"I Don't get all the hate for Dragon Age 2" - Take 2

[thespyder]

er, i thought i covered that with "with all the baggage that brings". i do remember seeing a developer discussion on this point, and it was made very clear that they wanted their own intellectual property due to being frustrated by using someone else's.

Hence my comment about "pejorative". But essentially correct.

 

[Bateluer]

So how far did you get in DA2?

Still playing it. Just completed Aveline's guardsmen quests, met Fenris, and got Merrill. The combat is still a joke though.

 

[Looney]

I wasn't too impressed with it. I liked the first act, but the rest of the game was just too repetitive. You were doing the exact same thing in the exact same areas as the first act. Even the voice overs didn't live up to Bioware standards if you ask me.

In the end, i give it a B- grade.

 

[Bateluer]

Not quite following the time line too well. Okay, so act 1 is 1 year after the Blight faced in DA:O? But DA2:Act 1 takes places after the events in Awakenings, because Anders is a Gray Warden

Spoiler

and Justice is merged with him

.

Why do I find Anders as a level 8 Mage and not as the level 35 mage I left at the end of Awakenings?

 

[zerogear]

Didn't like 7 years pass from prologue before you met anders?

Don't remember it too well the game was a giant blur since it was so repetitive.

 

[PrayForDeath]

Why do I find Anders as a level 8 Mage and not as the level 35 mage I left at the end of Awakenings?

Well it's the same reason you start as lvl 1 in the Witcher 2 even though it picks up just a month after TW1's ending. It is a game after all.

 

[Bateluer]

Didn't like 7 years pass from prologue before you met anders?

Don't remember it too well the game was a giant blur since it was so repetitive.

No, a little more than a year did.

 

[PrincessFrosty]

The reason DA2 was hated on so much was because in large part because DA:O was loved so much and they deviated from what made it good.

DA:O was good was because it was a spiritual successor to the RPGs of old like Baldurs Gate, and there's a lot of old school gamers who've wanted a modern RPG of this style for a long time, and DA:O delivered.

It wasn't perfect by any means but I believe it captured the spirit of this genre. DA2 by comparison took everything that was good and dumbed it down for the mainstream crowd, consolization at its finest.

Anyone else notice the nice sleek DA:O HUD and Menu went from looking nice/functional to looking like it was designed for 3 year olds? It reminded me instantly of those toys you give infants, you know with the colour coded shapes and corresponding holes you put them through.

It's like Playschools "My First RPG" for "Suitable Children under 7", press X to win game, Press Y to equip armour.

 

[Bateluer]

Anyone else notice the nice sleek DA:O HUD and Menu went from looking nice/functional to looking like it was designed for 3 year olds? It reminded me instantly of those toys you give infants, you know with the colour coded shapes and corresponding holes you put them through.

It's like Playschools "My First RPG" for "Suitable Children under 7", press X to win game, Press Y to equip armor.

Only for Hawke. Can't change other characters armor.

But yes, the new HUD blows. Should have kept it essentially the same from DAO, along with most of the spell/ability progression. That stuff was already in place, could have saved them a boat load of unnecessary development costs and let them focus on improving characters, dialogue, and story.

 

[Fayd]

i ascribe anders becoming gay to the fact that my protagonist in DA:O was just so manly awesome that everyone'd turn gay for him.

though he wasn't gay. so there might be some holes in my theory.

 

[Rifter]

BioWare fucked up, and they deserve the crap being flung their way for this monstrosity. Someone at BioWare either didn't have the balls or didn't have the intelligence to convince EA that what they were doing was a mistake, and that can't be blamed on anyone but them.

Are you for real or just 12 years old? Do you have any clue how the business world works?

EA Owns bioware, they arn't under contract for the game they are OWNED by EA. When the people who own your company tell you to do something you do it or they fire you and find someone who will do what they want, its that simple. You can try and reason with them but at the end of the day they own you and you do what they say.

So its 100% EA's fault as bioware had no option to tell them to f off, the game was rushed and i think bioware pulled off a miracle in the time they had.

