Dragon Age - PC Delayed

Well, actually - it went from the old 2nd edition AD&D to 3rd edition D20 rules.

I've never seen any reference to that, just that it was based on the d20 system. Besides, Icewind Dale 2 had already used the 3rd Edition rules.

That's not to say it was particularly complex or rich, but it was definitely much, MUCH more complex than what we find in Jade Empire or Mass Effect.

In combat yes, but certainly not in general. What really bugged me about KotOR was the small size and simplicity/linearity of the environments. They were almost as simple as those in Jade Empire, and far simpler than what ME offered.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,445
Location
Florida, US
If you really want a spreadsheet number-cruncher, then go and play WoW. You will spend far more time trying to figure out the best builds, gear choices, enchants, gems, glyphs, rotations, priorities etc than you will putting them into practice. It's a math-geek's wet-dream. Nothing in a single-player RPG even comes close really, because they aren't as tightly balanced, or competitive. 1% more DPS doesn't mean much of anything in a single-player D&D game.

Having played WoW extensively, I find that I'm not interested in number crunching when I play offline games. I want the things that I don't get in WoW - choices and consequences, depth of characterisation, quest design, and to some extent, story-telling. I think I just want a good story in any game I play that isn't Mario Kart or something similar.

If DA is an Action-Adventure with C&C, interesting characters and story, and an interesting world to explore, I'll be thrilled.
 
Joined
Jul 26, 2007
Messages
473
Location
Australia
If you really want a spreadsheet number-cruncher, then go and play WoW. You will spend far more time trying to figure out the best builds, gear choices, enchants, gems, glyphs, rotations, priorities etc than you will putting them into practice. It's a math-geek's wet-dream. Nothing in a single-player RPG even comes close really, because they aren't as tightly balanced, or competitive. 1% more DPS doesn't mean much of anything in a single-player D&D game.

Having played WoW extensively, I find that I'm not interested in number crunching when I play offline games. I want the things that I don't get in WoW - choices and consequences, depth of characterisation, quest design, and to some extent, story-telling. I think I just want a good story in any game I play that isn't Mario Kart or something similar.

If DA is an Action-Adventure with C&C, interesting characters and story, and an interesting world to explore, I'll be thrilled.

Why is it that people always say "if you want this, go play that" as if whenever someone points out an aspect that they enjoy, that's all they need - out of context?

Are people really that hungry for simplifying everything.

Anyway, I enjoy powergaming a lot - yeah - but I need more than that. That's why I call myself a demanding player, because I actually want A LOT of things before I'm satisfied.

I played WoW for way too long, and I achieved becoming #1 DPS rogue horde-side on my server - or so I gathered from the few hundred people I knew on Shadowsong - and that was fun until I realised how utterly hollow the experience was compared to the amount of time and effort I poured into it. WoW - like MMOs in general - has no purpose or ending, and I find that I can't play the genre anymore because inventing my own goals just isn't going to cut it in a virtual world. I need games to end and give me closure - and I need games to be fun throughout and not require me to work for that fun - at least not to the extent that it resembles an actual job.

KotOR wasn't a number-cruncher by any means, but it had what I consider meaningful development choices and it felt good to make good ones. That's really what I'm going for - the feeling that I've done something "smart" and I love to be rewarded by becoming more powerful. In Mass Effect - they streamlined the systems into oblivion and you have "+1 damage" or "+1 hit points" for pretty much every skill. You couldn't "game the system" by choosing the right class and holding back levels until you got to choose the right jedi class - and so on. KotOR - whilst simpler than NWN/BG2 - still had enough of that to represent quality to myself.

Mass Effect also sucked utterly in terms of giving you new "stuff" - which included new and interesting items or powers. You didn't really get anything visceral - a true power - beyond what was available at first. That's the best kind of powers - ones that give you some completely new cool visual indicator like a new move or - in the case of KotOR a new force power.

Mass Effect had a tiny handful of powers that simply got a bit better for each skill point - and that's just too boring. Beyond that the powers themselves were almost clinical in nature, which fit the style, but ultimately made for one boring "caster" class.

---

About the linear structure of KotOR vs Mass Effect - then I'd have to disagree Mass Effect was any better. Sure - the areas were A LOT bigger because of the outside exploration, but once you got into a base - it was much the same. There was always one or two paths to choose from, and there really wasn't any "exploration" to be had, because you got from one main quest objective to the next. I won't even get into the pointlessness of the side quests.

