Dragon Age - PC Delayed

[skavenhorde]

I really don't understand why people think KOTOR is mainstream. When I picture mainstream games I think of what my brother would play like Halo, Guitar Hero or Call of Duty. I tried to get him to play KOTOR once and he played it for about 10 minutes and said it was too boring, not enough action.

How exactly is KOTOR mainstream? Is it because it was realtime w/pause? or what? Baldur's gate was realtime w/pause and people seemed to enjoy that game. Not every game made can have the complexity of the Realms of Arkania series.

So put me in the catagory of KOTOR rulz because if DA comes close to the story and gameplay of that game then I would say RPGs are in an upswing towards better quality vs. the hackfests with no plot. I like Roguelike games just as much as the next guy, but some great writing and gameplay mixed together would be a nice change of pace.

 

[curious]

kotor is mainstream because my much younger brother in law actually loaned me the game and pretty much the only other pc game he's played or owned is world of warcraft. i tried loaning gothic 2 to him a few years back and he never even tried it. hell i even loaned him the more towards mainstream oblivion and that didn't interest him either. star wars is mainstream, and in addition to the game being a console first game i'm not sure how anyone can not call that mainstream with a straight face. kotor 2 was less popular and hence less mainstream since it deepened the game in every regard though it was not without its flaws.

 

[Estel]

you fail to understand that some of us consider the learning process just as fun - if not significantly MORE fun than actually playing.

No, i understand, i just disagree. I used to be like that, the more classes, skills and rules the better, but as time went by my priorities have changed and the games with me. Back in the old days there wasn't much more to an RPG than classes, skills and rules (Wizardry, M&M, Bards Tale etc), nowadays the focus lies on story and dialog, at least in the case of BioWare. If i want my fix for intricate game mechanics i play a strategy game.

No, it's based on my experience with the past and present of the gaming industry. You pick up a few things after 27 years of being passionate about the whole thing. It used to be about challenging the player and evolving the genres - and now it's about fast-food entertainment that won't frustrate the players and most definitely won't require a significant investment beyond representing the illusion of challenge.

That may be right but that still doesn't mean developers spend less time on gameplay. That just isn't true.

Btw i didn't find e.g. Baldur's Gate that challenging bar some fights as far as i can remember, maybe tedious in some parts but again not that challenging. KOTOR that you so seem to love was EASY! Stories and characters aren't worse nowadays either. Sometimes nostalgia clouds ones judgement...

 

[txa1265]

I really don't understand why people think KOTOR is mainstream.

I think it is mainstream because the 'bar to entry' is extremely low. I mean, even for NWN you have to *want* to play a spreadsheet game to really get it. For Kotor, you have the fact that it is Star Wars, making it immediately accessible, then the nice graphics and immediate plot intrigue and development, followed by the fairly easy difficulty.

I gauge the way my kids play - my older son is really a geek like me, so he'll try just about anything. Younger son needs a 'hook', and NWN and such are no interest to him - but KotOR was.

 

[hishadow]

That said, your comments about EA are spot on - why would they pay serious attention to a hardcore RPG? I'll be fascinated to see how this all plays out.

It isn't all about specific target audience either. LucasArts had some of the most talented employees in the business, but as commercial interest took over and dictated more and more of their business, employees left and the company has gone downhill ever since. It's dedicated and talented employees that make the games, not the name of the studio.

 

[Kostas]

@JDR
KotOR roolz, it's da best evar!!

 

[zakhal]

Kotors were the last good star wars games for me. After them I havent really played any other sw games since (old ones excluded).

 

[Gorath]

Then DArtagnan shouldn't worry about DA, since he thinks the former is a masterpiece and dumbing down is a major concern.

Agreed.

The following shouldn't be taken as an attack on Bio - I'm not suggesting they don't have fantastic sales.

Why shouldn't they do Bethsoft numbers? Because they haven't done those numbers for a while, and even then only when you look at long-term numbers across multiple skus (expansions etc).

I'm not sure which numbers you mean but I assume you mean Atari as the 2nd rate publisher (because their more recent partners have been Microsoft, then LucasArts, aside from PC ports which would account for a few hundred thousand)? If so, we're talking about NWN in 2003, which has sold 3M across all skus.

