204 réponses à ce sujet

[Noviere]

Doctor Moustache wrote...

Still ignoring the benefits of being a launch title I see. This thread is going absolutely no where.

If you compare this list of 360 launch titles with sales figures from vgchartz.com you will see that virtually all of the games did poorly... especially when compared to their prequels, sequels, and their past-gen counterparts.

Obviously sales figures aren't the only factor in making a game a launch title, but I don't think EA would be stupid enough to release DA3 as a next-gen exclusive. I wouldn't be that surprised if they did release on the next gen as well as the current though.

Modifié par Noviere, 03 janvier 2013 - 12:01 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Noviere wrote...

Lopper128 wrote...

According to allot of sources and a statement from EA themself it looks like we sadly wont see DA: I on the current gen consoles.

Sources:

http://www.ign.com/a...aiming-for-2014

http://www.gamefront...-consoles-only/

http://www.nowgamer....gen_rumour.html

http://www.polygon.c...soles-according

EA's statment: http://www.ign.com/a...s-late-in-cycle

Well, it's not a lot of sources, actually... It's one source, that has been reported by a lot of sites.

For those that didn't read the articles, the source is the LinkedIn profile for the "lead level designer for the EA Shanghai team" who worked on the game for 6 months, converting concept art into game levels.... or something like that. I'm not sure why he broke news of a release date delay/platform change on his resume...

As for EA's statement... It's talking about how they are only releasing sequels for the current gen, because they are saving new IPs for the next gen. Dragon Age 3 is obviously a sequel, not a new IP.

Also, let's not forget one important fact... ME3 has already come out on a next gen console, as it was re-released on the Wii-U. If Bioware planned to release DA3 on the Wii U, the 360, PS3 and PC, it could, strictly speaking, be called a "next-gen title."

[Fast Jimmy]

Thing is, Microsoft has no launch title. Neither does Sony. There is no console-exclusive IP to release on the new platform that will drive sales. So third party vendors will be hesitant to be the first to jump in. Why make games that are exclusively for a small market?

The 360 is an EXCELLENT example to show, because it shows the obvious - IPs aren't console exclusive, like they were back in every generation prior to the 360 and PS3. Every developer wants to market to the largest crowds and Sony and Microsoft have realized this. No console coming out is going to have any reason to play it until there are about a dozen next-gen exclusive titles for it. That won't happen the first day the console rolls out.

So even if you think the new consoles will be out in 2013 (which I don't), for DA3 to come out holiday 2013 and be a next gen title (ESPECIALLY a next gen exclusive) is assuming a ton of risk by Bioware. If the consoles were going to be out a year before the game's release, then I would agree with doing it. But a handful of months, at best? Or even a concurrent release? That's just a recipe for failure.

[Emzamination]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Noviere wrote...

Lopper128 wrote...

According to allot of sources and a statement from EA themself it looks like we sadly wont see DA: I on the current gen consoles.

Sources:

http://www.ign.com/a...aiming-for-2014

http://www.gamefront...-consoles-only/

http://www.nowgamer....gen_rumour.html

http://www.polygon.c...soles-according

EA's statment: http://www.ign.com/a...s-late-in-cycle

Well, it's not a lot of sources, actually... It's one source, that has been reported by a lot of sites.

For those that didn't read the articles, the source is the LinkedIn profile for the "lead level designer for the EA Shanghai team" who worked on the game for 6 months, converting concept art into game levels.... or something like that. I'm not sure why he broke news of a release date delay/platform change on his resume...

As for EA's statement... It's talking about how they are only releasing sequels for the current gen, because they are saving new IPs for the next gen. Dragon Age 3 is obviously a sequel, not a new IP.

Also, let's not forget one important fact... ME3 has already come out on a next gen console, as it was re-released on the Wii-U. If Bioware planned to release DA3 on the Wii U, the 360, PS3 and PC, it could, strictly speaking, be called a "next-gen title."

Well, as others have pointed out in this thread, I wouldn't exactly call the wii-u next gen. It's at the same level of performance as the current gen, no better, no worse.

Modifié par Emzamination, 03 janvier 2013 - 06:59 .

[Steppenwolf]

Robhuzz wrote...

Worse than agitating their user base by forcing them to buy a next-gen console for a game that was developed on current-gen consoles is knowingly reducing sales of a game that's make or break for the entire franchise. Going next-gen only makes ]zero[/color]sense. And releasing on current-gen and next-gen makes very little sense considering the investment required.

By that logic every game in the shifting phase should be made for both old and new consoles, still not utilizing the newer hardware. Where do you draw the line? When the next gen consoles have been out for a full year? Two years? When an established franchise is finished completely? Only starting completely new franchises every console generation?

The first Holiday season after the launch window is when new console sales and software for new consoles take off. That's been the trend since the 80s.

Robhuzz wrote...

I get that people have little incentive to buy a new console when there's still so few games for them but this industry has been standing still hardware wise for so long. Of course it's going to reduce sales at first since not everyone will buy a next gen console right of the bat but that's what they (developers and consumers) signed up for when they got into consoles imo.

