1106 réponses à ce sujet

[AngryFrozenWater]

This thread has been very informative. I don't think I am going to buy this expansion. It's not really an expansion if it throws away the player's past and doesn't allow previous DLCs. I am also afraid that DA:O won't be updated by patches anymore and that new patches and DLCs will be for Awakenings only.



I guess I have to say goodbye to the series for now. It has been fun, though.

[bluebullets]

David Gaider wrote...

bluebullets wrote...
I understand where you are coming from, and I get your pespective, but we were somewhat limited in DA:O in terms of conversations, amd now you are limiting us even more. It may turn out well, I have never seen it, but I can sympasize for all the people that have doubts with the change, because I also have doubts.

I'll just point out that if you thought DA:O's conversations were limited, then the problem may be your expectations. There was more dialogue with each party member than any other game we've made -- BG2 included. All I'm suggesting is that some of that dialogue was pretty low impact, and possibly superfluous when it came to building a character.

On another note, I wanted to ask you if you are done with Duncan for the series, I have read both your books and they are fantastic. .I think that there is a lot of circumstantial evidence that Duncan MIGHT not be dead (although I highly doubt that he is alive)

Duncan is dead. If he appears again, it would have to be in a story that takes place prior to Origins, if anything.

Thank you for taking the time to personally respond in these forums.

Thanks, but I also suspect nobody's actually listening to me. All some people
are hearing is what they think isn't there, and that I'm here to put a
spin on things. So be it. Perhaps it's better to just let it be and
wait until the hand-wringing has run its course.

There aren't many people willing to respond personally, and I am grateful that you do this..

Maybe i was a little harsh in my wording. At times there was no dialog and i had to spam gifts to get it back, is what I meant.

I meant to put heavy emphasis on 'somewhat'... I don't expct there to be more, but I'd like for it not to become lower, because thats part of the reason I like DA so much. It also keeps me occupied for hours, thus making the game longer.

[Bectos]

im still gonna buy the expansion...reason? because da was way too short! so what it went for 50-100 hours! it was freaking epic

[ElvaliaRavenHart]

David Gaider wrote...

bluebullets wrote...
I understand where you are coming from, and I get your pespective, but we were somewhat limited in DA:O in terms of conversations, amd now you are limiting us even more. It may turn out well, I have never seen it, but I can sympasize for all the people that have doubts with the change, because I also have doubts.

I'll just point out that if you thought DA:O's conversations were limited, then the problem may be your expectations. There was more dialogue with each party member than any other game we've made -- BG2 included. All I'm suggesting is that some of that dialogue was pretty low impact, and possibly superfluous when it came to building a character.

On another note, I wanted to ask you if you are done with Duncan for the series, I have read both your books and they are fantastic. .I think that there is a lot of circumstantial evidence that Duncan MIGHT not be dead (although I highly doubt that he is alive)

Duncan is dead. If he appears again, it would have to be in a story that takes place prior to Origins, if anything.

Thank you for taking the time to personally respond in these forums.

Thanks, but I also suspect nobody's actually listening to me. All some people
are hearing is what they think isn't there, and that I'm here to put a
spin on things. So be it. Perhaps it's better to just let it be and
wait until the hand-wringing has run its course.

Mr. Gaider, this isn't true, people are listening to you.  Thank you for your response that Duncan is actually dead.   It was fun to think he might be alive.  You're not the only person with an imagination. 

I think some of the problem is that some information is not accurate on the game and expansions.  Most often there is not clarification from BioWare/EA and this is what starts these discussions.  As a consumer who really enjoys this game and your books I just want the expansion to be as good as you folks can make it.  I will give you and BioWare/EA time to work the bugs out  and give you the benefit-of-the-doubt that the change to the camp dialogue will be better.  I'll take you at your word until I have played the expansion. Your consumers are upset over the US decisions of the game not being carried over and I'm sure you're aware of this.  This is a prime example.  I don't think people are mad at you per se. I think it speaks highly of you that you even take the time to even address people's concerns.  Since you have a voice with this product, then kick the behinds of those who are making the decisions to post information that maynot be accurate on the FAQ page before it is posted, with no retractions.  Don't tells us something is going to be this way, then all of a sudden it isn't.  This is a poor management decision, and your consumers have no control over the information they have been given,  then they find out this isn't the case they will react, they are the consumer, especially if they have prepaid for the game.  You may be the creator, but we are the consumer.  People just want the information to be accurate the first time around to make a decision to buy expansions or dlc  and not get suckered into it and then find out it's not what was originally told the the product would be. I don't think that is to much to ask.  BioWare/EA got the point over Warden's Keep in making us buy a second storage chest with Awakening.  The information over Warden's Keep was a rip off, it was misleading.  Thank you sir for your time.

