Game News Alpha Protocol: It Doesn't Look Like A RPG

[Brother None]

Of course this sends a clear message to Biow (and everyone else), that the more "streamlined" you make your RPG's the better they will sell, unfortunately.

DA:O, with its new engine and long production time, was probably significantly more expensive to make than Mass Effect 2, as well.

 

[Volourn]

So...

95% to 90% rating. And 3.3 mil for DA and 2.0mil for ME2 and somehow ME2 is sooooooooo much more successful than DA?

I don't think so. The claim was that DA would sell '90%' less than ME2 and have a wayyyyyyyyyyyyyy lower rating.

Even with your links, this simply isn't a case.


Also, a counter link to yours about ME2 sales.. Keep in mind this is 360 only and just for January 9and like said ME2 did come late): http://www.411mania.com/games/news/1297 ... minate.htm

Now, I never claimed DA woudle nd up no doubt more successful than ME2; but no doubt the numbers difference won't be that huge. I bet ME2 will settle between 3.5-5 million with DA between 3.5-4.5mil and hte ratings difference just isn't that huge.

Either way, bioth these games: the more rpgish DA and the dumbed down ME2 (character system wise) are BIO's two most successful games and they came out within a couple of months of each other.

DA wins in the characetr system/combat way; but ME2 wins in the C&C/atmosphere/story department.



"DA:O, with its new engine and long production time, was probably significantly more expensive to make than Mass Effect 2, as well."

I bet the cost difference between the two is relatively inconseuential. Don't forget BIO has to pay licensing fees for ME's engine. They don't own the basic engine. And, ME is obvious a graphics/content hog that it needed two discs despite being about 10 hours shorter (for me) than DA. *shrug*

 

[Brother None]

95% to 90% rating. And 3.3 mil for DA and 2.0mil for ME2 and somehow ME2 is sooooooooo much more successful than DA?

3.2 mil shipped vs 2 mil sold (or sold-in, that's unclear), with .5 million sold-through the first day. That's a HUGE difference in sales, considering the time-frame. A number I've heard bandied about for ME2's current sales status is 3.9 mil in 3 weeks (as opposed to DA's 3 months) and still going.

The claim was that DA would sell '90%' less than ME2 and have a wayyyyyyyyyyyyyy lower rating.

No one claimed that.

http://www.411mania.com/games/news/129715/January-NPD-Numbers:-New-Super-Mario-Bros,-Wii-Dominate.htm

NPD numbers are always a small fragment of total world-wide real sales, excluding digital sales, and completely unreliable.

Either way, bioth these games: the more rpgish DA and the dumbed down ME2 (character system wise) are BIO's two most successful games and they came out within a couple of months of each other.

I agree. DA, like TW, proves some viability is left outside of the pure shooter realm. But it's less. Just like Fallout was a success, just less of a success than BG. Thusly, history marches on.

I bet the cost difference between the two is relatively inconseuential. Don't forget BIO has to pay licensing fees for ME's engine. They don't own the basic engine. And, ME is obvious a graphics/content hog that it needed two discs despite being about 10 hours shorter (for me) than DA. *shrug*

Licensing fees are nothing compared to the costs of making your own engine. Why do you think people license engines to begin with? Creating Eclipse is significantly more expensive than licensing UE3.5, but the big advantage is Eclipse is free from now on. I think that and the higher production costs are why they hurried up DA's follow-ups.

Being a graphics/content hog is irrelevant to the cost if it significantly reuses assets, which it seems to do though not hugely.

But the big marker is time; ME2 took 2 years to make, DA:O took 6. That's 6 years of a full-time staff working full-time hours, albeit with pauses, to work through the canceled editions. There is no doubt in my mind DA:O was significantly more expensive than ME2, but that has to do with its unique, prolonged dev cycle, not its design.

 

[Volourn]

"No one claimed that."

"i.e. make it more RPG and less shooter than ME1, it would have got lower review scores and sold about 90% less copies. "

O RLY? No doubt the person I'm quoting was exaggerating which is the norm; but still bullshit.



"NPD numbers are always a small fragment of total world-wide real sales, excluding digital sales, and completely unreliable. "

True, true.

Then again, I never said without a doubt that DA will outsell ME2 just that it's not like it's some huge failure. Everyone should know that full fledge rpgs are going to have a smaller market. It shouldn't be news.

And, if ME2 has really sold 3.9 mil already, that's beyond impressive. ME2 (along with DA0 might just be the games where BIO has actually reached TRUE main stream success instead of being a very popular 'niche' developer.


