Dragon Age II - Final Thoughts (Bioware interview)

[tzimize]

-Depth simply isn't important. Being able to outfit your party just isn't worth them not looking the way the artist wants them to look. Being able to move the camera so that real tactical combat is possible isn't as important as having nice scenery.

I'd agree with them on this. It's hard to make a character look iconic if they are all wearing the same armor. As the the tactical camera, never really saw the need for it so...

Really?

I'd say its a lot more important that they design armor pieces that are not awful looking. With some decent design it would be simple to have for example rogue armor in some color sets and warrior armors in other color sets while wildly varying the look itself. Thus they are relatively easily recognizible and you can still have the joy of finding a new cool armor piece/weapon.

Personally I got to say that the fact that I had less equipping to do in DA2 didnt bother me as much as the fact that the game was simply plain bad.

 

[Irridium]

How did you come up to the conclusion that Bioware is pulling out of the RPG market? I fail to see anything pointing to such a thing. Yes, repetitive dungeons, enemies appearing out of thin air and then blowing up when dead are all bad choices(for me), yet they have nothing to do with the RPG part of the game.

They're stripping out the things that make their games RPGs. Sure, they'll still call them RPGs, but they'll basically be CoD with a dialog wheel. A dialog wheel that has no impact on the plot.

From here I can conclude you havent played DA2 Too the end

Everything in the game ties into the plot

You mean the end where all your choices end up being completely fucking pointless? Where it all gets thrown away so you can fight a mage who turned into a giant monster then a crazy lady with a big sword? Things that happen NO MATTER WHAT choices you make now and made earlier?

 

[postblitz]

How did you come up to the conclusion that Bioware is pulling out of the RPG market? I fail to see anything pointing to such a thing. Yes, repetitive dungeons, enemies appearing out of thin air and then blowing up when dead are all bad choices(for me), yet they have nothing to do with the RPG part of the game.

They're stripping out the things that make their games RPGs. Sure, they'll still call them RPGs, but they'll basically be CoD with a dialog wheel. A dialog wheel that has no impact on the plot.

From here I can conclude you havent played DA2 Too the end

Everything in the game ties into the plot

You mean the end where all your choices end up being completely fucking pointless? Where it all gets thrown away so you can fight a mage who turned into a giant monster then a crazy lady with a big sword? Things that happen NO MATTER WHAT choices you make now and made earlier?

do you really think anybody can make a game where every choice u make can influence the ending?

 

[Irridium]

How did you come up to the conclusion that Bioware is pulling out of the RPG market? I fail to see anything pointing to such a thing. Yes, repetitive dungeons, enemies appearing out of thin air and then blowing up when dead are all bad choices(for me), yet they have nothing to do with the RPG part of the game.

They're stripping out the things that make their games RPGs. Sure, they'll still call them RPGs, but they'll basically be CoD with a dialog wheel. A dialog wheel that has no impact on the plot.

From here I can conclude you havent played DA2 Too the end

Everything in the game ties into the plot

You mean the end where all your choices end up being completely fucking pointless? Where it all gets thrown away so you can fight a mage who turned into a giant monster then a crazy lady with a big sword? Things that happen NO MATTER WHAT choices you make now and made earlier?

do you really think anybody can make a game where every choice u make can influence the ending?

I expected something along the lines of the first 2 fallouts, or New Vegas, or Origins, where at the end there was an "epilogue" scene that showed you the long-term effects of your choices. They don't need to make you see them all, but just say what they did.

 

[AVATAR_RAGE]

-Depth simply isn't important. Being able to outfit your party just isn't worth them not looking the way the artist wants them to look. Being able to move the camera so that real tactical combat is possible isn't as important as having nice scenery.

I'd agree with them on this. It's hard to make a character look iconic if they are all wearing the same armor. As the the tactical camera, never really saw the need for it so...

I am on the fence with this, I think if devs are gonna have a set attire for a character in long games such as DA they should have a few alternate versions or different clothes all together, built into the system.

Or, alternatively, still give people the option to put different armour on their characters? You don't want to? Then leave them as they are. Having the option to customize how your characters look doesn't mean you have to.

You like the fact that Isabella looks like a medieval stripper? Fine, leave her as is. You want her to look a little more respectable? Put some robes on her. No-one's forcing you to ruin your characters 'iconic' look, but the option's there if you personally think they look naff.

For a game company who have previously espoused the virtues of choice, and even slagged off other developers for their lack of choice in games, Bioware are doing a good job of not letting you play with their toys now.

That's why I would like to see more alternate options (even if they have to be unlocked during the game. Honestly I understand that the devs want the characters to look iconic, but they don't have to take away the freedom of customizability from the players. This way they could have the slutty costume for Isablla as well as something less revealing. Win, win really.

 

[Susurrus]

SNIP

Well, er. Yes. Deus Ex.

 

[Irridium]

How did you come up to the conclusion that Bioware is pulling out of the RPG market? I fail to see anything pointing to such a thing. Yes, repetitive dungeons, enemies appearing out of thin air and then blowing up when dead are all bad choices(for me), yet they have nothing to do with the RPG part of the game.

