game

[hellcatt]

So ......any news when this gets released for us to play ?? I huge fan of BG games and really like Bioware. Wish they get poop in group and release soon dang it.

[Hill-Shatar]

The game still has an unannounced release date.

[Gauda]

I'm beginning to worry.

Since the announcement in 2004, two years ago, they haven't said a single word, made one screenshot, or filmed one second of footage from the game. And considering the fact that they are obviosly making three other games, I'm beginning to worry that dragon age is going to be discontinued.

[Stilgar]

There is to much developer feedback for that on the bioware forum (i hope). Bioware said they announced the game in a very very very early stage of development so it isn't weird we haven't seen any ingame movies or screenshots.
But i have to admit, i was expecting some information at last E3, but still nothing. All we can do is wait.

[Lady Dragonfly]

Gamespot optimistically indicates the release date as 2007.
I can't believe the information is so scarce all things considered.

[Catcher9]

As a longtime lurker and sometime contributer on the Dragon Age boards since the beginning, I'll try to fill in some gaps.


They did, indeed, announce DA at a very early stage of development. Since it's their own IP, they had to create the game system that runs behind the scenes before they even started on engine design. No D&D or D20-like crutches here, so development will understandably take a while. The "screenshots" seen at E3 in 2004 were done on a modified version of the NWN Aurora engine and intended only as a "proof of concept." At that time there was no Dragon Age engine or even a story yet. (Interesting note: The DA writers used NWN to 'storyboard' the DA story in advance to see how it worked out on the screen and rework stuff they felt didn't work).


Today, they have a staff of something like 60-70 people working on all aspects. The story is finished, the engine is complete enough to create areas, the artists and designers are hard at work getting the game pulled together. Here's what I call the Unofficial Official Bioware Update on Dragon Age as quoted from David Gaider, Head Writer for Dragon Age:

I get to be pleased watching places I created coming to life as the artists breathe life into them. Sometimes I complain very loudly and the artists stare at me blankly and think I'm insane, but usually I'm just awed.

And, yes, lots of progress. We're at that point where all those disparate parts of the game that everyone's been working on seperately are starting to come together. Like, until recently there were people working on the chassis and people working on an engine and people working on the tires -- and then recently we put it together and it rolled twenty feet and blew up. But still -- a car! Yaaay!

On the lack of publicity, I think they got burned and/or felt really bad about some expectations that were attached to NWN based on some early quotes. Since they can afford to do almost all the development in-house before signing a Publisher (who is usually the one behind the dog-and-pony Previews anyway), they're staying quietly guarded about what's in or out. There's some sens recently that, once Mass Effect has been released and its buzz dies down, that we may get more official pronouncements on Dragon Age but then, I thought we'd see something from the "behind closed doors" section of E3 this year so take that thought with a mine of salt.

[DesR85]

There's some sens recently that, once Mass Effect has been released and its buzz dies down, that we may get more official pronouncements on Dragon Age but then, I thought we'd see something from the "behind closed doors" section of E3 this year so take that thought with a mine of salt.

This year's E3 is already over and there is no mention of Dragon Age during the coverage of that event. Same goes for other game conventions like the Leipzig Game Conference. Mass Effect was the only game that received coverage during those events. Perhaps next year's E3 and other game conventions might reveal details about Dragon Age. Could be possible.

[Balder]

I saw in the sticky that their planning on 40-50 hours of gameplay, I think that sounds dissapointing. Why not charge more money for games that youve put more hours into.

Nowadays most games are short, cheap to buy and rushed, I would easily pay 150 dollars for a game and then knowing that they have put a lot of time and thinking into the game, and not rushed the game.

40-50 hours of gameplay isn't all that much, look at BG 2 you get far more attached to a game when you play it for 300 hours not 40, and yes I know you can finish BG 2 more quickly, but if you do all the sidequests and don't check any walkthroughs I guarantee it will take you some time.

I guess all I'm trying to say is instead of paying 50$ for a game then 30$ each, for 3 poorly made expansions, I would rather pay a larger sum for more quality in a game. And let the game take it's time the more hours they put in to DA, the better it will get.

[DesR85]

Nowadays most games are short, cheap to buy and rushed, I would easily pay 150 dollars for a game and then knowing that they have put a lot of time and thinking into the game, and not rushed the game.

Are you trying to say that all games (no matter the genre) should be long? FPS, RTS and action-based games have a duration of 15 hours max (and sometimes 20 hours but that depends). If they go beyond that limit, it will become boring, tedious and frustrating. RPGs are different because in an RPG, they're long becayse of the many side and main quests.

40-50 hours of gameplay isn't all that much, look at BG 2 you get far more attached to a game when you play it for 300 hours not 40, and yes I know you can finish BG 2 more quickly, but if you do all the sidequests and don't check any walkthroughs I guarantee it will take you some time.

