Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous has sold a million copies - A stellar or abysmal performance?

[Jarmaro]

The pirate setting has nothing to do with it. You can make an RPG out of any setting. It makes zero difference.

Blatantly detatched from reality. Some setting straight-up are more compelling to consumers than others. You are not going to advertise an underground, cave-dwelling setting as well as your average fantasy setting with elves and dwarves. And a pirate setting? It's down there with the worst of them. I can imagine anything more boring and uninteresting than ship sailing and pirates. The concept is hollow and barren.
Of course you could try to make it work - and can even succeed! But it'd require a disproportionate effort and time.

Not as if the first PoE game was compelling anyway, that weird, clunky piece of mismatched ideas and concepts full of bloated lore-dumps couldn't enchant a child. Next to zero cultural impact. If they weren't able to improve upon the most generic setting possible, how were they supposed to tackle something exponentially harder? For some things you need competency, and that was in short supply at their studio. In writing department, at least.

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

There were lots of talk about "below expectations" sales, There is a strong doubt Pillars 2 sold over half a million.
I.e.
https://www.gamewatcher.com/news/pillars-of-eternity-2-sales

Nigga the link you posted is sales data from 2018.

 

[Delterius]

It didn't sell well, because only like 10% of poe1 owners finished poe1.

Damn those are incredibly good numbers for poe1

 

[Harthwain]

Blatantly detatched from reality. Some setting straight-up are more compelling to consumers than others. You are not going to advertise an underground, cave-dwelling setting as well as your average fantasy setting with elves and dwarves. And a pirate setting? It's down there with the worst of them. I can imagine anything more boring and uninteresting than ship sailing and pirates. The concept is hollow and barren.
Of course you could try to make it work - and can even succeed! But it'd require a disproportionate effort and time.

I don't agree with that take. Just because you make a generic fantasy doesn't mean it will be successful and neither a pirate (fantasy) will automatically be a failure either. Look at Pirates of the Carribean. Sid Meier's Pirates! Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag. The Curse of the Monkey Island. To me it is more about how you handle the game, not the setting as such.

The problem with Pillars of Eternity 2 was being part of Pillars of Eternity, more than anything else. The reason Pillars of Eternity 1 did better was mainly because it was riding on the Kickstarter's hype and the actual release was a big disappointment to many (including me). Then you have the kind of association that comes with sharing the name in the title and... that's pretty much it.

 

[Russia is over. The end.]

Blatantly detatched from reality.

You are. Maybe you've heard of a blockbuster called the Pirates of the Caribbean. There's nothing uncompelling about pirates. It's your personal distaste for some reason that you're projecting on others.

Not to mention, pirates is 17th century. Anything from that century can be included. That means everything. It's as broad a subject as it can get.

 

[Jarmaro]

Maybe I should've elaborated more on why the setting's bad, but you guys don't understand what I wrote. Comparing Pillars 2 to Pirates of the Caribbean is laughable. Of course you can do pirates wtih their historical context, but trying to do it without the historical context the setting cannot stand on its own legs. Pirates of the Carribean and AC:Black Flag both used the setting in its historical context. Every setting can be used sucessfuly if you distill its most compelling features, but as a whole the pirate setting isn't as compelling as other to an average consumer. That's not my personal preference, I merely share that preference with the overwhelming majority of population.

And again, to reiterate because apparently I haven't made myself clear enough: Pirate setting can be used in a good and compelling way if you have a talented writer and designers that squeeze the most out of it, realizing it to its full potential. But anyone who isn't both talented and very interested in 'pirates' shouldn't seriously try it. Because the result is something like Pillars 2.

 

[Harthwain]

Comparing Pillars 2 to Pirates of the Caribbean is laughable. Of course you can do pirates wtih their historical context, but trying to do it without the historical context the setting cannot stand on its own legs. Pirates of the Carribean and AC:Black Flag both used the setting in its historical context.

Pirates of the Carribean had very strong supernatural elements and Black Flag had strong fictional elements (going as far as having a ghost ship), despite using historical context, so I am not sure what you're trying to say here. Pure "fantasy in pirate setting" may not be attractive, but fantasy understood as "pirates with supernatural elements" will not be a problem for an RPG.

Every setting can be used sucessfuly if you distill its most compelling features

So it's the matter of handling the setting, not the setting itself.

