21 réponses à ce sujet

[ChristianSoldier]

ME3 is similar to ME2 in terms of gameplay.

ME2 sold 2 million in 1 week.

ME1 sold 1.6 million in 6 weeks.

BIOWARE knows what they're doing. I am really glad they are going into exciting action packed gameplay. The action is what brings in so many people. It seems that the change in gameplay from ME1 to ME2 worked. If any of you ever played ME1 and ME2 you will notice the difference. EX) ME1 didnt count headshots. ME1 was basically RPG/Shooter gameplay. ME2 became a shooter with watered down RPG. From what i see in ME3 I think BIOWARE is following the same concept from ME2. The RPG elements in ME3 dont look promising to me. Casey said that you can customize your weapon which includes barrels, scopes, grips and the color. Casey also said one can augment his/her concussive shot with ammo powers for a more deadly effect. From this I conclude that AMMO POWERS in ME2 WILL RETURN. My assumption that ME3's gameplay concept is the same as ME2's concept is confirmed when Casey keeps on emphasizing that new people can enjoy ME3 without ME1 and ME2. Casey is trying to bring in Gears, CoD fanboys. I've noticed he has never been so keen on getting newbies during the last few E3s. ME3 is going to be awesome. The gameplay surprises me. Looks like BIOWARE can make their own action games now. O.O

[Phaedon]

ME3's gameplay is nothing close to ME2's.

They improve the shooter elements along with the RPG ones, Bioware has the right idea.

[GnusmasTHX]

I agree that ME3 is better action gameplay-wise, but am I getting trolled with those sales figures...

Surely you're aware a good chunk of ME2's sales simply capitalize on the successes of its predecessor, and ME1 was, in fact, the first of the series to be released?

[marshalleck]

ChristianSoldier wrote...
ME2 sold 2 million in 1 week.

No it didn't. 

[Tripedius]

Personally I think the attraction of the ME series has more to do with the story, the characters and the atmosphere/settings than its action. Cause let's face it there are a lot of games better in the action/shooter departement than ME1 and 2. And tbh I don't expect ME3 to really change that. Sure I think ME3 will be more a smooth shooter than ME1 or 2 were, but it still won't be the best in that departement.

[Phaedon]

http://www.1up.com/n...ct-2-week-sales

?

[marshalleck]

Phaedon wrote...

http://www.1up.com/n...ct-2-week-sales

?

http://investor.ea.c...ter=4&Year=2010

http://investor.ea.c...INAL_LOCKED.pdf

Q410 Highlights – In our Packaged Goods business:
 EA was the #1 publisher in North  America and Europe for the quarter, reflecting a four point share gain year-over-year. We were also #1 for the fiscal year with four titles in the top 20 in both North America and Europe.
  Battlefield: Bad Company 2 – we sold through three million packaged and digital units in the quarter for Europe and North America combined.  Battlefield: Bad Company 2 launched with a Metacritic rating of 89. To date, we have now sold through over four million units of Battlefield: Bad Company 2.   
 Mass Effect 2 – sold through over 1.6 million packaged and digital units in the quarter for Europe and North America combined and launched with a Metacritic rating of 96 on the Xbox 360.  

1.6 million sales, including digital distribution, for the fiscal quarter January-March 2010. Shipping 2 million copies to retailers is not the same as selling all those 2 million copies to end users, but publishers love to conflate terms (sell in vs. sell through, units shipped, units moved, etc) because it makes them look better.

Modifié par marshalleck, 08 juin 2011 - 10:20 .

[Flashlegend]

I completely agree with what you're saying but those figures aren't really indication of this. ME2 sales can be accredited to both its gameplay improvements and the success of the first game. I'm sure the same will be true of ME3 when its ships march of next year.

[kaiki01]

Might be that the 1up.com figure is including units shipped to retailers. While the investor data uses only sales to end customers.

