134 réponses à ce sujet

[Kabraxal]

So when you say "discussion" you mean talking to yourself?
 

Really?

Facts not in evidence. You have no idea how many copies DAI sold, DA2 sold half as many copies as DAO, and Mass Effect 3 sold fewer copies than ME2.

That must mean Call of Duty has a sterling reputation, right? And Madden?

ME3 being so poorly received damaged EA's value. 

You're not helping your case.

Many people? How many is that? An equal number of people liked and disliked DAI? How is that a good sign? And if DAI is so awesome and well-received why won't EA/BioWare release sales figures?

Go to any video game forum and ask if BioWare's rep is on the rise. You think it's just me?

Uh... I think you need to take a breath because your response to my post made no sense.

[Laughing_Man]

Weird... that first one is clearly an opinion.

 

And what do you think game awards are if not individual opinions? (in many cases influenced by other considerations besides game quality)

[MrFob]

Yes, Andromeda should make Mass Effect great again!

 

 

But seriously, what distinguishes  a "great" game from a "good" game? IMO, it's something different for each of us. I want BW to get some very specific features right, which I wouldn't mind some flaws in other ares. For other people, the opposite priorities might apply.

 

For myself, I would like it if BW goes back to the "details first" approach, that they used in ME1, with their story, with their lore and with their characters. I want to feel like the whole team took a long time and made a lot of effort to make all the little pieces fit, from the writers getting a story together that is coherent fits into the existing universe, to the level designers creating believable locations that correspond with descriptions made by characters to  game mechanics and design decisions that are made to immerse me into this world more than to just provide player occupation.

 

THAT would be require to make the game great in my eyes and yes, I definitely expect them to deliver on that. If that happpens, it will be a release price buy for me. If not, then I may wait a few months or a year to get the game with DLCs on the cheap.

[straykat]

Yes, Andromeda should make Mass Effect great again!

 

 

But seriously, what distinguishes  a "great" game from a "good" game? IMO, it's something different for each of us. I want BW to get some very specific features right, which I wouldn't mind some flaws in other ares. For other people, the opposite priorities might apply.

 

For myself, I would like it if BW goes back to the "details first" approach, that they used in ME1, with their story, with their lore and with their characters. I want to feel like the whole team took a long time and made a lot of effort to make all the little pieces fit, from the writers getting a story together that is coherent fits into the existing universe, to the level designers creating believable locations that correspond with descriptions made by characters to  game mechanics and design decisions that are made to immerse me into this world more than to just provide player occupation.

 

THAT would be require to make the game great in my eyes and yes, I definitely expect them to deliver on that. If that happpens, it will be a release price buy for me. If not, then I may wait a few months or a year to get the game with DLCs on the cheap.

 

I get this to some extent, but I don't know what you mean about the characters. They're just as detailed in the other games. 

 

And I was just thinking how ME2 sort of fleshed out some elements from ME1. Like Jack embodies all the crazy biotics from the first game. And Miranda gives a face to Cerberus. Later on, Javik gave a face to the Protheans and EDI gave a face to the Luna VI from the first game.

 

edit: how could i forget Legion

[Gothfather]

I don't see how it applies to Bethesda. They all wear money hats. 

 

I think a difference with DAI is it probably cost as much, if not, more than the Witcher.. and certainly more than their older games. But did it actually sell enough to justify it? I have no clue either way. They're vague and tightlipped. But as for the previous conversation, all me and Killroy wanted to know was about People's choice/fan awards. That's a better indicator than 100 awards from publications.

 

Really so all the WAH WAH WAH Bethesda is a dying studio because it is changing their product isn't similar or applies, Why?

 

The three AAA RPG studios all have the same thing going on in their forums a bunch of players who don't like the current instalment doing a chicken little.

 

No actually EA has been upfront on the numbers they just haven't told gamers because frankly gamers accuse anyone that tells them something they don't like as liars.

 

 

EA had only two games releases the third and forth quarters of their fiscal year '15 which is calendar year April 1st 2014 to march 31st 2015. looking at their numbers for 3rd quarter FY15 and 4th  quarter FY2015 with only two new titles we see consistently good numbers in terms of revenue.

 

For playstation 4 / xbone we see 427 and 468 million in revenue for quarters 3 and 4  So SOMEONE was buying the game in a typically bad quarter for sales as the sales numbers INCREASED from the holiday season.

 

PC sales were 218 to 221 million over the 3rd and 4th quarters so again if DA:I was this disaster people claim you would expect to see a DROP in revenue not an increase especially then the forth quarter is Jan 1st to March 31st not a typically good retail quarter but well these figures show an INCREASE in sales over the holiday quarter.

 

Xb 360 and playstation 3 had strong numbers too 306 and 328 again we see the exact same trend.

 

now the people who don't understand financial reports and don't want evidence to ruin their personal narratives will claim you can't know what % is DA:I vs other products and this is true but given that EA has publicly stated they are pleased with the numbers, that Bioware is happy with the numbers and that there is no reliable metric for unit sales given digital sales are not uniformly tracked unit sales no longer mean as much as they once did. It isn't reasonable to assume that DA:I had zero influence in their numbers when there wasn't any big shooter titles taking the lion's share here. I can't even recall the 2nd title that was released in the same time frame because it was eclipsed by DA:I. It is irrational to say these numbers don't show strong evidence that DA:I was a financial success.

 

EA hasn't been cagey or cryptic or whatever they have been very open and upfront it is just that gamers don't understand anything but units sold. or are just too bloody lazy to do any research because this is all open to the public and they do a webcast every quarter this isn't hidden secret info.

 

[sources] http://investor.ea.com/results.cfm

Figures from Q3 FY15 earning release pfd  and Q4 F15 earnings release pdf.  Page 1 for the calender dates of when the figures are taken from and page 16 for the platform net income numbers. Just to show I didn't pull these numbers out of my A$$.

 

 

But I am sure that none of these actual facts will change anyone's opinion because we don't live in the information age we live in the opinion age and facts are inconvenient to opinion.

[Gothfather]

Why is this about me? I asked a simple question and you're doing what the other guy did. Attack about random things.

 

It's not as angry, but that's what it is.

 

I didn't even say anything overtly negative. I said I "don't know" what sales they made. And I want to know what user driven awards they won. 

Talk about a self centred world view. I started a post responding to someone else before your post was posted  and I QUOTED THEM  how the hell can you think it was directed at you? The only way is you are so self absorbed to think simply because a post followed yours it is in response to your post. Get over yourself

 

I took time to actually provide FACTS to your post and sourced them. And you know it was direct to you because I quoted you.

[Odintius]

What I generally look for in a game is a check list for myself.
1. For a space theme game is it immersive and graphically enough for the feels.
2. Is the story/characters/ flushed out enough to make it engaging and enjoyable.
3. If it a huge world is their a balance in story driven quest over the fetch quest and how much of impact on overall game itself.
4. Is it good enough for replay value does the game have new game+ feature, depth in character progression etc.

DA:I after you close the breach and after intro to corypheus was good afterwards to me it feel meh on villain side of things questioning his being a good villain seem like he's wasn't good at it to me.

[MrFob]

I get this to some extent, but I don't know what you mean about the characters. They're just as detailed in the other games. 

 

And I was just thinking how ME2 sort of fleshed out some elements from ME1. Like Jack embodies all the crazy biotics from the first game. And Miranda gives a face to Cerberus. Later on, Javik gave a face to the Protheans and EDI gave a face to the Luna VI from the first game.

 

edit: how could i forget Legion

 

I don't mean so much the characters themselves but more how they act and develop inconsistently in some cases in the trilogy. No doubt, ME2/3 did have great characters but some were changed for pure drama without regard to what they were all about (think of the Virmire survivor encounter on Horizon in ME2, the changes to Legion between ME2 and 3, Kai Leng, etc.).

 

Also, I am not saying that ME1 was perfect (you are right about the crazy biotics, that was handled badly for example), but when I mean "details first", I don't necessarily mean that they need to flesh out every detail of everything but rather that they should keep details that have been shown in mind when dealing with their own material.

 

In short, I don't expect them to get everything 100% consistent and right (there is already too much stuff there) but I do want to feel like they do respect their own lore as much as us hardcore fans do. I didn't have that feeling when playing ME3 for example.

[AngryFrozenWater]

If EA was transparent, and if someone just helped me know what user awards there were, this would all go easier.

 

I figure it is probably worth it for EA to not be transparent... they know best. Heh.. But i don't know why we can't get an answer to the other question.

 

But if someone just quoted the game box and said "over 130 awards!", and tried to shut down conversation, that isn't exactly helping. 

I rather consult some reviewers on YT that actually finished the game. I skip the fan channels. I sometimes partially watch playthroughs with no comments. I don't visit gaming websites anymore and don't care about their "awards". I do visit the dev's forums to see how well the support is. Forums of gaming hardware often have a gaming forum with people who just like to play games. Those are informative as well. Then I try to find out that it doesn't have a draconic DRM or game client. UbiSoft is a no go by default.

