564 réponses à ce sujet

[Wicked 702]

addiction21 wrote...

Wicked 702 wrote...


Choice good.

...Also beer.

Lets see if I can make this work.

If the choices come down to Budweiser, bud light, Coors, Coors light, Miller, and Miller light. Then no thanks they are all essentially the same in my book.

If that choice comes down to Sam Adams, Guiness, Flat Tire, Pale Moon then please all go ahead. Please by all means go ahead with that.

I prefer the second group. There are a few lesser choices but each choice is substantionlly different from the others. And my brain hurts now.

Damn thinking. Why cant we get some streamlining and simplifying in that area?  /bad horrible joke

I still have 3.5 hours left at work before I can get some beer (yeah, I work a weird shift). Yer killing me!

[Maria Caliban]

RussianSpy27 wrote...

 I see people complaining about how all these new features of DA:2 are taking away from DA:O, but why do you think all of this is going on?

As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly.

[Mirage III]

Atakuma wrote...
ME2 has yet to be released on the PS3 so I would wait before making that claim.

Oh. come on, do you think that port to PS3 after one year of sales, as Ryzaki mentioned, can make any substantial difference? And I don't think that PS3 is a big slice of market for Bioware

TheCreeper wrote...
What? ME2 was a very huge hit and sold 2 million copies in the first WEEK. To say that the figures aren't that large is abusrd.

OH RLY?
It shipped two million copies yes, but first and second weeks are always the best weeks for sales, then numbers always slump. We still don't know the exact number of ME2 units sold or shipped. I guess, if numbers were much better than 2 million, EA would have published it.

Pugnate wrote...

ME2 according to that conference call sold 1.6 million. It shipped 2 million according to Kotaku.

According to Kotaku, DA sold 2.9 million. According to IGN, it shipped 3.2 million. Both stats are for worldwide.

From what I understand, units are shipped based on what retailers project demand to be. 1.6 is still a good number, but it is surprising that ME2, a second installment in a franchise, sold less than DA.

So, DA:O was sold almost twice as ME2. Good to know. 
P.S. DA:O made more money than ME2. That's why I don't see the point in making Dragon Age 2 looking like Mass Effect from commercial perspective. Not to mention gaming side.

Modifié par Mirage III, 09 décembre 2010 - 04:24 .

[Piecake]

Mirage III wrote...

P.S. DA:O made more money than ME2. That's why I don't see the point in making Dragon Age 2 looking like Mass Effect from commercial perspective. Not to mention gaming side.

How can you possibly know that without actual sales numbers for the games and total development costs for the two.

[Ryzaki]

namedforthemoon wrote..

Suit yourself. But only a crazy person would put sugar on cabbage. Especially cabbage rolls. Just sayin'. 

Actually sugar on cabbage isn't bad to be perfectly honest. Granted it's an acquired and odd taste but it's not nasty by any means.

Now collard greens. That's nasty. I don't care what you have they're still nasty. 

[MerinTB]

Upsettingshorts wrote...
To be fair, plenty of the complaints are in fact over things people have "tasted" before. They just don't want this new sauce on their favorite meal.

Yep.  The whole meme of "people are afraid of the unknown" and "change is scary" fails to account for the many people who HAVE experienced these gameplay mechanics and such before, many many times, for many years, and know that they DON'T want them.

There's being in a comfort zone because you've known nothing else...
and there's having moved around, ALOT, and settling in an area that you find most suitable to you.

[Pugnate]

Piecake wrote...

Mirage III wrote...

P.S. DA:O made more money than ME2. That's why I don't see the point in making Dragon Age 2 looking like Mass Effect from commercial perspective. Not to mention gaming side.

How can you possibly know that without actual sales numbers for the games and total development costs for the two.

Well, we have the actual sales numbers as announced by EA, but not the development costs. You can look back in this thread for those. Yea we can only speculate about development costs, but assuming ME2 cost about the same to develop and market, then DA made nearly twice as much money.

