There's an article (can't remember where) that talks about the game being made as a multi-player game and a "games as a service" game. Someone stepped down (bad with names) and they had asked another person to take over. The person who took over looked over everything and then had conversations with "the powers that be" and eventually they pulled everything back to be a single player game.
I imagine that added time, energy and money.
In any case, I gave them some money last night and I'm enjoying it. I'm certainly having more fun than I did in Inquisition (so far) Scott
Well I already said on here keep us posted if you play it, there is room for a Cartoon Hour on MMORPG.com.
Well the “start “ was certainly exciting but we all know that. I actually like the combat but in general I always have preferred more action combat.
Beautiful game, the art design isn’t bad but it is a bit stylized. The elf ears are awful but I think they went the eastern design route with them.
So far the dialogue is fine but I understand it gets rather explanatory as the game goes on. At least as far as the npc chit chat goes.
So we’ll see. Again, for my tastes it’s so far a better experience than inquisition.
Post edited by Sovrath on
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
The more game play videos I see, the better Veilguard looks to me. The combat looks way better than the first few teaser trailers I saw and the art is beautiful. Still not sure about the characters and story.
I wonder if this will end up like Star Wars: Outlaws which is getting a lot more positive feedback from people now that the "team opinion" antics from the launch are passing. I hope it hits GamePass in the next 6 months. I still don't think it's worth $120 for the full meal deal, but that's true of most games for me personally.
The more game play videos I see, the better Veilguard looks to me. The combat looks way better than the first few teaser trailers I saw and the art is beautiful. Still not sure about the characters and story.
I wonder if this will end up like Star Wars: Outlaws which is getting a lot more positive feedback from people now that the "team opinion" antics from the launch are passing. I hope it hits GamePass in the next 6 months. I still don't think it's worth $120 for the full meal deal, but that's true of most games for me personally.
Following advice here I have been watching parts of a 7 hour straight, unedited, gameplay video with the sound turned off. I think it looks great and visually wise it is a straight up, higher quality, continuation of DA Inquisition, the latest and most successful game in the series. I have also seen a reasonable amount of dark stuff by now.
I think I might actually buy it sooner then later because of watching footage. I really don’t know what people were expecting. Like stated before, I am playing Inquisition right now and the dialogue there really isn’t better, and neither is the combat and I still enjoy that one quite a bit (even though it really isn’t amazing)….
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
The more game play videos I see, the better Veilguard looks to me. The combat looks way better than the first few teaser trailers I saw and the art is beautiful. Still not sure about the characters and story.
I wonder if this will end up like Star Wars: Outlaws which is getting a lot more positive feedback from people now that the "team opinion" antics from the launch are passing. I hope it hits GamePass in the next 6 months. I still don't think it's worth $120 for the full meal deal, but that's true of most games for me personally.
Following advice here I have been watching parts of a 7 hour straight, unedited, gameplay video with the sound turned off. I think it looks great and visually wise it is a straight up, higher quality, continuation of DA Inquisition, the latest and most successful game in the series. I have also seen a reasonable amount of dark stuff by now.
I think I might actually buy it sooner then later because of watching footage. I really don’t know what people were expecting. Like stated before, I am playing Inquisition right now and the dialogue there really isn’t better, and neither is the combat and I still enjoy that one quite a bit (even though it really isn’t amazing)….
/Cheers, Lahnmir
Well like I said I did not have the sound turned off, but then I was not just watching videos that were plastering the game. Each to their own, but I can't see how it can live up to Inquisition.
A "plaster it" video I did see that made my laugh was about the level of insults in this and the past games, a good indicator of how mature the game really is. Past games called you or your companions a "mongrel" and the like. You don't get that now they are so nice and kind. It was like watching a Blue Peter version of DA.
User scores in MC don't have much science to them in the short term. Divisive games with dubious tactics (preventing early access to reviewers not aligned) will be bombed in the first days.
Long term things get more "real" even in MC. Steam is a different beast. Gamers there have accounts with lots of $ spent so is not so easy to go crazy "burning bridges" just to "send a message".
