159 réponses à ce sujet

[The Baconer]

Mr.House wrote...
That's not how buisness works.

OP asked what would make it a success in my eyes. I'm not a business, so thankfully I don't have to worry about all that other stuff.

Though, I will say if they have to move, like, 3 million just to break even, clearly there's a problem.

[addiction21]

Angrywolves wrote...

You're not the only customer.

I can only answer for myself. I am not so arrogant to speak for others.

Angrywolves wrote...

There are others that care, that's obvious.And if you don't care, then why are you here ?

Again I am only speaking for myself and I never said I didn't care about the franchise because I do. If it happens to die because of whatever reason then I choose not to care because it happens and life goes on.

[Plaintiff]

3! 3 million in sales!

Ah! Ah! Ah! Ah! Aaaah!

[David7204]

The Baconer wrote...

Mr.House wrote...
That's not how buisness works.

OP asked what would make it a success in my eyes. I'm not a business, so thankfully I don't have to worry about all that other stuff.

Though, I will say if they have to move, like, 3 million just to break even, clearly there's a problem.

Why is that a problem?

[Fast Jimmy]

Maria Caliban wrote...

EA does not expect DA:I to sell 5 million.

They'd like 1 million the first month and 2-3 million by the time it ends up in their quarterly report.

Mass Effect 3 managed 3.5 million and is, I believe, BioWare's best selling game. If DA:I could reach those numbers, no one would complain, but I don't think anyone is counting on it.

According to VGChartz, ME3 sold much more than 3.5 million. The 360 version alone is estimated to have sold 2.6.

http://www.vgchartz..../mass-effect-3/

The totals for ME3 reflect around 4.5 million total. DA:O was it's close second with around 4 million.

http://www.vgchartz....on-age-origins/

ME3 was developed over the course of 2 years. DA:I is over the course of 3. That added time will need to be made up somehow (and I doubt it will be with a $75 dollar price tag). DA:O needing 5 million sales is not a stretch of any imagination.

[Plaintiff]

David7204 wrote...

The Baconer wrote...

Mr.House wrote...
That's not how buisness works.

OP asked what would make it a success in my eyes. I'm not a business, so thankfully I don't have to worry about all that other stuff.

Though, I will say if they have to move, like, 3 million just to break even, clearly there's a problem.

Why is that a problem?

Haven't you heard? Games are best developed out of parents' basements, with the production costs subsidised by the programmer's part-time job at Wendy's.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 18 décembre 2013 - 02:32 .

[The Baconer]

David7204 wrote...
Why is that a problem?

Because it probably means the budget is being bloated on superficial things that aren't needed. Look at games like Dead Space 3, Tomb Raider, and Resident Evil 6 that failed to meet their financial goalposts and then compare that to the successes of things like The Witcher franchise and Dark Souls.

[stormhit]

The Baconer wrote...

David7204 wrote...
Why is that a problem?

Because it probably means the budget is being bloated on superficial things that aren't needed. Look at games like Dead Space 3, Tomb Raider, and Resident Evil 6 that failed to meet their financial goalposts and then compare that to the successes of things like The Witcher franchise and Dark Souls.

That's not necessarily what missing those sales targets means...it's in terms of earnings guidance for stock, not profitability.

[The Six Path of Pain]

Meh, sales for me don't indicate the success of a title. Success in my eyes lies in the quality of the story and characters and to a degree gameplay. That's just me though.

[Fast Jimmy]

Plaintiff wrote...

David7204 wrote...

The Baconer wrote...

Mr.House wrote...
That's not how buisness works.

OP asked what would make it a success in my eyes. I'm not a business, so thankfully I don't have to worry about all that other stuff.

Though, I will say if they have to move, like, 3 million just to break even, clearly there's a problem.

Why is that a problem?

Haven't you heard? Games are best developed out of parents' basements, with the production costs subsidised by the programmer's part-time job at Wendy's.

In an industry that spends, dollar for dollar, as much on advertising as it does for actual game development, saying multi-million unit sales marks are not a good thing isn't totally absurd.

[Lebanese Dude]

Plaintiff wrote...



3! 3 million in sales!

Ah! Ah! Ah! Ah! Aaaah!

I can't look at the Count without remembering that song that they bleeped that make it sound like it's a dirty song 

Modifié par Lebdood, 18 décembre 2013 - 02:58 .

[The Baconer]

stormhit13 wrote...
That's not necessarily what missing those sales targets means...it's in terms of earnings guidance for stock, not profitability.

I know. It's very likely that Dead Space 3 and Resident Evil 6 made profit (or at least broke even in the case of the latter), but does a game like Resident Evil 6 or Tomb Raider 2013 really need a budget of $100+ mill to accomplish what it set out to do? By all means, The Witcher 2 has the production qualities of a AAA game, aside from maybe a little more voice actor recycling than one is used to in a modern RPG, and it was made on a budget that was probably half (or less) that... while arguably being a better game despite that.

Though, I'll admit I can't comment on the quality of TR 2013 because I've never played it.

[-Skorpious-]

1 million would be good start considering DA2/ME3's polarizing performances.

[David7204]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

In an industry that spends, dollar for dollar, as much on advertising as it does for actual game development...

I doubt that.

[addiction21]

David7204 wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

In an industry that spends, dollar for dollar, as much on advertising as it does for actual game development...