But as for the actual question at hand, I guess it matters little at the end because DA2 development started started before DA was released. And I believe the DA:O was essentially ready on the PC at least six months before it was actually sold in stores, meaning DA2 was probably in development a year before DA:O was made ready for purchase.

Yes, I like to make intuitive leaps. Deal with it. :P

So the success of DA:O didn't have as much merit on the direction of DA2 as it would have.

If  DA2 sacrifices tactical play for the sake of a more responsive actiony game, then I wouldn't be surprsied if DA3 brings it back a little.

Modifié par Pugnate, 09 décembre 2010 - 08:27 .

[Piecake]

what you have are Incredibly old sales numbers that might not be reliable at all.

http://gamrreview.vg.../mass-effect-2/

That link, for example, totally contradicts your ME numbers, and that's only the xbox version. How much has it sold total? I have no freakin idea, because I cant find any PC sales numbers

And you can't assume that ME and dragon age had the same development cost, especially when Dragon Age was in development for 5 years.  Maybe a 5 year development cycle doesnt necessarily mean higher development costs, but it sure sounds reasonable that that is the case

If you dont want to bother to look, that site says that ME2 has sold 2.25 million on xbox.  DAO has sold 1.88 million on xbox and 1 million on ps3

Modifié par Piecake, 09 décembre 2010 - 08:46 .

[upsettingshorts]

This back and forth over totally unreliable, ambiguous data and assumptions is extremely compelling and supports both arguments very well. Please continue, I am enthralled.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 09 décembre 2010 - 08:46 .

[dorquemada]

Mirage III wrote...

So, DA:O was sold almost twice as ME2. Good to know. 
P.S. DA:O made more money than ME2. That's why I don't see the point in making Dragon Age 2 looking like Mass Effect from commercial perspective. Not to mention gaming side.

It took, how many, ~10 years for Bio to finish DA:O? ME2  was manufactured in a year and a half. So, we have game that lasts, say, 60 hours, is rather replayable (when one is replaying the game, the need to buy another one drops a bit)  and takes 10 years to make vs the game with 20 hours of gameplay, limited replayability and 1,5 year production time. So while the first game individually sells better, a 5 or 7 short games that can be churned out in 10 years time span would still be more profitable. 

...why I am so serious in a trololol thread? Ah! Beer.

[Xewaka]

dorquemada wrote...

It took, how many, ~10 years for Bio to finish DA:O? ME2  was manufactured in a year and a half. So, we have game that lasts, say, 60 hours, is rather replayable (when one is replaying the game, the need to buy another one drops a bit)  and takes 10 years to make vs the game with 20 hours of gameplay, limited replayability and 1,5 year production time. So while the first game individually sells better, a 5 or 7 short games that can be churned out in 10 years time span would still be more profitable. 

...why I am so serious in a trololol thread? Ah! Beer.

First: DAO took four years, not ten. Second: DAO should be compared to Mass Effect 1, as in both are the launch of a new IP. This implies a longer than usual development cycle, due to the need to build the setting from scratch.

[Mike_part_trois]

I think that people have the right to voice their opinion. Bioware is shaking things up, of course they are gonna get negative feedback from some of the fans.

[Pugnate]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

This back and forth over totally unreliable, ambiguous data and assumptions is extremely compelling and supports both arguments very well. Please continue, I am enthralled.

I am equally enthralled by your constantly dismissive and somewhat rude attitude. Shall we call it even? [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/tongue.png[/smilie]
Perhaps, our grey matter doesn't work as fluidly as yours. If that's
the case, you should realize that sarcastic one-liners might convey your
conclusions, but don't convey your thought process.

You won't find a smoking gun on every occasion. Sometimes evidence just points you in the right direction, eh? If I am ever being tried for a crime, I'd love for you to be the lead juror. [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/tongue.png[/smilie][smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/policeman.png[/smilie]

In
this particular case though, I am surprised by your comments. Granted,
there are no actual numbers regarding cost of production, distribution
etc, but the actual sales numbers are coming from Electronic Arts during their
conference calls to actual share holders. It would be illegal for them
to lie in these situations.

