134 réponses à ce sujet

[Innsmouth Dweller]

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.

"justification"? hardly. i don't know what is the real impact of publisher on the game design, but apparently it has substantial influence. i don't think we're discussing the aggressiveness of microtransactions here, just the reason for their inclusion - EA has spoken, studio obeys (or else?)

as for the part on putting corporate finance people in dev meetings - of course it was hyperbole. i like hyperboles, they are fun.

 

EDIT:

no, i don't think publisher is the big bad. it changes things, whether those changes are good or bad - that's subjective.

i, for one, prefer beer from small, local breweries over the mass produced, watered down spirits. others just want to drink alkohol.

[CronoDragoon]

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.

 

I'm on board with this, but then I've always had a rather extreme opinion when it comes to pre-release info; I don't believe, for example, that BioWare should reveal any of the characters or romances or whatever, and just let people discover it as they play the game.

[Fiery Phoenix]

I feel it's worth mentioning that the perceived 'false advertisement' practice isn't new to BioWare; it's something they've done in the past, and I believe it happened with all three Mass Effect games prior to their launch. 

 

Not that it's acceptable, but really it's just a matter of how much a developer is willing to show of their game before sending it out the door.

[Darkly Tranquil]

I'm on board with this, but then I've always had a rather extreme opinion when it comes to pre-release info; I don't believe, for example, that BioWare should reveal any of the characters or romances or whatever, and just let people discover it as they play the game.

I think it's fine to reveal stuff in advance of release as long as it's finalised and in the game. I'm not against marketing per se, I'm against dishonest/speculative marketing that may mislead the consumer.

[CronoDragoon]

I think it's fine to reveal stuff in advance of release as long as it's finalised and in the game. I'm not against marketing per se, I'm against dishonest/speculative marketing that may mislead the consumer.

 

On that note, I'd actually like to bring up that DA: I was one of the few games this year where the game was actually more beautiful than the screenshots led me to believe. They nailed the visual aspect and there was no downgrade.

[Gothfather]

I think it's fine to reveal stuff in advance of release as long as it's finalised and in the game. I'm not against marketing per se, I'm against dishonest/speculative marketing that may mislead the consumer.

 

So you are fine with releasing info but only if it it Finalised? That means you are NOT fine with things being revealed in truth. There is a ZERO guarantee that and feature in development will make it to gold. Developers don't know in advance what things in development will become problematic. They don't know what features they want to add and have prototyped fail to work in the end.

 

By your standards of what is acceptable for a reveal is there is total silence until a game goes gold aka about 2 weeks before a release. Because that is the only point when a developer "Knows" what features will actually make it into the game.

 

When developers reveal something in early development they are doing so honestly and they tell players things are subject to CHANGE but its people like yourself that refuse to acknowledge that a trailer and preview of a game in its early stages doesn't mean you will get what you see. What you are getting is a snap shot of the game at that moment in development. Developers have no idea what the future holds they don't know what issues or bugs in a system will derail development and force a change to features.

 

It is typical gamer unreasonableness rearing its ugly head again. Gamers demand info but when they are told we have no info to give you that we can guarantee will make it in the game they are accused of hiding things and not communicating with their fans. So they then say okay this is what we have at this moment but please be aware this is SUBJECT to change. And when it does change gamers rage at being misled. How were they misled? They were told this was subject to change. where is the duplicity? No one was lied to, no one was deceived you were told the truth and given a glimpse of the game in an UNFINISHED state as it was at the time of that reveal.

 

Maybe gamers should stop blaming everyone else for their own failings. And yeah if you are told something is subject to change and you REFUSE to heed that warning then the gamer is to blame NOT the developer.  

[wepeel_]

It is typical gamer unreasonableness rearing its ugly head again. Gamers demand info but when they are told we have no info to give you that we can guarantee will make it in the game they are accused of hiding things and not communicating with their fans.

 

How is it unreasonable? He did say he didn't mind if there were no announcements until the game was pretty much finished. I tend to agree. If Mass Effect 4 is slated for an October 2017 release, I really don't need to hear anything about it now. All the announcements and all the info might as well be saved until July 2017, at which point it will be a very nice surprise.

[Gothfather]

/snip

 

Never looking for improvements because there is no absolute improvement (except in technical stuff like graphics, sound and so on), what is improving for one person is ruining the game for the other. But since they are a big company and want to sell more and more I understand what they did, disagree and hate them for doing so, but understand.

Curiously they seem more clueless than I thought, they don't seem to understand exactly what they are doing, judging from all interviews since DA2 come out it seems like they are lacking depth while trying to understand fans critics and thus the failure. They were shallow while trying to address a lot of diferent requests and that led us to Inquisition, this weird chimera. I believe that if they bothered to understand what really made their games great and what the fans want they could make good use of feeback but just grasping the superficial speech of the community and delivering a generic answer like "huge areas almost open world" is, at least in my humble opinion, stupid.

