34 réponses à ce sujet

[Dutch's Ghost]

Anybody know the figures? Just recently CD announced that the Witcher franchise sold 20 million copies, 10 million being from Witcher 3.

How does DA compare?

[Steelcan]

probably not as highly, iirc DA2 tanked

 

but Origins and Inquisition likely have sold pretty well, probably not as well as ME but decently enough.  its not a contest between DA and TW series,

[Dutch's Ghost]

probably not as highly, iirc DA2 tanked

but Origins and Inquisition likely have sold pretty well, probably not as well as ME but decently enough. its not a contest between DA and TW series,

I'm guessing DA sold somewhere in between 10-20 million, same with ME.

[Addictress]

DA2 tanked?

I am disappointed. The world is truly blind and dumb.

[straykat]

I'm guessing DA sold somewhere in between 10-20 million, same with ME.

 

ME was 14 million across the series apparently.

 

They're pretty tight lipped on DA. DAI never made NPD charts.. While Witcher 3 did it two months in a row. Take that as you will.

 

I think if it was a great success, they'd brag about it more at the very least. I bet it cost more than Witcher 3 too (I think $80 million).

[ShadowLordXII]

DA2 tanked?

I am disappointed. The world is truly blind and dumb.

 

Nah, no one wants to waste their money on a rushed and heavily flawed game charged at full price. The initial sale numbers were high if I recall because no one knew about the disappointment that awaited them. They were expecting something as good or better than Origins and were flatly disappointed.

 

But hey? What do you expect when you rush the sequel and slash half of the content and possibilities that made the original great?

[Addictress]

Nah, no one wants to waste their money on a rushed and heavily flawed game charged at full price. The initial sale numbers were high if I recall because no one knew about the disappointment that awaited them. They were expecting something as good or better than Origins and were flatly disappointed.

But hey? What do you expect when you rush the sequel and slash half of the content and possibilities that made the original great?

Not rushed. Best writing in the series. I'm sorry you value "variable environments" higher than writing. :/

[ESTAQ99]

Nah, no one wants to waste their money on a rushed and heavily flawed game charged at full price. The initial sale numbers were high if I recall because no one knew about the disappointment that awaited them. They were expecting something as good or better than Origins and were flatly disappointed.

 

But hey? What do you expect when you rush the sequel and slash half of the content and possibilities that made the original great?

 

You are talking about DAI, aren't you? I mean, that's probably the reason why they never gave the the real numbers. They probably sold well by launching time because of the hype built on promising such a great game (or on the the wrong assumption that the game would resemble the video with the alpha content) then, very probably, sales tanked once the overwhelming avalanche of bad reviews from disappointed gamers started to roll on every website.

[Akrabra]

According to Vgchartz it sits at about 13 million physical copies, so i would estimate about 15 million copies.

 

http://www.vgchartz....name=Dragon Age

 

The only way we could ever get to know the actual number would be if EA told us. 

[Akrabra]

DA2 tanked?

I am disappointed. The world is truly blind and dumb.

It didn't tank, but Origin and DA:I sold more. Tank is when you sell under a million, as far as i know DA:II sold about 3 million copies.

[Shechinah]

You are talking about DAI, aren't you? I mean, that's probably the reason why they never gave the the real numbers. They probably sold well by launching time because of the hype built on promising such a great game (or on the the wrong assumption that the game would resemble the video with the alpha content) then, very probably, sales tanked once the overwhelming avalanche of bad reviews from disappointed gamers started to roll on every website.

 

I don't think that is the case. I am not so sure they would have bothered with a Game of the Year edition if that was true.
 

[XEternalXDreamsX]

DA2 definitely has some glaring flaws but it really depends on your expectations of DA after Origins.

I had a disappointing experience with DA Origins the first time around playing it. My two handed warrior had to stop mid swing because they would die from another party member. It doesn't sound like a big deal, but damn man, swing it! Of course, I had more time back then to play so I easily dropped it for other games.

It took a second round of hardcore gaming to enjoy it with an open mind. Learning about the world, gameplay, meta-gaming (example: Conner choice), BSN, and other things online. I had DA2 so I was able immediately begin the next game which helped my immersion.

DA2 lost a lot of Origin's charm but it was worth playing since I was already invested in the series. If this was my initial game, I would have not preordered Inquisition.

I would like to see the sales numbers though. I am worried that the DA series will be on the back burner for a while. I know that the new ME is coming Q1 2017 so I can basically rotate Bioware IPs as they are coming out plus the DLC lifeline.

I'm just worried that the new IP will take precedence over DA. Maybe it will be a good thing? As the DA IP comes to a close, they will already have cash flow from a new IP to take its place.

I'm sorry for the useless information but the DA sales results could show their next moves in the production of the series and possible future game (s).

