5 réponses à ce sujet

[Chuloos]

I really have hopes for this game.  But, after getting burned on DA2, and then crushed with ME3, a pre-order this time is not in the works.

 

I am really, really hoping you do us right Bioware.  Dragon Age, and Mass Effect are great series.. just .. please.. don't crush me again.

 

 

As per comments below - here is the revision:

 

DA2 had great graphics, some good combat mechs, but was very limited on 'World Space', pretty much confined to the city with sub jaunts here and there.. overall gameplay felt more confining and limited then DAO - DAA.

 

ME3 was a great, fantastic game up until the last 10 mins.  The fact that they basically threw everything out the window you had played for in the previous two games (decisions, etc) for the mindless interaction with the kid in the citadel was devastating.  Yes, they did try to clean that up with the Shore Leave, and the Extended Cut.. but ONLY after an enormous outcry from their customers.  And it took almost a year to do that.  So.. do I have faith they will do right this time.. not really, but I am hoping.  I forked out $80 for the pre-order on ME3, and $70 on the pre-order for DA2.  I think I will wait this time and see what the community has to say about the game after release before I fork out any more $$. 

 

Just letting them know that I do vote with my dollars.  They are no that easy to come by these days.

[Allan Schumacher]

most of the team is interns

 

I just want to mention that this isn't true at all.

[Allan Schumacher]

Perhaps interns is the wrong word, my main concern is there are maybe one or two people that worked at bioware pre mass effect 2, where, again, absolutely in my opinion only, bioware games started to go downhill.

 

That's still incorrect.

 

The executive producer (Mark Darrah) worked on the original Baldur's Gate.

 

 

I just did a quick peek at the Windows version of DAO's credits.

 

 

Mark Darrah (EP)

Mike Laidlaw (Lead Designer -> Creative Lead)

Nathan Frederick (QA Lead)

Matt Goldman (Senior Artist -> Art Lead)

Shane Hawco (Lead Character Artist)

Tyler Lee (GUI Artist/Lead GUI)

Warren Heise (GUI Artist)

Jon Perry (Cin Design)

Jon Epp (Cin Design)

 

Yaron Jakobs (Lead Tech Design)

 

Tech Designers (Kaelin Lavallee, Grant MacKay, Cori May, Josh Stiksma, Keith Warner)

Writers (David Gaider, Sheryl Chee, Mary Kirby, Lukas Kristjanson)

 

 

I could go on and on and on.  A lot of the programmers are still here (many of which go back further than DAO).

 

 

 

EDIT: As I look through this it's actually pretty surprising how many people are still around....

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 18 juin 2014 - 07:32 .

[Allan Schumacher]

(a bit off topic, but looking at that list, it's depressing to see how little women worked on origins)

 

I couldn't say the full breakdown, but more women are in writing and production type roles it seems, and not as bad in QA.  More tech/programming positions are definitely male dominated, and also art (which is a bit surprising to me, actually).

 

As a programmer by education, the ones that catch my eye are some of the senior programmers like Janice Thoms (around since KOTOR - one of our Tech Directors now).  I think it's getting better though.  Slow ship and all that.  I'm thinking it'll continue to improve.

[Allan Schumacher]

I'm sorry, why is this such a bad thing exactly? Men have been doing a fine job with the video game industry for the last 30 years. 

 

I'm not opposed to more women working in the gaming industry, but I'm not hailing it as a crucial development that will greatly improve all of our previously miserable and pathetic male lives somehow. Men can function fine without a woman around. Men are perfectly capabale of coming up with great stories, great gameplay, great games all on their own.

 

I'm sick and tired of people pretending everything sucks without a woman's touch. Either they are there or they are not, nobody needs to feel guilty about words like ''male-dominated''. It's not a negative word by definition.

 

It's not "bad" in that it means we'll not get games we find enjoyable.  I do think that it's not a good thing though, given that I value diversity and the different approaches to narratives it can provide.

 

 

I do think that there's potential growth in the gaming audience and I don't consider that a bad thing.  I do think an effective avenue for exploring this is encouraging a wide variety of people to get into game development.

 

 

I don't think anyone suggests that "everything sucks without a woman's touch."  I agree that men are capable of coming up with great stories, great gameplay.  I think that it's possible that we may be overlooking some potentially great stories and great gameplay by being exclusive, however.  And I feel this way towards other types of diversity too.  Because I love gaming and would love to see gaming continue to grow.

[Allan Schumacher]

Because people who grew up playing video games as a kid are now old enough to code.

 

These people were predominately male.

 

That's still sort of true today if you remove mobile & facebook games from any poll.

 

So it's not so much sexism as, in the eighties, females that played games were in a extreme minority, and therefore they are less likely to become developers.

 

Sure (I think women gamers are understated, personally, but I may also be biased by my experiences).

Note that women still make up a non-trivial of console focused numbers.  A fellow game dev aggregated some data here that shows that roughly 80 million women buy console video game content (i.e. not casual stuff)

 

 

As for the idea that it's simply because women are less common, it's important to also recognize that some stuff is subconscious.  A recent study on potential gender bias in science took a fake job application.  They gave half the subjects an application with a man's name, and the other half with a woman's name.  The professors being assessed were both men and women.  They found no statistically significant difference between male and female professors (i.e. their ratings were pretty similar).  They did, however, find that both men and women professors rated the applicant more harshly if the name was a woman's.  If we hired purely based on merit, this wouldn't be the case. 

 

So there's assumptions that go on here, and they are likely subtle ones as opposed to "I HATE WOMEN" outspokenness.  The applicants were rated based on competency, hireability, willingness to mentor them, and also suggested a salary.  The women applicants scored worse in every single category but a large enough margin that it's very unlikely that the deviation is due to random noise.

 

You can read the study here  (full text is available too)

 

 

And since this is off topic, I'm closing the thread.  If you wish to discuss my points, do so via PMs to me.