 

[Looney]

Not quite following the time line too well. Okay, so act 1 is 1 year after the Blight faced in DA:O? But DA2:Act 1 takes places after the events in Awakenings, because Anders is a Gray Warden

Spoiler

and Justice is merged with him

.

Why do I find Anders as a level 8 Mage and not as the level 35 mage I left at the end of Awakenings?

Really? This is your beef? That they reset the levels of the characters? This is a new game, not an expansion. It has a new story and all characters begin at level 1.

 

[Bateluer]

Really? This is your beef? That they reset the levels of the characters? This is a new game, not an expansion. It has a new story and all characters begin at level 1.

No, I have other beefs with the game. This just breaks immersion, when they could have easily created another mage character to fill the role.

 

[thespyder]

No, I have other beefs with the game. This just breaks immersion, when they could have easily created another mage character to fill the role.

Would have required too much creativity on the part of the story "Writers" (to use the term loosely) to create a new mage.

Besides, they wanted a way to "Tie back" the plot to the original IP. they are hoping to lend credibility to the product via a connection to former incarnation that was much liked. Kind of like including Drzzts in Baldur's gate. Or having Leonard Nemoy in the "New Star Trek". Only the "New" product is no where near as good as those examples.

 

[Wardawg1001]

Are you for real or just 12 years old? Do you have any clue how the business world works?

EA Owns bioware, they arn't under contract for the game they are OWNED by EA. When the people who own your company tell you to do something you do it or they fire you and find someone who will do what they want, its that simple. You can try and reason with them but at the end of the day they own you and you do what they say.

So its 100% EA's fault as bioware had no option to tell them to f off, the game was rushed and i think bioware pulled off a miracle in the time they had.

I'm going to quote my OWN POST that you just quoted, in response to your stupidity.

Zenoth, with all due respect to the effort you put into that post... who gives a fuck? It doesnt matter if it was BioWare or EA who forced it to be rushed out. The game was trash, and no they dont get a free pass because they had a limited timeline or budget. They took what could have been an amazing new original franchise and flushed it down the toilet, and whether its because their EA overlords wanted it to happen, or its because BioWare got greedy and wanted to make a quick buck off it and misjudged how people would react, it really doesnt matter - BioWare fucked up, and they deserve the crap being flung their way for this monstrosity. Someone at BioWare either didn't have the balls or didn't have the intelligence to convince EA that what they were doing was a mistake, and that can't be blamed on anyone but them.

Bioware chose to throw their lot in with EA, last time I heard it wasn't a hostile buyout. Bioware chose to allow EA to have the final say in what they produce. Bioware chose to let their success or failure as a studio be determined by EA.

The real question is do you have any clue how the real business world works? Companies and people are judged by the quality of what they produce. Bioware made the choices listed above, and this is what it led to - a shitty product. When EA came knocking, saying "Hey we know you just produced an amazing new game with original IP, but we want you to knock out a crappy sequel in one year and we're going to underfund it as well," nobody at Bioware could show the EA overlords why this was a bad idea. THIS IS A FAILURE BY BIOWARE. Nobody is saying EA aren't fucking idiots for it as well, but Bioware needs to accept responsibility for their decisions, and what it has led to. And consumers need to hold them accountable for it as well.

In the real business world, you don't get a pass because "your big bad boss told you to do it," or "the manufacturer shipments aren't on time," or "the testing department didn't catch this problem." You succeed or you fail, based on the quality of your work, and if Bioware is not capable of standing up for their standards of quality, if they are no longer able to produce quality products, then they will fail, and no amount of blaming it on EA will help them.

 

[Gheris]

Wardawg1001 is right. Bioware let EA buy them. Bioware was more than able to keep themselves an independent entity. I consider this a learning lesson for Bioware. They have seen the EA effect on a successful franchis. What happens next is going to be very telling. If Bioware produces another rushed\crappy game then I fear that may be a sign of things to come.

