ClovingWestbrook
Banned
I really wonder what happened to Bioware.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
BioWare Talks About Dragon Age 3's Direction
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
BrokenSymmetry
Member
LovingSteam said:
I get the impression that everyone within the company is focused on The Old Republic (which simply has to succeed for the company, to avoid the same fate as Pandemic), and everything else is falling by the wayside.
B_Rik_Schitthaus
Banned
It seems like when their forced to introduce a universe they don't have time to write crap,LovingSteam said:
they should start franchises then just have Obsidian make all their sequels.
Shrennin
Didn't get the memo regarding the 14th Amendment
BrokenSymmetry said:
They are definitely putting a ton of resources into that game and a lot of their best people are there. James Ohlen in particular is probably my favorite developer from BioWare and he's been working on TOR for a while now, I think.
Likewise, Drew Karpyshyn is probably my favorite writer from them as well and he was brought onto the TOR team sometime after or during the development of ME2, I believe. He was not the main writer for ME2, which is why there is a discrepancy between how the story is told in the first game and how the story is told in the second.
FutureZombie
Banned
Holy crap, you couldn't talk to your party members in DA2? That was the best part of the first game.
I find it annoying that he was talking about "cutting content" when it came to addressing area re-use and impact of choice issues. Though it wasn't likely to be the course of action they will take, it is plain that rather than considering putting more effort into fixing the flaws of the game, he sounded more eager to simplify the game further. This what pretty much what they did going from Mass Effect 1 to 2 and while I can understand them trying to stick to their strengths, I feel that it's a lazy and unambitious attitude for a game designer to have.
Also, I'm kind of surprised at how rigid his thinking seems to be when it comes to design issues such as companion armor customization or party member dialogue options. It's like he hasn't even actively thought about ways to polish these systems. I mean having a fixed appearance for each companion is understandable, but having 2/3 of all your loot drops in certain slots become vendor trash because they are class-specific-Hawke-only is a glaring issue that needs to be dealt with, and a middle-ground solution like having a fixed model for companion armor that changes color or texture based on equipment change seems to me to be an easy improvement to make and not require particularly much extra resources. As for the dialogue options, I don't understand why they are fixated on the idea of forcing the player to initiate important dialogue sequences from a base, especially since running to a base to start a dialogue sequence doesn't make sense when you have that companion in your party already. Even if certain plot items and scenes may be location specific, companions should certainly have more than merely a line on loop for dialogue when they are in your party.
Also, I'm kind of surprised at how rigid his thinking seems to be when it comes to design issues such as companion armor customization or party member dialogue options. It's like he hasn't even actively thought about ways to polish these systems. I mean having a fixed appearance for each companion is understandable, but having 2/3 of all your loot drops in certain slots become vendor trash because they are class-specific-Hawke-only is a glaring issue that needs to be dealt with, and a middle-ground solution like having a fixed model for companion armor that changes color or texture based on equipment change seems to me to be an easy improvement to make and not require particularly much extra resources. As for the dialogue options, I don't understand why they are fixated on the idea of forcing the player to initiate important dialogue sequences from a base, especially since running to a base to start a dialogue sequence doesn't make sense when you have that companion in your party already. Even if certain plot items and scenes may be location specific, companions should certainly have more than merely a line on loop for dialogue when they are in your party.
Shrennin
Didn't get the memo regarding the 14th Amendment
Derrick01 said:
This is not necessarily a bad thing, honestly. RPGs are some of my favorite games, but I believe RPG gameplay, in a lot of ways, can be stale. I think a happy combination is Mass Effect 2 gameplay with heavy RPG-like customization and I hope BioWare is taking that approach with the third one. As far as the way their stories are told, I honestly believe their stories have more RPG-like elements than most other RPG games (not that their writing is always the best because a lot of times it isn't).
With that said, Dragon Age should have been their core, old school RPG franchise. Dragon Age 2 took a huge misstep in that regard.
Tokubetsu said:
It's definitely not Dragon Age, that's for sure. I mean, I like how there is a different protagonist for every Dragon Age game which means the stain of Dragon Age 2 won't necessarily have to hurt the next game in the series. I still don't have too much hope for DA3 until I see it for myself.
Onion_Relish
Member
Chinese Electric Batman said:
quoting for new page and because i was going to do it.
