19127 réponses à ce sujet

[Ncongruous]

When has this ever not been the case in gaming? Or anything else for that matter? If you don't like the way a novel is written, the author isn't going to go back, rewrite it, and rerelease it just to make you happy. George Lucas sure as **** didn't remake the Star Wars prequels, no matter how many people complained.

 

You pays your money and you takes your chances. If you don't like the product they put out, that's fair, but if you think you're entitled to anything else, you're dreaming.

Diablo 3 yes? The removal of the RMAH was a controversial decision. Blizzard's approach to loot progression, an overwhelmingly large portion of Diablo 3's design, underwent a paradigm shift. And it was able to be done so because code is mutable at any point. Not some infallible monolith by which changes cannot occur, swept aside by the common dictum of "artistic integrity" or "original intent". The only thing in question here, is how serious they are about correcting this.

 

Spoiler

Arthur Conan Doyle killed off Sherlock Holmes in The Final Problem but ending up bringing him back. He did not rewrite the book in defense of what you said, but he ended up caving to his fanbase all the same. I'm almost certain there are other examples that supplant this idea of sacrosanct material that do not remove DA:I from scrutiny in this regard. As always thank for you reading.

[MisterMannIndy]

When has this ever not been the case in gaming? Or anything else for that matter? If you don't like the way a novel is written, the author isn't going to go back, rewrite it, and rerelease it just to make you happy. George Lucas sure as **** didn't remake the Star Wars prequels, no matter how many people complained.

 

You pays your money and you takes your chances. If you don't like the product they put out, that's fair, but if you think you're entitled to anything else, you're dreaming.

Didn't BioWare go back and change the ending of ME because the community didn't like their design choice?  

[Hexoduen]

Didn't BioWare go back and change the ending of ME because the community didn't like their design choice?  

 

The extended cut ending + the citadel DLC made ME3 MUCH BETTER

 

I am not giving up on Inquisition yet, they'll fix it, I'm sure

[jcmuki]

Didn't BioWare go back and change the ending of ME because the community didn't like their design choice?  

which they were still buttburt about, because people didn't understand their design and casey hudson left biowere after that me3 sh*t ending thing 

 

kind of how jay wilson left the diablo team over how poor vanilla diablo 3 was, and butt hurt over the original directer of diablo 1 and 2 criticizing him

[jcmuki]

The extended cut ending + the citadel DLC made ME3 MUCH BETTER

 

I am not giving up on Inquisition yet, they'll fix it, I'm sure

extended cut just made the ending less shitty, moving it from a very shitty ending to an mediocare ending

 

also the me3 dev team at least acknowledge that they messed on the ending, while the dai dev team haven't acknowledged that they messed up on the pc verison of dai, in fact they are still under the dellusion that everything is working as they entended and the the bug and crashes and the messed up tactics, cam, ui, and console scheme are features of the game and that we should be gratify for the game, otherwise we are creating a hostile envioment for them and they can't interact with us

[Captain Wiseass]

You are, in fact, entitled to a working product. That's what you paid money for, after all.

Of course, "working" is a rather ill-defined term, which is where most of the conflict arises.

 

Well, that's more like a novel where the back half is blank, or a movie where several scenes are replaced with scenes from another movie. Something's not working as intended. Deliberate creative choices are a whole other thing.

 

Diablo 3 yes? The removal of the RMAH was a controversial decision. Blizzard's approach to loot progression, an overwhelmingly large portion of Diablo 3's design, underwent a paradigm shift. And it was able to be done so because code is mutable at any point. Not some infallible monolith by which changes cannot occur, swept aside by the common dictum of "artistic integrity" or "original intent". The only thing in question here, is how serious they are about correcting this.

 

Spoiler

Arthur Conan Doyle killed off Sherlock Holmes in The Final Problem but ending up bringing him back. He did not rewrite the book in defense of what you said, but he ended up caving to his fanbase all the same. I'm almost certain there are other examples that supplant this idea of sacrosanct material that do not remove DA:I from scrutiny in this regard. As always thank for you reading.

