236 réponses à ce sujet

[nopho]

is there a reason why noone posts the pc-sales?
(worldwide)
1    143,830
2    38,002
3    26,165
4   16,082
5   10,850

on a brighter note, i guessed before that Bio is very well aware of the shortcommings of DAII (i mean things wich are obviously not design decisions but due to lazyness/too short developing time/unwillingness to hire more programmers) but can't adress it as it would break the neck of any sales yet to come. (i mean if a director apologizes for a movie the day it comes out, what can he expect?)
so the closer we move to insignificant numbers of sold units the closer we get to hear some serious answers from bioware away from defending the sinking ship



edit: stupid formating...

Modifié par nopho, 16 avril 2011 - 01:45 .

[cljqnsnyc]

nerdage wrote...

cljqnsnyc wrote...

I've already stated this before but I guess I'll repeat it again.......




Why is DA2 being given excuse, after excuse, after excuse, for it's sales performance?



You didn't hand in your assignment on the date it was due...for the 8th time? "The dog ate it....again"

You're late for work 4 times a week in a 5 day schedule? "Traffic is impossible!"

You forgot your spouse's, parent's, and best friend's birthdays...again? "We'll I've been so busy, it's hard to keep track of everyone."


All lousy excuses!




Call something by it's name! Spin it any way you wish, DA2 has serious problems.....and THIS is what's keeping people away. Simple. DA2 is to blame for DA2's sales performance. It's speaking for itself. Simple.

Side note

It really doesn't help matters when you have the lead designer continually trashing the original game as if this will somehow change perceptions. It also doesn't help when this same designer seemingly deliberately antagonizes fans with quotes like "Play it on hard." I guess this will somehow transform the game into something new....since we're too stupid, too old, or too terrified of the changing times to see how brilliant and innovative this game is.

If you say so Mike......

To be fair, I think Laidlaw's "trashing" DAO was at least as valid as any points you can make about DA2. He never said "It was a terrible game and we're ashamed of it." but things like comabt feeling unresponsive were completely true, if you ordered a warrior to intercept someone going for your mage they'd just swivel on the spot until the enemy stopped moving (presumably because they reached your mage and were getting to work).

Could it even be problems with Origins that put some people off DA2?

Mind = Blown!

LOL!

We'll since this is enough for your Mind = Blown......

Let me share this fascinating tale I heard about 3 Bears.

You're gonna love it!

Modifié par cljqnsnyc, 16 avril 2011 - 02:00 .

[Jerrybnsn]

Just to be sure here...this post is about how DAII didn't even sell 100,000 across all three platforms in its fifth week right?

and now Mortal Kombat, Portal 2 and SOCOM 4 was just released this past week.

What else can Bioware give away to try and move this game?

[Nerdage]

cljqnsnyc wrote...
LOL!

We'll since this is enough for your Mind = Blown......

Let me share this fascinating tale I heard about 3 Bears.

You're gonna love it!

Don't remind me, took hours to find all the pieces of mind splattered around the room after hearing that the first time. Bears living in a house? With porridge?!

Just pointing out that there's more than one thing speaking for DA2 when you're talking about comparing its sales to Origins.

Modifié par nerdage, 16 avril 2011 - 02:11 .

[mdugger12]

nerdage wrote...

To be fair, I think Laidlaw's "trashing" DAO was at least as valid as any points you can make about DA2. He never said "It was a terrible game and we're ashamed of it." but things like comabt feeling unresponsive were completely true, if you ordered a warrior to intercept someone going for your mage they'd just swivel on the spot until the enemy stopped moving (presumably because they reached your mage and were getting to work).

Could it even be problems with Origins that put some people off DA2?

Mind = Blown!

See, thats something nobody is even bothering to consider.  DA:O was obviously not made for consoles but managed to sell 3.2 million and 360 and PS3. Somehow everyone seemed to take it for granted that all of those people were happy with the first game and planned on buying DA2. 

That's what's really getting lost in all of this. The changes made to the game that disappointed a lot of fans were made to make the game more console friendly. But regardless of the sales figures of the first and how great the story and the world was, DA:O was a substandard port. That was reason enough for some people not to be as excited about DA2 regardless of the hype.

So while some people want to only focus on how Bioware wronged them and point out changes that "ruined" the game, how different do you think things would have been if they stuck to the DA:O playbook? Does anybody really think they would have reached 4 million sales by giving console gamers another crappy port?

