The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.
Video game industry thread: Trogdor commands you to use the new thread
One guy working at a massive company posting a positive review of his own game is not a 'swirling controversy'. The Escapist has a history of completely blowing these insignificant events out of proportion because that makes them Important Events and Newsworthy.
So glad i'm not the only one that sees this as a non-event.
Edit: rainbowdespair, have you looked at getgames, I think they're called? I believe it's a Eurogamer thing.
That's a good suggestion that I haven't heard before. Given the fact that Eurogamer gave us an 8/10, I think they'll probably be game.
I browse /v/ pretty often, and I'd agree. A lot of their whining is, well, whining for the sake of it.
But it's pretty farcical to think every low metacritic score came out of there.
I just scrolled down the first page of user reviews and checked every low score (ones in the red). Over 90% of them registered just to rate DA2, usually rating multiple versions of the games and sometimes with different scores.
Rakai on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]XBL: Rakayn | PS3: Rakayn | Steam ID
I browse /v/ pretty often, and I'd agree. A lot of their whining is, well, whining for the sake of it.
But it's pretty farcical to think every low metacritic score came out of there.
I just scrolled down the first page of user reviews and checked every low score (ones in the red). Over 90% of them registered just to rate DA2, usually rating multiple versions of the games and sometimes with different scores.
One guy working at a massive company posting a positive review of his own game is not a 'swirling controversy'. The Escapist has a history of completely blowing these insignificant events out of proportion because that makes them Important Events and Newsworthy.
So glad i'm not the only one that sees this as a non-event.
I don't even like Bioware and was about to post a very sarcastic statement about how stupid it is that people care about 1 review out of over a thousand from a guy that wasn't paid for his review (he's biased, but so is just about every user review there is).
If you are at all interested in selling your game directly, you should probably speak to cliffski of positech games, since he knows his stuff in that area.
He has a thing called Show Me the Games too, to showcase games sold direct by devs.
One guy working at a massive company posting a positive review of his own game is not a 'swirling controversy'. The Escapist has a history of completely blowing these insignificant events out of proportion because that makes them Important Events and Newsworthy.
So glad i'm not the only one that sees this as a non-event.
I don't even like Bioware and was about to post a very sarcastic statement about how stupid it is that people care about 1 review out of over a thousand from a guy that wasn't paid for his review (he's biased, but so is just about every user review there is).
Pretty sure a lot of people are rating Dragon Age II in response to how EA/Bioware has been acting, it's a knee jerk response in some aspects.
The false banning of sveral people on their forums most of which got their accounts restored.
The fact that the lead developer was defending the game from day one.
The Employee being caught red handed doing such a positive post saying to dismiss anything negative on all three systems.
People don't like that stuff, they've been getting sick of hearing such stories for a long time now, we've seen such things happen with other games in the past, so what do some do? Don't buy the game for one and others use their voices because yes those scores can make an impact. It's their way of reacting, maybe if the game developers and their PR some people wouldn't react the way they do, sure some are always going to give games 10's or 1's based on something they think is stupid or awesome if they're a fan or not but some people are reacting purely because of the companies policies and their own knee jerk responses.
I for one applaud the people fighting back as such, even in small ways instead of going "Lol, this is how it's always been, get over it, it's a non issue.".
Cade on
0
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
edited March 2011
...Most of those reviews were up before this stuff with bannings and such.
Dragon Age 1 is one of the most overrated games ever. It's ugly, boring to play, and tells a very lame story. Hype over some return to glory and great marketing got that game quite a bit of success.
DA 2 was rushed to cash in on that success and it shows.
Dragon Age 1 is one of the most overrated games ever. It's ugly, boring to play, and tells a very lame story. Hype over some return to glory and great marketing got that game quite a bit of success.
DA 2 was rushed to cash in on that success and it shows.
disagree on the first point, but agree entirely on the second.
The first is a matter of opinion in many respects, but the rush job on DA2 shows pervasively throughout the game and its design.
I'm in the investment community (yeah I'm one of those scum Wall Street guys) and followed this industry from a financial perspective for a very long time. Also happen to be a hardcore strategy gamer. I'm rooting for the strategy genre, but fearful that it goes away unless there is a pathway towards profitability. I believe LOL could be the blueprint for success.
