Dragon Age: Inquisition

[Gromnir]

 we likes fresca. is a beverage we first saw in the 70s back when tab and rc were big sellers. anyways, we like fresca and buy in large quantities. we bought those 24 packs til recent. reason why we don't buy 24 packs is 'cause coca cola don't sell'em no more.  coca-cola sells 20 count boxes... and charges same price they were recent selling 24.  Gromnir wants fresca, so while we groused a bit 'bout functional price increase, we still paid for 4 less cans o' soda.

 

publishers is no better than coca-cola. publishers ain't offering dlc to makes the world a better place-- they is making Money. dlc is a scheme that works to get you to pay more money for their games, 'cause like we need fresca, you'all need dlc. force everybody to pay more than $50 or $60 or whatever is basic standard day 1 price is gonna result in lost sales and lost dollars for publisher. publisher has no doubt figured out with a very small margin o' error, just how much money they lose by increasing cost of basic game. similarly, publishers know that some folks really need fresca, so they sell ce units and day 1 dlc folks to some folks... make optional.

 

you know, we bets some junkie who is stealing tvs and breaking into cars for loose change is gonna complain if his dealer raises cost of daily fix, but the junkie is still gonna find a way to pay. bet the junkie complains loud and long, but dealer knows the dirty little hollow man is gonna pay somehow, someway.

 

*shrug*

 

publish games has gotten less lucrative in recent years and so dealers is gonna find ways to get their consumers to pay more... oops, we means publishers, not dealers.  profits from successful games is having to cover inevitable loses from other games, so publishers has necessarily gotten creative in ways they squeeze blood outta you.  is no ethics o' day 1 dlc or such nonsense worth considering. is business. gotta deal with it or get clean... filthy junkies.

 

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps pardon us while we grab our 3rd fresca o' the day.

Edited August 27, 2013 by Gromnir

[Sarex]

I read all kinds of fantasy.

 

Me too, which is why I don't get the hate.

[decado]

 

Anyways do we really need to get into an argument about just how terrible some in-world contract fiction for a video game series is?  Really?

 

He's not the only person arguing the point.  So, based on your responses, I am led to conclude that your answer to that question is actually "yes."  Or is it just a "now that I've gotten the last word in" type of conclusion?  (I do that all the time too, btw)

 

 

I wouldn't normally consider someone "terrible" at something to be capable of writing "completely average" stuff.  Given that you led with it (as opposed to quite below average), leads one to feel that your conclusion is that he is typically completely average.  At this point, perhaps ostensibly because of your rhetorical question, I actually do feel like engaging in this discussion now (though I have never read any of the books).

 

I'm finding it difficult to disassociate your perspective from the standard internet MO of excessive use of hyperbole.

 

 

I'm perfectly happy to keep arguing it.  His books are awful.  He is a terrible book writer, who produced average or below-average writing.  I don't understand why people are tripping over this, it isn't magic.  If it makes people feel better, I can say that his writing was not below average but instead "terrible" but honestly, I was trying not to be too harsh.  However, if we are going to play musical chairs with words then I am using both barrels.  The books were awful.  Terrible. Terribad.

 

I have nothing against the guy as a writer of games.  BGII, one of my all time favorite games, was the first game he worked on. And that's cool, and he did a terrific job.  But writing a game and writing a book are completely different.  That is not to say that a person can't be good at both, of course, but they are two different skill sets.  If Gaider didn't have the backing of BioWare, and if the book placement wasn't decided beforehand, he would never be a published author with those DA books.  They are simply advertising fodder.

 

EDIT: Changed a sentence, Gaider didn't write that much of BGII!

Edited August 27, 2013 by decado

[Orogun01]

 

I read all kinds of fantasy.

 

Me too, which is why I don't get the hate.

 

People have differences of opinions 

[Maria Caliban]

I hope to pick up Weeks' tie-in novel The Masked Empire.

[alanschu]

If it makes people feel better, I can say that his writing was not below average but instead "terrible" but honestly, I was trying not to be too harsh.

