949 réponses à ce sujet

[Valkyrja]

A clear sign that DA:O would be a complete failure in this market, which I'm sure is the implication you were highlighting.

The console ports that likely saved DA:O would probably have done far worse.

[Majestic Jazz]

The good news is that Mass Effect 4 will be announced next week and perhaps this would "cool down" all the TW3 praise that is currently going on in the industry. Like I keep saying like a broken record, DAI had the benefit of zero compeition in the WRPG market and it was also the first AAA WRPG to be released this generation so nobody was comparing it to anything, the bar was not set. So DAI by default set that bar, TW3 raised it. Now we have Fallout 4 and Deus Ex: Mankind Divided possibly releasing this year, two highly anticipated AAA WRPGs and then perhaps ME4 next Spring.

 

It is going to get interesting and for Bioware I am sure everything has turned to ME4 to "retake" the throne. 

[In Exile]

 

I was thinking in cost of making the game only. And I happily acknowledge there are other factors as well.

 

That's what I mean. The cost of producing the game isn't quite directly proportional with the currency, because it matters where you're spending the money. CDPR earns in multiple currencies but they pay in zloty, and they don't have to convert all of their foreign cap into zloty to pay as they go. 

 

The console ports that likely saved DA:O would probably have done far worse.

 

You mean, like TW3? Because, again, that's clearly a game made primarily for the console, like TW2. With a series of features anathema to what is considered a to-line RPG on this forum, usually (e.g. re: DA:O). No companions. No tactical combat. No statistic-driven combat. Real-time, AC-esque combat. Limited reactivity. Scant variability in dialogue, paralleling ME3. 

 

I love TW3 - I think it's a phenomenal game. I just think its really funny when people cite it as a kind of preeminent example of what an RPG should be, when it has more in common with AC2 than anything that gets labelled an RPG, including DA:I. 

[In Exile]

The good news is that Mass Effect 4 will be announced next week and perhaps this would "cool down" all the TW3 praise that is currently going on in the industry. Like I keep saying like a broken record, DAI had the benefit of zero compeition in the WRPG market and it was also the first AAA WRPG to be released this generation so nobody was comparing it to anything, the bar was not set. So DAI by default set that bar, TW3 raised it. Now we have Fallout 4 and Deus Ex: Mankind Divided possibly releasing this year, two highly anticipated AAA WRPGs and then perhaps ME4 next Spring.

 

It is going to get interesting and for Bioware I am sure everything has turned to ME4 to "retake" the throne. 

 

Apart from KoTOR, when has Bioware ever unequivocally had the "throne" for an RPG? DA:O lost to Fable (ew!) and Oblivion, and even then a fair number of people were praising TW1 as surpassing it. Even BG2 was considered - critically, though not commercially - to fall short of PS:T, and BG1 wasn't Fallout 1 or 2.  

[midnight tea]

# 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.

 

Yes and the fact that the gap between PC reviews on DAI and TW3 is MASSIVE somehow doesn't raise a red flag when making comparisons? Also, it's funny compare more than 1k user reviews on PC to less than 500 on PS.

 

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. 

 

How do you know? I wish TW3 all the best, but I have to point out that the game was barely released. We're yet to see what's going to happen.

 

 

People keep pointing to TW3 as a way to make WRPGs. I do not recall this happening a lot with DAI after launch. 

 

I do, because it was the reason why I picked DAI in the first place.

[Seraphim24]

DA:I sold like 1.4 million by now if I had to guess.

[AresKeith]

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. 

 

Nobody really cares, your the only one right now acting your trying to prove something

[Ariella]

That's what I mean. The cost of producing the game isn't quite directly proportional with the currency, because it matters where you're spending the money. CDPR earns in multiple currencies but they pay in zloty, and they don't have to convert all of their foreign cap into zloty to pay as they go. 
 

Understood.

 

You mean, like TW3? Because, again, that's clearly a game made primarily for the console, like TW2. With a series of features anathema to what is considered a to-line RPG on this forum, usually (e.g. re: DA:O). No companions. No tactical combat. No statistic-driven combat. Real-time, AC-esque combat. Limited reactivity. Scant variability in dialogue, paralleling ME3. 
 
I love TW3 - I think it's a phenomenal game. I just think its really funny when people cite it as a kind of preeminent example of what an RPG should be, when it has more in common with AC2 than anything that gets labelled an RPG, including DA:I.

TW3 is a lot of fun but I agree, and I have to wonder why it gets that label. I've never really played AC but I've been told Shadow of Mordor is very similar as well. It makes me wonder if it's the fantasy elements rather than play style.