I would give way more weight to Steam reviews than Metacritic or any access media.
That said is best for people on the fence to look directly at the game play and give the people they are watching 2 gameplay sessions.
DA:I I started playing thinking "this might be even better than Origins" by the 4-6 hour mark I was bored to death. I didn't even finish it the first time. A year later I went back to it during christmas (had free time) but even then I remember I downloaded a trainer to just rush to the ending cause the gameplay was a mortal loop of boredom.
Veilguard gives similar vibes to me. Good first impact (bad writing), awful artistic choices and 0 RPG elements, but a complete lack of interests/engaging for the mid game and a dragging main quest gameplay loop with sponge enemies that only gives payoffs in the last hour of gameplay.
User scores in MC don't have much science to them in the short term. Divisive games with dubious tactics (preventing early access to reviewers not aligned) will be bombed in the first days.
Long term things get more "real" even in MC. Steam is a different beast. Gamers there have accounts with lots of $ spent so is not so easy to go crazy "burning bridges" just to "send a message".
I would give way more weight to Steam reviews than Metacritic or any access media.
MC doesn't require people to own the game. let alone play it, in order to review it. MC used to be somewhat useful but now there's too much brigading.
The last I knew, Steam still has the issue of letting people buy a game to review it but refunding it after writing the review.
I tend to find B2P games by first watching people play them on Twitch.
User scores in MC don't have much science to them in the short term. Divisive games with dubious tactics (preventing early access to reviewers not aligned) will be bombed in the first days.
Long term things get more "real" even in MC. Steam is a different beast. Gamers there have accounts with lots of $ spent so is not so easy to go crazy "burning bridges" just to "send a message".
I would give way more weight to Steam reviews than Metacritic or any access media.
MC doesn't require people to own the game. let alone play it, in order to review it. MC used to be somewhat useful but now there's too much brigading.
The last I knew, Steam still has the issue of letting people buy a game to review it but refunding it after writing the review.
I tend to find B2P games by first watching people play them on Twitch.
The reviews on Steam get marked as such and why would a user not be allowed to review a game they refunded. There is a reason why they refunded it. They allowed to voice it.
Either way. All reviews from user that have refunded a game, get marked as such.
User scores in MC don't have much science to them in the short term. Divisive games with dubious tactics (preventing early access to reviewers not aligned) will be bombed in the first days.
Long term things get more "real" even in MC. Steam is a different beast. Gamers there have accounts with lots of $ spent so is not so easy to go crazy "burning bridges" just to "send a message".
I would give way more weight to Steam reviews than Metacritic or any access media.
MC doesn't require people to own the game. let alone play it, in order to review it. MC used to be somewhat useful but now there's too much brigading.
The last I knew, Steam still has the issue of letting people buy a game to review it but refunding it after writing the review.
I tend to find B2P games by first watching people play them on Twitch.
The reviews on Steam get marked as such and why would a user not be allowed to review a game they refunded. There is a reason why they refunded it. They allowed to voice it.
Either way. All reviews from user that have refunded a game, get marked as such.
There were a number of negative reviews in the early hours of its release that later disappeared. In the first few hours the Steam rating was ~53%. I wonder at what point the refunded games are still marked as "product refunded" and when they are simply removed from the reviews?
User scores in MC don't have much science to them in the short term. Divisive games with dubious tactics (preventing early access to reviewers not aligned) will be bombed in the first days.
Long term things get more "real" even in MC. Steam is a different beast. Gamers there have accounts with lots of $ spent so is not so easy to go crazy "burning bridges" just to "send a message".
I would give way more weight to Steam reviews than Metacritic or any access media.
MC doesn't require people to own the game. let alone play it, in order to review it. MC used to be somewhat useful but now there's too much brigading.
When will you people begin to understand that once there is a divisive game out there, you simply assume that all the 0s and 10s are simply likes and dislikes and start treating them as a simple upvote / downvote system? You have a game like this, just switch from scores to up / down and that's it. It's not rocket science...
