142 réponses à ce sujet

[Gamemako]

Because most people evaluate a game based on what's in the game, and not what they think could have maybe been in the game.

You mean what they told would be in the game from marketing materials just a few months before release. E3 2014 was June 10-12; DA:I was released 5 months later on November 18th. It seems odd that they would make such a significant change at the eleventh hour. They had maybe 2 months before the game had to go to final QA, then console certification, then to the presses. I know it's all subject to change, but someone had to know that they were running out of time to create alternate paths when that snippet was being shown and described.

I just realized I'm in the Spoilers section and haven't gotten around to buying DA:I yet. Whoopsies.

[prosthetic soul]

Umm... isn't that how advertising works?

 

You make the product sound good, even if it isn't?

 

Then after that, it all depends on the subjectivity of the customer.

No, that would be called FALSE advertising, which is for all intents and purposes, ILLEGAL; at least, here in the good old US of A.  I swear, some of you people in this thread are acting all apathetic about Bioware LYING TO YOUR FACE; it's like an abusive relationship in and of itself.  Wake up and smell the coffee!  Being a complacent consumer isn't a good thing! 

 

Some of you Bioware apologists have never heard the term bait-and-switch before.  That practice would also be illegal, in both Canada and England. 

[Beomer]

I admit, I am assuming the same thing.

You're assuming you're neither Bioware and nor me? Are you so lost for arguments that you are stringing words together now, willy nilly?

 

 

They were assuming some reasonable level of discriminatory ability on your part, so that you could distinguish between actual Bioware communications and everything else.
 

I can quite easily distinguish between news from BW and pointless statements from the likes of you. See Bioware gives real info, though they might go back on it later. People like you are obstinate trolls, who by the way cannot discern the fine line between being a supporter and taking it in whatever whole they give it to you.

 

They did promise something which they later went back on without informing anyone. That is fact. And that is wrong. Beyond this I don't know what your point is, but that is probably because you have no valid point here.

[Giantdeathrobot]

No, that would be called FALSE advertising, which is for all intents and purposes, ILLEGAL; at least, here in the good old US of A.  I swear, some of you people in this thread acting all apathetic about Bioware LYING TO YOUR FACE; it's like an abusive relationship in and of itself.  Wake up and smell the coffee!  Being a complacent consumer isn't a good thing! 

 

Yeah, well good luck going to any judge and saying ''this explicitely Alpha footage filmed on a smartphone (IE not advertising) is not in the game! False advertising!'' and not get laughed out of the courtroom.

[hong]

You're assuming you're neither Bioware and nor me? Are you so lost for arguments that you are stringing words together now, willy nilly?

I'm assuming you're able to distinguish between actual communications from Bioware and... everything else.
 

I can quite easily distinguish between news from BW and pointless statements from the likes of you. See Bioware gives real info, though they might go back on it later. People like you are obstinate trolls, who by the way cannot discern the fine line between being a supporter and taking it in whatever whole they give it to you.

It is very simple. You said:
 

False advertising, deliberate or accidental, is still false advertising.

This was in (apparent) response to the post immediately before:

First of all Bioware did not release that footage online. That was done by someone with a cell phone who recorded the video and released it at a private function not opened to the public and it is clearly stated as Alpha and Beta footage.. Second, changes are being made right up to the time the game goes gold. The game is then turned over for certification by Sony and Microsoft. So if something is not working as intended it can be cut right up to that point.

I say apparent, because you neglected to quote the actual text you were replying to. However, given the context it seems a fair reconstruction of intent. In other words, you were claiming that material that Bioware did not authorise, or release, is still something they should take responsibility for.

They did promise something which they later went back on without informing anyone. That is fact. And that is wrong. Beyond this I don't know what your point is, but that is probably because you have no valid point here.

You appear to have very innovative definitions of "fact" and "wrong".