I have always bought Bioware games from Baldur's Gate on without seeing reviews because I knew they would be good. With the exception of Mass Effect 3 I will no longer be doing this.

 

[micrometers]

I don't all the hate either. Everything I"ve seen of DA2 seems better than DAO. It's more streamlined and there's just less clutter overall.

 

[thespyder]

I don't all the hate either. Everything I"ve seen of DA2 seems better than DAO. It's more streamlined and there's just less clutter overall.

I am going out on a limb in thinking that you have not actually read this (or the about a hundred other) threads on the subject, or played the game at all. Might want to actually read before posting.

 

[blackened23]

Are you for real or just 12 years old? Do you have any clue how the business world works?

EA Owns bioware, they arn't under contract for the game they are OWNED by EA. When the people who own your company tell you to do something you do it or they fire you and find someone who will do what they want, its that simple. You can try and reason with them but at the end of the day they own you and you do what they say.

So its 100% EA's fault as bioware had no option to tell them to f off, the game was rushed and i think bioware pulled off a miracle in the time they had.

Its bioware's fault for allowing greed to take over and getting bought out by EA. They used to pride themselves on being small and creating games with artistic vision, now just bow down before their EA overlords and do whatever they want. They WILLINGLY allowed EA to take over because some fat cat exec wanted to stuff his pockets with cash. THEY SOLD OUT. Screw them.

If they can't make a game without selling out all of their developers should just quit and call it a day. F' em.

And yes, DA2 is a horrbile joke compared to DA:O. I can't believe this came from the same company that made the masterpiece Baldurs Gate 2. Sad, sad day.

 

[Iron Wolf]

I don't blame EA.

I blame Bioware for the poor decision of making a completely different game than the original, especially knowing the time and money constraints EA put on them.

Wouldn't it have made a lot more sense to simply take the DAO engine, including the combat system, skill trees, and UI, and use them to create what, in effect, would be a big expansion pack to the original Dragon Age, and call it DA2?

People wouldn't bitch that it was a different game (a la DoW vs DoW2, although that is not a real apt comparison, as those two were entirely different types of games altogether), and your only time and expense-wasters are for writing a new plot, new character models, and new voice acting.

All that could have easily been done in a year, and not pissed anybody off. The only risk would be a comparison to the original, and the sequel may be found not quite as good, but it sure would be a hell of a lot better situation than the shitstorm that the actual DA2 generated.

And WTF? Didn't the devs say "We aregoing to take the best parts of DA1 and DA2 to make DA3?" WHAT best parts of DA2?

 

[thespyder]

I don't blame EA.

I blame Bioware for the poor decision of making a completely different game than the original, especially knowing the time and money constraints EA put on them.

Wouldn't it have made a lot more sense to simply take the DAO engine, including the combat system, skill trees, and UI, and use them to create what, in effect, would be a big expansion pack to the original Dragon Age, and call it DA2?

People wouldn't bitch that it was a different game (a la DoW vs DoW2, although that is not a real apt comparison, as those two were entirely different types of games altogether), and your only time and expense-wasters are for writing a new plot, new character models, and new voice acting.

All that could have easily been done in a year, and not pissed anybody off. The only risk would be a comparison to the original, and the sequel may be found not quite as good, but it sure would be a hell of a lot better situation than the shitstorm that the actual DA2 generated.

And WTF? Didn't the devs say "We aregoing to take the best parts of DA1 and DA2 to make DA3?" WHAT best parts of DA2?

Um, the suggestion is that all of the change in direction was mandated by EA. that it wasn't Bioware at all that wanted to change things in this manner. Which is why people are blaming EA, not Bioware.

As for the fact that EA owning Bioware was not "Hostile", goes to show that people really don't understand the nuances of the business. When a company buys another, even in "Friendly" "Mergers" doesn't necessarily mean that the DEVS and designers in the one company really wanted it. merely that the Board didn't oppose it. And it could have happened for any of a number of reasons, not the least of which is the ability to pay their employees on a long term basis (not necessarily greed).

