1033 réponses à ce sujet

[Boiny Bunny]

I think this has gone on far enough.

It's one thing to look at sales data week by week, from a generally unreliable source, and blather about how much of a failure the game is, because it sold less than the first one, also according to the unreliable data source.

It's another entirely to try and fit a function through the unreliable data using excel's auto-fit like a 4 year old. Simply put, the 'projections' in this thread are garbage.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

YohkoOhno wrote...

Of course, people are assuming Laidlaw's or Melo's statements in interviews was a realistic goal planned and taken into account by management (including marketing, finance, or accounting), or just a hopeful goal or wishful statement said in a press interview.   

Well, the 90+ Metacritic score is definitely an achievable goal, the only game this side of Baldur's Gate not to hit 90+ on Metacritic is Jade Empire... and that got 89. So really, a 90+ is "par for the course" for Bioware.

As for the 5 million buyers, definitely achievable. We take into account that Origins has sold anywhere from 3-4+ millions and 5 million is a tough, but hardly impossible goal.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 10 mai 2011 - 11:53 .

[YohkoOhno]

Most games appear to follow a logrithmic style function where the curve is really sharp and then levels out. It appears most games follow this curve--from what I see, the only time the curve gets skewed is for games that come out in November which get a spike upwards for a few weeks.

[YohkoOhno]

It's another entirely to try and fit a function through the unreliable data using excel's auto-fit like a 4 year old. Simply put, the 'projections' in this thread are garbage.

Actually, I think that's an accurate projection, at least x is trying to extrapolate from the existing data.

The biggest problem is arguing this stuff is sort of useless except for wanting to crow about your own opinions. Bioware has much more accurate metrics--sales data (both sell in and sell through), sources other than vgchartz, direct feedback from retail, as well as electronic metrics from players. Most people are just using the sales charts to validate their own opinions, rather than actually looking at it and trying to answer the questions like a neutral observer.

As for the 5 million buyers, definitely achievable. We take into account that Origins has sold anywhere from 3-4+ millions and 5 million is a tough, but hardly impossible goal.

I didn't say "achievable", and I wasn't mentioning metacritic, but I was pointing out that if Laidlaw said 5 million in an interview, that may not have been an internal goal for the company but rather a futuristic hope. (Somebody please pull an exact quote). Which means, while there might be some disappointment I doubt it will be considered a failure internally (as in, no sequel like Alpha Protocol or mass layoffs like some other games).

[xkg]

Boiny Bunny wrote...

I think this has gone on far enough.

It's one thing to look at sales data week by week, from a generally unreliable source, and blather about how much of a failure the game is, because it sold less than the first one, also according to the unreliable data source.

It's another entirely to try and fit a function through the unreliable data using excel's auto-fit like a 4 year old. Simply put, the 'projections' in this thread are garbage.

Short answer :
If you have any problem report my post as a spam, because i couldn't care less what you think of me.


Edit
Oh, and could you enlighten me what this "excel's auto-fit" is?
As far as i know all you can "auto fit" are cell's height and width - clearly you have no idea what you are talking about.
Learn something about Excel first then talk about it. Not the other way around.

Modifié par xkg, 11 mai 2011 - 12:43 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

YohkoOhno wrote...

I didn't say "achievable", and I wasn't mentioning metacritic, but I was pointing out that if Laidlaw said 5 million in an interview, that may not have been an internal goal for the company but rather a futuristic hope. (Somebody please pull an exact quote). Which means, while there might be some disappointment I doubt it will be considered a failure internally (as in, no sequel like Alpha Protocol or mass layoffs like some other games).

Oh, that's fair enough. A milestone that was being aimed at, but nothing something that determines the success/failure of the project internally.

What I was trying to say was that although it may not have been a vital goal, it wasn't a pie in the sky goal either. 5 million was definitely achievable.

[Statulos]

I have red a lot of comments (even from Mr. Gaider) pointing out at the release date. Fine, so why not waiting some months and release it in November? Yes, I understand that timing for DA:O was great because there was no massive competition like this year but if you´re sure about your game and its capabilities, you should release it. In fact, you can build a reputation by all the comparisons they are going to draw (extra marketing!).

