Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
[Column] Destiny: Destiny Sales Prove Review Scores Wrong
SBFord
Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,129
Too often, there exists a disparity between the feelings of game reviewers and game players. Time after time, we’re told a game is amazing only to find it out it doesn’t work (Sim City comes to mind). Or, we’re told a game is bad, just to find out that it’s a consumer hit. Such is the case with Destiny, the disappointing mega-hit we were told could only break our hearts with the letdown. What’s the deal, games industry? We answer that question, and break down the week’s biggest news, in this week’s RPG files.
Read more of Chris Coke's The RPG Files: Destiny Sales Prove Review Scores Wrong.
)
Comments
But does that make Destiny a bad game? Even a middling one? I don’t think so. But thankfully, I don’t have to make that case; the facts do. Last week, we found out that Bungie boasts 3.2 million players logging in every single day for an average of three hours a day, a month after launch
They boasted 3.2 million players as a daily average over the first month, and not a daily average a month after launch. There's a huge difference between the two, and the reason why they used a monthly average is because its much higher compared to the number a month after launch.
If you're going to point out facts, at least get your facts straight.
Additionally, last years top seller COD: Ghosts had the same kinds of reviews. And now I will go play Borderlands the pre-sequel, it also had reviews in the mid 70's. Its fun, but it doesn't make anything new and it has its fair share of flaws.
I tried to defend this game for awhile I felt the raid boosted the review score, but I can't seem to lay a finger on the game now that I have done everything in it and lvl 30. There is simply zero replay value and the multiplayer has as many features as a 15 year old shooter (lacking any).
i wish the kept to their old idea of mass effect with a halo feel
Roses are red
Violets are blue
The reviewer has a mishapen head
Which means his opinion is skewed
...Aldous.MF'n.Huxley
In all fairness, this is kind of splitting hairs. It's like saying, "Sure, WoW got 600K new subs a month before expansion launch to give them nearly 8 million subscribers, but it's nowhere near their peak of 12 million!"
What you seem to be forgetting, even though you make a point to aim at the "marketing lingo" being thrown around instead of the "facts", but then you completely defy any sort of logic yourself. There may have been an influx of users at the beginning, some of whom went on to trade the game in, etc., but let's remember one simple thing every single person who bought the game did NOT log in every single day for the first month for an average of 3 hours. So what are we talking about here? 10 million copies? 15 million copies? I know that I've probably been online for 20 days myself in the first month, which I consider a lot, but I definitely wasn't playing 3 hours per day.
I think that you're trivializing the numbers. You're casting them off like, meh, they're not so big. I would say that, conservatively, we're talking about 8 million copies, which is a success for any game. If they manage to maintain half those people, or even 1/8th of those people through a quarterly release cycle, we're talking about a very successful game. Nevermind we haven't been through Christmas yet, and we will likely also see a GOTY edition. No, it's not COD, it's not GTA, but it is successful and will probably be a financial success on an ongoing basis and will, hopefully, prove that a sub-through-DLC model s viable.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
I'm not sure that number of units sold equates to a bad review being wrong. It's not the first time, nor will it be the last, that people buy something that's bad, or even just mediocre.
You can't just write off those reviews based on sales numbers. It could just be that Bungie did a bang up job at marketing a poor game and it sold well. Doesn't make the game any better does it?
May be close to average play time since the numbers suggest that, on average, people logged into the game for just over 11 days - for 3 hours a day. So if you averaged about 1.5 hours then that would be about par.
The numbers also suggested sales of over 8 million in the first month. And doubtless still rising.
As for it being a daily average I agree - splitting hairs. If sales had been highly front loaded and the average number given out "tiny" then maybe. The numbers were huge though.
Damn, I was going to point out the Transformer movies but you beat me too it.
Sales don't counter how it's a generic sci-fi game. If this game came out later in this console generation I doubt it would have such sales.
People mileage will vary but this happens with every game; we play them, then put them down. Whether the game is WoW or South Park. And as Destiny has no monthly subscription it is more South Park than WoW; if you get the itch to create an alt after Christmas say no need to resub.
Your comment does raise an interesting issue however. How fast should Bungie aim to release DLC. Will December be too late or too soon for people who started out in September?
That's as maybe , but it also proves that Phantasy Star Online's game mechanics are still popular and work really well. Obviously this site didn't even review it as ( at the time ) it was almost 100% PC only. Probably also explains the slightly low score MMORPG.com gave Destiny too.
Cheers,
BadOrb.
PSO 4 years , EQOA 4 months , PSU 7 years , SWTOR launch ongoing , PSO2 SEA launch ongoing , Destiny 360 launch ongoing.
"SWG was not fun. Let it go buddy." quote from iiNoSkillzii 10/18/13
The original propoganda pixie dust villain :[]
I remember when this site didn't try to teach us how to be better players or better people even, didn't run articles trying to convince us of their worth as journalists, and didn't spend time trying to convince us that high sales mean a good game....
It used to be just about games, not this trying to shape us as a culture.
I am not sure when it all went wrong.
It feels more like a continuous life lecture here these days than a fun gaming site.
Maybe it's all proportional. If you take a development studio, with a history of creating excellent games, create a new product to revolutionize gaming {ahem} and launch it everywhere at once... you will sell, Sell, SELL!
Disappointment may be everywhere, but a proportion of those gamers will stick it out. Multiplayer games will always retain more gamers than single player because of the natural variety in play. So what kind of proportion of purchasers are actually still playing the game compared to it's counterparts?
3.2m for 3 hours seems high. Are the figures even correct?
In all honesty, I have not played the game. I watched videos, listened to what was to be and was excited... then I saw gameplay footage for about 30 seconds and knew immediately that it would not be what everyone wanted. Major disappointment for all.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
There is a huge difference between a first month average and a day 30 average, and my pissy post was mostly just me being tired of how columnists on this site keeps getting facts wrong, even worse this time because the author uses those numbers to prove a point of the quality of the game.
I prefer retention over initial sales to determine the quality of a game, and in that way I do agree future dlc sales is a far better indication of how good the game is.
Aloha Mr Hand !
True. But while the game is nowhere near what it should be that doesn't really make it a bad game either.
Some companies seems to get away with releasing games that would have done a lot worse if someone else would have developed them. Any game by Bungee, Blizzard, Valve or a bunch of others will still sell very well even if the game is just okay instead of great while smaller studios have a hard time with anything below excellent.
Please do tell people what games they should play, what games are the good ones because they are apparently unable to decide for themselves what is fun to them and what is worth their money.
I have no intention of telling anyone what they should do with regards to games or anything else despite your sarcastic suggestion. I merely stated the obvious, people sometimes buy stuff that's not that good, and sometimes a lot of people do it. I'm guilty of it myself, I've bought plenty of games in the past that I wish I hadn't wasted my money on.
I remain unconvinced that initial sales numbers reflect the quality of anything other than a marketing campaign, and those sales numbers don't mean reviews suddenly become invalid.