 

 

http://forum.bioware...d-kotaku/page-2

My tastes are far superior. If I required you or anyone else to agree they would be as inferior as yours. Royalty do not require commoners to do anything, the commoners make royalty superior by just stating their commoner inferior bad tastes, their very inferior existence exalts royalty.

Games accessible for anyone like Inquisition are way below my royal tastes. Let the peasants hold the left mouse button while I royally distribute my stat points in games with lots of classes and races. Enjoy your peasantry.

 

 

Only if your are crazy enough to think that anybody would be talking about each and every fan. But if you understand that it is obviously addressing to the majority of fans, then it is very easy to understand. There is a new thing called voting, pretty recent, humans use it to know what most people want =)

 

Yeah you entire position rings so VERY hollow. You at one point say hey use the vote and on the other you claim you are royalty for liking DA:O and everyone else is a peasant for liking DA:I. You claim Never innovate yet claim let players vote on things. Well the best measure of company to determine what is successful is not some silly online poll as that doesn't provide a large cross section of players, but via sales. Yep sales. And by any rational metric DA:I is the game bioware should draw its leads from and not DA:O because DA:I was more successful. It is a huge critical success and a huge financial success. It has received rewards from the industry and rewards from gamers. It has expanded the player base and given existing fan of origins a great experience. Just because you like origins and don't like inquisition doesn't actually mean that all origins fans like myself hate inquisition.

 

You think too highly of your own SUBJECTIVE opinions. You are not as important as you think you are. By your own metrics Bioware should ignore your Never innovate position because by doing so they may lose you as a fan but they will retain other older fans like me and gain newer fans. Which is democratic, you know that principle you claim should guide Bioware? Oh but you want a biased poll don't you? One that you can manipulate to your favour, not an unbiased polls like awards, accolades and sales. Oh no those democratic metrics must be ignored because "I am royalty and you people are peasants."

 

Suck it up princess.
 

[Morroian]

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...'

 

As I've suggested before why not just explain why features did not make it into the final game? You know be transparent. I tweeted this to someone from BW and he pretty much just ignored the point and stated what you stated above.

[Gothfather]

As I've suggested before why not just explain why features did not make it into the final game? You know be transparent. I tweeted this to someone from BW and he pretty much just ignored the point and stated what you stated above.

 

You mean give you the transparency like they did in this very interview? 

 

 

 

"We had to do some changes," Laidlaw admits. "That was something where we had a good working prototype but we hit a snag due to the technical limitations on it. Having multiple forces fighting works fine on PC but you end up in a situation where having realistic-feeling war on the older consoles is exceedingly challenging."

The game used to feature more environmental destruction, too, and a greater number of options for solving missions. Boats could be burnt and bridges collapsed to affect the strength of enemy forces. These items were cut based "a little bit [on the last-gen] platforms, a little bit about the flow of the gameplay," Laidlaw adds. "We didn't want to build a military campaign simulator and have one zone riddled with that but others that don't have keeps be different - we wanted a consistency across the game.

 

Seems to me you got the transparency you demanded. If you expect more you have typical gamer unreasonable expectation syndrome. And don't expect this level of transparency during development because that is foolish you don't broadcast to your competitors when and where you are having problems with a product. It hurts you with competitive edge, and it makes you look weak when you actually are not because this is a normal part of the development process but the average person wont see that they will just see company having problems and that effects confidence in the company which has a direct impact on share value.

 

Gamers are so self entitled, only they of all consumers think they have a right to know what is going on during development and to explain to them why X was chosen vs. Y. Movie and novel consumers don't expect or think they have some god given right to know every change to a movie or novel. Writers don't get accused of a lack of transparency for not telling their customers a thing about a novel once it is announced they are writing it. I don't see people freaking out of the lack of communication when a musician doesn't say anything about their up coming album. But somehow gamers think they are Oh so special that they are entitled to know the exact details of why every bloody feature was in or not in the end product.

[Fiery Phoenix]

How is it unreasonable? He did say he didn't mind if there were no announcements until the game was pretty much finished. I tend to agree. If Mass Effect 4 is slated for an October 2017 release, I really don't need to hear anything about it now. All the announcements and all the info might as well be saved until July 2017, at which point it will be a very nice surprise.

ME: Next is unlikely to be that far away. From everything I've read about it, sometime next year (2016) is a much more plausible release window.