The reason LOL represents the future is the implementation of the free-2-play business model which has been architected deeply into the game mechanics. Whats unique here is that its probably one of the first for the strategy genre.
F2P games have been around for a long time for MMO RPG's, but not yet for RTS/strategy games. I believe LOL has broken that barrier. Yes, Battleforge came earlier and went F2P, but that hasn't been a big success like LOL.
Unlike most RTS or strategy games before it, it doesn't try to sell you the client upfront, rather they monetize on usage. So instead of selling you the box for $60 one-time, they build persistence, and monetize the game over a large user base (of which a small % pay for items) over a long period of time. Monetization can potentially run for years hence a very steady earnings stream. This has been the blueprint for the entire Asian gaming industry for the past decade and its now finally coming here. In fact its been so successful the largest gaming company in the world "Tencent" decided to buy Riot Games for ~$400M. Tencent btw, has a market cap of $50B compared to Nintendo at $35B and EA at $6B and THQ at $300M. Tencent gets 1/2 of its revenue from monetizing F2P games. The market is rewarding this business model and Wall St thinks console games/packaged goods = death. No one cares about console games in the investment community. Why would Tencent pay more for a startup company with one free-2-play game more than the entire value of THQ (which includes all of Relic+Saints Row+Wrestling+Homefront, etc)? Because Tencent is blieves in this model and will also bring LOL to China and monetize it massively. Tencent's top F2P games in China are each monetizing to the tune of $200-300M per year every year!
This point about continued monetization is an important one. Lets take a look at the granddaddy of strategy games, Starcraft 2. At a recent investor conference in NY last week, the CFO of Activision said and I paraphrase, "Starcraft 2 was a lesson for Blizzard given high production cost and little potential for incremental revenue post game sale - not worth the effort". Even the AAA high polish SC2 which sold over 4M+ copies which brought in $250M+ or so in revenue was not good enough. Why? Because it took years to develop at huge cost and although it sold well initially, there is essentially zero ongoing monetization. SC2 just sold the client upfront and has zero subscription or item monetization after release. SC2 compared to WOW which has been doing over $1B per year for 5 years now, is considered a financial disappointment. SC2 has a chance at some redemption when they decide how they intend to monetize the game in China which I suspect will be on a subscription/time usage basis.
Ok, so all this comes back to LOL. LOL monetizes usage and utilizes the proven Asian F2P model, but has been crafted to fit the strategy genre. This should be a blueprint for other strategy games to follow. I know that Relic tried with Company of Heroes Online and inexplicably pulled the plug on it. I believe the reason they did that was THQ management which has little foresight here, decided to cut spending on this and refocus on if you can believe it, more "big AAA console games"....yawn. I would bet more AAA-level strategy games will have to move to this model in the coming years. Selling a game client without longtail monetization will become increasingly an untenable business model for AAA strategy games. (Not referring to indie titles or superhard core niche games which will always be around).
ssendam on
0
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
I figured that those scores came from blistered thumbs or something. They're delusional enough to pull that shit.
Honestly, like I said...most of the complaints are people who are mad the game wasn't made the way they wanted it.
It's like the whole ME1 to ME2 situation. Except since DA comes from a much more traditional RPG background people are a lot more deep-seated in what they do and don't like. So you get a lot more complaining.
See while that is certainly interesting, Dota2 is going to crush League of Legends and define the genre going forward. And it will be monetized in an entirely different way (probably following TF2s lead).
I figured that those scores came from blistered thumbs or something. They're delusional enough to pull that shit.
Honestly, like I said...most of the complaints are people who are mad the game wasn't made the way they wanted it.
It's like the whole ME1 to ME2 situation. Except since DA comes from a much more traditional RPG background people are a lot more deep-seated in what they do and don't like. So you get a lot more complaining.
To be fair, it was the only traditional style RPG since...NWN2?
Really what's surprising is that we haven't see a new infinity engine game come out of eastern europe or somewhere. it has to be super cheap to produce and if done right I'd reckon it would be popular.
I figured that those scores came from blistered thumbs or something. They're delusional enough to pull that shit.
Honestly, like I said...most of the complaints are people who are mad the game wasn't made the way they wanted it.