[ShadowLordXII]

Not rushed. Best writing in the series. I'm sorry you value "variable environments" higher than writing. :/

 

8 months to a max of a year and a half development time isn't rushed? Stop denying the well-known facts and accept the writing on the wall like everyone else has.

 

We've been over this at other forums. Having a different and interesting idea doesn't cut it if the execution is flawed. DA2's execution was heavily flawed and lacking especially in Act 3. With more time, this could have been amended, but that didn't happen thanks to EA and bad priorities.

 

You are talking about DAI, aren't you? I mean, that's probably the reason why they never gave the the real numbers. They probably sold well by launching time because of the hype built on promising such a great game (or on the the wrong assumption that the game would resemble the video with the alpha content) then, very probably, sales tanked once the overwhelming avalanche of bad reviews from disappointed gamers started to roll on every website.

 

I meant DA2, I was under the impression that Inquistion sold fairly well even after launch.

[straykat]

 

 

We've been over this at other forums. Having a different and interesting idea doesn't cut it if the execution is flawed.

 

I'll give you that. Definitely flawed (and rushed).

 

But the idea manages to outweigh that fault for me. Hawke is the human commoner origin, in an urban environment, and a decidedly less epic story. I like it.. it's kind of ghetto. And one of the villains is as good as Loghain (Arishok). I don't have too much of a problem with Act 3, other than the goofiness/execution. I never expected to be a hero, and I don't know why anyone would. I think that's the root of a lot of hate. That it feels helpless. But it's just there to present the mage/templar problem. Not solve the problem. I hold more against DAI for basically ignoring the problem and just fast forwarding to another plot. And churning out more generic heroism, with a protag who has no real context to any of it.

[Akrabra]

Could we maybe avoid turning this into yet another DA:O vs DA:II vs DA:I. We all have our favourite, they are all decent games, but they are all flawed. Lets not pretend otherwise. 

[straykat]

Could we maybe avoid turning this into yet another DA:O vs DA:II vs DA:I. We all have our favourite, they are all decent games, but they are all flawed. Lets not pretend otherwise. 

 

I don't even think DAI is decent. Some parts are. I can only sustain some interest because I'm a DA fan in general.

 

I'm sorry...

 

Lets just talk about Witcher vs DA then

[Akrabra]

I don't even think DAI is decent. Some parts are. I can only sustain some interest because I'm a DA fan in general.

 

I'm sorry...

 

Lets just talk about Witcher vs DA then

Fair enough, and no thank you. Lets talk about the sales of the franchise, which is what this is about. 

[straykat]

Fair enough, and no thank you. Lets talk about the sales of the franchise, which is what this is about. 

 

Not much to say. Bioware can't even talk about numbers. They can only offer vague marketing prose that means little. Except to the gullible. Like people who also believe informercials.

[JWvonGoethe]

You are talking about DAI, aren't you? I mean, that's probably the reason why they never gave the the real numbers. They probably sold well by launching time because of the hype built on promising such a great game (or on the the wrong assumption that the game would resemble the video with the alpha content) then, very probably, sales tanked once the overwhelming avalanche of bad reviews from disappointed gamers started to roll on every website.

The pre-alpha content was leaked. I doubt there was a conspiracy by BioWare to mislead the public on that front. The footage was not intended to be seen outside of a single showing in a small auditorium. And to be fair, the game wasn't hugely different from the pre-alpha content anyway. The Crestwood quest itself ended up pretty different, but it's not like it was a completely different game in spirit from the one we ended up getting. In the released game we saw big choices and events that could be failed if you took too long, just not in the Crestwood area.

If you need any more convincing, look at how open BioWare were about the game in the weeks leading up to release. There was the EA Access program which let people play the game for free for 5 hours before buying. In addition to that, the review embargo was one whole week before release. You don't do those things if you are trying to mislead the public. BioWare declared their "show don't tell" marketing policy from day one and by and large they stuck to it.

As for the "avalanche" of negative user reviews, even before the game came out there was a massive campaign on 4chan to bombard websites with negative reviews. This was partly fueled by people still angry about Mass Effect 3's ending. User reviews on websites like Metacritic are not particularly reliable for that reason. If it's any indication at all of the game's relative reception by the players, DA:I has a similar completion rate to The Witcher 3 (this is going by PS4 trophy statistics - 23.7% vs 25.8% completion for each game respectively). According to howlongtobeat.com, both games have a main campaign that lasts about 45 hours, so it's a fair comparison.

[ShadowLordXII]

I'll give you that. Definitely flawed (and rushed).

 

But the idea manages to outweigh that fault for me. Hawke is the human commoner origin, in an urban environment, and a decidedly less epic story. I like it.. it's kind of ghetto. And one of the villains is as good as Loghain (Arishok). I don't have too much of a problem with Act 3, other than the goofiness/execution. I never expected to be a hero, and I don't know why anyone would. I think that's the root of a lot of hate. That it feels helpless. But it's just there to present the mage/templar problem. Not solve the problem. I hold more against DAI for basically ignoring the problem and just fast forwarding to another plot. And churning out more generic heroism, with a protag who has no real context to any of it.

