134 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

This have been long before covered. The amount of votes are barely noticeable. If you had something like 200.000 people voting and 50.000 people voted for Inquisition, which would account for something like 1% or the players which would still be too low but perhaps it could be considered something, but numbers don't even come close to this. A handful of fanatics voted and that's it.

So fan votes are somehow unfair? You're serious?

Look, I suppose we could come up with some way to shape the electorate that would make it agree with you, but you've got to come up with a principled method.

[SofaJockey]

if publisher has the power to do this, the publisher may as well sit in sprint sessions and frown upon any brilliant idea dev team came up with, which in his mind won't sell and it's pointless waste of time, whilst spouting copy&paste propaganda

/shrug

 

Oh, this is the extent of your justification?

 

DAI's multiplayer has particularly unaggressive microtransactions and follows the MEMP model.

You can look at Ubisoft and others for more aggressive schemes.

 

That hardly puts corporate finance people in development meetings.

 

I'm sorry, this sort of copy/paste argument holds little water in my opinion.

[AlexTGW]

I decided to buy the game after seeing the pax prime 2013 demo and i fell in love with what was presented and i mean that.I think it was the first time when i became a fanboy for a game.I already loved the dragon age series but the game that was presented there for me at least was going to be everything i ever wanted from a dragon age game.It felt really engaging and choices in the campaign had visible consequences in the world and the world itself felt alive and dinamic.You don't see that in many rpgs, even the elder scrolls series from oblivion to skyrim feels kind of empty and static. I wanted that game so bad that i decided i would do anything to get it(I ended up having to eat once a day for a month and make some other sacrifices to save up for it).And when i got it i was extatic and i started to play it i got it 3 or 4 days after launch so at first i noticed that companions were not really talking even though i was walking every where.Mounts had no real value as the speed was quite low.The enemy seemed so sterile and the game itself felt quite empty of engaging elements.I said to myself:"be patient it is still early on  in the game my inquisition still has to grow.I got to the main base and after a while i got to the same area presented in the video i looked around the stronghold for the supposed side entrances maybe some side quests to poison wells or something that  weakens the garrison but nothing.I got in the main door got the flag up and that was it.Then i looked for patrols of said inquisition or other changes in the world.I got really dissapointed and stopped playing for a while.Then came back and hoped that the enemy would fight back or do something to scare me and keep me in suspense but nothing of that scope.Outside the main story which is good the game world itself feels dead and empty compared to what i was sold on.The game is still presented as highly customizable and "making the inquisition your own" on the main page but those are all lies.I felt really cheated and depressed after all this and angry.They even stated that all the things they presented are nailed down and they wouldn't talk about them otherwise.I feel that this practice of false advertisement the same that happened with mass effect 1 and 3 is a personal spit in the face of the customer.At least mention the fact that you had to cut on some things because of reasons before release not months after release.Thank you and i apologise for bad spelling or grammar.

[SofaJockey]

I decided to buy the game after seeing the pax prime 2013 demo...

They even stated that all the things they presented are nailed down and they wouldn't talk about them otherwise...

 

The 2013 demo was never officially released, it was recorded on someone's phone.

We've had folk who were in the room of the demo confirm categorically that statements were made that things were not nailed down.

[Realmzmaster]

There is not such animal as nailed down in software development until the product goes gold. Up to that point any feature may hit the cutting room floor especially if it is not working properly. This false advertisement claim has been discussed to death. As stated by Sofajockey the demo was not for public release. Someone took out their cell phone and recorded it. Bioware/EA never officially released that demo.

 

If you want to talk about the demos that were officially released that is fair game. If a demo specifically states that features are subject to change or that it is alpha or beta footage that is not fair game.

 

Before any one states that they can take this demo as proof of false advertisement to a court of law, save yourself the trouble. If there were witnesses there that can specifically state that Bioware said all the features are nailed down you may have a case. But in this instance you do not because people who were there have already come forth and stated unequivocally that Bioware did not state that all the features were nailed down.

 

Given the point that Pax Prime was held August 30 to September 1 2013 and DAI was released November 18 2014, you cannot tell me that Bioware spent over a year getting the errors out of the game. No what happened is that Bioware added features and removed features that were not working.