And again, to reiterate because apparently I haven't made myself clear enough: Pirate setting can be used in a good and compelling way if you have a talented writer and designers that squeeze the most out of it, realizing it to its full potential. But anyone who isn't both talented and very interested in 'pirates' shouldn't seriously try it. Because the result is something like Pillars 2.

You can say pretty much the same thing about any setting. Even generic fantasy. Boring shit will be boring anyways, as proved by Pillars 1.

 

[Delterius]

Non standard settings under performing and at best developing cult status is rather self evident. Claiming otherwise seems rather copeful to me given the track record of the genre. There's a reason Oblivion is set in wales rather than roman vietnam.

 

[VHS9000]

Yesterday I gave WotR another chance cause of the big beta-patch released. Was surprised once again how much work the game does for the purpose to be annoying and exhausting. So a million copies is still too much for this trash.

 

[Cross]

Non standard settings under performing and at best developing cult status is rather self evident. Claiming otherwise seems rather copeful to me given the track record of the genre. There's a reason Oblivion is set in wales rather than roman vietnam.

Deadfire doesn't have a 'non-standard' setting. Obsidian's stated goal with the Pillars setting was to create a Baldur's Gate/Forgotten Realms clone, with some superficial differences to give the illusion of originality.

You mention Oblivion, but not the preceding game with the more distinctive setting, Morrowind. It was a major commercial success that saved Bethesda.

While non-standard settings are obviously a harder sell, it's not as simple as 'generic setting = guaranteed success' and 'original setting = doomed to fail'.

 

[Roguey]

It was released in September 2000, and the archive @StrongBelwas posted shows it at 1.5 million by Dec 2002, but there's no real date on that. It's just when they updated with their About page, or else when the archiver noticed it was updated. Before that they were just totaling it with the combined sales of the series, which totaled at over 4 million copies within the 4 years since BG1's release. That's one million sales per year. BG2 likely surpassed one million worldwide within its first year - or just short of it, which would explain why they didn't announce the milestone.

Baldur's Gate was also at roughly one million sales worldwide within its first year btw.

You said BG, not BG2. In that case I'll wikiquote:

PC Data reported Baldur's Gate II's sales at 199,914 copies and its revenues at $9.2 million in the United States by the end of 2000.[128] The game's success in the country continued during 2001, when it finished 15th for January and sold another 103,144 units between February and the first week of November alone.[129][130] It tallied 225,763 domestic sales for the full year, which drew $9.63 million in revenue.[131]

The rule of thumb is to double US sales to get the international total. That would be about 500,000 copies in a year.

Wrath of the Tranny been out since 2021. That's over a year, and in a market with more RPG players worldwide than ever. I would have expected at least twice those sales by now.

What makes you think the market for pseudo-iso party-based RPGs has significantly increased? The number of people who play games has increased, yes, but they're dimwits and midwits who are into Skryim and co-op.

It didn't sell well on release probably because 'pirate setting'

It didn't sell well, because only like 10% of poe1 owners finished poe1. That's how many people wanted more of that turd.

The pirate setting has nothing to do with it. You can make an RPG out of any setting. It makes zero difference.

Most people don't finish games, but it has no bearing on whether or not they enjoyed it enough to buy a sequel. Most people didn't finish D:OS either. I'm with Sawyer, the Deadfire problem was poor marketing. The fact that nearly a million people have bought it now and its Steam user score is still good shows that things like "setting" or "gameplay" or "writing" or "the previous game" weren't dissuading factors.

 

[Cross]

Just for comparison see how Pillars 2 did.

Deadfire eventually made a profit.

399.3 k .. 958.3 k on reviews
~1.14 M by PlayTracker
~643.5 k by VG Insights
~935.0 k by SteamSpy

Close enough to a million.

Wrath of the Righteous has almost twice as many user reviews on Steam as Deadfire (20k vs 11.5k). If they both sold a million copies, how come there's such a big discrepancy there?

 

[Roguey]

Deadfire eventually made a profit.

399.3 k .. 958.3 k on reviews
~1.14 M by PlayTracker
~643.5 k by VG Insights
~935.0 k by SteamSpy

Close enough to a million.

