Morgoth Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 P.S. TW2 has sold elss than 2mil total over its lifetime. You likely lose that bet. L0L That's PC only, mate. The 360 version was just released, so let's re-evaluate that number again in a couple of months. Yes, 1,3 million units sold in NA is considered a failure by BioWare's/EA's standards, since they are the one who aimed to sell 10 million+ units. Well, they failed. If something like Skyrim can sell 10 million units, then BioWare (self-proclaimed "best RPG developer and story-tellers out there) certainly must reach that target too, no? Except, BioWare doesn't get it. They're stuck in their old ways and that's why they continue to become more and more irrelevant. Rain makes everything better.
Volourn Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 You guys are just ignorant. Siomehow.. ME2 is a success when it sold less than ME3 (by more than half) yet ME3 is a fialure? That doesn't even make sense. InflatioN? We're tlaking a difference of 2 years. Plus ME3 was made on an alreayd long established engine/series and I doubt the marketing costs differences are that different. BIO/EA has never satted they should sell 10mil copies. What they said is to be considered AAA elite sellers they need to sell 10mil copies and they stated no prevuious BIo game has met that criteria. Are you so stupid you cna't read? BIO games will never sell 10 mil copies. Never. So, no, it's not a fialure unless you wanna claim ME1 and ME2 are failures too. Which you won't. ME3 sells 1.3 copies in NA/HD alone = failure but ME2 selling .5mil copies = success WTFW TF WTF DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
Amentep Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 You guys are just ignorant. Siomehow.. ME2 is a success when it sold less than ME3 (by more than half) yet ME3 is a fialure? That doesn't even make sense. InflatioN? We're tlaking a difference of 2 years. Plus ME3 was made on an alreayd long established engine/series and I doubt the marketing costs differences are that different. BIO/EA has never satted they should sell 10mil copies. What they said is to be considered AAA elite sellers they need to sell 10mil copies and they stated no prevuious BIo game has met that criteria. Are you so stupid you cna't read? BIO games will never sell 10 mil copies. Never. So, no, it's not a fialure unless you wanna claim ME1 and ME2 are failures too. Which you won't. ME3 sells 1.3 copies in NA/HD alone = failure but ME2 selling .5mil copies = success WTFW TF WTF While I agree that its ultimately meaningless to look at the numbers as an indicative of quality, it is possible that a .5 mil sell through could be seen as a success and 1.3 mil a failure depending on the sales expectations going into each game. Particular a company that is making a sequel on the same hardware as the original is probably going to base their projections on the total lifetime sales of the previous game to account for what they see as a first month user base to pull from. I cannot - yet I must. How do you calculate that? At what point on the graph do "must" and "cannot" meet? Yet I must - but I cannot! ~ Ro-Man
entrerix Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 i made a widget for $10, i sold 10 of them at $100 each, thus making $1000, minus my costs of construction leaves me $900 profit = success! i made a gadget for $100 i sold 15 of them at $100 each thus making $1500, minus my costs of construction leaves me $0 profit = failure! 1 Killing is kind of like playin' a basketball game. I am there. and the other player is there. and it's just the two of us. and I put the other player's body in my van. and I am the winner. - Nice Pete.
Volourn Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 Amentep: True, but ME2 itself is a sequel to a popular game. A popular game that itself sold even less than ME2 when it came out. The fact is ME3 has more than double ME2 sales and I doubt its cost or real expectations (as opposed to out of context hype) were so much more than ME2. This isn't even about quality since I've stated before that I feel ME3 is the weakest of the three games but it's obvious that sakles wise it's way more successful than the earlier ME (largely based on them to a point for obvious reason). The logic used in thsi thread doesn't make sense. ME2 sales = .5mil = success ME3 sales = 1.3mil = failure l0lz oNLY ON THE INTERNETZ DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
Amentep Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 Rising costs would certainly be a factor; although it'd depend on how much costs raised and all of that. Ultimately that'd be factored into the expectations which is why I decided to take that route. I cannot - yet I must. How do you calculate that? At what point on the graph do "must" and "cannot" meet? Yet I must - but I cannot! ~ Ro-Man
entrerix Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 (edited) a game could sell 100 million copies and still be a failure if they don't recoup their expenses Edited April 13, 2012 by entrerix 1 Killing is kind of like playin' a basketball game. I am there. and the other player is there. and it's just the two of us. and I put the other player's body in my van. and I am the winner. - Nice Pete.