[prosthetic soul]

Yeah, well good luck going to any judge and saying ''this explicitely Alpha footage filmed on a smartphone (IE not advertising) is not in the game! False advertising!'' and not get laughed out of the courtroom.

the redcliffe demo was not filmed on a smartphone and most certainly wasn't alpha footage. 

[Lewie]

It is actually horrifying to think that animals are easier to understand at times. 

 

[pdusen]

the redcliffe demo was not filmed on a smartphone and most certainly wasn't alpha footage.

What exactly is the problem supposed to be with the Redcliffe demo? Except for some spoilery extra stuff in the full game, the Redcliffe plot played out exactly as it was shown at E3.

[Beomer]

It is very simple. You said:
 

False advertising, deliberate or accidental, is still false advertising.

This was in (apparent) response to the post immediately before:

First of all Bioware did not release that footage online. That was done by someone with a cell phone who recorded the video and released it at a private function not opened to the public and it is clearly stated as Alpha and Beta footage.. Second, changes are being made right up to the time the game goes gold. The game is then turned over for certification by Sony and Microsoft. So if something is not working as intended it can be cut right up to that point.

I say apparent, because you neglected to quote the actual text you were replying to. However, given the context it seems a fair reconstruction of intent. In other words, you were claiming that material that Bioware did not authorise, or release, is still something they should take responsibility for.

 

 

It was not in apparent response to whatever one post you are quoting. I meant it as a general post in response to many posts defending Bioware.

Anyway I don't know what video that dude was talking about but I do remember promotional feeds released by Bioware which advertised features that did not make it into the final cut.

[Giantdeathrobot]

the redcliffe demo was not filmed on a smartphone and most certainly wasn't alpha footage. 

 

That? It happens pretty much textbook in the game minus Leliana's face, apart from the devs lying about the context to avoid spoilers (which is a far cry from false advertising). They explicitely said that the preview didn't say the whole story, and it didn't. I have no idea how this could possibly be controversial.

[Beomer]

What exactly is the problem supposed to be with the Redcliffe demo? Except for some spoilery extra stuff in the full game, the Redcliffe plot played out exactly as it was shown at E3.

 

ML says something along the lines that you have a choice to send any one adviser in, and since you sent Leliana in and she got captured it will affect your relationship with her.

I don't know whether ML was misinformed or not (the argument of BW supporters here, it is hard to believe the lead designer was misinformed of such facts at that point of time), but as we all know Leliana goes in by default. There is no choice and nothing changes, contrary to what ML had lead people to believe.

[Elsariel]

No, that would be called FALSE advertising, which is for all intents and purposes, ILLEGAL; at least, here in the good old US of A. I swear, some of you people in this thread are acting all apathetic about Bioware LYING TO YOUR FACE; it's like an abusive relationship in and of itself. Wake up and smell the coffee! Being a complacent consumer isn't a good thing!

Some of you Bioware apologists have never heard the term bait-and-switch before. That practice would also be illegal, in both Canada and England.

Yes, I'm a Bioware apologist because I choose to not get angry over a thing that didn't end in in the game that I didn't really care enough about to begin with.

[Melca36]

the redcliffe demo was not filmed on a smartphone and most certainly wasn't alpha footage. 

We saw the Redcliffe footage nearly a year ago. The game was in an Alpha state back then. It was stated as such MANY times.

[Melca36]

That? It happens pretty much textbook in the game minus Leliana's face, apart from the devs lying about the context to avoid spoilers (which is a far cry from false advertising). They explicitely said that the preview didn't say the whole story, and it didn't. I have no idea how this could possibly be controversial.

 

That's because its NOT.  

 

Problem is that in this day an age, people have been conditioned to believe everything they see.

[theluc76]

Yes EA-Ware did trolled their customers, 2 times already.

 

people never learn....

[Giantdeathrobot]

That's because its NOT.  

 

Problem is that in this day an age, people have been conditioned to believe everything they see.