Wrath of the Righteous has almost twice as many user reviews on Steam as Deadfire (20k vs 11.5k). If they both sold a million copies, how come there's such a big discrepancy there?

If they don't care enough to leave a review, they won't. Wrath numbers:
499.1 k .. 1.37 M on reviews
~792.6 k by PlayTracker
~747.8 k by VG Insights
~930.0 k by SteamSpy

 

[Russia is over. The end.]

Most people don't finish games, but it has no bearing on whether or not they enjoyed it enough to buy a sequel.

From "most people don't finish games", you don't jump to "it has no bearing".

From most people don't finish games, you can jump to something like "with 50% finish rate, you're great, they'll all still buy the next installment". 10% finish rate is abysmal. Poe1 is proven shit by the numbers.

For comparison, GoW3: 56%, Portal 2: 40%, Dark Souls 3: 50%, Dark Souls 2: 38% (it's a controversial game). Take a hint.

 

[Cat Headed Eagle]

Sales figures are important because they are an indicator for investors and director boards to greenlight projects. They matter. And it's not just that Sons of The Forest follows current trends (which is a bit amusing because this "trend" has been going on for years now), The Forest itself was a very popular game and many people followed it.
I think WOTR selling this much is a good sign for the genre. We might see more crpgs like it in the future which means there's at least a chance of getting more decent games.
POE2's marketing was really bad yes, but I don't think the pirate setting hurt it. People have been clamoring for a while for a good pirate themed game, even if they want another Black Flag. Even if it made a profit I don't think they are ready to admit their last "brand" game was a flop.

 

[Cat Headed Eagle]

Most people don't finish games, but it has no bearing on whether or not they enjoyed it enough to buy a sequel.

From "most people don't finish games", you don't jump to "it has no bearing".

From most people don't finish games, you can jump to something like "with 50% finish rate, you're great, they'll all still buy the next installment". 10% finish rate is abysmal. Poe1 is proven shit by the numbers.

For comparison, GoW3: 56%, Portal 2: 40%, Dark Souls 3: 50%, etc.

10% completion is somewhat okay ish for games that aren't the type of stuff you mentioned. Those are above your average videogame in terms of being stuff that people have their eyes on and have what we might call a certain "pedigree". They are the first choices for someone who wants to take part in the gaming ecosystem, of sorts, and it's very rare that someone would go for a crpg as a first choice for gaming.

 

[Russia is over. The end.]

Most people don't finish games, but it has no bearing on whether or not they enjoyed it enough to buy a sequel.

From "most people don't finish games", you don't jump to "it has no bearing".

From most people don't finish games, you can jump to something like "with 50% finish rate, you're great, they'll all still buy the next installment". 10% finish rate is abysmal. Poe1 is proven shit by the numbers.

For comparison, GoW3: 56%, Portal 2: 40%, Dark Souls 3: 50%, etc.

10% completion is somewhat okay ish for games that aren't the type of stuff you mentioned. Those are above your average videogame in terms of being stuff that people have their eyes on and have what we might call a certain "pedigree". They are the first choices for someone who wants to take part in the gaming ecosystem, of sorts, and it's very rare that someone would go for a crpg as a first choice for gaming.

Give examples of great or just good games that only 10% people finished. I'll wait.

 

[Roguey]

Most people don't finish games, but it has no bearing on whether or not they enjoyed it enough to buy a sequel.

From "most people don't finish games", you don't jump to "it has no bearing".

From most people don't finish games, you can jump to something like "with 50% finish rate, you're great, they'll all still buy the next installment". 10% finish rate is abysmal. Poe1 is proven shit by the numbers.

For comparison, GoW3: 56%, Portal 2: 40%, Dark Souls 3: 50%, Dark Souls 2: 38% (it's a controversial game). Take a hint.

Those are action games.

Divinity: Original Sin I and II were the clear winners of the Kickstarter revolution.

D:OS Classic https://steamcommunity.com/stats/230230/achievements
Grande finale
You have totally, completely, and utterly finished the game! Woooo!!!!1 7.3%

D:OS EE https://steamcommunity.com/stats/373420/achievements
Grande finale
You have totally, completely, and utterly finished the game. 11.5%

D:OS 2 https://steamcommunity.com/stats/435150/achievements
Sourcerer
Complete the game in Explorer Mode (everyone who completes it gets this at the minimum) 11.6%

That only 12% of the millions who buy them complete them doesn't stop those same millions from buying each subsequent Larian game.

