Dungeon Siege III ships 820K units.

[Labadal]

Read this on neoGAF:

 

NA: 320k

EU: 480k

JP: 20k

 

Deus Ex: Human Revolution shipped two million units in the two weeks following its release in August, and that's just about where it remained throughout September. As part of its six-month earnings report today, Square Enix provided a brief update on its best-selling title for the April-September window, saying the Eidos Montreal-developed title shipped 2.18 million units during the period.

 

Though Square Enix seemed pleased with Deux Ex's performance, the company's overall earnings for the first half of its fiscal year were mixed. Revenues continued their slide, with net sales for the April-September period falling 15 percent year-over-year to

[WorstUsernameEver]

It was shipped as expected.. damn that's really not a good number.

 

Just for comparison: Alpha Protocol was 700k (shipped). Squenix expected to ship 1mil+.

[C2B]

It was shipped as expected.. damn that's really not a good number.

 

Just for comparison: Alpha Protocol was 700k (shipped). Squenix expected to ship 1mil+.

 

Sales "expectations" are normally higher than actual sales/shipments. So, its not a big difference. And Alpha Protocol cost a LOT more than DSIII. In every way. Theres not even remotly a comparison here.

 

From what I see it did okish.(Even neogafs comments are mostly positive on that number. NEOGAF)

 

Edit: According to a comment there DSIII even had a much higher (15% more) shipped/sale rate than DX.

Edited November 4, 2011 by C2B

[Flouride]

It was shipped as expected.. damn that's really not a good number.

 

Just for comparison: Alpha Protocol was 700k (shipped). Squenix expected to ship 1mil+.

 

Sales "expectations" are normally higher than actual sales/shipments. So, its not a big difference. And Alpha Protocol cost a LOT more than DSIII. In every way. Theres not even remotly a comparison here.

 

From what I see it did okish.(Even neogafs comments are mostly positive on that number. NEOGAF)

 

Edit: According to a comment there DSIII even had a much higher (15% more) shipped/sale rate than DX.

 

Aye, Alpha Protocol had way more people working on it and a longer development time. And those "shipped" numbers don't cover digital sales at all. So I would say it wasn't exactly what Squeenix was hoping for, but most likely decent amount that they might make little profit from the game.

[C2B]

It was shipped as expected.. damn that's really not a good number.

 

Just for comparison: Alpha Protocol was 700k (shipped). Squenix expected to ship 1mil+.

 

Sales "expectations" are normally higher than actual sales/shipments. So, its not a big difference. And Alpha Protocol cost a LOT more than DSIII. In every way. Theres not even remotly a comparison here.

 

From what I see it did okish.(Even neogafs comments are mostly positive on that number. NEOGAF)

 

Edit: According to a comment there DSIII even had a much higher (15% more) shipped/sale rate than DX.

 

Aye, Alpha Protocol had way more people working on it and a longer development time.

 

Not to mention all the costs for the dialouge sequences/cinematics (including things like Motion Capture), UE3 licensing, some high profile voice actors and so on.

Edited November 4, 2011 by C2B

[Wombat]

That said, I cannot but notice how unpopular DSIII is in Steam's stats even after the release of the DLC. Sadly, business-wise, it seem to be much better to make a solid online experience rather than offering story-focused DLCs with a certain intervals - at least, for a game like DSIII. In fact, Boarderlands, Dungeon Defenders, and Dead Islands appear to be quite popular. Let's see how Diablo III turns out.

 

Well, at least, the latter scheme worked fine with FONV. The trend of information industry tends to go for money-milking schemes have been quite strong. In fact, I have stumbled upon an interesting blog article, which probably sheds light on the trend to some extent. While I'm not totally happy with the world filled with money-milking schemes from online trades to MMORPGs but the points of the author is more than understandable.

[Flouride]

That said, I cannot but notice how unpopular DSIII is in Steam's stats even after the release of the DLC. Sadly, business-wise, it seem to be much better to make a solid online experience rather than offering story-focused DLCs with a certain intervals - at least, for a game like DSIII. In fact, Boarderlands, Dungeon Defenders, and Dead Islands appear to be quite popular. Let's see how Diablo III turns out.

