227 réponses à ce sujet

[Plaintiff]

BrotherWarth wrote...
The Witcher 2 did, ME1 did, Baldur's Gate 2 did. Should I keep digging through numbers?

This is the first I've heard of it.

Nonsense. What does Origin's uncommon sales trend have to do with whether or not DA2 could have matched its total sales? You're not just moving the goalposts, you're hiding them.

DA:O is an outlier, it's an anomaly, unless you can prove that the sales trend Orgins experienced is common, expecting its sequel or any other game to match it in sales is moronic..

ME2 outsold ME1 on 360 and PC. Try again.

I already addressed that when I said

Plaintiff wrote...
Sequels typically sell better than the original

The majority of sales for all videogames occur within a short time period after release. All any game normally has to do to sell better than its predecessor is have a better opening week. 

That's another nonsensical argument. No one was buying the Collector's Edition and standard edition of Origins. And DA2 had the Signature Edition.

Did I say "Collector's Edition"? No. No I did not. The "Ultimate Edition" is s separate product entirely, it was released later and came bundled with all the previously released DLC. It would go some way to accounting for increased sales later in the game's shelf-life. No such edition of DA2 was ever released, though.

Good lord, could you at least try not to rely solely on hyperbole and strawmen?

You apparently don't know what these terms mean.

It's not hyperbole to say quality is subjective. Nor is it a 'strawman' to refute your erroneous claim that "high sales = quality" by pointing to successsful prodcts in other industries that might suggest otherwise.

[Viktoria Landers]

 Thank you DG for stopping by and replying in the thread.
I've noticed that a large portion of the replies here say how many times they finished each game and so on. I'd like to emphasize on the fact, as DG confirmed, that most of your statistics are an "anomaly" meaning that you have spent way more effort than the average Dragon Age/Mass Effect player and subsequently you belong to a tiny minority.


I've also thought that my initial post didn't include an example of what I described. so I'll try to give one now.

Since I'm not a DA developer, I don't know which popular choices of the silent majority influenced the game design, however I'd like to mention one example which even if it may not be true, it explicitly shows that fact:

When Dragon Age II was developed, Nathaniel Howe and Anders were designed to be Hawke's companions. However, in Awakening, Nathaniel could be killed by the Warden and Anders could be given back to the templars and thus never has the chance to become a Grey Warden.

Probably this is where telemetry came up and showed that a significant portion of the players killed Nathaniel instead of recruiting him, contrary to Anders who was recruited by almost every player. That would mean that if Nathaniel showed up in DA2 as Hawke's companion, then a significant amount of players would feel insulted by bringing up as a companion a dead character and that could have an impact on the game's popularity. So Nathaniel was dropped and Anders eventually made it to Dragon Age II even if the latter didn't always become a Grey Warden as I mentioned.

Modifié par Viktoria Landers, 29 novembre 2012 - 11:46 .

[upsettingshorts]

I doubt that, actually.

Anders simply made way, way more sense for what DA2 was doing.

If telemetry was involved in that decision, I imagine it was in determining precisely how many people had a dead Anders and would have to have his "resurrection" lampshaded.

Also, on another note, comparing DA:O and DA2 sales is stupid.  DA:O had over five years in development, DA2 had less than one.  Their relative sales are being graded on entirely different curves. This also applies to critical feedback, especially on certain issues.  Thankfully, BioWare knows this because they are not stupid.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 29 novembre 2012 - 11:52 .

[Realmzmaster]

Data is used by everyone. We take it in from our surroundings, what we read, what we experience etc and process it through our brains. The amount of data we sift through in a day is enormous. A lot of it we discard or ignore as not being relevant. Other data we process in our brains to information so we can make decisions. We base the decision on the best data and information we have at hand.

Who is Bioware going to listen to. What if I think DA2 is good? What if Fast Jimmy thinks it is average and StM thinks it is bad. We all present our personal opinions on why we feel the way we do based on our experience with the game. I may think that the only opinion that matters is my own and Bioware needs to listen to no one else.

Is that reasonable? Well for my point of view it would be. From your point of view it may not be unless you agree with my point of view. Bioware on the other hand may look and think Realmzmaster is blowing smoke again.

Anecdotal data is useful to a point, but it is not the only point you make a decision on especially if you are making a product for mass consumption.

As far as Mass Effect and its sales. ME1 was released on the Xbox first and then roughly six months later for the PC. The PS3 version is being released in December 2012 roughly five years later. So it is quite possible for ME1 sales to out strip ME2. Even then using the numbers from VGChartz that are available: ME1 sold 3.26 million (Xbox and PC), ME2 sold 4.43 million, ME3 sold 4.28 million.

Now for sake of agrument lets predict what the sales for ME1 would have been if Bioware had released a version along with the PC version in 2008. Lets take the 1.21 for ME2 sales and say it would be the same for ME1. Then ME1 would have sold a total of 4.47 million or if we take the sales from ME3 4.26 million. All of this is conjecture using the available data at hand. Does it speak to the quality of the game? Not really. If it does then ME3 is a very good game and consistent with the series.

[Maria Caliban]

Viktoria Landers wrote...