Let me be honest here. Do you think anybody will like to get stuck in a game for that long (300 hours)? No. From my perspective, I find that 40-60 hours is more than enough. Anything more than that will make the game become a drag and frustrating. Take for example Gothic 3. 2 months into the game and I already became frustrated with it and I quit cold turkey as a result.

[Catcher9]

I saw in the sticky that their planning on 40-50 hours of gameplay, I think that sounds dissapointing. Why not charge more money for games that youve put more hours into.

Nowadays most games are short, cheap to buy and rushed, I would easily pay 150 dollars for a game and then knowing that they have put a lot of time and thinking into the game, and not rushed the game.

40-50 hours of gameplay isn't all that much, look at BG 2 you get far more attached to a game when you play it for 300 hours not 40, and yes I know you can finish BG 2 more quickly, but if you do all the sidequests and don't check any walkthroughs I guarantee it will take you some time.

I guess all I'm trying to say is instead of paying 50$ for a game then 30$ each, for 3 poorly made expansions, I would rather pay a larger sum for more quality in a game. And let the game take it's time the more hours they put in to DA, the better it will get.

This has been one of those recurring discussions on the official Dragon Age boards so I'll try to bring some of the Developer points as well as the better fans points over.

Using BG2 as a benchmark is a very bad idea in this day-and-age. Then you had a perfect storm of a mature engine, long-established graphical interface, and favorable market conditions. Evenso, BG2 almost sank Bioware as a company and the QA process still gives some of the old Bioware hands nightmares. With the 3D graphics model still in flux keeping tools and art resources expensive, there's a limit on how much can be reasonably depicted within a game and not blow the budget and schedule. Further, deeper interaction requirements make longer games more difficult to test/debug. Also the market has broadened and aged since BG2 was released. As a personal example, back then I was a 'just married' guy who could blow a couple of hours here and there during the week to play BG2. Now, with 2 little ones and a house, shorter times and less frequent long stretches are the rule.


What Bioware seems to be aiming for, at least from what's being said on the Forum (YMMV ), is to pack more game into the hours they do have. The NPC interactions are being written with far more depth than before with a variety of roles from Romance to Friendship to Grudging Acceptance to I Can't Stand That Guy. Selectable charcater backgrounds allows the gameworld to include content tailored to your character. Broader combat options gives you more to contemplate when entering the inevitable combat sequences. In short, they're trying to give us more tang for our tick(tock).


The idea that game length = adequate development time is a bit silly. The NWN OC was touted by the marketing department (that's the folks who give you those numbers, BTW) at ~80 hours. That campaign was thrown together in something like six months and it shows. As it is, Bioware is drawing some heat and rumors based on the time they're currently taking with Dragon Age. As for one big game versus expansions, actually doing things in a stretched out timeframe makes more sense. With expansion work, Bioware can really tune the engine and game to take advantage of the input of millions a playhours from their final Beta testers: us. This isn't a company that does numerous, skimpy expansions anyway. Both NWN expansions moved the game foward significantly in play value (eventhough SoU wasn't Bioware's until the third-party developer pulled out) and the downloadable content has been a far better value than other, competing companies. I see more benefit to the original plus two expansions than dragging out development times and risking losing the audience.

Just some thoughts. Drop by the Bioware boards anytime.

[Balder]

Are you trying to say that all games (no matter the genre) should be long? FPS, RTS and action-based games have a duration of 15 hours max (and sometimes 20 hours but that depends). If they go beyond that limit, it will become boring, tedious and frustrating. RPGs are different because in an RPG, they're long becayse of the many side and main quests.

Let me be honest here. Do you think anybody will like to get stuck in a game for that long (300 hours)? No. From my perspective, I find that 40-60 hours is more than enough. Anything more than that will make the game become a drag and frustrating. Take for example Gothic 3. 2 months into the game and I already became frustrated with it and I quit cold turkey as a result.

Im writing this in gamebanshees DA forum so yes, im talking about RPGs.

You can finish BG2 much faster but they give you the option of playing 300 hours. I like it when a game isn't too focused on the main story, I like some freedom in the game. In NWN 2 almost the entire game up until Crossroad keep (wich was a great), is very controled, and very pressured: hurry run and save her, or fast get back to your hometown, report directly to the commander. But don't get me wrong I enjoyed NWN 1 and 2. But BG2 was more laidback. Run and kill a dragon here save i damsel in distress there and do what you like, but still an important mission at hand.

And thank you Catcher for the info

I know it is much to ask from a game theese days with the 3D graphics and many other improvements since the days of BG. And you're making good points and I can see why it would be very hard to make such a game. But this was just a wish from a dedicated player.

But Im speaking way too fast here and won't judge a game before i've even played it. I hope I will be pleasantly surprised, and I'm really looking forward to the release.