Lostconfused
Member
No, people are just getting tired of the WoW formula.Pureauthor said:
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
BioWare: Dragon Age 2 fan reaction 'caught us off-guard'
- Thread starter Kosma
- Start date
I mean, I get what BioWare has been trying to do and why. They want to make games for everyone, not just hardcore PC RPG fans. There's nothing inherently wrong with having that kind of ambition.
And DA2, for all it's faults and my personal gripes, is not a terrible game. That is to say, I think there's certainly aspects of a very good game in there. But it was clearly unfinished and their quest for a "broader audience" appears fueled by focus testing and player data graphs. And it shows when you play the game if you're susceptible to that kind of stuff. So they ended up with a title that made some money but hurts their legacy, with the added bonus of pissing off their longtime fanbase even further after they'd been grumbling for a while.
I still believe BioWare has the capacity to make great games. Hell, I love the Mass Effect series and can't wait for 3. But they need to rethink what a great game that everyone can enjoy truly is - something born of vision and confidence in their ideas, or something born out of what everyone that's not buying their products might be most receptive to. Trying to have it both ways, as they so clearly desire, is a surefire path to mediocrity.
And DA2, for all it's faults and my personal gripes, is not a terrible game. That is to say, I think there's certainly aspects of a very good game in there. But it was clearly unfinished and their quest for a "broader audience" appears fueled by focus testing and player data graphs. And it shows when you play the game if you're susceptible to that kind of stuff. So they ended up with a title that made some money but hurts their legacy, with the added bonus of pissing off their longtime fanbase even further after they'd been grumbling for a while.
I still believe BioWare has the capacity to make great games. Hell, I love the Mass Effect series and can't wait for 3. But they need to rethink what a great game that everyone can enjoy truly is - something born of vision and confidence in their ideas, or something born out of what everyone that's not buying their products might be most receptive to. Trying to have it both ways, as they so clearly desire, is a surefire path to mediocrity.
polyh3dron
Banned
resistance is futile.TouchMyBox said:
Regardless of some of the major problems, reuse of assets, etc. The art direction stands in Dragon Age 2 as drab, lack of detail and such. Even the very few dungeons Dragon Age 2 kept repeating were as bland as a wooden spoon, and you was forced to see them over and over.
Not saying Origins didn't suffer with this, but not in the extreme of DA2.
Not saying Origins didn't suffer with this, but not in the extreme of DA2.
Pureauthor said:
Too much emphasis on re-doing the old vanilla WoW and I didn't even think all that much changed quest wise. The areas were changed quite a bit but honestly leveling as the worgen it didn't feel that different.
New 5 man dungeons sucked, every single one of them. They were also really tough which made finishing them extremely hard unless you had an active and good guild. Trying to finish it with random people who are likely to quit at the first wipe? Good luck. Also if you were a dps you had a 40 minute to 1 hour wait to get in which made it all the more infuriating when a tank or healer left after a wipe causing the group to fold.
After a month or two of that I had to quit. It became mentally draining to log on and play which is the opposite of what a game should be.
DimmuBurgerKing
Member
Moaradin said:
Ah, come on! I wouldn't go that fa--
Zeliard said:
Nevermind. You're right.
People getting tired of the formula, not a particularly upstanding set of updates, and a ton of content was devoted to remaking the early-game content, which people were happy about at first, but like most MMO gamers, quickly decided were useless when they hit max level and just wanted to grind for gear.Pureauthor said:
megalowho said:
Bioware is interested in making lite RPGs for the masses. They reference deep role-playing elements in such well-known RPGs as Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, as hints of where their actual intentions lie. They want to make RPGs as mass market as they possibly can. Invariably, that means stripping out RPG elements and focusing on simplistic action gameplay.
This is a company that would much prefer putting out a piece of mediocrity that sells than a quality game that is still financially successful but has an inherently limited audience. They instead end up putting out mediocrities to limited audiences. Mass Effect does good numbers but it will never have the potential audience of a Call of Duty, as Bioware desperately wants it to.
From the horse's mouth:
Mike Laidlaw said:
DimmuBurgerKing said:
When someone calls Mass Effect "an extremely innovative game" while attacking detractors of Bioware, there's no appropriate response other than laughter.
The_Darkest_Red
Member
I feel like Bioware has become the anti-From Software.Zeliard said:
Hari Seldon
Member
Dresden said:
And this is why people are questioning the long term stability of TOR. It might recapture some of the lost MMO lust for a little while, but damn that formula is really god damn stale at this point.
fizzelopeguss
Banned
Tor is just something to waste time on until Guild wars II is out.
ShockingAlberto
Member
Another non-apology. The equivalent of "Sorry the game was too real for you, whiners."
The game wasn't bad because it wasn't DAO. The game was bad because it was bad.