It's like the whole ME1 to ME2 situation. Except since DA comes from a much more traditional RPG background people are a lot more deep-seated in what they do and don't like. So you get a lot more complaining.
The reason that comparison doesn't quite fit is that despite the radical change in game design from ME1 to ME2 it is nearly impossible to argue that ME2 is in any way technically inferior. It runs better, looks better, and has better interface and structure in pretty much every aspect of design.
Xenogears of Bore on
3DS CODE: 3093-7068-3576
0
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
edited March 2011
I didn't mean so much in...whether or not DA2 is superior to DA1 from a technical aspect. That could be argued.
I meant moreso why people ARE complaining. In which the situations are very similar.
Dragon Age 1 is one of the most overrated games ever. It's ugly, boring to play, and tells a very lame story. Hype over some return to glory and great marketing got that game quite a bit of success.
DA 2 was rushed to cash in on that success and it shows.
So they should let the dragon age more before releasing him next time?
Make sure he becomes a more sophisticated and mature dragon before they take him out in public.
Complaints about change for the positive (ME1 > ME2) are about disliking what the new game is, not what the old one became. Essentially a dislike for the design and type of game, not the execution.
Complaints about change for the negative (DA1 > DA2) are about disliking developer decisions, not just what the new game is. They're about complaining at execution and design. The absolute worst case scenario.
It's fine to say you don't like ME2 because you don't like what it is. But not because you don't like how it was made. Because it is a shining example of the specific genre it occupies. You just don't like that genre, not the game itself.
But with DA2 it's a bit of both. The game changed genres and also turned out worse overall. So you get double the amount of people complaining. Those who don't like the new genre (more of a brawler) and those who don't like the execution.
Dragon Age 1 is one of the most overrated games ever. It's ugly, boring to play, and tells a very lame story. Hype over some return to glory and great marketing got that game quite a bit of success.
DA 2 was rushed to cash in on that success and it shows.
So they should let the dragon age more before releasing him next time?
Make sure he becomes a more sophisticated and mature dragon before they take him out in public.
Dragon Age 1 is one of the most overrated games ever. It's ugly, boring to play, and tells a very lame story. Hype over some return to glory and great marketing got that game quite a bit of success.
DA 2 was rushed to cash in on that success and it shows.
So they should let the dragon age more before releasing him next time?
Make sure he becomes a more sophisticated and mature dragon before they take him out in public.
Should have stopped with the first line, you ruined a perfectly good joke by expanding it. Just like Dragon Age!
Xenogears of Bore on
3DS CODE: 3093-7068-3576
0
CorehealerThe ApothecaryThe softer edge of the universe.Registered Userregular
edited March 2011
F2P that follows a Guild Wars and TF2 style of unnecessary (in terms of gameplay and balance), in-game monetization is the best way to do it, with an added emphasis or boxed sales and real life retail additions. Oftentimes, F2P is used rather more as ethier an exploitative vacuum sucking every drop of money it can from a usually small userbase or it comes as a crutch used to shore up shitty MMOs that want to get more revenue under a guise of being "free" to play. F2P is very much a relative term in the latter definitions because you can never be sure how much is free to play until your already in and told to buy this content or this new armor set to stay competitive. Turbine and Cryptic are examples that use models like this.
If strategy games go towards a more money grabby direction then LoL, it will hurt us and probably the genre long term. If they go towards a non-evil direction, hopefully with a push from DOTA2, then it will probably be better and more sustainable in the long run. There should be no artificial or arbitrary barriers covered in dollar signs denying access to core gameplay content in games already purchased by a player, F2P needs to be more about little things.
As to DA2, I reserve judgment until after I've played it, but I do think that it probably was a rush job from what i've seen and heard round the Internet and from friends, mixed with the fact that Bioware already has it's many hands full with SW:TOR and ME3. The metacritic thing really isn't a big deal, mainly because people should be researching games more thoroughly and not relying on a troll heavy metacritic score before dropping 60$ on a new release title. The game will sink or swim regardless based on it's own merits and the merits of those bastards in marketing.
Corehealer on
0
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
edited March 2011
Like I said. I won't argue that the game wasn't rushed.
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
edited March 2011
Well...one has to remember that DA1 was originally going to be release around March of 2009...don't know what they did between those time periods.