Why would game developers have to take it on the chin just because consoles don't sell in significant numbers for the first 6-12 months? They get to decide when they release their games. The only reason they make games for consoles is because consoles eventually sell more software than PC.

Rubios wrote...

You are putting the Xbox360 as an example? LOL

- Every single release game was rubbish, period.
- The Xbox brand was completely irrelevant at that point.
- PS2 (the biggest console ever made) wasn't stagnant like the current generation.
- The ~90% of the "core gamers" were waiting for PS3, the 101% of Nintendo fans were waiting for the Wii.
- It was one of the worst electronic products ever made, if not the worst (between 25% and 50% failure rate).
- It didn't have any big franchises to drive early sales (like Mario/Zelda or MGS/GoW).

...

Nobody expected the Xbox360 to be successful, that is not the case anymore, even the WiiU is selling like hotcakes.

All of that is just your own opinion, and some of it just rubbish. The XBox had better software sales than the GameCube so it was not irrelevant coming into the current cycle. The PS3/360 aren't stagnant. New games are still getting record sales and there are plenty of innovative and interesting games coming next year like 'The Last Of Us' and 'Beyond:Two Souls.' 90% of gamers were not waiting for the PS3. More 360 units were sold in its first 3 months than XBox units in its first 8 months. XBox had Halo and Fable, 2 massively successful franchises appealing to 2 different audiences. The 360 entered the market with plenty of gravitas.

Modifié par BasilKarlo, 03 janvier 2013 - 08:18 .

[XX-Pyro]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Thing is, Microsoft has no launch title. Neither does Sony. There is no console-exclusive IP to release on the new platform that will drive sales. So third party vendors will be hesitant to be the first to jump in. Why make games that are exclusively for a small market?

The 360 is an EXCELLENT example to show, because it shows the obvious - IPs aren't console exclusive, like they were back in every generation prior to the 360 and PS3. Every developer wants to market to the largest crowds and Sony and Microsoft have realized this. No console coming out is going to have any reason to play it until there are about a dozen next-gen exclusive titles for it. That won't happen the first day the console rolls out.

So even if you think the new consoles will be out in 2013 (which I don't), for DA3 to come out holiday 2013 and be a next gen title (ESPECIALLY a next gen exclusive) is assuming a ton of risk by Bioware. If the consoles were going to be out a year before the game's release, then I would agree with doing it. But a handful of months, at best? Or even a concurrent release? That's just a recipe for failure.

It isn't assuming a ton of risk, it's almost a guaranteed failure.

[Iosev]

Well, I can see Microsoft trying to obtain timed-exclusivity from some developers/publishers in order to make their next-gen system more attractive (similar to what they did with the original Mass Effect). Whether or not EA/Bioware would attempt that with Dragon Age, which has an established, multiplatform fanbase, is still uncertain, although as a PC gamer, I hope DA3:I isn't a timed exclusive.

Modifié par arcelonious, 03 janvier 2013 - 08:27 .

[Steppenwolf]

Microsoft didn't pay for timed exclusivity with Mass Effect 1, they published it.

[Iosev]

BasilKarlo wrote...

Microsoft didn't pay for timed exclusivity with Mass Effect 1, they published it.

I never said that they paid for it, all that I'm saying is that they may possibly be looking into utilizing timed exclusivity in some form, to potentially stagger the release of the PC version.

Modifié par arcelonious, 03 janvier 2013 - 08:34 .

[tfcreative]

BasilKarlo wrote...

tfcreative wrote...

I haven't seen this theory yet:

While it would be technically difficult, I can certainly see the strategic benefit to releasing next gen first, then porting to current gen after 3-6 months. EA would get a chunk of money out of console makers for timed exclusivity, a very high attach rate to new console sales with very little competition up front, and later be able to bring it to the older consoles to get the big install base. I can recall that well into the life of the PS3 there were dual gen releases that still sold better on the PS2, so there would be considerable time to move more units to the late adopters with no plans to upgrade in the first year of the new consoles.

Just a thought, but not based on any real info.

That's not how it works. Why would Sony and Microsoft pay for a title that the other would also get? They would gain nothing from the deal. And how would the logistics of such a thing even work? Microsoft makes an offer and Sony has to match it? Sony pays one amount and Microsoft pays another? No, it makes no sense.

Sorry, wasn't clear. The assumption there is that a single console maker wins that initial timed exclusive, I was trying not to make an assumption about which company. They money would have to be big, so it depends on how badly said manufacturer needed a launch title. The reality is that in trying to cash in on all markets, it would likely be a jack of all trades move. In any case, I don't plan to buy a next gen console so I hope to not be one of the poor schlubs waiting around.

[Nighteye2]

john_sheparrd wrote...

I have a xbox 360 and I don't want to buy the new xbox when it comes just for a game
I really hope it also comes to the current consoles! What do you think?

I hope not - I prefer the game to use modern features that make it look good, like tesselation and physics simulation. PCs and next-gen consoles can handle that, but not consoles that are nearly a decade old.

If you don't want to buy a new console, get the PC version.