User scores in MC don't have much science to them in the short term. Divisive games with dubious tactics (preventing early access to reviewers not aligned) will be bombed in the first days.
Long term things get more "real" even in MC. Steam is a different beast. Gamers there have accounts with lots of $ spent so is not so easy to go crazy "burning bridges" just to "send a message".
I would give way more weight to Steam reviews than Metacritic or any access media.
MC doesn't require people to own the game. let alone play it, in order to review it. MC used to be somewhat useful but now there's too much brigading.
The last I knew, Steam still has the issue of letting people buy a game to review it but refunding it after writing the review.
I tend to find B2P games by first watching people play them on Twitch.
The reviews on Steam get marked as such and why would a user not be allowed to review a game they refunded. There is a reason why they refunded it. They allowed to voice it.
Either way. All reviews from user that have refunded a game, get marked as such.
Reported for that and I won't read anything from you again.
You know, I'm pretty much past caring about such stuff on this site, to be honest. The article in question does not exactly contribute to reverse the sentiment, so I don't think this petty reaction of yours and whatever the response will be will have any actual impact as far as I am concerned. Keep ignoring the substance and act just as petty and emotional as in this post, if it helps you in some way.
My interpretation is that its an rpg lite primarily intended for the console crowd,
What does that mean exactly?
Streamline the build options and customization so you can quickly get into the game, reduce/remove tactical aspects and instead make it primarily an action game with some story on top.
Doesn't make it inherently bad since I have enjoyed a bunch of games like that.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
MC doesn't require people to own the game. let alone play it, in order to review it. MC used to be somewhat useful but now there's too much brigading.
The last I knew, Steam still has the issue of letting people buy a game to review it but refunding it after writing the review.
I tend to find B2P games by first watching people play them on Twitch.
Yeah, I find MC User Scores really dubious, I can't see how they get better in the long run. But are you saying that if a game is F2P you will just download it without even bothering with reviews and videos?
Guys, we have managed 8 pages in a thread I was convinced would get shut down after two at the most. So do try to refrain from slanging matches and it might even get into double figures.
Streamline the build options and customization so you can quickly get into the game, reduce/remove tactical aspects and instead make it primarily an action game with some story on top.
Doesn't make it inherently bad since I have enjoyed a bunch of games like that.
I agree but to me that does make the game worse. There is a conception of console players that they can't handle the complexities a PC player can, that they need games to be dumbed down. I take the micky out of console players for that that myself, but I don't believe it!
I actually think console players are far more mature than they are given credit for and I am including the teens in that. If you keep giving players a diet of dumbed down they end up thinking that's all that is on the menu and this is gaming.
They could handle far more complexity than what seems to be on offer in Veilguard, they just don't get the chance.
Guys, we have managed 8 pages in a thread I was convinced would get shut down after two at the most. So do try to refrain from slanging matches and it might even get into double figures.
Keep Calm and Carry On Posting!
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
It is sitting at a Mostly Positive rating on Steam with almost 4,000 reviews. Sounds in line with the 79 to 80 score it seems to be at. I am more than fine with that score for a game. I think some people are getting a little too granular and judgy. Seems weird to me. Play the game or not. That is really the only two options that matter. Pick one and lean into it.
lol... you're being too impatient, the general population on metacritic cant even vote yet.
Another thing there not lots of people actually playing according to steam unless you think 34k people online is good?
Havent fact checked anything but I am reading it has had at peak 70k players......that's really not good tbh and tells me it's leaning towards being a huge flop.
Being impatient would mean I bought the game and am playing it. I have not. I enjoyed the other Dragon Age games, my favorite being DA:I I enjoyed the Mass Effect games including Andromeda, which was destroyed at launch but now sits at Mostly Positive on Steam and I found it a fun game. This game looks better than Andromeda so the 7 to 8 score is in line with the expectation I have with the game. By the time I get through other games on my list it will be, maybe, March or April next year, it will be patched and ready for me to dive in. I look forward to it. Matters not to me what anyone else thinks about it.