 

That is typical in the entertainment industry. movies and songs get edited. Games get features added or removed. Until the game goes to ship or to digital distribution it is subject to change.

 

Now with digital distribution developers are letting gamers have a go at alpha and beta versions which specifically state what they are. The final product goes out when the developers slap on that final version tag.

[CronoDragoon]

If you're going to cry false advertising about Inquisition, then the only thing BioWare can do is not release any details about the game until after it goes gold, a month before release.

 

They won't do that, of course, and not just for the obvious reasons such as "marketing," but also because most fans either don't care or know what pre-Alpha and Alpha mean.

[AlexTGW]

When i said things were nailed down i was not refering to that demo alone.They said that at other interviews when they were asked about other features and stuff.I will try and search for the interview where they stated that fact.They talked a lot about customizing the inquisition and making it your own and one of the ways they relied this statement on was the keeps and how you chose to use them affecting the game world heavily in terms of quests available and npcs present.If you read my post i talked about how they never mentioned cutting any feature that they presented earlier even if it was "leaked"footage(some people recorded this on cameras) it is false advertisement.They never came out and said oh this video that was released without our permision is presenting features that are no longer in the game.They simply stopped talking about them.I think i have a right to know what exactly i'm buying and not be deceived or led to believe i'm buying something that no longer exist.I followed them in the last year before launch and they never said anything about cut features they presented before nor they tried to remove the "leaked"footage.They can cut 90% of the game if they want but make it clear what you are selling and not talk high and mighty about a supposed product and then not deliver on the promise because on the basis of that promise i make a purchase.It's like seeling a potato painted red and calling it a tomato.I feel cheated and i've seen this practice from them on other games.For the personal sacrifice i made in buying this game it makes the burn so much more intense for me.I played it only once since it released and i played dragon age 2 4-5 times and origins around 7 times.I'm not crying anything i'm stating my opinion on their bussiness practices which i feel are dishonest.This was my experience with Bioware i'm not taking anything to court i just felt a bitter taste and a feeling of heavy dissapointment for a game i hoped would make it worth my personal sacrifice.I'm glad people liked the game and they got what they thought were buying .I have a game that i never felt was worth the money i spent on it and got me bored around 60% of the time.Multiplayer was not a good experience for me.I hoped it would be something like mass effect 3 gameplay wise but i never felt that.I'm sad to see the practice of manipulating potential buyers with potential features only to cut them without notice beeing used more frequently.

[SofaJockey]

... i'm stating my opinion on their bussiness practices which i feel are dishonest. ...

 

I'm sad it didn't work for you.

 

I think BioWare should be judged on their ample official demos (the Hinterlands / Redcliffe demo was the big one) and the ample demos on Twitch and other game shows thereafter (and the game itself of course). Not a phone camera captured prototype more than a year before launch.

 

I have no doubts about your sincerity, but to suggest that running a demo to a closed audience equates to manipulating buyers is a perverse opinion.

 

But if that's your view, ok.

[Morroian]

When i said things were nailed down i was not refering to that demo alone.They said that at other interviews when they were asked about other features and stuff.I will try and search for 

 

Please in the name of all thats holy use paragraphs.

[Darkly Tranquil]

If you're going to cry false advertising about Inquisition, then the only thing BioWare can do is not release any details about the game until after it goes gold, a month before release.
 
They won't do that, of course, and not just for the obvious reasons such as "marketing," but also because most fans either don't care or know what pre-Alpha and Alpha mean.

I often think that's exactly what they should do. Make the game entirely in secret, then once it's finished, unveil it in a grand marketing push in the months between the announcement and launch, promoting it on exactly what is in the game and not a bunch of false promises, bullshots, spin, and baseless speculation. All it needs is for one big developer to do it and the rest of the industry would be able to see that the 2-3 year hype train actually does more harm than good. Personally, I'm hoping that Bethesda are going to announce Fallout 4 at E3 with a release date for this year (the Bethesda dev team have to have been doing something since Skyrim). If they do that, and it works, it will show unequivocally that you can develop a game under wraps and then successfully announce and launch it when it's ready without all the hoopla and still have a huge release.

