Dragon Age: Inquisition

[Nepenthe]

I don't think that rehashing me3s failings is going to make them go away, and I'm sure Bioware are aware of them to the degree they can be by now.

 

Just remains to be seen what they do about it in the next game.

[entrerix]

also, its not really fair to dump criticism on Allan, he was neither the producer nor the lead designer of ME 3 or DA2 (or so he claims )

 

so I'm glad that most people who had complaints kept their issues to themselves

Edited September 5, 2013 by entrerix

[anubite]

Well, I think criticism is vital to improvement. But PAX or solely Alan are probably not the viable targets/forums for this.

[Zoraptor]

Well, obviously they think that enough people will use it for it to be worthwhile to set up a system like it. Would be a colossal waste of resources if it wound up not having an impact on the game.

 

And, as they've said, this allows them to overcome issues like Conrad Verner's bad flags in ME2 due to being more adaptable. So, obviously, this is a major project for maintaining game-to-game continuity and, well, I can't believe they'd do it just for cosmetics.

I'm certainly not saying it's useless or wasted effort, I applaud it in fact and it is a fundamentally good idea.

 

I'd actually doubt it uses much in the way of resources. The fan editor for ME save games is perfectly functional without any inside knowledge, so it should be pretty easy for someone with access to how the save games are built to knock something up quickly, the difficult part would be getting it past the producer/ project director as something useful to do, not the implementation itself. I'd say it has two main functions, getting the committed fan online since the saves/ system will be cloud based- useful for getting better DLC penetration/ uptake rates, better 'biometrics', better utilisation of Origin etc- and because, as Maria says, Bioware is currently offering everyone free ice cream and this is a topping that will appeal to high value customers, exactly the type of people who may be disgruntled about things like the Conrad Venter bug instead of going "Conrad who?". 

 

But, while I suspect it will get a lot of use amongst the committed and well informed people like you or I (he says, with his customary surfeit of modesty) I do question how much usage it will get from the more casual who may not even know about it. Anyone with an offline console simply won't be using it even if they do know about it, for example, unless the cloud based system changes.

Edited September 5, 2013 by Zoraptor

[anubite]

They definitely are doing it for the telemetry. It's not necessarily a good thing either - races were canned from DA2 in large part because telemetry "supported" the idea (in my own mind, it only "supported" the fact the origin story mechanic was not executed as well as it could have been). When people get statistics in their hands they get funny ideas. I say it's better we keep developers in the dark about hard numbers - you can't make a game better through statistical analysis alone (yet this is the danger I see as a result of this).

[Tale]

I think you can make a game better that way, if you use it right.

 

If Dragon Age 2 had all the same resources and opportunities of Origins, but shifted the Origins resources over to improved reactivity, it could have been a fantastic tradeoff. But... that's not really the situation as it stood. Imagine entire class quests with dungeons that were unique.

 

But also, given how little time they had to work on Dragon Age 2, cutting races seemed like the right idea. If they'd had to implement race reactivity into the game they had, it wouldn't have saved it.

[anubite]

*In the right way.

 

But BioWare is an EA company, so they are basically ruled by people in managerial/marketing positions. If they get their hands on statistics, we'll see the culling of entire necessary features because 'the numbers justify it'. This is why the decision to make DA2 a 1-year cycle game was made in the first place.

 

I'm arguing a moot point though - I guess it's inevitable. It won't be long until all games are like this, where developers receive detailed "feedback" about player behavior, designing the game around such data.

Edited September 5, 2013 by anubite

[Orogun01]

How cynical, specially considering that it will get dropped once they see how useless "feedback" is. On the other hand it probably gives better results during testing, specially if the testers are particularly daft.

[alanschu]

So, because you've "heard it all" before, they're not valid criticisms? 

 

I intentionally made a purely objective recount of the nature of the complaint, and did not make any sort of qualitative assessment as to whether or not the complaints were or were not valid.  Part of why I did this was because Orogun asked if I was allowed to discuss the complaints.

 

Any inference made that I was being dismissive is a reflection of how you chose to read my post.

 

 

For the record the complaints were valid then, and are still valid now.

[NOK222]

 

 

For the record the complaints were valid then, and are still valid now.

 

That's nice too hear. Different from the earlier "they're just butthurt" responses. 

[lobotomy42]

 

Well, obviously they think that enough people will use it for it to be worthwhile to set up a system like it. Would be a colossal waste of resources if it wound up not having an impact on the game.

 

And, as they've said, this allows them to overcome issues like Conrad Verner's bad flags in ME2 due to being more adaptable. So, obviously, this is a major project for maintaining game-to-game continuity and, well, I can't believe they'd do it just for cosmetics.