I think you completely missed the context of my post and got too defensive here. If you think and perhaps even enjoy/love the game then great for you, there's nothing wrong with that and I wasn't implying any otherwise.
The point is those scores are too early right now to actually mean anything when it comes to the fact of.... is it a big hit or a huge flop?
Perhaps you are right, Western context is lost on me. Apologies.
The side that matters to me is, is the game fun for me? Maybe and hopefully. MetaCritic users have blasted it. Woke, Trans and so on. (I think MetaCritic is a joke, do you even have to have played a game to post a review of it?) The reviews on Steam from actual players is mostly positive as they are when I checked on both my Xbox and PS5. I see another post citing the 'only' 70,000 players on Steam, but the game is also on consoles, and you can play on PC without Steam. I think you are right that it is too early to tell. In general, but for me it looks to be what I was expecting and that is a positive for me. Hopefully I will like it when I dig into it sometime next year.
Steam numbers are an indication of how well the game is doing overall. Most people are probably playing it on consoles but even if we double the numbers for each console, which I believe is how it normally goes when comparing Steam to XBox and PS5, that's around another 300k. Combined with Steam, it's only about 350-400k total. That's not great for a AAA game that cost as much as DAV and the expectations for sales. I don't think it will flop like Concord or Suicide Squad but I also don't believe it's going to come anywhere near what it needed to make it profitable. My guess is less than 500k total sales. We're going to see some more job losses at Bioware in the next few months if I'm right.
Steam is only one of the PC homes though right? Also Epic and EA launcher? So three PC launchers, Xbox and PS5 that is a good size pool to draw numbers from but not sure what those numbers are. Honestly does it matter? Seems to be a decent seller and we have no idea what it cost to make so how do we know what the ROI is to determine the sales numbers they were aiming for that return?
EGS and the EA store are a fraction of the numbers Steam gets if a game launches on Steam, too. Being generous, that might mean another 35-40k. It still doesn't bring the numbers up very much.
Edit: I just checked SteamDB and the numbers are a little better over the weekend. Peaked at 84,832 yesterday. A good sign but still not breaking 100k. If it doesn't break 100k at any point, then it's in trouble. If it does, then it might be OK. Just OK, I believe, is the ceiling for sales. Even then, it might not be good enough for the number crunchers at EA/Bioware to consider it a success.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
It is sitting at a Mostly Positive rating on Steam with almost 4,000 reviews. Sounds in line with the 79 to 80 score it seems to be at. I am more than fine with that score for a game. I think some people are getting a little too granular and judgy. Seems weird to me. Play the game or not. That is really the only two options that matter. Pick one and lean into it.
lol... you're being too impatient, the general population on metacritic cant even vote yet.
Another thing there not lots of people actually playing according to steam unless you think 34k people online is good?
Havent fact checked anything but I am reading it has had at peak 70k players......that's really not good tbh and tells me it's leaning towards being a huge flop.
Being impatient would mean I bought the game and am playing it. I have not. I enjoyed the other Dragon Age games, my favorite being DA:I I enjoyed the Mass Effect games including Andromeda, which was destroyed at launch but now sits at Mostly Positive on Steam and I found it a fun game. This game looks better than Andromeda so the 7 to 8 score is in line with the expectation I have with the game. By the time I get through other games on my list it will be, maybe, March or April next year, it will be patched and ready for me to dive in. I look forward to it. Matters not to me what anyone else thinks about it.
I think you completely missed the context of my post and got too defensive here. If you think and perhaps even enjoy/love the game then great for you, there's nothing wrong with that and I wasn't implying any otherwise.
The point is those scores are too early right now to actually mean anything when it comes to the fact of.... is it a big hit or a huge flop?
Perhaps you are right, Western context is lost on me. Apologies.
The side that matters to me is, is the game fun for me? Maybe and hopefully. MetaCritic users have blasted it. Woke, Trans and so on. (I think MetaCritic is a joke, do you even have to have played a game to post a review of it?) The reviews on Steam from actual players is mostly positive as they are when I checked on both my Xbox and PS5. I see another post citing the 'only' 70,000 players on Steam, but the game is also on consoles, and you can play on PC without Steam. I think you are right that it is too early to tell. In general, but for me it looks to be what I was expecting and that is a positive for me. Hopefully I will like it when I dig into it sometime next year.