Here are some direct links.

http://gamrconnect.v...d.php?id=109046

During their recent conference call, Electronic Arts reveals some sales data to three of the biggest 2010 games. 

According
to the publisher, Mass Effect 2 has sold 1.6 million units on the PC
(including digital downloads) and Xbox 360. Army of Two: The 40th Day
was able to sell through more than 1 million units across the PSP,
Playstation 3 and Xbox 360. Finally, Dante’s Inferno did “almost 1
million units” on the PSP, Playstation 3 and Xbox 360. All the numbers
above are through the last fiscal quarter for Electronic Arts, which
ended on March 31st.

http://investor.ea.c...eleaseid=443674

Leading video game developer BioWare™, a division of Electronic Arts
Inc. (NASDAQ: ERTS), announced today that Dragon Age™:
Origins has sold-in over 3.2 million* units worldwide. The "RPG of
the Year" as named by Game Informer, G4, SpikeTV, AOL.com, and PC
Gamer, Dragon Age: Origins has been hailed by Seth Schiesel
of The New York Times as, "...perhaps the best electronic game made
yet." Dragon Age: Origins has won over 30 "Best of 2009" awards
and has an average review score of 91**. This staggering critical and
commercial success makes Dragon Age: Origins the sixth
consecutive blockbuster from BioWare, alongside Baldur's Gate™,
Neverwinter Nights™, Star Wars®: Knights of the Old Republic™, Jade
Empire™ and Mass Effect™.
Since the release of Dragon Age: Origins in fall 2009, the studio
has continued to enchant gamers with additional content packs including Warden's
Keep and Return to Ostagar. The upcoming expansion pack, Dragon
Age: Origins - Awakening is set to launch on March 16, 2010.
"This is a tremendous start for the Dragon Age franchise and we
are extremely pleased with the great reception the game has already
received from critics and fans worldwide," said Dr. Ray Muzyka,
co-founder, BioWare and Group General Manager of the RPG/MMO Group of
EA. "Our team is dedicated to crafting high quality, engaging new
adventures and stories in the world of Ferelden for our fans!"
Dragon Age: Origins - Awakening, BioWare's next
installment in the Dragon Age lore, occurs following the
events of Dragon Age: Origins. Players assume the role of a Grey
Warden Commander entrusted with rebuilding the order of Grey Wardens and
tasked to uncover the mystery of how the darkspawn survive after the
slaying of the Archdemon. How players choose to rebuild their order,
resolve the conflict with the mysterious "Architect," and determine the
fate of the darkspawn are just some of the many intriguing moral choices
that will shape each player's heroic journey. Players will be able to
import their character from Dragon Age: Origins or start out as a
new Grey Warden from the neighboring land of Orlais.
Dragon Age: Origins received "Best of 2009" awards from a wide
range of respected media outlets around the world, including
USAToday.com, CNN.com, MSNBC.com, The Associated Press, Game Informer,
GameSpot, IGN, and many more. The game has also inspired a tremendous
response from gamers as BioWare's online community skyrocketed to more
than 5 million registered users, helping to make DragonAge.com the most
visited site in EA's network in 2009, including EA.com.
Dragon Age: Origins is available now for the Xbox 360,
PlayStation® 3 and the PC and is rated 'M' for Mature by the ESRB, '18+'
by PEGI, and 18 by the BBFC.
*According to internal EA data

Modifié par Pugnate, 09 décembre 2010 - 12:10 .

[DPB]

Xewaka wrote...

First: DAO took four years, not ten. Second: DAO should be compared to Mass Effect 1, as in both are the launch of a new IP. This implies a longer than usual development cycle, due to the need to build the setting from scratch.

It was more like 6. It was announced in May 2004, but apparently they'd been working on it before then, after HotU was finished in late 2003.

Modifié par dbankier, 09 décembre 2010 - 12:19 .

