You people need to stop. The pc version was not a port, both console and pc were developed alongside each other. Quit complaining about an issue that simply isn't there.
Downright depressing that a game like this doesn't sell any more copies. What the hell is wrong with people?
2 main factors.
Firstly a lot of people genuine don't like it.
Secondly, after Mass Effect 3 & DA:2 people were always going to be skeptical about hype over quality.
You can't blame gamers for this. If DA:I was genuinely good enough it would have everyone frothing at the mouth to get it. It's not unfirtunately.
The sales seem fine to me. Don't know if Bioware/EA think the same way, considering they wanted to make this game as Skyrim-like as possible, but I never thought Inquisition would even come close to Skyrims sale numbers. I guess it will reach 2-2.5 million sales at the end of the year, which is decent.
*Shrugs* Everyone I know is enjoying the game, from moderately to enormously. The aura of awfulness only seems to exist here on BSN. It might not be a game you like, but that's different from being a bad game.
I don't have a controller so I don't know how much better the tactical camera is with it. But it seems odd that the camera angles in close quarters and the targeting circle not crossing terrain would be fixed by a change from keyboard to controller. And those are the only issues I have with the tactical camera.
You people need to stop. The pc version was not a port, both console and pc were developed alongside each other. Quit complaining about an issue that simply isn't there.
It was a port. Alot of people can see that, even those who don't mind it. It is a huge issue. Its not anyone's problem you can't see it but its there.
Downright depressing that a game like this doesn't sell any more copies. What the hell is wrong with people?
Nothing is "wrong" with people. A lot of people simply have different tastes when it comes to video games.
It was a port. Alot of people can see that, even those who don't mind it. It is a huge issue. Its not anyone's problem you can't see it but its there.
Assertions without any evidence are worthless. There's no design issues that suggest its originally made for a console.
*Shrugs* Everyone I know is enjoying the game, from moderately to enormously. The aura of awfulness only seems to exist here on BSN. It might not be a game you like, but that's different from being a bad game.
I don't have a controller so I don't know how much better the tactical camera is with it. But it seems odd that the camera angles in close quarters and the targeting circle not crossing terrain would be fixed by a change from keyboard to controller. And those are the only issues I have with the tactical camera.
Sorry, but I have found it bad so far. "Bad" is of course subjective, but it's just dull MMO style quest after dull MMO style quest and a constant barrage of facepalm moments from bad dialogue to combat which just isn't fun.
I can see why people may like it too, but I can see why people like Skyrim too. For me it's not an RPG and there's not the elements I want from an RPG, elements which Bioware themselves have spent 10-15 years conditioning me into expecting! lol (A decent, deep main story would be a nice start)
Assertions without any evidence are worthless. There's no design issues that suggest its originally made for a console.
On the contrary. Everything visual and control that differ from DA2 and Origins is exactly the difference between consoles and PCs. But I'm lazy now and I will just point one thing: Mouse being useful to perform actions.
Now please, tell me, what in DAI is better with a mouse+keyboard than with a controller =)
But **** this retarded game, I complain because I'm a bad loser, I know now that this franchise is lost for me forever so I'm just like a spoiled child wrecking havoc because after 15 years mom decided to deny my pleasure
I just wish I was a powerful person so that I could have my vengeance more efficiently than flooding a forum with my tears =(
2 main factors.
Firstly a lot of people genuine don't like it.
Secondly, after Mass Effect 3 & DA:2 people were always going to be skeptical about hype over quality.
You can't blame gamers for this. If DA:I was genuinely good enough it would have everyone frothing at the mouth to get it. It's not unfirtunately
rpgs genereally are a small market, actiongames sell more then rpgs, and rpgs more then adventures etc etc
I'm waiting for several patch cycles before buying, by which time the game price will probably be somewhere around $30. Game companies nowadays are incapable of releasing a finished product, because the corporate office knows that people will pay the full release price regardless of the product's quality, and so can rely on customers to do final QA and testing. I refuse to pay for the privilege of beta-testing a game when there are plenty of finished games I can be playing in my free time. If a company wants me to pay upwards of $60 for a game, then it should do proper QA.