 

The game was somewhat popular when it was originally released and even weeks after that. The DLC however was released without any real notification and I'm sure half of the people don't even know it's out.

[Wombat]

Er...you know, we are not living on making games and don't need to face the reality but, for the designers, the story is probably different. It seems, at least, the most of people don't seem to want story for a game like DSIII, which is what I gathered from browsing. I thought Japanese gamers, who are more accustomed to story-focused CRPGs may be interested in the game but, as it seems, core action gamers are much more picky than I thought. I haven't played Souls series but if DSIII and Dark Souls are at the same price range, it's not tough to imagine what Japanese action gamers would say about DSIII. Although waned by net gaming, it doesn't necessarily mean that Japanese console market is easy to penetrate into.

 

In AAA game market, Obsidian need to fight toe to toe against games supported by enormous funding. While Obsidian have to match the expectation to the product value of AAA games, at the same time, they must keep their originality in order not to be buried in the sea of similar products. They are quite successful with FONV but the same scheme don't seem to have turned out well with DSIII. Probably, they shouldn't have made a Dungeon Siege sequel, but I don't think they have a plenty of choices in offered contracts.

[pmp10]

It seems, at least, the most of people don't seem to want story for a game like DSIII, which is what I gathered from browsing. I thought Japanese gamers, who are more accustomed to story-focused CRPGs may be interested in the game but, as it seems, core action gamers are much more picky than I thought.

This has nothing to do with the story itself but the way it was handled.

You shouldn't break the flow of an action game with fetch quest, long exposition and moral choices.

[Tigranes]

It's weird how both AP & DS3 had sales expectation of 1 million though AP must have cost so much more, yes.

 

Now we know AP's 700k shipped was pretty terrible. Does that mean DS3 had a fairly high expectation and 820k shipped is 'OK'? Sales-wise Obsidian's been doing very well throughout its history and AP is the only true bomb in that respect, but we know that in this industry even one or two underperformers can really hurt.

 

I don't think DS3 selling lower than expected had to do with story, by the way. There are plenty of games out there that mix story with action. I think that attitude is actually down to our own position as CRPG gamers - from our point of view we know what a 'proper' CRPG story is, quest is, setting is, gameplay is, etc - so (1) we judge DS3's story from that perspective, (2) we judge DS3's action gameplay from that perspective, (3) we have a particular way of thinking about ARPGs as a genre. For a different type of gamer, it's actually a very natural and positive thing to pick a game up, start swinging swords and find that there's a story on, too.

 

I think the difficult reception AP/DS3 had is actually down to quite similar reasons, broadly speaking. Obsidian's games, historically, all suffer from similar Achilles' heels. E.g. They have a weak beginning which is either boring or confusing, both in terms of story / level progression and introducing gameplay in a fun and understandable way. When you make something like NWN2 this won't hurt you as much, because you are targeting the game at an established fanbase - who know what they are meant to get out of that game 5 hours down the line so are more willing to sit this out. When you pick up a game and you don't really know what it's going to be or you expect something different to begin with (i.e. AP and the half million people who expected Splinter Cell or something), then that becomes a much bigger problem.

 

Ironically, we know that AP suffered from a horribly long dev period with lots of two step forward one step back, while with DS3 they tried to be efficient, think small, think tight. Certainly DS3 is a lot more polished and bug free. But I think they still share project management level problems as well that translated into the mixed reception. I don't agree that AP didn't know what it was about - it knew exactly what it was about and had a philosophy running right through it, as did DS3. The problem is that if you examine that identity, the way they arrived at that identity is rather.. odd. E.g. if you accept that AP is a stat-based multi-solution spy game where a big chunk of gameplay occurs through conversations & decisions, it's a fantastic game. But that's a complicated concept that lies in the mdidle of various valleys and in the end AP, whether in the game itself or through the hype/whatever, was unable to convince many people that such a concept is a good one, or even that that is the concept. Thus you see people that think AP doesn't know what it is, etc. I think it was the same with DS3.

