We shouldn't let canarius' clownish approach distract us from a fairly serious question -- do series do better with a central character?
I'm OK with a new PC every time, but you can make a case that this is not the best approach for maximizing sales.
The example of GTA suggests that people don't mind different central characters from game to game. And that does okay, sales wise.
Well when Hawke came back, was it pandering?
How Hawke was used was really good, and made sense considering his status in the world of things. He was still the major everyman of this series, and one that I would love to play as again.
Considering the difference between Hawke, who survives no matter what in DA 2 and that Hawke's arc is connected to events in DAI, I'd say no.
Bringing back a character who has the option of being dead for a major game or dlc seems to fit the definition. If the US didn't exist, maybe I could see a way to have brought the Warden back for this, but with a good portion (I don't know the demographics of who took the DR and who did US) of people who's Wardens are no longer with us, it'd be a huge work around for a major plot point.
We shouldn't let canarius' clownish approach distract us from a fairly serious question -- do series do better with a central character?
I'm OK with a new PC every time, but you can make a case that this is not the best approach for maximizing sales.
I don't remember many people screaming for open world when it was announced, just that we don't want to be restricted to one city for a whole game like DA2. Most of the semi-open world area's in the game are boring anyway. No proper city and 3 deserts is over kill.
Edit: And honestly, I would not mind if the open world was more like TW3 in DA4. Hopefully, they'll drop last gen by then.
First of all, DAI is not open world. Way too many invisible walls and level lock outs. Skyrim, you can pick a direction and walk. Sure, you might get killed, but you can. DAI doesn't even come close.
Now that doesn't mean DAI is a bad game. It's not. But I do think BW wanted to create a "Skyrim' and in that regard they failed. BW should stick to what they are good at: story driven games. Focus on the characters and the fighting not the world.
But Skyrim was such a hit (it's STILL selling) it's hard for EA not to want that kind of success. They haven't had it in a Class A game in a long while.
Judging from what my friends are still playing I doubt DAI is a big of a hit EA was hoping for. And now with TW3 out, and Fallout 4 announced, good luck to BW/EA with this title. Players aren't talking about DAI anymore.
First of all, DAI is not open world. Way too many invisible walls and level lock outs. Skyrim, you can pick a direction and walk. Sure, you might get killed, but you can. DAI doesn't even come close.
Now that doesn't mean DAI is a bad game. It's not. But I do think BW wanted to create a "Skyrim' and in that regard they failed. BW should stick to what they are good at: story driven games. Focus on the characters and the fighting not the world.
But Skyrim was such a hit (it's STILL selling) it's hard for EA not to want that kind of success. They haven't had it in a Class A game in a long while.
Judging from what my friends are still playing I doubt DAI is a big of a hit EA was hoping for. And now with TW3 out, and Fallout 4 announced, good luck to BW/EA with this title. Players aren't talking about DAI anymore.
Using your friends is not a great metric. Using the fact that EA told its shareholders that DAI helped make Q4 2014 a success is a pretty darn good one.
Second, you do remember that DAI came out in November of 2014, right? Of course Witcher 3 is going to be talked about more, so is ME Next if its announced at E3. The media has the attention span of a fruit fly. People like shiny new things. By the time the titles from E3 get out Witcher 3's 15 minutes will have come and gone.
Third, I doubt Skyrim is selling all that much now. Probably about the same as DAO and DA2.
The example of GTA suggests that people don't mind different central characters from game to game. And that does okay, sales wise.
I don't think this is a fair comparison. GTA, Fallout, and Elder Scrolls are open world games where you have the freedom to do whatever you want. Also these series have been around for about 20 years. Dragon Age games are narrative-driven unlike these games. So a better comparison would be other narrative-driven games such as Mass Effect and The Witcher. The sales for these 2 series went up from the 1st game to the 3rd game while Dragon Age sales went down. The reasons for this are very simple: The quality of Mass Effect and The Witcher games increased with the sequels while the quality of Dragon Age decreased with the sequels. The other reason is they had the same main character for the sequels which made the fans of the previous game come back for the sequels. Dragon Age changed the main character and this made some of the fans of Origins lose interest for the sequels. Oh and it's so obvious that Bioware is including LGBT characters for political correctness and not for story reasons. I'm sure they are selling more copies to the SJW's but they are losing their fanbase while doing this. Sales are a proof of this.
I think, for Bioware, a new PC is much better. They're barely consistent with their design in a single game. As ME proves, asking for consistent takes across a series is too much.
A new PC fits their style better.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again, but Shepherd wasn't even necessary for the ME trilogy as it stood. In ME1, Shepherd had an actually unique attribute of relevance in the prothean beacon, but afterwards there was never an actual need for his/her reputation again other than arbitrary hand-wave of 'we need someone famous.' In ME2, Shepherd's fame doesn't actually achieve any part of the plot: every new character bar Legion joins for reasons that any Cerberus operative who happened to be a PC could have fulfilled, and even Legion/Garrus and even Tali could have been justified joining a non-Shepherd relatively easily.
In ME3, Shepherd's fame is even less relevant because Shepherd's primary role in the narrative is 'Hackett's gopher': gopher this, gopher that... they couldn't even demand Spectre status as being particularly important since it not only matters once for purely arbitrary reasons, but it gets forced on you if you refused it in ME2. They could have slapped it on any agent of Hackett at that point- and all of ME3 could have been the story of a rising war hero who goes from one front to the next bringing victories.