And as for Bioware standing up to EA, when a company owns another, sure the ownee "Can" say we want to do X, Y, Z. And hopefully they will be heard. Hopefully the Owner company will listen. And in most cases where the parent company has any sense, that happens. And it is also true that, if the DEVS and programmers who actually make the magic had a difference of opinion from management, they could start looking for new jobs. But who wants to do that?

But the true reality of the matter is EA had a different vision of DA2 than was originally in DA:O. That vision held out, irrespective of what Bioware may have wanted or didn't want. there may have been some hand shaking. there may even have been some grumbling. We don't know. But given Bioware's track record prior to DA2 (and ME2), I personally believe I have reason to suspect that the changes that made DA2 as bad as it was came from sources that were not involved in previous endeavours. that may make me naive, but I think it is reasonable to suspect, all things being equal.

Of course the entire discussion is moot. We got what we got. And EA owns Bioware. And the whole DA franchise lost a good deal of credibility such that quite a lot of former Converts will think twice before blindly purchasing any further DA products.

 

[Wardawg1001]

Um, the suggestion is that all of the change in direction was mandated by EA. that it wasn't Bioware at all that wanted to change things in this manner. Which is why people are blaming EA, not Bioware.

As for the fact that EA owning Bioware was not "Hostile", goes to show that people really don't understand the nuances of the business. When a company buys another, even in "Friendly" "Mergers" doesn't necessarily mean that the DEVS and designers in the one company really wanted it. merely that the Board didn't oppose it. And it could have happened for any of a number of reasons, not the least of which is the ability to pay their employees on a long term basis (not necessarily greed).

And as for Bioware standing up to EA, when a company owns another, sure the ownee "Can" say we want to do X, Y, Z. And hopefully they will be heard. Hopefully the Owner company will listen. And in most cases where the parent company has any sense, that happens. And it is also true that, if the DEVS and programmers who actually make the magic had a difference of opinion from management, they could start looking for new jobs. But who wants to do that?

But the true reality of the matter is EA had a different vision of DA2 than was originally in DA:O. That vision held out, irrespective of what Bioware may have wanted or didn't want. there may have been some hand shaking. there may even have been some grumbling. We don't know. But given Bioware's track record prior to DA2 (and ME2), I personally believe I have reason to suspect that the changes that made DA2 as bad as it was came from sources that were not involved in previous endeavours. that may make me naive, but I think it is reasonable to suspect, all things being equal.

Of course the entire discussion is moot. We got what we got. And EA owns Bioware. And the whole DA franchise lost a good deal of credibility such that quite a lot of former Converts will think twice before blindly purchasing any further DA products.

I never suggested that the programmers and graphics designers and every single last employee there was happy with (or hell, even had a vote in) the decision. What I'm talking about is the quality of products that a company produces and the reputation of a company. I'm not trying to say that the employees there are bad people, or that they are untalented, I'm just saying that the company as a whole is no longer one worthy of praise if this is what we can expect from them. And I couldn't give a shit about the reasons, and nobody else should either, unless you have some agenda other than simply appreciating a company for the quality of what it produces. Does it matter if they let EA buy them from greed or because they legitimately thought it was a good business decision and a good decision for the quality of their games going forward? No, it really doesn't, unless all you are concerned about is apologizing for them or making excuses. But they made the decision, they have to live with it (or do something to change it), and I'm tired of people apologizing for Bioware because "its all EA's fault!"

Let me reiterate - I don't think that the developers, designers, graphics artists, writers, janitors, etc are bad people or that they are wholly responsible for what has happened to the quality of Bioware games. You could gather the greatest game designers of our time into a single team and develop a game, and if it sucked, then they dont deserve any praise for making the game. This is what has happened at Bioware. They have (or at least had) some very talented people with great vision and great ideas, and other influences (whether its losing their talented people, or EA's oversight, or a bad decision by the project team) caused them to create a crappy game and possibly permanently scar the reputation of a promising new IP they had spent YEARS developing. If they continue to let this happen, then their reputation will sink, and they will have deserved it.