[Valkyrja]

You mean, like TW3? Because, again, that's clearly a game made primarily for the console, like TW2. With a series of features anathema to what is considered a to-line RPG on this forum, usually (e.g. re: DA:O). No companions. No tactical combat. No statistic-driven combat. Real-time, AC-esque combat. Limited reactivity. Scant variability in dialogue, paralleling ME3. 
 
I love TW3 - I think it's a phenomenal game. I just think its really funny when people cite it as a kind of preeminent example of what an RPG should be, when it has more in common with AC2 than anything that gets labelled an RPG, including DA:I.

I was thinking of how DA:O relied on poor console ports of the lead PC version to get to acceptable sales. These days I don't think treating that market that way would fly so yeah they would have to switch to having consoles as their lead platform like the Witcher.

Obviously that has far reaching consequences for the design.

[Majestic Jazz]

Nobody really cares, your the only one right now acting your trying to prove something

 

Correction, nobody on these forums care but the industry does.....the same industry that Bioware has to compete in. So while BSN might not care, I am sure that EA is looking at TW3's success very closely. If they aren't, then they are poor businessmen because any successful company is willing to recognize success of a competitor's product and make the steps to use it as a benchmark for their next product, in this case, Dragon Age 4. 

[midnight tea]

Correction, nobody on these forums care but the industry does.....the same industry that Bioware has to compete in. So while BSN might not care, I am sure that EA is looking at TW3's success very closely. If they aren't, then they are poor businessmen because any successful company is willing to recognize success of a competitor's product and make the steps to use it as a benchmark for their next product, in this case, Dragon Age 4. 

 

Well it's not like EA has never done poor business decisions...

[AresKeith]

Correction, nobody on these forums care but the industry does.....the same industry that Bioware has to compete in. So while BSN might not care, I am sure that EA is looking at TW3's success very closely. If they aren't, then they are poor businessmen because any successful company is willing to recognize success of a competitor's product and make the steps to use it as a benchmark for their next product, in this case, Dragon Age 4. 

 

Duh?

 

And I really wish would stop with the competition crap

[Majestic Jazz]

Duh?

 

And I really wish would stop with the competition crap

 

So competition is bad? The way I see it, as a Bioware fan, I am sort of glad for the success of TW3 as this will mean Bioware will try harder with DA4....which means we get a better product in the end. This is why Madden games have sucked the past decade, because there is no NFL2K/NFL Gameday/NFL Blitz/NFL Quarterback Club to compete with. Competition might suck and be stressful for developers/publishers, but we the consumers benefit from it.

[In Exile]

Correction, nobody on these forums care but the industry does.....the same industry that Bioware has to compete in. So while BSN might not care, I am sure that EA is looking at TW3's success very closely. If they aren't, then they are poor businessmen because any successful company is willing to recognize success of a competitor's product and make the steps to use it as a benchmark for their next product, in this case, Dragon Age 4. 

 

I'm not sure the industry really cares all that much. Who is really competing in the AAA "RPG" space these days besides Bioware, Bestheda and CDPR?

[AresKeith]

So competition is bad? The way I see it, as a Bioware fan, I am sort of glad for the success of TW3 as this will mean Bioware will try harder with DA4....which means we get a better product in the end. This is why Madden games have sucked the past decade, because there is no NFL2K/NFL Gameday/NFL Blitz/NFL Quarterback Club to compete with. Competition might suck and be stressful for developers/publishers, but we the consumers benefit from it.

 

Competition itself? no. But the fanbases acting like they need to be exactly like the other game because "it's more successful"? Yes

 

Are you sure the Madden games don't suck because there's really nothing left to add to them? 

[Majestic Jazz]

Competition itself? no. But the fanbases acting like they need to be exactly like the other game because "it's more successful"? Yes

 

Are you sure the Madden games don't suck because there's really nothing left to add to them? 

 

 I never said that Dragon Age 4 or any other game should be EXACTLY like Witcher 3. I have said in the past that there are aspects of TW3 that perhaps Bioware can learn from such as the quality of side quest and the atmosphere/approach of the open world. But I never said that any future WRPG should be exactly like Witcher 3. Hell, there are MANY things that CDPR should learn from Bioware such as better player customization. Also CDPR can learn from Bioware the better way to portray LGBT characters. The one gay/cross dresser character I saw in TW3 seemed to be there more as a jest than anything substantial. Perhaps going forward in Cyberpunk 2077, women and gays will be portrayed differently than they have been in the three Witcher games. So no, this isn't a 1-way street where TW3 is this almighty perfect game that all other WRPGs should bow down to. But it does do some things right and many gamers are noticing it. 