Steam numbers are an indication of how well the game is doing overall. Most people are probably playing it on consoles but even if we double the numbers for each console, which I believe is how it normally goes when comparing Steam to XBox and PS5, that's around another 300k. Combined with Steam, it's only about 350-400k total. That's not great for a AAA game that cost as much as DAV and the expectations for sales. I don't think it will flop like Concord or Suicide Squad but I also don't believe it's going to come anywhere near what it needed to make it profitable. My guess is less than 500k total sales. We're going to see some more job losses at Bioware in the next few months if I'm right.
Steam is only one of the PC homes though right? Also Epic and EA launcher? So three PC launchers, Xbox and PS5 that is a good size pool to draw numbers from but not sure what those numbers are. Honestly does it matter? Seems to be a decent seller and we have no idea what it cost to make so how do we know what the ROI is to determine the sales numbers they were aiming for that return?
EGS and the EA store are a fraction of the numbers Steam gets if a game launches on Steam, too. Being generous, that might mean another 35-40k. It still doesn't bring the numbers up very much.
Edit: I just checked SteamDB and the numbers are a little better over the weekend. Peaked at 84,832 yesterday. A good sign but still not breaking 100k. If it doesn't break 100k at any point, then it's in trouble. If it does, then it might be OK. Just OK, I believe, is the ceiling for sales. Even then, it might not be good enough for the number crunchers at EA/Bioware to consider it a success.
So far it is the best selling, single player, EA game launch on Steam ever. Whatever that is worth, more then both Jedi games at least and probably positive for the number crunchers. Unless they expected a ten year dormant series to outsell a recent follow up Star Wars game by an even bigger margin at launch.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Streamline the build options and customization so you can quickly get into the game, reduce/remove tactical aspects and instead make it primarily an action game with some story on top.
Doesn't make it inherently bad since I have enjoyed a bunch of games like that.
I agree but to me that does make the game worse. There is a conception of console players that they can't handle the complexities a PC player can, that they need games to be dumbed down. I take the micky out of console players for that that myself, but I don't believe it!
I actually think console players are far more mature than they are given credit for and I am including the teens in that. If you keep giving players a diet of dumbed down they end up thinking that's all that is on the menu and this is gaming.
They could handle far more complexity than what seems to be on offer in Veilguard, they just don't get the chance.
When I made the post I thought of witcher 3, you don't play it for rpg complexity, you play it because you wish to bash ugly monsters and take part of a story.
There are huge overlaps between pc and console but (and I wish I remember where I heard about it), if you play a game on your phone you want to get into the gameplay within five minutes, with console it was around 15-30 minutes, and for pc games it was far longer. That's why pc games sometimes ends up way more complex than console games.
And I do agree with you, console gamers can handle far more than AAA developers give them credit for.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
If it's not better than Baldur's Gate 3, it's not worth my time, and yes, those are where my expectations are at- so my apologies to all future RPGs that have yet to be created.
Those are not even same kind of game , at least compare it with other action rpg like elden ring or witcher 3 . Bg3 is top view , turn based...
The more game play videos I see, the better Veilguard looks to me. The combat looks way better than the first few teaser trailers I saw and the art is beautiful. Still not sure about the characters and story.
I wonder if this will end up like Star Wars: Outlaws which is getting a lot more positive feedback from people now that the "team opinion" antics from the launch are passing. I hope it hits GamePass in the next 6 months. I still don't think it's worth $120 for the full meal deal, but that's true of most games for me personally.