Amentep Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 Amentep: True, but ME2 itself is a sequel to a popular game. A popular game that itself sold even less than ME2 when it came out. The fact is ME3 has more than double ME2 sales and I doubt its cost or real expectations (as opposed to out of context hype) were so much more than ME2. This isn't even about quality since I've stated before that I feel ME3 is the weakest of the three games but it's obvious that sakles wise it's way more successful than the earlier ME (largely based on them to a point for obvious reason). The logic used in thsi thread doesn't make sense. ME2 sales = .5mil = success ME3 sales = 1.3mil = failure l0lz oNLY ON THE INTERNETZ Remember though that expectations could have been greatly higher based on the installed userbase; I've seen movie companies declare movies that make money failures because they didn't make enough money (the GREEN HORNET film from last year is a prime example). That said for players I think sales is a weak argument in terms of success or failure (unless we're also EA stockholders or something). I cannot - yet I must. How do you calculate that? At what point on the graph do "must" and "cannot" meet? Yet I must - but I cannot! ~ Ro-Man
Volourn Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 (edited) Rising costs? Within a couple of years? Come on people. I doubt the technoology and the people cost 9employees) changed sod rmaatically between the two games. And, I doubt the advterising budget 9another major games cost) increased so much between ME2 and ME3. Now youa re claiming that ME3 didn't make a profit but ME2 did? Geez.. If that were logical BIO/EA would have to have tripled (at least) ME3's budget comapred to ME2. Do you really beleiev that or are you just trolling because it's considered cool to scream 'FAILURE!" towards BIO/EA? L0LZ p.s. I ahve yet to hear/read EA state anything about ME3's sales fialure. In fcat, they have been bragging about its success even while dealing with the whole ending drama. Edited April 13, 2012 by Volourn DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
Morgoth Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 BioWare has 600+ developers, that's a high burning rate. I've seen dev studios with only 100 devs shut down after they sold 3 million units of their games (Homefront). There's no point in keeping such a huge hog around if you stop innovating and your competitors are speeding ahead of you. I'm not just talking in terms of sales. Rain makes everything better.
Volourn Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 Morgoth just trollin' guyz... L0LZ DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
GhostofAnakin Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 "Because it could be a case of their costs needing more than those sales in order to break even or turn a profit. Only BioWare/EA know how much they spent to make ME3, so I guess we'll never know for sure. " Even at 1mil sold withb each new copy being sold for $50 (I paid $70ish) that's $50mil made. Yup, I think they did alright. You're making it sound like if BioWare sells 1 million copies at $50 each, that they come away with $50 million net income. You do realize that's not free and clear, right? Out of that revenue, they have costs associated with making the game that eats into that $50. "Console exclusive is such a harsh word." - Darque"Console exclusive is two words Darque." - Nartwak (in response to Darque's observation)
Morgoth Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 Morgoth just trollin' guyz... L0LZ Stop the liez, start the truthz! Rain makes everything better.
Volourn Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 ":You're making it sound like if BioWare sells 1 million copies at $50 each, that they come away with $50 million net income. You do realize that's not free and clear, right? Out of that revenue, they have costs associated with making the game that eats into that $50. " You make it sound that ME3 cost 250mil to make and ME2 took 10mil to make. Only explanation for why ME3 is a 'failure' and ME2 is a 'success' despite more than double and almost tripling its sales. LMAO DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
Hurlshort Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 It does seem there is some wishful thinking here, and it isn't Volourn doing it. The numbers indicate that , at minimum, ME3 is a solid hit. We typically hear when a title like this fails to meet expectations, so all this speculation is baseless. 1
Morgoth Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 Maybe EA is content with ME3's sales, but after the three-color ending fiasco, someone certainly has to raise the question whether the ME series is gonna be a sustainable hit in the future? There just wasn't enough innovation in any of the three games. Unlike DA2, which I thought felt a bit fresher than that singleplayer MMO that was DA:O. Either way, with developers like Rockstar and Bethesda continuing to explore and improve ambitious open-world game design (imo teh future), BioWare just keeps entrenching and straitjacketng themselves into a deeper hole. Popping out games in fast intervalls certainly doesn't help them to get out of that hole, either. They will continue to lose prestige and relevance. But at least they should have the integrity to admit it. 1 Rain makes everything better.
Hurlshort Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 I'm pretty sure Mass Effect has reached its conclusion. I know the universe will continue to be used, but who knows what type of game that will be?
