonist genre - then who says developers are looking at Bioware and even seeing any $$$?

I'm not great with numbers, but something there doesn't add up to me. So if BioWare's sales aren't generally as good as the 'safe' or 'dime a dozen' formulas sales that exist, and those studios are still shutting down while BioWare lives on... doesn't that meant that the cost to develop something BioWare does is in fact not as high as those others, therefore cheaper? To me that just says that the BioWare formula, not only in terms of what they create, but how they create it, is very successful - after all, they are still here despite the comparitively lower sales.

[Fast Jimmy]

Ponendus wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Simply put - developers aren't copying the Bioware model because it ISN'T successful. Not wildly successful, at least. Its easier for a fledgling developer to work in a smaller scale, like an indie scene or mobile/online platforms, which can be much more controlled and generate higher revenues for the money invested. And larger developer/publisher firms have their own RPG titles and, quite frankly, probably aren't interested in trying to replicate Bioware's success or market. 

Do you really think it isn't succussful? I confess I don't really know the financials, but surely a company that has as many studios running projects at the same time, number of employees etc that BioWare has must be doing something right. I mean, otherwise they wouldn't have the finances and motivation to keep on going would they?

You  make a really good point about the other stuff - it would definitely be easier to not make something with so many factors all working at once, and possibly more profitable, I don't know. I just wonder.

Bioware is solvent... but they aren't blowing the doors off of other developers so much so that every developer out there is getting orders from the bean counters to make RPGs. Heck, if developers are looking at franchise RPGs, Final Fantasy still SLAYS Bioware games in terms of total sales/revenue. Same for Skyrim. 

Being successful and being so insanely successful that developers try and copy your market are worlds of difference. Madden is a great franchise in terms of financials... yet you don't see companies making pro-football sports games left and right... simply because Madden has the name recognition as the go-to in the industry for that type of game. No one would go out and buy Rex Ryan NFL 2015, for instance. 

Is there possibly a bigger market out there than developers are satisfying? Possibly. But the market Bioware grabs might also be too fractured for other developers to get, even if they offered the same exact game. Bioware has the old-school fans from the BG games, even though they haven't made a game that fit most of that criteria in close to half a decade. They have the more action-based fans from ME and DA2, even though they don't really compare with action games of other genres. They have games where you can create your own character, but depending on what that means to you, Bioware's character creator and appearance customization are trumped by other games, while their ability to role-play and control your characters actions are also beaten. And the stories, while the hallmark of Bioware's trademark, are often not as visceral as some of the newer contenders out there, like Last of Us.

Point being - even if someone were to have Bioware make a new IP and slap someone else's name on it, there's a good chance it wouldn't sell near what Bioware does, simply because Bioware (like all established companies) does many of their sales based on their name alone. Being a Bioware game earns a large percentage of sales with no other factors accounted for. And, again, Bioware doesn't even sell THAT many units compared to similar sized developers. There's no way a developer could say "well, if we only did things the way Bioware did, we could have a cash cow" simply because Bioware isn't a cash cow. None of their IPs are. Their attempt at creating one, TOR, was, while not as much of a failure as many wail about, still not anywhere NEAR revenue projections.

That's why you see Bioware constantly re-evaluating its own formulas... because they aren't the blockbusters in the industry people perceive them to be... but they WANT to be.

[Ponendus]

Yes, Fast Jimmy and TipsLeFedora I think have hit the nail on the head. The exact same game probably wouldn't work elsewhere, just parts of it.

Thanks for all the comments

[bmwcrazy]

Cowboy Saunter wrote...

Pizza,beer,guns,boobs,blunts,cars,tech,politics,careers,adventure....

You know the basic's that Activisin tries to inbod into CoD

Whaaat?

I've played every single CoD and I don't recall seeing any nice ******.

[Fast Jimmy]

Ponendus wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

If the best Bioware has sold (not considering the slumps like DA2 or some of the pre-EA aquisition sales like Jade Empire) is enough to have other franchises shut down - franchises which are not nearly as intricate or resource-heavy as the cinematic, party-driven, non-set protagonist genre - then who says developers are looking at Bioware and even seeing any $$$?

I'm not great with numbers, but something there doesn't add up to me. So if BioWare's sales aren't generally as good as the 'safe' or 'dime a dozen' formulas sales that exist, and those studios are still shutting down while BioWare lives on... doesn't that meant that the cost to develop something BioWare does is in fact not as high as those others, therefore cheaper? To me that just says that the BioWare formula, not only in terms of what they create, but how they create it, is very successful - after all, they are still here despite the comparitively lower sales.

