Timebean: I started playing SWTOR because of the two KOTOR games. I think especially the jedi knight story is very in the spirit of those games. Most of the stories are well written, typical Bioware trait, and they have some replayability, because you have dark and light Side options for every class story and some really memorable npcs. You can play all the storiylines alone. (Sorry for the OT)
There is nothing wrong with SWTOR... I did like the old Starwars movies...and the next 3 movies ok... so the first 6 movies were good.
However sorry Starwars in not good now.... the new movies are not good and feel like average movies. Of course your old game is based on idea of old movies.
I even like more the HALO movie then the new Starwars movies that are so average. I did buy this movie and it is better then new Starwars movies are for me: HALO
That said if I play a MMO I like fantasy and not SCIFI space MMO:s. Who said I am anti BIOWARE? I like old BG and Neverwinter Nights.
On sales I wonder if BG3 will sell more then 5 millions? IF BG3 will sells 5 million or even more then that then likely BG3 is not only PC game no instead also XBOX and Playstation release.
I bought it for the RPG part (not the D&D rule based fight system), because I saw a funny dialogue in a youtube preview with a goblin kid (saying some funny things about his dead parents).
I don't know if this will end as a good RPG, depends on the rest of the story and the upcoming companions. An the moddabilty (is that a word?), since I can't see Larian changing the character creator enough and many other things could benefit from a Skyrim treatment (that made that game playable for me, was just ignored until the mods saved it).
It's a good point to make, most people don't care about the rules set, and won't really notice it unless it's actively bad, sales are mostly about what people perceive the story and the companions to be like.
@fylimar I played The Old Republic MMO like a single-player game too (in fact it's the only MMO I've ever played), they really had some great storylines and good companions, it's too bad we probably won't be seeing anymore Knights of the Old Republic games in the future.
Kreia, man. Kotor 2 is great, but the way that old lady just manages to sell you on the mystique of the Force is unparalled. The way she builds up Revan, too. Such a shame that BW just decided to ruin him and scrap the Exile, because they needed an expansions.
Not that i don't love SWTOR, mind, it provides very good and out-of-the-box SW stories, but man, why couldn't they just leave those two alone.
Krea and Bindo for sure. Their take on the force and the way your perception of and relationship to the force impacted ur character (and the world around u) in both games was pretty compelling.
I could give two farts about lightsabers or ewoks, personally. But those games made me actually appreciate the Star Wars universe. I dig a good story with memorable dialogue and characters. Both games delivered that, I think.
But that is just what I like. I don’t really know what makes a game sell (back to the topic). I imagine marketing is key. Plenty of subpar games have great marketing and get that first initial rush of buyers who want the next new thing (eg CP77, Fallout 76). I am interested to see BG3s initial sales versus longevity of purchases. Of course, the latter may be linked to mod capabilities and large communities (eg Skyrim).
Would love to see something dark like KOTOR2 with modern graphics.
There are lot of rumors about remaster both KotOR & KotOR II. ... But some say it should be reworked into one new game, that shall canonize Revan's story ... some say that it will be just retexture of each title, and that they will be released separately again ... some say they will be properly remastered (retexture + adding some QoL stuff to older title) ... and some say that it was allways just a rumor.
I believe i have even seen some petition for Kotor remaster ... it had 300 000+ signs. :-/ I gues that is still not enough for Disney to bother.
Kinda sad they stopped Aperion project. I mean ... have you seen this?
Dantooine crystal cave melts my heart every time i see it.
Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 01/09/2109:43 AM.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
Ah yes…Apeiron project = another victim of Disney and their vice-like grip on the IPs of our childhoods. *sigh*. What a bummer that it will remain in the vault.
Aspyr remake could be s disaster, depending on choices made. Combat def needs an upgrade. Story could go deeper with more side quests and more npc interaction. Worlds could have stronger designs. All of that would be great. However…if they try to make it lighthearted and safe, if they cheese it up and fill it with easter eggs and Disneyesque garbage…it will end up a milktoast mess that nobody wants.
I would honestly prefer to play the mod remaster. But alas!!
Oh well…we can always look forward to new games, new ideas, new IPs!
I dunno ... i kinda liked the combat in kotor ... I can imagine some improvements tho, so im really curious when ... and more importantly, what will they show us.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
I mean, Kotor 1 was pretty lighthearted to begin with. Basically A New Hope with a bit of Empire at the end. It was Kotor 2 that went full Revenge.
And both did well what they set out do, by the way. As much as i prefer 2, the Sequels made me realize how worthy of praise even just a straight SW-story is.
Star Wars is my ur-fandom, so I try to be restrained whenever I talk about it. It's difficult for me to view each movie in a trilogy as discrete. Though Star Wars and Empire are the easiest.
I think Kotor 1 is a better game overall, while Kotor II is more interesting in its attempts to deal with headier philosophical concepts within the Star Wars universe, but how well it does that can be successful or not, depending a lot on your own engagement with those concepts, which for me is variable depending on my mood. It's like watching a movie with an ambiguous ending because it deals with questions that have no answer, or that loses credibility by endorsing more than one.
