59 réponses à ce sujet

[Alan Drifter13]

I was just taking a look at VGchartz (http://www.vgchartz....s=0&results=200) and it looks like DA:I outsold the total sales of DA2 (published in 2011) in less than 2 months, considering the last update for global sales on VG chartz is for the sales until December 27th. Yes, DA:I is available for more consoles, but the single best selling one (PS4) already outsold the single best selling one for DA2 (XB360) too.

 

In Europe, the PS4 sales for DA:I are already higher than the PS3 total sales for DA:O, and it looks like in general DA:I will reach DA:O soon (it's already almost half way there, in 6 weeks, and I guess all the GOTY awards can only help this trend).

 

I just wanted to leave this here because I've seen threads by people worried because the game, even in PS4, hasn't been in the top-10 (or even top-20) during most weeks since launch date, some even suggesting there might not be more DA games because of this. Well, while it seems clear that Dragon Age can't compete with the sales of GTA, COD, FIFA, AC or Pokemon, it seems clear that DA:I will outsell its predecessors in this series.

 

*I still find it sad that games that change with every new installment sell much less than those that just launch pretty much the same game year after year (COD, FIFA, etc.), but I guess that's something for another, wider, discussion.

[Thargorichiban]

Not surprised. This game is getting better reviews and better word of mouth than the last one.

 

It also probably helped that EA released Dragon Age Origins for free for awhile and it sparked more interest for this game.

[Degenerate Rakia Time]

and thats without digital downloads

[Alan Drifter13]

and thats without digital downloads

 

VGchartz doesn't count digital sales? Thanks for the info, I didn't know that. 

[Andraste_Reborn]

Insofar as we can trust VGchartz or any other publically available figures, this is what I was expecting and hoping for. Good news!

 

"Excuse me while I do my happy dance!"

[rubynorman]

That's awesome. I'm happy for Bioware, keep doing the good job and don't rush anything please. I can wait 4 years for ME4.

[Sailfindragon]

So I have read. VGChartz grossly over estimate their figures. I read a thread here that the actual console sales where 700k if I remember correctly. This does not include digital and physical PC copies.

[MrSnoozer]

AAA games have passed the typical games media, now you see more game trailers on TV/cinema's. With huge amounts of money spent on advertising.

Also selling on  5 platfroms from the get go always helps ^^ .

All in all its great news, now to get rid of pre ordering.....

[Fast Jimmy]

DA2 made the vast majority of its sales in the first two weeks, so saying "DA:I sold more in two months than DA2 did in four years!" is silly.

The real analysis should be "DA:I sold only marginally better than DA2, despite having double the development time (and likely the budget)."


Not so sterling a claim now, is it?

[CronoDragoon]

Let's avoid using VGChartz for anything, positive or negative.

[PrinceofTime]

Thats not really impressive, especially since Bioware tried to tap into the Skyrim audience with the marketing. Ironically the vast majority of said audience(well most gamers) were playing COD-GTA5 and everything in between this holiday.

[LPPrince]

The real analysis should be "DA:I sold only marginally better than DA2, despite having double the development time (and likely the budget)."

Not so sterling a claim now, is it?

 

Isn't that just as silly though? More time and money does not automatically equate to higher sales figures, nor should it. If that were the case, indies would never excel. But even with AAA titles, there's a million factors and a million more that affect a particular game's sales trends.

 

Usually fans will pull numbers out of their bums and not take into account all the factors that lead to those numbers they'll use for their arguments, so I think its best to heavily research the particular situation and form an opinion based on that instead of just relying on a source or two.

 

Its too easy to make things simple when conveying the mathematics of the business side of this industry. We should know though that it is far more complicated than that.

 

Though in my case(and I imagine this is the case for many), I'd rather just play my games as a past time, unless someone gives me an opportunity to enter the industry on another level outside of being a dedicated consumer.

[SNascimento]

VGChartz is an utterly unreliable source, it is know. 

[Fast Jimmy]

VGChartz is an utterly unreliable source, it is know.

Lies. Show me one example where VGChartz has proven to be off by more than 15% total units.

While that's not dead point accurate, the fact that it is the only public metric out there makes it relevant. Being off by 500K units when total sales are over 5M is sample variance, not inaccuracy.

[LPPrince]

Lies. Show me one example where VGChartz has proven to be off by more than 15% total units.

While that's not dead point accurate, the fact that it is the only public metric out there makes it relevant. Being off by 500K units when total sales are over 5M is sample variance, not inaccuracy.

 

I can't say. Though I do know it does not account for my purchase of the game, which was an Xbox One Pre-load Digital Download.

[Fast Jimmy]

Isn't that just as silly though? More time and money does not automatically equate to higher sales figures, nor should it. If that were the case, indies would never excel. But even with AAA titles, there's a million factors and a million more that affect a particular game's sales trends.

Indies are successful by employing smaller staff and spending less resources on aspects that don't improve a game, such as bleeding edge graphics or marketing campaigns that rival the budget for the game development itself.