[Phaedon]

marshalleck wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

http://www.1up.com/n...ct-2-week-sales

?

http://investor.ea.c...ter=4&Year=2010

http://investor.ea.c...INAL_LOCKED.pdf

Q410 Highlights – In our Packaged Goods business:
 EA was the #1 publisher in North  America and Europe for the quarter, reflecting a four point share gain year-over-year. We were also #1 for the fiscal year with four titles in the top 20 in both North America and Europe.
  Battlefield: Bad Company 2 – we sold through three million packaged and digital units in the quarter for Europe and North America combined.  Battlefield: Bad Company 2 launched with a Metacritic rating of 89. To date, we have now sold through over four million units of Battlefield: Bad Company 2.   
 Mass Effect 2 – sold through over 1.6 million packaged and digital units in the quarter for Europe and North America combined and launched with a Metacritic rating of 96 on the Xbox 360.  

1.6 million sales, including digital distribution, for the fiscal quarter January-March 2010. Shipping 2 million copies to retailers is not the same as selling all those 2 million copies to end users, but publishers love to conflate terms (sell in vs. sell through, units shipped, units moved, etc) because it makes them look better.

1. They can not include all of the digital services, they mean the EADM, or how it's called.
2. Bioware/EA makes profit with how many units are sold to retailers.
3. The final result is 7+ million units for both ME1 and 2, without taking digital services into consideration.

Modifié par Phaedon, 08 juin 2011 - 10:25 .

[ChristianSoldier]

Phaedon wrote...

ME3's gameplay is nothing close to ME2's.

They improve the shooter elements along with the RPG ones, Bioware has the right idea.

ME3 gameplay concept is similar to ME2's. ME3 gameplay is an IMPROVED VERSION of ME2. When I said similar i didnt mean LITERALLY THE SAME GAMEPLAY. Just to point that out across.

ME1 was very RPG in nature. It was 50 shooter 50 RPG. I am not an RPG guy so when i played ME1 i was wondering why my headshots didnt deal more damage than when i shot the enemy's body. I realized that ME1 was an RPG!!! lolololol ME2 was better because it counted head shots, and combat was more action packed. ME3 is going all out from what I see. You can choose to take cover and take out your enemies gears style or run and gun halo style. I'm really excited. I dont think RPG is going to be that much of a deal in gameplay besides powers and a few weapon perks(scopes, grips, and barrels.). What do you think of ammo powers? cuz they are back fo sho.

[Phaedon]

ME2's gameplay is much closer to ME1's, than ME3's is to ME2's, at least when it comes to the shooter elements.

ME1 wasn't a 50/50 hybrid. It's hardly a shooter, since you have limited control over your main character, and the weapons are therefore not responsive to your commands. It has shooter elements, but it's not a shooter, or at least a shooter hybrid.

[kaiki01]

Phaedon wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

http://www.1up.com/n...ct-2-week-sales

?

http://investor.ea.c...ter=4&Year=2010

http://investor.ea.c...INAL_LOCKED.pdf

Q410 Highlights – In our Packaged Goods business:
 EA was the #1 publisher in North  America and Europe for the quarter, reflecting a four point share gain year-over-year. We were also #1 for the fiscal year with four titles in the top 20 in both North America and Europe.
  Battlefield: Bad Company 2 – we sold through three million packaged and digital units in the quarter for Europe and North America combined.  Battlefield: Bad Company 2 launched with a Metacritic rating of 89. To date, we have now sold through over four million units of Battlefield: Bad Company 2.   
 Mass Effect 2 – sold through over 1.6 million packaged and digital units in the quarter for Europe and North America combined and launched with a Metacritic rating of 96 on the Xbox 360.  

1.6 million sales, including digital distribution, for the fiscal quarter January-March 2010. Shipping 2 million copies to retailers is not the same as selling all those 2 million copies to end users, but publishers love to conflate terms (sell in vs. sell through, units shipped, units moved, etc) because it makes them look better.

1. They can not include all of the digital services, they mean the EADM, or how it's called.
2. Bioware/EA makes profit with how many units are sold to retailers.
3. The final result is 7+ million units for both ME1 and 2, without taking digital services into consideration.