[dostunuz]

fail game is fail..whos gonna learn that it stinks? biodrones ofcourse

[mdugger12]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Just to be sure here...this post is about how DAII didn't even sell 100,000 across all three platforms in its fifth week right?

and now Mortal Kombat, Portal 2 and SOCOM 4 was just released this past week.

What else can Bioware give away to try and move this game?

Where did you get that number? Why is not selling 100,000 this week bad? Where did you read not hitting that number means failure?

[Eternal Phoenix]

Sorry to burst your bubble kid but DA2 is still the best selling RPG for PC on Amazon.co.uk

Click

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 16 avril 2011 - 02:21 .

[Jerrybnsn]

[quote]mdugger12 wrote...

 But regardless of the sales figures of the first and how great the story and the world was, DA:O was a substandard port. That was reason enough for some people not to be as excited about DA2 regardless of the hype. 

[/quote

The reason the sequel is doing poorly is because the original that won awards and sold 4.5 million turned people off.

Is that what you are saying? How do you account for DA2 outselling Origins in its first two weeks?

[Eternal Phoenix]

Time for some rage. No one cares how much they've sold. They've sold enough to laugh at these threads.

[Jerrybnsn]

mdugger12 wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Just to be sure here...this post is about how DAII didn't even sell 100,000 across all three platforms in its fifth week right?

and now Mortal Kombat, Portal 2 and SOCOM 4 was just released this past week.

What else can Bioware give away to try and move this game?

Where did you get that number? Why is not selling 100,000 this week bad? Where did you read not hitting that number means failure?

This post starts out with those numbers.

[Scimal]

Cataca wrote...

Right, so none of the things that the many people say against DA2 is valid. Way to be objective. I agree that there will be many subjective oppinion heavy reviews of the game, but if you wanted to make a point against that, way to sabotage your point.

Just the opposite.

Many things people are saying are valid. My own criticism of DA2 exists. The levels are re-used, the pacing for the first two acts is mediocre, sometimes the wheel option doesn't correlate to the spoken word, and the development could have been longer.

Like I said - the game is good, but it's not great.

While I could've made my point more eloquently, I was trying to point out that the game's sales will probably hold steady for a while or pick up after the Grognards have had their time peeing their shorts in blind rage and stop, quite literally, insulting people for liking DA2 - driving  people away from the community when what they should be doing is welcoming people in.

Sales are indicative of subjective quality, not objective quality. Your next game will sell only as well as it favorably compares to your last, and DA:O - while also a good game (though not great in my opinion) - overshadows DA2 for the loudest portion of the RPG-playing population.

The OP was implying through sales that DA2 is not a good game. It is a good game - but it's just mediocre compared to BioWare's last one, and the RPG crowd is one of the most cutthroat, unforgiving target audiences you could have. So some of the RPG crowd go out of their way to make DA2 look like the worst thing ever.

I'm not going to say that BioWare shouldn't admit to some of the faults of the game, but I understand why they don't. BioWare is a business, and saying the game re-used environments too often will hurt what future sales it has left. Having the developers speak that they made a great game is simply the opposite counter to some people on these boards saying the game is the worst thing to ever emerge from the depths of EA.

The truth always sits between the two. Never believe the marketing hype, and never believe those people who feel so robbed of enjoyment that they feel the need to make snarky or insulting comments on the forums or review sites.

Modifié par Scimal, 16 avril 2011 - 02:25 .

[AkiKishi]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Just to be sure here...this post is about how DAII didn't even sell 100,000 across all three platforms in its fifth week right?

and now Mortal Kombat, Portal 2 and SOCOM 4 was just released this past week.

What else can Bioware give away to try and move this game?

Thats the thing unless you get very good word of mouth you are only "hot" for a few weeks at best until something else comes out.

DA2 was/is at fire sale prices can't really go much lower.

I've found both Trinity and Ar Tonelico more engaging than DA2.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 16 avril 2011 - 02:26 .

[Dragoonlordz]

mdugger12 wrote...

nerdage wrote...

To be fair, I think Laidlaw's "trashing" DAO was at least as valid as any points you can make about DA2. He never said "It was a terrible game and we're ashamed of it." but things like comabt feeling unresponsive were completely true, if you ordered a warrior to intercept someone going for your mage they'd just swivel on the spot until the enemy stopped moving (presumably because they reached your mage and were getting to work).

Could it even be problems with Origins that put some people off DA2?

Mind = Blown!

