greylord

Per EA (a somewhat more reliable source than volo et alia parroting how ME2 sold a billionty billion copies!!! FACT!!!) ME2 had only sold 1.6 million units after three months, a full million less than DAO had at a similar time. I'd suspect either Baldurs Gate game/ NWN or KOTOR made more absolute profit even if it was distributed to a lot more parties as licenced IP/ publisher deals since the teams that made them were far smaller than those that made any of Bioware's recent games. Funny seeing everyone and their dog was saying they sold more than this after the first MONTH (some would say week) of ME2's release. I'll even give several sources http://www.1up.com/news/mass-effect-2-week-sales http://www.mcvuk.com/news/37369/Mass-Effect-sales-top-2m No matter how many times you repeat this, doesn't make it any more true...still is false from what I can tell. Of course those sales are related to those copies shipped verses those reported sold via retail...which is where you 1.6 mil copies come in...but in retail ME2 sold MORE than DA:O over the same time period...so your argument is still rather defunct. In PC sales during that period ME2 sold ~600K copies with Xbox360 selling ~900K copies...and were listed in the top 3 selling games for both and overall. DA:O did not make an appearance in the top 3 during that time period. (edit: Though DA:O was #1 right after it's release for a platform...the period of ME2's release it DA:O didn't make an appearance in top 3 For more information....ME2 had shipped/sold 2/3 the number of copies within the first month that DA:O had done already. OF course the releases were so close that basically they were almost overlapping in sales...but DA:O had the benefit of HOLIDAY sales which ME2 did not...and made ME2 even a bigger shock in some ways. When comparing RETAIL sales for the same amounts of time (a quarter after DA:O was released compared to ME2 was released) for US NUMBERS...the amount appears that DA:O sold 1.3 retail copies (vs. shipped, which was around 3.2 million...at the same period which was ME2's 2 million) compared to when the equivalent time had passed for ME2 being 1.6 (though my math shows 1.5) million copies sold at retail. We don't know full numbers of foreign sales...so with those included it's possible DA:O actually did sell more than ME2...but only EA and Bioware would know that answer. From what they've been doing with DA2....the indications are that ME2 actually sold more worldwide than DA:O...but that's only an educated guess.

The Red Queen and the knights for starters...and who says she couldn't ressurect the mad Hatter and the Jabberwock because...well she's the Red queen...get some pawns and advance them!

[sarcasm] Yep, that game day release DRM (and it's less then what it originally was even) for the PC really helped stop the pirates from getting this one. Obviously it was so effective since everyone knows PC games are the biggest piracy focus (despite the fact that I can buy whatever console game pirated I want, if I wished, in asia...but not so for PC...the logic against PC piracy is really screwy). Glad they prevented it from being leaked or released because their DRM is so effective at stopping pirates. [/sarcasm] Just my two cents on the issue of leakage and the entire "we need to put DRM, or at least date activations on the PC version to help prevent piracy" idea.

I'm sure that all the people Activision has laid off are happy with your assessment. Just because (some) publishers are doing really well by slashing all but 2-3 product lines doesn't mean that the industry is in a good shape. But yeah, I have a rule, I try not to argue with fanatics, it's useless, and I'm definitely breaking it talking to you. Well, as I said, it makes no sense locking the door once the pirate is already in the house, unless you want to stop the police from helping you out. As for any problems with some publishers...most of the time it's not because of pirates, but because people didn't buy their games for the REAL reason (the game they made stunk...OR they give them reasons not to buy the game...such as I not buying some DRM games on PC since I don't want to put up with the headache. That's why a lot of my gaming has moved to consoles currently, thus far they haven't given the headache out, though some of them are starting to move in that direction).

Exactly. In this case, as in Starcraft II's case, it's like the burgular is already in your house. So you're going to lock the door...what's that going to do...simply make it so the police can't come help you? Smart move. As for second hand sales...since hardly anyone sells second hand anymore, I guess they got that done. I don't really think that helped them sell anymore games either though...so that's kind of stupid as well. The only thing I can think of is trying to cheat the law (well, in Britain...I believe everyone has the right to back up their games for PERSONAL and PRIVATE usage...DRM may make the game makers feel as if they can cheat the law in that arena). I think the only thing DRM has done is to increase the number of pirated games or move more people to consoles where they don't have to worry about DRM (yet).