[AlexTGW]

I'm sorry i couldn't find all the info i searched for but i found two articles about the stuff that i thought were in the game at launch, http://www.pcgamer.c...sition-preview/and http://kotaku.com/five-things-bioware-wants-you-to-know-about-the-next-d-1584867161 .I'm sorry for my awkward typing and linking as you can see these were my first posts on this forum as i don't voice my opinion often or at all  as that leads to confrontation usually.This will be my last post because i don't feel comfortable doing this and i believe that i may offend people inadvertedly in this community that i don't really feel a part of even though i love the dragon age and mass effect series very much.

LE:If anyone can find an article or a post from someone at bioware which shows that they said which features were cut or anything like that about the game i'll be really thankfull as at this point i would really like to find a reason to not be dissapointed with the gaming industry and Bioware.In short i'd like to be proven wrong.

Modifié par AlexTGW, 18 mars 2015 - 09:46 .

[Shechinah]

(to AlexTGW) Don't worry about it, everybody offends somebody at some point.

[Lilithor]

So fan votes are somehow unfair? You're serious?

Look, I suppose we could come up with some way to shape the electorate that would make it agree with you, but you've got to come up with a principled method.

Missed the point by a lightyear.
I voted on one GOTY, in my whole life, and this was last years, and was out of hatred for Inquisition. I don't even remeber if it was Gamespot or IGN or whatever. Such small percentage of people voting would only be considered in academy if they were chosen at random, well any amount of people to be honest, these kind of voting in GOTY would only be worth to be laughed at in anything serious, meaning they do not bear any weight on persuing truth.

Here (BSN), of course if it served my purposes I would have used but it doesn't so I show how it is not valid. BUT all that being said, I'm pretty sure the majority of people loved the game, I mean something like 75% to 90%. I argue just for the sake of arguing against Inquisition, I know players loved it, that's the whole point of the game losing all the features I loved in the franchise. In the end Inquisition made me understand that only indie games will please me, that it is impossible for a big game to go the way I like while all "indies" (I prefer to call them kickstarters) do it without even trying, and that's exactly because indies are not aiming at 20 million sales, or at least it is a huge coincidence that they don't. Until a big game shows me stats, races, classes and combat on the level of Pillars of Eternity I will consider people loving a game the perfect reason to stay away from it.

[Farangbaa]

I'm sorry i couldn't find all the info i searched for but i found two articles about the stuff that i thought were in the game at launch, http://www.pcgamer.c...sition-preview/and http://kotaku.com/five-things-bioware-wants-you-to-know-about-the-next-d-1584867161 .I'm sorry for my awkward typing and linking as you can see these were my first posts on this forum as i don't voice my opinion often or at all  as that leads to confrontation usually.This will be my last post because i don't feel comfortable doing this and i believe that i may offend people inadvertedly in this community that i don't really feel a part of even though i love the dragon age and mass effect series very much.
LE:If anyone can find an article or a post from someone at bioware which shows that they said which features were cut or anything like that about the game i'll be really thankfull as at this point i would really like to find a reason to not be dissapointed with the gaming industry and Bioware.In short i'd like to be proven wrong.

First article is about the same footage of the Pax show.
Second article says totally different things. Everything the article says is in the game.

[SofaJockey]

This will be my last post because i don't feel comfortable doing this and i believe that i may offend people inadvertedly in this community that i don't really feel a part of even though i love the dragon age and mass effect series very much.

 

You have made some interesting points, even if I personally don't agree with some of them. I would hope no one would be offended, as you have been polite and thoughtful from your perspective. I hope you choose to post again on another topic 

 

I often think that's exactly what they should do. Make the game entirely in secret, then once it's finished, unveil it in a grand marketing push in the months between the announcement and launch, promoting it on exactly what is in the game and not a bunch of false promises, bullshots, spin, and baseless speculation. All it needs is for one big developer to do it and the rest of the industry would be able to see that the 2-3 year hype train actually does more harm than good. Personally, I'm hoping that Bethesda are going to announce Fallout 4 at E3 with a release date for this year (the Bethesda dev team have to have been doing something since Skyrim). If they do that, and it works, it will show unequivocally that you can develop a game under wraps and then successfully announce and launch it when it's ready without all the hoopla and still have a huge release.

 

You can see some of these behaviours in what BioWare are doing now, which is not talking about anything in the future.

They will barely confirm there is DLC coming, they're certainly not embracing that there will be a DA4.