The combat has actually been the part of the game that even in negative reviews, received positive comments. The combat looks like it might be fun. Good combat doesn't make a game good, though. I really enjoy the combat in Neverwinter but I wouldn't call it a good game just because of it. There's lots of other ingredients required to make a good game, esp. an RPG.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
I know the game is mixed atm, but I would honestly say the industry is better with Bioware vs without it. To me, development time doesn't really amount to anything if people remember Anthem's history and how long that was in development for only to be heavily changed in its last 2-3 years. Plus a lot of big people on Veilguard's team were dropping out during development, so that would obviously affect some things even though EA would release statements saying everything is 'on track' or whatever. Plus lets not pretend that Bioware didn't use to release some middling games in the past (Dragon Age 2 comes to mind which I personally liked alot).
I know the game is mixed atm, but I would honestly say the industry is better with Bioware vs without it. To me, development time doesn't really amount to anything if people remember Anthem's history and how long that was in development for only to be heavily changed in its last 2-3 years. Plus a lot of big people on Veilguard's team were dropping out during development, so that would obviously affect some things even though EA would release statements saying everything is 'on track' or whatever. Plus lets not pretend that Bioware didn't use to release some middling games in the past (Dragon Age 2 comes to mind which I personally liked alot).
I personally thought Dragon Age 2 was better than inquisition.
I also think, given that Veilguard was originally a multiplayer "games as a service game," as directed by the management, that it was precisely that fact that hurt it to begin with as far as development time.
Had they stuck with a single player game and not tried to wedge a "games as a service" slant on it, it would have launched much earlier.
It really is a double edged sword. Given no management, developers could literally fritter away money as they perfected their game. But, given management, sometimes that can ruin a game as they seek greater profits.
It seems that the best management is to keep the developers in check but understand that making a great game doesn't mean wedging things like "games as a service" into a property where it doesn't belong.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
It is sitting at a Mostly Positive rating on Steam with almost 4,000 reviews. Sounds in line with the 79 to 80 score it seems to be at. I am more than fine with that score for a game. I think some people are getting a little too granular and judgy. Seems weird to me. Play the game or not. That is really the only two options that matter. Pick one and lean into it.
lol... you're being too impatient, the general population on metacritic cant even vote yet.
Another thing there not lots of people actually playing according to steam unless you think 34k people online is good?
Havent fact checked anything but I am reading it has had at peak 70k players......that's really not good tbh and tells me it's leaning towards being a huge flop.
Being impatient would mean I bought the game and am playing it. I have not. I enjoyed the other Dragon Age games, my favorite being DA:I I enjoyed the Mass Effect games including Andromeda, which was destroyed at launch but now sits at Mostly Positive on Steam and I found it a fun game. This game looks better than Andromeda so the 7 to 8 score is in line with the expectation I have with the game. By the time I get through other games on my list it will be, maybe, March or April next year, it will be patched and ready for me to dive in. I look forward to it. Matters not to me what anyone else thinks about it.
I think you completely missed the context of my post and got too defensive here. If you think and perhaps even enjoy/love the game then great for you, there's nothing wrong with that and I wasn't implying any otherwise.
The point is those scores are too early right now to actually mean anything when it comes to the fact of.... is it a big hit or a huge flop?
Perhaps you are right, Western context is lost on me. Apologies.
The side that matters to me is, is the game fun for me? Maybe and hopefully. MetaCritic users have blasted it. Woke, Trans and so on. (I think MetaCritic is a joke, do you even have to have played a game to post a review of it?) The reviews on Steam from actual players is mostly positive as they are when I checked on both my Xbox and PS5. I see another post citing the 'only' 70,000 players on Steam, but the game is also on consoles, and you can play on PC without Steam. I think you are right that it is too early to tell. In general, but for me it looks to be what I was expecting and that is a positive for me. Hopefully I will like it when I dig into it sometime next year.
Steam numbers are an indication of how well the game is doing overall. Most people are probably playing it on consoles but even if we double the numbers for each console, which I believe is how it normally goes when comparing Steam to XBox and PS5, that's around another 300k. Combined with Steam, it's only about 350-400k total. That's not great for a AAA game that cost as much as DAV and the expectations for sales. I don't think it will flop like Concord or Suicide Squad but I also don't believe it's going to come anywhere near what it needed to make it profitable. My guess is less than 500k total sales. We're going to see some more job losses at Bioware in the next few months if I'm right.
