u r dum

[crakkie]

I hate that damn show. The first time I saw the fucking dragon in a wheelchair I almost lost it in front of the kids.

 

[JarlFrank]

"BG still has the strongest fanbase because people just want good gameplay and challenging combat"

No, it doesn't. Stop lying. NWN is BIO's most successful game. And, it's fanbase is much shealthier than the 5 people who still play BG regularly. LMAO

BG died a long time ago. ME is still very much alive with 2 near guaranteed sequels, and JE may or may not have one but it just had a PC port last year while with BG with just get empty promises from Atari about a maybe BG3. LMAO

"BG has a huge fanbase" doesn't mean "millions of people still play BG every few weeks", it just means that BG has become a fucking cult classic. Baldur's Gate 2 is still rated pretty high on most gaming sites and even gaming magazines user-ratings, people still care about those games by creating tools like TUTU, and BG2 is often mentioned in "What's your favourite RPG ever?" threads in various forums. Jade Empire and Mass Effect are far from that. KotoR maybe too, yes, it's also one of Bioware's more *lasting* games, but Mass Effect and Jade Empire? Jade Empire doesn't get much attention anymore, and Mass Effect will probably suffer the same fate.

Just accept it, Volly. The BG series is the most popular Bioware ever created.

 

[MetalCraze]

When games are 20-50 mil investments, who wants to take risks?

with 2/3 of that being hype-money

100 people team (Some EA teams are 150 people). Even at 50k a year avg that's 5 mil a year. 3-4 years - 15-20 mil just salaries. At 70k a year avg that's 21-28k. Add equipment, engine licensing costs (Unreal 3 engine goes for 750k, for example), other software licensing (10k for Speed Tree, etc), voice acting, setting licenses if any, office & administration, and you are looking at quite a number BEFORE we even start talking about marketing.

BG2, however, didn't require that much money. it is the best selling game of Bioware for PC to date and top selling RPG for PC ever (at least according to wiki). did they spend that much $$$ on it?
3-4 years with licensing of a finished engine? that's too much. 2 years are enough. also they licensed UE3 and what? it looks like shit in ME. Characters look great sure, but backgrounds look like it is 2004 again. Obsidian spent 1 year making KotOR2 and without all content that didn't make it to the final release KotOR2 still beats 2-years-in-development JE and ME content-wise.
1 year MotB also beats JE and ME by content. Obsidian is smaller than Bioware.
Troika spent 2 years on Arcanum and there were just 12 men in the beginning. Arcanum beats every game of Bioware by content.
so if Bioware really spends that much money and years to produce such short and empty-on-content games - they must fire someone definitely

 

[Volourn]

"Just accept it, Volly. The BG series is the most popular Bioware ever created."

You are simply wrong. And, full of shit. BIO themselves have claimed NWN their most successful game in pretty much every way.


" it is the best selling game of Bioware for PC to date and top selling RPG for PC ever (at least according to wiki). did they spend that much $$$ on it?"

NWN is more successful.


"1 year MotB also beats JE and ME by content."

No, it doesn't.


"so if Bioware really spends that much money and years to produce games - they must fire someone definitely"

Why? They spend more money to make more money. Come back and say this when Obsidian becomes more successful than BIO. Good luck!


"BG2 is often mentioned in "What's your favourite RPG ever?" threads in various forums"

Internet loser geeks do not equal every one. Dumb ass.

 

[thesheeep]

BG2 was 8 years ago. Don't even try to compare development costs back then with costs today...

 

[JarlFrank]

"Just accept it, Volly. The BG series is the most popular Bioware ever created."

You are simply wrong. And, full of shit. BIO themselves have claimed NWN their most successful game in pretty much every way.

Most successful =/= most popular.
Many people bought NWN because they thought it would be as good as BG2, and then they were disappointed. Bioware still got the money from those people, but they still prefer BG to NWN. There are more people who think BG2 is the most awesome Bioware RPG ever than people who think NWN is the most awesome Bioware RPG ever.

"BG2 is often mentioned in "What's your favourite RPG ever?" threads in various forums"

Internet loser geeks do not equal every one. Dumb ass.

