Wikia

Dragon Age Wiki

DA:3 toolset?

7,249pages on
this wiki

Forum page

Forums: Index > Game Discussion > DA:3 toolset?
Note: This topic has been unedited for 824 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not continue it unless it really needs a response.

In the recent interview with David Gaider, the topic of whether a toolset should be released to the community was raised. Gaider hedged, saying that while he thinks it's a good idea, it would be difficult to license the third-party tools used in the toolset.

The DA:O toolset, while not the easiest to use, produced a lot of great mods at Bioware Network and Dragon Age Nexus. In my opinion, these mods have helped create a vibrant community and extended the life of the first DA game. No toolset was released for DA:II, but some mods did appear, thanks to modders' ingenuity and the similarity of the games' files.

What are y'all's opinion on the importance of the toolset? Whocares65 (talk) 20:09, April 21, 2012 (UTC)

So if a toolset is included it will allow for the creation of mods and such for DA3? If that's the case, then I think it'd be a very good idea. I haven't honestly used any mods for DAO (I'm an Xbox player) but from what I've heard from others who did, the special items/plots that were created were awesome. I'd like to have something like this and I'll get the PC version to mod with :) Here's hoping the idea is implemented EzzyD (talk) 20:13, April 21, 2012 (UTC)

I doubt there will be a toolset. EA is really not big on modding, and with Origin they can even ban you from modifying any files on your own. Though it seem that at least being banned doesn't mean, you won't be playing your games anymore.

However, I really hope that there will be mods for DA3, if nothing else, then texture replacements, because I'm pretty sure that BW won't do a quality job there once again.--SunyiNyufi (talk) 20:37, April 21, 2012 (UTC)

Short summary of my opinion:

Is toolset good? - YES
Do we ever get it? - NO

Because really, how will EAware be able to get money from Item Packs, if people start making item packs themselves? Or how will EAware be able to make money from sub-par stories and quests, if people start making their own quality stories and quests? No toolset for you, buy the DLCs!-Algol- (talk) 21:16, April 21, 2012 (UTC)

I don't think it's fair to blame EA for everything. DA:O was released after Bioware was acquired by EA, and EA didn't stop them from releasing the toolset. As for item packs, look at Bethesda's infamous Horse Armor DLC. Releasing a toolset didn't stop them from developing mediocre content. Whocares65 (talk) 02:23, April 22, 2012 (UTC)
There are a few things you should remember, though. Dragon Age Origins was in development before EA's acquisition of BioWare, so the contract for that particular game most likely allowed the release of a toolset for the sake of maintaining BioWare's LARGE established fanbase. Bethesda Softworks is NOT BioWare. I've been playing Bethesda games for almost a decade (Elder Scrolls I: Arena, Elder Scrolls II: Daggerfall, Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind, Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, Fallout 3, and Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim). Bethesda has a very different business philosophy compared to BioWare. It places a high premium on its audience because its parent company (ZeniMax Media) is a privately owned company that is dependent upon Bethesda's audience. Electronic Arts, however, is a public company with thousands of SHAREHOLDERS. Bethesda can't piss off its audience while BioWare can't piss off EA's shareholders. They are both out to make a profit, obviously, but neither is like the other. Lol at the horse armor, which was released back in 2006 for ESIV: Oblivion. Bethesda hasn't released any DLC for Skyrim yet, only the Creation Kit (modding tool). I'm eagerly awaiting something awesome, though. BioWare isn't going to release a DA3 toolkit for anything short of a command from EA. ChomskyDisciple (talk) 02:49, April 22, 2012 (UTC)
Bethesda Says People Are Still Buying Horse Armor (17 March 2011) Go Figure. ;-)
Still, I think that was the last nickel-and-dime dlc from Bethesda.
BioWare, on the other hand... Oh BioWare!
But I agree about not blaming EA, even though BioWare is a division of EA, i.e., BioWare is part of EA. Still, I'm pretty comfortable in saying that I believe its the BioWare division of EA, and only the BioWare division of EA, that's responsible for the weapon set dlc's, and for deciding not to release tool sets for recent games. And sadly, I believe that BioWare saw the tool set as taking money out of BioWare's own pocket.
BioWare... Oh, BioWare!
But, hey. Things change. People change. Businesses can also change. Even though the odds might not be great, it is possible we'll see another tool set from BioWare someday. Maybe even for DA3 (if there is a DA3). WarPaint (talk) 02:57, April 22, 2012 (UTC)
I think it's an open secret that DA:III has been in development for a while. I'd be sad but not surprised if it doesn't come with a toolset. A toolset can make up for a lot of shortcomings. If you've been following Skyrim, some dedicated players created a whole UI for the PC that replaces the much-maligned vanilla UI, and it's been downloaded a million times, which shows just popular mods can be. Whocares65 (talk) 05:21, April 22, 2012 (UTC)
I know all about SkyUI. I'm a PC gamer. But again, Bethesda and BioWare are not the same company. You're trying to compare apples and oranges. I would love if BioWare released a toolkit, but I don't see it happening. It wouldn't be profitable for EA, unless it intended for user-generated content to be "inspiration" for official DLC. ChomskyDisciple (talk) 06:48, April 22, 2012 (UTC)
LOL. The adage notwithstanding, it can be useful to compare apples and oranges depending on the knowledge one seeks. Similarly, comparing different varieties of apples, different varieties of oranges, apples of the same variety, or oranges of the same variety, may or may not provide useful information depending on the purpose of the comparison. BioWare and Bethesda are operated on different business models, but the same is true of all different companies, in general. Nevertheless, the study of business is beneficially informed by comparison of different business models and comparison of different businesses for various purposes.
BioWare and Bethesda share goals, inter alia, of generating profits, and producing RPGs. The business models used by the companies differ, as do the RPGs produced by the companies. Yet both companies have produced tool sets in the past. And BW executives have stated in interviews that they have carefully looked at Skyrim. There's no reason to believe that BW executives haven't and aren't analyzing costs and benefits of the Skyrim tool set, in conjunction with analysis of costs and benefits of BW's own prior tool sets.
Prior to release of DA2, the DA2 team said they expected a DA2 tool set would follow. That never happened. But we don't know exactly why. It is reasonable to believe however that BW was still open to the possibility of a tool set within the past two years. It's also reasonable to expect that despite the differences between BW and Bethesda, BW will consider Bethesda's tool set experience in any future BW decisions of whether to invest in their own tool set. WarPaint (talk) 14:09, April 22, 2012 (UTC)
Fair enough, but I maintain my doubt in light of repeated past actions taken by EA. ChomskyDisciple (talk) 17:23, April 22, 2012 (UTC)
I'm with you 100% on your doubts. In addition to the 'a tool set could hurt profits' issue, BioWare seems to have opted strongly for a 'console first' approach, and tool sets haven't generally benefited console gamers to date. The DA2 developers made a statement to the effect that a tool set for PC gamers would be unfair to console players. In contrast Bethesda said they were happy to offer game mod tools for their valued PC customers (meanwhile enjoying retail sales of Skyrim on Xbox alone exceeding 5.8 million -- note that doesn't count PS3 sales or digital sales). Sometimes I think BioWare just doesn't get it (in multiple departments).
Regards. WarPaint (talk) 19:44, April 22, 2012 (UTC)