[Neverwinter_Knight77]

Pretty good would mean better than DAI and ME3, so that's good enough I guess.

[Cheviot]

If I enjoy playing the game, then that's all I need.

[Laughing_Man]

In short, I don't expect them to get everything 100% consistent and right (there is already too much stuff there) but I do want to feel like they do respect their own lore as much as us hardcore fans do. I didn't have that feeling when playing ME3 for example.

 

Very well said.

[Killroy]

Uh... I think you need to take a breath because your response to my post made no sense.

 
Really?
 

Considering Bioware's pretty good is most other devs best, I can live with pretty good. If we get Origins/ME2/Inquisition level tgen we are just being greedy for another game in the greatest of all time discussion.

[Kabraxal]

Really?

Ah. And yet Origins and ME2 are a regular in any such discussion and Inquisition has only had to deal with vitriolic backlash online. Most of the people I game with don't post in any forum and routinely have Inquisition in our discussions.

Just because the voices of Inquistion fans are continually shouted down in the petulant tantrums online does not mean they do not matter. It just means they got sick of the crappy attitudes of topics like this and decided to stop getting shouted at by people that can't stand that Inquisition is actually liked. I just have time to waste at work waoting for calls and can continually post for hours. Otherwise I would barely post as I would be enjoying Inquisition again with my new run.

[Draining Dragon]

It'll have to be great for me to buy it, that's for sure.

[Laughing_Man]

...petulant tantrums online...

 

I don't know, you seem rather petulant yourself.

 

I'm glad to hear you are enjoying DA:I. Many others didn't, or thought that it felt like a missed opportunity.

[Gothfather]

Ah. And yet Origins and ME2 are a regular in any such discussion and Inquisition has only had to deal with vitriolic backlash online. Most of the people I game with don't post in any forum and routinely have Inquisition in our discussions.

Just because the voices of Inquistion fans are continually shouted down in the petulant tantrums online does not mean they do not matter. It just means they got sick of the crappy attitudes of topics like this and decided to stop getting shouted at by people that can't stand that Inquisition is actually liked. I just have time to waste at work waoting for calls and can continually post for hours. Otherwise I would barely post as I would be enjoying Inquisition again with my new run.

 

True. I take the time to show that sales figures for EA where good during this period after claims of EA silence on the issue and suddenly there is deafening silence by the DA:I haters.  They want to believe that their SUBJECTIVE view is objectively correct and this just can't stomach the idea that DA:I is well liked because they don't like it. You tell them it sold well they don't believe it they want proof and when you actually give it to them it is conveniently ignored because it doesn't fit their personal narratives.

 

I get not liking a game i do it all the time. I also get not liking a popular title as well, i do that all the time as well. What i don't get is this gamer need for people to agree with my SUBJECTIVE tastes and that if you don't agree you aren't a real gamer or any evidence shown that said position isn't universally held and you get BS conspiracy theories to counter them. Talk about insecurity in one's subjective tastes. The irony is there is no need to justify any subjective taste because it is subjective and thus there is no right or wrong.

 

Gamers    [Shakes head]

 

Sorry children it is conspiracy BS to claim DA:I was a bad game and that 2014 was a bad year for gaming and that is why it won said awards. That isn't logical. It is logical to say it wouldn't have won as many awards in a stronger year but a stronger year doesn't make DA:I a bad game. If DA:I was a bad game it wouldn't have won awards PERIOD strong or weak year. People have to LIKE the game to vote for it. I don't vote for games i dislike just because its on a list. You are only going to vote for a game if you LIKE said game. This it was a weak year doesn't stand up to logic when used to ignore that teh game was liked. You can use it to ignore comparing previous GOTY winners with DA:I but that is about it.

 

Seriously do gamers honestly think other gamers go around voting for games they don't like?

[QueenofPixals]

It's no secret that BioWare's reputation has been on a downward trajectory. Dragon Age 2, while ambitious, was kind of a disaster thanks to EA rushing it out the door. ME3 was obviously a problem. And Inquisition was pretty much an empty box, devoid of quality content.

Now that gamers have access to multiple high-quality AAA RPGs this gen, with even more on the way, is it enough for BioWare to come to the table with a game that's just pretty good? Will enough consumers respond if BioWare puts out a game that isn't as good as their competitor's offerings? Will a 7/10 game salvage the Mass Effect franchise and keep BioWare on the radar of gamers? 

 

You act like Dragon Age: Inquisition was a loosing proposition for the developer.  It got a solid 85 on Metacritic and won multiple game of the year awards.  Andromeda will do just fine without us hand wringing for the next nine months. 

