267 réponses à ce sujet

[Savber100]

Resident Evil 6 as OP said..

You want a more recent proof that attempting to appeal to everyone fails? Look at that franchise, Mr. Laidlaw and Co. The struggle between appealing to "more than survivor horror fans" and "keeping the fanbase" was hinted with RE5 and finally utterly exploited in RE6.

Don't follow the path of Capcom. Keep your unique identity rather than compromise that vision with financial gains.

[EricHVela]

Larger audience = more $$$ even at the cost of former fans -- or so some people think.

EA studios had to viciously compete with each other for EA's love in the past. The symptoms point to that still being the case now.

[Nomen Mendax]

TMZuk wrote...

This pretty much hits the head on the nail, IMO. Aside that I disagree that games has gotten better. I don't think DA:O was better than BG2. It was good, yes, and had a few areas were it superceded BG2, but as a whole, no! The only truly great CRPG I have played the past five or six years was Fallout: New Vegas. And that wasn't excactly polished.

But I agree very much when you argue that games today suffer from to much focus-testing. They feel unoriginal, contrived and, oh so politically correct . Which studio today would dream up a game like Dungeon Keeper? Or Carmageddon?

The hardware is so much better today, but all the major studios has become as gutless as Hollywood, terrified of venturing outside the well-trodden path. Resulting in forgettable, play-it-safe, uninspired games. Like DA2. Which failed anyway, because it was boring and lack-luster.

I am very curious to see how Wasteland 2 and Project Eternity comes out, and how the major developers will react, if these two games are succesful. Here's to hoping for more daring, less catering to stereo-types.

I don't think that's fair at all.  I preferred BG2 to DA2 but I don't see how it was any more daring or controversial than DA2.  It was set in one of the most bland fantasy settings ever, explicitly designed to appeal to as many people as possible and features a fairly conventional fantasy plot.  Fallout and PST were much more unconventional than BG2.

While I've been very critical of it I think DA2 tried to do many things that were different and unusual for CRPGs. There is no world threatening crisis, your character doesn't start off as anyone special, there is no one obvious villain, and so on.

Modifié par Nomen Mendax, 03 octobre 2012 - 03:02 .

[Wulfram]

TsaiMeLemoni wrote...

I love it when people throw numbers around without trying to offer any explanation. I know the general consensus around here is that DA2 sucks, but has anyone considered that part of the decline in sales is due to DA:O?

DA2's initial and pre-order sales were good, which doesn't fit with the idea that DA:O was hurting sales.  Problem was that the sales dropped away quickly, probably because of mediocre - for Bioware - reviews and some really hostile word of internet.  While DA:O just kept on selling.

To the extent that VGchartz suggests that in 2012, DA:O actually sold more copies than DA2 on Xbox.

Modifié par Wulfram, 03 octobre 2012 - 03:13 .

[SpunkyMonkey]

Wulfram wrote...

TsaiMeLemoni wrote...

I love it when people throw numbers around without trying to offer any explanation. I know the general consensus around here is that DA2 sucks, but has anyone considered that part of the decline in sales is due to DA:O?

DA2's initial and pre-order sales were good, which doesn't fit with the idea that DA:O was hurting sales.  Problem was that the sales dropped away quickly, probably because of mediocre - for Bioware - reviews and some really hostile word of internet.  While DA:O just kept on selling.

To the extent that VGchartz suggests that in 2012, DA:O actually sold more copies than DA2.

Way I see it  is that a lot of people pre-ordered DA:2 on the strength of DA:O too, such as me. A mistake I won't be repeating for DA:3

I've already purchased DA:O twice - once when first released, once for the full Enhanced Edition. I dare say that I'll purchase it several times on various formats down the years (especially of they upgrade the game engine and add other DLC/quests)

If BG2 was released with a DA:O engine I'd snap it up straight away - and that would be the 4th time I'd purchased that game (so far - once on first release, once for a friend and once in the Anthology) 

It's simple really - make a good game and it will sell and make more money. Go for a DA:2 approach and you'll make less. DA:3 won't have as many pre-orders as a lot of people are very suspect of Bioware since EA got involved and their games started taking the more commercial route.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 03 octobre 2012 - 03:17 .

[Iosev]

I dislike comparing the sales between DA:O and DA 2 when people ignore the times in which they were released (i.e., DA:O released during the holiday season, while DA 2 released in March, when consumers aren't spending as much on games (not to mention the following months in summer are slower as well)). There are numerous factors that may have affected the sales of the games, but to ignore the times in which they were released prevents capturing the entire picture.

Modifié par arcelonious, 03 octobre 2012 - 03:36 .

[upsettingshorts]

arcelonious wrote...

I dislike comparing the sales between DA:O and DA 2 when people ignore the times in which they were released (i.e., DA:O released during the holiday season, while DA 2 released in March, when consumers aren't spending as much on games). There are numerous factors that may have affected the sales of the games, but to ignore the times in which they were released prevents capturing the entire picture.

Not to mention, of course, the wildly disparate time spent on development of both games.

An argument could be made that, pound for pound, DA2 might have been more profitable.  But there's no way any of us here without a BioWare tag could ever know that, and I doubt they could say either way.