I am optimistic for DA 3. Let's be real here. Just like in EVERY other entertainment industry, fuck, almost every industry ANYWHERE, the second game is more likely than not to be the one that causes derision in the fanbase. Regardless of whether or not the game is shit (dmc 2) or the game has a new protagonist that no one likes with better gameplay (mgs 2) the list goes on and on and on and on. Given how many games and movies and things out there that had their 3rd movie be a rollicking success, its pretty hard to bet against them
While i liked DA2 more than DAO, the series doesn't really appeal to me (anymore)... It's too generic (fantasy, with some nice twists), it doesn't feel epic like Mass Effect does. The shortcomings of DA2 (re-used areas, bad boss fight/ending) don't affect this decision however.
I'll probably pass DA3 at first and get it when it's 15.
I'll probably pass DA3 at first and get it when it's 15.
Futurevoid
Member
Will the A button still produce awesome?
I still have trouble understanding how a succesful and very professional outfit like Bioware could ever think that something like the Wave attacks of completely repetitive enemies was a good idea.
Did no one in development have the courage to stand up and say: "Yeah this isn't working at all - its boring and frustrating to play" ?
Did no one in development have the courage to stand up and say: "Yeah this isn't working at all - its boring and frustrating to play" ?
jim-jam bongs
Member
AwesomeFuturevoid said:Will the A button still produce awesome?
Bodacious
Xtreme
Yeehah
Will this one have good gameplay? (I know Bioware isn't about the gameplay, but goddamn, put some effort in man). Also, I would like a story that branches out even more. Like, if I kick a stone at a small child, that changes the future (ie. he later comes back to kick a stone at me, way later in game...or a boulder, I dunno, be creative, I'm not a developer)
Just don't make it like DA2 because fuck, if I wasn't bored of that shit.
Just don't make it like DA2 because fuck, if I wasn't bored of that shit.
DennisK4 said:
I agree with you. Problem is -concerning the bolded- they won't. They truly see DA2 as a stepping stone for the series, they feel that with DA2 they are "half way there" and that shows in these posts. His points seem reasonable of course, but they knew all of that before the game shipped.
Bioware, as one of EAs Biggest studios, will never compromise potential sales in order to please the hardcore that want that "Baldur's Gate spiritual succesor" that was once promised. They want 5 million copies per game, that's why EA paid top dollar for a studio with a history of releasing 90+ metacritic games.
They've moved on and after Mass Effect 3 so will I.
Shrinnan said:
Bioware better be focusing on TOR because it's a do or die scenario with that game. As far as Mike Laidlaw and the DA team goes, rationality is overrated. It's fine to have the rational approach and analyze what went wrong with the game given the fans reaction and criticism, but ultimately it doesn't mean crap. Talent is the most important thing which can help in making your game better. Talent related to game design is creativity+instinct+knowledge+rationality and some of those can't be learned. The DA2 team ain't good enough given what we saw so you can't expect much better for DA3.
spindoctor
Member
I agree with Mr. Laidlaw on one point... they need to make it as accessible as they can to attract as many new players as possible because they sure as hell are going to lose a lot of old players after the second game.
But DA:O sold great!inky said:
They have said how surprised they were with the sales. And then they release a turd like DA2....good job on nuking a new multi-million dollar franchise Bioware...
:|
It looked so good at one point:
Mass Effect series - Nr.1 sci-fi RPG series
Dragon Age series - Nr.1 fantasy RPG series
Star Wars: The Old Republic - Nr.1 sci-fi MMORPG
and then they completely fucked up, and the rest is history.
B_Rik_Schitthaus
Banned
From the quick look it seems like the same problems are in the DLC.Nirolak said:
They need to take their time. I want it to be as big as DA:O, I didn't regret paying full price for it since it offered plenty of bang for my buck. I'm still passing on $20 sales for DAII.
I'd also like to see them distance it from the past games. Personally, I don't really give a crap about choices and plotlines from the past games carrying over, and save imports are always underwhelming, so they should wipe the slate clean.
I'd also like to see them distance it from the past games. Personally, I don't really give a crap about choices and plotlines from the past games carrying over, and save imports are always underwhelming, so they should wipe the slate clean.
DennisK4 said:
Absolutely, I think everyone was impressed by the sales numbers, but... they want even more (hence the "we can do it more accessible yet") AND EA wants Bioware to release 1 game a year/18 months on top of that.
