Unfortunately, a combination of exploitive pricing in the freemium space and the race to the bottom in the indie space has totally distorted players' conceptions of fair pricing. It makes it almost impossible to have a rational discussion of DLC pricing on this or any forum.
I still don't quite see why you can't make this work by amortizing infrastructure and fixed costs over the entire run of the episodes. Can you put up some hypothetical numbers to illustrate the point? IIRC the problem with Half-Life was that fans expected new gameplay types and whatnot with every installment, but that's a problem with Valve fan expectations rather than episodic itself.
You risk losing everyone with a bad first ep, however. I'm actual curious how Telltale works it out financially. Does their Ep. 1 just cover cost, and everything else is profit? Ep. 2?
I hope that the grossly dehumanising classing of Krem as "it" in the second tweet is your own fail and not DGaider's. If it's his, then I question whether he really has evolved on his transphobia or not.
butthurt sjw confirmed. Remove sjw.
I hope that the grossly dehumanising classing of Krem as "it" in the second tweet is your own fail and not DGaider's. If it's his, then I question whether he really has evolved on his transphobia or not.
I think by it, Gaider is referring to Dragon Age: Inquisition. As in:
#Biowarechat ran the idea of Krem by the transgender world during DAI's creation @davidgaider @dragonage
Hope future DLC is story/character focused. Tired of boring fetch quests.
lol as long as there is plenty of companion interaction and story....idc what it is. I buy Bioware games for the characters not a watered down mmo run around.
Any chance that the whole interview can be compiled and posted to make it easier to read? I don't have Twitter and it's quite hard to sort through it, since it's not well designed for interviews and such. What I read was fascinating though, and great job!
Maybe that's hard to understand, I don't know. But the "final" game, the one where all the cinematics are finally in, all the level art has been finalized and the bugs mostly ironed out -- that's one that doesn't come until the last minute, and that's the one you see. I don't play it at that point, though I've tried. I just know everything too well, inside and out. There are no mysteries for me, and the pleasure of seeing everything 100% in its final form just isn't enough. Some of the other writers are different, however, so it's certainly not the same for everyone.
If the suggestion is that my not doing so is somehow shirking my duty, however, then I would kindly suggest that person kindly blow it out their rear.
Honestly, I think it's just hard for people who haven't worked on a game (or at the least an expansive mod) to understand. When I was a lot younger I was similarly surprised to learn that a developer of a game I liked hadn't played the finished product. I mean, the game was great! Why wouldn't you play it and revel in the awesomeness you created? I didn't get it at the time, until I worked on a large gaming project myself many years later. Like you say, you can try, but you just know everything too well.
(Weirdly though, I can read my own books. Don't know about you!)
Guest_TrillClinton_*
Addition of the races was a bit half-assed. They should have just left it out and stuck with the human if it caused complications. They wouldn't have to implement all the extra features that come with the races and maybe in that way they could move their resources around so freely. In a software development environment, your greatest resource is time anyway. The main problem is that playing the game again with a different race just feels like a reskin rather than a different character.
It seems like there was a lot of cut content, which is normal I guess. Combining that with the way this game started first as an MMO,I really do not like the new model if this is the direction there will be taking. Origins seemed more concrete IMO.
I'm pretty sure it was never an MMO. It was, however, designed with a human protagonist in mind (Possibly Hawke?) at the start. I imagine that was a chief limitation when they decided to add more races late in development. By contrast, Origins was designed from the ground up with multiple races and Origins in mind to my knowledge.Addition of the races was a bit half-assed. They should have just left it out and stuck with the human if it caused complications. They wouldn't have to implement all the extra features that come with the races and maybe in that way they could move their resources around so freely. In a software development environment, your greatest resource is time anyway. The main problem is that playing the game again with a different race just feels like a reskin rather than a different character.
It seems like there was a lot of cut content, which is normal I guess. Combining that with the way this game started first as an MMO,I really do not like the new model if this is the direction there will be taking. Origins seemed more concrete IMO.
Guest_TrillClinton_*
http://www.gamespot....y/1100-6423362/I'm pretty sure it was never an MMO. It was, however, designed with a human protagonist in mind (Possibly Hawke?) at the start. I imagine that was a chief limitation when they decided to add more races late in development. By contrast, Origins was designed from the ground up with multiple races and Origins in mind to my knowledge.
http://www.gamespot....y/1100-6423362/
Plays like an mmo too. I see a lot of parallels with swtor in terms of design too. There were just too many constraints
There was a multiplayer game planned, that's not the same as an MMO, and it sounds more like the technology employed rather than the design was the lasting influence into Inquisition proper. That article certainly doesn't indicate DAI started as an MMO.
I see many parallels with games like Skyrim and Assassin's Creed: open world, many shallow quests, collectibles galore. Many of the things people claim make DAI like an MMO I've seen in other SP games designed to have an explorable open world.
There was a multiplayer game planned, that's not the same as an MMO, and it sounds more like the technology employed rather than the design was the lasting influence into Inquisition proper. That article certainly doesn't indicate DAI started as an MMO.
I see many parallels with games like Skyrim and Assassin's Creed: open world, many shallow quests, collectibles galore. Many of the things people claim make DAI like an MMO I've seen in other SP games designed to have an explorable open world.