 

From the article:

 

"we have to finish the patch cycle and put out the [previously announced] Black Emporium update. We've also talked about multiplayer DLC - we've put out one pack and would like to do another." BioWare has so far remained silent on its plans for new single-player expansions, and fans have been left to only guess as to what or when it may arrive. It's a welcome change from the situation a couple of years ago, when BioWare was hawking day-one Mass Effect 3 DLC to fans before the game released.

 

"I'd say it's possible there will be more Dragon Age"

 

The question becomes how long before launch do you need to market a game? 6 months? 3 months? 1 month?

I can pre-order Mass Effect '4' right now on Amazon !

[Fiery Phoenix]

Just a notice: ME3's first paid story DLC (Leviathan) didn't release until 5 full months post-launch, from early March to early August.

 

It is likely this is a similar case.

[Realmzmaster]

I often think that's exactly what they should do. Make the game entirely in secret, then once it's finished, unveil it in a grand marketing push in the months between the announcement and launch, promoting it on exactly what is in the game and not a bunch of false promises, bullshots, spin, and baseless speculation. All it needs is for one big developer to do it and the rest of the industry would be able to see that the 2-3 year hype train actually does more harm than good. Personally, I'm hoping that Bethesda are going to announce Fallout 4 at E3 with a release date for this year (the Bethesda dev team have to have been doing something since Skyrim). If they do that, and it works, it will show unequivocally that you can develop a game under wraps and then successfully announce and launch it when it's ready without all the hoopla and still have a huge release.

 

The problem with this approach is that gamers are constantly asking for information about the game (whoever is the developer). If no information is forthcoming the developers get accused of not talking to their fanbase. Also it takes time to get a marketing campaign in full gear. The whole point of marketing is to let the public know that the game is coming, generate excitement and when it will be available for purchase or pre-order.

 

Also Bioware/EA is not the only company to be considered since EA/Bioware sell their games on the consoles. So Sony and Microsoft will also have a say in what happens. Generally both companies want to get their advertising campaigns going also.

[wepeel_]

The problem with this approach is that gamers are constantly asking for information about the game (whoever is the developer). If no information is forthcoming the developers get accused of not talking to their fanbase. Also it takes time to get a marketing campaign in full gear. The whole point of marketing is to let the public know that the game is coming, generate excitement and when it will be available for purchase or pre-order.

 

He has a point though. If a game hasn't been announced, there won't be a forum full of fans demanding to know information. The demands come when there's an announcement, a teaser and then a long period of silence. A developer announcing a - finished - game and at the same time announcing the release date a few months later would be extremely refreshing compared to the current, drawn-out hype cycle.

[SofaJockey]

If no information is forthcoming the developers get accused of not talking to their fanbase. Also it takes time to get a marketing campaign in full gear. The whole point of marketing is to let the public know that the game is coming, generate excitement and when it will be available for purchase or pre-order...

 

BioWare get criticised for not talking to their fanbase now, but if they do, even in the form of a prototype demo, they get criticised, as in the case of 'Crestwoodgate' being discussed in this thread.

 

I can see BioWare's line become even more resolutely 'we're not talking about that now...'

 

Times from launch announcement to shipping date vary (excluding any delays)

• Assassin's Creed Unity was 4.5 months. source
• DAI was 5.5 months. source
• Witcher 3 was 8.5 months. source
• Destiny was 9 months. source
• Skyrim was 11 months. source

This is not the actual launch window, in fact only Skyrim & Destiny, with the longest windows, from the list above delivered on the date promised. These are marketing times of how long these businesses feel is appropriate to market their games.

 

For DAI, even with the 5.5 month marketing window, the multiplayer was not announced until 10 weeks from the (new) launch date. source

 

We can't have our cake and eat it.

 

Either we have highly accurate announcements of content 'at the last moment',

or we must accept a little ambiguity in information if we are hassling the company for 'moar leaks!!'

 

I expect more of the former, with less of the latter and in a way, I'm sad about that.

The marketing becomes dumbed down, because the audience is sufficiently unable to distinguish between pre-alpha, alpha and beta/gold content.

