125 réponses à ce sujet

[myahele]

It seems most people say its better than da2 and not as good as DAO....so maybe sales will be roughly the same.

[DemGeth]

Yes good sales.

Also it's a strong pc game so nice amount of digital downloads.

And yes I'm sure they'll be more Dragon ages.

[DemGeth]

It seems most people say its better than da2 and not as good as DAO....so maybe sales will be roughly the same.

Maybe if you compare first year to first year.

Da:o has a huge lifetime number I'm betting and stil is played fairly often looking at steam stats. A lot of people bought it at 5 bucks a course.

[Julia Luna]

Yes good sales.

Also it's a strong pc game so nice amount of digital downloads.

And yes I'm sure they'll be more Dragon ages.

Nope only one Dragon Age. We don't now the name of the next age in Thedas but surely not Dragon Age.

[goishen]

Look.   I still occasionally see DA:O on the top sellers list on Steam.  Agreed, it is when it's on sale, and when there's not much else coming out.  Still, it is there.  I mean, yah, you're right to worry about BioWare's sales numbers.  Just not to obsess over them so completely.  If you enjoyed the game, I can guarantee at least you're gonna find some people out there who enjoyed the game as well.

[Battlebloodmage]

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. 

Metacritics users score. A lot of people trust the users more than the critics. If you look at other high profile RPG games then DAI scored lower than many of them. I feel like Witcher will get at least 9 to 10 score by most reviewers, and I'm not even like the Witcher. People are gonna compared this game to the Witcher even though they're different, I know the reason why but probably keep quiet to avoid a flame war. 

[Han Master]

DA2 has good sales in the opening month but later on sales drop down fast, DAO on the other hand has less sales on the opening month but as the word spread around how good the game is the sales figures more or less remain constant the entire year making it game of the year.

[Mathias]

The only thing Metacritic user scores show is that the bioware fandom is filled with babies who throw fits when the end result isnt what they wanted. The user reviews are complete spam and should not be taken seriously in the slightest. 

 

Also, sales are incredible. 1.1 million in its first week, thats better than any bioware game in recent history, anyone whose putting down these sales needs to get a grasp on reality because this will be probably be the best selling dragon age at the end.

 

ME2 and ME3 both sold more than DA:I in it's first week. What are you talking about?

[Mathias]

Metacritics users score. A lot of people trust the users more than the critics. If you look at other high profile RPG games then DAI scored lower than many of them. I feel like Witcher will get at least 9 to 10 score by most reviewers, and I'm not even like the Witcher. People are gonna compared this game to the Witcher even though they're different, I know the reason why but probably keep quiet to avoid a flame war. 

 

A lot of people aren't the brightest bulbs in the bunch. 

[kensaileo]

Metacritics users score. A lot of people trust the users more than the critics. If you look at other high profile RPG games then DAI scored lower than many of them. I feel like Witcher will get at least 9 to 10 score by most reviewers, and I'm not even like the Witcher. People are gonna compared this game to the Witcher even though they're different, I know the reason why but probably keep quiet to avoid a flame war. 

The witcher 3 will be next "skyrim" in terms of sales, at least 10 million, far more than dragon age inquisition

[Mathias]

Yep. I was totally wrong. Still best opening for a Dragon Age. 

 

Well we'll see if it's sales can remain steady these next 5 weeks. Word of mouth is kinda mixed. Obviously not as bad as Da2 though. I'd only start to worry if by the end of 2014, DA:I doesn't hit somewhere between 2.5 - 3 million. The budget for the game and it's marketing campaign had to have been really big.

[escapePlan]

The witcher 3 will be next "skyrim" in terms of sales, at least 10 million, far more than dragon age inquisition

Lol, good luck with that. No way.

[Mathias]

I firmly believe Witcher 3 will end up being the better game, and will most likely outsell DA:I.

 

10 million copies though? Not happening.

[Han Master]

The witcher 3 will be next "skyrim" in terms of sales, at least 10 million, far more than dragon age inquisition

Agreed, can't wait for witcher 3. The mouse and keyboard controls will be more or less the same as witcher 2 which is good.

[Epic777]

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. 

You should NEVER trust metacritics especially for PC gaming. There are so many 2/10 reviews because said game cannot run on 9 year old machine. To add to the enigma games like Arcanum have very positive reviews from users on metacritics despite being very buggy.

[MadMaximoff]

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

Let me stop you right there.

Divinity Original Sin for a starters is getting a falsely high meta critic as people are still treating that franchise as Indie.

Except. ...

The Developers got a Publisher that gave them a Blank cheque to develop Original Sin and they priced it the same as a triple A when it released.

What we got?

A Game that while graphically stunning, had a UI ripped out of the Early 90's, Voice Acting that makes Resident Evil 1 on the PSX look oscar worthy and a counter intuitive Tactical game play style that was frankly a Final Fantasy Tactics rip off and all the worse for it.

It tries so hard to be X:Com and Diablo and falls short at both.

This is what you see if you take the "but indie developer" blinkers off.

I panned the game on Steam Reviews and was immediately rushed by zealous fans that kept using the "But Indie" excuse.

Moral of the Story. Metacritic isnt always a good gauge, neither are "Industry Reviewers"

(Open to score manipulation by people that create multiple accounts to up/down rate something)

The only good gauge is personal opinion and more like DA: I than don't.

[Linkenski]

The user metacritic is bombarded with pre-release hate bias towards EA and DA2 though. I would never use that in an argument, other than to say "this is how EA's rep has hurt Bioware"

[bEVEsthda]

You should NEVER trust metacritics especially for PC gaming. There are so many 2/10 reviews because said game cannot run on 9 year old machine. To add to the enigma games like Arcanum have very positive reviews from users on metacritics despite being very buggy.