 

Well, it did only serve to muddy up the waters, since you were no longer clear on your perspective.  The idea of trying to not be too harsh is weakened if you're just going to state that he's terrible in the first place, so yeah, just say it.  It doesn't come across as any more harsh IMO.

 

 

In any case (and perhaps still related)

David did post on his tumblr a degree of explanation: http://dgaider.tumblr.com/post/59443409665/on-things-i-learned-from-the-internet

 

I actually agree with the sentiment that people understate their idea of "Well I just didn't like it."  Although I think the dichotomy that consumers often end up creating helps facilitate this.  If something isn't appropriately justified, a critic will come in and attempt to dismiss due to lack of justification.  I mean, if someone wishes to elaborate on why they disliked it, that's fine.  But simply saying "it wasn't something I liked" is still valuable.  If you elaborate on it but start talking about immersion and whatnot, it doesn't necessarily help me understand what you didn't like about it though.

 

Though the worst culprits are when people try to economically substantiate why we should do things they like, while not doing things they don't like.  They are logical deductions which may or may not be true, but typically it boils down to that: "Don't do thing I don't like because ultimately you will lose money in the end" or "If you do this thing I will like, it'll totally make you more money too."  It's where fans recognize that it's still a business and if I can substantiate my argument with economic reasoning, there's a greater chance of getting what I want.  Which may or may not be true, I find (since I have little data on that sort of stuff in order to corroborate).  Same with the idea of "it shouldn't be hard."  Sometimes it is.  And even if it isn't, there are thousands of "not very hard" tasks that go into a game, and the opportunity cost may or may not be worth choosing X of Y.

Edited August 27, 2013 by alanschu

[NOK222]

I’ll tell you one thing, though: we certainly didn’t listen to the criticism more which accused us of being butthurt.

 

 

 

Ughhh. Jesus, he is so condescending. 

Edited August 27, 2013 by NKKKK

[Gorth]

Famous last words in software development: "How hard can it be?..."

 

Not joking (much). One of the few types of comments that makes me foam at the mouth are accusations of "lazyness". You don't get to the top of the food chain in software development by being lazy or incompetent. In my own (entirely anecdotal) experience, when a project turns to a nightmare, it's not a single individual or even a single team that go wrong, it's something much bigger involving the entire synergy of the whole team.

 

Yeah, that was probably a bit off topic

[alanschu]

Ughhh. Jesus, he is so condescending.

 

If you mention the term "butthurt" in a critique of a game, it doesn't motivate me to continue reading said post.  At that point, best to hope that someone with similar issues presented the same position but with less, well, condescension.  (there typically is, however, so I wouldn't worry too much).

 

So speaking for myself, I definitely do not give any extra consideration (which is precisely what David is saying...) if you start tossing in words like that, even if you're not directing said "butthurt" towards me.  I would argue that in most cases (if not all), someone using the phrase "butthurt" is likely being condescending themselves.

 

 

 

 

Not joking (much). One of the few types of comments that makes me foam at the mouth are accusations of "lazyness".

 

That is definitely a teeth grating one for me too.  Would prefer "I didn't like the choices you make" or even the slightly more adversarial "You make bad decisions" than "You are lazy" haha.

Edited August 28, 2013 by alanschu

[Tale]

I wonder if I have ever said that. It's not on the list of things I would never say. But I'm not sure I would understand the reasoning behind saying it.

 

Self-reflection moment.

[NOK222]

 

 

If you mention the term "butthurt" in a critique of a game

Amateur reviewers saying naughty words? Someone get the ****ing presses. 

Edited August 28, 2013 by NKKKK

[alanschu]

I wonder if I have ever said that. It's not on the list of things I would never say. But I'm not sure I would understand the reasoning behind saying it.

 

Self-reflection moment.

 

Butthurt or lazy?  Hahaha.

 

I can understand why people come to the conclusion that a dev is being lazy, especially when there are issues that are pretty obvious (DA2's map reuse, to call BioWare out on a glaring issue).  Being lazy is having the disinclination to do work despite having the ability to do so, and I think people can (fairly) say "You definitely have the ability to do so."  I think they are incorrect that there's a disinclination to actually put in said work, however.  It usually means work is being done elsewhere.