I'm certainly not saying it's useless or wasted effort, I applaud it in fact and it is a fundamentally good idea.

 

I'd actually doubt it uses much in the way of resources. The fan editor for ME save games is perfectly functional without any inside knowledge, so it should be pretty easy for someone with access to how the save games are built to knock something up quickly, the difficult part would be getting it past the producer/ project director as something useful to do, not the implementation itself. I'd say it has two main functions, getting the committed fan online since the saves/ system will be cloud based- useful for getting better DLC penetration/ uptake rates, better 'biometrics', better utilisation of Origin etc- and because, as Maria says, Bioware is currently offering everyone free ice cream and this is a topping that will appeal to high value customers, exactly the type of people who may be disgruntled about things like the Conrad Venter bug instead of going "Conrad who?". 

 

But, while I suspect it will get a lot of use amongst the committed and well informed people like you or I (he says, with his customary surfeit of modesty) I do question how much usage it will get from the more casual who may not even know about it. Anyone with an offline console simply won't be using it even if they do know about it, for example, unless the cloud based system changes.

 

 

Just because a fan can do it does not mean it's "easy" if by easy you mean "low-cost in terms of time and resources."  Even if it were just a matter of building a "save game editor," there is still a lot of UI work to be done, to say nothing of the enforcement of internal logic (I haven't used the ME savegame editor specifically, but in my experience this is not something most savegame editors do.)  And this isn't even just a savegame editor - this will also have to tie in to game imports over at least five platforms, separate out multiple "world states" per user, integrate with Origin, require its own QA, etc, etc.  In my experience, any project done at the professional level - even when the goal is just to clone functionality from an existing amateur project - requires lots more time and energy from everyone involved because there are simply more chefs in the kitchen who will all need a hand in it.  (Which isn't to say that their presence is bad, just that it adds complexity.)

 

Case in point: read the credits sequence from any AAA game and notice how many names scroll by that are *not even employees of the developer or publisher*

[Hurlshort]

 

 

 

For the record the complaints were valid then, and are still valid now.

 

That's nice too hear. Different from the earlier "they're just butthurt" responses. 

 

 

Hah, you can do both!  You can have a valid complaint and still sound like a complete tool when you voice it.  

 

For example, saying "I was unsatisfied with the ending in ME3 and here are my reasons" is a reasonable way to voice one's complaints.

 

But screaming "The ME3 ending ruined my entire life!  I want my money and time back!" is still tackling to same issue, but sounds utterly ridiculous.

[NOK222]

 

 

"The ME3 ending ruined my entire life!  I want my money and time back!

 

It was a terrible time for us, and dark place in our history. I think the global economy went down a bit. 

Edited September 6, 2013 by NKKKK

[alanschu]

 

 

Hah, you can do both!  You can have a valid complaint and still sound like a complete tool when you voice it.

 

The thing about being overly hostile is that you end up going up against my humanity (i.e. that fallible nature that will feel inclined to make a snappy remark, get dismissive, or in general just be defensive) which creates barriers to facilitating feedback.  It's less murky and the details are usually clearer without that excess.  That doesn't mean you need to say you love us or cannot say you hate a game or a feature, though.

[Zoraptor]

this will also have to tie in to game imports over at least five platforms, separate out multiple "world states" per user, integrate with Origin, require its own QA, etc, etc.

The engine is the same for all five platforms so there's no reason for unique save game formats for each, different 'world states' are integral to the very idea of having 'editable' save game states and there's no need to integrate with Origin (or rather, it will likely be done automatically as part of its built in cloud save system, same potentially with the consoles that offer that functionality eg potentially link it to your Live profile for MS if needed). It shouldn't be a QA sink either, or at least not any more than allowing 'normal'  save game integration would be such as from ME1->2->3. When it comes right down to it the story flow algorythms of a computer game are not very complex and the whole thing can be tailored towards relevancy as Bioware knows what stuff is going to be important/ used, unlike a fan editor which has to take everything in a save into account since they are not sure what is used. It may take some effort on behalf of the web team (presumably) to get it prettied up but their job is not directly linked to producing the game anyway; in terms of the programming side it ought to be straight forward and fairly quick, since at its heart a world state of that type is a list of a few dozen variables, most of them booleans or with similar low numbers of options. They don't even need to ask things like what the previous character's names were, since they're a few hard defined options like Hawke and Cousland defined by race.

[Monte Carlo]

 

Hah, you can do both!  You can have a valid complaint and still sound like a complete tool when you voice it.