 

What's the consequences? I thought AP was a brilliant game and DS3 a decent, fun one. I want Obsidian to make sure they keep on making proper CRPGs but I'm also excited about these unique mixes they keep coming up with. The challenge is how do you make such mixes speak to your audience, so that they will judge your game by your standards. Because that (a) gets better reviews & sales, but also (b) helps people have more fun with your game. I don't know how much of that is down to the game itself, and whether games like DXHR did something that AP/DS3 could not.

[Pidesco]

DS3 only problem was one of perception, I think. Everyone was expecting a Diablo clone when instead it's really a Secret of Mana clone. In any case I'd say its combat design is the best in any PC action RPG I've seen. The only real fault it has is ranged combat, as the aiming is problematic.

[Zoma]

And camera. Terrible terrible camera.

[Pidesco]

In single player and two player co-op I didn't run into any problems with the camera. From complaints, I understand the problems are with 4 player co-op.

[C2B]

DS3 only problem was one of perception, I think. Everyone was expecting a Diablo clone when instead it's really a Secret of Mana clone. In any case I'd say its combat design is the best in any PC action RPG I've seen. The only real fault it has is ranged combat, as the aiming is problematic.

 

Basically this for me too + Online Co-op. (It has other problems too but they are mostly "in need of improvment" rather than big faults.)

Edited November 7, 2011 by C2B

[Zoma]

I encountered lots of problems with camera in SP campaign. Namely in the caves where the walls doesn't disappear and the camera perception is forced to bounce upclose to your character in the middle of combat. Its frustrating.

[WDeranged]

I wanted the game to do well for Obsidian as it's solidly coded and well thought out, ultimately I didn't buy it as the characters and world felt flat to me, I never got into the first two games so I just didn't have the connection

 

I'm glad the game seems to have done "ok" at least.

[Pidesco]

I encountered lots of problems with camera in SP campaign. Namely in the caves where the walls doesn't disappear and the camera perception is forced to bounce upclose to your character in the middle of combat. Its frustrating.

 

 

That happened to me a few times in the caves and only in the caves. I wasn't much bothered by it.

[Volourn]

Not even a million. That's got to be a dissapointing fo a company desperately trying to be relevant in the main stremas amrket - espicially consideirng that FO:LV sold 4-5mil copies. Then again, FO:LV is a much better overall game than the last two Obsidian games.

 

820k is a fail no matter hwo it is spinned,. Even if it ends up with a minimal profit, SS will likely see it as a failure since the goal for companies is not to somply surive game to game but to propser so you can handle flat out bombs.

[C2B]

Not even a million. That's got to be a dissapointing fo a company desperately trying to be relevant in the main stremas amrket - espicially consideirng that FO:LV sold 4-5mil copies. Then again, FO:LV is a much better overall game than the last two Obsidian games.

 

820k is a fail no matter hwo it is spinned,. Even if it ends up with a minimal profit, SS will likely see it as a failure since the goal for companies is not to somply surive game to game but to propser so you can handle flat out bombs.

 

First off 4-5 Million+ sold like Bethesda games do is exceptional for RPG games. Period.

 

Secondly, you don't know that. You don't know if it was a fail. Like at all. Comparably with how other big comparable games do after ~3 Months its actually doing well/average.

 

Of course we don't know if it will be enough for Square to continue we don't know. That's in the Future

 

Fake Edit: The number generally (outside of this place and a very few others) isn't badly recived at all. If you visit the neogaf link you'll see that nearly all comments about the number was positive. Considering how Neogaf recieved that game they would have just loved the oppertunity to go Boooomb on it.

[Wombat]

I've gotten an impression that a close-up over the shoulder camera mode might have helped than the misleading top-down one since the view is quite common in successful PC ports - I think it's a sweet spot for PC/console control scheme (Haven't played Dragon Age 2 but it appears like it took this view, too). In fact, with the top-down view mode, I felt like playing an old school shooter, in which I, personally, don't find any fun.