[Mlaar]

In answer to the question raised in the title of this thread the main cause imho is:



People's imagination they read something their imagination fills in the gaps raises the standards and they envision a game of epic proportions its all looking great whoo hoo

The logic part of their brain then kicks in disects all that they have imagined and they see all the flaws that could happen ohh oh

Finally people being the fatalists that they are dash to the forums and post negativley thier concerns without actually having any firsthand experiance



This happens on every single game check out any forum and you will see the pattern first comes the high as new information comes your way then comes the downer as it conflicts with the sub concious image you have created in your mind and unfortuntatly the Human race always remember the bad things more than the good, so they then post what they remember



And that my friend is why people are complaining about DA2



I myself will wait to judge the game until I own a copy and have played it (Bioware for me have such good standing due to past games that I will purchase without the need to test it)

[Pugnate]

Piecake wrote...

what you have are Incredibly old sales numbers that might not be reliable at all.

http://gamrreview.vg.../mass-effect-2/

That link, for example, totally contradicts your ME numbers, and that's only the xbox version. How much has it sold total? I have no freakin idea, because I cant find any PC sales numbers

And you can't assume that ME and dragon age had the same development cost, especially when Dragon Age was in development for 5 years.  Maybe a 5 year development cycle doesnt necessarily mean higher development costs, but it sure sounds reasonable that that is the case

If you dont want to bother to look, that site says that ME2 has sold 2.25 million on xbox.  DAO has sold 1.88 million on xbox and 1 million on ps3

Yes your VG charts link directly contradicts what EA has gone on record with. I am more inclined to believe EA, aren't you?

Assuming that EA isn't lying to its investors;

* According to VG charts, ME2 sold 1.64 million at the end of 10 weeks, only on the Xbox 360, and not the PC. According to EA's conference call to its investors, ME2 sold 1.61 million at the end of that same period, and that included Xbox 360, PC, and digital download sales

I've already linked above where EA says that Dragon Age 2 has sold 3.2 million across all platforms ten months ago. According to your data ME2 has gotten to 2 million sales, that is still 35% or so less than DA:O. Granted that DA:O was on all three platforms, but at the same time DA:O was the first installment in a new franchise, while ME2 was the second installment in a more established IP.

Also keep in mind, even when observing the pattern in your own data, games sell their most in their first 2-3 months on sale. Keep also in mind, that games are still fully priced during this period, and that subsequent sales are during a period when price is lowered significantly.

During its first few months, again according to EA, ME2, on both PC and 360, sold 1.6 million units. According to your data, DA:O, within that same period sold 2.2 million on the consoles alone. It is safe to assume that PC sales only added to that, assuming it did not sell zero copies on the PC.

Whichever way you look at it, Dragon Age has outsold Mass Effect 2.

I do agree that it was false of me to assume so naturally that Dragon Age had an equal cost of production. It spent a long time in development, so who knows.

Mass Effect 2 also was licensing the Unreal Engine, and from what I know, Dragon Age used a proprietary one. Also, the marketing for DA:O was definitely more aggressive than that of ME2.

[Ziggeh]

Mirage III wrote...

P.S. DA:O made more money than ME2. That's why I don't see the point in making Dragon Age 2 looking like Mass Effect from commercial perspective. Not to mention gaming side.

Is that why we're discussing the money?

That's pretty bizarre. All of the changes that make it "more like ME2", with the exception of the fixed voiced protagonist, (which I would say is the direct result of the more personal narrative, but the voiced part is open to debate) solve a problem from the previous game. Many might think that mage-hatted, gorilla-shuffling combat was the best thing since they introduced bacon to bread, but those things are hard to defend.

So in looking for solutions, they either have to go with something original and untested, or go with something that they know has already been well received. I don't think you have to have much experience in roleplaying to put yourself in those shoes.

Even if you're wrong about the money (and I'm not saying you're right, we can't say), looking at ME2 and going "lets be more like that" makes little sense, while looking at it's solutions to similar problems DA2 may be facing makes a whole lot.

Modifié par ziggehunderslash, 09 décembre 2010 - 01:24 .

[Piecake]

Pugnate wrote...

Yes your VG charts link directly contradicts what EA has gone on record with. I am more inclined to believe EA, aren't you?

Assuming that EA isn't lying to its investors;

* According to VG charts, ME2 sold 1.64 million at the end of 10 weeks, only on the Xbox 360, and not the PC. According to EA's conference call to its investors, ME2 sold 1.61 million at the end of that same period, and that included Xbox 360, PC, and digital download sales

I never said they lied, and I'm quite sure they were telling the truth since it makes zero sense for a company to claim that their product sold less than what it actually did.  The issue is that they were telling the truth of 8 or 9 months ago, not the truth of today. 

My link simply gave you updated console game sales

Whichever way you look at it, Dragon Age has outsold Mass Effect 2.

You cant possibly know this.  You're trying to solve an addtion problem with two unkowns.  The only updated data for sales is console sales.  ME2 - 2.25 million DAO 2.9 million

Now, we know DAO has sold at least 3.2 million total, and I'd hazzard to guess more than that because I doubt the PC version only .3 million units up till today, but even then, thats still just a guess.

As for ME2, we know even less.  DAO's PC sales might have trounced ME2's PC sales, or it could have beaten ME2 slightly.  Or it could have been the other way around and ME2's PC sales were much better than DAOs.

Frankly, I think it makes sense that ME2 on the PC sold well, because all of the gamers who didnt own an xbox, but a ps3, had to buy it on the PC.  Of course, that doesnt mean anything since its just pure speculation and guesswork and for all i know DAO still outsold ME2 on the PC and you are absolutely right.  The point here is, its pure speculation and guesswork.

2.25 million + PC sales = X>1.6 million
2.9 million + PC Sales = X>3.2 million

a purty math problem

Modifié par Piecake, 09 décembre 2010 - 01:52 .

[biostarfan]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

eyesofastorm wrote...

What I don't understand is why people who are happy with the direction in which Bioware is going... people whose gaming needs are being met by Bioware are here complaining about people complaining.

Well, there are at least two good reasons, and as much as I hate to group people by motivations, because that's oversimplifying and generally innacurate, I'm going to do it anyway:

First is good old fashioned pedantry. A spirited distaste for horrible reasoning. I'd be lying if I said I didn't fall into this group, but luckily there is certain overlap with the second reason:

Wanting a better game. I don't want people to stop complaining. I think it's what these forums are basically for, sure they want to know when we like things as well, but criticism is where the devs can really learn things they might have otherwise missed. The problem? A lot of people are awful at it. I mean really dreadful. They complain about things that don't exist, they blame EA, they start out with insults and perhaps most commonly, deem opinions to be self evident. And this should be pointed out, at every opportunity.

If a complaint can't stand up to scrutiny, there probably wasn't a good reason to make it to begin with. Maybe the criticism stands up on it's own merits, but it might not, and maybe that person will find a strong defence, maybe they needed to clarify or expand, or change the direction to one more reasonable and accurate.

People should complain, and people should correct them. Through a process of peer review, theres a chance we might all get better at complaining.

I completely agree with this. you tell a person that a certain complaint is unwarranted considering bioware confirmed so, they insult your intelligence and proceed with the complaining, not to mention that they complain like jerks, as you mentioned.

[In Exile]

Here is what I don't understand about the sales argument re: ME2/DA:O. Let's say the figures are entirely right and DA:O blew ME2 out of the water, and the reason wasn't the gameplay, setting or story but the fact that the PC was silent, there were origins, there was a tactical camera on the PC (but no tactical camera on the 360), etc. In other words, let's say that these 'hardcore' RPG features are actually incredibly mainstream compared to the ME2 features.

What does that leave us with? It basically has to tell us Bioware doesn't care about $$ as much as they care about their artistic vision. Otherwise, why would they make a game they have exellent reasons to believe will selll less? 

The argument that DA:O was more commercially succesful than ME2 for precisely those features that ME2 lacks cannot possibly be consistent with an argument than Bioware is catering to any audience for more money, if the data says DA:O is more mainstream without ME2 features.