 

Hawke's rags to riches and character was a good aspect. However, the whole commoner aspect is undermined when you recall that Hawke is heir to the Amell fortunes and eldest son to a late powerful mage-mercenary. Most of the story was good, especially Act 2, but Act 3 is where everything fell apart. The writers tried to apply a "helpless narrative" to a story which has already established its scope with protagonist whose powerful and makes his own fate. Then they pull the rug out and suddenly force both Hawke and the player into a dark vs dark conflict for the sake of drama. Myself and others didn't expect to solve the mage-templar war, but we also didn't expect to be forced into a crazy fest between two sides without being able to face this conflict on our own terms. Like...flipping off both sides or just leaving Kirkwall all together. The writers forgot that the story has to be balanced with player interactivity and agency or the player loses investment in playing the game.

 

That's before we even talk about the cuts to gameplay; rpg aspects like equipment, specializations, and inventory; and other instances of forced drama (most obvious with the siblings and the prologue).

 

That's what I mean about having a good idea with bad execution. An idea is only as good as you develop it, as good as you pitch it and as good as you execute it. That's why there's the saying that "any story can be interesting/good, It just depends on how its told."  That's why Da2's sales dipped after its launch, because the first wave of players saw DA2's flaws and then made others aware via word of mouth so that they're more informed about what DA2 was. 

[thebigbad1013]

I can understand the interest in knowing the sales numbers for Dragon Age, but why oh why does it have to be compared to The Witcher? Yes, both series are rpgs, but all of these Dragon Age vs. The Witcher threads are getting tiresome.

 

As for the Dragon Age 2 stuff, the game tried to do some things that I really enjoyed, especially with the more personal story instead of the classic "saving the world". I also very much enjoyed seeing the companions evolve over time and watching the friendships grow and develop. The game certainly had its issues, I'm not denying that, but I still maintain that it had a lot of strong points too, and I really enjoyed the fact that they tried to do something different with it.

[ESTAQ99]

The pre-alpha content was leaked. I doubt there was a conspiracy by BioWare to mislead the public on that front. The footage was not intended to be seen outside of a single showing in a small auditorium. And to be fair, the game wasn't hugely different from the pre-alpha content anyway. The Crestwood quest itself ended up pretty different, but it's not like it was a completely different game in spirit from the one we ended up getting. In the released game we saw big choices and events that could be failed if you took too long, just not in the Crestwood area.

If you need any more convincing, look at how open BioWare were about the game in the weeks leading up to release. There was the EA Access program which let people play the game for free for 5 hours before buying. In addition to that, the review embargo was one whole week before release. You don't do those things if you are trying to mislead the public. BioWare declared their "show don't tell" marketing policy from day one and by and large they stuck to it.

As for the "avalanche" of negative user reviews, even before the game came out there was a massive campaign on 4chan to bombard websites with negative reviews. This was partly fueled by people still angry about Mass Effect 3's ending. User reviews on websites like Metacritic are not particularly reliable for that reason. If it's any indication at all of the game's relative reception by the players, DA:I has a similar completion rate to The Witcher 3 (this is going by PS4 trophy statistics - 23.7% vs 25.8% completion for each game respectively). According to howlongtobeat.com, both games have a main campaign that lasts about 45 hours, so it's a fair comparison.

 

Regarding your first paragraph, I could have agree with you if the alpha content was showed in a convention in 1992. Bioware as any other game developer knows pretty well that these showings will be liked because people come to those places with recording devices and whatever the content, it will be spread fast and will create understandable hype about said upcoming game. I don't get how you can say that the game ended up not being too different from the alpha content. It was like two different games setup in a similar world.

 

No one can have a real idea about a game playing it for 5 hours. The majority of casual gamers weren't even aware of these free tries or demos. Regarding professional reviewers, I can only say they either may get paid by developers to give these ridiculous misleadingly great review or they just watch some videos and base their reviews on them. I'm sorry but based on their highly praised reviews of so many mediocre games, I can't trust them.

 

I'm sorry but the reality is that no matter which website you try (this very forum not excluded), the majority of customer's reviews for DAI were horrible. I won't believe in a conspiracy theory of angry ME gamers. it doesn't make sense.

[The Baconer]

DID YOU GUYS KNOW THAT THE WITCHER IS A GAME

[vertigomez]

Does it matter? DA4's still gonna be greenlit. (Greenlighted? I can't words.)

[Geth Supremacy]

I am extremely interested to see how the next dragon age game does coming off of Inquisition.  People say DA2 was bad and I won't even argue that even though there were parts that I liked in DA2 and I bought both games.  I think Inquisition was the last straw for a lot of people in many different ways and I want to see the results.