 

No game should be exactly like another game as uniqueness is what drives this industry, but that does not mean that some games can learn a thing or two from another game.

[Sabbatine]

Understood.

 
TW3 is a lot of fun but I agree, and I have to wonder why it gets that label. I've never really played AC but I've been told Shadow of Mordor is very similar as well. It makes me wonder if it's the fantasy elements rather than play style.

 

 

Considering Witcher 3 has far more meaningful decision making in the game than the previous two dragon age games I can't help but wonder if this post is intentional misdirection or true ignorance...  Neither combat style nor a fantasy setting are what make a game an rpg.

 

I don't consider Dragon Age: Inquisition a bad game, nor do I consider it a non-rpg, but someone who likes Dragon Age: Inquisition is hardly on a solid foundation when calling out Witcher 3 for not being rpg enough.

[Ariella]

Considering Witcher 3 has far more meaningful decision making in the game than the previous two dragon age games I can't help but wonder if this post is intentional misdirection or true ignorance...  Neither combat style nor a fantasy setting are what make a game an rpg.
 
I don't consider Dragon Age: Inquisition a bad game, nor do I consider it a non-rpg, but someone who likes Dragon Age: Inquisition is hardly on a solid foundation when calling out Witcher 3 for not being rpg enough.

I didn't find the choices all that meaningful. The only 'choice' I've run into so far wasn't one. The end of White Orchard where you're forced to kill and then it gets brought up in the Novagrad tavern.

What does make an rpg is the ability to customize your character and play YOUR character. Geralt isn't yours. His personality is defined by another. There's very little wiggle room in that. Dragon Age allows for those things. I'm not saying that TW3 is bad, but it's a lot closer to an adventure game than pure rpg.

[Aren]

DA:I sold like 1.4 million by now if I had to guess.

I don't know if it's true, generally EA/Bioware do not release their data ,i wish to know where the informations came from.

TW3 seems to have already sold 4 mln

[Sabbatine]

I didn't find the choices all that meaningful. The only 'choice' I've run into so far wasn't one. The end of White Orchard where you're forced to kill and then it gets brought up in the Novagrad tavern.

What does make an rpg is the ability to customize your character and play YOUR character. Geralt isn't yours. His personality is defined by another. There's very little wiggle room in that. Dragon Age allows for those things. I'm not saying that TW3 is bad, but it's a lot closer to an adventure game than pure rpg.

 

Geralt is as much mine as my Inquisitor.  He can be a mage, specced for slow attacks like a warrior, specced for fast attacks like a rogue, or a mix of all three... along with a fourth utilitarian spec option so I guess in a way you have even more customization with Geralt than you do in inquisition.  I say that in jest of course but there are also plenty of forced events in dragon age that occur no matter how you played the game or games previously.

 

Geralt's personality is no more defined than the Inquisitor.  I cannot in either game choose to drop my pants and urinate on the person I am speaking to at will or do anything else I feel my character should do, I am limited to the choices provided. Both games for the most part present decisions that boil down to one of two things happening and on rare occasion one of three or four things.  Do you want to play the level headed inquisitor that thinks through situations and usually only kills as a last resort?  Great!  You can do that with Geralt too.  Do you want to play the hot headed Geralt who kills for fun and doesn't apologize for it?  Well you can do the same with the Inquisitor.

 

I don't disagree with your statement about Witcher being more like an adventure game than an rpg but I do disagree that it is very much more an adventure game than Dragon Age: Inquisition.

[LinksOcarina]

DA:I sold like 1.4 million by now if I had to guess.

 

Sold 1.4 million on the first week, actually, but that is if VG chartz is to be believed,and it usually isn't.

 

That said...if it is true...by now it would probably be around the 3 million Mark presuming trajectory of sales and what not, as a rough estimate. 

 

If I recall, Origins had sales of (last confirmed) 3.2 million, which was in 2009/2010.

 

So for EA to call it a success...my guess is it is in line with Origins in terms of overall sales by the end of the Quarter, meaning its on the same trajectory for growth.

 

which is not a bad thing. Sales really are insignificant in pure numbers like that. Hell, look at CoD as the example. 

[Andraste_Reborn]

Geralt is as much mine as my Inquisitor.

 

I can see how other people might feel that way, but for me the inability to change the protagonist's gender, race, appearance or name is an impassable barrier to me enjoying The Witcher. (I'm not big on action-y combat, either, but I might have been able to get past that for a customisable character.)