I doubt that.

For all games no. For the CoDs. Battlefields. and Mass Effect they spend tens of millions or dollars on advertising.

[Fast Jimmy]

David7204 wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

In an industry that spends, dollar for dollar, as much on advertising as it does for actual game development...

I doubt that.

http://en.wikipedia....eting_of_Halo_3

http://bf3blog.com/2...top-50-million/

http://www.gamesindu...on-says-analyst 
to be followed up with 
http://www.cinemable...rket-58922.html


And, lastly, a quick info-pic:

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 18 décembre 2013 - 03:25 .

[David7204]

Is that fact that this picture of yours proclaims that the average video game will cost over $120 in a month (2014) not enough to tell you it's complete nonsense?

[SomeoneStoleMyName]

Skyrim has sold 14 million copies. Im guessing that can be called a success? I made a sale prediction thread on the Bethesda forums pre-release and I guessed 12 million copies, at that time I was being mocked for being crazy, naive and unrealistic.

As for Dragon age: Inquisition, Im not sure what advertisment costs. But Im positive that the Skyrim TV commercials Bethesda paid for - paid itself back big time. Im not sure what it will cost EA/Bioware to make TV commercials, but I think personally that if DA:O and DA2 didnt sell more than 3-4 million copies each, spending half a million in advertisment is still worth the risk.

Word of mouth is also a huge factor, I personally believe that Skyrim as a great game + good reputation for previous great games + commercials + word of mouth made the sales so great. The problem with Dragon age: Inquisition is that Bioware split resources between Mass effect and Dragon age (biting over too much) and therefore something had to inevitable suffer in quality. This leads to a bad circle because losing credibility due to DA2 not being as good as it could coupled with the divided resources, means that the word of mouth factor needs to be very high after the ME:3 + DA2 controversy for the game to reach a chain reaction of buyings.

Diablo 3 is also an important factor. Diablo 3 REALLY made gamers more critical to buying AA titles. One can no longer assume an AA title will automatically be good.

So my opinion? If Bioware believes in what they have done with DA:I, they shouldnt need commercials, because RPG lovers will buy it anyway if the word of mouth is good. And if they really, REALLY believe they have made a tremendously great game, then buying commercials wont actually be a risk and can be done easily because they may reach a even bigger audience.

Another problem is the target audience. MacDonalds probably sells more food than fancy resturants despite the food at the resturant being better, because people want fast things with lots of sugar. Humans in general are not very smart, and RPGs (In my presumtious opinion) caters to smarter and wiser people - not the stupid masses. However an epic commercial on TV might drag these stupid masses in.

I had a point somewhere but my mind wandered off... uhm... yeah. Bioware should put their heart and soul into Dragon age: Inquisition, and RISK going all in on TV commercials aswell as relying on word of mouth and reviews. Because after the ME:3 ending and DA2, they really dont have that much to lose imo. DA:I has to be fantastic, it has to. Bioware has gained enourmous credability and respect in the hearts of gamers over the years. But I believe that controversy struck them badly, but not enough for fans to give up on them. And Dragon age Inquisition is ****THE*** biggest chance they have to show that they still got it, and that they are still kings of the RPG genre.

Consoles and such is probably to blame for dumbing down dragon age, I hate it like probably anyone else on this forum. But from a business perspective they kinda had to do it to a degree to reach bigger audiences. They can do that, because they probably know that true RPG fans will often be more focused on the quality of the story and characters/writing, and that a tad easier gameplay might reel in the stupid masses while RPG fans will STILL buy the game for the story and roleplaying aspects alone.

Again... I had a point somewhere,,, where is my mind? Where is my mind? In the fade? meow!

[Fast Jimmy]

David7204 wrote...

Is that fact that this picture of yours proclaims that the average video game will cost over $120 in a month (2014) not enough to tell you it's complete nonsense?

Fine. Then ignore it. 

It doesn't trump the fact that the examples I gave spent EASILY half their budget on marketing alone. And they are hardly the exception. 

[Fiery Phoenix]

Game would be lucky to hit the three million mark. It's really not THAT popular.

Personally, I couldn't care less as long as it meets my expectations.

[David7204]

Do you any evidence that these games are 'hardly the exception'?

[Fast Jimmy]

Humans in general are not very smart, and RPGs (In my presumtious opinion) caters to smarter and wiser people - not the stupid masses. However an epic commercial on TV might drag these stupid masses in.

I'd just like to address this, as it was talked about in another thread the other day.

RPGs being for "smart" people, while games like Madden or FIFA being for "dumb sports jocks" is pretty much a laughable concept right now. The big name sports franchises sell three to four times more units than successful RPGs (if we ignore Skyrim for the moment, since it truly is an industry rarity). Yet a sports game these days have much more complicated stats, leveling, training opportunities, build layouts and gear/equipment combinations than seen in the most recent Bioware or CDProjekt games.

The idea that "RPGs are for smart people" seems to be not true anymore, since RPGs are increasingly moving towards simplicity, while the more complex game systems found in sports are the ones, ironically enough, making the most dough.

Granted, there is more to making an RPG complex than pure stat juggling, such as deep story or complex issues, but I'd say that's less intelligence based and more simply refined narrative preferences. Smart is reading A Brief History of Time. Refined is reading To Kill a Mockingbird.