DA:O started as a lan-based MP game using the NWN Aurora engine, so really this moniker is meaningless.
You risk losing everyone with a bad first ep, however. I'm actual curious how Telltale works it out financially. Does their Ep. 1 just cover cost, and everything else is profit? Ep. 2?
You risk losing everyone with a bad first ep, however. I'm actual curious how Telltale works it out financially. Does their Ep. 1 just cover cost, and everything else is profit? Ep. 2?
Losing on the bad first episode is bad. In addition, the rule is you monotonically lose people over time. While you have people jumping into a new title like ME2 (not having played ME1), this doesn't appear to happen in episodic games. To make episodic work, you have to have a healthy backlist, like a book publisher (Interestingly enough, Infocom wanted to treat games this way and it is hypothesized that this is one of the business decisions that caused their demise).
I am not sure on this, but my feeling about Tell Tale is that their point-and-click gameplay is key. Those games were always light on technological infrastructure, and heavy on non-reusable content (indeed, this is why photo-realistic gaming went away). Because nothing is reusable, there is nothing to amortize. So each game is budgeted around the content.
Soooooooooooo. There's a certain thing that hasn't been posted yet. 
You risk losing everyone with a bad first ep, however. I'm actual curious how Telltale works it out financially. Does their Ep. 1 just cover cost, and everything else is profit? Ep. 2?
I think part of the reason why Taletell can be as successful as they are is because they don't have the costs like a game like Inquisition does, for their games aren't as complex like the new ones. It would also be why a game like the original Monkey Island was successful without selling millions of copies.
I would love it if a year or two down the line when Bioware have finished making DLC for Inquisition they make a Directors Cut with most of the best ideas cut from the original in the game.
Slightly off topic, I'm replaying (and really enjoying) Dragon Age 2 at the moment and i'm in the middle of the Legacy DLC. After the good build up of Cory and his boss fight it really hurts how much of a missed opportunity he was in Inquisition. He didn't get fair treatment in Inq and i'm curious how much of his own content was cut.
DA:O started as a lan-based MP game using the NWN Aurora engine, so really this moniker is meaningless.
Nope, it is not. Starting as an MMO in itself is not a problem, because well, MMOs can take many directions. but starting as an MMO and then turning out to be the perfect generic korean MMO RPG gameplay is a HUGE problem. Played almost all generic ****, none played like Origins (I really doubt someone would bear grinding with that style of combat) while I'd say 25~40% of the MMOs I played are exactly like Inquisition in skills, combat, "gear is everything", "crafting is boring resource grinding", quest structure and (lack of) builds.
Killing someone is a problem, but killing someone who is about to destroy the human race because you have no other way to stop this person and killing someone so that you play hockey with his body parts just for fun are very different ****. You can't say one thing is important or not without the proper context.
Starting as an MMO is retarded because everything online need basis for a lot of **** like player interaction, balance and other boring stuff that mankind should have never suffered BUT almost all of this can change during the development. But starting as an MMO and following everything retarded a MMORPG have to present a 100% retarded game makes that "starting off as an MMO" thing be a lot more important than it should be if the game was at least playable without making people vomit their brains to enjoy it.
The follow up is everything...
The cooker fingered himself in the ass and then made me food. If it is bad or not depends if he washed his hands properly after this. Inquisition development team did not.
Now, it would be REALLY nice to:
1. have all those off-topic posters burned in Hell gone elsewhere (I mean really, 7 pages of useless and irrelevant sh!t?)
2. get a clear respond from the OP about where\when\how can people read\listen\watch the complete interview.
This is pretty typical -- "if they remove the stuff I don't like, they'd obviously have more time to work on the stuff I do like".
I'm afraid it's comparing apples to oranges, however. You could remove all the exploration content in the entire game, and that still wouldn't amount to a single additional major plot on the crit path. Different people, cinematic designers in particular, who did little to no work on the exploration content as it was.
I normally appreciate this argument, but I cannot see how it applies here.
If you have enough resources and people to make well over a hundred hours worth of exploration content and ten open-world areas, far exceeding anything the previous games had to offer, but not enough to produce a main storyline that's at least the same length as the previous games then clearly something happened at the planning / resource allocation stage that skewed things in favour of exploration.
It's not like it was written in stone that the game had to have 100+ hours of exploration, 10 open-world areas and a relatively light main questline the instant the game was conceived. It was entirely possible to just have less exploration content designers/producers working on the project in the first place and take on an extra cinematic designer instead.
It's not "Remove the stuff I don't like", It's "Balance the resources so that the amount of side content doesn't outweigh the main story by such an insane margin". Even as somebody who really liked Inquisition, and the side content, I felt there was simply far too much of it compared to the other elements of the game.
I think part of the reason why Taletell can be as successful as they are is because they don't have the costs like a game like Inquisition does, for their games aren't as complex like the new ones. It would also be why a game like the original Monkey Island was successful without selling millions of copies.
Of course. And the results show. All story, very little gameplay. No technology hurdles. Some people prefer that. I don't. I have yet to buy a single Telltale game, though I've partially played some of their demos and free first episodes. Not for me.
Retour en haut