I'm with you guys who want the toolset, cause DAO is SOOOOOO much better on a high end PC with mods, but we all know this is not happening. It would be a fantastic gesture, but the facts are that console gamers are where the money is, XBOX in particular as it seems to dwarf everything else. I suspect SW:TOR will just reinforce this for BW/EA in the future as it's only a PC game and is not doing so hot. PC sales for ME and DA2 were somewhat far behind the consoles also. Thus we have games developed for consoles first, PC second, ergo no toolset. Besides, we can't be making better crap than the Bioware...that's just unseemly... right? The Grey Unknown (talk) 20:34, April 22, 2012 (UTC)

"Besides, we can't be making better crap than the Bioware..." <--- Algol approves of bitter sarcasm, +10. A drunk monkey could write a better story for ME3 endings, then Bioware.-Algol- (talk) 01:16, April 23, 2012 (UTC)

EA has just announced a new policy that's likely to settle the toolset question once and for all; EA Announces Expansion of Its Always Online DRM Policy. Here's an excerpt:

"Electronic Arts’ policy of requiring its users to always be online when playing their games is going to continue but with a twist, confirmed Keith Ramsdale, the general manager of EA Northern Europe.
"This new version of the always online requirement will feature the implementation of “online universes,” where the games players purchase will exist on the servers rather than on one’s computer.
"...

It would be difficult, at best, to modify a game when you can only access the game while playing online. Although I guess it might be possible to have an always online toolset, it seems to me that would mean allowing users access to the guts of the game and would likely provide a major loophole for users who want to duplicate and use the game offline.

At any rate, if EA goes through with the new policy, it would kill my interest in any future games from EA companies. Playing games in a virtual prison just isn't my idea of fun.

Regards to all. WarPaint (talk) 13:18, April 24, 2012 (UTC)

That would be the end of EA games for me as well. Bioware included. And just how can anyone be expected to maintain a constant internet connection? I do normally, but what about cable outages, or satellite issues...etc. Not too mention financial issues for some. Nope. This is too far. It's a shame, but I see other companies following suit too. I think I may have to finally "grow up" and leave gaming behind. Sad. The Grey Unknown (talk) 17:40, April 24, 2012 (UTC)
Hold on, are you guys saying that future EA games may ONLY be accessed with an internet connection? No, no, no, no.... This sounds completely horrible on so many levels. What will be the point of hard copy in the future then, if all your game files aren't even on your computer; then they aren't yours (if they ever were yours, that is) What is the gaming industry coming to? EzzyD (talk) 20:01, April 24, 2012 (UTC)

So EA finally went from arrogant greedy pricks to batshit psychos? Good, at least many people will finally realize, that they are being treated like sheep, and stop buying EA's products.-Algol- (talk) 00:32, April 25, 2012 (UTC)

Wow... that's just BEGGING people to resort to Isabella's profession (No, NOT whoring!!), if you know what I mean ;) This policy my be a smart move for EA regarding games that are bought predominantly for their multiplayer, but the same cannot be said for single player. Some (Isabella's profession) games can access private servers or even be stripped of their mandatory internet connection depending on the skill of the person or team (Isabella's profession) the game. I honestly think this system will just end up promoting (Isabella's profession) rather than preventing it for games like Dragon Age, unless they make some kickass multiplayer component, as they apparently pulled off in ME3. Ccg08 (talk) 08:05, April 25, 2012 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki