579 réponses à ce sujet

[Statulos]

Adventure is a different deal. I haven't played a good one since the days of Gabriel Knight, Fate of Atlantis and so on.

And I agree: 6 months should be the minimum to state anything about success or failure. I'd even say that less than a fiscal year is even way too short.

Modifié par Statulos, 05 avril 2011 - 08:21 .

[wright1978]

I would guess it will be seen as a qualified success.

[Persephone]

Statulos wrote...

Adventure is a different deal. I haven't played a good one since the days of Gabriel Knight, Fate of Atlantis and so on.

And I agree: 6 months should be the minimum to state anything about success or failure. I'd even say that less than a fiscal year is even way too short.

Hence me mentioning 1999. (Gabriel Knight III....ending on a cliffhanger that will never be resolved. *Sobs*)

BUT: There IS "The Longest Journey". Nothing else even comes close though.

[Statulos]

I liked it but not as much as I liked SCUMM-based games.

Of course there was craptastic ones like Bureau 13, but well, I still have and remember kindly games such as Beneath a Steel Sky or Noctropolis.

[Zan Mura]

sympathy4saren wrote...

I've heard (and understand) a lot of the negative feedback. Is it generally acknowledged that this game was a flop. Or what's the deal? And will DA2 stand a chance against Skyrim in a one-on-one comparison when its all said and done?

People say all kinds of things here, like metascores 3/10 etc, your typical emotional lies and bickering. Yet currently DA2 is sitting comfortably on a metascore of 82 on Steam, which isn't anything spectacular, but definitely passes for a "good" game. That's also my experience of the game and the score matches what I would give rather well. I've now played it through a nerdy amount of times and in a nutshell, it's below average for a BW game, but well above average for an action-paced RPG in general. If you're not much into RPG's, or if you like Bethesda game types like the TOS series, then I really can't tell if DA2 is for you. But if you've typically liked BW games, then I expect your experiences will be similar to me and my friends: it's a disappointment compared to what was expected, but given the chance it's still well worth the money and has several innovative ideas that will hopefully make it to following BW products as well.

As for Skyrim comparison, I have never liked Bethesda's games. Not ever. They make sandboxes, with cardboard deep characters and very little story. Fallout 3 was their best game yet, and even that fell way short from what I was expecting. BW on the other hand tends to make the opposite style from Bethesda's. If there's one thing that acts as a guarantee of what a game is going to be like, it's the developer. Bethesda will likely *never* produce my kind of RPG's, so I have zero plans for ever getting Skyrim regardless of the scores it will receive. I hated Morrowind, I found Oblivion abhorringly boring and pointless, and Fallout 3 was altogether a great disappointment to me. Even though I loved Fallout 1 & 2, and found New Vegas to be quite good too. So for me the comparison is easy. But as said, this is just my opinion.

[aftohsix]

Zan Mura wrote...

People say all kinds of things here, like metascores 3/10 etc, your typical emotional lies and bickering. Yet currently DA2 is sitting comfortably on a metascore of 82 on Steam, which isn't anything spectacular, but definitely passes for a "good" game. That's also my experience of the game and the score matches what I would give rather well. I've now played it through a nerdy amount of times and in a nutshell, it's below average for a BW game, but well above average for an action-paced RPG in general. If you're not much into RPG's, or if you like Bethesda game types like the TOS series, then I really can't tell if DA2 is for you. But if you've typically liked BW games, then I expect your experiences will be similar to me and my friends: it's a disappointment compared to what was expected, but given the chance it's still well worth the money and has several innovative ideas that will hopefully make it to following BW products as well.