Also, way too much of the "size" of Mass Effect consisted of driving around samey areas shooting down turrets or droids with the MAKO cannon. This was about the most boring and pointless activity I can think of in a CRPG. It mostly resembled an arcade game from the 90s in these sections. 100% filler crap content that was there simply to extend the life of a mediocre game.

That said, I DO think Mass Effect has an AMAZING visual style and really hits all the right notes in term of sci-fi atmosphere. But that's about it in terms of strengths.

---

The Star Wars universe will always be special to me. Not because I respect Lucas or his work - because he's demonstrated his talent with his last three movies. But let's not forget that his ideas can be good while the execution of them most definitely isn't.

I don't care where he stole his samurai Jedis from - I just think he created a wonderful galaxy with tons of ideas with tons of potential. The fact that I was spellbound as a little kid only adds to my appreciation for Star Wars.

KotOR wasn't made by Lucas - it was made by Bioware. So they simply drew from the strengths and added their own. I think they succeeded brilliantly, and I think KotOR is the best SW game in existence. It has flaws - true - but overall I think it's really well put together. I'm replaying it as we speak - and I'm amazed at the amount of content there is - lots of deep characters, lots of nice systems, good but optional minigames, good story, still looks good, and in general just a very well done product.

Mass Effect just can't really compare in terms of "the sum of its parts".
 
Well everyone will have their opinion, and while mine might be in the minority, I simply found Mass Effect to be a lot more interesting than KotOR.

Maybe it's simply a matter of burnout. As I said earlier, I've been a huge Star Wars fan for a long time. After all the movies, novels, comic books, action games, space sims, first-person shooters, etc, etc, based on Star Wars, KotOR just didn't blow me away.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,445
Location
Florida, US
Well everyone will have their opinion, and while mine might be in the minority, I simply found Mass Effect to be a lot more interesting than KotOR.

Maybe it's simply a matter of burnout. As I said earlier, I've been a huge Star Wars fan for a long time. After all the movies, novels, comic books, action games, space sims, first-person shooters, etc, etc, based on Star Wars, KotOR just didn't blow me away.

Nothing wrong with different opinions :)

To each his own - and I'll add that I was initially very impressed with Mass Effect and its atmosphere. There's no doubt it's a very competent title - my tastes just require a stronger focus on the "gamey mechanics" aspects. While not as bad as Jade Empire (imo), it's just not enough for a Bioware title. Then again, I did think of them as being in the top 3 of developers some years ago - so maybe my expectations are a bit out of whack. It took me a while to realise just how much they've moved towards the current standard of mass market explosion appeal. Jade Empire should have clued me in, but I gave it a pass and thought it was an exception. I took it as an experiment with a completely new setting and IP - and I saw it as more of a pure console title, and as such a stronger focus on action was expected.

I also got a bit caught up in the hype of Mass Effect, and they talked endlessly about the advantages of having their own license and not having to deal with the D&D rules system. It kinda shocked me that they'd actually do away with such a big strength of their former games - namely the D&D system - only to completely mess it up themselves.

I expected a system with similar complexity, but without the awkward implementation issues of a pen and paper system. Actually, I expected an even deeper and more interesting RPG system, now that they were free to make it all up without having to code their way out of incompatibilities. Instead they opted for the easy way out, and just went "Dungeon Siege" on the skill system and invented just about the least colorful loot system I've seen in a CRPG.

It's safe to say that I was quite disappointed personally, and because of my special expectations, I might be harder on it than most.
 
Last edited:
Mmmm, not sure why you expected those things. It sounds to me like you simply set yourself up for disappointment. I followed Mass Effect from the moment it was first announced, and Bioware most certainly never led anyone to believe it was going to have the complexity of a pen and paper system.

Bioware also didn't opt for the easy way out at all. Just the opposite actually, they took a chance on something different. If they truly wanted to go the easy way, then they simply would have cranked out yet another turn-based RPG.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,445
Location
Florida, US
Mmmm, not sure why you expected those things. It sounds to me like you simply set yourself up for disappointment. I followed Mass Effect from the moment it was first announced, and Bioware most certainly never led anyone to believe it was going to have the complexity of a pen and paper system.

No, I didn't say they led me to believe it. I had the expectations based on their previous titles and them talking about the advantages of not being restricted by licenses and rule systems. My expectations were based on what I would have done myself under those circumstances.

Since I used to respect them a lot as game designers, I simply thought they'd understand the strengths of the D&D system. Maybe they do, but they certainly didn't want such a system to interfere with "sales" - and that's why I was disappointed.

I'm not saying it was realistic or unrealistic, but I will say that their choice was horrible. But that's just my opinion and obviously other people don't mind simplistic systems in their CRPGs.