See, thats something nobody is even bothering to consider.  DA:O was obviously not made for consoles but managed to sell 3.2 million and 360 and PS3. Somehow everyone seemed to take it for granted that all of those people were happy with the first game and planned on buying DA2. 

That's what's really getting lost in all of this. The changes made to the game that disappointed a lot of fans were made to make the game more console friendly. But regardless of the sales figures of the first and how great the story and the world was, DA:O was a substandard port. That was reason enough for some people not to be as excited about DA2 regardless of the hype.

So while some people want to only focus on how Bioware wronged them and point out changes that "ruined" the game, how different do you think things would have been if they stuck to the DA:O playbook? Does anybody really think they would have reached 4 million sales by giving console gamers another crappy port?

Yes, I would also like to point out that it was not a crappy port, because the end result after porting was a game that was still far better than a majority of RPGs on the consoles. Therefore the console players, ones who have the ported version were not as unhappy as you claim. Your coming at it from the perspective of the PC player looking in at the console version as opposed to the console player who have the ported version.

[AkiKishi]

Dragoonlordz wrote...
Yes, I would also like to point out that it was not a crappy port, because the end result after porting was a game that was still far better than a majority of RPGs on the consoles. Therefore the console players, ones who have the ported version were not as unhappy as you claim. Your coming at it from the perspective of the PC player looking in at the console version as opposed to the console player who have the ported version.

This is true. While the PS3 is swimming in JRPGs and sandbow RPGs (Xbox less JRPGs) There are no CRPGs like Bioware makes on either system. What there are, is plenty of hack and slash action RPGs with much higher quality action than DA2.

[Dragoonlordz]

Elton John is dead wrote...

Sorry to burst your bubble kid but DA2 is still the best selling RPG for PC on Amazon.co.uk

Click

Sorry to burst your bubble it's not because of the quality of the game, the fact the PC version new is £13.98 when all others below it are mostly double that price. People would pay money for a bargain and buy something cheap even though it's not a good quality game, thats just human nature. If the price was the same as most of the rest at still 24+ then it would not be the best selling.

[Doctorfun]

So it didn't pay to "consolify" what could have been a brilliant game? Tell me something I didn't kno0w beforehand

[cljqnsnyc]

mdugger12 wrote...

nerdage wrote...

To be fair, I think Laidlaw's "trashing" DAO was at least as valid as any points you can make about DA2. He never said "It was a terrible game and we're ashamed of it." but things like comabt feeling unresponsive were completely true, if you ordered a warrior to intercept someone going for your mage they'd just swivel on the spot until the enemy stopped moving (presumably because they reached your mage and were getting to work).

Could it even be problems with Origins that put some people off DA2?

Mind = Blown!

See, thats something nobody is even bothering to consider.  DA:O was obviously not made for consoles but managed to sell 3.2 million and 360 and PS3. Somehow everyone seemed to take it for granted that all of those people were happy with the first game and planned on buying DA2. 

That's what's really getting lost in all of this. The changes made to the game that disappointed a lot of fans were made to make the game more console friendly. But regardless of the sales figures of the first and how great the story and the world was, DA:O was a substandard port. That was reason enough for some people not to be as excited about DA2 regardless of the hype.

So while some people want to only focus on how Bioware wronged them and point out changes that "ruined" the game, how different do you think things would have been if they stuck to the DA:O playbook? Does anybody really think they would have reached 4 million sales by giving console gamers another crappy port?

You make a good point.

I originally bought DAO on the 360 before my epiphany with pc gaming. Anyway, yes, the port left something to be desired. By the way, this was Mike Laidlaw's primary role on DAO, handling th console version.

Back to my point.

Still, for me, the game itself was strong enough to keep me invested until a month later I upgraded my pc. If the owners of the console version of DAO hated the game at it's core, it wouldn't have sold. Word of mouth would have killed it. Maybe others had the same experience I did? Who can say? 

Whatever the case may be, DA2 needed a lot more time in production and it's painfully obvious.

[mdugger12]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

mdugger12 wrote...

nerdage wrote...

To be fair, I think Laidlaw's "trashing" DAO was at least as valid as any points you can make about DA2. He never said "It was a terrible game and we're ashamed of it." but things like comabt feeling unresponsive were completely true, if you ordered a warrior to intercept someone going for your mage they'd just swivel on the spot until the enemy stopped moving (presumably because they reached your mage and were getting to work).

Could it even be problems with Origins that put some people off DA2?

Mind = Blown!