 

[Russia is over. The end.]

D:OS Classic https://steamcommunity.com/stats/230230/achievements
Grande finale
You have totally, completely, and utterly finished the game! Woooo!!!!1 7.3%

D:OS EE https://steamcommunity.com/stats/373420/achievements
Grande finale
You have totally, completely, and utterly finished the game. 11.5%

D:OS 2 https://steamcommunity.com/stats/435150/achievements
Sourcerer
Complete the game in Explorer Mode (everyone who completes it gets this at the minimum) 11.6%

Thanks for confirming that DOS is utter shit and why "BG" 3 will be as well.
The only reason that shit is bought is due to co-op. Co-op with your gf for an hour, okay great, let's do it again in 3 years when the sequel comes out. Doesn't work for single player games.

 

[Desiderius]

Blatantly detatched from reality. Some setting straight-up are more compelling to consumers than others. You are not going to advertise an underground, cave-dwelling setting as well as your average fantasy setting with elves and dwarves. And a pirate setting? It's down there with the worst of them. I can imagine anything more boring and uninteresting than ship sailing and pirates. The concept is hollow and barren.
Of course you could try to make it work - and can even succeed! But it'd require a disproportionate effort and time.

I don't agree with that take. Just because you make a generic fantasy doesn't mean it will be successful and neither a pirate (fantasy) will automatically be a failure either. Look at Pirates of the Carribean. Sid Meier's Pirates! Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag. The Curse of the Monkey Island. To me it is more about how you handle the game, not the setting as such.

The problem with Pillars of Eternity 2 was being part of Pillars of Eternity, more than anything else. The reason Pillars of Eternity 1 did better was mainly because it was riding on the Kickstarter's hype and the actual release was a big disappointment to many (including me). Then you have the kind of association that comes with sharing the name in the title and... that's pretty much it.

I liked PoE1. Deadfire flopped on release because it was insultingly faceroll. Once they fixed that it did better. Still overbalensed with too many shitty quests (including main) because Soyer has lost his goddamned mind.

 

[Desiderius]

I don't finish games anymore but typically get around 2/3 thru. DOS games run out of new skillz about halfway.

 

[Roguey]

Thanks for confirming that DOS is utter shit and why "BG" 3 will be as well.
The only reason that shit is bought is due to co-op. Co-op with your gf for an hour, okay great, let's do it again in 3 years when the sequel comes out. Doesn't work for single player games.

Show me a dozens of hours long non-action RPG with a decent completion rate.

Even with a story game like Disco Elysium, the highest achievement is 33% https://steamcommunity.com/stats/632470/achievements

 

[Harthwain]

I liked PoE1. Deadfire flopped on release because it was insultingly faceroll.

I am not sure about that. Pillars of Eternity I has 13,731 reviews (Very Positive - 87%). Pillars of Eternity II has 11,451 reviews (Very Positive - 87%). The amount of reviews is very similar and the reviews themselves are pretty much identical. Yet Deadfire sold below expectations. Why? My reasoning still stands: that people who backed Pillars of Eternity I on Kickstarter didn't bother buying (and therefore reviewing) Deadfire, because Pillars of Eternity didn't have the magic they were expecting to find.

My money is on that, because the brand (in this case - Pillars of Eternity) is more likely to pull or push people away than the setting in which the game is set in.

Even with a story game like Disco Elysium, the highest achievement is 33% https://steamcommunity.com/stats/632470/achievements

That is not a good example though, because getting Kim to trust you has no bearing on the player being able to complete the game.

 

[Roguey]

That is not a good example though, because getting Kim to trust you has no bearing on the player being able to complete the game.

Unfortunately ZAUM didn't include a regular completion achievement.

Dungeons of Nabbledegook https://steamcommunity.com/stats/970830/achievements 22.8%
Soylasta https://steamcommunity.com/stats/1096530/achievements 21.6%
King Arthur Knight's Tale https://steamcommunity.com/stats/1157390/achievements 14.7%

 

[Harthwain]

Unfortunately ZAUM didn't include a regular completion achievement.

True, but in that case I'd argue that the completion level is somewhere above 33%.