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Thing is, Microsoft has no launch title. Neither does Sony. There is no console-exclusive IP to release on the new platform that will drive sales.

Popular as BioWare games are among their niche market, I don't see a Dragon Age game as non-exclusive (both 720 and PS4) launch title that will make those brand next gen consoles must-have items that will send those consoles flying off the shelves.

I just don't see any advantages, other than maybe some small technical ones, for making the game next gen exclusive on the console side of things. It could lead to profit losses, even major ones. At the end of the day, for any artistic merit they have (and I strongly believe games can be art), they are more product than anything and they have to sell units. Dragon Age IV won't get made just because its predecessor is critically acclaimed and the fans and devs alike think its a glorious achievement if it flops commercially. BioWare's wanted to make a sequel to Jade Empire for years now, and look at how well that's gone...

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

Nighteye2 wrote...

john_sheparrd wrote...

I have a xbox 360 and I don't want to buy the new xbox when it comes just for a game
I really hope it also comes to the current consoles! What do you think?

I hope not - I prefer the game to use modern features that make it look good, like tesselation and physics simulation. PCs and next-gen consoles can handle that, but not consoles that are nearly a decade old.

If you don't want to buy a new console, get the PC version.

I'll take a game with solid gameplay and a great story over fancy schmancy graphics and realistic physics any day. Crysis might look good, but that's about all anybody sings its praises for.

[Steppenwolf]

Filament wrote...

I find it odd how passionate some of you are about the potential profits of the game or company I'd assume none of you are personally a part of-- seems a bit far removed from what a gamer ought to be concerned with for not wanting it to be next gen, like "I want it sooner" or "I don't want to buy a next gen console."

We should suspend logic because you think it's out of character for gamers to think of bottom lines?

Filament wrote...

Wii-U is next gen just as well as the Wii is current gen. Nintendo has chosen not to focus on the hardware spec war and they seem to be doing just fine. (or they were for a long while, at least)

Nintendo has been hemorrhaging money for the last 4 years. Low software sales for the Wii have gutted them.

[XX-Pyro]

BasilKarlo wrote...

Filament wrote...

I find it odd how passionate some of you are about the potential profits of the game or company I'd assume none of you are personally a part of-- seems a bit far removed from what a gamer ought to be concerned with for not wanting it to be next gen, like "I want it sooner" or "I don't want to buy a next gen console."

We should suspend logic because you think it's out of character for gamers to think of bottom lines?

Filament wrote...

Wii-U is next gen just as well as the Wii is current gen. Nintendo has chosen not to focus on the hardware spec war and they seem to be doing just fine. (or they were for a long while, at least)

Nintendo has been hemorrhaging money for the last 4 years. Low software sales for the Wii have gutted them.

Wait why wouldn't I want Bioware to make as much money as possible? Hopefully they put some of that into future titles to make them even better. Barring that considering Dragon Age is a series I enjoy playing on my console (not enough modding capabilities for my liking) I don't want to have to shelf out 400 dollars on a consol that is likely to be racked with problems on release.

[Fast Jimmy]

Filament wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Thing is, Microsoft has no launch title. Neither does Sony. There is no console-exclusive IP to release on the new platform that will drive sales.

Halo and Gears of War are two giants that immediately come to mind.

Except Halo JUST released another sequel, as is Gears of War. Making them off the table for the new console market.

Coincidence? No. They know they wouldn't waste their attempts to re-establish their franchises (Halo after the end of Halo 3 and the slump in sales comparatively with Halo:Reach, and Gears of War with their prequel, which is looking to garner less attention because of its lack of relevant story).

If those two heavy hitters aren't risking the next gen roll out on their roll out of recementing their footing with their IP, why the heck should Dragon Age?

[Conquerthecity]

 Only Alan Wake 2 would prompt me to buy a next gen console right away. If DA: I is announced as a next gen exclusive, it will just further my resolve to wait for it to achieve bargain bin status. 

[Emzamination]

 Majornelson just put up a count down to xbox reveal.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Emzamination wrote...

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

I really, really hope it's next gen only.

Since you're a pc player, that's a pretty heartless thing to say. Even tho I'm just waiting for the new xbox to hit the shelves, I feel for the people who won't be able to immediately shove out near one thousand dollars (Console/accessories/possible hard drive) and get the game at the same time or neither.I can see the benefit of it being on next gen with less memory restrictions but I hope it's on both current and next gen so no one is left out.

I don't think it is heartless. Let me explain. I am a PC player as well and I also want the title to come to next gen consoles. And of course to the PC. The reason is that these new consoles may have higher specs and thus the PC version of the game could be more advanced as well. Games used to push the borders of PC tech. These days games push the borders of what consoles can do. And the current consoles tech is rather old compared to modern gaming PCs. That's not intended to be a nasty remark. It's just that a lot of PC gamers have rigs that have these great features that are rarely being used in game ports.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 03 janvier 2013 - 11:15 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Yes, EA is going to pass on the huge install base of the current-gen consoles in favor of the non-existent install base of the yet-to-be announced next-gen consoles. Are you people serious? There is a possibility of a port to next-gen consoles. But exclusive? Uhh... no.