Also, the idea that ME2 i selling so well because it's 'dumbed down' comapred to ME1 is silly since we all know most more casual gamers don't do that kind of research to even know that.

Chances are BIO/EA's advertising and the growing popularity of the BIO brand is expanding and is adding new customers (from the ones BIO already had).

In fact, I have little doubt that if BIO released MDK2 now it would sell way more than the half mil copies that it did. Heck, I'd bet if they released JE NOW IN 2010 As opposed to 2010 it would ahve sold more than the 1.5-2mil copies than it did simply because the BIO brand in the mainstream had grown a great deal since then.


"That's 6 years of a full-time staff working full-time hours"

Oh, come on. Are you truly making the argument that BIO had a full statf of 200-300 devloeprs working on DA throughout its 5years or so of development? Don't be on crack. The first few years were BIO writers and deisgners going over the world basics and gameplayd eisgn. And, the last year was mostly them ironing out as many bugs and issues as well so i doubt it was full staffed espicially no doubt many of their develoeprs likely started working on the expansion, and poentials eqals and othegr games BEFORE DA went gold.

Yeah, DA was likely more costly than ME2 but remember a lot of those costs will eaisly be recouped with expansions and sequels to cover the time they don't have to waste on graphics, world background, and the like either. Much like ME2 beenfits from much of the unievrse background costs being taken care of by ME1's devlopment cycle 9same with BG2 and its continuation of using old resources).

 

[Dionysus]

Of course this sends a clear message to Biow (and everyone else), that the more "streamlined" you make your RPG's the better they will sell, unfortunately.

Not really. The fact that Bioware can push a bunch of units of both products in close proximity suggests that there's room for both games.

And ME needed some serious work. Some of the gameplay elements were so fucked up that they needed to be overhauled or scrapped all together. Let's not pretend that this was a beloved classic.

 

[Volourn]

Except it was. Well. dunno about 'classic' since it's not exactly an olde rgame. Obviosuly, ME was well loved or ME2 would have bombed.

And, yeah, ME1 wasn't perfect but dumbiong down the character system and combat was not the way to fix it.

 

[Jaesun]

But the big marker is time; ME2 took 2 years to make,

Keep in mind bio spent longer making Mass Effect, but they now have more in-house tools for the unreal engine when they then moved on to ME2 to develop it.

 

[Azrael the cat]

But the big marker is time; ME2 took 2 years to make,

Keep in mind bio spent longer making Mass Effect, but they now have more in-house tools for the unreal engine when they then moved on to ME2 to develop it.

Plus concept work and so on. It's tough to compare the cost of developing ME2 as a stand-alone game vs DA:O. You need to factor in the time and cost saved by virtue of the work done on ME1.

I think the guy above hit the nail on the head in saying that the sales show that there's room for both in the market. I'm not sure that Bioware could ship that many units of two games in that short a time-frame if the games were DA:O and DA:In Space, or ME2 and ME:fantasy-version.

If any instruction came down from EA, it would have been 'make the two franchises as different from each other as you possibly can', so as to diversify their market. That, I suspect, would have been the primary motivation for making ME2 more of a shooter and even less of an rpg.

 

[Jaesun]

If any instruction came down from EA, it would have been 'make the two franchises as different from each other as you possibly can', so as to diversify their market. That, I suspect, would have been the primary motivation for making ME2 more of a shooter and even less of an rpg.

Agreed, that has been my feeling as well.

 

[Norfleet]

Honestly, the idea that RPGs need "stats" and "levels" and whatnot is purely cargo cult design. This produces the belief that because some high-profile RPGs have stats and levels, that having stats and levels therefore makes you an RPG. Of course, it doesn't work that way. The magic cargo doesn't return merely because you build an airfield.

 

[Darth Roxor]

At least the Mass Effect games are science fiction, which makes it possible that someone might mistake one of them for being a role-playing game, even though they look like shooters.

I needed him to remind me of the underlying stat-based, RPG-ness of this game. It's not obvious at a glance.

Head -> desk.

 

[Pliskin]

Weather we like it or not, we have to face the realities of the market. If Bioware had gone the other way with ME2, i.e. make it more RPG and less shooter than ME1, it would have got lower review scores and sold about 90% less copies.

Obsidien is going for the exact same market with AP.

The casual gamers and consoletards have taken over our beloved hobby and there's not a damn thing we can do about it. Video games are no longer a niche market. In fact gaming is now the no. 1 entertainment medium on the planet - bigger than movies, TV and music (in monetary terms - not necessarily participation rates).