Dragkonias on
0
CorehealerThe ApothecaryThe softer edge of the universe.Registered Userregular
edited March 2011
I liked DA:O and bought it on a whim with my GF not long after it came out (something I don't do often). It was a very fun game that had few real flaws in my eyes and I ended up running through it and the lion's share of DLC three times. Awakening was much more, if not rushed, at the very least not very well thought out in my mind, and seemed to be more of a forced extension of the core storyline that didn't really do much for me. Maybe it was because of a money grab, maybe not. I only played it once and don't care.
DA2 may be good and may not be good. I'm still willing to give Bioware some benefit of the doubt regardless of the talk of reused dungeons and graphical issues/glitches/bugs. I still appreciated DA:O enough to give it a go. But should there be a DA3, shame on me if I buy it having hated 2.
I'm really enjoying DA2 for what its worth. It was definitely rushed and it has its flaws for sure. But for me, the core of the game is still great. I like the combat (even the maligned reinforcement system) over DA:O, and I generally like the characters over DA:O. So far, I am really liking the story as well. I can't blame Bioware for the rush job as product slate and deadlines are likely out of their hands as much as they are out of the hands of the developer I work for. I'm actually a little surprised at the quality we got from them in such a short amount of time.
I do feel like if it had been named something else from a different developer it would have gotten a much better reaction. Its all about expectations, and people expect huge things from Bioware. Even if the game is good, its easy to feel really let down when the game doesn't live up to those expectations.
CorehealerThe ApothecaryThe softer edge of the universe.Registered Userregular
edited March 2011
It would probably live up to those expectations if it actually had control over it's development cycle and deadlines, like Valve does, and Bioware certainly makes plenty of bucks for their bang to support such a setup.
They just made a new Dragon Age 2 General Discussion forum that you have to own the game to post in (it has to be registered to your account). This is after everyone is spamming the DA2 forum with the metacritic stuff.
Wow, they're even giving an item to have people register now:
If you have not yet registered your copy of Dragon Age II, you can do so HERE If you do register your game, you not only gain access to post on our registered owner forums, you also get the in game bonus item, the Boots of the Frozen Wastes for doing so.
Complaints about change for the positive (ME1 > ME2) are about disliking what the new game is, not what the old one became. Essentially a dislike for the design and type of game, not the execution.
Complaints about change for the negative (DA1 > DA2) are about disliking developer decisions, not just what the new game is. They're about complaining at execution and design. The absolute worst case scenario.
It's fine to say you don't like ME2 because you don't like what it is. But not because you don't like how it was made. Because it is a shining example of the specific genre it occupies. You just don't like that genre, not the game itself.
But with DA2 it's a bit of both. The game changed genres and also turned out worse overall. So you get double the amount of people complaining. Those who don't like the new genre (more of a brawler) and those who don't like the execution.
It's a perfect storm.
Dragon Age 2 did not change genres. It's an RPG, just like DA:O and Baldur's Gate, etc.
Posts
That's a good suggestion that I haven't heard before. Given the fact that Eurogamer gave us an 8/10, I think they'll probably be game.
Steam ID : rwb36, Twitter : Werezompire,
I just scrolled down the first page of user reviews and checked every low score (ones in the red). Over 90% of them registered just to rate DA2, usually rating multiple versions of the games and sometimes with different scores.
Curiouser and curiouser.
Shitty Tumblr:lighthouse1138.tumblr.com
Woo. Good thing they embargoed/held off all those bad to middling reviews until after release.
3DS Friend Code: 2165-6448-8348 www.Twitch.TV/cooljammer00
Battle.Net: JohnDarc#1203 Origin/UPlay: CoolJammer00
BOOOO!
Do not engage the Watermelons.
If you are at all interested in selling your game directly, you should probably speak to cliffski of positech games, since he knows his stuff in that area.
He has a thing called Show Me the Games too, to showcase games sold direct by devs.
It took me a minute to get that.
The false banning of sveral people on their forums most of which got their accounts restored.
The fact that the lead developer was defending the game from day one.
The Employee being caught red handed doing such a positive post saying to dismiss anything negative on all three systems.