 

With Blizzard, that was a decision they made themselves, not one where fans stamped their feet and held their breath where they got what they wanted.

 

And Doyle never rewrote "The Final Problem", he just wrote a new story that retconned it. That's analogous to, say, Dragon Age 4 bringing back healing magic. Again, creative decisions are made by the creators, not the audience.

 

Didn't BioWare go back and change the ending of ME because the community didn't like their design choice?  

 

Nah, just clarified it. Whilst many were clamoring for a return to some mythical "original" ending that probably never existed in any concrete development sense, they didn't get it.

 

Bottom line, your dislike of something doesn't impose an obligation on the creators to change it to better suit you. (General you, there.)

[AxholeRose]

The extended cut ending + the citadel DLC made ME3 MUCH BETTER

 

I am not giving up on Inquisition yet, they'll fix it, I'm sure

 

The DLC only added a few more scenes at the end that explain what happened.  If the star child is still there, then it's not really that much better 

 

As for DAI I'm sure they get around to fixing the bugs...  if they ever have spare time left over from working in the multiplayer and paid DLC.  Don't expect too much changes though, it took us like 2-3 months for them to do something about ME3.

[turuzzusapatuttu]

 

Still waiting for Bioware to fix

• keyboard and mouse controls
• user interface for PC

 

Well, I wish you luck.

 

This game was marketed and sold as a game made by PC gamers for PC gamers, the issues of this game are more than just oops! they're in the realm of false advertising and cheating their customers.

[Hexoduen]

You're an optimist! I hope you remain one until Patch 5.

 

I am    A rather frustrated and disappointed Bioware fan at the moment, but an optimist nonetheless. They did make some of the best games I've ever played

[CatatonicMan]

Well, that's more like a novel where the back half is blank, or a movie where several scenes are replaced with scenes from another movie. Something's not working as intended. Deliberate creative choices are a whole other thing.

Well...no, actually. Deliberate creative choices can still be horrible, wrong, broken, fail to work, etc.

Being intentionally bad just adds insult to injury.

[Sartoz]

The extended cut ending + the citadel DLC made ME3 MUCH BETTER

 

I am not giving up on Inquisition yet, they'll fix it, I'm sure

What are you hoping to get fixed?

[Sartoz]

 snip

 

And Doyle never rewrote "The Final Problem", he just wrote a new story that retconned it. That's analogous to, say, Dragon Age 4 bringing back healing magic. Again, creative decisions are made by the creators, not the audience.

 

snip

I believe money drives decisions. A truly creative piece of work may not sell very well. Thus, decisions are based on "how do I get the most bang for our development cost?".  Add marketing sauce to the mix that sells expectations that won't be in the game and voila. A possible GOTY award.

[Captain Wiseass]

I believe money drives decisions.

It certainly drove Doyle's decision to bring back Holmes.

[Hexoduen]

What are you hoping to get fixed?

 

That's a very long list    But for starters I'd like to see:

 

1) Proper PC controls

2) Improved UI and inventory navigation

3) Tactics

[spacefiddle]

With Blizzard, that was a decision they made themselves, not one where fans stamped their feet and held their breath where they got what they wanted.

 

I'm not sure what you're picturing with this statement.  Of course they made the decision themselves.... after a ton of outrage, angry posting, bad reviews and press, and lots more.  They didn't make that decision in a vacuum, and it's not something they were just planning on doing anyway even if they got no negative feedback.

 

Also notable is... have you ever seen the Blizzard forums?  Any of them???  "Nasty," "Semi-literate," and "holy major meltdown freakout, Batman" would all be accurate descriptions for some of the posters there.  At no time did Blizzard use any of the vicious trolling or total psychos as an excuse not to address issues, and they performed a complete overhaul of the game and added many new features - and the level of insanity and vitriol over there is a bajillion times higher than 99% of anything you'll ever find here.