Steam is only one of the PC homes though right? Also Epic and EA launcher? So three PC launchers, Xbox and PS5 that is a good size pool to draw numbers from but not sure what those numbers are. Honestly does it matter? Seems to be a decent seller and we have no idea what it cost to make so how do we know what the ROI is to determine the sales numbers they were aiming for that return?
EGS and the EA store are a fraction of the numbers Steam gets if a game launches on Steam, too. Being generous, that might mean another 35-40k. It still doesn't bring the numbers up very much.
Edit: I just checked SteamDB and the numbers are a little better over the weekend. Peaked at 84,832 yesterday. A good sign but still not breaking 100k. If it doesn't break 100k at any point, then it's in trouble. If it does, then it might be OK. Just OK, I believe, is the ceiling for sales. Even then, it might not be good enough for the number crunchers at EA/Bioware to consider it a success.
So far it is the best selling, single player, EA game launch on Steam ever. Whatever that is worth, more then both Jedi games at least and probably positive for the number crunchers. Unless they expected a ten year dormant series to outsell a recent follow up Star Wars game by an even bigger margin at launch.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
To your point: Call of Duty is only number 5 on the steam charts with ≈245K concurrent players right now with 306K peak during the rolling record period. Black Ops 6 is the best selling COD ever. It has millions of players. Just saying, while Steam is a significant indicator, it isn't the only place people game.
Comments
Beautiful game, the art design isn’t bad but it is a bit stylized. The elf ears are awful but I think they went the eastern design route with them.
So far the dialogue is fine but I understand it gets rather explanatory as the game goes on. At least as far as the npc chit chat goes.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
A "plaster it" video I did see that made my laugh was about the level of insults in this and the past games, a good indicator of how mature the game really is. Past games called you or your companions a "mongrel" and the like. You don't get that now they are so nice and kind. It was like watching a Blue Peter version of DA.
Veilguard gives similar vibes to me. Good first impact (bad writing), awful artistic choices and 0 RPG elements, but a complete lack of interests/engaging for the mid game and a dragging main quest gameplay loop with sponge enemies that only gives payoffs in the last hour of gameplay.
The last I knew, Steam still has the issue of letting people buy a game to review it but refunding it after writing the review.
I tend to find B2P games by first watching people play them on Twitch.
Either way. All reviews from user that have refunded a game, get marked as such.
When will you people begin to understand that once there is a divisive game out there, you simply assume that all the 0s and 10s are simply likes and dislikes and start treating them as a simple upvote / downvote system? You have a game like this, just switch from scores to up / down and that's it. It's not rocket science...
Doesn't make it inherently bad since I have enjoyed a bunch of games like that.
I actually think console players are far more mature than they are given credit for and I am including the teens in that. If you keep giving players a diet of dumbed down they end up thinking that's all that is on the menu and this is gaming.
They could handle far more complexity than what seems to be on offer in Veilguard, they just don't get the chance.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
There are huge overlaps between pc and console but (and I wish I remember where I heard about it), if you play a game on your phone you want to get into the gameplay within five minutes, with console it was around 15-30 minutes, and for pc games it was far longer. That's why pc games sometimes ends up way more complex than console games.
And I do agree with you, console gamers can handle far more than AAA developers give them credit for.
Those are not even same kind of game , at least compare it with other action rpg like elden ring or witcher 3 . Bg3 is top view , turn based...
The combat has actually been the part of the game that even in negative reviews, received positive comments. The combat looks like it might be fun. Good combat doesn't make a game good, though. I really enjoy the combat in Neverwinter but I wouldn't call it a good game just because of it. There's lots of other ingredients required to make a good game, esp. an RPG.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
To your point: Call of Duty is only number 5 on the steam charts with ≈245K concurrent players right now with 306K peak during the rolling record period. Black Ops 6 is the best selling COD ever. It has millions of players. Just saying, while Steam is a significant indicator, it isn't the only place people game.