I don't think this is a fair comparison. GTA, Fallout, and Elder Scrolls are open world games where you have the freedom to do whatever you want. Also these series have been around for about 20 years. Dragon Age games are narrative-driven unlike these games. So a better comparison would be other narrative-driven games such as Mass Effect and The Witcher. The sales for these 2 series went up from the 1st game to the 3rd game while Dragon Age sales went down. The reasons for this are very simple: The quality of Mass Effect and The Witcher games increased with the sequels while the quality of Dragon Age decreased with the sequels. The other reason is they had the same main character for the sequels which made the fans of the previous game come back for the sequels. Dragon Age changed the main character and this made some of the fans of Origins lose interest for the sequels. Oh and it's so obvious that Bioware is including LGBT characters for political correctness and not for story reasons. I'm sure they are selling more copies to the SJW's but they are losing their fanbase while doing this. Sales are a proof of this.
Were you able to tolerate the nefarious homosexual agenda in Kotor, Jade Empire, ME1, and DA:O?
I don't think this is a fair comparison. GTA, Fallout, and Elder Scrolls are open world games where you have the freedom to do whatever you want. Also these series have been around for about 20 years. Dragon Age games are narrative-driven unlike these games. So a better comparison would be other narrative-driven games such as Mass Effect and The Witcher. The sales for these 2 series went up from the 1st game to the 3rd game while Dragon Age sales went down. The reasons for this are very simple: The quality of Mass Effect and The Witcher games increased with the sequels while the quality of Dragon Age decreased with the sequels. The other reason is they had the same main character for the sequels which made the fans of the previous game come back for the sequels. Dragon Age changed the main character and this made some of the fans of Origins lose interest for the sequels. Oh and it's so obvious that Bioware is including LGBT characters for political correctness and not for story reasons. I'm sure they are selling more copies to the SJW's but they are losing their fanbase while doing this. Sales are a proof of this.
First, Fallout wasn't open world until Bethesda got the rights, second, Elder Scrolls scaled back on open world after Daggerfall, which was a mess. Third, I want to see those numbers before I believe you. Fourth, the fact that the Ultimate Sacrifice was there, and an option the entire time should have been enough warning on the box, so if it alienated fans, they weren't paying attention. Fifth, you make the assumption that there are no lesbians, gays or transgender people among the fan base. Sixth, if LGBT people had been added for 'story' purposes you'd still be complaining since you'd have to deal with it anyway.
And how does having LGBT people in game harm YOU in any way?
The trick is figuring out why. Of course, TW3 had a more successful predecessor.
In other news, Witcher 3 sells over 4 million copies in just 2 weeks.
A clear sign that DA:O would be a complete failure in this market, which I'm sure is the implication you were highlighting.
So does that mean The Witcher series is more successful than Dragon Age?
A clear sign that DA:O would be a complete failure in this market, which I'm sure is the implication you were highlighting.
What do you mean by successful? CDPR spends in the Polish currency but earns in (among other things) dollars (of all kinds) and euros. They're making a relative mint with TW3 even if they sell less, which they very likely are not.
A clear sign that DA:O would be a complete failure in this market, which I'm sure is the implication you were highlighting.
What do you mean by successful? CDPR spends in the Polish currency but earns in (among other things) dollars (of all kinds) and euros. They're making a relative mint with TW3 even if they sell less, which they very likely are not.
What is the conversion rate on USD to Polish currency? And Canadian as well since Bioware's budget isn't going to be in USD.
As for DAO, iirc it didn't recoup its cost or some such.
1$ is arouns 3,5-4 zł as of now. CAD around 1,2$
Witcher 3 Metacritic: User score
PlayStation 4 = 9.0
Xbox One = 8.9
PC = 9.1
Then behind curtain #2......Dragon Age: Inquisition!!!! 2014 Game of the Year!!!!:
PlayStation 4 = 7.4
Xbox One = 6.9
PC = 5.8
YOU do the math
Successful in terms of public opinion. Just look at the user ratings on metacritic for TW3 then look at the user ratings for DAI.
Tsk, tsk... comparing user ratings of a game that's been more than half a year on the market to the one that's still on its 'honeymoon' period (it hasn't been even a month since TW3 was released)?
Hah...
Witcher 3 Metacritic: User score
PlayStation 4 = 9.0
Xbox One = 8.9
PC = 9.1
Then behind curtain #2......Dragon Age: Inquisition!!!! 2014 Game of the Year!!!!:
PlayStation 4 = 7.4
Xbox One = 6.9
PC = 5.8
YOU do the math
Ultimate Demolition Derby (PC): 9.1.
Bionicle Heroes (PC): 9.1.
Medieval Lords: Build, Defend, Expand (PC): 9.0.
Skyrim (PC): 8.0.
One day, Bestheda will put out a product of the caliber of Bionicle Heroes on PC. TW3 just barely reached that level on PC.
Tsk, tsk... comparing user ratings of a game that's been more than half a year on the market to the one that's still on its 'honeymoon' period (it hasn't been even a month since TW3 was released)?
Hah...
# of People who rated DAI on PC = 3331
# of People who rated TW3 on PC =1982
# of People who rated DAI on X1 = 546
# of People who rated TW3 on X1 = 515
# of People who rated DAI on PS4 = 1484
# of People who rated TW3 on PS4 = 1960
The only major gap I see is the PC, other than that, things are pretty even. In fact, MORE people rated TW3 on PS4 than they did with DAI.
Just admit it people, TW3 is more popular than DAI and in many ways, more successful and it isn't a current "fad" that will fade in a few months. People keep pointing to TW3 as a way to make WRPGs. I do not recall this happening a lot with DAI after launch.
What is the conversion rate on USD to Polish currency? And Canadian as well since Bioware's budget isn't going to be in USD.
As for DAO, iirc it didn't recoup its cost or some such.
It's not just about conversation rate, you have to look at PPP and other more sophisticated measures.
1$ is arouns 3,5-4 zł as of now. CAD around 1,2$
It's not just about conversation rate, you have to look at PPP and other more sophisticated measures.
Retour en haut