[WARDEN9652]

David Gaider wrote...

Duncan is dead.


He's dead oh my poor butterfly,

But what could of happened to him ,  I don't understand

I gues this means im on my own , thank you.

Modifié par WARDEN9652, 15 mars 2010 - 07:40 .

[Stoomkal]

Jeezus...



Four months and Forty Thousand "Duncan" topics and he comes out with three words to end it all...



Why take all the time to quell the storm? Just to throw it out in a sad-face post?



Maybe if we can anger Fernando Melo enough we will actually get a real patch for this game...

[Bryy_Miller]

I don't think you understand what a patch is.

[Stoomkal]

Tee-hee...



Tell that to the PC users.



What was in 1.03? A new crashing feature? Anything else?

[Bectos]

...since no answer, a patch is somethign that fixes/modifies the game in such a way that it fixes any bugs in the game e.g. the dexterity=no bow damage, the +healing% does nothing etc, etc however something that would bring duncan back from the dead would be called a MOD

[Bectos]

and i was actually hoping that Justice was Duncan with Justice reanimating him

[Kail Ashton]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

MassEffect762 wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

Morroian wrote...
Yep, I agree with the above and personally think Bioware don't fully understand the ramifications of limiting conversations insofar as it effects our (the players) sympathetic identification with the characters.

I would object to the idea that "sympathetic identification" requires being able to talk to a character anytime, anywhere, about anything. I understand that some people liked the way the dialogue worked in DAO, but just because you liked the characters does not mean that the way it worked didn't have its down side or that altering one aspect of it (the list of questions when you clicked on a character) suddenly means only the extreme opposite is possible and all characters are rendered personality-less automatons.

Could you click on party members in BG2 and ask them questions? No? Were they without personality or the possibility of "sympathetic identification"?

My observation is that the most effective means of connecting with party members is through banter and dialogues that actually have import -- they relate to something that is actually going on, either in the plot or in their lives. Being able to ask them all sorts of background questions, while pleasant enough, never really added very much -- and while I get that some people automatically imagine that this means they won't get to talk to their favorite characters at all, it just isn't so. Just because something has been changed does not always result in a net negative.

Again, I'd suggest actually trying it out. You can always return here afterwards and complain bitterly about it, along with the lack of [insert favorite character here], the travesty of [insert plot element here] or the injustice of [insert failure to carry forward plot element here].

Maybe. Personally it sounds like spin to me.

.... seriously? He just gave you an in-depth answer and your response is to say that he is lying?

lol and fans are spoiled, greedy, little brat children who think they know better (you don't by the way) though the person you quoted takes the cake for ****, i'll say that much lol

[Feraele]

Expansion coming on Tuesday, we'll see how it works out. /shrug I hope the new stuff is better..I really do, I think some of us, have had some disappointments in what we thought was going to occur in Awakening.



Benefit of the doubt for now.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Feraele wrote...

Expansion coming on Tuesday, we'll see how it works out. /shrug I hope the new stuff is better..I really do, I think some of us, have had some disappointments in what we thought was going to occur in Awakening.

Benefit of the doubt for now.

I'm interested in seeing if there's a couple 100 new items like Melo proclaims during that interview over at greywardens.com. The second he let out with that I rolled my eyes and went oh boy here we go with the PR shpeel.

I'm hoping the characters, story, and new skills/specs, are interesting enough to justify the 40 dollar price tag for an expansion of all things, though the length and removal of a camp type of area chalk full of optional dialog goodness does cast some doubts.