I'm not getting any version. I'm just anti-DRM and find the reasons for it rather lacking. I feel it actually hurts sales (stops people like me from even getting the game, it's the number one turn off), and if the pirates already have the game...stopping pirates with it is pretty false of a reason. AKA...there's no real reason for it except stupidity.

So the pirates already have the game... Are they going to be putting piracy protection on it then...aka DRM... Or do they still think it's going to stop the pirates? I'd think it would be kind of ridiculous...seeing the pirates got it before the legit customers... But hey...DRM seems to be the in thing...why not hurt the customer and force them to turn to the pirates free version...which apparantly is now out before the real version anyways.

Well, I got Dragon Age, Dragon Age:Origins, on PC and PS3, just got the Ultimate Editions for both as well. I got Mass Effect for the PC...had to hack that one...as I DO NOT AGREE WITH DRM...and almost didn't get Mass Effect 2 because of Mass Effects DRM. I don't like having to hack my own games...aka...my gaming PC isn't on the Internet. I did get Mass Effect 2 though (great game)...but DRM is a BAD thing. From what I hear, this means they'll lose at least a sale to me for Dragon Age 2 on PC. I'll buy it for the PS3 though. In that light, DRM killed the PC market. 5 years ago at most Walmarts you could have a PC game shelf that was one to two shelves. Three years ago you typically at least had one to 3/4's of a shelf (shelf meaning the entire row there) devoted to PC games. These days...you're lucky if you have 1/4 shelf if that at a typical Walmart or department store. You can literally see the shrinking market...and I don't buy how big the d/l market for PC games is. In a recent study it showed how offbase sellers were in relation to the consumer...less then 50% wanted something as disposable...they wanted something that they could hold and share with friends. For example...I'm more likely to download applications for the Ipod touch/Ipad than I am to download a gamer's game for the PC that I have to pay for. I'm more likely to download ebooks even...and I'd say I'm one of those that would have answered favorably on the survey (if I had been asked) in relation to downloads. DRM killed the PC market and relative sales...NOT PIRATES. Pirates were never buying the game to begin with. When you shut off and scare off your own customers...that's when you lose sales and kill the market.

definately Dragon Age 2 Mass Effect 2 (for PS3) Dungeon Siege III Torchlight 2 Mass Effect III Maybe...depending on how it turns out Diablo III Starcraft II Expansion X-men Destiny

As long as someone mentioned the BGDA series and the Champions of Norrath series, I should also note the X-men Legends series and Marvel Ultimate Alliance series. Of those Marvel Ultimate Alliance and X-Men Legends 2 are the best for Co-op and on par with Champions of Norrath!

Is Diablo III actually Diablo III, or just a game they happened to make with a storyline continuing from Diablo II? Hmmm, well, change happens and sometimes is good, but change it too much and you have something entirely different rather than something that builds on what you had in the past. Maybe this is going to be a Diablo/WOW/whatever clone? The change in attributes I think would be more unnecessary (if the auto assign idea still is going through) anyways... Hopefully the game is still great...I'm just getting a wee bit more wary of some of the things and direction they've taken.

I wonder how this tactic would work for other luxturies. If a resturant changed $60 for a meal that tasted like crap on purpose, would it become one of the most popular resturants ever? Ask Burger King... Though it is cheaper than that...they'll get it out of you after about 10 of their meals...

With LA, what I want is a new version of X-wing or another one of that series. One of the Awesomest series ever by LA. After that...how about a REAL KOTOR III, not some MMO?

AP Alpha Protocol? I leave the disk in the console...does it run without the disk being in it? Is the PC version Disk Free

Err, what? What are these new adventures better than Grim Fandango, Monkey Island etc. Forget that, name me one landmark adventure in the last 5 years and you win a cookie. Beyond Good and Evil was considered pretty landmark, different approach than many of the more recent ones though with a more cartoony approach.