They're stripping out the things that make their games RPGs. Sure, they'll still call them RPGs, but they'll basically be CoD with a dialog wheel. A dialog wheel that has no impact on the plot.

From here I can conclude you havent played DA2 Too the end

Everything in the game ties into the plot

You mean the end where all your choices end up being completely fucking pointless? Where it all gets thrown away so you can fight a mage who turned into a giant monster then a crazy lady with a big sword? Things that happen NO MATTER WHAT choices you make now and made earlier?

I dont mean to be a ***** but I found mages I saved, bloodmages and the like on my way to the end trying to kill me or standing besides me in te room before the final battle
I saved a lyrium addicted ex-templar who was reinstated thanks to me and he was killed in conversation by the knight commander

I could have killed anders when I wanted but I didn't and he brought substantial fighting power tot the field

I chose to take bethany into the deep roads, she died
I could have made contact with a grey wardenapparently to have her fight by my side in the end
or could have left her at home to be taken away

You should fucking play the game again do sidequests and remember who you talk too, character models are not copy paste for example, you just encounter the same people a lot unless you kill em off and they're gone

I did play through the game. Twice and halfway through a third. The final part is still the same apart from a few different characters fighting by your side.

 

[AlternatePFG]

I did play through the game. Twice and halfway through a third. The final part is still the same apart from a few different characters fighting by your side.

And that is why the game is such a disappointment for me. Act 3 plays almost exactly the same, no matter what you do. They made you think that the choices you made earlier in the game would have impact but no, the mages are still suicidal dipshits that fight you even if you are on their side, and you fight the same people no matter what side you take.

 

[Krantos]

Really just a lot of white noise. He never really addressed the controversy at all, seeming to pretend that it was only minor or nonexistent.

The only points that stuck out for me were:

-The ending. He claimed the ending was better because it shows things falling apart. He said this was more interesting than Origins where things "get resolved." ... That's kind of the point of an ending. Things need to get resolved. You can have an ending that leaves room for a sequel and still have a sense of resolution. Having things fall apart at the end isn't an artistic novelty; it's called a cliff-hanger.

-Companions. A couple things here. Firstly, he deflected the complaints that the characters were less engaging by claiming it was a combination of nostalgia and slower character development. I don't buy that. A slower character development should still be just as engaging if not more so. I feel like this point was just a smoke screen. He thought people were wrong, so he dismissed their views.
Second thing about the characters was the outfits. The reasoning for not allowing players the change them was that it gave the developers more of a chance to personalize them. Fair enough, but taken with the earlier complaint (that companions were less engaging) it seems to have failed. They'd be better off looking at other options; preferably ones that don't make players feel like they're getting skimped on options.

-Tactical Camera. I understand that having the tactical camera restricts what they can do with the levels. The problem I have with this, and indeed anything similar (i.e. Character outfits), is this is still a game. Anytime you have to sacrifice gameplay components to add artistic flair, you have to seriously consider whether that's a good idea. If the developers want to create a visual experience unimpeded by gameplay restrictions, they should just make movies. A good designer focuses on gameplay first and structures the visuals around that. Not the other way around.


By and large, I'm just kind of disappointed in the interview. Laidlaw seems to be going to great lengths to deflect and devalue the complaints people have with the game. He never once says "this was a bad idea on our part" about anything. He seems to honestly believe that the game is 100% fine as it is and only requires a little tweaking.

Whenever a developer says something like that, it puts my knickers in a twist. No game has ever been perfect. My favorite interview of all time was one Game Informer did with the designer for Far Cry 2. In it, the guy is completely open and critical of the game, discussing numerous things that didn't work as planned and some that were outright bad ideas. It really impressed me that a developer was willing to be that honest about their game and made me view the game more charitably.

Conversely, anytime a developer gives an interview like Laidlaw did here, it make me more critical. After all, if the developer is unwilling to acknowledge the faults of the game, it's unlikely they'll be addressed in the sequel.

 

[Trolldor]

Laidlaw's opinions may be dissapointing for some, encouraging for others but there is one thing that stands above all considering people's thoughts on DA2.

Why does everyone act like they own the game, the direction of development and what is right or wrong with it?

In my opinion the game was a step forward concerning many little annoyances the first one had. Sure, some things may appear devolved from my perspective.. but who am I to say its better or worse?

There's this comment on the OP link that struck me:
"whitemute

Posted Apr 4, 2011 9:36 am PT

I'm just so tired of giving my money to these greedy people...."

So ... this guy is complaining that he gives away money -FREELY- to bioware and he dislikes what he's doing? Maybe you shouldn't do it then, you twat! Why do you and everyone else think demos/reviews/previews and dev interviews exist?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TLDR: Do you think Leonardo da vinci working on Mona Lisa (or wtv other masterpiece) cared what some customers that bought his work think?

Make no mistake: games are art! If games would be made mechanically to stardards like cars or other engineering products they would all be dull!