Still though I am looking forward to midnight when I can go snag a copy.

Modifié par CoS Sarah Jinstar, 15 mars 2010 - 11:54 .

[TheMadCat]

I'll just point out that if you thought DA:O's conversations were
limited, then the problem may be your expectations. There was more
dialogue with each party member than any
other game we've made -- BG2 included. All I'm suggesting is that some
of that dialogue was pretty low impact, and possibly superfluous when
it came to building a character.

I still don't understand how dialogue that helps to develop a character can be considered superfluous. Needless to the story at hand sure but it certainly all served a role, adding another dimension to your characters and giving us a reason to view them differently than we did before. Sten for example, his needless dialogue went on and revealed quite a bit about the Qunari culture and the bits of personality under his obdurate attitude and this helped greatly to propel his character away from the state of shallowness. Like I said, I just don't see how dialogue that fleshes out a character even if it's effects are more subtle can be looked at as low impact or completely needless and excessive. But I suppose that's just the reality of the medium you're developing on, a fine line between appropriate and excessive and it doesn't take much to reach that line. Or perhaps I'm simply encompassing more dialogue than I should be.

I'm not sure whether you can answer this or not, but I'm curious. What prompted this change? Was it a personal/team decision, business, influenced by the user base? It's just weird, I thought the writing and dialogue (along with the general lore) were what saved DA:O from a fate of mediocrity and a decision was made to cut back on it. Or maybe I'm being far to presumptuous and blowing this out of proportion.

Thanks, but I also suspect nobody's actually listening to me. All some people
are hearing is what they think isn't there, and that I'm here to put a
spin on things. So be it. Perhaps it's better to just let it be and
wait until the hand-wringing has run its course.

Is that a "woe is me" post? Come on David you're better than that, wheres that witty sharped tongue nuisance

Aside from the rare and off hand troll I'd say everyone is listening to you, perhaps far too carefully which is leading to over analysis, incorrect interpretations, and false assumptions. Many people felt the dialogue and writing in DA:O is was separated it from the pack and to hear mention that the system and amount was changed is going to naturally set off the red flags and provoke a desire for clarity. Like I said your comment threw me for a bit of loop and I'm trying to get a sense of how/why this decision was drawn and exactly what direction you took it in because at the moment I have no way of gaining this knowledge myself aside from pursing one of several illegal methods, I love DA but not enough to get locked up for breaking and entering.

And if you feel it's best to let it be, than let it be. Personally I'm thankful and grateful you take the time to fall in the ranks of the masses and get your hands messy by taking some of the dirty questions where as many of your comrades simply prefer to take the safer stuff from afar. 99% of the time you're correct and precise and we're all better for it. This time not so much, I just don't understand it and my curiousity compels me to ask seeing as there is no other way for me to quell my ignorance on the matter.

[Rixxencaxx]

David Gaider wrote...

bluebullets wrote...
I understand where you are coming from, and I get your pespective, but we were somewhat limited in DA:O in terms of conversations, amd now you are limiting us even more. It may turn out well, I have never seen it, but I can sympasize for all the people that have doubts with the change, because I also have doubts.

I'll just point out that if you thought DA:O's conversations were limited, then the problem may be your expectations. There was more dialogue with each party member than any other game we've made -- BG2 included. All I'm suggesting is that some of that dialogue was pretty low impact, and possibly superfluous when it came to building a character.

On another note, I wanted to ask you if you are done with Duncan for the series, I have read both your books and they are fantastic. .I think that there is a lot of circumstantial evidence that Duncan MIGHT not be dead (although I highly doubt that he is alive)

Duncan is dead. If he appears again, it would have to be in a story that takes place prior to Origins, if anything.

Thank you for taking the time to personally respond in these forums.

Thanks, but I also suspect nobody's actually listening to me. All some people
are hearing is what they think isn't there, and that I'm here to put a
spin on things. So be it. Perhaps it's better to just let it be and
wait until the hand-wringing has run its course.