And as for Bioware standing up to EA, when a company owns another, sure the ownee "Can" say we want to do X, Y, Z. And hopefully they will be heard. Hopefully the Owner company will listen. And in most cases where the parent company has any sense, that happens. And it is also true that, if the DEVS and programmers who actually make the magic had a difference of opinion from management, they could start looking for new jobs. But who wants to do that?

People need to stop pretending like this is some "giant faceless corporation" vs "giant faceless corporation" thing. These are real people, with feelings, thoughts, knowledge, and most of all the ability to digest information. Someone at Bioware used to think that taking the time to develop high quality games was the best way to run their business. Someone at EA disagrees. I guarantee these people ended up in the same room together at some point, or on a call, or what the fuck ever means of communication they had the option to use. Bioware couldn't convince EA not to fuck up their new franchise, and thats on Biowares shoulders. These decisions that come down to Bioware are not god given edicts written in stone. These are the results of brainstorming, discussions, meetings, market analysis, and a slew of other things that go on before a game is given a green light to be created. If Bioware didn't build enough autonomy into their relationship with EA to make sure that their voice can be heard and given legitimacy, or they lack the ability to make their case in a manner that makes sense to the decision makers over at EA, then once again, this is a failure by Bioware, and once again, the quality of their games and subsequently their reputation will fall because of it.

 

[thespyder]

I never suggested that the programmers and graphics designers and every single last employee there was happy with (or hell, even had a vote in) the decision. What I'm talking about is the quality of products that a company produces and the reputation of a company. I'm not trying to say that the employees there are bad people, or that they are untalented, I'm just saying that the company as a whole is no longer one worthy of praise if this is what we can expect from them. And I couldn't give a shit about the reasons, and nobody else should either, unless you have some agenda other than simply appreciating a company for the quality of what it produces. Does it matter if they let EA buy them from greed or because they legitimately thought it was a good business decision and a good decision for the quality of their games going forward? No, it really doesn't, unless all you are concerned about is apologizing for them or making excuses. But they made the decision, they have to live with it (or do something to change it), and I'm tired of people apologizing for Bioware because "its all EA's fault!"

Let me reiterate - I don't think that the developers, designers, graphics artists, writers, janitors, etc are bad people or that they are wholly responsible for what has happened to the quality of Bioware games. You could gather the greatest game designers of our time into a single team and develop a game, and if it sucked, then they dont deserve any praise for making the game. This is what has happened at Bioware. They have (or at least had) some very talented people with great vision and great ideas, and other influences (whether its losing their talented people, or EA's oversight, or a bad decision by the project team) caused them to create a crappy game and possibly permanently scar the reputation of a promising new IP they had spent YEARS developing. If they continue to let this happen, then their reputation will sink, and they will have deserved it.

So let me understand this. If EVERY SINGLE PERSON in Bioware was firmly against the changes necessary to make DA2 what it ended up to be, it isn’t the PEOPLE’s fault, but it is still Bioware’s fault? And not EA who mandated the changes? Interesting.

People need to stop pretending like this is some "giant faceless corporation" vs "giant faceless corporation" thing. These are real people, with feelings, thoughts, knowledge, and most of all the ability to digest information. Someone at Bioware used to think that taking the time to develop high quality games was the best way to run their business. Someone at EA disagrees. I guarantee these people ended up in the same room together at some point, or on a call, or what the fuck ever means of communication they had the option to use. Bioware couldn't convince EA not to fuck up their new franchise, and thats on Biowares shoulders. These decisions that come down to Bioware are not god given edicts written in stone. These are the results of brainstorming, discussions, meetings, market analysis, and a slew of other things that go on before a game is given a green light to be created. If Bioware didn't build enough autonomy into their relationship with EA to make sure that their voice can be heard and given legitimacy, or they lack the ability to make their case in a manner that makes sense to the decision makers over at EA, then once again, this is a failure by Bioware, and once again, the quality of their games and subsequently their reputation will fall because of it.