I don't really follow that portion of gaming...so I guess you are right? In that light maybe PC gaming has really taken off for one segment of society...

Because all the game producers and developers are now making their games for consoles whilst the PC normally only get's the port? Much bigger selection (heck, my PS3 has a bigger selection than the PC and it's supposed to be the loser in this generation of consoles), and many more games you can find on the consoles not available on PC means that the gaming chioces are much better for consoles these days. It's only the rare PC game (SCII) that is both worth time and is any good that is found on the PC and not the console. The biggest draw for PC games now are the indie games...and there's an equal draw for them via the Iphone and Cell phones these days too. It used to be the PC market was big enough and strong enough that the ports went the other way (PC games were PORTED to consoles)...now days though...and actually for the past few years...it's always been console games getting ported to the PC instead. (there was the rare exception with the C&C games though, and some would contest whether Dragon Age was a console Port or a PC port...but overall normally it's the PC getting the console port...and it's obvious).

it's an X-box...it happens these days. This isn't the first time, and it's happened many times previously. X-box games get patched these days...it's an MS thing. Don't like it...buy a Wii...of course then you wouldn't be playing F:NV on it either. I don't like the idea either...anymore than I like Steam...but that's how things happen. Live with it.

Yeah, but I rented it at Blockbuster, and it's due back tomorrow. Then can you guess what to do? Buy the game if you like it or don't. But please don't assume that we care about corrupted files as if they were a tragedy. Well if they patch it, will my save work, or would I still have to start over? I don't know. I DO know that they are currently aware of the problem and seem to be working on it. Whether their patch (when it comes out) makes it so you can play from the save, or if the save is irretrievable at this point is completely unknown to me.

Actually, I believe it's higher than that for the drug use. People keep putting their heads in the sand about the state of PC games...it's amazing how much in denial many are. Steam can make money due to the cutting out of middle men, but the numbers are pretty bad in relation to what they were many years ago for the PC gamer. It's still pretty healthy for consoles though.

Oh man, that stinks.

The guys in charge of STEAM which sells 25% of PC game sales today... But that 25% of sales today is equal to 2% of sales yesterday? Meaning the market for 100% of the sales today is less then 10% of the sales yesterday? Oh yes... I see how Valve is at the forefront of it...the forefront of the crash that is...

Ahhhhh, I thought it was unlikely that I was the first to discover and post it. thanks for the heads up. Those are high requirements? My gaming rig is a year old already and it has 8 Gig of RAM, a better video card, and basically can qualify to run the game easily. Here I was worrying whether my computer would be good enough or not...and these requirements won't even test it. Thanks for the information though.