KotOR has lifetime sales of 3M...with arguably the biggest IP in the world.

The first shipping sell-in for Fallout 3 was 4.5M. Yes, I know sell-in and sell-through are different but I'm pretty sure that FO3 will comfortably surpass Bio's best seller and much faster. You have to add every Baldur's Gate sku to come up with 5M lifetime sales and that's a long time back.

Perhaps the multiplatform release of DA will bring bigger results but I don't see solid evidence of getting Bethsoft numbers. Of course, I haven't seen the game - maybe it is that good or maybe my data is wrong.

Or maybe Riccitello needs to justify the ridiculous price they paid, in light of mounting poor EA results.

I meant the data you quoted.

In the context of my post every publisher with less than 1B$ revenue through games or a focus on only one platform is "2nd rate". This leaves ca 5 "1st rate" publishers. The main difference between them is that the big players are able to deliver both marketing and distribution on a high level on all target platforms in all relevant markets. The 2nd group can't do this, they have weaknesses in certain areas.
Bethesda is in an enviable situation because they have strong brands, full control and a strong partner. It's indeed unlikely Bio can reach such numbers with their first hardcore game in years. They have never before had a big multiplatform release and a big publisher who commits to it though. This time they have the legendary "EA marketing machine" behind them.
It's possible EA will be satisfied with solid numbers, let's say 1M for full price on all platforms and then another 1.5M for budget, if the game gets great review scores and helps to repair EA's battered image. That should be enough to earn some money and get the franchise started. (-> compare Mass Effect Trilogy)

"Justifying the price" is probably another reason. Saving money on marketing a third. One big marketing push could be cheaper than 2 reasonably big ones.

I hope EA doesn't cut jobs at Bio when DA has shipped. Wouldn't be the first time in the industry.

 

[K1000]

Hi everyone, first time post. Read through this thread.
I'm just afraid Bioware will get the same treatment than Origin did when EA bought them. They destroyed one of the most creative teams in the business, and I'm afraid same thing will happen with Bioware (especially considering the financial crysis)...
What bothers me in modern games is that everything must be cross platform. I completely understand that the PC alone may not be viable for AAA titles, but developers can at least TRY to make use of the advantages a PC has over consoles, and try having a UI adapted to the PC's.
Just a rant...

 

[wolfing]

- Kotor 1 was the rulz
- You can quote me when sometime next year the 'docs' will leave Bioware/EA
- RPGs need stats to be RPGs, otherwise, if all that matters is story and decisions, they're just adventure games.
- Thank God it's Friday

 

[Prime Junta]

- Kotor 1 was the rulz
- You can quote me when sometime next year the 'docs' will leave Bioware/EA
- RPGs need stats to be RPGs, otherwise, if all that matters is story and decisions, they're just adventure games.
- Thank God it's Friday

Which adventure games have meaningful decisions? I've played more than a few, and I can't think of a single one off the bat, unless you count the "Naw, I'll fight/think/talk my way through" decision in Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis. (Which I don't.)

 

[blatantninja]

The first shipping sell-in for Fallout 3 was 4.5M. Yes, I know sell-in and sell-through are different but I'm pretty sure that FO3 will comfortably surpass Bio's best seller and much faster.

Admittedly I have sinned and have not played Fallout 1 or 2 (did buy them from GOG though and plan to!), but what do you think accounts for Fallout 3 selling so much better than something like KOTOR which is widely regarded as at least an above average game and as you said based on the largest IP on the planet?

 

[DArtagnan]

I've conceded that KotOR was a mass market game - but it's definitely a lot less mainstream than Jade Empire and Mass Effect.

I don't have any idea why you would expect Dragon Age to be any different from JE/ME - and developers hyping their own games isn't the most reliable source. The fact that EA is going wild - alone - is more than evidence enough for me that this will be 100% mainstream stuff.

Mass Effect was also supposed to have a "deep and tactical" combat system based on the hype - and look what we got.

I'm talking about the underlying RPG mechanics and systems - like the D&D rules in KotOR - and that resulted in a game much more interesting - to me - than Mass Effect with its utterly hollow systems. Jade Empire was even worse - and was basically an action/adventure game with minimal RPG elements.

