735 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

The problem for me isn't that I can't imagine my character's line delivery - I certainly can - but from my perspective, the consequences of every choice in the game - no matter how small - are predetermined.  So I can't suspend disbelief the way Sylvius the Mad can, at least based on my reading of how he plays these games, and thus - we're approaching the game from a fundamentally different and incompatible perspective.

This is correct.

The reason it annoys me so much is taht my appoach has always worked, while your approach (and that of those who prefer teh voiced protagonist) has never worked.  So yes, you're really pleased that DA2 has a voice, and that ME has a voice, because that makes those games suit your playstyle more.

But why do you even have that playstyle?  It never worked before.  How could you possibly have developed these expectations when not a single game in the world catered to them?

I'd suggest that the games you want are an entirely new genre of games - the interactive story - and that genre didn't exist before 2007.  So while I don't bgrudge you guys having games you want to play, I do object to you taking away my games to do it.

[Brockololly]

In Exile wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

The sales figure is taken from Wall Street Journal article and allegedly reported by EA: http://online.wsj.co...1063997848.html

the financial reports are available at EA investor site: http://investor.ea.com/results.cfm

the 6.6 mil figure pops up referenced couple times in google search, mostly in the context of keynote presented by BioWare earlier this year: http://uk.ps3.ign.co.../1083726p1.html  This, too, appears to be second hand info and i'm not sure where the original information came from.

Thank you.

The Wall Street Journal article only mentions the 4th quarter, and the inference to be drawn is that ME2 sold 1.5 million copies in that quarter alone. The fiscal year for EA ends March 31st, and I am assuming started Jan. 1st. That would mean during its initial 3-month release, ME2 sold 1.6 million. 

I have found evidence that DA2 reached triple platinum (3 million + sales) in Feb. 2010. That would be approximately the same 3 month period.

So maybe there is justification to the claim that DA outsold ME.

That just raises further questions, though. If DA outsold ME so dramatically, then what was the cause for success? Obviously the gameplay, but which parts? According to Mike, their focus groups wanted improvements in the combat animation and VO, but was that an accurate rendition of the DA fanbase?

On the whole, I think DA outselling ME just raises more questions than it answers, particularly in regard to the design changes for DA2.

Yeah, I guess the other consideration is that ME2 was only on PC and 360 while DA was on PS3, PC and 360.

But still, its tough to draw any conclusions based on the sales numbers. You've got the whole "sold in" versus "sold through" data then you probably have to account for digital distribution and those numbers are rarely ever disclosed. Fact is that a copy of a game sold digitally is likely going to net more money for EA/BioWare than one sold through a retail store. I don't know how big of a difference that may make, but certainly you avoid many of the middle men when selling a PC title digitally versus a console title in a store, never mind used console games.

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
This is correct.

The reason it annoys me so much is taht my appoach has always worked, while your approach (and that of those who prefer teh voiced protagonist) has never worked.  So yes, you're really pleased that DA2 has a voice, and that ME has a voice, because that makes those games suit your playstyle more.

I certainly didn't view it as ideal, however back when both the NPC and the PC "spoke" in text it was less of an issue to me.  The hybrid setup of DA:O was actually worse for me than the consistency of something like say, Baldur's Gate.  However, the fundamental core of my playstyle is that I believe I've always been at the "mercy" of the game's writers - for reasons previously stated.  So the status of my protagonist's voice isn't the core of my playstyle, but rather my preference for a voiced protagonist is rather the result of that approach.

I obviously didn't know I'd have a preference for the dialogue wheel before it existed, but the way I approach these games always meant that I inevitably would - if you follow my argument.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
But why do you even have that playstyle?  It never worked before.  How could you possibly have developed these expectations when not a single game in the world catered to them?

I disagree.  Again it's not any specific feature that guided my playstyle, but the underlying operating assumption that the story being told was never my story, but the writer's.  Which was, in my view, always possible and in fact inseparable from the very concept of a (non-sandbox) CRPG.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I'd suggest that the games you want are an entirely new genre of games - the interactive story - and that genre didn't exist before 2007.  So while I don't bgrudge you guys having games you want to play, I do object to you taking away my games to do it.