I agree, the gaming market IS dying with quality games, at least for the PC. Part of that is that the PC producers killed the market. In their angst about Piracy, they inflicted such drastic measures to stop it, that they stopped legit customers from buying games. Online doesn't account for even part of what retail still can sell, but these days a majority of major games for the PC are sold online. It used to be that you could go to a Game store, or Walmart, and have an entire row of PC games...these days you are lucky if you get a shelf and a half. The days of PC games is dead already overall. Part of the decline then is that there are less gold standard PC games being made. When you have more games being created, you have more chances for great games to come about. You had a ton of games being made in the late 90s and early 00s for PC...but those days are past. You still get gems in the water however...but these are now normally catered to older and mature audiences, instead of the more teen and twenties audiences of yesteryear...perhaps because those same teens and twenty year olds are now the twenty, thirty, and forty year olds of today. You still get classic games being made however. The Indie scene is hotter then ever, and some of the small games are rising...and are MORE suitable to the online distribution model than the Gold Standard games are. I'll download an Indie game that's free...and that is small enough to download in seconds to minutes before PAYING to download a Full sized game that will still take 30 minutes to d/l on my 1 MB/sec internet (slowed to who knows what, NOT on MY SIDE...but the d/l servers don't go faster than some speeds apparantly...) and then refuse to work until they continuously update themselves...etc. You still get a few Gold Standard games I think will stand the test of time as well. I think Dragon Age Origins is good enough to stand the test of time...I think Torchlight is an up and coming franchise that MAY stand a chance depending on what happens with Torchlight 2. They are fewer and farther between though. Last one before those that really struck me as great was Sins of the Solar Empire. However, with the indie games you are getting small hits that take off on their own, but classics in a different way (Mine craft may stand a chance of this...hard to say). The big scene now days is on the consoles...but I think they have degraded in quality as well. Prime example is the Final Fantasy series. FF XIII looked better then any FFXIII before it...but the gameplay was deplorable overall in comparison to the others. It was just...lacking. You still get classics...but with the consoles it seems that they are pumping out SO MANY GAMES that there is a TON of junk out there that is just dross. On the otherhand with so much being released there are games that I think are up there in quality and will last for years...if not decades. They are building fanbases that will be just as devoted as the Diablo and SFC and BG fans of today. Super Street Fighter IV is a sequel...but it's going well with it's fans. Resonance of Fate was an OUTSTANDING GAME which I think will have a bunch of hardcore fans in it's niche spot...even if it never hits it big like some other games. So I think overall you are correct, especially in regards to PC games...but I don't think that means no quality games are being made. They are still out there and being made. The Witcher series is another that people are pretty in love with...though that fits my description above of games being made for the older and more mature audiences today as opposed to what was done in the past. So I agree with you for the most part...but with reservation PS: ON Starcraft II...on my second copy already due to their stupid DRM policies and computers...I have to say that the gameplay for SCII is MUCH better the the original SC in my opinion. However, I think the DRM that they've put on it, or at least the protection policies have done MORE harm then good. I for one probably will NOT get the sequels/expansions simply due to the pain that this first one has been with authentications, playing SP online...etc. However I feel that if it weren't for the DRM...and maybe even with it...it is all the greatness of a Gold Standard game. DOW II COULD have been an epic game...but the DRM for it killed that thought completely. I see it already dying if not dead in the PC world in relation to other games...but it's older brother...the original DOW...I still play that one.

Yup, see: www.ageofempiresonline.com I played the demo at the gamescom, the gameplay is exactly like AoE2, 4 resources (stone is back) and gather points are in use again, and you can garrison units in towers :D. But we are getting offtopic now! True, but it sounds interesting what you are bringing up. Back on topic, I liked DS1 and DS2. I don't feel DS2 destroyed the franchise, and in fact feel it built it to be better for the SP portion. There are some things I probably would have changed for the MP portion, but I still think it was a really good game. DS2 wasn't a bad game, but the multiplayer was weak, after 2 plays, I was played out. In DS1, I found a secret area I have never seen before a few months ago. I still occassionally play DS1, I haven't touched DS2 for 2 years now. Ironically I'm more of the opposite. I'll occasionally pick up DS2, but I haven't actually played DS1 in a while. I tried to pick it up a few weeks ago...that lasted all of about an hour. LOA...probably will never touch that again. I think I may have even tossed that one away to tell the truth. If I didn't, I don't know where it is. Didn't like ANY of the DS expansions that have been made. 1 or 2. I'll probably touch DS1 occasionally, but hardly as much as I'll play through DS2. DS1 is great for the music, and MP, which is where DS2 fails...but DS2 is better for overall gameplay in my book. I think I had explored almost all of the DS1 areas pretty quickly. They had more for MP however...but the SP game really was boring for me after the first play through. Probably because it played itself FAR more than 2 did...it was like watching a bunch of people do everything instead of you. Interesting idea at first, but then very boring. You COULD get that in DS2 with the proper settings, but I really didn't like it in DS1 soooooooo..... I know, you could jump around in DS1...but after the tenth time of trying to reign everyone in, or having to run away simply so you could get everyone to regroup around you instead of running off like chickens with their heads cut off...it annoyed me to say the least. I preferred parties of solo (myself) if playing the other campaigns without MP...simply because of the party dynamics in DS1. MAYBE, MAYBE one companion.