1329 réponses à ce sujet

[Lebanese Dude]

Well, they don't know their audience very well if they thought people wanted an "arty" ending. People play RPGs to save the world and get the girl (or guy). If there's some interesting, thought provoking plot twists in there? All the better. But there better be an opportunity for things to end well. Especially in a developer who is known for characters, and character development, to not have those characters that people grew attached to live happily ever after?

The writers basically had no conception of what and who their fan base was to think people would've been satisfied with that ending.

 

The entirety of ME3's plot was based on the progressive realization that you are doomed to die. The battle for Earth was as desperate a battle as they come. There was no reprieve.

 

That's the entire goddamn point. You cannot even tickle one "boss" and there are thousands of them. It took an entire fleet to destroy one which was weakened and distracted.

What point would a final confrontation serve beyond getting crushed?

 

It's sad that this flies over people. You expect an epic boss battle when you are literally bleeding on your knees? 

 

It was alright that they had to release EC to make things clearer for those who need more factual results, but this has set a precedent where gamers think they have a say in the story. 

 

This isn't the ME3 thread and this has been discussed to death already so I won't bother you any further. At this point opinions are solidified.

[Aurok]

Maybe they'll make something better instead. Like the Bioware-Does-Hornblower/Sharpe game I've always wanted them to make

[Aurok]

 

It was alright that they had to release EC to make things clearer for those who need more factual results, but this has set a precedent where gamers think they have a say in the story. 

 

This is Bioware though, which has built all of its success on the principle of giving gamers a say in the story. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

[Riverway_Inca]

I'm afraid if the game sells really well that the powers that be will be led into thinking that dumbed down writing, storylines and character interactions/relationships is the way to go; that a single-player MMO will become their recipe for success.

 

On the other hand, if the game sells really poorly, DAI may be the end of the franchise and we'll never get to see if the next installment hits it out of the ballpark. But I don't know, I held out such immense hope for DAI after DA2 and look what that got me...

 

...so yes, I'm torn on this issue. 

[Lebanese Dude]

This is Bioware though, which has built all of its success on the principle of giving gamers a say in the story. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

 

Er... the decisions you make are created by BioWare. You cannot do anything that isn't accounted for by the developers. 

 

No matter what you do, you always have to complete the story and the focal point of the ending is always the same.

 

Slay an Archdemon.

Spark the Mage/Templar War.

Save the Citadel.

Survive (or die and be unable to continue the story) the suicide mission.

Save entire galactic civilization from immediate annihalation.

 

ME3 gave you the option to alter the focal point of the ending by giving you three (or four if you are suicidal) options. 

You decide how the story ends, but on their terms, with plenty of room for imagination to fill in the blanks.

 

Bah...I totally failed at not continuing this tangent lol

[CronoDragoon]

I'm afraid if the game sells really well that the powers that be will be led into thinking that dumbed down writing, storylines and character interactions/relationships is the way to go

 

Since DA: I has the best writing of the series, why would they think this?

[X Equestris]

This is Bioware though, which has built all of its success on the principle of giving gamers a say in the story. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

Bioware games are built on the illusion of choice. The choices ultimately lead to the same place, with a few minor variations.

[StingingVelvet]

Even if it sells better than DA2 I would guess EA were hoping it would at least compete with Bethesda style sales. I would imagine even 4-5 million sales would be a disappointment.

 

Which, not to be a jerk, but I think would be a good thing. I found this game disappointing and hope it under-performs so that Bioware are pressured to re-examine their priorities.

[CronoDragoon]

Even if it sells better than DA2 I would guess EA were hoping it would at least compete with Bethesda style sales. I would imagine even 4-5 million sales would be a disappointment.

 

You think EA was expecting to move 20 million units?

[brzoz]

Even if it sells better than DA2 I would guess EA were hoping it would at least compete with Bethesda style sales. I would imagine even 4-5 million sales would be a disappointment.

 

Which, not to be a jerk, but I think would be a good thing. I found this game disappointing and hope it under-performs so that Bioware are pressured to re-examine their priorities.

that's odd... coming from person on BSM and all. well, i'm for one happy that it's doing well, even if i'm disappointed/awaiting patches. i'd rather have action-(ahem)rpgs on the market than another cod/halo/ac

[StingingVelvet]

You think EA was expecting to move 20 million units?

 

No, nowhere near that. I said compete, not beat. 4 million sales would be pretty disappointing for a 4 year investment and all the marketing and such, I think. They directly aimed for that exploration-focused market, they dropped Skyrim into half the early previews, they upped the time and development cost quotient considerably. I would think selling about what the first two games did would be seen as disappointing.