I think with few exceptions any series loses from its audience with every sequel, regardless of the story. Baldur's Gate 3 is a reboot, and a reboot of a fairly hallowed series so we should probably expect The Force Awakens level of hype/marketing that will bring in a lot of people. Most people haven't played the original games, but I do think most people have probably heard of them, and usually with respect to how influential they are.
This could lead to a bit of a backlash from people coming in blind not really understanding what they're in for and then being disappointed by a game regardless of how good it is. Baldur's Gate 3 will likely be the start of its own trilogy, so it's not totally irrelevant how seriously WotC and Larian take that potentially unhelpful feedback.
(Almost) all the best selling so called RPGs are fairly streamlined, cinematic, action-adventureish fares when compared to what was going on throughout the "Golden Age" of New World Computing, Sir-Tech, SSI, Origin, later on Black Isle, Troika et all. Depending on your preferences, that may be a good thing. But there's been a significant shift in games development, as none of these games back then ever shipped enough numbers that would justify the investment of the big dogs (which naturally goes for modern games trying similar stuff all the same).
Dragon Age:Origins was arguably the last time Bioware tried to harken back to the "old days" some, it was meant to be BG updated for a newer audience (and even that is heavily streamlined when compared to BG et all, and still heavily ecplised in sales by other titles, which is why it was their last). Thus, the best BG3 could do is bridging that gap somewhat between the "new" and the "old", and show that different approaches, including tactical party based combat and pen&paper mechanics may not sell Witchere'sque hotcakes, but still be somewhat viable. The same goes for D&D games at least somewhat true to the source material, character options and rules. I mean, there's still obvious differences between BG1+2 and this. But it's already in the name "Baldur's Gate 3", innit.
And if BG3 doesn't do that, I don't care. The fallout of the kickstarter "renaissance" is still going strong in fairly high/er profile games such as Pathfinder, as well as interesting indies such as Broken Roards alike. Whilst I enjoyed the likes of Skyrim back then well enough despite the ever declining character systems in the TES series (played Daggerfall as my first), the dumb puzzles, rail-roaded dungeons and excessive hand-holding ruining most sense of discovery; and whilst I totally digged New Vegas (which is AAA RPG done right in my book, it's basically "oldschool" Fallout in 3d) -- I'd never have gotten as into RPGs again wouldn't it have been for that renaissance. In a sense, BG3 may have never happened without it too (I wasn't too fond of DOS -- but without it, BG3 would have never had a pitch success).
For a time I was hoping Bloodlines 2 to build similar bridges with its more popular FPS format, action combat and deep RPG mechanics as well as player agency (just as Bloodlines 1 had those), but alas, I think we can write that one off completely. (And Bloodlines 1 never sold huge numbers already too). But then, New Vegas as a possible bridge builder also was quickly abandoned (a shimmer of hope for me) in favor of Bethesda's subsequent Fallout games.
Sorry, don't buy this claim at all. I don't see EA sales being 2 million right now. Furthermore, and more importantly, I see the EA sales as NOT being the tip of the sales iceberg and rather as the BULK of sales for the game. In other words, people who like this game have already bought it in EA, and there are not that many people left out there who will be buying it after it comes out of EA. I see total sales at no more than 5 million max, under the best of circumstances, which is what DA:O sold, so not at all an impressive showing for a AAA game.
Hmm, curious. What would be a good showing, if something around 5 million isn't? When we look at things like Skyrim, how many of those sales are people buying multiple copies? I have 2, one for PC, and one for XBox. Am I the only one, or are there millions of others just like me? How many of those are going to buy the latest edition, that's slated for release due to it's anniversary?
How many people that may be interested took Larian's advice from the store fronts, and are waiting for full release, or for reviews after full release? From where I'm sitting, even just the million copies is a decent enough showing for a AAA game. It certainly shows that there's a reason to develop and release the game, even if it just doubles the initial sales. If it hits 5 million, it would put it in line with some of the most popular RPGs out there. There's this post https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=786065#Post786065 that shows that ME 2 sold 5 million copies. I guess that game isn't as popular as the internet would lead us to believe? I mean, if 5 million copies is a lackluster showing, it can't be all that popular, right?
Sorry, don't buy this claim at all. I don't see EA sales being 2 million right now. Furthermore, and more importantly, I see the EA sales as NOT being the tip of the sales iceberg and rather as the BULK of sales for the game. In other words, people who like this game have already bought it in EA, and there are not that many people left out there who will be buying it after it comes out of EA. I see total sales at no more than 5 million max, under the best of circumstances, which is what DA:O sold, so not at all an impressive showing for a AAA game.
Hmm, curious. What would be a good showing, if something around 5 million isn't? When we look at things like Skyrim, how many of those sales are people buying multiple copies? I have 2, one for PC, and one for XBox. Am I the only one, or are there millions of others just like me? How many of those are going to buy the latest edition, that's slated for release due to it's anniversary?