That's a reasonable opinion.  However, I am not the one taking such games away from you, nor am I obligated to join you in pressuring - for lack of a better term - Bioware to continue to produce them.  Since those more recent games you allude to are my preference, it stands to reason I ought to look forward to having more of them. 

Do I get where you're coming from?  Absolutely.  Do I feel the same way in this specific case?  No.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 10 octobre 2010 - 03:00 .

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
I hope you realize that you just made a cyclical argument.

It is not role playing because we are not given the information by the game.
We are not given the information by the game because to use it would not be role playing.

Each is based on the other.

I did nothing of the sort.

Those were different pieces of information.

They are not separate! Each is dependant on the other one. <_<

Your reason for claiming that it's not role playing to use the written responses is that you are not given the information needed. But then when it is pointed out that the information is readily available in the game you say you cannot use it because that's not role playing.

Role playing = A
Available information = B

Your argument = It's Not A because of Not B, AND it's Not B because of Not A.

Edit:

To add a little more for clarity of circular argument, it is related to you previous assertion that about the rules of physics in the world. I mentioned that they could not provide a textbook for you that explains the physical rules of the world. In this case the specific interpretation of the given text is available to you. It is not metagaming to use this information unless you specifically define it to be so for your own purposes. It is the very same thing as there being Vocie Acting or a tone indicator with the text except that you are arbitrarily designating the time of delivery as a criteria just so that you can then say "well that informatin isn't available when I make the choice" even though on subsequent playthroughs it is definitively available through previous experience except that you still insist on arbitrarily ignoring that information.

The only reason the information on the tone and intent of your PCs responses is not there is because you choose for it to not be there. And then you claim the text is not explicitly role playing because the information is not there. In effect you are saying "it is not role playing because I have choosen for it to not be role playing." Which is a tautology.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 10 octobre 2010 - 03:25 .

[SirOccam]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The reason it annoys me so much is taht my appoach has always worked, while your approach (and that of those who prefer teh voiced protagonist) has never worked.

What do you mean by "worked?"

[Rurik948]

In fact the fans of PC version of Origins (including myself) have lots of reasons to worry.

Just look at these figures and do not blame Bioware for choosing consoles as their main development platform.

http://gamrreview.vg...name=dragon age

Assuming total sales of 3.2 millions only 530 000 copies were sent for PC.



It is too early to arrive at any conclusions but it is quite possible after the release a lot of Origins fans will accuse Bioware in significant simplificationes and console style of the game-play. Well, I guess it would be better just to look at the figures before posting any complains.

[Lyssistr]

Rurik948 wrote...

In fact the fans of PC version of Origins (including myself) have lots of reasons to worry.
Just look at these figures and do not blame Bioware for choosing consoles as their main development platform.
http://gamrreview.vg...name=dragon age
Assuming total sales of 3.2 millions only 530 000 copies were sent for PC.

It is too early to arrive at any conclusions but it is quite possible after the release a lot of Origins fans will accuse Bioware in significant simplificationes and console style of the game-play. Well, I guess it would be better just to look at the figures before posting any complains.

Are these numbers retail exclusive or retail+online distribution? coz lots of people buy their games online these days.

[Rurik948]

I don't know. I assume these are the total sales. But in fact it doesn't matter. It just shows the pc is in the worst situation now.

[Lyssistr]

Rurik948 wrote...

I don't know. I assume these are the total sales. But in fact it doesn't matter. It just shows the pc is in the worst situation now.

I'd still expect consoles to be on top, but 500k seems a little low for PC, that's why I'm wondering if digital distribution is included in this. Still however arguing whether its good to "consolize" the spiritual successor to the best Computer RPG is a valid point.

[Meltemph]

No, Digital purchases are not currently being tracked, and seeing as Steam(and D2D) nowadays plays a fairly large role in the PC market, I would say they add a lot. Since currently the actual tracked stats by the game companies is from copies shipped we won't ever really know that. And honestly, until retailers report sales numbers of exact titles(won't happen by enlarge), we will never know the true sales. All that matters is if the Publishers/Developers think it is worth it.

Only numbers the public knows though, is "shipped", everything else is guess work.

Modifié par Meltemph, 10 octobre 2010 - 03:55 .