And it still gets high ratings in game magazines that feature a reader-hitlist of best games ever. Much higher ratings than NWN.

 

[MetalCraze]

@thesheep:
so where's the logic then? 8 years ago development costs were much lower but games had 5-10 times as much content as they have today.
yet today Bio spends tons of money on ME and in the end it's a shallow linear shooter with some RPG flavour - how come?
every area in BG2 (except some interiors of usual houses) was unique, huge, with lots of detail. it surely took much more work than Mass Effect's copy pasta. the same with dialogues. the same with characters and species, you had to render an animation of each weapon/helmet separately, while today you just glue those items to a "bone" of the model and that's it. Bio even used the same armour model for like 10 types of armour in ME, just changing a texture.

 

[Jasede]

But but the graphics and voice acting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

AND ADVERTISING COSTS

 

[Dark Matter]

More mindless BIO bashing, it seems.

Anyways, DA looks pretty interesting.

 

[Volourn]

"There are more people who think BG2 is the most awesome Bioware RPG ever than people who think NWN is the most awesome Bioware RPG ever."

Proof, please.


"Bioware still got the money from those people, but they still prefer BG to NWN."

Must explain the continued sales of NWN even after it was out for awhile, the successful expansions (the BGs only got 1 each, and TOB which wa ssuppsoed to be a full sequel got forced to be just an expansion). How many modules for BG2 did people actually pay for? LMAO


NWN > BG2

 

[inwoker]

Just accept it, Volly.
You are simply wrong. And, full of shit.

edit

 

[Dgaider]

Bioware's own game, BG 2, didn't need no new engine and sold perfectly well with dated graphics. People don't care about graphics and that's a fact.

BG2 didn't need a new engine because it was a sequel, we were re-iterating an already-existing engine... which is definitely a situation you want to be in, as it gives you the chance to create final content right from day one instead of spending so long in development time working on something that is incomplete and often unstable. We haven't really been in the same situation since BG2, which is unfortunate. Hopefully that will happen again soon.

If you're under impression that BG2 was cheap, however, you are sadly mistaken. While its development costs would have been lower due to the shorter development time, we're still talking about a huge team's salaries for two years. The amount of emphasis you guys put on marketing is a bit extreme-- on a Mass Effect scale.

As for its "dated" graphics, it was still good enough at the time-- but I would say even then reviewers were commenting on how old the Infinity Engine was getting... and this is only after a few years! You want to discuss one of the problems a developer faces, try dealing with the fact that the expectations of the public practically outpaces the speed of development. It's difficult enough to get back to that sweet spot of engine re-use without the driving need being for technological advancement.

Because as popular as BG2 might still be (and I agree it is, there is a great deal of nostalgia still associated with it, especially amongst the hardcore audience-- Volourn is right that NWN has a similarly fanatic group of followers, but they're not quite the same people and consist far more of modders and multiplayer enthusiasts) I think it is questionable to assume that this would translate into sales today. Say what you like, expectations amognst the public change-- and rapidly-- and the idea that those people who bought and enjoyed BG2 would run out and purchase a game done in exactly the same manner today is hardly a given. I'd like to see it tested, mind you, but if the people that "don't care about graphics" were able to drive the industry we would already see a more robust independent game industry -- and that's a fact.

 

[Vault Dweller]

BG2, however, didn't require that much money. it is the best selling game of Bioware for PC to date and top selling RPG for PC ever (at least according to wiki). did they spend that much $$$ on it?

We have no idea how much BG2 development cost, but consider that both the engine and most assets were already there and paid by Interplay during BG development. NWN was in development for 5 years. It cost Interplay a fortune, and then Atari picked up the rest of the bill.

3-4 years with licensing of a finished engine? that's too much. 2 years are enough.

Enough? Are you an expert on game development, skyway?

also they licensed UE3 and what? it looks like shit in ME. Characters look great sure, but backgrounds look like it is 2004 again. Obsidian spent 1 year making KotOR2 and without all content that didn't make it to the final release KotOR2 still beats 2-years-in-development JE and ME content-wise.

