Just as a general note, when discussing stuff like this keep in mind that everyone is filling in blanks and to be mindful of how your perspective (and impression of the game) will predispose you to concluding various things (i.e. "launch" only means day one).
With respect to "hardcore fans" it's also important to recognize that different platforms will have different audiences. If I take my two PAX experiences, almost every single person that has tried our games loves them immensely. I probably met several hundred (maybe a thousand???) people at PAX Prime 2013 and I had two people talk to me about how they were disappointed with how BioWare has gone. One was related to mandatory Origin, and the other was about the Mass Effect 3 endings.
If I go into online spaces, I can get different impressions depending on where I go. My experience with the fanbase on twitter differs from the forum. Tumblr seems to be different from both of those. And so forth.
They were quite proud of the new art style, as I recall.
Matt Goldman had a talk at PAX South regarding art and while he was enthusiastic about changing things up (we basically had one base model for *everything* in DAO), he did concede that on some level there was an "over-correction" for some things such as how much the elves changed and whatnot.
He did a very interesting breakdown (somewhat simplified) of the various colour palettes used by each game and the motivations behind them. I actually sat in on the talk just "as a fan" and found it pretty interesting myself. He did like having a more distinct look compared to DAO, which is something I agree with.
what I'm curious about is how much time/resources were used to make fb3 usable for rpgs, as opposed to actually making dai.
We'll still look to iterate and whatnot and continue to add more, but certainly "non-trivial." If we already had the tools we had now at the start of production we probably could have shaved off a large chunk of time.
Sure a new IP is great if it works, and a disaster if it fails. Thus ==> risky
New IPs are risky, but at the same time I consider them essential for long term prospects. There's still a lot of "potential savings" as technology that we use for one game may still be usable for another game, but I think if a company like BioWare (or EA) refuses to do new IPs everyone loses out in the long run.
As for NPD, Blake Jorgensen mentioned that he feels there's a bit too much over reliance on NPD due to the digital transition. Especially since digital purchases on consoles are becoming more common as well. I agree and remember getting into a discussion on the old BSN who was using NPD sales to show how the gaming market was spiraling downward and less and less people were buying games while the revenue numbers of the industry seemed to be indicating otherwise.
As for the game's reception and success, I am pretty optimistic. Take that how you will I guess.
Retour en haut