And that is where I see the main issue. Their ambition for bigger sales numbers will be their doom. Now their every move is very carefully planned to stretch the numbers and not because it fits the game or makes it great. Every character design will be focused on pleasing one segment of their audience. Every amount of content will be carefully planned as how it fits the marketing scheme, every loot object will be designed not because it is cool for the game, but because they can offer it as a pre-order incentive, bonus, or dlc, crossover product, etc. And this ambition for bigger numbers =/= ambition in game design, on the contrary, they will play it as safe as they can. I don't think we will ever see a game from them with such potential and real ambition as Mass Effect once had.
I know it sounds too dramatic, but I do see a change in their ideology and the way they design games, and as long as they do them just to tick bullet points in a mktg list their games will lack what their old classics had.
Sapphire Dreams
Member
I can understand the accessibility issue, because when you are a game designer you want your game to be played by everyone.
And what I want in DA 3 is a good story, you know I must have the feeling that I am working towards something, I never felt that in DA2 which made the plot thinner than a Kleenex tissue.
Also, bring back the creative dungeon designs from DA:O.
And what I want in DA 3 is a good story, you know I must have the feeling that I am working towards something, I never felt that in DA2 which made the plot thinner than a Kleenex tissue.
Also, bring back the creative dungeon designs from DA:O.
GillianSeed79
Member
Okay, new character is cool. As much as DAII seems like a prologue, I'd rather try to forget about it and see something fresh. I'm sure mage/templar conflict will continue.
I'm more worried about his less enthused response to camp banter. For those who didn't play DAII, you could talk to your companions, but it fell into the ME2 pitfall of party discussion since every character was a romance option. I much prefered DA1 interaction.
Like everyone has said make it more like DA1.
I'm actually tempted to buy Legacy, but am not sure. Any impressions.
I'm more worried about his less enthused response to camp banter. For those who didn't play DAII, you could talk to your companions, but it fell into the ME2 pitfall of party discussion since every character was a romance option. I much prefered DA1 interaction.
Like everyone has said make it more like DA1.
I'm actually tempted to buy Legacy, but am not sure. Any impressions.
Guerrillas in the Mist
Member
While DA:O was a much better game, I liked how DA2 did something other than the classic "travel the world getting 4 McGruffins in order to accomplish a big task at the end" thing with the story. I even liked the idea of the game taking place in the same area over the years, although the execution simply involved a lot of asset reuse and little else.
Something on DA:O's scale and level of polish that isn't afraid to take some risks with story and structure would be cool.
Something on DA:O's scale and level of polish that isn't afraid to take some risks with story and structure would be cool.
jim-jam bongs
Member
I think they knew DAII was going to be worse. Mike is talking like the studio made mistakes unintentionally.
To take one point, the environments, the reasonable assumption to make is that in DAO they had the skills to make diverse environments, and that during the development of DAII, they retained those skills.
They obviously knew that a variety of environments was important for a game, otherwise they would not have wasted budget on making them in origins.
Therefore, at some point they decided that they were going to sacrifice the game quality by cutting the number of art assets in DAII.
I'm not hearing admissions of intentional sacrifices here, but what I assume to be lies of unintentional mistakes by the developers, in an understandable attempt at damage control.
I think with DAII, they wanted to see how far they could cut the quality of a game, and retain a good marketing plan, and see what the reaction of gamers and consumers would be. They realise that they have not found the balance yet, and will increase the quality (and therefore budget) with DAIII, but I doubt it will ever reach DAO levels.
To take one point, the environments, the reasonable assumption to make is that in DAO they had the skills to make diverse environments, and that during the development of DAII, they retained those skills.
They obviously knew that a variety of environments was important for a game, otherwise they would not have wasted budget on making them in origins.
Therefore, at some point they decided that they were going to sacrifice the game quality by cutting the number of art assets in DAII.
I'm not hearing admissions of intentional sacrifices here, but what I assume to be lies of unintentional mistakes by the developers, in an understandable attempt at damage control.
I think with DAII, they wanted to see how far they could cut the quality of a game, and retain a good marketing plan, and see what the reaction of gamers and consumers would be. They realise that they have not found the balance yet, and will increase the quality (and therefore budget) with DAIII, but I doubt it will ever reach DAO levels.