See, thats something nobody is even bothering to consider.  DA:O was obviously not made for consoles but managed to sell 3.2 million and 360 and PS3. Somehow everyone seemed to take it for granted that all of those people were happy with the first game and planned on buying DA2. 

That's what's really getting lost in all of this. The changes made to the game that disappointed a lot of fans were made to make the game more console friendly. But regardless of the sales figures of the first and how great the story and the world was, DA:O was a substandard port. That was reason enough for some people not to be as excited about DA2 regardless of the hype.

So while some people want to only focus on how Bioware wronged them and point out changes that "ruined" the game, how different do you think things would have been if they stuck to the DA:O playbook? Does anybody really think they would have reached 4 million sales by giving console gamers another crappy port?

Yes, I would also like to point out that it was not a crappy port, because the end result after porting was a game that was still far better than a majority of RPGs on the consoles. Therefore the console players, ones who have the ported version were not as unhappy as you claim. Your coming at it from the perspective of the PC player looking in at the console version as opposed to the console player who have the ported version.

Oh no. I'm speaking from the perspective of a console gamer that wasn't as impressed with DA:O as they were told they should have been. Not necessarily how I felt but believe me those feelings were out there. But if you're saying YES it would have hit 4 million by not making changes you're mistaken.

Honestly it couldn't hit those numbers either way......

Mass Effect 2 Sales PS3
http://gamrreview.vg.../mass-effect-2/

That says all that needs to be said about the slugish market hurting sales figures.  Not even 400k. Come on.

[AkiKishi]

mdugger12 wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

mdugger12 wrote...

nerdage wrote...

To be fair, I think Laidlaw's "trashing" DAO was at least as valid as any points you can make about DA2. He never said "It was a terrible game and we're ashamed of it." but things like comabt feeling unresponsive were completely true, if you ordered a warrior to intercept someone going for your mage they'd just swivel on the spot until the enemy stopped moving (presumably because they reached your mage and were getting to work).

Could it even be problems with Origins that put some people off DA2?

Mind = Blown!

See, thats something nobody is even bothering to consider.  DA:O was obviously not made for consoles but managed to sell 3.2 million and 360 and PS3. Somehow everyone seemed to take it for granted that all of those people were happy with the first game and planned on buying DA2. 

That's what's really getting lost in all of this. The changes made to the game that disappointed a lot of fans were made to make the game more console friendly. But regardless of the sales figures of the first and how great the story and the world was, DA:O was a substandard port. That was reason enough for some people not to be as excited about DA2 regardless of the hype.

So while some people want to only focus on how Bioware wronged them and point out changes that "ruined" the game, how different do you think things would have been if they stuck to the DA:O playbook? Does anybody really think they would have reached 4 million sales by giving console gamers another crappy port?

Yes, I would also like to point out that it was not a crappy port, because the end result after porting was a game that was still far better than a majority of RPGs on the consoles. Therefore the console players, ones who have the ported version were not as unhappy as you claim. Your coming at it from the perspective of the PC player looking in at the console version as opposed to the console player who have the ported version.

Oh no. I'm speaking from the perspective of a console gamer that wasn't as impressed with DA:O as they were told they should have been. Not necessarily how I felt but believe me those feelings were out there. But if you're saying YES it would have hit 4 million by not making changes you're mistaken.

Honestly it couldn't hit those numbers either way......

Mass Effect 2 Sales PS3
http://gamrreview.vg.../mass-effect-2/

That says all that needs to be said about the slugish market hurting sales figures.  Not even 400k. Come on.

You do realise that most serious gamers have both consoles and the Xbox version was out a year before ? Also at the time they released the PS3 version the Xbox version is selling for £10.
The only real benifit in the PS3 version is getting all the free DLC.

[Boiny Bunny]

The strange thing is, I've been playing (perhaps as Laidlaw suggested) on Nightmare from the very start. The combat is terrible in my opinion. The absolute worst part of the game. And shoved in your face at every single opportunity. Every single quest has multiple combat scenarios. Every area between quests has them. You practically can't take 2 steps anywhere in the game without 4 waves of fully armoured ninjas jumping out of the sky (or similar).

Enemies have far too much HP. The battles just go on for far longer than they should. Most of the big bosses take 30 minutes to an hour to complete, in one attempt that is. I'm not sure how Laidlaw (or anybody) could think that any breed of gamer (be it casual, RPG, FPS, or anywhere in between) would find a battle interesting where they do nothing but hit something for 1 hour while in almost no danger whatsoever of being killed.