More time DOES lead to higher budget, though. Indies are able to extend their project times because their smaller staffs make it possible to do so. But for a team like Bioware, which had likely close to 300 full time artists, programmers, designers, writers, testers and other employees? Every month adds millions more to the budget. Every year geometrically increases the cost to rise for $10-$20 million a year. For a game like DA2 to be developed in less than two years and move ~3M units means the team likely made money, even after development and marketing. For a game like DA:I to be developed over four years... it's quite likely the budget for this game was over $50 million, not including marketing.

Will it make a profit? Sure, it is quite likely. Especially if MP takes in MT revenue half of what ME3 did. But how much? Will it be enough to pay for a sequel? If not, then that means it might not be viewed as a very strong revenue generating IP.

Usually fans will pull numbers out of their bums and not take into account all the factors that lead to those numbers they'll use for their arguments, so I think its best to heavily research the particular situation and form an opinion based on that instead of just relying on a source or two.

Its too easy to make things simple when conveying the mathematics of the business side of this industry. We should know though that it is far more complicated than that.

Though in my case(and I imagine this is the case for many), I'd rather just play my games as a past time, unless someone gives me an opportunity to enter the industry on another level outside of being a dedicated consumer.

I do make the sin of trying to overly track the financial success of a game, but it still just irks me when people come to false conclusions with data, regardless of the topic or reason.

[Fast Jimmy]

I can't say. Though I do know it does not account for my purchase of the game, which was an Xbox One Pre-load Digital Download.

True, it cannot track digital downloads because, unlike retailers, the providers of digital downloads stubbornly refuse to offer any insight. But that's a limitation of the industry - NO ONE has those numbers, outside of EA themselves. And EA's numbers are suspect, since they track units sold and not any returns/refunds.

VGChartz isn't perfect, but it also isn't ever drastically wrong. "Ballpark" is all it claims to do. And in that regard, DA:I selling in the ballpark of DA2 is not great news.

[Alan Drifter13]

DA2 made the vast majority of its sales in the first two weeks, so saying "DA:I sold more in two months than DA2 did in four years!" is silly.

The real analysis should be "DA:I sold only marginally better than DA2, despite having double the development time (and likely the budget)."

 

 

I disagree. DA2 didn't sell much after the first month because the reviews on those first few weeks destroyed the game. On the contrary, DA:I got great reviews and several GOTY awards. There's no reason to believe the trend will be the same.

 

Also, DA2 was bound to get good sales on the first week, because it came from a successful game (DA:O), while DA:I got good sales despite coming from an unsuccessful predecessor (DA2).

[CronoDragoon]

Well, we also need to take into account the sales bump that the holidays gave Origins compared to DA2. I expect something similar for Inquisition.

[Darkly Tranquil]

Not surprising. The whole point of Inquisition was to turn the game into action oriented eye candy that would appeal to the console kiddies. Mission accomplished. Pity they gutted all the gameplay systems to do it.

[CronoDragoon]

Not surprising. The whole point of Inquisition was to make turn the game into action oriented eye candy that would appeal to the console kiddies. Mission accomplished. Pity they gutted all the gameplay systems to do it.

 

Oh, stop.

[Fast Jimmy]

I disagree. DA2 didn't sell much after the first month because the reviews on those first few weeks destroyed the game. On the contrary, DA:I got great reviews and several GOTY awards. There's no reason to believe the trend will be the same.

Also, DA2 was bound to get good sales on the first week, because it came from a successful game (DA:O), while DA:I got good sales despite coming from an unsuccessful predecessor (DA2).

Yes, but the window for sales volume of any sort of relevance occur in the first ten weeks, which we are exitting here in just 16 days, I believe. And the tail end of the 10 week cycle sees the lowest sales of any weeks, before puttering out to less than 2% of total sales per month after that point.

Regardless of good review or bad reviews, DA:I has about run it's course. Unless a Ultimate Edition or expansion is released (or there is a fire sale where the game costs a fraction of the original price) the odds of it seeing even more than 50K more units sold after we enter February is scant.

[Fast Jimmy]

Well, we also need to take into account the sales bump that the holidays gave Origins compared to DA2. I expect something similar for Inquisition.

Looking at VGChartz, their numbers have been updates after the holiday rush. What is showing there should capture Christmas sales.

Now... it won't capture the $40 discount on digital copies that is STILL going on right now. For that sale to start right before Christmas makes sense, but it is a little surprising to see it continue into the second week of January...

[Spooky81]

There was a fantastic marketing campaign done by EA leading up to the release of DA:I and much anticipation it was going to totally redeem the faults of DA2, which likely helped boost sales over DA:O and DA2.

 

Wonder what future PC sales for the DA series will look like, seeing how there's mixed reviews and divided opinions in the PC community towards DA:I.  Will be interesting to see if BIoWare decides to meet in the middle and cater designs to both console and PC, or if they do what most mainstream devs do and revolve everything around console mechanics.