If they don't understand this, then how can anyone have any confidence in DA3?
The game wasn't bad because it wasn't DAO. The game was bad because it was bad.
If they don't understand this, then how can anyone have any confidence in DA3?
1) Take the sequel to a pretty high selling and regarded game,
2) Drastically change the core of the game to appeal to a wider audience,
3) Be surprised that fans of the original got angry.
Me thinks BioWare must cultivate a working environment full of endless, delicious kool-aid for everyone. They're either completely trained 24/7 by EA's expert PR people and nothing they say is honest, or they really believe the bullshit that comes out of their mouths.
2) Drastically change the core of the game to appeal to a wider audience,
3) Be surprised that fans of the original got angry.
Me thinks BioWare must cultivate a working environment full of endless, delicious kool-aid for everyone. They're either completely trained 24/7 by EA's expert PR people and nothing they say is honest, or they really believe the bullshit that comes out of their mouths.
Kosma said:
I think this is the problem. You can't have it both ways. Some people want a deep, rich experience, others want a game they can play without having to think much. These two types of games are very different from each other. I think that the "game for everyone" is just not the right way to go about it.
For example I love Mass Effect, but have no interest in any Dragon Age game. I never will, so Bioware needs to stop trying to make the game appeal to me and make the game for the true fans of the series. "Watering down" entertainment, whether it be music, movies or games is never a good thing. It's a slap in the face to real fans.
Deadstar said:
This is true. You can have as many complex systems as you want, but if you make the game easy enough and casual enough for the "CoD audience", then the nature of the experience will make it so those complex systems are totally unnecessary. And who wants to go out of their way to overcomplicate things when a simpler method will achieve equal or better results?
To make those "hardcore" people happy, you have to craft an experience that is difficult enough that it forces utilization of the more complex systems.
I don't hate the idea of a lite RPG for the masses on principle. But if they can't be bothered to make one of the utmost quality, why even try? Laidlaw is arrogant but not wrong, most people need a gateway drug to discover a genre they might really like. Problem is Dragon Age 2 is a shitty drug with clear problems that go beyond pandering to a wider audience.Zeliard said:
If BioWare was focused on making the best game they could instead of adding and subtracting based on market research and a vague idea of what the mass market can handle, they might actually net that wider audience in a respectable way. I still feel they have the capacity to do that, but it seems the impetus just isn't there from the top men on down.
So basically, sales were shipped not sold, game isn't selling as strongly as they hoped. But they don't want to admit they fucked up either. So continue blaming fans and keep talking about new ones.
Lucky they are with EA now. They'll have the massive starting shipments and advertising budgets.
Lucky they are with EA now. They'll have the massive starting shipments and advertising budgets.
They know exactly what they're doing and have been fairly open in the past about the direction they want their games to head in. They're just feigning ignorance, making promises, and as usual, it's lapped up by the Bioware faithful.
"I think its going to be about 40 hours or so for the main story, so its going to be a good-sized BioWare RPG just for the core part. Off the beaten path, theres probably another 20 or 30 hours or so of stuff, or more, depending on how much you do and what order you do it in and all of that.
Its this non-linear exploration of uncharted worlds. Youre flying around this vast universe with hundreds of locations, where ones a derelict spacecraft from which you get this distress call. Another might be an uncharted world with a full backstory, multi-hour storyline that youve got to explore and go on the surface and sub-surface and explore and find some new locations that send you off to a new location.
You might be flying through space on your primary quest when you get this distress call or you hear some message. The planets on sensors, so do you want to explore this now or do you go back later? Its all non-linear."
- Dr. Ray Muzyka on the innovative Mass Effect 1
That was only a few months prior to release. All they're ever good for are laughably empty promises and insipid PR. Why anyone cares for a developer that insults its fanbase the way these guys do is beyond me.
True, but the whole thing was misguided in the first place. They had something effective with Origins. It certainly had its share of problems but it was a good base to start from. If they want to make a lite RPG, why in the world are they doing it with a franchise they originally marketed for years as a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate 2? It's completely nonsensical.
They have a lite RPG franchise with Mass Effect, and clearly, it's all they're ever interested in making anymore. Nobody wanted Dragon Age to be more like Mass Effect except for the top guys at Bioware. Brent Knowles ended up leaving due to it.
People "shit" on Bioware with reasoning to back it up. People praise Bioware by shitting on the detractors. Blackface's post contained not a single shred of logic, just a bunch of indignant nonsense.
"I think its going to be about 40 hours or so for the main story, so its going to be a good-sized BioWare RPG just for the core part. Off the beaten path, theres probably another 20 or 30 hours or so of stuff, or more, depending on how much you do and what order you do it in and all of that.