I highly doubt that. And unfinished and unpolished game is an unfinished and unpolished game. And it spent much longer than a year in development.

1 year MotB also beats JE and ME by content.

An expansion.

Troika spent 2 years on Arcanum and there were just 12 men in the beginning.
Arcanum beats every game of Bioware by content.

A) More than 3 years and B) it looked like crap and sold poorly.*

...so if Bioware really spends that much money and years to produce such short and empty-on-content games - they must fire someone definitely

Bioware is still in business and growing. Troika isn't.*

* This discussion is not about quality appreciated by a relatively small group of people, but about businesses, products, and investments.

 

[JarlFrank]

Say what you like, expectations amognst the public change-- and rapidly-- and the idea that those people who bought and enjoyed BG2 would run out and purchase a game done in exactly the same manner today is hardly a given. I'd like to see it tested, mind you, but if the people that "don't care about graphics" were able to drive the industry we would already see a more robust independent game industry -- and that's a fact.

Good point there. While most of the Codex would buy another game with Infinity-Engine graphics, I wonder if everyone else who liked BG2 would.
Still, it would be worth trying to make a new game with 2D graphics - with today's possibilities, it can look extremely gorgeous, even more beautiful than most 3D games with all their bloom and other shit, and maybe it would be less expensive too [although I don't know about that, as animating is a lot easier in 3D].

And how are the chances that we ever see a BG3?

 

[Shoelip]

Bioware's own game, BG 2, didn't need no new engine and sold perfectly well with dated graphics. People don't care about graphics and that's a fact.

BG2 didn't need a new engine because it was a sequel, we were re-iterating an already-existing engine... which is definitely a situation you want to be in, as it gives you the chance to create final content right from day one instead of spending so long in development time working on something that is incomplete and often unstable. We haven't really been in the same situation since BG2, which is unfortunate. Hopefully that will happen again soon.

If you're under impression that BG2 was cheap, however, you are sadly mistaken. While its development costs would have been lower due to the shorter development time, we're still talking about a huge team's salaries for two years. The amount of emphasis you guys put on marketing is a bit extreme-- on a Mass Effect scale.

As for its "dated" graphics, it was still good enough at the time-- but I would say even then reviewers were commenting on how old the Infinity Engine was getting... and this is only after a few years! You want to discuss one of the problems a developer faces, try dealing with the fact that the expectations of the public practically outpaces the speed of development. It's difficult enough to get back to that sweet spot of engine re-use without the driving need being for technological advancement.

Because as popular as BG2 might still be (and I agree it is, there is a great deal of nostalgia still associated with it, especially amongst the hardcore audience-- Volourn is right that NWN has a similarly fanatic group of followers, but they're not quite the same people and consist far more of modders and multiplayer enthusiasts) I think it is questionable to assume that this would translate into sales today. Say what you like, expectations amognst the public change-- and rapidly-- and the idea that those people who bought and enjoyed BG2 would run out and purchase a game done in exactly the same manner today is hardly a given. I'd like to see it tested, mind you, but if the people that "don't care about graphics" were able to drive the industry we would already see a more robust independent game industry -- and that's a fact.

You know what would be really cool in Dragon Age? Babies. I mean, if you're going to have romance, why not go one step further and have the player actually get to become a parent? I always remember the time in throne of Bhaal when Arrie says she's preggers. Actually, that was probably my favorite part of the expansion since it was conspicuously lacking the open endedness that I loved about Shadows of Amn. Oh that, and it was really cool when you actually got to use a non-combat spell on an NPC, resurrecting that guy in that city under siege.

 

[Vault Dweller]

@thesheep:
so where's the logic then? 8 years ago development costs were much lower but games had 5-10 times as much content as they have today.

From my Rock Paper Shotgun interview:

"Overall, I’ve witnessed the trend from simple graphics-amazing gameplay to amazing graphics-simple gameplay. Can’t say I’m too happy about it. Take X-COM for example:

1994: It took 7 people to make X-COM: UFO Defense. Two guys who did both design and programming, 2 artists, 2 music/sound guys and a project manager.