If it turns out Dragon Age is closer to BG/NWN than KotOR - then I'll be pleasantly surprised.

However, KotOR also had a nice plot and decent characters (imo) and I'm a sucker for the Star Wars universe.

Just because a game is "hardcore" doesn't mean it's automatically good, and that's not what I'm saying at all. Oh, and yeah I've seen the early DA videos - but then I was also interested in Mass Effect based on similar early videos with developer comments like "this is a very deep and flexible system." - Yeah right.

I guess we just have to wait and see.

 

[DArtagnan]

No, i understand, i just disagree. I used to be like that, the more classes, skills and rules the better, but as time went by my priorities have changed and the games with me. Back in the old days there wasn't much more to an RPG than classes, skills and rules (Wizardry, M&M, Bards Tale etc), nowadays the focus lies on story and dialog, at least in the case of BioWare. If i want my fix for intricate game mechanics i play a strategy game.

My favorite genre is CRPG - because it combines so many features that I'm fond of. A strategy game is an entirely different and limited genre - from where I'm sitting. It ain't enough.

That may be right but that still doesn't mean developers spend less time on gameplay. That just isn't true.

I don't know about time - I'm talking about focus. You can spend an eternity perfecting a tic-tac-toe game - but that doesn't make it anymore interesting. Gameplay HAS to be the draw to get someone like me interested. You could call it depth of gameplay or evolution of gameplay - if you will.

Btw i didn't find e.g. Baldur's Gate that challenging bar some fights as far as i can remember, maybe tedious in some parts but again not that challenging. KOTOR that you so seem to love was EASY! Stories and characters aren't worse nowadays either. Sometimes nostalgia clouds ones judgement...

Why would you equate depth and complexity with challenge? I'm talking about how INTERESTING a system is - not how HARD the game is.

Again, I can make a Doom clone that's impossible to beat - but that doesn't make the underlying systems interesting. Coincidentally, that's why I don't get too much out of shooters.

 

[JDR13]

I didn't find KotOR's "system" to be very interesting at all, if you're refering to combat that is. All they did was take the same D20 system from BG, change the camera viewpoint, shrink your party down to half the size it was in the BG games, and allow you to engage far fewer enemies at once. It was obviously a result of having focused more on the visuals than anything else imo. As it was already mentioned, the first clear step towards the mass market.

That's not to say it wasn't fun. I enjoyed playing KotOR, it just didn't captivate me the way the Infinity Engine games had, and I've been a huge Star Wars fan for 20+ years. I've never had any desire to replay the game, or to play KotOR 2.

 

[curious]

@Prime Junta-meaningful is a rather subjective term. there's plenty of adventure games that alter events or relationships. if you're talking about the pixel-hunting crap ones then yes i would agree but just because adventure games don't have guilds or factions to lose or gain doesn't mean there can't be meaningful choices. if you'd like examples i could provide a host of them.

@JDR - you really are missing out on Kotor 2. Obsidian really does better party interactions than Bioware from a writing perspective and mechanics. At the very least if the restoration project from Kotor 2 is ever finished you should at that point jump on board.

 

[DArtagnan]

I didn't find KotOR's "system" to be very interesting at all, if you're refering to combat that is. All they did was take the same D20 system from BG, change the camera viewpoint, shrink your party down to half the size it was in the BG games, and allow you to engage far fewer enemies at once. It was obviously a result of having focused more on the visuals than anything else imo. As it was already mentioned, the first clear step towards the mass market.

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

The amount and variety of powers and loot was much more satisfying as a result - and though the combat was too easy in general - at least I felt like I had control and insight when doing something right. JE/ME was mostly frustrating systems with very few choices and variations of "powers".

That's not to say it wasn't fun. I enjoyed playing KotOR, it just didn't captivate me the way the Infinity Engine games had, and I've been a huge Star Wars fan for 20+ years. I've never had any desire to replay the game, or to play KotOR 2.

I agree that infinity engine games handled combat and party control in a better way, but I personally greatly enjoyed the atmosphere and setting of KotOR.