Plus, if in that environment you actually get more awards, the taste of victory is far better.

[neppakyo]

Statulos wrote...

I have red a lot of comments (even from Mr. Gaider) pointing out at the release date. Fine, so why not waiting some months and release it in November? Yes, I understand that timing for DA:O was great because there was no massive competition like this year but if you´re sure about your game and its capabilities, you should release it. In fact, you can build a reputation by all the comparisons they are going to draw (extra marketing!).

Plus, if in that environment you actually get more awards, the taste of victory is far better.

To the bolded. If you mean RPG competition, then no. But in general game competetion. Craploads of games
Here's what came out same time as origins.

Assassins Creed 2
Call Of Duty: MW2
Left4Dead 2
God of War Collection
Dirt2
Super Mario Bros Wii (i know its wii, but SM games sell like crack in harlem)
The Sims Adventure.

So plenty of competition for a gamers money in that month. 

[IndigoWolfe]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that these continual updates about how Dragon Age 2 is selling has gone from sales analysis, to a thread for the people who dislike DA2 to stroke their egos.

[CaptainBlackGold]

IndigoWolfe wrote...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that these continual updates about how Dragon Age 2 is selling has gone from sales analysis, to a thread for the people who dislike DA2 to stroke their egos.

With all due respect; I disagree. I personally find the information incredibly interesting and very much appreciate those who have been trying to visually show us the sale's trends. Granted, the level of discussion regarding the implications of those trends runs the gamut of profund to silly - but I think it is a disservice to reduce all these comments to mere "ego stroking." And the silly comments often make me snort coffee out my nose.

After all, we can only get an update on sales every week - something has to fill the time until the next information is released.

And for the record, I do not "dislike" DA2 - just think that it failed to live up to Bioware's normally outstanding standards. For me it is an "OK" or "meh" game playable but ultimately forgettable - and the sale's projections appear to demonstrate that I am not alone in my evaluation. And it will be fascinating to see how the critics reviews (both professional and player), the feedback from the forums (here and other places) and DA2's overall sales affects the development of future DLC, expansions and DA3.

I suspect that if the trends had been counter to what they appear to be now, and DA2 matched or even outsold DAO, many of the "haters" might just have walked away from these forums by now - because clearly, their evaluation would have been the minority. However, it appears (though yet to be proven) that at least in regards to sales, the neutral to negative evaluation is shared by the game buying public in general.

This strongly suggests to me that Bioware will have to rethink how they handle future offerings in this franchise.

[neppakyo]

CaptainBlackGold wrote...

IndigoWolfe wrote...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that these continual updates about how Dragon Age 2 is selling has gone from sales analysis, to a thread for the people who dislike DA2 to stroke their egos.

With all due respect; I disagree. I personally find the information incredibly interesting and very much appreciate those who have been trying to visually show us the sale's trends. Granted, the level of discussion regarding the implications of those trends runs the gamut of profund to silly - but I think it is a disservice to reduce all these comments to mere "ego stroking." And the silly comments often make me snort coffee out my nose.

After all, we can only get an update on sales every week - something has to fill the time until the next information is released.

And for the record, I do not "dislike" DA2 - just think that it failed to live up to Bioware's normally outstanding standards. For me it is an "OK" or "meh" game playable but ultimately forgettable - and the sale's projections appear to demonstrate that I am not alone in my evaluation. And it will be fascinating to see how the critics reviews (both professional and player), the feedback from the forums (here and other places) and DA2's overall sales affects the development of future DLC, expansions and DA3.

I suspect that if the trends had been counter to what they appear to be now, and DA2 matched or even outsold DAO, many of the "haters" might just have walked away from these forums by now - because clearly, their evaluation would have been the minority. However, it appears (though yet to be proven) that at least in regards to sales, the neutral to negative evaluation is shared by the game buying public in general.

This strongly suggests to me that Bioware will have to rethink how they handle future offerings in this franchise.

