You shouldn't be expecting BF to outsell COD. You should be looking to see if BF eats market share and causes COD sales to miss expectations.
I'm honestly confused by the push for open weapons by part of the community. If you don't like the class system, why not just play 2042?
I mean, judging by most of the comments here, it's hard to blame devs for repeatedly making bloated open worlds and filling them with grindy, repetitive tasks. Apparently that's what many gamers see as value now. People would really rather have a bland open world with about 8 hours of good story missions padded out with 60 hours of fetch quests and time trials, than a tight 10-15 hour game.
@Gardenia
Bummer. But I wasn't talking about the European price (though I don't see why it's higher), hence my only mentioning the USD symbol. People have been posting that it was going to be $80 in the US for weeks and it was false.
Also nice that it isn't $80. Some "insiders" definitely hurt their credibility with that. People were talking about that like it was an established fact.
Yeah it would be pretty weird to strand a game only on Xbox at this point when Microsoft is even moving away from that.
So many people had their entire impression of BFV from one trailer (or in most cases, what influencers said about that one trailer). Friends would tell me they didn't want to play it because they didn't want to see a guy with a bionic leg running around with a pirate sword in WWII, but I never saw anything like that actually playing. I don't think I would have even known you could play as women if it hasn't been such a big part of the advertising.
And of cou...
A bunch of websites are running stories today saying that EA denied that BF will be $80. But if you actually look at what was said, I don't read it as a direct denial, but rather a general statement that they don't have plans to change their pricing.
https://www.gamespot.com/ar...
@derek
Yeah, I mean I'm never going to try to estimate exact lifetime sales based solely on launch weekend Steam concurrents. But I will use the information I have to make educated estimates. Like if a game completely underperforms similar titles in terms of its Steam numbers, I'm going to assume it is underperforming on console too, unless there is some rational reason not to (i.e. game launched on GP, the game is from a series that is closely associated with PlayStation and...
This. If I have some data available, and the people who could provide me with full data elect not to do so, I'm going to use the data I do have to make educated estimates on the full picture. I'm not just going to assume that the hidden data paints a completely different picture than the available data.
Again, if there is some logical reason to go against the Steam data, I'll consider it. Like if a game launches on Gamepass, I'm not going to compare its stea...
And every time someone makes this argument, I'll always go back to the response: we can only use the data available to us. It's the same with the weekly UK physical game sales charts. Do we know they aren't perfect/complete? Yes. But should we ignore the available data just because we don't have all possible data? No. And that's particularly true when we aren't going to get the rest of the data because the other platforms are hiding it.
You say peopl...
"You can’t literally use the exact same formula for every game for over 10 years without change then blame everything and everyone for no longer finding any of it interesting."
The thing is, I think this is exactly how they got hung up. Although there could be some debates about when the "Ubisoft formula" started, I think Assassin's Creed II is a fair place to say it truly started (prior open world games they made like Far Cry 2 were not so hand-hold...
I think they got complacent during the late PS3/360 era through the PS4/XONE era and they can't adjust to the new reality. During that period, they were repeatedly rewarded financially for doing the same type of open world game over and over again. Also Rainbow Six: Siege taking off the way it did during the PS4 era probably reinforced some pretty bad behaviors, considering it's a microtransaction machine. And during that era something like Clair Obscur could have easily been overlook...
@Cellblock11
Part of the issue is that if the store is cluttered up with trash, it makes discovery of real games that much more difficult, particularly for indies. This has already been an issue for awhile with the amount of shovelware, and AI only adds to the problem.
So yes, gamers refusing to buy these games is part of the solution. But it doesn't fix the entire problem.
@MrBaskerville
That is definitely a factor here, since it has been 5 years since Ghost of Tsushima and that one came out on prior generation hardware. As you say, even when iterative sequels were more acceptable, they usually came out sooner and were developed for the same hardware as the prior game.
Although some franchises still get away with it, there is definitely a trend amongst a large section of gamers to look down on iterative sequels. Basically if a sequel isn't a seismic shift, it's "mid." A great recent example is the perception of God of War Ragnarok compared to the 2018 reboot. While both sold well, the narrative around Ragnarok was much less positive.
A lot of people have turned on the concept of iterative sequels in recent years. They expect every sequel to be a seismic shift or it's "mid."
So did you wait for the limited physical release of BG3?
There are STACKS of them at my Kmart in Madeupville, Nebraska, so that must mean there is no demand.
/s.
Yep. Classic tactic for when you want to say you gave consumers input but you also want to reach a specific conclusion.