[alanschu]

 

 

Amateur reviewers saying naughty words? Someone get the ****ing presses.

 

Why should I give a review that says that an extra consideration, compared to one that doesn't?

[Tale]

Butthurt is on the list of things I would never say. Aside from referential such as this post.

[NOK222]

 

Amateur reviewers saying naughty words? Someone get the ****ing presses.

 

Why should I give a review that says that an extra consideration, compared to one that doesn't?

 

I don't know Alan, I don't care about reviewers, neither should you. 

[alanschu]

I'll keep that in mind the next time you have a critique about our games.

[NOK222]

I'll keep that in mind the next time you have a critique about our games.

You've always been welcomed to ignore my rants. Gosh, people here are touchy today aren't they?

Edited August 28, 2013 by NKKKK

[Sargallath Abraxium]

...not ta get off-topic, but alanschu, did Karzak e'er find his way ta BioHQ??...jus' wonderin', since, ya know, wouldn't put it past him...hehehe...Gaider did invite 'im, so...hehehe...

 

 

...WHO LUVS YA, BABY!!...

[alanschu]

I don't have any recollection of his appearance.

 

 

I predict instant, preemptive banning likely occurred!

 

I come and go on the BSN in spurts though (usually surrounding news and a short time after said news).

Edited August 28, 2013 by alanschu

[Sargallath Abraxium]

I don't have any recollection of his appearance.

 

 

I predict instant, preemptive banning likely occurred!

 

I come and go on the BSN in spurts though (usually surrounding news and a short time after said news).

...hehehe...no, amigo, I means did he e'er get ta Edmonton ta "visit"...hehehe...

 

 

...WHO LUVS YA, BABY!!...

[alanschu]

Oh man.  I have zero clue about that.  Our building structure still appears to be intact...  Unless it was a friendly social visit, given that he WAS the friendly Half-Orc.

[decado]

 

If it makes people feel better, I can say that his writing was not below average but instead "terrible" but honestly, I was trying not to be too harsh.

 

Well, it did only serve to muddy up the waters, since you were no longer clear on your perspective.  The idea of trying to not be too harsh is weakened if you're just going to state that he's terrible in the first place, so yeah, just say it.  It doesn't come across as any more harsh IMO.

 

 

In any case (and perhaps still related)

David did post on his tumblr a degree of explanation: http://dgaider.tumblr.com/post/59443409665/on-things-i-learned-from-the-internet

 

I actually agree with the sentiment that people understate their idea of "Well I just didn't like it."  Although I think the dichotomy that consumers often end up creating helps facilitate this.  If something isn't appropriately justified, a critic will come in and attempt to dismiss due to lack of justification.  I mean, if someone wishes to elaborate on why they disliked it, that's fine.  But simply saying "it wasn't something I liked" is still valuable.  If you elaborate on it but start talking about immersion and whatnot, it doesn't necessarily help me understand what you didn't like about it though.

 

Though the worst culprits are when people try to economically substantiate why we should do things they like, while not doing things they don't like.  They are logical deductions which may or may not be true, but typically it boils down to that: "Don't do thing I don't like because ultimately you will lose money in the end" or "If you do this thing I will like, it'll totally make you more money too."  It's where fans recognize that it's still a business and if I can substantiate my argument with economic reasoning, there's a greater chance of getting what I want.  Which may or may not be true, I find (since I have little data on that sort of stuff in order to corroborate).  Same with the idea of "it shouldn't be hard."  Sometimes it is.  And even if it isn't, there are thousands of "not very hard" tasks that go into a game, and the opportunity cost may or may not be worth choosing X of Y.

 

I read his tumblr page, and then I got to the comments.  Ugh.

[alanschu]

https://twitter.com/AvoidComments

[Zoraptor]

Can't say that I have any problem with 'lazy' when used in proper context. There may be reasons for reuse of maps or spawn mobs in DA2, but from the outside it looks like a simple straight line to the quickest solution, and from the general end user's perspective that is what it is, whatever the actual reasons. On the other hand something like the end of ME3- whether a particular person liked it or not- was not lazy, since it would have taken equal effort to take an alternative approach.