Bioware also didn't opt for the easy way out at all. Just the opposite actually, they took a chance on something different. If they truly wanted to go the easy way, then they simply would have cranked out yet another turn-based RPG.

In terms of the rule system and item system, yeah, I'd say they took the easy way out. That's not to say the entire game was the easy way out, and I've said as much repeatedly. It's a competent and very well-crafted game, but in my opinion they sacrificed too much to adapt to the mass market.

But yet another turn-based RPG wouldn't have generated the same profit - not by a long shot - which is precisely why Mass Effect is as shallow in terms of complexity as it is. I'm claiming they compromised because they wanted it to sell better than BG/NWN - and Stormwaltz all but admitted as much.
 
Some guy on the official forums played the demo. I'm guessing the one showed at Comic-Con. And posts some of his experiences.

Seems the inventory will be a common pool. And the max weight limit is the sum of everyone's weight limit.

Also two gameplay movies (cams) from Comic-Con. The first and second.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
6,416
Since I used to respect them a lot as game designers, I simply thought they'd understand the strengths of the D&D system. Maybe they do, but they certainly didn't want such a system to interfere with "sales" - and that's why I was disappointed.

That's my point though. Such a system certainly never interfered with their "sales" in the past. That's why I don't understand why anyone would think that. They could have made another D&D turn-based RPG, and amost been assured of great sales. Instead they tried a different direction with ME, territory that was unfamiliar to them. They had no guarantee that ME was going to do well.


But yet another turn-based RPG wouldn't have generated the same profit - not by a long shot - which is precisely why Mass Effect is as shallow in terms of complexity as it is. I'm claiming they compromised because they wanted it to sell better than BG/NWN - and Stormwaltz all but admitted as much.

The only problem with that theory is that it's not supported by the numbers. So far Mass Effect hasn't sold nearly as well as Baldur's gate 1 or 2 did on the PC. In fact, I'm not sure if even the Xbox 360 and PC figures combined have surpassed BG yet.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,445
Location
Florida, US
The only problem with that theory is that it's not supported by the numbers. So far Mass Effect hasn't sold nearly as well as Baldur's gate 1 or 2 did on the PC. In fact, I'm not sure if even the Xbox 360 and PC figures combined have surpassed BG yet.

Huh? The BG series has been out for how many years? Even if you're comparing BG2 to ME, the former's been out for much, much longer. Also, back then it was released when just about any PC could run it. There're still people buying a new copy here and there, or buying a copy for a first time... and any PC will be able to run it (albeit with some fiddling with compatibility settings). Mass Effect, being an under-optimized all-graphics-no-content blockbuster, can only be run on a reasonably up-to-date gaming PC. Put two and two together, but don't count five.
 
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
290
That's my point though. Such a system certainly never interfered with their "sales" in the past. That's why I don't understand why anyone would think that. They could have made another D&D turn-based RPG, and amost been assured of great sales. Instead they tried a different direction with ME, territory that was unfamiliar to them. They had no guarantee that ME was going to do well.

Well, guarentees are few.

But I'm not saying another RPG wouldn't have been a hit - but that it wouldn't have been optimal for the new market. Even in 2003, the market was significantly smaller and somewhat less casual overall - so expectations were different. These days, especially post-WoW, you really need to hold back on complexity or inaccessibility if you want to reap the greatest profit.

But look, I'm not saying Mass Effect is a bad game in any way, nor am I saying it's a "dumb" game. I'm just saying it's a typical example of the direction the industry has been following the last few years. Since we've had a Bioware developer conceding that as the case recently, I don't think there's much point in denying that.

I can't agree, though, that it was unfamiliar territory. In terms of gameplay structure and flow - it's nearly a carbon copy of KotOR. In fact, only the rule/combat systems and the setting are different - beyond that, the games are nearly identical. They knew exactly what they were doing with this game.

As Stormwaltz said, they've been going through a refining process - and identifying exactly what they were best at, and focusing on those elements. That pretty much says it all about how it's anything but unfamiliar territory.

The only problem with that theory is that it's not supported by the numbers. So far Mass Effect hasn't sold nearly as well as Baldur's gate 1 or 2 did on the PC. In fact, I'm not sure if even the Xbox 360 and PC figures combined have surpassed BG yet.

What?

I haven't looked at any numbers - but I can't possibly believe Baldur's Gate sold anywhere near as well as Mass Effect after a similar period of time. Mass Effect sales were something like 1.5 million after just one week - and somehow I doubt BG/BG2 sold that well after such a short period of time.