You said eqoulently, far better than I could of, what I pretty much well think. Are you a mind reader sir? 

[csfteeeer]

[quote]David Gaider wrote...

Not to suggest anything beyond this, but if one is going to compare the sales of the two games one might also wish to take into account the fact that Origins was released shortly before Christmas. Beyond that, whatever extrapolations you wish to make are up to you.
[/quote]

yes, that is true, however, MANY things should be put in consideration:
despite being selled as a Spiritual Successor to Baldur's Gate, all in All, Origins was a new franchise, DA2 is a sequel
the excelent and well deserved word-of-mouth that DAO got from the users ultimately attracted many users, but like Aaleel said:
[quote] 
I know you get a sales boost around Christmas. But on consoles 230k for DA:O to 31K for DA2. 700% Christmas sale boost? 
[quote] 

something like that is EXTREMELY unlikely, especially considering that DA2 was a sequel, so by default MOST of the audience of Origins should have already bought the game, however the very Negative word-of-mouth, the reaction to the demo, among the many changes which already pissed a lot of people off when da2 was first announced, has ultimately worked against the game.
and others, like the competition, which has already been said, like Modern Warfare 2, Left 4 Dead 2, New Super Mario Bros. Wii, and yet the game managed to sale like cake because, it was indeed, awesome, DA2 however has little to competition, the only Worth Mentioning would be Homefront.
i'm just saying....

[CaptainBlackGold]

neppakyo wrote...

Snip
You said eqoulently, far better than I could of, what I pretty much well think. Are you a mind reader sir? 

You are too kind sir. But If I was a mind-reader, I would not have ended up in Tiajuana that time, tied to a bed-post and missing my wallet, clothes and kidney...

[Boiny Bunny]

xkg wrote...

Boiny Bunny wrote...

I think this has gone on far enough.

It's one thing to look at sales data week by week, from a generally unreliable source, and blather about how much of a failure the game is, because it sold less than the first one, also according to the unreliable data source.

It's another entirely to try and fit a function through the unreliable data using excel's auto-fit like a 4 year old. Simply put, the 'projections' in this thread are garbage.

Short answer :
If you have any problem report my post as a spam, because i couldn't care less what you think of me.

Sorry, what?  Where did I say anything about your post being spam, or refer to you personally at all?  I don't think anything 'of you'.  I have no idea who you are, or what motivated you to attempt to fit a simple function through the sales data - nor do I care.  Your post, and your graph, are not spam.  They are merely misguided.

Edit
Oh, and could you enlighten me what this "excel's auto-fit" is?
As far as i know all you can "auto fit" are cell's height and width - clearly you have no idea what you are talking about.
Learn something about Excel first then talk about it. Not the other way around.

Call it Solver, Goal Seek, Auto Fit, whatever you will.  It ultimately makes no difference.  You are attempting to fit a closed form 2 parameter function to an incredibly unreliable data set consisting of 8 observations (in addition, most likely with no understanding whatsoever of the underlying methodology Excel uses to actually estimate parameters when one of the aforementioned 'tools' is used).

Given that you appear to know nothing about statistics, I'm not directing any personal comments your way.  I can imagine why you might think your function is a good indicator of the game's future performance.

I'm merely stating that it's an extremely unreliable model, at very best.

[neppakyo]

CaptainBlackGold wrote...

neppakyo wrote...

Snip
You said eqoulently, far better than I could of, what I pretty much well think. Are you a mind reader sir? 

You are too kind sir. But If I was a mind-reader, I would not have ended up in Tiajuana that time, tied to a bed-post and missing my wallet, clothes and kidney...

Jeesh. I only lost my clothes, and it was in the phillapeans (too tired to spell, need mroe caffeine)

[Travie]

@Boiny Bunny

What sources do you consider more reliable?

[Boiny Bunny]

Travie wrote...

@Boiny Bunny

What sources do you consider more reliable?

A fine question.  That are available to the general public?  There are none.