[Kabraxal]

I don't know, you seem rather petulant yourself.
 
I'm glad to hear you are enjoying DA:I. Many others didn't, or thought that it felt like a missed opportunity.

And yet most of that is when people claim opinion as fact. And if you've noticed, the posters continually making topics like this repeatedly mock, dismiss, or attack posters that don't mindlessly agree with their opinion. There are a few posters that don't like Inquisition but don't constantly ram it down everyone's throats and make repeated topics to make sure their hatred is well known. Good for you. The hatred has been noted. But when so many topics are simply bashing Bioware, their games, and dismissing the fans that don't agree... Well, it's clear that some posters just need to take a break and actually go somewhere else for a while instead of dragging so many conversations into negative hostility.

You won't find me on Activision, Square Enix, or CDPR forums berating the devs for what I feel are massive failings in their games. I let the fans have the space to talk about the things they like. Be nice if others gave the same consideration.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

I'll be formulating an opinion over time, based on response, and am almost certainly going to be waiting until it comes down in price before I buy it.

 

I assume the cross-section will be that I will buy it when the price has come down to something I am comfortable paying for the game I expect. If it's "pretty good" that's not going to bother me unless my expectations end up being significantly off, but I will be waiting until there is a body of actual information to develop my expectations.

[SofaJockey]

Yeah, that's pretty much BS. Inquisition was getting perfect scores from reviewers than only played 10 hours(or less) of the game. Almost no professional reviewers bothered to finish the game before dishing out hyperbolic praise. Once that happened no website, magazine, etc could go back on their review without admitting that their reviews are total fabrications. 

 

Nope, that's factually incorrect and flawed analysis verging on a conspiracy theory about game reviewers. That's a foolish theory.

 

GOTY's are delivered over a period of several months and are a useful assessment of consensus, though not a comparative assessment of quality from one year to the next. Arguably DAI was lucky to not be up against top-flight competition but its great success confirms it as a 'pretty good ' game compared to the rest of 2014's fare, even if its 'greatness' is harder to prove, particularly longer term.

 

The point I'm making is that 'greatness' is highly subjective, so a consensus is much better a judge of success than any small bitter and twisted pool, such as this forum for example.

 

DAI was considered at launch to be an almost hilarious over-compensation for DA2 (which was an enjoyable game with serious flaws in my view).

I expect an over-compensation from MEA also, let's hope that doesn't cause issues.

 

To the OP question, achieving 'greatness' is a really tough ask so having that as an expection (the good old hype train) is a train to disappointment.

If it's pretty good I'll be pleased, frankly I expect pretty good from BioWare. If it's great, that will be bonus.

[Addictress]

You act like Dragon Age: Inquisition was a loosing proposition for the developer.  It got a solid 85 on Metacritic and won multiple game of the year awards.  Andromeda will do just fine without us hand wringing for the next nine months. 

http://kotaku.com/me...games-472462218

[Killroy]

Ah. And yet Origins and ME2 are a regular in any such discussion and Inquisition has only had to deal with vitriolic backlash online. Most of the people I game with don't post in any forum and routinely have Inquisition in our discussions.

Just because the voices of Inquistion fans are continually shouted down in the petulant tantrums online does not mean they do not matter. It just means they got sick of the crappy attitudes of topics like this and decided to stop getting shouted at by people that can't stand that Inquisition is actually liked. I just have time to waste at work waoting for calls and can continually post for hours. Otherwise I would barely post as I would be enjoying Inquisition again with my new run.

 

I would love to meet this group of friends that just sits around talking about what games should be considered "the best of all time" and throw around DAO, ME2, and DAI as solid contenders.

[Killroy]

Nope, that's factually incorrect and flawed analysis verging on a conspiracy theory about game reviewers. That's a foolish theory.

It's not. Numerous professional game reviewers freely admit that they don't finish many or any of the games they review before submitting their reviews, and people like Adam Sessler have openly condemned the vast majority of the gaming press for doing just that. One of the threads here on the BSN about the discrepancy between the professional review scores and user review scores for DAI featured a tweet or blog post(I can't remember which) from a professional reviewer admitting that he only played the game for about 10 hours before giving it a perfect 10/10 score.

[Kabraxal]

I would love to meet this group of friends that just sits around talking about what games should be considered "the best of all time" and throw around DAO, ME2, and DAI as solid contenders.

If you question Origins or ME2, it is clear you just have an agenda. Those two are constantly referenced even online. But then, your dismissive and condescending posts only prove the point I just made. Stop being so dismissive and hostile to fans of Bioware and their games ON THEIR FORUMS. Enough is enough.