[Lee T]

No.The game would forever be in development and ultimately get cancelled.No. They are there to make sure the project is financially feasable. At some point in time someone's gotta tell to finish it up. Bioware already got a whole extra year of development time. These projects can't last forever, there has to be made profit somewhere, and if you keep letting the project drag on and on and on because the developpers keep adding things, your margin of profit will drop more every single day until finally, everybody on the planet needs to buy the game and you'd break even.

My point was that suits like numbers (it's an understandably convenient synthesising tool) and that leads to the unfortunate consequence that metacritic scores are taken way too seriously by higher ups. I don't know who you are answering to for I have made no comment about the development time.

[Realmzmaster]

He has a point though. If a game hasn't been announced, there won't be a forum full of fans demanding to know information. The demands come when there's an announcement, a teaser and then a long period of silence. A developer announcing a - finished - game and at the same time announcing the release date a few months later would be extremely refreshing compared to the current, drawn-out hype cycle.

 

You will still have gamers asking when is the next game coming out, because they assume there will be a next game until told otherwise.

[SofaJockey]

You will still have gamers asking when is the next game coming out, because they assume there will be a next game until told otherwise.

 

So when is the next game coming out? 

And when is the next Mass Effect coming out?

And the new IP?

 

Tell us biower pls... 

[Darkly Tranquil]

The problem with this approach is that gamers are constantly asking for information about the game (whoever is the developer). If no information is forthcoming the developers get accused of not talking to their fanbase. Also it takes time to get a marketing campaign in full gear. The whole point of marketing is to let the public know that the game is coming, generate excitement and when it will be available for purchase or pre-order.

 

Also Bioware/EA is not the only company to be considered since EA/Bioware sell their games on the consoles. So Sony and Microsoft will also have a say in what happens. Generally both companies want to get their advertising campaigns going also.

 

Oh, there's no doubt is goes against the prevailing industry norms. It would take a studio with both guts and pull in the industry (hence why Bethesda would be a candidate) to pull it off. I just think it would be interesting to see someone buck the established pattern and try a different approach and see if it produces a more productive developer/publisher/consumer interaction than the current system.

 

Edit: An interesting commentary by Colin Moriarty (ex-IGN) on this very topic: (relevant part starts at 11:15)

Spoiler

[Gothfather]

It's a bit disheartening to hear that the multi-platform release negatively impacted the design. 

 

DA:I was released a year late, if it had been released in the summer of 2013 as was their initial goal that would have been released before the current gen consoles were available. So it makes sense they were developing the game for the last gen console systems. Hardware limitations will ALWAYS impact design it is just the way game design is.

 

It seems to me that any expectation that DA:I should not have been developed for last gen consoles is wishful thinking as this game was suppose to be released before either the Ps4 or the XBone were released and honestly who releases a game in the summer for a console that is due to be released 2-3 months later while at the same time doesn't release the game for existing consoles?

 

DA:I was developed in a transition period where gamers expect games to be made for both systems. Games not developed in a transition period don't have to worry about this problem but those that are released during this time do and if they don't gamers will rage. hell gamers rage when titles get released on consoles they don't own, aka when ME series went to the PS3. So many gamers raged about that, what can we take from that? That gamers are the most self centred consumers in the world and are for the most part unreasonable in their expectations.

[wepeel_]

Times from launch announcement to shipping date vary (excluding any delays)

• Assassin's Creed Unity was 4.5 months. source
• DAI was 5.5 months. source
• Witcher 3 was 8.5 months. source
• Destiny was 9 months. source
• Skyrim was 11 months. source

This is not the actual launch window, in fact only Skyrim & Destiny, with the longest windows, from the list above delivered on the date promised. These are marketing times of how long these businesses feel is appropriate to market their games.

 

For DAI, even with the 5.5 month marketing window, the multiplayer was not announced until 10 weeks from the (new) launch date. source

 

We can't have our cake and eat it.

 

Either we have highly accurate announcements of content 'at the last moment',

or we must accept a little ambiguity in information if we are hassling the company for 'moar leaks!!'

 

I wasn't talking about launch date announcements though, but official (or even unofficial but visible) announcements. DAI for example by all accounts appeared on the radar as early as mid-2011, i.e. 3,5 years ahead of its release. The Inquisition title and trailer came at E3 2013, so still 1,5 years of hype-building at the very least. I for one don't need to keep my cake for that long but would rather see it presented when ready to eat.