1. Why can't they include all digital sales? I'm sure EA has sales reports from all digital retailers for their products.
2. It's more important that customers are buying units then retailers. If, for example, 2 million units were shipped to retailers, but only 500k were sold to customers, then that hypothetical example would be a huge flop.

[Phaedon]

1. Afaik, several digital distributors, such as Steam don't release such information.
2. It is? For what reason? ME2 did sell those units, that's the point I wanted to prove.

[ChristianSoldier]

Phaedon wrote...

ME2's gameplay is much closer to ME1's, than ME3's is to ME2's, at least when it comes to the shooter elements.

ME1 wasn't a 50/50 hybrid. It's hardly a shooter, since you have limited control over your main character, and the weapons are therefore not responsive to your commands. It has shooter elements, but it's not a shooter, or at least a shooter hybrid.

I disagree that ME2's gameplay is similar to ME1's. Are you playing the right game?

If I placed a headshot on enemies in ME1, it deals the same amount of damage if i were to place that shot in the enemy's chest. ME2 counts headshots. ME3 will count headshots. ME2 and ME3 have both rechargable health and shields/barriers. ME1 does not have rechargable health. ME1 also had auto aim(option). That was intended for RPG guys. When ME1 was introduced to E3, it was an RPG. ME1 demos had auto aim. ME2 BIOWARE took that option away and made ME2 a shooter. ME3 they are following the same concept.

I use headshots as an example because its very prominant in shooter franchises. And ME2 and ME3 will have headshots. ME2 and ME3 are visceral, but ME3 will be more visceral than ME2. ME1 WAS NOT visceral. ME1 was actually a pure PRG like you said.

[DarthCaine]

Phaedon wrote...

ME2's gameplay is much closer to ME1's, than ME3's is to ME2's, at least when it comes to the shooter elements.

You're kidding right? ME3's combat looks EXACTLY like ME2's with a few minor upgrades thrown in.

It looks like you haven't played ME1 for a long time to see how much drastically different it is (and how much it sucks)

ME3? More like ME 2.5

[kaiki01]

Phaedon wrote...

1. Afaik, several digital distributors, such as Steam don't release such information.
2. It is? For what reason? ME2 did sell those units, that's the point I wanted to prove.

1. They don't release that data to end customers. They do release that information to publishers as Valve has said on several occasions.
2. If retailers are stuck with units that will not sell it will give them an incentive not to stock as many units of future games, be less inclined to do special promotions for future games, etc. Also, if customers are not buying units sent to retailers, that is a clear indication that the game is not popular. So there are a couple of reasons why units sold to customers is the more important figure.

They may have not sold all those units. If EA is reporting that 1.6 million physical + digital units were sold to customers & 1up.com is stating 2 million units were shipped, then units were shipped but not sold.

[LGTX]

Headshots have absolutely nothing to do with the general look and feel of the game. ME3 is different in exactly the right amount from ME2 as an average sequel should be. It's just that Bioware made that huge leap from ME1 to ME2, and now we're all spoiled expecting the same.

DarthCaine wrote...

It looks like you haven't played ME1 for a long time to see how much drastically different it is (and how much it sucks)

ME3? More like ME 2.5

It also looks like you haven't played ME3. You just watched a few minutes of a build nine months to release. Bioware may surprise you.

Modifié par LGTX, 08 juin 2011 - 10:43 .

[marshalleck]

Phaedon wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

http://www.1up.com/n...ct-2-week-sales

?

http://investor.ea.c...ter=4&Year=2010

http://investor.ea.c...INAL_LOCKED.pdf

Q410 Highlights – In our Packaged Goods business:
 EA was the #1 publisher in North  America and Europe for the quarter, reflecting a four point share gain year-over-year. We were also #1 for the fiscal year with four titles in the top 20 in both North America and Europe.
  Battlefield: Bad Company 2 – we sold through three million packaged and digital units in the quarter for Europe and North America combined.  Battlefield: Bad Company 2 launched with a Metacritic rating of 89. To date, we have now sold through over four million units of Battlefield: Bad Company 2.   
 Mass Effect 2 – sold through over 1.6 million packaged and digital units in the quarter for Europe and North America combined and launched with a Metacritic rating of 96 on the Xbox 360.  