To be honest mr gaider...i'm pretty sure that the no romance thing and the no free dialogue thing are only budget related (less lines of dialogue less choices less costs) and nothing to do with bioware artistic choices.
There is no other reason to limit dialogues. And yes i doubt that a game developer could intentionally cut a part of the game that the majority of customers liked.
Yes we all know you lacked funding for the expansion.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

TheMadCat wrote...

I'll just point out that if you thought DA:O's conversations were
limited, then the problem may be your expectations. There was more
dialogue with each party member than any
other game we've made -- BG2 included. All I'm suggesting is that some
of that dialogue was pretty low impact, and possibly superfluous when
it came to building a character.

I still don't understand how dialogue that helps to develop a character can be considered superfluous. Needless to the story at hand sure but it certainly all served a role, adding another dimension to your characters and giving us a reason to view them differently than we did before. Sten for example, his needless dialogue went on and revealed quite a bit about the Qunari culture and the bits of personality under his obdurate attitude and this helped greatly to propel his character away from the state of shallowness. Like I said, I just don't see how dialogue that fleshes out a character even if it's effects are more subtle can be looked at as low impact or completely needless and excessive. But I suppose that's just the reality of the medium you're developing on, a fine line between appropriate and excessive and it doesn't take much to reach that line. Or perhaps I'm simply encompassing more dialogue than I should be.

I'm not sure whether you can answer this or not, but I'm curious. What prompted this change? Was it a personal/team decision, business, influenced by the user base? It's just weird, I thought the writing and dialogue (along with the general lore) were what saved DA:O from a fate of mediocrity and a decision was made to cut back on it. Or maybe I'm being far to presumptuous and blowing this out of proportion.

Thanks, but I also suspect nobody's actually listening to me. All some people
are hearing is what they think isn't there, and that I'm here to put a
spin on things. So be it. Perhaps it's better to just let it be and
wait until the hand-wringing has run its course.

Is that a "woe is me" post? Come on David you're better than that, wheres that witty sharped tongue nuisance

Aside from the rare and off hand troll I'd say everyone is listening to you, perhaps far too carefully which is leading to over analysis, incorrect interpretations, and false assumptions. Many people felt the dialogue and writing in DA:O is was separated it from the pack and to hear mention that the system and amount was changed is going to naturally set off the red flags and provoke a desire for clarity. Like I said your comment threw me for a bit of loop and I'm trying to get a sense of how/why this decision was drawn and exactly what direction you took it in because at the moment I have no way of gaining this knowledge myself aside from pursing one of several illegal methods, I love DA but not enough to get locked up for breaking and entering.

And if you feel it's best to let it be, than let it be. Personally I'm thankful and grateful you take the time to fall in the ranks of the masses and get your hands messy by taking some of the dirty questions where as many of your comrades simply prefer to take the safer stuff from afar. 99% of the time you're correct and precise and we're all better for it. This time not so much, I just don't understand it and my curiousity compels me to ask seeing as there is no other way for me to quell my ignorance on the matter.

Great post Mad Cat, if I were to hazard a guess for the removal of that "superfluous" dialog (which somewhat comes off as a copout statement on Mr. Gaider's part to begin with imo) I'd contribute it to time, and development funds. Or lack there of in both instances.

[Rixxencaxx]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

TheMadCat wrote...

I'll just point out that if you thought DA:O's conversations were
limited, then the problem may be your expectations. There was more
dialogue with each party member than any
other game we've made -- BG2 included. All I'm suggesting is that some
of that dialogue was pretty low impact, and possibly superfluous when
it came to building a character.

I still don't understand how dialogue that helps to develop a character can be considered superfluous. Needless to the story at hand sure but it certainly all served a role, adding another dimension to your characters and giving us a reason to view them differently than we did before. Sten for example, his needless dialogue went on and revealed quite a bit about the Qunari culture and the bits of personality under his obdurate attitude and this helped greatly to propel his character away from the state of shallowness. Like I said, I just don't see how dialogue that fleshes out a character even if it's effects are more subtle can be looked at as low impact or completely needless and excessive. But I suppose that's just the reality of the medium you're developing on, a fine line between appropriate and excessive and it doesn't take much to reach that line. Or perhaps I'm simply encompassing more dialogue than I should be.