I did however play it at a friend's house on their 360 (with their 2 handed warrior, on Normal). The game plays much more smoothly in terms of combat. Things die quickly, dozens of enemies are killed every minute, blood flies all over the screen. And of course, button mashing galore. I feel that this was the difficulty that the designers spent 90% of their time on - then at the end quickly tagged the others on the end and only bothered to increase basic enemy stats like HP, damage, resistances, etc.

At any rate, on Normal, I found teh combat to be utterly mindless (and button mashing galore on a console) - while Nightmare is incredibly boring by virtue of many of the big battles turning into 30 minute to 1 hour kite fests.

Also, again IMO, on any difficulty, Assassins are incredibly broken. I would love to see a mod that removes them from the game completely and replaces them with another enemy type.

[mdugger12]

cljqnsnyc wrote...

mdugger12 wrote...

nerdage wrote...

To be fair, I think Laidlaw's "trashing" DAO was at least as valid as any points you can make about DA2. He never said "It was a terrible game and we're ashamed of it." but things like comabt feeling unresponsive were completely true, if you ordered a warrior to intercept someone going for your mage they'd just swivel on the spot until the enemy stopped moving (presumably because they reached your mage and were getting to work).

Could it even be problems with Origins that put some people off DA2?

Mind = Blown!

See, thats something nobody is even bothering to consider.  DA:O was obviously not made for consoles but managed to sell 3.2 million and 360 and PS3. Somehow everyone seemed to take it for granted that all of those people were happy with the first game and planned on buying DA2. 

That's what's really getting lost in all of this. The changes made to the game that disappointed a lot of fans were made to make the game more console friendly. But regardless of the sales figures of the first and how great the story and the world was, DA:O was a substandard port. That was reason enough for some people not to be as excited about DA2 regardless of the hype.

So while some people want to only focus on how Bioware wronged them and point out changes that "ruined" the game, how different do you think things would have been if they stuck to the DA:O playbook? Does anybody really think they would have reached 4 million sales by giving console gamers another crappy port?

You make a good point.

I originally bought DAO on the 360 before my epiphany with pc gaming. Anyway, yes, the port left something to be desired. By the way, this was Mike Laidlaw's primary role on DAO, handling th console version.

Back to my point.

Still, for me, the game itself was strong enough to keep me invested until a month later I upgraded my pc. If the owners of the console version of DAO hated the game at it's core, it wouldn't have sold. Word of mouth would have killed it. Maybe others had the same experience I did? Who can say? 

Whatever the case may be, DA2 needed a lot more time in production and it's painfully obvious.

I'm not disputing the that DA2 was rushed or saying that it didn't need improvements. That's a fact no reasonable person can argue.

[Dragoonlordz]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...
Yes, I would also like to point out that it was not a crappy port, because the end result after porting was a game that was still far better than a majority of RPGs on the consoles. Therefore the console players, ones who have the ported version were not as unhappy as you claim. Your coming at it from the perspective of the PC player looking in at the console version as opposed to the console player who have the ported version.

This is true. While the PS3 is swimming in JRPGs and sandbow RPGs (Xbox less JRPGs) There are no CRPGs like Bioware makes on either system. What there are, is plenty of hack and slash action RPGs with much higher quality action than DA2.

Your kind of spot on, even my collections on both my 360/PS3 RPG wise are huge amounts of jRPGs for one simple reason there aren't as many w/cRPGs on them when the systems came out. DAO was a shining success not just on the fact it was a cRPG and as such brought with it a breath of fresh air. But also the fact it was a truly amazing game even within the cRPG genre itself. It was not a bad port though it was a port that worked very well from the perspective of the console player who bought it.

Over the first few years of system release both were vastly lacking in RPG genre titles now the genre is making good grounds so my collection has began encompassing more and more cRPG and wRPG as they are released. Even so out of all types of RPG~ DA2 is still at best only half way up the entire collection (quality wise and enjoyment) including all forms of RPG on both systems (jRPG/wRPG/cRPG) which means it's mediocre in relation to my collection itself. The only titles that were worse from my standpoint are ones like Nier which has split personality as didn't know what it wanted to be itself genre wise, even Enchanted Arms was a better game from enjoyment factor.