Also, the horrifically tasteless mandatory pajamas the Inquisitor wears deserve at least a $10 discount off the sticker price. Anyways.
Skyrim sold spectacularly despite being a buggy mess of half-finished "features" because Bethesda is the only company producing high-budget open-world murder-boxes. I call them murder-boxes because in games like Skyrim, 99% of the time the player's meaningful decisions revolve around selecting the method of killing someone or something. Bethesda shoveled Skyrim out the door and relied on the player community to fix its mistakes, and will continue to do so as long as it has a monopoly on its niche.
Similarly, EA knows that it has time to polish Inquisition because Bioware is the only developer producing this particular type of RPG. Inquisition is not nearly as buggy as Skyrim or the most recent Assassin's Creed, but it's far from a finished product.
I'm really enjoying the game, and I was very skeptical after DA:2 and the ME3 ending.
So let me get this straight 1.1 million copies in a week is what exactly?
Origins sold 3.2 million copies in 97 day's.
DA2 which apparently still turned a profit sold 2 million in 150 day's.
if we apply average declining sales rate's on this number: drop of 37% in week 2 a slight increase in week 3 for drop of 33% of week one sales that means by week 4 DA:I will have sold 2.53 Million copies in just 21 days meaning it's on track to break even origins record.
http://www.edmontonj...9789/story.html
https://www.few.vu.n...cm39-264134.pdf
Learn a little about games sales before going nuts 1.1 million is great numbers for 7 days and if correct mean's it's on track to be the highest selling Dragon age game.
I wish to thank you from the bottom of my heart for injecting some degree of quantitative analysis into this cesspool of innumeracy.
Actually, they did say that. The game cost roughly 10 million to make and market, Square was hoping for 6 million in the first month. They hit that 6 million mark earlier this year.
So it is still technically a loss. But they are again, making a sequel.
My point is that AAA game "not selling" jepordizing future games is not exactly true anymore.
No, go read the neogaf thread about it. SE were ridiculed because they over-estimated sales by a ridiculous number, they were expecting 5-6 million, and it sold a respectable 3.5million+. As of January it actually generated a profit.
Basically the game did sell, exactly in line for that type of game/genre, SE have been a long running joke of incompetence for a while now. They get more flak off their fans and bystanders than EA does thesedays.
I wish to thank you from the bottom of my heart for injecting some degree of quantitative analysis into this cesspool of innumeracy.
^That as well.
It was a port. Alot of people can see that, even those who don't mind it. It is a huge issue. Its not anyone's problem you can't see it but its there.
Do you even know what a port is? The majority of the people here don't even understand game development with all the "Patch this in" and "DLC this in" threads. But by all means continue to think you're right, even though you aren't. You only hurt your own image.
Tomb Raider was a failure when it came out technically, despite the fact it made over 3.4 million in a month, Square Enix didn't make their money back.
They are making a new Tomb Raider still though.
Sales and sale figures, if companies like EA are smart, will never hit the 1 billion mark like Call of Duty or GTA, which are anomalies in the gaming market. RPG's especially won't likely hit it.
Hell, the best selling RPG of all time is still Pokemon as a Franchise, roughly 30 million for the first generation, and still pulling in over 15 million in sales with each generation. As much as I love Dragon Age, no BioWare game is ever going to hit those numbers realistically. Even Elder Scrolls has only recently cracked 30 million sales as a franchise.
I think EA and BioWare realize that too. Check out how low key the marketing campaign was this time, which eats up a lot of the budget for most games.
My guess, Dragon Age is going to recoup sales and losses through multiplayer purchases over time, and it will lead to the series continuing because it is a successful franchise with more than just games out there. That is why the sales don't matter.
Well. If you look at successful franchises like CoD, GTA, TES, Pokemon, etc, they actually have some common properties.
...Which EA have never respected.
The first is that their sales volumes follow a stepped ladder through the sequels. The best and most celebrated installments are not those that sold best. Look at the contrast with EA's games, where the best game (usually the one mainly developed before EA purchased the studio) tends to also be prominent in the sales. Quality of the single game is not what drives the sales of the successful franchises though.