I'm not sure whether you can answer this or not, but I'm curious. What prompted this change? Was it a personal/team decision, business, influenced by the user base? It's just weird, I thought the writing and dialogue (along with the general lore) were what saved DA:O from a fate of mediocrity and a decision was made to cut back on it. Or maybe I'm being far to presumptuous and blowing this out of proportion.

Thanks, but I also suspect nobody's actually listening to me. All some people
are hearing is what they think isn't there, and that I'm here to put a
spin on things. So be it. Perhaps it's better to just let it be and
wait until the hand-wringing has run its course.

Is that a "woe is me" post? Come on David you're better than that, wheres that witty sharped tongue nuisance

Aside from the rare and off hand troll I'd say everyone is listening to you, perhaps far too carefully which is leading to over analysis, incorrect interpretations, and false assumptions. Many people felt the dialogue and writing in DA:O is was separated it from the pack and to hear mention that the system and amount was changed is going to naturally set off the red flags and provoke a desire for clarity. Like I said your comment threw me for a bit of loop and I'm trying to get a sense of how/why this decision was drawn and exactly what direction you took it in because at the moment I have no way of gaining this knowledge myself aside from pursing one of several illegal methods, I love DA but not enough to get locked up for breaking and entering.

And if you feel it's best to let it be, than let it be. Personally I'm thankful and grateful you take the time to fall in the ranks of the masses and get your hands messy by taking some of the dirty questions where as many of your comrades simply prefer to take the safer stuff from afar. 99% of the time you're correct and precise and we're all better for it. This time not so much, I just don't understand it and my curiousity compels me to ask seeing as there is no other way for me to quell my ignorance on the matter.

Great post Mad Cat, if I were to hazard a guess for the removal of that "superfluous" dialog (which somewhat comes off as a copout statement on Mr. Gaider's part to begin with imo) I'd contribute it to time, and development funds. Or lack there of in both instances.

we all know that this change is determined by funding problems but they think we are all stupid whining people....
i clearly remember that just after the awakening faw was published they told us that romances were not present in game cause in this expansion you have a lot of things to do and no time to romance....then when anger mounted they admitted it was budget related...now again....they call dialogue options superfluous and "laundry list" but soon  they will blame again budget constraints....

[Nimander]

TheMadCat wrote...
I still don't understand how dialogue that helps to develop a character can be considered superfluous. Needless to the story at hand sure but it certainly all served a role, adding another dimension to your characters and giving us a reason to view them differently than we did before. Sten for example, his needless dialogue went on and revealed quite a bit about the Qunari culture and the bits of personality under his obdurate attitude and this helped greatly to propel his character away from the state of shallowness. Like I said, I just don't see how dialogue that fleshes out a character even if it's effects are more subtle can be looked at as low impact or completely needless and excessive. But I suppose that's just the reality of the medium you're developing on, a fine line between appropriate and excessive and it doesn't take much to reach that line. Or perhaps I'm simply encompassing more dialogue than I should be.

I suppose I'm coming at it from a different POV, myself.  I approve of this change greatly.  As someone who's a voracious reader (not saying you aren't, just as a baseline) and someone who does a lot of online roleplaying in his off time, I get exactly what the fellow means.  A lot of people seem to think that lots and lots of exposition is a good thing, and I don't agree.

Take the Honor Harrington series.  Great series if you like military science fiction, but every once in a while, Weber throws in a page or two of exposition that throws you out of the story.  On various MU*s and online RP boards, certain types of people will toss out paragraph upon paragraph of exposition and basically filler.  To me, quality > quantity.  It's certainly true that Sten for instance, talks quite a bit about the Qunari, and that's interesting.  It could be handled however by conversations while passing by women, or a smith, or such and so on.  I'll wait and see how they handle it.

[Jawson]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

This thread has been very informative. I don't think I am going to buy this expansion. It's not really an expansion if it throws away the player's past and doesn't allow previous DLCs. I am also afraid that DA:O won't be updated by patches anymore and that new patches and DLCs will be for Awakenings only.

I guess I have to say goodbye to the series for now. It has been fun, though.