About the aspect of finances I'd reckon if they'd have trouble selling DA2 they will take measures like retcons in comics.

PS: i hate that isabella didn't upgrade her armor(in looks/style) as merril did. Other than that.. i liked the chars iconic gear and i hate mages'shoulderpads being made of feathers and fur.

I lol'd.

Isabella didn't wear armor. She wore a piece of cloth. A fan service redesign, a completely ridiculous overhaul.
The elves suffered the same insult.
The world was narrowed, the characters simplified, Hawke was a titan of fuck-all characterisation. If both his siblings AND parents are dead, why does he not ever fucking acknowledge the fact? Just carries on as if nothing ever happened. You get one cutscene and that's it.
Games might be art, but Dragon Age 2 is a finger-painting from a first grader.

 

[Irridium]

wasn't it just so in origins?

I mean in some way it may be a little less build up since we didn't get to impregnate a witch again hardiharhar
but still the choice remains the same

Kill a dude Y/N, Side left right or centre, choose a team, fight the "war" this time instead of factions joining your battle , you get people you helped or didn't help in sidequests showing up

you know the only real issue with the story is that you can't actually play centre
That's my only critique on the game

You can't give me a centre option and then just keep on saying "OH YOU WANT THAT? C'EST IMPOSSIBLE"
Hawke should have been able to become the leader of kirkwall

In Origins there was a nice Epilogue that detailed what happened after the game. You learned what happens to the Dwarves, Elves/Werewolves, the Kingdom of Ferelden, your companions, the Arl's son, the Mages Tower, Andraste's Ashes, and plenty of other side missions. You get to see what your choices did to people, and how they ended up based on a choice you made. It wasn't anything spectacular, just some text. But it offered closure, an ending. Something thats very lacking these days.

Dragon Age 2 doesn't have that. Its basically you fighting a battle, then according to Varric you all ran away. And apparently shit's getting real. But then the credits roll.

What about the mage kid who can walk in/out of the fade at will? What do the Qunari do when they learn about the Arishok's death? What happens to most of your companions(Varric says most go their separate ways)? What happens to Bodan and Sandal? What happens to that slave girl you could save? What happens to your uncle? What happens to the Bone Pit(does it stay dead or does it get revived by someone)?

All we learn is that the Chantry/Templars/Mages all over Thedas are all in disarray, but thats all we learn. And even then it just sets things up for a sequel.

 

[Frotality]

minor note: stop countering criticisms of DA2 by exclaiming that someone must not of played the game fully; its childish, ignorant, and isnt helping your case. while that might be status quo on the internet, surely you can present better retorts than to just deny that the other person is aware of what they are criticizing.

...onto the OT: im certain its another of those interviews where the actual interview took place behind the scenes, then some PR guy "improved" the answers for public broadcast/posting. laidlaw basically just says "this is what we did in DA2. its probably what we'll do from now on. goodbye.". he doesnt actually DENY any criticism, mostly just covers his ears and goes "lalalalala". im sure laidlaw himself has very different opinions on the subject; sadly this interview wreaks of executive meddling; pretty common nowadays, and not at all unexpected from EA, but still, its kinda sad to see my once-favorite developer bioware stoop to this so shamelessly.

its becoming more and more obvious that yahtzee was right; indie games are where its at right now, AAA developers are getting more and more like hollywood, releasing countless cash-in sequels and having interviews consisting entirely of padding with no insight into the development process to be gained at all. if you'll excuse me, i think its time i finally finished my giant mage tower in minecraft and dump some more lava on elves in dwarf fortress.

 

[Instant K4rma]

What?! Someone has taken pride in the work they have done?! What's next? Genocide? I guess BioWare just can't win. They release one game and everyone writes them off as a failure and a disgrace as a gaming company. Other great companies have released bad games, too. And, while I'm at it, DA2 wasn't even all that bad. It was just a change form the original, which has everyone up in arms (Though I will admit that DA:O was a better game). People are even getting pissed at them giving away free copies of ME2 to everyone who has already purchased DA2, or purchases DA2 by the end of the month as a celebration of it's successful sales numbers. They get flak for giving good games away. Really?

Bah, this whole thing will blow over by the time Skyrim comes out. By that time everyone will be crying about Bethesda being a terrible company for not copy/pasting Oblivion and calling it a sequel.

 

[johnnnny guitar]

To Instant K4rma
Dude just go to say love your pic

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

a more viable future for the franchise.

That's everything you need to know. They spent five years on DA:O, and it showed - both in the quality of the product and the development cost. Someone told them that kind of development cycle was no longer feasible, so they shortened it to 14 months and hoped we'd all just play along. That hasn't happened, so it will be very interesting to see what happens next. If they rush out another sequel, we'll know they've basically caved to shareholder concerns and jettisoned their artistic integrity. At that point, they are no longer worthy of my support. If they do something crazy, like spend two whole years on DA3, we'll know there was enough pushback from fans to make an actual difference.

I can't help but feel this is all related to The Old Republic. They're taking their sweet time with that one, which is commendable, but the sheer cost of that project is clearly affecting other franchises.