 

Buggy games can be great. In fact they often are. ...VtMB, FO3, ...and yeah Arcanum,...

 

User metacritcs seem, to me, to tell the truest story of a game in the end. Yes, there are 0/10 reviews from people who haven't even played the game, 10/10 from fanboys and whatnot. But in the end it tends to average out to something that in some way is deserved. As for professional reviews, is a 8.9 game almost as good as a 9.3? Nope. It can be both either complete crap or vastly superior to the 9.3 game. Different month, different hype, different company, different marketing budget. If a game ends up with 5.4 in user rating, otoh, there're always good reasons for it, and the rating is kinda deserved. Whereas a bad game can always get good professional reviewer scores, if a big publisher is marketing it.

 

As for DA:I, I'm sure it'll pick up in user ratings, as the game seem to have the qualities to do so. More gamers will discover it. And the current ratings are sort of deserved for now, as Bioware took a ****** on PC-users.

I also think that the DA:I franchise will be safe now. There will be a "DA4", i.e. DA:I 2. The DA franchise though, i.e. DA:O franchise, is utterly dead. Which is a pity. But who knows, maybe someday someone says "Hey, why don't we do a sort of spiritual successor to Dragon Age: Origins?".

[LinksOcarina]

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.

 

 

And the flipside of all that is people complain about it being too much of the same thing. Pokemon has that issue going on with it, to the point where hitting upwards of 20 million for a generation is difficult to achieve at best for that franchise, even the jump to 3D models over sprites was not fully effective in the end for a lot of people. And most folks around her make fun of Call of Duty for doing the same thing for going on seven plus years now. I don't think that is the ideal of what sequels should be, chasing imaginary numbers like they mean something. 

 

It is also not the opposite of what EA does either. The Battlefield and Sims series have more or less been functionally the same for years. The changes come through mostly as cosmetic, interactivity online, focuses on some new mechanics and differences and the like. Following your own interpretation of a true sequel, those games are pretty much examples of EA doing that, aren't they?

 

The strange thing for me is also this attitude that people have for games sometimes.  You say staying "true to the game" and "respecting it", are keys to making good sequels, but those are very hollow terms. What are you respecting, first off?  The lore? The characters? The game itself and how it was played?

 

These type of things make no sense to me, such attachment to a game is good, but what are you really attached to? Yes you can enjoy the system and how the game is presented, but isn't it a little presumptuous, and unrealistic, to assume it will always be like that, with all games in a series? How do you actually evolve further, push boundaries, and come up with new ideas then?

 

People complain about The Legend of Zelda series for following the same pattern each time, yet when playing it it's not the same pattern each time, it's a pattern that is different and always unique because of the changes to mechanics. The elements that make it a "Zelda game" are the characters, the weapons, the bare basics of what give it that heroic essence. If the argument that Inquisition is not the basics of a Dragon Age game, that's a bad argument because all those ingredients are present; the classes, the world,the roleplaying, the conflict and romances, all intact, all different, but present.  

 

Those are the central ideals of Dragon Age. It has nothing to do with the mechanical shell that surrounds them, the interpretations of the world and how you interact with it, how long or short the damn game is. You have a proper Dragon Age game in front of you, but people refuse to acknowledge that because the shell is different this time. It seems like most feel it's inferior because it doesn't hit a meaningless number, or because it's not the same as before exactly, again reflecting the deterministic attitude I despise in most RPG fans, or because you simply don't like it because EA made it, we that's like a indie band selling out on you. Scary.

 

In the end, who really knows anything? 

[artgeek25]

Let me stop you right there.

Divinity Original Sin for a starters is getting a falsely high meta critic as people are still treating that franchise as Indie.

Except. ...

The Developers got a Publisher that gave them a Blank cheque to develop Original Sin and they priced it the same as a triple A when it released.

What we got?

A Game that while graphically stunning, had a UI ripped out of the Early 90's, Voice Acting that makes Resident Evil 1 on the PSX look oscar worthy and a counter intuitive Tactical game play style that was frankly a Final Fantasy Tactics rip off and all the worse for it.

It tries so hard to be X:Com and Diablo and falls short at both.

This is what you see if you take the "but indie developer" blinkers off.

I panned the game on Steam Reviews and was immediately rushed by zealous fans that kept using the "But Indie" excuse.

Moral of the Story. Metacritic isnt always a good gauge, neither are "Industry Reviewers"

(Open to score manipulation by people that create multiple accounts to up/down rate something)

The only good gauge is personal opinion and more like DA: I than don't.

divinity OS is a bad game??!?? WTF

[Quaddis]

divinity OS is a bad game??!?? WTF

Game is also self-published and is partially founded by kickstarter. Full budget for game was 5 million $.

What the hell is he talking about?

[Ekliane]

Not a bad game, just not a AAAsogoodOMG one. I liked Divinity games, but they always felt "could be greater".

[TheRealJayDee]

These type of things make no sense to me, such attachment to a game is good, but what are you really attached to? Yes you can enjoy the system and how the game is presented, but isn't it a little presumptuous, and unrealistic, to assume it will always be like that, with all games in a series? How do you actually evolve further, push boundaries, and come up with new ideas then?

 

There are differences between things always staying the same in a gaming series, and not keeping certain elements for more than one part of a series, regardless of how well it was implented and recieved. How can we have this discussion about Dragon Age, when so far each installement was drastically different from the other?

 

I never thought much of people who keep insinuating that all those unhappy with things not staying the same are somehow against change in general (and yes, there are players like that as well). Change coming in form of improving existing things imo has a better chance of being welcomed than change that seemingly arbitrarily cuts or replaces game elements that were already working well. 

 

And of course there will never be a scenario where everyone is happy, that's just how it is.