spacehamsterZH wrote...
I wouldn't necessarily say that critical success always leads to commercial success, but you make a very strong point about longevity. Especially if you're trying to build a franchise. If you look at any long-lasting movie or game franchise, it usually at least started out with substance. Star Wars is what it is because of the original trilogy, the sequels may have been commercially successful, but they mostly piggybacked on the established appeal of the Star Wars label. I seriously doubt a movie as boring and convoluted as Episode 1 would have been anywhere near as profitable otherwise.
The way I'd look at it. I'd rather just break even with a movie on the first go around and by word of mouth it be established as an epic movie that flew under the radar. Now DVD sales go through the roof and the fanbase slowly grows in size daily as people talk. Now when the next movie comes out I have a wave of loyal people that turn it into a blockbuster and a marketable franchise.
Star Wars as you said piggybacked on a brand name. It was a commercial success because it had a big fat Star Wars label on it. The fanboys flocked in droves, Phantom Menace is #11 top grossing film of all time because everyone went wild about the idea of a new Star Wars, not because people went back to watch it again and again.
Its also ranked #12 in the top 25 list of Worst Sequels ever made, and a good number of Razzie awards for those that consider those to mean anything. So yeah its a commerical success but as far as critical success its trash.
As was the point of the OP, I'd rather BioWare stick to their guns on the story being the most important aspect and the dollar sign not being the deciding factor. Stanley's comments however rub me the wrong way. If the post was intended as a joke it failed hard, and makes me worry about the future of the company.