 

I mean, hell, the movie industry is ten times worse in regards to avoiding spoilers. For example, in the latest Star Trek movie (spoilers for that, I guess), they said it would not feature a retooled Khan or have Leonard Nimoy in it. Lo and behold, the movie features a retooled Khan and a Leonard Nimoy cameo. Did you see all the lawsuits flying around? Nope, because that's not the case for a lawsuit at all, and only people with skewed priorities think this is false advertising worthy of getting their panties in a bunch.

[BAC PARTY CITY]

Preorder cancelled.

 

haven't pre-ordered a game since Mass Effect 3 (which to be fair was almost a perfect game for me till the horrible ending) and I see no reason to do so for any developer.

 

I actually find its better to wait at least two weeks or a month. Long enough for all the bugs to get sorted out and patched

[robertthebard]

So let's see, we have at least one poster here that didn't even buy the game, but is up in arms based entirely on "he said, she said", source. I wonder, what part of "Alpha content, your game may vary" wasn't met with any of the marketing material? That's going to be a hard thing to prove, since it seems the premise of the thread is "the Alpha content changed, BioWare trolled us".

But let's look at some of the arguments:

Your choices don't matter. Except that they do. If you don't bring specific party members, you can't recruit some of the agents. Unless, of course, you choose to take the Perks that make that choice moot. But Rob, isn't that still considered "choices matter"? Why, yes, it is.

Redcliffe doesn't play out as advertised. Gee, you mean where they avoided spoilers about events in the story arc? Note, this would include things like "You can avoid this by not sending Leliana". "But Rob, why would that mean it's stated to avoid spoilers, since they show it?", and quite simply, it's because it's part of the arc that matters. Codex entries in the quest state that Leliana was resistant to the Taint, meaning that, for the purpose that Alexius is using her, it would be crucial that she was there. How are Josie or Cullen going to wind up resistant to the darkspawn taint, a crucial part of the the story arc, since Alexius is trying to cure Felix of the taint?

Forts. I admit, I don't get how this one works, however, it was still listed as Alpha content, and that actual gameplay may vary. Since actual gameplay does indeed vary, I'd say one would be hard pressed to claim false advertising, since the advertising turned out to be spot on, actual game play varies. It was a cool concept, but it's likely that there were issues involved in the implementation that made it impossible, or impossible to iron out prior to release.

Overall, this is the BSN. Panties in a bunch is the rule, rather than the exception. In DA 2, Hawke was too emotive, and expressed feelings that he/she shouldn't have, some of this followed by claims that "I wouldn't care if my mother died". This is how far people were willing to take that argument. VAs have been criticized for "overplaying" an accent, despite that being their normal accents.

Edit: Here, the Inquisitor is too bland...

[SkyKing]

What?! A developer demoed a vertical slice of an in development game at a conference geared more towards press and investors and then later changed it as they got further along while still giving us a great game that has won multiple Game of the Year awards?

 

Game of the year awards based on paid critics or those who hadn't finished the game yet or tried a 2nd playthrough.  Or based on their lies and demos with preorder sales?   Not game of the year, more like 'scam of the year'. 

[SkyKing]

Yes, I'm a Bioware apologist because I choose to not get angry over a thing that didn't end in in the game that I didn't really care enough about to begin with.

 

 

And THAT is the typical console player that can be blamed for the feces of video games being dumped on the market.  The console gamer who doesn't really care about the game that much, they have hundreds and buy them, play a bit, and move on.  This is who bioware is now catering to, catering to meaning making a sub par game for a casual player to do fetching and button smashing and move on. 

[prosthetic soul]

Yes, I'm a Bioware apologist because I choose to not get angry over a thing that didn't end in in the game that I didn't really care enough about to begin with.

You're not really refuting my point here.  You're just underlining your own apathy.  Which is destroying your argument.  Apathy is a BAD TRAIT.  It is reprehensible.  I don't think there is a single circumstance in life in which apathy is GOOD TO HAVE.  Good lord. 

[Metalunatic]

ME3, DA2 and DA:I -- alot of trolling.