[Lilithor]

http://forum.bioware...d-kotaku/page-2

 

 

 

Yeah you entire position rings so VERY hollow. You at one point say hey use the vote and on the other you claim you are royalty for liking DA:O and everyone else is a peasant for liking DA:I. You claim Never innovate yet claim let players vote on things. Well the best measure of company to determine what is successful is not some silly online poll as that doesn't provide a large cross section of players, but via sales. Yep sales. And by any rational metric DA:I is the game bioware should draw its leads from and not DA:O because DA:I was more successful. It is a huge critical success and a huge financial success. It has received rewards from the industry and rewards from gamers. It has expanded the player base and given existing fan of origins a great experience. Just because you like origins and don't like inquisition doesn't actually mean that all origins fans like myself hate inquisition.

 

You think too highly of your own SUBJECTIVE opinions. You are not as important as you think you are. By your own metrics Bioware should ignore your Never innovate position because by doing so they may lose you as a fan but they will retain other older fans like me and gain newer fans. Which is democratic, you know that principle you claim should guide Bioware? Oh but you want a biased poll don't you? One that you can manipulate to your favour, not an unbiased polls like awards, accolades and sales. Oh no those democratic metrics must be ignored because "I am royalty and you people are peasants."

 

Suck it up princess.
 

You take yourself too serious, and my posts too.
Your whole posts supposes I don't know how the world works, you are right, in fact all you said is pretty obvious. To be fair I don't give a damn about any of it. I just answered with a joke because that is all you deserve, if you REALLY think I was serious perhaps you really are a commoner compared to my majesty

[keyip]

I just answered with a joke because that is all you deserve, 

 

People thought you were serious because you're not funny. Rule of thumb, if you have to explain your jokes... just stop.

[SofaJockey]

People thought you were serious because you're not funny. Rule of thumb, if you have to explain your jokes... just stop.

 

Correct.

Poe's Law often applies on BSN.

http://en.wikipedia..../wiki/Poe's_law

[Morroian]

Seems to me you got the transparency you demanded. If you expect more you have typical gamer unreasonable expectation syndrome. And don't expect this level of transparency during development because that is foolish you don't broadcast to your competitors when and where you are having problems with a product. It hurts you with competitive edge, and it makes you look weak when you actually are not because this is a normal part of the development process but the average person wont see that they will just see company having problems and that effects confidence in the company which has a direct impact on share value.

 

Fine but it took how long........... Its an explanation that should have been made at launch. Given that the pax demo was used to build up hype. 

[AlanC9]

I feel it's worth mentioning that the perceived 'false advertisement' practice isn't new to BioWare; it's something they've done in the past, and I believe it happened with all three Mass Effect games prior to their launch. 

I was more bothered by what they said about ME1, but that mostly says something about what I wanted and didn't get from the game.

[AlanC9]

How is it unreasonable? He did say he didn't mind if there were no announcements until the game was pretty much finished. I tend to agree. If Mass Effect 4 is slated for an October 2017 release, I really don't need to hear anything about it now. All the announcements and all the info might as well be saved until July 2017, at which point it will be a very nice surprise.

Well, it would be nice to know if there are any real dealbreakers in the design -- canonizing IT, for instance.

[Shechinah]

(to AlanC9) Didn't they say something about setting it in an alternative universe (so that they could dodge ending canonization) or was that forum speculation?

[CronoDragoon]

(to AlanC9) Didn't they say something about setting it in an alternative universe (so that they could dodge ending canonization) or was that forum speculation?

Speculation. The only things we know for sure are that it's not a prequel and it won't have Shepard.

[AlanC9]

There was also something about respecting our choices or some such, but I'm not going to try and read those tea leaves.

[Lilithor]

Speculation. The only things we know for sure are that it's not a prequel and it won't have Shepard.

And that it will be the worst game in the franchise. What else to expect from Bioware after seeing Inquisition?

[CronoDragoon]

And that it will be the worst game in the franchise. What else to expect from Bioware after seeing Inquisition?

That you will have moved to the ME boards, crying when it wins a bunch of GOTY awards like Inquisition, I suppose.

[Paul E Dangerously]

That you will have moved to the ME boards, crying when it wins a bunch of GOTY awards like Inquisition, I suppose.

 

Like that's a real accomplishment these days. A gaming GOTY award is literally dime-a-dozen.

[CronoDragoon]

Like that's a real accomplishment these days. A gaming GOTY award is literally dime-a-dozen.

 

I guess it's a good thing it got ten dozen of them. Now it can buy a soda!

 

In all seriousness, it doesn't really matter to me how many GOTY awards it wins. It was just a way of saying he'll be there, salty, regardless.

[Realmzmaster]

I find it interesting that posters belittle the GOTY awards and People's Choice awards when it is a game they do not like, but some are the first to point to them when it is a game they like and support. 

 

If the GOTY and People's choice awards are worthless in one given year then to me they are worthless in any given year.

 

It really does not matter as long as the investors and stockholders are happy with the financial success and critical acclaim. So those GOTY's and People's Choice awards, Metacritic scores and sales do matter to someone.

 

But as always YMMV.