Since I'm not a DA developer, I don't know which popular choices of the silent majority influenced the game design, however I'd like to mention one example which even if it may not be true, it explicitly shows that fact:

I don't understand that last sentence.

How can something that you admit is conjecture show 'that fact?'

And is anyone really arguing that BioWare doesn't design games for the majority of its customers? I take it as a given that the silent majority is BioWare's main concern when creating their games.

I just don't think that's a bad thing. I think a game designed purely for the people who post in this forum would be terrible.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 30 novembre 2012 - 12:00 .

[rapscallioness]

AlanC9 wrote...

rapscallioness wrote...
I wonder if the ME team used this kinda thing as reason for trying to implement so much auto dialogue? They said something about how it was too pause-y before. It didn't flow. And that they think w/auto-d it flows better.

I wonder if they were trying to interpret stats of players just standing there during convo.s. Idle. and thought that maybe the player was bored, or something? Maybe they thought to keep the player involved by flowing the scene up?

Well, to hear Patrick Weekes talk -- he's about the only ME guy who's been really forthcoming lately --it was more about cutting out the choices that didn't change anything in favor of better flow in the convos. Autodialogue was intended to replace fake interaction that always took you to the same place no matter what order you hit the investigate choices in, if you hit them at all. I'm replaying ME2 right now, and I can see a lot of places where interacting with the wheel is just busywork.

Which doesn't mean that ME3 didn't take the approach too far. I presume DA3 won't make that particular mistake again.

I, too, hope that. It was a concept I had hoped the teams would cultivate so that it would not be busywork. Well, except for investigate cuz to me that's just info gathering. Sometimes I need it. Sometimes I don't. Sometimes it's backstory, sometimes it helps me to make more informed decisions down the line.

But the other part I would like to see actually different lines that get to different places in the convo. But really auto-d combined with paraphrasing just takes it way too far away from me. A 2 word paraphrase had my Shep go on this long spiel that ended w/Shep saying, "How did we get here?" I'm sitting there thinking, "Idk, Shep. Idk!"

But I don't wanna disrespect the DA forum w/ME talk. So, I'll leave it there.

[Welsh Inferno]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Also, on another note, comparing DA:O and DA2 sales is stupid.  

That statement is whats stupid. Seriously? We cannot compare the sales of the sequal to the original because they took a different amount of time to develop?

What faulty logic is this.

Modifié par Welsh Inferno, 30 novembre 2012 - 12:02 .

[upsettingshorts]

Welsh Inferno wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Also, on another note, comparing DA:O and DA2 sales is stupid.  DA:O had over five years in development, DA2 had less than one.  Their relative sales are being graded on entirely different curves. This also applies to critical feedback, especially on certain issues.  Thankfully, BioWare knows this because they are not stupid.  

That statement is whats stupid. Seriously? We cannot compare the sales of the sequal to the original because they took a different amount of time to develop?

What faulty logic is this.

You can compare them, as long as you qualify those comparisons.  

In simple math terms, DA2 (likely) cost far less to make, and therefore had less in the way of expected returns.  In terms of quality, corners were clearly cut with DA2 and everyone involved had to know that this would impact its review scores and sales.  As such, the drop in sales numbers cannot in of themselves be taken as an indictment of any specific feature, because on a whole the game was rushed and it shows.

From the individual consumer's perspective, none of that matters.  But threads bringing up the topic of sales figures, like this one for example, are in essence attempting to wrap their own disappointment in numbers that don't say what they think they say.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 30 novembre 2012 - 12:11 .

[Realmzmaster]

Welsh Inferno wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Also, on another note, comparing DA:O and DA2 sales is stupid.  

That statement is whats stupid. Seriously? We cannot compare the sales of the sequal to the original because they took a different amount of time to develop?

What faulty logic is this.

No what he may be saying is that sales do not mean a quality product. If that is the case then Twilight and Harry Potter are the best quality movies of all time (and in some fans estimation they are). Sales do not mean a qulaity product.

Many of us have played games that we thought were great quality but the sales sucked while other games of lesser quality rode the wave of popularity to big sales, because they appealed to the silent majority like C.O.D and its sequels. They must be the greatest computer games.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 30 novembre 2012 - 12:13 .

[upsettingshorts]

I wasn't saying that. I was basically trying to convey the idea that if sales numbers have something to say about DAO vs. DA2, it is not a rejection or endorsement of a particular set of features, because there are too many other major factors in play to be able to isolate the cause as people would like to.

[Realmzmaster]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I wasn't saying that. I was basically trying to convey the idea that if sales numbers have something to say about DAO vs. DA2, it is not a rejection or endorsement of a particular set of features, because there are too many other major factors in play to be able to isolate the cause as people would like to.

Ahh! Gotcha

[Welsh Inferno]

I understand, I know that the numbers alone are not proof of a products quality. They are open to wildly different interpretations depending on what ones opinion of the product is. But I'd say that the numbers over the long term put together with plenty of dissent towards the new direction do say a lot about its quality.

Twilight is used a lot as an example of something crappy that sells a crap load. And yet the numbers certainly don't lie for all those millions who do enjoy such a thing.