[Rurik948]

Thanks, guys. I just didn't know all these details.

[addiction21]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...


But why do you even have that playstyle?  It never worked before.  How could you possibly have developed these expectations when not a single game in the world catered to them?

I'd suggest that the games you want are an entirely new genre of games - the interactive story - and that genre didn't exist before 2007.  So while I don't bgrudge you guys having games you want to play, I do object to you taking away my games to do it.

*Does not See Jorian around*

Septerra Core. PC RPG released a year before BG2 with a fully voiced protag and a lot of the cast.

Just because you have not seen/played them does not mean they did not exsist.

Again just because something does not fit your narrow and limited defination of what a rpg should be or do, does not make them less of an rpg. It is just a different sort of rpg. One that you do not prefer. A Red apple has a thicker skin and a little more bitter taster then a golden apple that is more yellow, a thinner skins and is sweeter. They are both apples just different ones. Just because you prefer one more then the other does not make the other less of an apple.

[AlanC9]

I didn't see Sylvius saying that VO makes a game less of an RPG. Just that it makes the game bad.

[Brockololly]

Lyssistr wrote...
Are these numbers retail exclusive or retail+online distribution? coz lots of people buy their games online these days.

Those are from VGChartz, which get their numbers this way:

All sales estimates on VGChartz are arrived at via a number of proprietrary and ever-developing methods:

• Polling end users to find out what games they are currently purchasing and playing
• Polling retail partners to find out what games and hardware they are selling
• Using statistical trend fitting and historical data for similar games
• Studying resell prices to determine consumer demand and inventory levels
• Consulting with publishers and manufacturers to find out how many units they are introducing into the channel

So yeah, they more than likely are not even figuring in digital sales. And Steam sure as hell never releases their numbers. So its pretty much only factoring in PC copies sold in a brick and mortar store, which for PC sales is a pretty poor metric.

Modifié par Brockololly, 10 octobre 2010 - 04:01 .

[MerinTB]

Sylvius the Mad wrote..

I'd suggest that the games you want are an entirely new genre of games - the interactive story - and that genre didn't exist before 2007.  So while I don't bgrudge you guys having games you want to play, I do object to you taking away my games to do it.

Interactive story didn't exist?

Have you ever played a Sierra game?  I'm not sure what you mean by interactive story, but I assume you mean a story-driven game with choices in the story...
maybe with a voiced, set protagonist?

Like Phantasmagoria?
Like Wing Commander?

You'll have to narrow down what you mean by "interactive story" as I think FFXIII would fit that as well.. as would most games with a story to them.

I think you mean a game like an adventure game.   But now I'm curious as to how you think they didn't exist before 2007, as in what in 2007 came out that was radically different than stuff before it?

[Lyssistr]

Brockololly wrote...

Lyssistr wrote...
Are these numbers retail exclusive or retail+online distribution? coz lots of people buy their games online these days.

Those are from VGChartz, which get their numbers this way:

All sales estimates on VGChartz are arrived at via a number of proprietrary and ever-developing methods:

• Polling end users to find out what games they are currently purchasing and playing
• Polling retail partners to find out what games and hardware they are selling
• Using statistical trend fitting and historical data for similar games
• Studying resell prices to determine consumer demand and inventory levels
• Consulting with publishers and manufacturers to find out how many units they are introducing into the channel

So yeah, they more than likely are not even figuring in digital sales. And Steam sure as hell never releases their numbers. So its pretty much only factoring in PC copies sold in a brick and mortar store, which for PC sales is a pretty poor metric.

Cheers 

[upsettingshorts]

MerinTB wrote...
Like Wing Commander?

Coincidentally one of my favorite series ever.

[Lyssistr]

Btw if this numbers for retail sales are true, it could be that Torchlight(*) outsold the PC sales of DA.



(*) Awesome Indie game by a small indie studio, perfectly catered to PC in terms of UI etc.

[Meltemph]

So its pretty much only factoring in PC copies sold in a brick and mortar store

Don't mean to be so nit-picky, honestly, however. It is actually factoring what the brick and mortar stores purchased for shipping. A lot of the time, marketing likes to mix these numbers around, since technically, from where they are sitting it IS sold. If it leaves the publisher and gets sent to the stores, that is success for them.