Well said, this is how I feel. I'm sure I'll pick it up down the road when it drops in price, or maybe when a second expansion comes out depending on how it's designed.  As it stands now I have little to no interest.  I LOVED Origins, but a few more hours of gameplay with characters I either don't know, or don't care about isn't worth the price tag atm.   I do want to see everyone's feedback though, this is an intelligent community for the most part, and I value it's opinions.

[Case]

Notice he didn't say anything about an 'undead' Duncan...

[Feraele]

Case wrote...

Notice he didn't say anything about an 'undead' Duncan...

I think Mr Gaider means exactly what he said..Duncan is dead.  

Would that apply to his "epic beard"? 

[TheMadCat]

I suppose I'm coming at it from a different POV, myself.  I approve of
this change greatly.  As someone who's a voracious reader (not saying
you aren't, just as a baseline) and someone who does a lot of online
roleplaying in his off time, I get exactly what the fellow means.  A
lot of people seem to think that lots and lots of exposition is a good
thing, and I don't agree.

Take the Honor Harrington series.
 Great series if you like military science fiction, but every once in a
while, Weber throws in a page or two of exposition that throws you out
of the story.  On various MU*s and online RP boards, certain types of
people will toss out paragraph upon paragraph of exposition and
basically filler.  To me, quality > quantity.  It's certainly true
that Sten for instance, talks quite a bit about the Qunari, and that's
interesting.  It could be handled however by conversations while
passing by women, or a smith, or such and so on.  I'll wait and see how
they handle it.

Quantity which serves the sole role of filler, sure I'd agree it's fat and should be trimmed and of course there was a bit of that in Origins. But the last place that should be trimmed are the main characters and the lore wouldn't you agree? Personality and history for main characters isn't something I inherently view as needless, in fact if anything I'd call it a boon as it does add depth and creates a much more emotional connection with the characters, be it love or hate, than a superficial one. Quality is always more important that quantity, but at the same time sacrificing quantity in the wrong areas can effect the quality. It is a wait and see because neither of us know, but going off of what David said I can't help but feel they went in the wrong direction in terms of what needed some trimming.

To your example, what would be the difference between handling it with Sten over time or dealing it in one sitting with some random person? What makes one situation better than the other if the same amount of dialogue and lore is being used? Bundling it I would think would be a far worse choices rather than displaying it in bits over time. Giving it all in one sitting creates the situation you described with Weber, a big chunk not inherently related to the plot all delivered at once and throwing you off track. A couple of lines after you leave Lothering, a couple more after you do the circle, and a few more after the forest, ect. is a much more effective way of delivering it as it's not long enough to really detract you from the true purpose of the story but still adds depth to the characters and the lore around you.

[Feraele]

Stoomkal wrote...

Jeezus...

Four months and Forty Thousand "Duncan" topics and he comes out with three words to end it all...

Why take all the time to quell the storm? Just to throw it out in a sad-face post?

Maybe if we can anger Fernando Melo enough we will actually get a real patch for this game...

Well I think they "could" have quelled this one early on..probably, say  at least two months ago. 

I am not sure why certain things ..like a post that consists of one post only..gets answered.   And then other  very very long, threads are left hanging for weeks on end, with no official response.

I do appreciate when answers are forthcoming, don't get me wrong, and I have respect for those that provide the answers..when and if they have time.

I also realize that if we do get answers its because its due to the good graces of the person answering.

But sometimes..it would be good ...if, for instance noone has time to answer, then perhaps an appropriate section of the FAQ could be adjusted to the most current information, for the burning issue of the week.

[Kohaku]

@AngryFrozenWater - I like to hear what others have to say but I'm going to reserve all judgment until I get the actual game in my hands. I read reviews, but listen to them rarely. I'm glad Nemesis7884 was able to tell us what he thought about the game. It's appreciated and I'm glad he took the time to do it.



What I have been seeing over the past few months with this game and Mass Effect 2 is people just jumping the gun before they even play it. I have plenty of games I would consider garbage but I can at least say I came to that conclusion on my own after playing it. Not before based off what everyone else says.