[upsettingshorts]

BrotherWarth wrote...

But you yourself said that DA2 had cut corners and was of lower quality. Why shouldn't lower sales of a lower-quality product have any relevance?

It depends on what relevance you claim it has.

I am simply claiming that because it was rushed and cut corners, using sales numbers to back up specific conclusions about the difference between the two games doesn't really work.  There's too much noise.

BrotherWarth wrote...

DA2 having a smaller budget and shorter development cycle has no relevance to total sales.

That depends on what point you're trying to make. 

[Fishy]

My bad . I most belong to the super minority .. I've been lurking these forum forever and I lost count how many time I completed DA:O and modded the hell out of it.

But it's like some other band you enjoy .. You listen to it, but you don,t hang at their website ;p.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

If telemetry was involved in that decision, I imagine it was in determining precisely how many people had a dead Anders and would have to have his "resurrection" lampshaded.

Given how quickly DA2 was produced, that would have been a poor means of determining that.  Only if we assume that the proportion of players with a dead Anders would remain constant (as many players simply didn't have a dead Anders yet) would that be useful information.

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

If telemetry was involved in that decision, I imagine it was in determining precisely how many people had a dead Anders and would have to have his "resurrection" lampshaded.

Given how quickly DA2 was produced, that would have been a poor means of determining that.  Only if we assume that the proportion of players with a dead Anders would remain constant (as many players simply didn't have a dead Anders yet) would that be useful information.

I doubt it was a major factor anyway, in any case as long as the number was reasonably significant they could conclude that some lampshade hanging would be necessary. 

Heck even if it wasn't, someone would come onto a forum somewhere and point out that there was no explanation and then people who didn't have Anders die in their game would be annoyed on that person's behalf.

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

Well, to hear Patrick Weekes talk -- he's about the only ME guy who's been really forthcoming lately --it was more about cutting out the choices that didn't change anything in favor of better flow in the convos. Autodialogue was intended to replace fake interaction that always took you to the same place no matter what order you hit the investigate choices in, if you hit them at all. I'm replaying ME2 right now, and I can see a lot of places where interacting with the wheel is just busywork.

But that itself is a misinterpretation of player behaviour.  In this case, the dev team cannot see the gameplay that takes place in those dialogue selection events, because it happens outside the game.  As Patrick Weekes put it, he was eliminating things that didn't matter to add some positive feature.

But that's now what happened.  Instead, they removed something that did matter - roleplaying - to add something that wasn't nearly worth that cost.

Which doesn't mean that ME3 didn't take the approach too far. I presume DA3 won't make that particular mistake again.

I think DA2 took it too far.  I hope DA3 pulls it back quite a bit.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Heck even if it wasn't, someone would come onto a forum somewhere and point out that there was no explanation and then people who didn't have Anders die in their game would be annoyed on that person's behalf.

Based on his portrayal in DA2, I'm certainly predisposed to kill him in Awakening.

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Heck even if it wasn't, someone would come onto a forum somewhere and point out that there was no explanation and then people who didn't have Anders die in their game would be annoyed on that person's behalf.

Based on his portrayal in DA2, I'm certainly predisposed to kill him in Awakening.

You of all people wouldn't let your predispositions get in the way of honest roleplaying though, would you?

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 30 novembre 2012 - 12:58 .

[TMZuk]

Sorry to butt in late with a question, that might already be answered.

I am curious, however, how I figure in this? Because, I registered my game online. Since then I have been playing offline. I have not uploaded anything, whatsoever.

I have, however, completed DA:O, more than once. Same with ME and ME2. But, as I play offline, how can Bioware know anything about wether I've finished the game or not? How does this figure in the survey, if at all?

[upsettingshorts]

@TMZuk: If you are not connected to the internet, you did not contribute to their metrics.  If you are connected to the internet and did not deliberately turn off metrics, you did.

@BrotherWarth:  Yes, but it's a pretty broad statement that opens itself up to quite a number of thoughtless conclusions.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 30 novembre 2012 - 04:52 .

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Well, to hear Patrick Weekes talk -- he's about the only ME guy who's been really forthcoming lately --it was more about cutting out the choices that didn't change anything in favor of better flow in the convos. Autodialogue was intended to replace fake interaction that always took you to the same place no matter what order you hit the investigate choices in, if you hit them at all. I'm replaying ME2 right now, and I can see a lot of places where interacting with the wheel is just busywork.

But that itself is a misinterpretation of player behaviour.  In this case, the dev team cannot see the gameplay that takes place in those dialogue selection events, because it happens outside the game.  As Patrick Weekes put it, he was eliminating things that didn't matter to add some positive feature.

But that's now what happened.  Instead, they removed something that did matter - roleplaying - to add something that wasn't nearly worth that cost.

Well, like I said, much of the stuff they cut out wasn't actually roleplaying. What I find myself doing a lot in ME2 is trying to manage the order of the investigate options so the conversation makes sense. Occasionally I have an actual choice to make, simce some of Shep's quesitons are awfully dumb, and others imply beliefs. Those are RP choices.

Maybe it's just that ME3 dispelled the illusion?