But I could be wrong, and I'd love to see some numbers. Do you have any?
 
From bioware:
# Baldur's Gate, released in 1998, has sold over 2 million units for PC and has won many industry awards; in 1999, BioWare released Baldur's Gate: Tales of the Sword Coast, a Baldur's Gate expansion pack. It debuted at #1 worldwide and sold over 600,000 units
# Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn, was released in Sept. 2000 and continued the award winning story line of the Baldur's Gate series, selling over 2 million units so far; in June 2001 Baldur's Gate II: Throne of Bhaal was released, the expansion pack to the award winning Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn, and the conclusion to the Baldur's Gate series, selling more than 500,000 units
#The game debuted at #1 worldwide at launch. Neverwinter Nights and its two expansions have sold close to 3 million copies worldwide so far.
#Kotor-The game has sold 3 million copies to date (Xbox and PC) and spawned a successful sequel which was launched in Holiday 2004.
#Jade Empire-sales not mentoined
#Mass Effect-sales not mentioned
 
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
1,163
Location
Scandinavia
From bioware:
# Baldur's Gate, released in 1998, has sold over 2 million units for PC and has won many industry awards; in 1999, BioWare released Baldur's Gate: Tales of the Sword Coast, a Baldur's Gate expansion pack. It debuted at #1 worldwide and sold over 600,000 units
# Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn, was released in Sept. 2000 and continued the award winning story line of the Baldur's Gate series, selling over 2 million units so far; in June 2001 Baldur's Gate II: Throne of Bhaal was released, the expansion pack to the award winning Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn, and the conclusion to the Baldur's Gate series, selling more than 500,000 units
#The game debuted at #1 worldwide at launch. Neverwinter Nights and its two expansions have sold close to 3 million copies worldwide so far.
#Kotor-The game has sold 3 million copies to date (Xbox and PC) and spawned a successful sequel which was launched in Holiday 2004.
#Jade Empire-sales not mentoined
#Mass Effect-sales not mentioned

Yeah, 2 million copies after so many years - including budget/gold/platinum/etc. versions, I'm sure.

ME sold 1.6 in a week.

Let's check back in 8 years and see what numbers we're looking at :)

But anyway, dumbing down games isn't a 100% guarentee of a hit - nor am I claiming it is. I'm simply saying that's what they're TRYING to do - ensure a hit by making it as accessible as possible.

That's exactly what Stormwaltz conceded they did - and there's really nothing wrong with it - objectively speaking, nor is it hard to understand.

I personally just think it's unfortunate that we've lost YET another top-tier developer to the never-ending chase after bigger bucks.

EA is most likely not improving the situation either.
 
I wish I had 6the same amount of energy to constantly battle against others with defending my own position like you have, D'artagnan.

Which for me means that I'll be skipping ALL discussions with you involved in future, because I wouldn't be able to stand your "scripture assaults", energy-wise.

Sorry, but I just had to say this.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
21,979
Location
Old Europe
10 or 12 years ago you could break even if you just sold about 400,000 copies; you could even turn a nice profit to re-invest if you sold 600,000 copies. Today, not even 1,500,000 sold copies of Tomb Raider: Underworld could save some people at the development studio. You can't really make a game today that sells less than 1,6million copies - also the PR for Mass Effect was huge; not so for Baldur's Gate; I bought the game, BG1, mainly on the reference from a former collegue..
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,147
Location
Denmark, Europe
I wish I had 6the same amount of energy to constantly battle against others with defending my own position like you have, D'artagnan.

Which for me means that I'll be skipping ALL discussions with you involved in future, because I wouldn't be able to stand your "scripture assaults", energy-wise.

Sorry, but I just had to say this.

I'm not sure what you're hoping to accomplish by that statement. If you don't like me or my style - you could simply put me on ignore. Oh well.

By nature - I try to explain my views whenever they're put into question. I often feel like I'm wasting too much energy and time, because does it really matter, but there's a compulsion there. It sounds really odd - but I tend to greatly dislike the process in general, because I really want to spend my time in more enjoyable and beneficial ways. But I have this urge to clarify what I mean - whenever people are telling me I'm wrong. I wish it was more common to agree to disagree - but my statements tend to draw out aggressive positions. It's probably because I don't "fit in" with the majority in my views - nor have I ever.

Personally, I don't think it's particularly right or wrong - but it's unfortunate that you tend to get a lot more negative reactions when doing this than positive ones. I'm not sure I understand the benefit of either not replying or pretending like I don't think what I think. It's probably my social skills lacking, and yet I don't have much choice - being of the nature that I am.