1.6 million sales, including digital distribution, for the fiscal quarter January-March 2010. Shipping 2 million copies to retailers is not the same as selling all those 2 million copies to end users, but publishers love to conflate terms (sell in vs. sell through, units shipped, units moved, etc) because it makes them look better.

1. They can not include all of the digital services, they mean the EADM, or how it's called.
2. Bioware/EA makes profit with how many units are sold to retailers.
3. The final result is 7+ million units for both ME1 and 2, without taking digital services into consideration.

None of which is the point. Mass Effect 2 did not sell 2 million copies to end users in the first week of release. Period, end of. 

[ChristianSoldier]

LGTX wrote...

Headshots have absolutely nothing to do with the general look and feel of the game. ME3 is different in exactly the right amount from ME2 as an average sequel should be. It's just that Bioware made that huge leap from ME1 to ME2, and now we're all spoiled expecting the same.

DarthCaine wrote...

It looks like you haven't played ME1 for a long time to see how much drastically different it is (and how much it sucks)

ME3? More like ME 2.5

It also looks like you haven't played ME3. You just watched a few minutes of a build nine months to release. Bioware may surprise you.

EDIT

Dude dont deny the facts. I bet you 99.99% of ME players agree that ME3 is following ME2's gameplay format.  You said that ME1 is similar to ME2. I disagree and so does DarthCaine. We're not blind. We see that everything is similar in ME3 as in ME2. The health bar is the same. The shield/barrier regen is the same. The shooting mech is the same.

Modifié par ChristianSoldier, 08 juin 2011 - 10:52 .

[LGTX]

ChristianSoldier wrote...

LGTX wrote...

Headshots have absolutely nothing to do with the general look and feel of the game. ME3 is different in exactly the right amount from ME2 as an average sequel should be. It's just that Bioware made that huge leap from ME1 to ME2, and now we're all spoiled expecting the same.

DarthCaine wrote...

It looks like you haven't played ME1 for a long time to see how much drastically different it is (and how much it sucks)

ME3? More like ME 2.5

It also looks like you haven't played ME3. You just watched a few minutes of a build nine months to release. Bioware may surprise you.

Dude dont deny the facts. I bet you 99.99% of ME players agree that ME3 is following ME2's gameplay format.  You said that ME1 is similar to ME2. I disagree and so does DarthCaine. Now you try to redirect your claim by saying that BIOWARE may surprise us. We're not blind. We see that everything is similar in ME3 as in ME2. The health bar is the same. The shield/barrier regen is the same. The shooting mech is the same.

You are falsely accusing me. I did NOT say that ME2 was similar to ME1, what's your problem... I just pointed out that they are NINE months to release, that sort of time is usually enough to completely overhaul the UI. Please keep your emotions in check.

[kaiki01]

ChristianSoldier wrote...

LGTX wrote...

Headshots have absolutely nothing to do with the general look and feel of the game. ME3 is different in exactly the right amount from ME2 as an average sequel should be. It's just that Bioware made that huge leap from ME1 to ME2, and now we're all spoiled expecting the same.

DarthCaine wrote...

It looks like you haven't played ME1 for a long time to see how much drastically different it is (and how much it sucks)

ME3? More like ME 2.5

It also looks like you haven't played ME3. You just watched a few minutes of a build nine months to release. Bioware may surprise you.

EDIT

Dude dont deny the facts. I bet you 99.99% of ME players agree that ME3 is following ME2's gameplay format.  You said that ME1 is similar to ME2. I disagree and so does DarthCaine. We're not blind. We see that everything is similar in ME3 as in ME2. The health bar is the same. The shield/barrier regen is the same. The shooting mech is the same.

Also the dev team has said, in the IGN video interview last month I believe, that ME3 was less of a change from ME2 then ME2 was a change from ME1. For combat at least.