Mindshare does.
The first game sells like 1.5 - 3 million. But it gets a solid reputation. The word goes around. When the sequel comes, all the original customers buy the game. But there are now also many others who recognize the title and decide to bite this time. When that game also delivers, the reputation grows even more. The next installment sells even more. And so on, as long as the sequels respect the franchise and remain true enough to it, to sustain the reputation.
Which brings us to the second property of successful franchises: They are true sequels. They offer very similar gameplay ideas and gameplay mechanics. They are evolved, of course, changed. But they do not tamper with the central ideas of the game, the mood or the details and mindset which are central to playing and enjoying the game.
This is the opposite of what EA typically does. EA tend to treat a sequel as just the title. They always figure they will be more successful with a completely different game for different gamers, because they somehow figure the first game excluded all those who didn't buy it.
Well. If you look at successful franchises like CoD, GTA, TES, Pokemon, etc, they actually have some common properties.
...Which EA have never respected.
The first is that their sales volumes follow a stepped ladder through the sequels. The best and most celebrated installments are not those that sold best. Look at the contrast with EA's games, where the best game (usually the one mainly developed before EA purchased the studio) tends to also be prominent in the sales. Quality of the single game is not what drives the sales of the successful franchises though.
Mindshare does.
The first game sells like 1.5 - 3 million. But it gets a solid reputation. The word goes around. When the sequel comes, all the original customers buy the game. But there are now also many others who recognize the title and decide to bite this time. When that game also delivers, the reputation grows even more. The next installment sells even more. And so on, as long as the sequels respect the franchise and remain true enough to it, to sustain the reputation.
Which brings us to the second property of successful franchises: They are true sequels. They offer very similar gameplay ideas and gameplay mechanics. They are evolved, of course, changed. But they do not tamper with the central ideas of the game, the mood or the details and mindset which are central to playing and enjoying the game.
This is the opposite of what EA typically does. EA tend to treat a sequel as just the title. They always figure they will be more successful with a completely different game for different gamers, because they somehow figure the first game excluded all those who didn't buy it.
Well said.
Honestly, sales don't matter.
Yes they do. If a game does not sell well then there may never been additional content or another game afterwards.
I'm not surprised. Bioware abandoned PC gamers. Bad words of mouth and average scoring from reviews from critics and terrible reviews from fans like Metacritics. I enjoyed this game. I hope it sells better later on, but it doesn't look very good.
I'm not surprised. Bioware abandoned PC gamers. Bad words of mouth and average scoring from reviews from critics and terrible reviews from fans like Metacritics. I enjoyed this game. I hope it sells better later on, but it doesn't look very good.
Please revise your post, not enough hyperbole.
I'm not surprised. Bioware abandoned PC gamers. Bad words of mouth and average scoring from reviews from critics and terrible reviews from fans like Metacritics. I enjoyed this game. I hope it sells better later on, but it doesn't look very good.
Since when is getting a 89 metascore considered an average score? I just looked at Metacritic, and if you take away the re-releases (GTA V and Last of US), Dragon Age: Inquisition stands out as the highest rated game of the year. How is that average?
Disclaimer: This is without taking the Wii U into account. If we do, then the highest rated game of the year is Smash.
The sales will pick up closer to christmas. I am sure lots of people will buy it as a gift etc.
Well... metacritiquing, only the PC version:
DAO:
Metascore: 91
Users: 8.6
DAI:
Metascore: 87
Users: 5.6
Now, really good RPG games that came this year:
Legend of Grimrock 2:
Metascore: 86
Users: 8.3
Divinity Original SIn:
Metascore: 87
Users: 8.8
Wasteland 2:
Metascore: 81
Users: 7.3
And lets see how it fights against the champion of all time (not that I like it...)
Skyrim:
Metascore: 94
Users: 8.4
TL:DR DAI sucks and brings shame to Bioware and Dragon Age Origins is the most fantastic game ever because I say so (even if DoS had better user reviews =( )
EDIT: I'm sorry to state the obvious again...
Baldur's Gate II
Metascore: 95
Users: 9.3
Retour en haut