[glosoli]

I'm not sure what you're picturing with this statement.  Of course they made the decision themselves.... after a ton of outrage, angry posting, bad reviews and press, and lots more.  They didn't make that decision in a vacuum, and it's not something they were just planning on doing anyway even if they got no negative feedback.

 

Also notable is... have you ever seen the Blizzard forums?  Any of them???  "Nasty," "Semi-literate," and "holy major meltdown freakout, Batman" would all be accurate descriptions for some of the posters there.  At no time did Blizzard use any of the vicious trolling or total psychos as an excuse not to address issues, and they performed a complete overhaul of the game and added many new features - and the level of insanity and vitriol over there is a bajillion times higher than 99% of anything you'll ever find here.

 

Fanbase put a huge pressure on Jay Wilson and despite the financial success, their parent company didn't do much to take the pressure off of Mr. Wilson. Some say he quit, some say he moved to a dead project intentionally. Only an insider would know... On the other topic, if someone calling BW forums toxic, they have never visited Blizzard forums. Trolling quality in there was undeniable. I even believe some actions were born in there... like "server is on!", "free stuff for doing this". Sometimes you can't even be mad at what you are reading because of.. it's just too absurd. It's far better now, though.

[Sylveria_Relden]

Also notable is... have you ever seen the Blizzard forums?  Any of them???  "Nasty," "Semi-literate," and "holy major meltdown freakout, Batman" would all be accurate descriptions for some of the posters there.  At no time did Blizzard use any of the vicious trolling or total psychos as an excuse not to address issues, and they performed a complete overhaul of the game and added many new features - and the level of insanity and vitriol over there is a bajillion times higher than 99% of anything you'll ever find here.

 

This forum is "Sound of Music" tame compared to the Blizzard forums There is MUCH truth in the statement quoted here.

[moonblade_820]

Time ... goes by ... so slowly ...

and time can do so much ...

[Peregrinus]

Time ... goes by ... so slowly ...

and time can do so much ...

 

Are you alright?    

[Ncongruous]

With Blizzard, that was a decision they made themselves, not one where fans stamped their feet and held their breath where they got what they wanted.
 
And Doyle never rewrote "The Final Problem", he just wrote a new story that retconned it. That's analogous to, say, Dragon Age 4 bringing back healing magic. Again, creative decisions are made by the creators, not the audience.

Blizzard indeed made the decisions themselves. But you imply that they came to that decision not as a result of the fan outrage but rather their own judgement... I recall seeing a ton of "feet stomping" on the main Diablo forums well into a year after release. It was generally too maudlin to follow along.
 
As for Arthur Conan Doyle, I never said he rewrote that story. In fact I quite explicitly mentioned that he did not. My point in bringing that up was to provide an example where the original intent of the author was abolished or rather overridden for the fans. Monetary motivations aside.

I do agree that creative decisions lay in the hands of the creator. However, I believe our opinions diverge on what happens or can happen to that product after it is given to the masses. You often use a movie or book in your examples and where in a book or movie would find difficulty to change there are so very many fundamental differences for the medium of software that supersede that thought. How far can change take us?

Are you alright?

What moonblade said I found acute. Time heals all wounds but time is moving very slowly here.

[edit]
Just realized spacefiddle said exactly the same thing about Diablo 3. Sorry about that.

[Invisible Man]

That's a very long list    But for starters I'd like to see:
 
1) Proper PC controls
2) Improved UI and inventory navigation
3) Tactics

I'd also add melee combat fixes as well, especially the dagger rogue.

[learie]

Am getting CTD and no banter with new patch.

 

Frostbite is proving to be a real headache, isn't it?

[Gundar3]

Didn't BioWare go back and change the ending of ME because the community didn't like their design choice?  

 

Unfortunately, not really.  They didn't really have a choice in the matter.  To do nothing, or even worse - to charge people a new ending as dlc - would have been financial suicide.

 

i would have a look at the videos posted by Archengeia on youtube about the matter.  He sums it up very well and adds his own poignant thoughts.