As for Skyrim comparison, I have never liked Bethesda's games. Not ever. They make sandboxes, with cardboard deep characters and very little story. Fallout 3 was their best game yet, and even that fell way short from what I was expecting. BW on the other hand tends to make the opposite style from Bethesda's. If there's one thing that acts as a guarantee of what a game is going to be like, it's the developer. Bethesda will likely *never* produce my kind of RPG's, so I have zero plans for ever getting Skyrim regardless of the scores it will receive. I hated Morrowind, I found Oblivion abhorringly boring and pointless, and Fallout 3 was altogether a great disappointment to me. Even though I loved Fallout 1 & 2, and found New Vegas to be quite good too. So for me the comparison is easy. But as said, this is just my opinion.

Excuse me sir but you're sounding far too rational.  I'm going to need some blanket critcisms followed by a few paragraphs of poorly worded ranting before I listen to anything you have to say.

[Corwyn]

fishx255 wrote...

The sales numbers seem to back the passionate fans claims.

Eh to me it's too early to say this.  For one thing DAO came out during a holiday and like I said I personally know more people who didn't buy DA2 because they didn't like DAO then didn't buy it because of the new direction it took.  

In the long run you may very well be right and DA2 won't match DAO's numbers but it's already sold enough that it most studios would consider it a sucess.  If you consider the game a failure that's certainly your right, I personally liked most but not all of the things they changed.

[Zan Mura]

aftohsix wrote...

Excuse me sir but you're sounding far too rational.  I'm going to need some blanket critcisms followed by a few paragraphs of poorly worded ranting before I listen to anything you have to say.

Haha, yeah I hear ya.

I do feel sorry for all the rational people who bother looking at this general discussion forum. Honestly my head's about to explode from all the emotional overreacting, ranting and general lack of manners and sense of self-entitlement here. But that's your internet generation for you, not much that can be done.

[dfstone]

The game is selling nearly as many copies as the original did. I can't see how that can be defined as a failure.

[Corwyn]

dfstone wrote...

The game is selling nearly as many copies as the original did. I can't see how that can be defined as a failure.

You should have been here the first week when the numbers were better for DA2 then DAO, somehow this was still presented as a failure by some of the more determined haters.

[dfstone]

I really had no idea that Origins had such a rabid fanbase that any deviation from the original formula causes the pitchforks and torches to bust out.

[DJBare]

dfstone wrote...

The game is selling nearly as many copies as the original did. I can't see how that can be defined as a failure.

It initially sold on the strenght of DA:O, financial success/failure is not really the issue but trust is, it's a good game but fell below a lot of peoples expectations, I certainly do not think they will be clammering to pre-order DA3.

[mando69]

Not a failure.

But the game has weak points which definitely need to get addressed or DA3 will be in trouble.

[barryl89]

Demons Souls is better than both. Roll on Dark Souls

If you have a ps3 and haven't played Demons Souls, then by god get it now.

[Volourn]

Sorry, barry, I don't play crappy games on a crappy console.

[xkg]

hmmm according to Sharkey1337's polls here on forums it seems like failure - and comparing to DA:O like utter failure but you can see for yourself

Sharkey1337's polls

[aftohsix]

barryl89 wrote...

Demons Souls is better than both. Roll on Dark Souls

If you have a ps3 and haven't played Demons Souls, then by god get it now.

True dat.  It is one of the most amazing RPGS I've ever played.

Volourn wrote...

Sorry, barry, I don't play crappy games on a crappy console.

Take it back...  TAKE IT BACK DAMN YOU.

[MingWolf]

xkg wrote...

hmmm according to Sharkey1337's polls here on forums it seems like failure - and comparing to DA:O like utter failure but you can see for yourself

Sharkey1337's polls

Interesting poll results

It roughly resembles a metacritic distribution (made that up) in a way. 

Modifié par MingWolf, 05 avril 2011 - 10:02 .

[Zan Mura]

xkg wrote...

hmmm according to Sharkey1337's polls here on forums it seems like failure - and comparing to DA:O like utter failure but you can see for yourself

Where's the failure? For one, DLC has to do with DLC and not a game. DLC in general is a dubious marketing system which many people don't like, and more often than not DLC fails to add anything significant to a game.