Its this non-linear exploration of uncharted worlds. Youre flying around this vast universe with hundreds of locations, where ones a derelict spacecraft from which you get this distress call. Another might be an uncharted world with a full backstory, multi-hour storyline that youve got to explore and go on the surface and sub-surface and explore and find some new locations that send you off to a new location.
You might be flying through space on your primary quest when you get this distress call or you hear some message. The planets on sensors, so do you want to explore this now or do you go back later? Its all non-linear."
- Dr. Ray Muzyka on the innovative Mass Effect 1
That was only a few months prior to release. All they're ever good for are laughably empty promises and insipid PR. Why anyone cares for a developer that insults its fanbase the way these guys do is beyond me.
megalowho said:
True, but the whole thing was misguided in the first place. They had something effective with Origins. It certainly had its share of problems but it was a good base to start from. If they want to make a lite RPG, why in the world are they doing it with a franchise they originally marketed for years as a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate 2? It's completely nonsensical.
They have a lite RPG franchise with Mass Effect, and clearly, it's all they're ever interested in making anymore. Nobody wanted Dragon Age to be more like Mass Effect except for the top guys at Bioware. Brent Knowles ended up leaving due to it.
Lothars said:
People "shit" on Bioware with reasoning to back it up. People praise Bioware by shitting on the detractors. Blackface's post contained not a single shred of logic, just a bunch of indignant nonsense.
NullPointer
Member
With a pinpoint focus on growth and expanding the audience I think the bean counters at these companies make a dire mistake. They presume they're already entitled to their previous audience and numbers. Talk about entitlement.
Note to companies everywhere: you do have to earn it, every time.
Note to companies everywhere: you do have to earn it, every time.
Deified Data
Banned
Who is this "new audience"?
As someone who didn't even hate DAII, this justification appalls me. It's okay to lose the core audience so long as they attract a new one? Who are these people who were drawn to DAII but never gave a second glance to Origins? Do they exist, or is Bioware making them up to justify their silly design choices?
I stand by my opinion that DAII has some of the best characterization of any game I've ever played, but that alone cannot carry it for long. How much of this fickle "new audience" does Bioware think will hang around for DAIII?
As someone who didn't even hate DAII, this justification appalls me. It's okay to lose the core audience so long as they attract a new one? Who are these people who were drawn to DAII but never gave a second glance to Origins? Do they exist, or is Bioware making them up to justify their silly design choices?
I stand by my opinion that DAII has some of the best characterization of any game I've ever played, but that alone cannot carry it for long. How much of this fickle "new audience" does Bioware think will hang around for DAIII?
FieryBalrog
Member
It really hasn't been from what I've seen.FStop7 said:
Also, most of you guys drastically underestimate just how insatiable and demanding an MMO playerbase is. You get a honeymoon in beta, you don't at launch.
People who play CoD and GTA. Not making this up, Bioware doctors have specifically talked about going after the GTA audience.Deified Data said:
FieryBalrog
Member
Bioware has been churning out mediocre genre fiction for a long time, which passes for "mind-blowing" in videogames.zoner said:
My favorite games of theirs weren't anything special in the writing and dialogue departments, but it was OK since that wasn't what the whole game hinged on. There was so much more to do in BG1 and BG2.
Even in Dragon Age, the writing is entirely boilerplate, and the blood-spattered cutscenes are cringe-inducing at times. But the gameplay is pretty fucking solid even if it isn't up to their own best.
I suspect that DA 3 will be set just far enough into the future that characters will be able to use guns, they will strip it down so that each class is limited to maybe 5 skills each (so it's not too confusing) and any choices that are presented will sound different, but be similar just enough so that you can't complain that your choices don't matter. There will not be any cooldowns/statbuffs/waiting to use that next "visceral, hardcore" combat technique, and the music will be replaced with various samples of music from the likes of Manson. The game will play out along one long corridor path so that they can have the time, and can put forth the effort to create different enviroments for each scenario, and to top it all off every character will be bisexual, have no preferences, and pretty much be a blank slate that your character can just view them as a hole with a "personality".
All, or some of this atleast will happen, and Bioware will say that it was all done because the "fans" demanded it be so. It will be glorious, and reviewers will love it and claim it to be the new standard for RPGs.
All, or some of this atleast will happen, and Bioware will say that it was all done because the "fans" demanded it be so. It will be glorious, and reviewers will love it and claim it to be the new standard for RPGs.
Having recently played through Baldurs Gate 1, the amount of asset reuse was somewhat egregious as well. Many building interiors only come in three varieties, most landscape environments merely repopulated assets(tree, rocks, buildings, etc..) in different formations to create 'unique' environments. Enemy variety was quite low as well given the massive overall content(low level D&D play is mostly to blame).
