145 réponses à ce sujet

[Soulinet]

Was there any obvious things in the game that you think were missing, and it all makes more sense to you now [that Bioware has admitted some parts were missing]?

Honestly, one of the things that bothered me the most was the lack of run/walk toggle.

[Fearsome1]

...they kinda just admitted they outright rushed the game to some extent. 

 

Despite some who will erroneously interpret their statement as an admission of the game being rushed to release, given that Inquisition was delayed from its originally intended release to include MORE content and/or tweaks not planned in the first place, AND also that an extra few weeks beyond even that targeted release ended up changing the October date to November 18 for the same purpose, what I think that they are saying is that EVERYTHING that they would have "preferred to be featured" just  didn't get in because they ran out of time. That happens! So ...... more content will be added and/or patched; great for everyone. This type of thing happens with video games, and it shouldn't be a surprise or misinterpreted. Falsely rushing to accept that this eventuality is something other than par for the course, seems like a waste of effort.

[Jaron Oberyn]

It took 4 years to develop this game, I'd hardly say it was rushed. Don't confuse wanting to add more with a rushed title. Every game ends up shipping before developers can add little details they want. In truth a game is never really finished, especially with the bugs that are impossible to entirely eradicate. If there weren't a deadline, games would be in development forever because there's always going to be something to add to the experience. The good news is Bioware is going to be continuing to update the game as time goes on. 

[Draining Dragon]

Biower had plenty of time and resources, they just put too much of it into quantity rather than quality.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

Running out of time to implement everything that the devs wanted to, and being rushed, aren't really the same thing.

 

After all, the date was pushed back by several months, so presumably that helped them take their time with at least some of what they wanted to do.

I still haven't bought the game, though, so I don't know what I would have to say after playing it. I'm still doing the "wait and see" thing, particularly awaiting at least one more patch to address some of the glitches and CC bugs that have been identified.

[Devil's Avocado]

I don't see this as a rush but more like they had a lot of ambition but too much on their plate. What they did give us is impressive in itself so it's curious as to what it would have looked like if they had unlimited time and money.

[AlanC9]

Doesn't every game ever have cut content?

[aries1001]

It is not the developer who decides when to release a game; it is the publisher, in this instance EA who has decided that the game needed to come out in November 2014. Since it probably would be good for EA's Holiday or Christmas sale. If the quote from Scylla Costa reveals anything it is this: EA decided the date, Bioware had no choice than to say  'yes' to the November 2014 release date. Even if Bioware as the developer probably knew that there were multiple problems on all platforms, Bioware couldn't do anything about this, since it is EA's call when to relase the game.

 

edit: Yes, every game has content that get cut. However, I'm very happy with the fact that the RTS element of the game has ben cut. E.g. the element where we would have to deploy troops at every garrison or fort across the vast gameworld. This might have worked in a smaller game like say DA2 taking place in only ine city, but I don't think it would have worked in a game this big.

[LinksOcarina]

It is not the developer who decides when to release a game; it is the publisher, in this instance EA who has decided that the game needed to come out in November 2014. Since it probably would be good for EA's Holiday or Christmas sale. If the quote from Scylla Costa reveals anything it is this: EA decided the date, Bioware had no choice than to say  'yes' to the November 2014 release date. Even if Bioware as the developer probably knew that there were multiple problems on all platforms, Bioware couldn't do anything about this, since it is EA's call when to relase the game.

 

BioWare also thanked EA for extending development time previously. 

 

Honestly, I think this is just a reminder/PR speak that all artists tend to say, we have ideas but little time to implement them. 

[Kleon]

I doubt that it was rushed, they just cut the story in favor of multiplayer and fetch quests.

 

Story content requires more time and effort while fetch quests and multiplayer are a timesink which takes little to no effort to make with minimal time required.

[NUM13ER]

No. Dragon Age II was rushed. A game that came out 18 months after Origins, a game that took four years to put together. I enjoyed the game but most of it's problems were from it's limited development schedule.

 

Setting Inquisition anywhere near the the word rushed when we have DAII as entry in the series is laughable. 

 

[LinksOcarina]

No. Dragon Age II was rushed. A game that came out 18 months after Origins, a game that took four years to put together. I enjoyed the game but it showed often how limiting the development time was.

 

Setting Inquisition anywhere near the phrase rushed when we have DAII as entry in the series is laughable. 

 

 

Origins took 6-7 years actually, id argue it was over-baked in most cases but thats me. 

[errantknight]

There's always more you want to do or things that turn out not to work with the story overall as you thought they would. It's not a big deal and is par for the course. While that's true, I don't think the lack of pc controls has anything to do with lack of time, though. I think they wanted to make exactly the same game on all platforms, thinkiing that skyrim got away with craptastic pc contols and not wanting to ****** off the console gamers. Thing is, Bioware has always had an excellent PC interface while Bethesda hasn't, so the lack was not only more noticable, it was more annoying.

[Cainhurst Crow]

There's a fine line between cutting content due to time/resources, and a game being rushed with cut content. Often the two can bleed into each other, and so its not 100% to peg down.

 

From my POV, when a game has a significant or glaring flaw within the games actual design, such as level design or textures being horrid, objects or in-game resources being around with seemingly no function, NPC's who exhibit odd behavior such as appearing to be interactible but really not, and of course if the story itself seems poorly paced or rushed. Basically, if the game seems bad, or particularly empty, or something generally feels off, then it might be rushed.