 

Also, I noticed some Japanese reviewers regard non-boss fights as a routine grinding process rather than fun hack&slash. Furthermore, I haven't come across to a single Japanese review which complains about the story (Then don't even talk about the story - so there are no complaints or praises). That said, the majority of the complaint is about that there are not many things to do after the rather short campaign is completed and, of course, the lack of variety in the multi-player mode area, which are common in player reviews in their western counterparts.

 

Secondly, you don't know that. You don't know if it was a fail. Like at all. Comparably with how other big comparable games do after ~3 Months its actually doing well/average.

No. We don't know the view of SE on the sales figures but the release of DLC seems to have been accepted rather...silently for a successful game. If I hadn't been tracking Obsidian games, I wouldn't have noticed the release at all.

[C2B]

Secondly, you don't know that. You don't know if it was a fail. Like at all. Comparably with how other big comparable games do after ~3 Months its actually doing well/average.

No. We don't know the view of SE on the sales figures but the release of DLC seems to have been accepted rather...silently for a successful game. If I hadn't been tracking Obsidian games, I wouldn't have noticed the release at all.

 

Yes, that was weird. Though, during the time of announcement till release there was a big marketing push for Deus Ex + DLC. So, maybe they just wanted to focus on what would (logically) sell more in the end due to sales and critical reception.

 

+ DSIII wasn't the meatiest game so people that already liked DSIII are more likely to buy the DLC.

 

Of course, thats more or less speculation.

 

And I disagree on the top down vs third person debate. I would agree that probably more people like 3rd person but I prefer top down nearly all the time when it comes to my hack n'slash. On all plattforms since SNES days (of course back then nothing else was possible except first). (Though I would rather have it more zoomed out than in DSIII. Third Person was the worst thing about Witcher 2 and gave me a lot of confusion.

Edited November 8, 2011 by C2B

[Starwars]

Here's my take on the situation.

 

DS3 fallsshort of sales expectations unfortunately. Creation of one DLC was baked into the original contract for the game, thus we get Treasure of the Sun. SE however doesn't feel it's worth it finanically speaking spending the PR money on it.

[C2B]

Here's my take on the situation.

 

DS3 fallsshort of sales expectations unfortunately. Creation of one DLC was baked into the original contract for the game, thus we get Treasure of the Sun. SE however doesn't feel it's worth it finanically speaking spending the PR money on it.

 

About that expectation thing. In every buisness there is "expectation" and "EXPECTATION". I really have not much of an idea on the gaming industry side of things (or even how Square Enix sets it internally). But a product falling mildly under the expectation bar isn't really an uncommon thing. Furthermore. Don't forget that this is "just" 3 Months of sales/shipments. We have no idea in what timeframe the 1mil. should be reached. So, saying that it didn't reach expectations is quite far fetched in itself.

 

We'll see in the coming months how it played out for Square and how interested they are now in continuning the franchise.

Edited November 8, 2011 by C2B

[Flouride]

Here's my take on the situation.

 

DS3 fallsshort of sales expectations unfortunately. Creation of one DLC was baked into the original contract for the game, thus we get Treasure of the Sun. SE however doesn't feel it's worth it finanically speaking spending the PR money on it.

 

I don't think it would have cost pretty much anything to release a statement about the release date.

[WorstUsernameEver]

Here's my take on the situation.

 

DS3 fallsshort of sales expectations unfortunately. Creation of one DLC was baked into the original contract for the game, thus we get Treasure of the Sun. SE however doesn't feel it's worth it finanically speaking spending the PR money on it.

 

About that expectation thing. In every buisness there is "expectation" and "EXPECTATION". I really have not much of an idea on the gaming industry side of things (or even how Square Enix sets it internally). But a product falling mildly under the expectation bar isn't really an uncommon thing. Furthermore. Don't forget that this is "just" 3 Months of sales/shipments. We have no idea in what timeframe the 1mil. should be reached. So, saying that it didn't reach expectations is quite far fetched in itself.

 

We'll see in the coming months how it played out for Square and how interested they are now in continuning the franchise.

 

Long-run sales have never meant anything in this industry, and it should be considered that the number is shipped. To actually clear out a lot of those shipped copies pretty much every retailer is offering huge discounts on Dungeon Siege III.