Of course that being the first Infinity Engine game, as well as offering an optional 'overworld' to fully explore unlike any other Infinity Engine release after(including BGII), and finally the first true offering from the developer with limited funding compared to what would elicit future catalog titles, it is not as surprising. One of BGII's many intents was clearly to do away with repeated assets, and Bioware succeeded completely. Nearly every screen was handcrafted and original in the second adventure. These games were labors of love that came across clearly in the sheer scope of BG1(requiring limiting assets), and the vast enhancements and ingenuity added resources offered for BGII less than 2 years later.
A decade removed, under the umbrella of one of the largest publishing houses in the business, developed by a team that dwarfs the size of Baldur's Gate 1, a release like Dragon Age 2 is embarrassing. I wouldn't argue that the DA2 team didn't 'love' their product, but it didn't show very well, particularly in comparison to the effort on display in DA1, even as flawed as that game was.
Of course that being the first Infinity Engine game, as well as offering an optional 'overworld' to fully explore unlike any other Infinity Engine release after(including BGII), and finally the first true offering from the developer with limited funding compared to what would elicit future catalog titles, it is not as surprising. One of BGII's many intents was clearly to do away with repeated assets, and Bioware succeeded completely. Nearly every screen was handcrafted and original in the second adventure. These games were labors of love that came across clearly in the sheer scope of BG1(requiring limiting assets), and the vast enhancements and ingenuity added resources offered for BGII less than 2 years later.
A decade removed, under the umbrella of one of the largest publishing houses in the business, developed by a team that dwarfs the size of Baldur's Gate 1, a release like Dragon Age 2 is embarrassing. I wouldn't argue that the DA2 team didn't 'love' their product, but it didn't show very well, particularly in comparison to the effort on display in DA1, even as flawed as that game was.
fizzelopeguss
Banned
Deified Data
Banned
This is the new shit.ReaperXL07 said:
diffusionx
Gold Member
Chinner said:
You still can! I think a better DAO would sell extremely well. Bioware just needs to have a desire to engage the audience that buys games like DAO, in the same way that, say, Capcom engaged the audience that buys games like Street Fighter. They could've made it more casual, give Chun-Li giant tits and make Ryu bald and gritty, but that's probably more of a risk than what they did.
Thing is, I don't think Bioware cares. They want to sell 10 million copies of their games, and they don't think the DAO crowd is 10 million strong.
FieryBalrog
Member
Brandon F said:
Even in BG1, there were so many unique touches to the environments and there was a real "sense of place". Even if you were wandering through many similar looking forests, over here there was a octagonal Wizard's house. Over there were some wyvern nests. Maybe a bandit camp or the Xvart town.
The only time the re-use of assets really dragged the game down a bit was with the mines. There was too much time spent in them and they all looked the same. But you still had the rest of the world. The Gnoll Fortress. Beregost. Nashkel. And above all, Baldur's Gate itself, which was a large and fully detailed city.
planar1280
Banned
they joined EA. EA loves Money, Doctors obeyed EA and made the money with rehashed assets and for a wider audience AKA dumbed down.
diffusionx
Gold Member
Billychu said:
It may have, seriously. First pics of DAO came out in like 2004 or something. They pooped out DA2 in 15 months. A lot of that time was engine work and world building but still.
FieryBalrog
Member
Yeah, but that's a very short-term strategy.diffusionx said:
DAO may have cost way more to make, but it sold a lot more, AND it was the main reason people cared about DA2 in the first place! It set a franchise, a new IP in motion, which is a difficult and commendable feat in today's industry.
And what impact will shoving out a lazy, half-assed product have on the sales of DA3? And their brand?
ShockingAlberto
Member
Nirolak is generally better at pulling out the necessary quotes than I am, but the doctors have been pushing this "We need to make games faster, more accessible to everyone, and spending less time on each individual game" thing since before the EA buyout.planar1280 said:
diffusionx
Gold Member
FieryBalrog said:
That's true, but EA's a short-term company.
Deified Data
Banned
Yeah, let's not heap everything on EA, here. Bioware is doing this sort of thing because they want to - they're not tragic victims of circumstance.ShockingAlberto said:
planar1280 said:
Visceral games was able to make a sequel that was great under EA, so why can't Bioware? Trust me I understand the distaste for the way EA handled it's developer relations in the past I loved Origin for a long time, same with Westwood, but honestly I don't think that whats going on with Bioware is as simple as "EA" being an evil corporation. I think Bioware just wants more money, they have already admitted that they want the COD crowed. Bioware has just lost their minds, thats my stand point. they allow their games to be designed by focus groups and inaccurate surveys, then wonder why people jump on them for being idiots.
diffusionx said:
Most companies that have to show numbers are. DA2 was pushed to make the end of the FY so quality was disregarded; it was a gamble and I'm sure that in Bioware's mind (even with the backlash) it went better than they expected, sales wise and even in critical reception.