People don't like that stuff, they've been getting sick of hearing such stories for a long time now, we've seen such things happen with other games in the past, so what do some do? Don't buy the game for one and others use their voices because yes those scores can make an impact. It's their way of reacting, maybe if the game developers and their PR some people wouldn't react the way they do, sure some are always going to give games 10's or 1's based on something they think is stupid or awesome if they're a fan or not but some people are reacting purely because of the companies policies and their own knee jerk responses.
I for one applaud the people fighting back as such, even in small ways instead of going "Lol, this is how it's always been, get over it, it's a non issue.".
You really have an agenda to push don't you.
This is the saddest one.
Twitter
DA 2 was rushed to cash in on that success and it shows.
Just so we're absolutely clear, Dragon Age 2 has topped the sales charts both sides of the Atlantic.
These scores have zero impact at all.
Most of the complaints are basically that it isn't DA1...or rather BG2 from what I've gathered.
Twitter
disagree on the first point, but agree entirely on the second.
The first is a matter of opinion in many respects, but the rush job on DA2 shows pervasively throughout the game and its design.
Honestly, like I said...most of the complaints are people who are mad the game wasn't made the way they wanted it.
It's like the whole ME1 to ME2 situation. Except since DA comes from a much more traditional RPG background people are a lot more deep-seated in what they do and don't like. So you get a lot more complaining.
To be fair, it was the only traditional style RPG since...NWN2?
The reason that comparison doesn't quite fit is that despite the radical change in game design from ME1 to ME2 it is nearly impossible to argue that ME2 is in any way technically inferior. It runs better, looks better, and has better interface and structure in pretty much every aspect of design.
I meant moreso why people ARE complaining. In which the situations are very similar.
So they should let the dragon age more before releasing him next time?
Make sure he becomes a more sophisticated and mature dragon before they take him out in public.
Complaints about change for the negative (DA1 > DA2) are about disliking developer decisions, not just what the new game is. They're about complaining at execution and design. The absolute worst case scenario.
It's fine to say you don't like ME2 because you don't like what it is. But not because you don't like how it was made. Because it is a shining example of the specific genre it occupies. You just don't like that genre, not the game itself.
But with DA2 it's a bit of both. The game changed genres and also turned out worse overall. So you get double the amount of people complaining. Those who don't like the new genre (more of a brawler) and those who don't like the execution.
It's a perfect storm.
Boo!
Twitter
Should have stopped with the first line, you ruined a perfectly good joke by expanding it. Just like Dragon Age!
If strategy games go towards a more money grabby direction then LoL, it will hurt us and probably the genre long term. If they go towards a non-evil direction, hopefully with a push from DOTA2, then it will probably be better and more sustainable in the long run. There should be no artificial or arbitrary barriers covered in dollar signs denying access to core gameplay content in games already purchased by a player, F2P needs to be more about little things.
As to DA2, I reserve judgment until after I've played it, but I do think that it probably was a rush job from what i've seen and heard round the Internet and from friends, mixed with the fact that Bioware already has it's many hands full with SW:TOR and ME3. The metacritic thing really isn't a big deal, mainly because people should be researching games more thoroughly and not relying on a troll heavy metacritic score before dropping 60$ on a new release title. The game will sink or swim regardless based on it's own merits and the merits of those bastards in marketing.
Because it was and it really shows.
Ack, thats even worse.
Don't be such a drag
Twitter
And he has a cool theme song.
Dragon Age: Expansion Pack - March 2010
Dragon Age II - March 2011
For what is supposed to be a a big massive AAA RPG series, the release dates are awfully close together.
Steam ID : rwb36, Twitter : Werezompire,
DA2 may be good and may not be good. I'm still willing to give Bioware some benefit of the doubt regardless of the talk of reused dungeons and graphical issues/glitches/bugs. I still appreciated DA:O enough to give it a go. But should there be a DA3, shame on me if I buy it having hated 2.
I do feel like if it had been named something else from a different developer it would have gotten a much better reaction. Its all about expectations, and people expect huge things from Bioware. Even if the game is good, its easy to feel really let down when the game doesn't live up to those expectations.
Wow, they're even giving an item to have people register now:
Double Wow.
Dragon Age 2 did not change genres. It's an RPG, just like DA:O and Baldur's Gate, etc.