1996: It took over 30 people to make a “more of the same” sequel. Now we have 4 assistant producers, 12 artists, 6 level designers, etc.

1997, XCOM: Apocalypse, a game that kinda sucked. Over 50 people team. 5 sound guys. 21 artists. An army of level designers. We even have a brand manager now. Good times are about to roll.

2001: X-COM: Enforcer or Say Goodbye to the Series. Great job managing the brand, assholes. "

As long the focus remains on graphics - and it will remain on graphics for a long time - games will cost fortunes to make and gameplay (as we understand the term) will suffer. Remember those comments about AP? "looks dated; is it a budget title? wtf lol!" Well, there you go. Hopefully, the indie industry will grow and fill up the niche.

yet today Bio spends tons of money on ME and in the end it's a shallow linear shooter with some RPG flavour - how come?

How come what? You don't see what the bulk of the money was spent on?

 

[easychord]

I'd like to see it tested, mind you, but if the people that "don't care about graphics" were able to drive the industry we would already see a more robust independent game industry -- and that's a fact.

I can't disagree. Isn't it fair to say though that the most popular games are often not the ones on the bleeding edge of graphics technology? People who pick up on technical faults in every new screenshot are probably even more of a "squeaky wheel" niche than people who want another infinity engine game.

 

[Kingston]

Skyway, shut up. Please. You're embarassing yourself. Don't be such a damn snoob the whole goddamn time. This "I HATE EVERYTHING" attitude is so old and so predictable. Move on, develop a personality other than "biowhore and betheshud are all in it for the money they r morons destroying everything we love how can they like 3d iso is infinitely better they used to make good games now they are sellouts omg omg omg FUCK FUCK FUCK!!!1111"

I fell for VD's link :D

I don't know about Dragon Age. Mass Effect really took away any enthusiasm I had for Bioware, it totally flopped for me as a b-movie adventure, save the ending. If they failed such a game as Mass Effect, how on earth will they make this hardcore awesomeness bonanza Dragon Age?

 

[Vault Dweller]

Say what you like, expectations amognst the public change-- and rapidly-- and the idea that those people who bought and enjoyed BG2 would run out and purchase a game done in exactly the same manner today is hardly a given. I'd like to see it tested, mind you, but if the people that "don't care about graphics" were able to drive the industry we would already see a more robust independent game industry -- and that's a fact.

Definitely.

And how are the chances that we ever see a BG3?

Atari owns the license, not Bioware.

As a small side question to VD:

Are you able to say how many copies of AoD at what cost will have to be sold until you are actually making some sort of profit?

We'll sell the game at 25 bucks per copy. The portals want 30-40%. That's 7-10 bucks for them, 15-18 bucks for us. If we do everything ourselves, we can probably keep 20 bucks, but get less exposure. So, do the math, at 15-20 range, we'd need to sell 500-650 copies to cover the initial investment, but you can't compare it to the mainstream industry because nobody got paid for 4 years of work, even if it was part-time.

 

[Texas Red]

Bioware's own game, BG 2, didn't need no new engine and sold perfectly well with dated graphics. People don't care about graphics and that's a fact.

BG2 didn't need a new engine because it was a sequel, we were re-iterating an already-existing engine... which is definitely a situation you want to be in, as it gives you the chance to create final content right from day one instead of spending so long in development time working on something that is incomplete and often unstable. We haven't really been in the same situation since BG2, which is unfortunate. Hopefully that will happen again soon.

If you're under impression that BG2 was cheap, however, you are sadly mistaken. While its development costs would have been lower due to the shorter development time, we're still talking about a huge team's salaries for two years. The amount of emphasis you guys put on marketing is a bit extreme-- on a Mass Effect scale.

As for its "dated" graphics, it was still good enough at the time-- but I would say even then reviewers were commenting on how old the Infinity Engine was getting... and this is only after a few years! You want to discuss one of the problems a developer faces, try dealing with the fact that the expectations of the public practically outpaces the speed of development. It's difficult enough to get back to that sweet spot of engine re-use without the driving need being for technological advancement.