It is how it is and it's not going to change anytime soon. All we can do is hope that bigger market attracts more indie's who may cater to our needs.

Exactly.

What I find so amazing, is that for the #1 money-making entertainment industry on the planet, it's still run by amateurs and dilettantes. Especially the "journalists" associated with the industry.

As you say, one can only hope that once it moves passed the illusion that it is still a hobby, and on into an actual industry, we get an influx of new blood interested in the Old School.

 

[Ch1ef]

At least the Mass Effect games are science fiction, which makes it possible that someone might mistake one of them for being a role-playing game, even though they look like shooters.

Dragon Age takes place in a very familiar land of humans, dwarves, elves, and blood-thirsty monsters. You'll find knights and mages, undead and ogres, dragons and giant spiders, werewolves and golems. It's a Tolkien-esque world aimed at creating instant recognition, familiarity, and comfort, if you're easily confused by unfamiliar worlds and anything original.

SAME LEVEL

 

[Lesifoere]

For the record: ME2 obviously is selling more then DA. Though it probably has as much to do with the fact that it has to be so dumbed down to be playable on consoles in the first place.

But ME2 is also a better game than DA. Shit as an RPG, but you know, it's actually not too tedious.

 

[MetalCraze]

various earned perks that would, for example, briefly display enemy positions on a mini-map before needing to shut off for a cool-down period.

Trve RPG Avelon iz god!!!

it sure looked like he was playing a third-person machine-gun raid of a Middle Eastern military complex.

OMG cocksucking media-whore you haven't played it you can't criticize!!!

It Doesn't Look Like A Role-Playing Game

What the fuck Kotatku is talking about? They are just retarded and trying to look hardcore. It's by Obsidian and Avellone - it's RPG!!!

 

[janjetina]

I don't understand so many emotional reactions about the article simply stating something that was obvious since AP and "innovative stance dialogue system" were announced.

 

[Chaud]

Honestly, the idea that RPGs need "stats" and "levels" and whatnot is purely cargo cult design. This produces the belief that because some high-profile RPGs have stats and levels, that having stats and levels therefore makes you an RPG. Of course, it doesn't work that way. The magic cargo doesn't return merely because you build an airfield.

Dumbing Down much?

Every RPG has stats, but not all games that have stats are RPGs. But we can chance the meaning of a term to whatever we like. The problem is that, then, we aren't speaking of the same thing anymore. So why use the same term for both?

 

[Darth Roxor]

Stats are redundant 'cause you can have C&C!!11

 

[ricolikesrice]

interactive movie with console action combat and barely any RPG elements but oh so awesome dialogue CHOICES made by bioware = mainstream RPG of the year

interactive movie with console action combat and almost zero RPG elements but oh so awesome dialogue CHOICES made by pollacks= codex RPG of the year

seeing how AP looks like another interactive movie with console action combat and barely any RPG elements but oh so awesome dialogue CHOICES ... it will obviously also find its fans and for eternity* will they battle with the mass effect and witcher fans which of their favourite action adventures is the best recent RPG. *until TW2,AP2 and ME3 come out that is.

whats funny though is that in the whole conflict the mainstream dudes look like the most reasonable ones, least most ME2 reviews mentioned "less of a RPG, more of a shooter"... the witcher codex review went the "the earth is flat" route by lying straight in your face that the game has a "focus on RPG mechanics"

 

[Overweight Manatee]

whats funny though is that in the whole conflict the mainstream dudes look like the most reasonable ones, least most ME2 reviews mentioned "less of a RPG, more of a shooter"... the witcher codex review went the "the earth is flat" route by lying straight in your face that the game has a "focus on RPG mechanics"

The thing is, ME2 let your team permanently die in some situations if you made a stupid choice. As far as being an RPG goes, thats far stronger then anything done in the shooter category. The shooting in ME2 was about as painful as combat in arcanum and there was 10x as much as it. I would say ME2 is better as an RPG then a shooter, just the same as the witcher.

 

[MetalCraze]

By 'some situations' you mean the final mission right?

 

[KalosKagathos]

the size of the gun's targeting reticule was affected by some of the player-character's gun-oriented stats

As usual, Skyway ignores the important part.

 

[SerratedBiz]

the size of the gun's targeting reticule was affected by some of the player-character's gun-oriented stats

As usual, Skyway ignores the important part.

You can still edit this post and never come back.

 

[Volourn]

"By 'some situations' you mean the final mission right?"

nO. U R DUM

 

[Lesifoere]

In what situations other than the suicide mission can your squad members die permanently? Apart from when you pick Morinth over Samara?