You forget that the biggest chunk of a game's budget these days is marketing. Bioware games market themselves (relatively speaking). GTA V spent well over $100 million in bugetting to be the best selling video game of all time (over $1 billion in revenue). Bioware games take lots of resources to make (well, except when they don't, like DA2) but they also have a name that can sell games attached with it. 

Tomb Raider's developer? Crystal Dynamics. A name that, in a couple years, many will not remember. Dead Space 3? Made by Visceral Games - a developer that has made its name through the Dead Space label and the Dead Space label alone.

Bioware has more value with its names than it does with its games. EA can use it as a shield against those who decry Madden 20XX, Tiger Woods 20XX, NBA 2KX, Need for Speed X, Modern Warfare: War Faring Modernity X, etc. as the very embodiment of the worst parts of the industry. The sequel munfacturing, mass-market appealing publisher. Bioware is used as a way to diversify their portfolio and get a name that has (or maybe had, depending on who you ask) real credibility in the industry. As long as they generate some profit, then they are of value to EA. But if all of their IPs buckle out, like the developers of Tomb Raider and Dead Space 3, then they will cease to have value and they will reapportion their staff and resources elsewhere.

EDIT: Also, it's worth pointing out that Bioware had ME1 and DA:O in production when EA purchased them. Having more than one IP that you show you can generate content for simultaneously (which means you can get into a schedule where you, as a developer, are making money every year, instead of having boom years and then famine years, has a lot of value). 

But... if having two or more successful IPs was an easy thing to emulate, then EVERY developer would do it. It's the white whale of the developer world. It's a shame the ME series had to self-immolate the IP, such that many of its fans don't even want it back.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 03 janvier 2014 - 12:46 .

[Steelcan]

I also think BioWare games have been suffering from a lack of clear cut genre.

ME was a pseudo RPG, part TPS, part story driven game, part character driven. This inconsistency was most apparent in ME3 where it seems to me that the game was supposed to be a massive action game ala Gears of War but still had to appeal to the fans of ME1/2 which both had a distinct feel, ME3 then tried to add its own feel but just felt like a mess.

DA2 took that then multiplied it

[Ponendus]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

You forget that the biggest chunk of a game's budget these days is marketing. Bioware games market themselves (relatively speaking). GTA V spent well over $100 million in bugetting to be the best selling video game of all time (over $1 billion in revenue). Bioware games take lots of resources to make (well, except when they don't, like DA2) but they also have a name that can sell games attached with it. 

Tomb Raider's developer? Crystal Dynamics. A name that, in a couple years, many will not remember. Dead Space 3? Made by Visceral Games - a developer that has made its name through the Dead Space label and the Dead Space label alone.

Bioware has more value with its names than it does with its games. EA can use it as a shield against those who decry Madden 20XX, Tiger Woods 20XX, NBA 2KX, Need for Speed X, Modern Warfare: War Faring Modernity X, etc. as the very embodiment of the worst parts of the industry. The sequel munfacturing, mass-market appealing publisher. Bioware is used as a way to diversify their portfolio and get a name that has (or maybe had, depending on who you ask) real credibility in the industry. As long as they generate some profit, then they are of value to EA. But if all of their IPs buckle out, like the developers of Tomb Raider and Dead Space 3, then they will cease to have value and they will reapportion their staff and resources elsewhere.

Some very insightful points there.

Steelcan wrote...

I also think BioWare games have been suffering from a lack of clear cut genre.

ME was a pseudo RPG, part TPS, part story driven game, part character driven. This inconsistency was most apparent in ME3 where it seems to me that the game was supposed to be a massive action game ala Gears of War but still had to appeal to the fans of ME1/2 which both had a distinct feel, ME3 then tried to add its own feel but just felt like a mess.

DA2 took that then multiplied it

Yes this is something that comes up every now and then. People ask me 'what genre is Dragon Age' and ... I really don't know how to answer it. That's probably another discussion though, but lends itself to the reason the BW formula isn't emulated. 

After all, there isn't anything truly unique about BioWare games in themselves, they borrow the best bits of many other genres in my opinion. So I suppose its the combination of all the elements that they get right (in my opinion) and are, as Jimmy says, probably still working to balance correctly even today.

Modifié par Ponendus, 03 janvier 2014 - 12:47 .