 

[Dhruin]

I'm talking about the underlying RPG mechanics and systems - like the D&D rules in KotOR - and that resulted in a game much more interesting - to me - than Mass Effect with its utterly hollow systems. Jade Empire was even worse - and was basically an action/adventure game with minimal RPG elements.

I'm replying to several comments here, so I'm just using this quote as a launching pad. KotOR is definitely more complex than ME - that I can appreciate. That said, the simplification from BG is evident...three party members, three active powers at any given time, embarrasingly simple areas to explore. I see a lot of people loved KotOR because the big twist worked for them...it didn't for me. I was completely unimpressed. Actually, it reminded me of NWN...collect the four Waterdavian creatures - oops, Star thingies.

Anyway, while I generally like more complex systems than not, the whole can sometimes be better than the sum of the parts. Since KotOR was simplified anyway, I felt ME embraced the sci-fantasy space opera action better. It helps that I don't mind a story-driven shooter.

However, KotOR also had a nice plot and decent characters (imo) and I'm a sucker for the Star Wars universe.

Probably where it falls down for me. I'm over Star Wars (I'm convinced Lucas has no idea), the plot twist didn't work and I never liked [strike]Aribeth[/strike] Bastilla.

Admittedly I have sinned and have not played Fallout 1 or 2 (did buy them from GOG though and plan to!), but what do you think accounts for Fallout 3 selling so much better than something like KOTOR which is widely regarded as at least an above average game and as you said based on the largest IP on the planet?

Interesting question.

1. Graphics. Bio does good, Beth does cutting edge (in the context of an RPG). I think the 1st person view helps sell the graphics, as well.

2. The hardcore that care about real choices is quite small. The broader market loves playing dressup / virtual dolls, and Beth does exactly that.

3. Free marketing. It's very hard to know how much the press created by the whole "the hardcore fans hate FO3" created an even higher profile.

4. Shooter / action fan crossover. The whole market of shooter players could consider buying a Beth RPG but not a Bio game.

 

[Moriendor]

1. Graphics. Bio does good, Beth does cutting edge (in the context of an RPG). I think the 1st person view helps sell the graphics, as well.

2. The hardcore that care about real choices is quite small. The broader market loves playing dressup / virtual dolls, and Beth does exactly that.

3. Free marketing. It's very hard to know how much the press created by the whole "the hardcore fans hate FO3" created an even higher profile.

4. Shooter / action fan crossover. The whole market of shooter players could consider buying a Beth RPG but not a Bio game.

5. KotOR was originally Xbox exclusive. That might have alienated a lot of PC players who decided to pirate (hey what was that? Anyone else hear that sound of a can of worms popping open? ) the game when it came out for PC or just plain didn't get it because they didn't like what they heard from people who played it on the Xbox.
Also, it never made it to the PS2 or did it? That's a (few?) million lost sales right there.
Fallout 3 on the other hand was a simultaneous release on all major platforms.

6. The Star Wars license argument is not as strong when a game is set in the expanded universe and not during the timeline of the movies. I would consider myself as a pretty serious (not hardcore but I'm definitely into it, alright) Star Wars fan but the whole ancient 4000 years before the events of the movies theme never really captivated me. Sure, it was better than no Star Wars game at all but... meh.

7. If we compare FO3 vs KotOR then we also have to take into account that the games industry as a whole is growing considerably every year. I'm too lazy to look up how many 1st gen Xboxes were around in 2003 when KotOR came out vs how many X360s were around when FO3 was released but I wouldn't be surprised if install base and market size as a whole has quite a lot to do with the better absolute performance of Bethesda's latest. It would be more interesting to find out about the relative performance but my name is not Nielsen and I'm definitely getting paid too little to do any of that kind of in-depth analysis and research .

 

[txa1265]

- As I already said, I loved the Old Republic and was thrilled at seeing stuff I already knew. But I also realize that is already a limiting factor - move outside the core realm and lose players. Period.

- Can anyone really expect a turn-based RPG to compete with a FPS based on Oblivion with a hyped mega-gore system?

- As for XBOX vs X360, the 360 is in a much better place sales and penetration wise ... and Fallout absolutely hits the sweet spot of the demographic.