@S0ndor said:

@CaptainCharisma said:

Subscribers find out first and us non-payers find out later. I see no problem here, subscribers have earned at least something since content has been pretty bare lately due to the readjustments being made.

Dude, you are seriously lost.

HA! No idea how that got there. Was meant for another thread. My bad.

@ExplodeMode said:

@SeriouslyNow: I feel like they try to cater to so many they end up satisfying less. Saying 'the games they want to make', I mean all of the times people give them shit for not taking into account this random thing from a past game and then they have to defend themselves. I wish that wasn't a factor. I don't know, I know it isn't a popular opinion, but I think save importing has been a thorn in their side rather than helpful. Maybe their games just aren't for me anymore.

They're not catering to so many. They're doing the kinds of Pen and Paper DnD-influenced RPGs they've always done. There's a reason why their most successful game to date was their most traditional, because it's what they know best. Sure, the file save stuff make it 'sorta' more complex (not really though, it's a series of boolean operands being switched based on choices being made - it's why ME3 asks questions when you generate a char without loading a previous save; some boolean operands being processed there instead of being read from a file). What Bioware has to defend themselves from is fan backlash due to poor reception of lower quality work (DA2 isn't AWFUL but it's a pale shadow of DA: O with it's repeated dungeons, waves of enemies and shitawful ending which doesn't reflect player choices, notice a pattern here?). Bioware's quality control isn't what it was two years back. They are rushing development and it shows.

@SeriouslyNow said:

@ExplodeMode said:

I wish they would drop the whole save import feature and just make the games they want to make. They've tried accounting for variables in the game and previous games at the same time and, to me, it's never satisfying. It's a waste of resources that seem like they are desperately needed. When you ask why a random thing doesn't turn out they way it ideally should have (ex: a rachni queen section in ME3 no matter you chose in ME1 or a Dragon Age character being alive if you killed them previously) the answer is going to be something like, 'making games is hard/didn't have enough time.' If it never turns out well, just stop wasting time with it. If the quality of the games could go up without the import feature, I would be all for that.

What? How are Bioware not making the games they want to make? The whole point of save games being used from one game to another in a series is to allow the player the ability to tell an epic tale which has been directly shaped by choices made in previous games. That's exactly the kind of game which Bioware has been trying to make since even their early D&D licensed games. Their games haven't improved with even more streamlining so I wouldn't recommend more of it.

It doesn't really seem to work out like that in practice though, just because of the logistics involved. Mass Effect showed that and that franchise was designed with it in mind from the start. The choices were (or at least seemed) massive, but the consequences were typically very minor, very shallow or very shortlived. I think worrying about the save carry-over stuff puts too many limitations on what they can do within each individual game. They can give you more meaningful options within a game if they know they'll only need to take them into consideration for the rest of that game, rather than indefinitely over the franchise.

@TaliciaDragonsong said:

Very cynic of me, but all of this they did right in DA1 and previous RPG's. So them saying they should return to what made them big in the first place...well duh?

Ha, yeah I agree. It's like we're supposed to be grateful that they're not going to go ahead and create yet another highly rushed and highly flawed sequel to one of the greatest RPGs of all time. ''Hey, we could just turn Dragon Age into DMC with dialogue wheels, but we won't'' *THUNDEROUS APPLAUSE*

I do really like that they're at least very self-aware and aren't trying to shy away from the criticisms of DA2, leaving it as the elephant in the room, and I guess it's appreciative that they're going to 'listen' to the fans... though given how much that's usually worth, I'm still sceptical.

Eh, on the other hand, I'm still highly curious (though not exactly optimistic) to see where this franchise goes. They could actually stick to their word and make a sequel deserving of the DA brand, but it'll take a lot of convincing down the road.

I think it's pretty fucking obvious they just have to not rush another Dragon Age game and make a game in the vain of Origins with some new cool additions. It doesn't take a rocket science to see that the first one sold and reviewed incredibly well and the second one under performed in every aspect. Yes vgchartz isn't 100% accurate but looking at the numbers you can see a wide gap:

Pos	Game	Platform	Year	Genre	Publisher	North America	Europe	Japan	Rest of World	Global
1	Dragon Age: Origins	X360	2009	Role-Playing	Electronic Arts	1.57	0.47	0.03	0.21	2.27
2	Dragon Age: Origins	PS3	2009	Role-Playing	Electronic Arts	0.85	0.34	0.08	0.18	1.45
3	Dragon Age II	X360	2011	Role-Playing	Electronic Arts	0.59	0.22	0.01	0.08	0.90
4	Dragon Age II	PS3	2011	Role-Playing	Electronic Arts	0.29	0.18	0.04	0.08	0.59
5	Dragon Age II	PC	2011	Role-Playing	Electronic Arts	0.18	0.17	0.00	0.06	0.41
6	Dragon Age: Origins	PC	2009	Role-Playing	Electronic Arts	0.00	0.35	0.00	0.03	0.38
7	Dragon Age Origins: Awakening	X360	2010	Role-Playing	Electronic Arts	0.27	0.07	0.00	0.03	0.37
8	Dragon Age Origins: Awakening	PS3	2010	Role-Playing	Electronic Arts	0.19	0.00	0.00	0.02	0.21
9	Dragon Age Origins: Awakening	PC	2010	Role-Playing	Electronic Arts	0.00	0.04	0.00	0.01	0.05