Because as popular as BG2 might still be (and I agree it is, there is a great deal of nostalgia still associated with it, especially amongst the hardcore audience-- Volourn is right that NWN has a similarly fanatic group of followers, but they're not quite the same people and consist far more of modders and multiplayer enthusiasts) I think it is questionable to assume that this would translate into sales today. Say what you like, expectations amognst the public change-- and rapidly-- and the idea that those people who bought and enjoyed BG2 would run out and purchase a game done in exactly the same manner today is hardly a given. I'd like to see it tested, mind you, but if the people that "don't care about graphics" were able to drive the industry we would already see a more robust independent game industry -- and that's a fact.

Maybe this stagnation of PC gaming we've been hearing about is reason enough to change? Wii and WoW have already presented to you on a silver plate proof that graphics don't matter. If the number of computer owners grows in rapid paces and the number of sold games for computers doesn't, then there is something rotten with the business.

 

[spacemoose]

dragons and magic are p lame. why don't you do a political intrigue rpg, dgaider

 

[Vault Dweller]

If the number of computer owners grows in rapid paces and the number of sold games for computers doesn't...

I wonder why...

 

[Jasede]

It's certainly not piracy (which isn't stealing because nothing is physically removed from an inventory).

 

[MetalCraze]

We have no idea how much BG2 development cost, but consider that both the engine and most assets were already there and paid by Interplay during BG development.

JE and KotOR engines also were already there. they looked much worse though - as the levels there are consisting of the same details reused over and over. with NWN it's even worse. BG2 in the art department didn't have anything ready besides characters mind you (were backgrounds something you could already see in BG1? of course not)

Enough? Are you an expert on game development, skyway?

I'm just comparing with what other, smaller devteams do during the same amount of time.

I highly doubt that. And unfinished and unpolished game is an unfinished and unpolished game. And it spent much longer than a year in development.

KotOR1 - released - november 2003. then rights went to Obsidian. KotOR2 - released - december 2004. one year.

An expansion.

uh huh. An expansion that beats full AAA titles

*

*the discussion was about "costs + content"
Arcanum sold poorly for many reasons. looked like shit? I still want to see something like Vendigroth and steampunk in general in modern games.

but I would say even then reviewers were commenting on how old the Infinity Engine was getting... and this is only after a few years!

you mean those IGN/Lamespot whores? but of course
however on the other hand we have all those mmorpgs that look like shit (WoW, L2 f.e.) yet bring enormous amounts of cash to their creators. so maybe it is time to stop sucking to those kewl graphics and do some work on the game concept? it doesn't have to be MMORPG of course - but that was just an example of how graphics doesn't matter.
btw I remember some reviewer (from actual -reviewers=) said that most gamers will accept PS2 graphics where people look like people, just give them some interesting concept in games (it was said in 2004 fyi)
and look how PS2 were selling all these years, even after it became too old just 2 years after its release in 2000
hey - a great amount of people still play that PoS Counterstrike 1 - it has graphics of '98
another example - Space Rangers. now this is more RPGish, isn't it? a game had primitive 2d graphics - it was extremely low-budget, yet it had an extremely addictive concept and gameplay. the publisher even didn't try to hype it - and the game later turned out to be a sleeper hit for what it was. and now the guys who made it only prosper and already released their 3rd -hardcore- game.

and the idea that those people who bought and enjoyed BG2 would run out and purchase a game done in exactly the same manner today is hardly a given.

well I for one wouldn't purchase such game just because of too emo party members and too much hack'n'slash - the things I hate about BG2. stop reusing that goddamn Anomen/Carth/Sky/Kaiden stereotype, will you? kinda hint-hint

but if the people that "don't care about graphics" were able to drive the industry we would already see a more robust independent game industry -- and that's a fact.

or probably nobody gives a chance for people, who don't care about zomggraphix, to prove something?
why do you think that you will need to spend so much money making a game for hardcore gamers? these guys want concept, they have enough imagination to make up for not so up-to-date graphics.

 

[Binary]

I only reconize that from the spoof Robot Chicken did of the seris, what is the name?

This explains the average age of the Codex readers