Edit: 

This is often taken as BS marketing, but its much more. Shipped units mean a store has ordered them, and the company has sent them. If an item is shipping 7 million units[for example) in a year and a half, the sold numbers(while important), really dont matter unless you are talking specifics. If the orders are coming in and the shipments are going out, the product is a success, period. 
Now, where we lose our way is when sold units are compared to shipped units DIRECTLY. This is a trap for argument where neither side can prove any point beyond guessing.

Modifié par Meltemph, 10 octobre 2010 - 04:09 .

[MerinTB]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

MerinTB wrote...
Like Wing Commander?

Coincidentally one of my favorite series ever.

Mine as well - and I only like flight sim-type games slightly more than FPS type games.  Which, is to say, not much.

But Chris Roberts told a good story (with bits you have to bludgeon through in a space fighter) with dialog choices and story choices and voiced everyone.  And, as Origins had as a tagline, they "created worlds".

Wait - story, dialog choices, story choices...
and not an RPG.

But... I thought RPGs were all about story and...

whoops, hornet's nest there - almost stepped in it.

Modifié par MerinTB, 10 octobre 2010 - 04:08 .

[Brockololly]

Meltemph wrote...
Don't mean to be so nit-picky, honestly, however. It is actually factoring what the brick and mortar stores purchased for shipping. A lot of the time, marketing likes to mix these numbers around, since technically, from where they are sitting it IS sold. If it leaves the publisher and gets sent to the stores, that is success for them.

Thats the "sold in" numbers, right? With the idea being that the "sold through" numbers should be similar and only really matter to the store in question?

This is often taken as BS marketing, but its much more. Shipped units mean a store has ordered them, and the company has sent them. If an item is shipping 7 million units[for example) in a year and a half, the sold numbers(while important), really dont matter unless you are talking specifics. If the orders are coming in and the shipments are going out, the product is a success, period.

Sure, but doesn't the number of copies actually sold to the consumer matter too? I doubt there is a huge disparity in sold in vs. sold through usually, but still, are you saying that a publisher like EA only gets their share of profit from shipping the game to the retailer? 

[Meltemph]

Sure, but doesn't the number of copies actually sold to the consumer matter too?

Well, yes they matter, in the sense that if they don't sell them in the stores you won't be getting more requests.

are you saying that a publisher like EA only gets their share of profit from shipping the game to the retailer?

It does not work quite like a cinema if that is what you are thinking. After they ship them they are completely the stores responsibility and they get all the profit(although, the current profit rate is low I believe[relatively] for the stores), which is why stores like gamestop have to push accessories and used games so hard.

Modifié par Meltemph, 10 octobre 2010 - 04:28 .

[addiction21]

AlanC9 wrote...

I didn't see Sylvius saying that VO makes a game less of an RPG. Just that it makes the game bad.

And I see it in a different manner.

Saying they did not exist, that they are an entirely different genre, and that they are "taking away his games" screams that it is a lesser version or does not even qualify as a version of  his genre. 
So like I said just because something does not fit someones personal prefrences does not exclude it from a genre or make it a lesser version.

I am not going to go on with the "what is and what is not an RPG debate" It is fruitless because it is a genre and within a genre many varietys of it can exist. It also gets threads locked.

Maybe someone just needs to bite that bullet and make that thread in the off topic sub-forum and start posting a link when this debate rears its ugly face.

[Meltemph]

I should add, if publishers actually requested royalties as well(which I am assuming could very well happen) then the units sold from each store would probably be readily available(Although I would have to assume this would be a logistical cluster****). I mean, having to have that many accounts payable? Yeek, just the thought has me hoping that never happens or we will be paying out the nose for the games.

Modifié par Meltemph, 10 octobre 2010 - 04:32 .

[Brockololly]

Meltemph wrote...
It does not work quite like a cinema if that is what you are thinking. After they ship them they are completely the stores responsibility and they get all the profit(although, the current profit rate is low I believe[relatively] for the stores), which is why stores like gamestop have to push accessories and used games so hard.

Makes sense, thanks- my understanding of it all mostly came from this video which breaks down the relative distribution of where the dollars go for your average console game (starts at about 2:30 mark).