[StingingVelvet]

that's odd... coming from person on BSM and all. well, i'm for one happy that it's doing well, even if i'm disappointed/awaiting patches. i'd rather have action-(ahem)rpgs on the market than another cod/halo/ac

 

Why is it odd? Do you think everyone who likes Bioware games likes all of them? I loved Origins, I have been disappointed with the sequels. I want them to focus more on gameplay than cinematic stories. If they are going to push exploration I want them to realize what makes Skyrim exploration so fun and that there is none of that in Inquisition.

 

There's a difference between being a fan and being a slavish devotee who doesn't care about quality.

[dlux]

You think EA was expecting to move 20 million units?

Well, the 5-6 million (maybe even more) copies that DA:O sold obviously wasn't enough for EA.

 

I guess EA thought that a "Dragon Age: Sykrim" would sell better, which would explain why they completely changed everything. Maybe they can try "Dragon Age: Grand Theft Auto Carriage" for their next iteration... maybe that will sell 20-30 million copies.

[Salaya]

I think the problem with DA:I sales performance is that for many of us, it's a no-win situation.

 

If DA:I sells well enough, Bioware will try to emulate the formula in next installments. And if the game sells poorly, they will change again the game to turn it into something even simpler or similar to the next "big game" that sells millions.

[RavenousIron]

I'm pretty sure you don't have to worry about it not making it to the top 10 games of the month. I forgot where I read it, but basically one of the guys over at Bioware said that they're not stopping the franchise at DA:I. They want to make more, and that does not necessarily mean that it's going to be Dragon Age 4, but that we can expect more DA in the future nonetheless. So to answer your question, yes we will be seeing more DA in the future. Hopefully by 2016-2017. It takes time to make good games, so I have no problem waiting.

[brzoz]

Why is it odd? Do you think everyone who likes Bioware games likes all of them? I loved Origins, I have been disappointed with the sequels. I want them to focus more on gameplay than cinematic stories. If they are going to push exploration I want them to realize what makes Skyrim exploration so fun and that there is none of that in Inquisition.

 

There's a difference between being a fan and being a slavish devotee who doesn't care about quality.

nah, that's not what i meant. you see... if the numbers are too low - they decide to abandon whole franchise simply because it's not profitable. if numbers are high -  we will have more BS pumped into the content (and less rpgy-substance). there's no way to win, but i think 2nd option is a bit better (until they decide to pull a shooter/ac out of their arse)

[Cyonan]

I think the problem with DA:I sales performance is that for many of us, it's a no-win situation.

 

If DA:I sells well enough, Bioware will try to emulate the formula in next installments. And if the game sells poorly, they will change again the game to turn it into something even simpler or similar to the next "big game" that sells millions.

 

The problem is that people are silly enough to think that DA:I selling poorly means BioWare will do whatever it is that they personally want. The reality is that they would likely just stop making them because they aren't profitable.

 

but it sounds like the game is doing fine. We'll probably get a sequel that sticks to the same formula with some refinements.

[Riverway_Inca]

CronoDragoon, IMO I don't know how on earth you can say that DAI is better written than Origins, for example. The interactions with your companions alone were handled much better and with so much more nuance in Origins.

 

Now, this is not to say that there was no good writing at all in DAI. Some of the major story sequences, such as the one at the ball, I thought were done very nicely. Morrigan's arc was also wonderful, I felt; anytime she spoke, I listened. The problem is that there just isn't enough good writing spread around, and my God, that ending was absolutely pathetic. Anytime we were being carried along by the main story moments, the game was engaging, but no, we had to go around doing WoW-like stuff if we wanted our experience with the game to carry over for more than a few days.

 

And dlux, that was a good one!

[Lebanese Dude]

No, nowhere near that. I said compete, not beat. 4 million sales would be pretty disappointing for a 4 year investment and all the marketing and such, I think. They directly aimed for that exploration-focused market, they dropped Skyrim into half the early previews, they upped the time and development cost quotient considerably. I would think selling about what the first two games did would be seen as disappointing.

The games barely out yet. This sort of conjecture is very premature. There is no evidence that DAI won't sell well... yet.

Comparing DAI to Skyrim isn't really fair either, as one came after an established franchise while DAI came after DA2 and ME3, which were rife with controversy.

While profit is undeniably the driving force of the industry, DAI is also about restoring faith in BioWare.
According to what I've seen so far (on basically every site other than BSN) it's done a good job at that.