I can't recall if the same people are making both arguments, but these are absolutely incompatible. Either Bioware is following the money, in which case ME2 is the commercial success, or DA:O was the greater commercial success because of the non-ME features, and so Bioware is being artistically motivated and visionary.

[Centra28]

I don't see lack of gameplay footage as an issue. I bought DA:O after seeing the commercial for it on TV one time. There was maybe a few seconds of actuall game play footage? I just remember it mostly being a cinematic trailer though. The point being I thought the game looked good enough to buy and try out. Turned out to be a good buy. I personally don't need to review every aspect available on a game before I know whether I want to play it or not. Haven't you ever bought a game just looking at the back of the box? What happened to those days lol?

[Matchy Pointy]

Centra28 wrote...

I don't see lack of gameplay footage as an issue. I bought DA:O after seeing the commercial for it on TV one time. There was maybe a few seconds of actuall game play footage? I just remember it mostly being a cinematic trailer though. The point being I thought the game looked good enough to buy and try out. Turned out to be a good buy. I personally don't need to review every aspect available on a game before I know whether I want to play it or not. Haven't you ever bought a game just looking at the back of the box? What happened to those days lol?

Internet killed those days, nowadasy everyone wants to know everything about a game before buying it .

[Vylan Antagonist]

They've already as much as said that DA:O sold better, but wasn't necessarily as profitable. I think the most reasonable conclusion to draw is that DA:O's long development cycle took a healthy chunk out of the gross. Other possible factors:



-An emphasis on shorter development cycles in general. Games can be cranked out much faster under the ME model and it wouldn't be surprising if DA was retooled at least partially to follow suit.

-Star Wars the Old Republic- Financially, this seems to be Bioware's focus right now. Everyone wants WoW money. Zeschuk didn't call it out accidentally. Bioware doesn't have unlimited capital. I would not be surprised if it is affecting other projects.

-Fantasy almost always sells better than SciFi. It's just the way it is.

-ME is much more console friendly in design than DA:O was and the consoles are a bigger market. DA:O was the best selling Bioware game yet, sure, but it led on the PC and it had a long development time. Someone somewhere had to wonder how much more it would have sold if it was a better console experience and hadn't sunk as much time into development, particularly because of how much better fantasy sells than SciFi.



Big sale numbers are great, but 5 year dev cycles and comparatively underperforming console sales, not so much. In many circumstances, a quicker turnaround with a tighter budget can be much more attractive, particularly if a lot of your money is tied up in what you hope will be a whale.



But all of this is pretty speculative and we are missing big chunks of potentially game-changing data. It ultimately doesn't matter except for the sake of our curiosity. The decision was made for reasons we may never fully understand, but the end result is what it is. For those of us that particularly appreciated certain features and looked forward to a sequel incorporating those same points, there's more of a tendency to wistfully wonder why, but we aren't going to change anything.



For my part, I'll miss the tactical pausable real-time combat. I enjoyed it and I wasn't alone, but as long as they aren't continuing to perpetrate the fiction that reviewers 'hated it' or complained about 'shuffling combat', I'm willing to give the Newest $#!* a shot.

[Eshaye]

ErichHartmann wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

They are complaining because they dislike the direction of the game.

Essentially this.  Some people hate change. 

I love change, usually. What people are forgetting is that Dragon Age was sold as a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate with that classic gameplay in a new package. THAT is what was cool about DAO, and THAT is what is going away. I was under the impression this vision would remain true for the whole series, but that is not the case. Hence the disappointment, it's back to scouring little known European RPG's for that classic Baldur's Gate feel. 

[Ziggeh]

Eshaye wrote...

What people are forgetting is that Dragon Age was sold as a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate with that classic gameplay in a new package.

I'm not sure anyones forgotten that (there are almost certainly a couple of referenecs in this thread alone). The trouble with that is, while you might find some common ground, what you associate with the spirit of BG is going to be different from the next guy and the guy after that.

It's an awful standard to hold it up to, because what it means is entirely subjective.