 

Funnily enough I've always considered butthurt to be with regards to those suffering from hemmeroids haemerrhoids haemorrhoids, since people with that most unfortunate and totally unhilarious affliction are typically grumpy and looking for things to be grumpy about. Never even considered the alternative.

 

Not to defend Gaider's writing, because I've not been impressed by the writing in Bioware games, but game dialogue writing and book writing are not interchangeable. I've yet to see highly rated published authors succeed in game dialogue, and vice versa.

Karpyshyn's (sp, no doubt) Star Wars books must have sold decently since they got sequels and they weren't all TOR tie ins, so it was successful on that front at least. Though I read the Bane novel a while back when I was stuck in town with nothing to do, and was not impressed with it quality wise.

[anubite]

Art is art, at the end of the day, you live with your choices. You should be proud of them - but only if you were convinced those choices were right at the time of making them. All art invites critique and most artists are egotistical to ignore it - and they probably should.

 

But the public impression is that BioWare games are not art, because they have descended down into the dreaded depths of "acquiring the call of duty audience". Or at least, this was the public impression upon the release of Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 2. Or at least, my impression way back then. It was not helped by the hypersexualization of BioWare's latest titles, or the decision to make all significant-role females in Mass Effect, even if they are alien females, physically attractive.

 

BioWare has an identity crisis. They claim to be artists, and thus, deflect all criticism. Yet, they clearly aren't artists when they cave in to tacked-on multiplayer horde mode, hypersexualization (*let me make a note that I have nothing against sex in games; what I dislike is hollow vapid sexualization that doesn't seem to serve any purpose other than to be eyecandy - there is a place for sex in art, that much is obvious, but in Mass Effect it feels like 90% of the motivation to actually want to engage in romance with any of the characters - not that they are enchanting people, just that their bodies make your brain all foggy), casualization, the dialogue wheel, et cetera, et cetera

 

Japanese games feel more like "art" to me. Of course, I'm biased. My parents were both solo-artists. I'm not sure how "company" or "group" art really works. But if you're making a painting or a sculpture, your ego gets captured in there. I can understand a willingness to ignore critique - since your ego is basically being criticized, and one's ego, if properly expressed is true to oneself, there's nothing one can find fault in it. Japanese games come off as being these egotistical works, look at Suda51, or any older Mario game - they have a consistent look, feel, texture, et cetera, so that it feels like it's all got some coherent theme or design behind it. But for most Western developers, I usually don't get that impression - it feels more like a product than a piece of art, so the decision to deflect criticism seems like a cop out. If you want the call of duty audience, you have to be willing to take criticism. If you don't want an audience, then make **** however you want to and just hope that people will continue to patronize your work. That's how most of the artists I've met make their living - they make what they love, and if it doesn't sell, they keep making it anyway. And then it becomes valuable, after they're dead.

 

This is my understanding of the philosophical conflict between the mass of angry (or 'butthurt') consumers and BioWare. Consumers want less corporate meddling, more art (or more hypersexuality? Maybe both.) and design, more substance, less flakiness... I mean, I've not been probably a great critic of BioWare's latest works, but I think I've clearly identified some areas that are in desperate need of improvement. Like, enemy design. DA2's enemy design is just bad. You can't deflect criticism there - every mage in DA2 has the same pool of spells with just some aesthetic differences. If that's not laziness, then it's bad design - or a sign of a team not properly planning ahead. I hope you guys didn't plan that ahead of time. I'm hoping it was something like, "****, this game is supposed to be released tomorrow?" "What can we cut guys?!" "T-The enemy spells! It's not like players want to lose anyway!"

 

Criticisms in terms of writing are much harder to substantiate and analyze but I would pin it more on the whole choice thing than I would the quality or direction of the writing. Mass Effect 3's biggest criticism is probably that your choices up until the RGB ending scene didn't matter. Cosmetically, they mattered maybe a little bit, but not in the way maybe people were anticipating, when ME1 made its grandstand appearance.

Edited August 28, 2013 by anubite