[CronoDragoon]

CronoDragoon, IMO I don't know how on earth you can say that DAI is better written than Origins, for example. The interactions with your companions alone were handled much better and with so much more nuance in Origins.

 

That depends on the companion. Maybe you can give some examples of nuance? Anyway, Origins has very strong companions, possibly even better than Inquisition, but the writing for the main story of Inquisition is leagues ahead of Origins.

 

 

Well, the 5-6 million (maybe even more) copies that DA:O sold obviously wasn't enough for EA.

 

5-6 million is never going to be enough for a game with 6 years of development.

[StingingVelvet]

nah, that's not what i meant. you see... if the numbers are too low - they decide to abandon whole franchise simply because it's not profitable. if numbers are high -  we will have more BS pumped into the content (and less rpgy-substance). there's no way to win, but i think 2nd option is a bit better (until they decide to pull a shooter/ac out of their arse)

 

Well I can't pretend I like the direction the game took just to try and avert not getting a follow-up. I have to be honest about things.

 

I do understand what you're saying, and it would be a shame if Bioware just turned away from this specific genre, but if it succeeding just means more MMO style collect-a-thons and cinematic cutscenes trying to be a movie but failing constantly then... well... not a big loss, IMO.

[StingingVelvet]

While profit is undeniably the driving force of the industry, DAI is also about restoring faith in BioWare.
According to what I've seen so far (on basically every site other than BSN) it's done a good job at that.

 

Reaction seems pretty mixed across the board to me. Mainstream reviewers definitely praised it, but they praise almost anything on this scale. On every forum I go to the reaction from RPG players is pretty much the same. Lousy side-content, MMO style side-quests, but a solid main quest and pretty (yet empty) zones.

[Aurok]

Er... the decisions you make are created by BioWare. You cannot do anything that isn't accounted for by the developers. 

 

No matter what you do, you always have to complete the story and the focal point of the ending is always the same.

 

Slay an Archdemon.

Spark the Mage/Templar War.

Save the Citadel.

Survive (or die and be unable to continue the story) the suicide mission.

Save entire galactic civilization from immediate annihalation.

 

ME3 gave you the option to alter the focal point of the ending by giving you three (or four if you are suicidal) options. 

You decide how the story ends, but on their terms, with plenty of room for imagination to fill in the blanks.

 

Bah...I totally failed at not continuing this tangent lol

 

Bioware games are built on the illusion of choice. The choices ultimately lead to the same place, with a few minor variations.

 

Neither of these rebuttals actually contradict what I said, which was that Bioware games already give you "a say in the story". I didn't say you get to write the entire script, and the fact that the end state remains broadly the same doesn't mean that you didn't get to have a say in the story. 'Story' is not synonymous with 'end state' any more than 'journey' is synonymous with 'destination'.

 

My point was that the precedent for gamers 'having a say in the story' was set by Bioware long ago. More than that even, it's been their unique selling point which sets them apart from other developers in the industry for years (without it, Mass Effect would just be another Gears of War knock-off for example).

 

The ending do-over did not "set a precedent where gamers think they have a say in the story", because that way of thinking was already long since established and has been deliberately cultivated by Bioware for years.  For them to build all of their success on this principle, ask players to be invested in this principle for an entire trilogy of games, yet then turn around and act like it was out of order for those same fans to say 'This phoned-in ending you made sucks and should be changed' would have been both ridiculous and short-sighted. To react like that would have undermined the entire principle their success is founded upon. They don't get to reap the benefits of it when it is going well and then cry foul when the wind turns. They know that in the long term the benefits of gamers feeling so personally invested in their storytelling far outweigh the cons, which is why they pulled out all the stops to preserve that relationship when it looked like they were about to throw it all away with the ME3 ending debacle.

[brzoz]

(...) if it succeeding just means more MMO style collect-a-thons and cinematic cutscenes trying to be a movie but failing constantly then... well... not a big loss, IMO.

actually... it's interesting, what will happen with the franchise, because we don't have the figures to know for sure. they tried to attract more mainstram crowd and it seems they've succeeded (reviews, awards), it was all done on their base's expense. fans forgive, right? for the third time? huh... i wonder how many gamers turned away from BW's "rpgs" after DAI

 

i'm talking about misleading promotional materials, the gameplay/bugs/etc, lack of communication, not just the mmorpgish/terrible-hollywood-movie style

[ORTesc]

So this is a top 10 chart with CoD as #1 and Madden as #4.

 

And we wonder why Dragon Age turned into this. Why must people buy stupid things?