 

The thing about being overly hostile is that you end up going up against my humanity (i.e. that fallible nature that will feel inclined to make a snappy remark, get dismissive, or in general just be defensive) which creates barriers to facilitating feedback.  It's less murky and the details are usually clearer without that excess.  That doesn't mean you need to say you love us or cannot say you hate a game or a feature, though.

 

 

Obviously not referring to you personally, Alan, but Bio's corporate culture comes across as terribly passive / aggressive. Customers (different from 'fans', btw) are either (a) this mysterious race of incredibly complex and precious creatures that require advanced telemetry and marketing ninjas to understand, or (b) eternally snarky, butt-hurt plebs who couldn't possibly fully understand or appreciate the creative genius that goes into making a game.

 

Personally I find it amusing and partially blame it on the circle-jerk, festering, emo-scented hive of lameness that is the BSN.

[alanschu]

If you're referring to the BSN as being a place predominantly focused on praising BioWare, I disagree.  Obviously the topic of BIoWare games comes up a lot more there than here, but I'd say the breakdown of supporters to detractors is not all that different on the BSN than on this board.

 

 

 

 

It shouldn't be a QA sink either, or at least not any more than allowing 'normal'  save game integration would be such as from ME1->2->3.

 

There will be some unique QA aspects, such as the actual web interface/systems and so forth, as well as the pipeline for storing the data and delivering it to a game, as well as enforcing data integrity (i.e. not allowing contradictory choices).  Although I couldn't say how much is actually required, though I do know they have one embedded QA on their team.

[Maria Caliban]

*In the right way.

 

But BioWare is an EA company, so they are basically ruled by people in managerial/marketing positions. If they get their hands on statistics, we'll see the culling of entire necessary features because 'the numbers justify it'. This is why the decision to make DA2 a 1-year cycle game was made in the first place.

 

Not quite.

 

EA picked up BioWare in 2007, right before the recession started. In fall 2008, they lost 681 million and started seriously pruning its workforce. In 2009, DA:O came out and it made a lot of money so they decided they wanted another game pushed out as quickly as possible to boost the 2011 spring quarterly.

 

Sure, you can criticize them for thinking short term with the franchise, but it worked for the company. Because they were aggressive in pushing out 'blockbusters' that quarter showed 11% growth over the previous year. Every quarter, they were able to show that they were making more money than 2010, which is important because, to quote the Q1 report, "Cash flow from operations this quarter totaled a loss of $148 million versus a loss of $328 million a year ago."

 

Right. They were still operating at a loss.

 

They never planned for Dragon Age to be a once-a-year series. EA was in the red, they were laying off lots of employees, and they needed to beat a quarter that had the Sims 3 released among ten AAA titles.

 

Why are they now giving DA:I lots of time? Because of the fan backlash? Nope, because they're now operating at ~250 million gained. They can afford to let BioWare take an extra year to polish the game.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

If you're referring to the BSN as being a place predominantly focused on praising BioWare, I disagree.  Obviously the topic of BIoWare games comes up a lot more there than here, but I'd say the breakdown of supporters to detractors is not all that different on the BSN than on this board.

I'd say that the problem with the BSN is that it is saturated with people who manage to be hypersensitive and insensitive at the same time, not a breakdown of supporters to detractors. YMMV.

[lobotomy42]

 

this will also have to tie in to game imports over at least five platforms, separate out multiple "world states" per user, integrate with Origin, require its own QA, etc, etc.

The engine is the same for all five platforms so there's no reason for unique save game formats for each, different 'world states' are integral to the very idea of having 'editable' save game states and there's no need to integrate with Origin (or rather, it will likely be done automatically as part of its built in cloud save system, same potentially with the consoles that offer that functionality eg potentially link it to your Live profile for MS if needed). It shouldn't be a QA sink either, or at least not any more than allowing 'normal'  save game integration would be such as from ME1->2->3. When it comes right down to it the story flow algorythms of a computer game are not very complex and the whole thing can be tailored towards relevancy as Bioware knows what stuff is going to be important/ used, unlike a fan editor which has to take everything in a save into account since they are not sure what is used. It may take some effort on behalf of the web team (presumably) to get it prettied up but their job is not directly linked to producing the game anyway; in terms of the programming side it ought to be straight forward and fairly quick, since at its heart a world state of that type is a list of a few dozen variables, most of them booleans or with similar low numbers of options. They don't even need to ask things like what the previous character's names were, since they're a few hard defined options like Hawke and Cousland defined by race.

 

My argument is not that it is rocket science.  My argument is that even the work that is done by non-rocket-scientists is work that takes time and effort, and any time and effort spent on this is necessarily not spent on other things.

[alanschu]

How cynical, specially considering that it will get dropped once they see how useless "feedback" is. On the other hand it probably gives better results during testing, specially if the testers are particularly daft.