Overall DA2 was a test run of a new system of story telling that fell flat on it's face, this 'framed narrative' and trying to appeal to people who don't play RPGs the game itself becomes another Nier. I will grant it that DA2 is only just better than Nier but as a RPG specific gamer DA2 does not even come halfway up to the standards of 95% of the past Bioware titles, the exception being MDK which I did not like.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 16 avril 2011 - 02:54 .

[mdugger12]

Boiny Bunny wrote...

The strange thing is, I've been playing (perhaps as Laidlaw suggested) on Nightmare from the very start. The combat is terrible in my opinion. The absolute worst part of the game. And shoved in your face at every single opportunity. Every single quest has multiple combat scenarios. Every area between quests has them. You practically can't take 2 steps anywhere in the game without 4 waves of fully armoured ninjas jumping out of the sky (or similar).

Enemies have far too much HP. The battles just go on for far longer than they should. Most of the big bosses take 30 minutes to an hour to complete, in one attempt that is. I'm not sure how Laidlaw (or anybody) could think that any breed of gamer (be it casual, RPG, FPS, or anywhere in between) would find a battle interesting where they do nothing but hit something for 1 hour while in almost no danger whatsoever of being killed.

I did however play it at a friend's house on their 360 (with their 2 handed warrior, on Normal). The game plays much more smoothly in terms of combat. Things die quickly, dozens of enemies are killed every minute, blood flies all over the screen. And of course, button mashing galore. I feel that this was the difficulty that the designers spent 90% of their time on - then at the end quickly tagged the others on the end and only bothered to increase basic enemy stats like HP, damage, resistances, etc.

At any rate, on Normal, I found teh combat to be utterly mindless (and button mashing galore on a console) - while Nightmare is incredibly boring by virtue of many of the big battles turning into 30 minute to 1 hour kite fests.

Also, again IMO, on any difficulty, Assassins are incredibly broken. I would love to see a mod that removes them from the game completely and replaces them with another enemy type.

Really? I've heard other people say this about playing on nightmare too. I play on nightmare on 360 but It isn't like that at all. I mean yeah enemies have alot of HP but it's never a situation where It takes long periods of time to kill them and mistakes on my end are usually met with a swift death so there is always danger. 

[Dragoonlordz]

mdugger12 wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

mdugger12 wrote...

nerdage wrote...

To be fair, I think Laidlaw's "trashing" DAO was at least as valid as any points you can make about DA2. He never said "It was a terrible game and we're ashamed of it." but things like comabt feeling unresponsive were completely true, if you ordered a warrior to intercept someone going for your mage they'd just swivel on the spot until the enemy stopped moving (presumably because they reached your mage and were getting to work).

Could it even be problems with Origins that put some people off DA2?

Mind = Blown!

See, thats something nobody is even bothering to consider.  DA:O was obviously not made for consoles but managed to sell 3.2 million and 360 and PS3. Somehow everyone seemed to take it for granted that all of those people were happy with the first game and planned on buying DA2. 

That's what's really getting lost in all of this. The changes made to the game that disappointed a lot of fans were made to make the game more console friendly. But regardless of the sales figures of the first and how great the story and the world was, DA:O was a substandard port. That was reason enough for some people not to be as excited about DA2 regardless of the hype.

So while some people want to only focus on how Bioware wronged them and point out changes that "ruined" the game, how different do you think things would have been if they stuck to the DA:O playbook? Does anybody really think they would have reached 4 million sales by giving console gamers another crappy port?

Yes, I would also like to point out that it was not a crappy port, because the end result after porting was a game that was still far better than a majority of RPGs on the consoles. Therefore the console players, ones who have the ported version were not as unhappy as you claim. Your coming at it from the perspective of the PC player looking in at the console version as opposed to the console player who have the ported version.

Oh no. I'm speaking from the perspective of a console gamer that wasn't as impressed with DA:O as they were told they should have been. Not necessarily how I felt but believe me those feelings were out there. But if you're saying YES it would have hit 4 million by not making changes you're mistaken.

Honestly it couldn't hit those numbers either way......

Mass Effect 2 Sales PS3
http://gamrreview.vg.../mass-effect-2/

That says all that needs to be said about the slugish market hurting sales figures.  Not even 400k. Come on.

ME2 came close to 3mil sales according to VG, baring in mind they also made some big changes. Without those changes could it have hit 4mil, possibly but no way of knowing for sure. According to VG DAO made 3.66mil sales, could DA2 have hit 4mil if had stuck closer to DAO and further from Darksiders, I think so.
 

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 16 avril 2011 - 02:58 .