Please note that I am not attempting to insult the creator of the projections, nor am I arguing that his projections would have been more accurate if he had used some other publicly available data source.  I'm merely pointing out that it is impossible to create a reliable projection of overall sales based on the data that we do have.

[Rebecca Black likes DA2]

Boiny Bunny wrote...

Travie wrote...

@Boiny Bunny

What sources do you consider more reliable?

A fine question.  That are available to the general public?  There are none.

Please note that I am not attempting to insult the creator of the projections, nor am I arguing that his projections would have been more accurate if he had used some other publicly available data source.  I'm merely pointing out that it is impossible to create a reliable projection of overall sales based on the data that we do have.

OK then so your only contention is xkg's projected numbers.  That's fine with me because I also have a problem with them as I believe they look too high.

I'm glad that's your stance because for a minute there I thought you were gonna pull a YohkoVolourn and get all stoopit.  As long as you understand that since it's the same source using the same system for both DAO and DA2 so both sets of numbers are perfectly comparable with DA2s sales being absolutely abysmal then you're fine in my book.

[Boiny Bunny]

Rebecca Black likes DA2 wrote...

Boiny Bunny wrote...

Travie wrote...

@Boiny Bunny

What sources do you consider more reliable?

A fine question.  That are available to the general public?  There are none.

Please note that I am not attempting to insult the creator of the projections, nor am I arguing that his projections would have been more accurate if he had used some other publicly available data source.  I'm merely pointing out that it is impossible to create a reliable projection of overall sales based on the data that we do have.

OK then so your only contention is xkg's projected numbers.  That's fine with me because I also have a problem with them as I believe they look too high.

I'm glad that's your stance because for a minute there I thought you were gonna pull a YohkoVolourn and get all stoopit.  As long as you understand that since it's the same source using the same system for both DAO and DA2 so both sets of numbers are perfectly comparable with DA2s sales being absolutely abysmal then you're fine in my book.

I have no problem with people looking at the graphs to compare performance between the games, or even just to have a vague look at the trend/pattern in either.  My issue is with the projection (which actually involves fitting a mathematical function to a shonky data set then drawing conclusions from it).

[SirShreK]

Boiny Bunny wrote...

I have no problem with people looking at the graphs to compare performance between the games, or even just to have a vague look at the trend/pattern in either.  My issue is with the projection (which actually involves fitting a mathematical function to a shonky data set then drawing conclusions from it).

All projections are nothing more than, as they say, projections i.e. non-facts. Otherwise there would be no need of statistics. You would simply look at the real data.

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

CaptainBlackGold wrote...

neppakyo wrote...

Snip
You said eqoulently, far better than I could of, what I pretty much well think. Are you a mind reader sir? 

You are too kind sir. But If I was a mind-reader, I would not have ended up in Tiajuana that time, tied to a bed-post and missing my wallet, clothes and kidney...

Look on the bright side, at least they took off your clothes first so blood didn't get on them when they stole the kidney. It's a rare thing to meet classy kidney thieves these days.

[astrallite]

Not sure what Boin is whining about, complaining about sales because the source is unreliable? We already know the upper bound of copies on the shelves, unless of course, EA is an unreliable source and only a direct line to God counts as reliable.

[blu_skye]

DA2 sold approximately 2 million copies through the end of April.
DAO sold approximately 4.5 million copies to date.

This information was taken from EA financial results.

There is no way that DA2 will hit 4.5 million copies no matter how many gimmics EA comes up with. Considering that EAWare wanted sales to approach Call of Duty, I would say that it is a failure. From the standpoint of my wife and I, the game was a dismal failure. The only time either us of pressed a button and something awsome happened is when it was deleted from her PC.

[Zeevico]

I really should reiterate that these sale figures show bupkis about bupkis. EA has the real figures. They could be great or terrible: we simply don't know either way.

[blu_skye]

Zeevico wrote...

I really should reiterate that these sale figures show bupkis about bupkis. EA has the real figures. They could be great or terrible: we simply don't know either way.

EA has reported that DA2 sold approximately 2 million copies.  So we do know.  Go read the financial report yourself.  It's public knowledge.