Safe to say pretty much nobody here has a clue what DA2's sales mean because we lack critical information.  All we can say with any confidence is that they were lower.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 03 octobre 2012 - 03:38 .

[NedPepper]

Everytime I see something like this I think of The Witcher 2. Does great with a niche audience. Put it on a giant console and it sinks. Or people buy based on hype and return. You want to be depressed about RPGs in general? Go to a video game store and see how many copies of used Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2's, Mass Effect 1,2,3s, and the startling number of Witcher 2s collecting dust in the used game section. And Witcher 2 isn't even that old, console wise. (I'm not even sold they all WERE used. I think they were just put there to excuse the extremely marked down price.)

Each game probably catered to a certain audience based on feedback. I'm not sure if any were able to connect with the general gamer. The general gamer BUYS the games based on hype and marketing. But it seems like they don't ever finish the games or even understand them and just return them. If that's what RPGs are trying to do, I think they are fighting a losing battle. RPGs require time, dedication, imagination, and let's be honest, at least some semblance of intelligence. They will never sell like COD or Madden.

And for all the people who want to cite DA:O...I remember when everyone was buying the game. The COD crowd was buying the game. And I also remember talking to them about it. They hated it because they didn't know how to play it. My brother just bought Origins used really cheap based off my adoration. He was all excited at first. I haven't heard from him since. I think he doesn't want to tell me he didn't like it....

So, then it becomes catering to either PARTS of your consumer niche or trying to find a good blend to capture them all. And even that is problematic, because the RPG consumer doesn't agree on anything.

Out of all of them, Mass Effect has done the best job by implenting the shooter with complex lore and a number of RPG features. But look what happened there.....

[Atakuma]

nedpepper wrote...
Out of all of them, Mass Effect has done the best job by implenting the shooter with complex lore and a number of RPG features. But look what happened there.....

It sold really well?

[NedPepper]

Atakuma wrote...

nedpepper wrote...
Out of all of them, Mass Effect has done the best job by implenting the shooter with complex lore and a number of RPG features. But look what happened there.....

It sold really well?

And it's also collecting dust in the used section.  But that's not even my point.  Everyone had such an IDEA of what that game was supposed to be, and when it didn't turn into that, the ****storm that resulted rocked Bioware and EA and became an argument on gamer entitlement on just about every gaming site and even mainstream press.

Mass Effect transcended the genre...but did it ultimately succeed?  I'm not so sure.  (And BTW, I like the 3rd game very much.)

[upsettingshorts]

nedpepper wrote...

Mass Effect transcended the genre...but did it ultimately succeed?

Unequivocally yes.

[Master Shiori]

nedpepper wrote...

Mass Effect transcended the genre...but did it ultimately succeed?  I'm not so sure.  (And BTW, I like the 3rd game very much.)

Considering that it's both popular and a financial sucess, I'd say yes. Ofc, that doesn't mean that every game that tries to follow in it's footsteps would do the same, but it demonstrates how merging two genres together can work out.

[upsettingshorts]

Games blend genre features all the damn time, to varying levels of success.

For example:  Almost every major sports game out now has at least one RPG mode. They're wildly popular.

To assert that they never work together is patently ridiculous, especially considering there's no consensus on where a particular genre starts and another even begins.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 03 octobre 2012 - 04:33 .

[DarkKnightHolmes]

EA motto, 5 million + or GTFO.

[axl99]

Actually that's pretty much every major's publisher's motto.

[upsettingshorts]

Gamer motto: "I only have a problem with publishers making money when they make games I don't want. When the opposite is true, I cite their awesome sales as an endorsement of my tastes."

[Maclimes]

This is a weird thread.

[axl99]

This is a weird forum.

[DarkKnightHolmes]

axl99 wrote...

Actually that's pretty much every major's publisher's motto.

Then my favourite game developers must be canned by now.

[Nomen Mendax]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Gamer motto: "I only have a problem with publishers making money when they make games I don't want. When the opposite is true, I cite their awesome sales as an endorsement of my tastes."

Of course!  And as a corollary, any changes to systems that I like are always because the new version is dumbed down to appeal to people who are less intelligent than me (and who preferably play games from genres I don't like or platforms I don't own).

[Maclimes]

axl99 wrote...

This is a weird forum.

Touche.

[spirosz]

In Exile wrote...

marktcameron wrote...

DAO 3.79 million DA2 1.45 million

Hmmm... COD = 4.2 million units for the Xbox 360 in November 2009 alone ... that obviously means all Bioware games have to be first person shooters! Your argument has convinced me.      

You missed the point.

[fchopin]

I agree with op, Bioware should listen to no group and just make the game how they want.

If they need to listen to what to put in DA3 then they have failed before they start.

[spirosz]

fchopin wrote...

I agree with op, Bioware should listen to no group and just make the game how they want.

If they need to listen to what to put in DA3 then they have failed before they start.

Do you really want those re-used maps?  They should listen to certain things, IMO. 

[upsettingshorts]

spirosz wrote...

fchopin wrote...

I agree with op, Bioware should listen to no group and just make the game how they want.

If they need to listen to what to put in DA3 then they have failed before they start.

Do you really want those re-used maps?  They should listen to certain things, IMO. 

Nobody wants re-used maps, least of all BioWare.