[LinksOcarina]

 I never said that Dragon Age 4 or any other game should be EXACTLY like Witcher 3. I have said in the past that there are aspects of TW3 that perhaps Bioware can learn from such as the quality of side quest and the atmosphere/approach of the open world. But I never said that any future WRPG should be exactly like Witcher 3. Hell, there are MANY things that CDPR should learn from Bioware such as better player customization. Also CDPR can learn from Bioware the better way to portray LGBT characters. The one gay/cross dresser character I saw in TW3 seemed to be there more as a jest than anything substantial. Perhaps going forward in Cyberpunk 2077, women and gays will be portrayed differently than they have been in the three Witcher games. So no, this isn't a 1-way street where TW3 is this almighty perfect game that all other WRPGs should bow down to. But it does do some things right and many gamers are noticing it. 

 

No game should be exactly like another game as uniqueness is what drives this industry, but that does not mean that some games can learn a thing or two from another game.

 

You know, it's funny.

 

I agree on the uniqueness of the games, and what the Witcher does with their game is aggressive historical accuracy (to a point) on sex, women, and the like. I get that, and i'm fine with it, not every game should portray LGBT characters the same way, for example, otherwise it is just homogenizing the games fully. 

 

But honestly...the only trailer we have seen for Cyberpunk has a gorgeous, half-naked women in a blood-stained nightgown with random metal blades coming out of her arms and legs, as a bunch of SWAT officers point guns on her as it looks like she is about to cry.

 

I am trying to remember what was actually said, but I showed a friend of mine that and he laughed at it because of how ridiculous it all looked, and how disturbing it was to him because of the image. Not only was it not actual Cyberpunk in his eyes, but it was also felt like a pandering trailer, the semi-nude model, the guys in SWAT uniforms taking her down, and the fact that it had a strange pose to her body because of the metal bits. This is more or less his words. 

 

And this is not a social justice kind of guy and that can of worms either. This is someone who has more knowledge than I do when it comes to games and RPGs, and I like to think at least that I know what I am talking about from time to time.

 

Truth be told, I have low expectations for the Cyberpunk game. But good on them for at least trying it, it will probably be better than that weak Shadowrun game that came out. Knowing me, I will likely play it anyway eventually. 

[Ariella]

Geralt is as much mine as my Inquisitor.  He can be a mage, specced for slow attacks like a warrior, specced for fast attacks like a rogue, or a mix of all three... along with a fourth utilitarian spec option so I guess in a way you have even more customization with Geralt than you do in inquisition.  I say that in jest of course but there are also plenty of forced events in dragon age that occur no matter how you played the game or games previously.
 
Geralt's personality is no more defined than the Inquisitor.  I cannot in either game choose to drop my pants and urinate on the person I am speaking to at will or do anything else I feel my character should do, I am limited to the choices provided. Both games for the most part present decisions that boil down to one of two things happening and on rare occasion one of three or four things.  Do you want to play the level headed inquisitor that thinks through situations and usually only kills as a last resort?  Great!  You can do that with Geralt too.  Do you want to play the hot headed Geralt who kills for fun and doesn't apologize for it?  Well you can do the same with the Inquisitor.
 
I don't disagree with your statement about Witcher being more like an adventure game than an rpg but I do disagree that it is very much more an adventure game than Dragon Age: Inquisition.

Geralt isn't yours. Geralt was created with set characteristics and personality, and that cannot be altered. And yes, he IS more defined considering the fact he's a character from a novel series. He has to stay within the lines, unlike any of the DA PCs. And his spec doesn't matter. In DA people react differently to your choices when it comes to character. Mages and elves and Qunari are treated differently. Geralt is Geralt no matter what play through.

Then there's the lack of party mechanics which goes bavk to the old days of rpgs. Ultima had it until 8, but that was when the franchise crashed. The gold box games, Bard's Tale. The only big rpg of the time without was Quest for Glory. Bioware was the only other rpg company to create autonomous followers with personality, and they took it light years beyond Ultima.

I know I'm not going to convince you, but at the same time if you compare the two games to the big rpgs like BG, DA as a series comes a lot closer.

[AlanC9]

Successful in terms of public opinion. Just look at the user ratings on metacritic for TW3 then look at the user ratings for DAI.

If you say so, I guess. That's not really something I have any interest in judging. I care about whether I like a game, not whether others do. I do have an interest in profitability, though, since that's what determines if I get more games. As noted, CDPR has built-in advantages there, but that doesn't really matter either since relative profitability is irrelevant.

Edit: well, except that EA might decide to chase TW numbers. But that's a crapshoot anyway. There's stuff I like and stuff I don't like about TW, so the expected payoff is about zero. As opposed to chasing Skyrim, where my expected payoff was slightly negative, and I was right about that.