That said, I think I can survive without you participating in debates along with me - and since you seem to prefer people stop "defending" themselves, it's probably not a huge loss for either of us.
 
Huh? The BG series has been out for how many years? Even if you're comparing BG2 to ME, the former's been out for much, much longer. Also, back then it was released when just about any PC could run it. There're still people buying a new copy here and there, or buying a copy for a first time... and any PC will be able to run it (albeit with some fiddling with compatibility settings). Mass Effect, being an under-optimized all-graphics-no-content blockbuster, can only be run on a reasonably up-to-date gaming PC. Put two and two together, but don't count five.

The number of copies sold after a title's main run are fairly insignificant. That's why those figures for ME have never been updated since then, and it's also why the BG games have been listed as selling over 2 Million copies each for well over 5 years now.


I haven't looked at any numbers - but I can't possibly believe Baldur's Gate sold anywhere near as well as Mass Effect after a similar period of time. Mass Effect sales were something like 1.5 million after just one week - and somehow I doubt BG/BG2 sold that well after such a short period of time.

Of course not. Are you actually trying to compare a PC game to a console game?

ME sold 1.6 in a week.

Not even close.

Those numbers were for 1-1\2 months, and represent the bulk of the copies sold. Most importantly though, those are Xbox 360 sales, not PC. I tried to dig up PC sales for ME to no avail, but people at the official forums seem to think around 500k.

Let's check back in 8 years and see what numbers we're looking at

I'd love to. This being PC vs PC of course, not PC vs PC + Xbox. ;)
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,445
Location
Florida, US
Yeah, 2 million copies after so many years - including budget/gold/platinum/etc. versions, I'm sure.

ME sold 1.6 in a week.

No it didn't, and so far as I can tell you are the only person claiming that it did. MS claimed it did that in six weeks- vgchartz has it taking around three months to get there, and being at around 2.3M currently (may or may not include PC figures, it isn't supposed to, but there's some evidence they've included PC sales in Bioshock's figures and perhaps others)

Hmm, I type too slowly.

Jade Empire indisputably did poorly- by extrapolation around 800k copies, and being able to pick up a SE copy at budget level price only a few months after its release suggests the PC version didn't do so hot either. It probably didn't lose Bioware money because of the large exclusivity bonus from MS, but it was not great from MS's point of view (not least from having a bunch of people who bought their loss making hardware and only ever played one game on it).

Comparisons based on sales numbers alone are spurious in any case. The most profitable commercial game, return on investment wise last year was almost certainly Sins of a Solar Empire, which returned around 20x its dev costs. Somewhat facile as an example, but if GTA4 were to achieve that level of return it would need to sell roughly 1 billion copies.

aries100 said:
10 or 12 years ago you could break even if you just sold about 400,000 copies
That's a bit high, around 100,000 full price copies sold was generally regarded as being a good measure of when a title became profitable, though it depended a lot on the scope of the title, of course. 400k would probably be regarded as the threshold for a game being considered seriously successful.
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2008
Messages
193
Those numbers were for 1-1\2 months, and represent the bulk of the copies sold. Most importantly though, those are Xbox 360 sales, not PC. I tried to dig up PC sales for ME to no avail, but people at the official forums seem to think around 500k.

Well, I was off on the time - but it's hardly insignificant to consider time since release. I just remember the 1.6 number being mentioned after a very short period of time - and I remembered it as a week. I apologize for the mistake.

You can't really compare the two directly because the market was entirely different when BG2 was released - and the game didn't exist on any other platform. Gamers will buy games on whatever platform it's available on if they like it enough.

Anyway, I'd be very surprised if Mass Effect doesn't outsell BG2 - and significantly so - after a similar amount of years.

But since we don't have precise numbers and we're basically speculating on outdated and unclear facts - I consider it useless to continue. I might very well be wrong about the success of Mass Effect, and I'll be pleased if that's the case. I WANT dumbing down to be punished - I just couldn't imagine this being the case here.

However, this is all irrelevant to my point. I'm not talking about how successful Bioware has been - but what direction they've taken. They've adapted to the mass market and that's why Mass Effect is what it is. It's unfortunate for them if their dumbing down isn't paying off - but it doesn't really change their reasons.

As I said, Stormwaltz explained this recently - and as a developer for Bioware, he should be able to convince you better than I.
 
I'm not sure what you're hoping to accomplish by that statement.

I wouldn't call it "accomplish".

I'd rather call it "waving the white flag".


Which would surely make me a whiner in some people's eyes (hello, Esseliad, darling ! ;) )
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
21,979
Location
Old Europe
Back
Top Bottom