You are right. These are people with thoughts and feelings, and blaming them for something they had no power over what so ever, is hardly fair.

Understand that, if EA made a decision about one of its subsidiaries, there might literally have been no power on earth that could change that. This isn’t “Big Faceless Corporation”, this is the way business works at almost all levels. Again, hopefully the parent company listens, but if they don’t that is by no means “Necessarily” a failing on the part of the owned company. And blaming someone for going up against a brick wall and failing is just plain stupid.

Don't get me wrong. I agree that Bioware's rep is mud now. But I think that it is because EA is doing the driving. Not because Bioware fundamentally decided to tank their IP, or that their internal direction changed.

 

[Iron Wolf]

You guys are crazy. I have trouble believing any of this. It sounds like rantings about conspiracy theories to me.

My experiences (not in the software industry, mind you) with takeovers are that if you know what you are doing and are successful at it, all the parent company wants is that you keep doing it, and keep making them money. Unless EA is a strange company, I have trouble believing that they were micromanaging to the point where they told Bioware to make all those radical changes to the game.

It's only when a company is unsuccessful and they are bought out because of that that when the buying company's execs have to step in and make radical changes, and even then, it to the way you do business, not necessarily to the individual products you are selling.

 

[Wardawg1001]

So let me understand this. If EVERY SINGLE PERSON in Bioware was firmly against the changes necessary to make DA2 what it ended up to be, it isn’t the PEOPLE’s fault, but it is still Bioware’s fault? And not EA who mandated the changes? Interesting.

I didn't say no single person can be blamed for what happened, I said not every single person at Bioware is responsible for it. If every single person that works at Bioware did in fact disagree with the direction EA was taking with DA2, then yes, there is still someone to blame - whoever is responsible for putting Bioware under the control of EA. If letting EA buy Bioware is TRULY the catalyst for what has happened, then that is the mistake Bioware made, and that is the reason they ruined a great new franchise, and that is Bioware's fault, and its not your job as a consumer to rationalize it away for them. I am not absolving EA of blame in this hypothetical instance, both parties fucked up.

You are right. These are people with thoughts and feelings, and blaming them for something they had no power over what so ever, is hardly fair.

Understand that, if EA made a decision about one of its subsidiaries, there might literally have been no power on earth that could change that. This isn’t “Big Faceless Corporation”, this is the way business works at almost all levels. Again, hopefully the parent company listens, but if they don’t that is by no means “Necessarily” a failing on the part of the owned company. And blaming someone for going up against a brick wall and failing is just plain stupid.

Don't get me wrong. I agree that Bioware's rep is mud now. But I think that it is because EA is doing the driving. Not because Bioware fundamentally decided to tank their IP, or that their internal direction changed.

Its funny, you empathize with the poor dev's over at Bioware for having thoughts and feelings that I am supposedly unfairly insulting, yet in the next paragraph you seem to think that the people at EA are "brick walls" and have no thoughts, feelings, intelligence, or the capacity to listen to reason. I've got news for you, theres real people on both sides, and the people over at EA aren't brain dead brick walls. They can be talked to, they can be reasoned with, their minds can be swayed. If nobody at Bioware is capable of doing this, then guess whats going to happen to Bioware? I think you get my point.

And yes it is fair to blame Bioware for failing to convince EA that they had a better way to go about developing DA2. And if the people at EA truly wouldn't listen to reason, refused to be convinced, then once again whoever is responsible for putting Bioware under the control of EA is at fault. I have a big meeting next week where I have to convince some higher-ups that a new process I developed that uses a new piece of code is far superior to the way we do things right now. If I can't do that, then I have failed to accomplish my goal, my work will go unnoticed, and the efficiency of the work done in my division will not be as good as it could have been. Do I deserve praise for being able to create something useful but failing to achieve anything? Should I be promoted even though I can't get my ideas across to anyone important enough to do something about it? If Bioware has a recipe for success (and it seems they used to), but they can't use it because they have lost their autonomy, then yes the blame lies with them, and they will suffer the consequences of that until they fade into mediocrity.