 

 

Feedback isn't useless, though it does require context.  Though it is somewhat entertaining how many people are quick to let us know about things like selection bias, when I know my CompSci program required a good chunk of statistics courses.

 

Yes there is a degree of interpretation, but it's pretty quick to conclude "The default choices are the most frequently chosen choices."  A lot of the times we share those infographics of telemetry breakdown purely for entertainment purposes.  Other forms of telemetry, such as where people die and what sort of actions they do in the game are things I find a bit more interesting.

 

 

There's also a degree of feedback from talking with fans.  Sometimes it's something silly, such as concept artists just chatting with cosplayers, and learning about what does/doesn't work.  It mostly starts out as just fun, but then there's the realization that an armor piece has serious physical restrictions and it's not as grounded as was thought.  So by having a discussion like that the concept artist can be better informed on the types of things that are actually physically possible, resulting in concepts that are more grounded in reality rather than simply looking cool.  And it's fun for all parties to boot.

[BruceVC]

 

 

Hah, you can do both!  You can have a valid complaint and still sound like a complete tool when you voice it.

 

The thing about being overly hostile is that you end up going up against my humanity (i.e. that fallible nature that will feel inclined to make a snappy remark, get dismissive, or in general just be defensive) which creates barriers to facilitating feedback.  It's less murky and the details are usually clearer without that excess.  That doesn't mean you need to say you love us or cannot say you hate a game or a feature, though.

 

 

Obviously not referring to you personally, Alan, but Bio's corporate culture comes across as terribly passive / aggressive. Customers (different from 'fans', btw) are either (a) this mysterious race of incredibly complex and precious creatures that require advanced telemetry and marketing ninjas to understand, or (b) eternally snarky, butt-hurt plebs who couldn't possibly fully understand or appreciate the creative genius that goes into making a game.

 

Personally I find it amusing and partially blame it on the circle-jerk, festering, emo-scented hive of lameness that is the BSN.

 

 

I find it slightly draining and also irrelevant the constant generalizations that people make towards BSN.

 

Let me give you an example, so there was this thread on BSN about what the sweat of a Asari would taste like ( or something similar ). There were maybe 20-30 people who participated in this esoteric discussion. But this discussion was used as an example of the depraved nature of the debates on BSN. Really? So the fact that a few people out of thousands discuss possibly controversial topics now the whole website is considered weird and socially inadequate?

 

Personally I could never formulate an opinion about a website based on such a small percentage of what the members say but hey that's just me

[GhostofAnakin]

 

 

 

Hah, you can do both!  You can have a valid complaint and still sound like a complete tool when you voice it.

 

The thing about being overly hostile is that you end up going up against my humanity (i.e. that fallible nature that will feel inclined to make a snappy remark, get dismissive, or in general just be defensive) which creates barriers to facilitating feedback.  It's less murky and the details are usually clearer without that excess.  That doesn't mean you need to say you love us or cannot say you hate a game or a feature, though.

 

 

Obviously not referring to you personally, Alan, but Bio's corporate culture comes across as terribly passive / aggressive. Customers (different from 'fans', btw) are either (a) this mysterious race of incredibly complex and precious creatures that require advanced telemetry and marketing ninjas to understand, or (b) eternally snarky, butt-hurt plebs who couldn't possibly fully understand or appreciate the creative genius that goes into making a game.

 

Personally I find it amusing and partially blame it on the circle-jerk, festering, emo-scented hive of lameness that is the BSN.

 

 

I find it slightly draining and also irrelevant the constant generalizations that people make towards BSN.

 

Let me give you an example, so there was this thread on BSN about what the sweat of a Asari would taste like ( or something similar ). There were maybe 20-30 people who participated in this esoteric discussion. But this discussion was used as an example of the depraved nature of the debates on BSN. Really? So the fact that a few people out of thousands discuss possibly controversial topics now the whole website is considered weird and socially inadequate?

 

Personally I could never formulate an opinion about a website based on such a small percentage of what the members say but hey that's just me

 

 

I've formulated an opinion that BruceVC likes searching the internet for threads about Asari sweat based on this thread.

[Gorth]

Hmm... was about to say something. Then considered the "PG" nature of this board and reconsidered. Never mind.

[Maria Caliban]

.. they have one embedded QA on their team.

 

Mental image of a tick buried head-first in skin.

 

 

 

I've formulated an opinion that BruceVC likes searching the internet for threads about Asari sweat based on this thread.

 

 

Mine is that he has a bad memory. It was about Tali's sweat, and she is not an asari. 

Edited September 6, 2013 by Maria Caliban