Amentep Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 It does seem there is some wishful thinking here, and it isn't Volourn doing it. The numbers indicate that , at minimum, ME3 is a solid hit. We typically hear when a title like this fails to meet expectations, so all this speculation is baseless. Realistically, without knowing the exact budget to make the game or the expectations of EA in units sold, there's not much conclusion to be made about what the ME3 sales mean. I cannot - yet I must. How do you calculate that? At what point on the graph do "must" and "cannot" meet? Yet I must - but I cannot! ~ Ro-Man
Morgoth Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 I'm pretty sure Mass Effect has reached its conclusion. I know the universe will continue to be used, but who knows what type of game that will be? Whatever type of game it will be, the writing is gonna be guaranteed to be bad. Rain makes everything better.
entrerix Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 i'd like to see mass effect re-imagined as a top-down turn based rpg ala fallout. with the depth and quality of writing of planescape torment. Killing is kind of like playin' a basketball game. I am there. and the other player is there. and it's just the two of us. and I put the other player's body in my van. and I am the winner. - Nice Pete.
Majek Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 And with Jagged Alliance 2 like combat. :D I'd buy that. 1 1.13 killed off Ja2.
Volourn Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 "Maybe EA is content with ME3's sales, but after the three-color ending fiasco, someone certainly has to raise the question whether the ME series is gonna be a sustainable hit in the future? " You just changed the entirE argument we wer ehaving on the last page. L0LZ It has nothing to do with quality (or perceived quality), tool. "Realistically, without knowing the exact budget to make the game or the expectations of EA in units sold, there's not much conclusion to be made about what the ME3 sales mean. " Except, EA/BIO have made announcements bragging about ME3 sales, and its success. Even dealing with the ending hoopla, they've been very clear about that. It deoesn't matter if some internet geekz are personally dissapointed in the ending. It's friggin' iirelevant in terms of sales. "Either way, with developers like Rockstar and Bethesda continuing to explore and improve ambitious open-world game design (imo teh future), BioWare just keeps entrenching and straitjacketng themselves into a deeper hole. Popping out games in fast intervalls certainly doesn't help them to get out of that hole, either. They will continue to lose prestige and relevance. But at least they should have the integrity to admit it. " HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAS! DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
Morgoth Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 I think Volly completely lost it. Rain makes everything better.
GhostofAnakin Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 ":You're making it sound like if BioWare sells 1 million copies at $50 each, that they come away with $50 million net income. You do realize that's not free and clear, right? Out of that revenue, they have costs associated with making the game that eats into that $50. " You make it sound that ME3 cost 250mil to make and ME2 took 10mil to make. Only explanation for why ME3 is a 'failure' and ME2 is a 'success' despite more than double and almost tripling its sales. LMAO I never once said ME3 was a failure financially. I've stated multiple times that we don't know how much it cost to make ME3, and thus only BioWare knows for certain. The closest I've gotten to any sort of comment on ME3's sales is when I posed the question about whether or not the units sold is enough to cover the cost of making the game. But even then, I merely posed the question without making any definite statements about it. So I'm not sure what you're yammering on about. "Console exclusive is such a harsh word." - Darque"Console exclusive is two words Darque." - Nartwak (in response to Darque's observation)
Zoraptor Posted April 13, 2012 Posted April 13, 2012 I think we need to get one thing straight immediately. This is probably the only time I will say this: Volourn is right. He may be using made up numbers which completely invalidate his 'ME2 sold 3 million copies r00fles!!! FACT!' shtick but on the important stuff he is right. ME3's sales are very good. Retail only, US only. You can approximately double them for worldwide and digital sales, especially since digital ~ 2 retail copies return wise. So 2 million+ inside a month, and crucially they're sold through copies (so there aren't 100ks sitting around in warehouses), since that is what NPD measures. ME2 sold 1.6 million including digital and PC, worldwide, in a quarter- 3 months- for a direct like to like comparison. It won't reach DAO's numbers but it will certainly outdo either previous ME title by a fair bit given it's already close to their lifetime totals. That's 40+ million in revenue, plenty more than enough to cover the cost of the game, though not really enough to justify the ludicrous prive paid by EA for Bioware in the first place. It ain't Halo or GoW or CoD or GTA numbers, but if you use them as a yardstick for success then there's maybe two successful releases a year and everything else is a failure.
Recommended Posts