 

Dragon age inquisition manages to avoid most of these, so to me its not rushed, just having cut content normal for a game release.

[dekarserverbot]

Software Developers... if it were up to us, it will never be done. Always a new feature, always some optimization...

 

It's a martial art after all... every art is exactly the same IT NEVER ENDS and it's always rushed, heck even masterpieces are rushed

[Brovikk Rasputin]

No, they did not. There'll always be features and improvements that dok't make it into a game, simply because no one can afford to work on a game forever. These threads are embarrasing.

[Sanunes]

Just because there is some content that has been cut from the game doesn't mean it was rushed.  They have always cut content even back with Knights of the Old Republic because there isn't enough time for all the grand ideas or technology doesn't work as they had hoped (Sten without horns in Dragon Age: Origins or no Sten) or even another problem arises that requires more work then intended and they have to make cuts elsewhere.

 

Just so you don't think its EA's fault, look at the trailers for Mass Effect 1, it is a CGI video but there is the impression you can walk away from Noveria and not help them.

[SofaJockey]

It's probably more accurate to say that every game is rushed.

And you could cram more in if you had the time and inclination.

 

Game development typically includes a crunch phase when studios gallop to include the features decided to be included

and drive out the bugs before launch. (there are often more of both items than is ideal).

 

Example:

 

Face codes and an in-game face melter are features that take time to build and are nice to have.

But if you set that feature against game stability, and you have a deadline, you might decide that's a 'for later'...

 

I'd rather play a stable game with some 'nice' features to follow, than play a buggy game that missed its release window.

 

On Xbox One my experience has been pretty much bug-free - I realise that hasn't been the same for all.

 

This is a balance all game studios make, and it's a hard call to make:

• It's going in the game at release, or
• we'll hold that back from release but patch/DLC it in later, or
• nice idea but that won't fly: cut

Even Skyrim with its (five?) patches released some 'nice' additional features, it's not always just bug fixing.

[SofaJockey]

Biower had plenty of time and resources, they just put too much of it into quantity rather than quality.

 

You could have had more fetch quests 

The Chanter's Boards look to be functional in the 2013 leaked demo.

 

Either way, it really is an artistic decision that BioWare alone can make.

Sometimes significant 'lost' stories resurface as DLC.

[Giantdeathrobot]

When CD Projeckt says stuff like that, it means they love their fans and everyone owes them undying loyalty forever.When Bioware says it, OMG they were rushed by EA and suck. I mean, don't get me wrong I love The Witcher and all but the double standard rubs me the wrong way. 

 

All games on the market are rushed to a point, else they would take forever to make. You always want to add X little thing, and can't always do it. If they want to add those things post-release for free, more power to them. My guess is that it's going to be minor stuff like extra mounts, equipment or casual outfits (PLEASE let us get rid of the beige pyjamas).

 

Dragon Age II was obviously rushed, what with the ridiculously recycled and linear levels and glaringly obvious graphical flaws. Inquisition could have used better QA and PC attention, but it's not anywhere near that.

 

At any rate, I can't think of a single big RPG that didn't need a good bit of patching post-release before it was up to snuff. From Baldur's Gate (remember baldurdash?) to Fallout to Origins to The Witcher to, well, every single Bethesda and Obsidian games ever. Expecting an RPG to be in top shape from day 1 seems a bit weird given that the genre has a long, long history of being flawed at release.

 

[Molohk]

It seems a bit sensationalist to call the game "rushed". Every major software project, including games has features that had to be left out either by time constraints or budget constraints.

 

The only situation where I would call a game "rushed" is where there's an obvious lack of quality control or the content is obviously truncated to cut short. I believe neither is the case with DA:I (keep in mind that bug-less software does not exist). Except a few bugs and quirks, the game is fairly polished and the amount of content is simply huge.

 

Managing a development project, requires balancing of three factors: Time, Money, and Features. For instance, if you want to add features, then you'll either need extra time or extra money, likewise if you want to cut down in time you'll have to reduce features or invest more money. Game designers always come up with new features (it's their job), and there has to be a game director to chose which ones make the cut, even if it means leaving out cool ideas or saving them for a future update.

[Sidney]

Scope creep is more likely the issue with DAI than rushed. You've got a new engine to begin with and then toss in the new open world "mode", the new crafting mini-game, all the keep stuff, the new combat and skills, the war table mini-game.

On the one hand I don't want to see this get to Dragon Age 2015, Dragon Age 2016 level of cut n' paste the same game over and over but maybe they need to take a breath and make these sorts of wholesale changes they have made in every DA game in every other DA instead.

[Ridwan]

No, it wasn't rushed. Bioware has never taken as long on a game as they have taken on this one. I don't know how you can call that rushed.

Talk to any developer, and they'll tell you there's always cut content. There's always ideas they had that they couldn't get done for whatever reason (time being the most common). That's just how the industry is. If they implemented every good idea they had, the game would never be finished.

What? Origins took 5 years to develop and it's viewed as their best game for a long time.

 

A lot of you are coming across as blind fanboys excusing Bioware by playing the "Well other companies do this and that" for crying out loud. It's not a bad thing expecting quality of a company who used to deliver top notch stuff.

[SomeoneStoleMyName]

They didn't admit to anything.

 

Game developers never have time to implement all they want. Even the world of warcraft devs said they wanted sooo much more in their vanilla game. This is true for probably 95% of game projects. Time is the number one enemy.