As for the 3 other questions, it's just comparing DA2 to DAO. DAO could be the perfect game, and DA2 just below perfect, and the scores would be what you see there.

What you just did was point out a textbook scenario of what's tought in highschool statistics class already: using your own opinions to draw completely wrong conclusions based on statistics that are far too small and nowhere near well defined enough to justify those conclusions in the first place.

EDIT:
Literally the ONLY conclusion we can draw, is that DLC divides opinions, and that out of the ~300 - 800 people who voted, most like DAO over DA2. In that respect, I guess you could say DA2 has failed to exceed or even reach DAO in people's eyes. But I think what people understand as "failure" here is something a lot worse than just that. When you label a game as a failure, it typically means that the game just sucks all over, isn't worth the money, and basically flopped. DA2 has not flopped, and the poll in question does nothing at all to point to DA2 being that kind of failure.

Modifié par Zan Mura, 05 avril 2011 - 10:10 .

[2papercuts]

Zan Mura wrote...

xkg wrote...

hmmm according to Sharkey1337's polls here on forums it seems like failure - and comparing to DA:O like utter failure but you can see for yourself

Where's the failure? For one, DLC has to do with DLC and not a game. DLC in general is a dubious marketing system which many people don't like, and more often than not DLC fails to add anything significant to a game.

As for the 3 other questions, it's just comparing DA2 to DAO. DAO could be the perfect game, and DA2 just below perfect, and the scores would be what you see there.

What you just did was point out a textbook scenario of what's tought in highschool statistics class already: using your own opinions to draw completely wrong conclusions based on statistics that are far too small and nowhere near well defined enough to justify those conclusions in the first place.

to be fair, disappointment is often common in failure

[AkiKishi]

aftohsix wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

aftohsix wrote...
Sales for DA2 are currently exceeding that of DAO during the same time period of it's release....

I'm talking about Dragon Age 2 of course.  I don't know what Dragin Age is.  Is it fun?

Do you actually find that suprising ? It's a sequel, it was half way there on pre-orders anyway. Plus it's been advertised to an almost ridiculous level.

It did not meet it's objectives of being mass market, that makes it a fail.

I'm not surprised by it.  I'll pay attention to the sales numbers at 6 months before I make any judgement on how DA2 actually did as a game.  Its still WAY too early to say one way or the other.

Sales numbers are basically meaningless now, they will only tell how much of a defeat it was. If you set an objective and you don't meet it, that's a fail.

[Darth Death]

Actually, its more of a general consensus that you failed to spell "dragon" within the title.

[Zan Mura]

2papercuts wrote...

to be fair, disappointment is often common in failure

I don't see how the word applies. Disappointment in what exactly? If something has failed, then certainly people are disappointed. Should they be happy instead? But I'm going out on a limb here and guessing that what you intended to say was that *denial* is common in failure, possibly implying that I am in denial and protecting a lost cause? That's what most people tend to say to their opposition in these internet debates, so I think it's a good guess, yes?

Well, luckily it doesn't matter. Whether or not I'm in denial makes no difference, because all of what I said is true either way. My opinion, biased or not, doesn't factor in. You cannot draw conclusions from statistics that are as undefined and lacking as those 4 questions. The only conclusions you CAN draw, I already edited and listed in my earlier message. If you've ever seen a real poll about anything, the kind to ACTUALLY be used for statistical analysis and scientific or economical research for instance, you'd know that you need a whole LOT more questions, and the questions need to be defined so clearly as to almost perfectly eliminate any chance for misinterpretation, to produce the most accurrate and unbiased results possible. 4 questions along the lines of "which is better, X or Y" just doesn't cut it. There's no way.

[sonsonthebia07]

I liked more than I disliked in Dragon Age 2 so I wouldn't qualify it as a failure.

[Volourn]

"Take it back... TAKE IT BACK DAMN YOU."

Actually, you know what, I will take it back. I can't judge the game since I haven't played it. But, I stand by my jab at the PS3...