How many people that may be interested took Larian's advice from the store fronts, and are waiting for full release, or for reviews after full release? From where I'm sitting, even just the million copies is a decent enough showing for a AAA game. It certainly shows that there's a reason to develop and release the game, even if it just doubles the initial sales. If it hits 5 million, it would put it in line with some of the most popular RPGs out there. There's this post https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=786065#Post786065 that shows that ME 2 sold 5 million copies. I guess that game isn't as popular as the internet would lead us to believe? I mean, if 5 million copies is a lackluster showing, it can't be all that popular, right?
When I talk sales here I am speaking purely in a commercial and marketing context. A game that sells just a couple of million can still be a success in many other ways, including being a "fan favorite." For me, then, AAA success amounts to the sales numbers of games like Skyrim and Witcher 3, 42 M and 35 M respectively. Even games like DA:I and ME3 have sold around 10 M. By contrast, commercially successful AA games like The Outer Worlds 1 have sold around 3 M, and older games like DA:O and ME2 sold around 5 M. And then you have games like D:OS2 and P:Km with sales in the 2+ M range. So this gives me a sense of where the cutoff point may be for sales "success" between a AA game and a AAA game, and that seems to be around 5 M. In other words, if it's a AA game, sales of about 2-3 M would be good and around 5 M would be excellent. Whereas for a AAA game, around 10 M is the low point for being viewed as a success.
But the bottom line is that this is just my personal take. People can see this in whatever way they want. I'm sure there are people out there who will sing the sales success of a game that sold 2 M even while putting down another game that sold 5 M, all because they personally loved the first game and hated the second game. All people are ultimately subjective, myself included.
Sorry, don't buy this claim at all. I don't see EA sales being 2 million right now. Furthermore, and more importantly, I see the EA sales as NOT being the tip of the sales iceberg and rather as the BULK of sales for the game. In other words, people who like this game have already bought it in EA, and there are not that many people left out there who will be buying it after it comes out of EA. I see total sales at no more than 5 million max, under the best of circumstances, which is what DA:O sold, so not at all an impressive showing for a AAA game.
Hmm, curious. What would be a good showing, if something around 5 million isn't? When we look at things like Skyrim, how many of those sales are people buying multiple copies? I have 2, one for PC, and one for XBox. Am I the only one, or are there millions of others just like me? How many of those are going to buy the latest edition, that's slated for release due to it's anniversary?
How many people that may be interested took Larian's advice from the store fronts, and are waiting for full release, or for reviews after full release? From where I'm sitting, even just the million copies is a decent enough showing for a AAA game. It certainly shows that there's a reason to develop and release the game, even if it just doubles the initial sales. If it hits 5 million, it would put it in line with some of the most popular RPGs out there. There's this post https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=786065#Post786065 that shows that ME 2 sold 5 million copies. I guess that game isn't as popular as the internet would lead us to believe? I mean, if 5 million copies is a lackluster showing, it can't be all that popular, right?
When I talk sales here I am speaking purely in a commercial and marketing context. A game that sells just a couple of million can still be a success in many other ways, including being a "fan favorite." For me, then, AAA success amounts to the sales numbers of games like Skyrim and Witcher 3, 42 M and 35 M respectively. Even games like DA:I and ME3 have sold around 10 M. By contrast, commercially successful AA games like The Outer Worlds 1 have sold around 3 M, and older games like DA:O and ME2 sold around 5 M. And then you have games like D:OS2 and P:Km with sales in the 2+ M range. So this gives me a sense of where the cutoff point may be for sales "success" between a AA game and a AAA game, and that seems to be around 5 M. In other words, if it's a AA game, sales of about 2-3 M would be good and around 5 M would be excellent. Whereas for a AAA game, around 10 M is the low point for being viewed as a success.
But the bottom line is that this is just my personal take. People can see this in whatever way they want. I'm sure there are people out there who will sing the sales success of a game that sold 2 M even while putting down another game that sold 5 M, all because they personally loved the first game and hated the second game. All people are ultimately subjective, myself included.
Here's my problem with your analysis, and I asked about it in my post: How many of those sales numbers are people buying multiple copies? I own The Witcher once, and 2 copies of both 2 and 3. One each for PC and XBox. The same applies to all of the ME games, including the recent release. I have 2 copies of Skyrim, but I'm not buying the recent release, and I didn't touch the VR version. Skyrim is an interesting choice here, since there's Vanilla for all platforms, then the Special Edition, and 3 or 4 other re-releases. Then there's the platform issue. Currently, this game isn't available on consoles. So let's compare apples to apples, what are the Skyrim sales for PC/Stadia? How do they compare? The same for the Witcher series. Then, let's compare initial release sales for the one platform. It's not that I think this game's going to be a record setter, although it might, but when I see people comparing sales numbers from 5 or 6 platforms, over 10 years, vs a single platform release, in EA, I start scratching my head, wondering what they're trying to prove.
Edit: Upon re-reading this it seems rather snarky, and that's not my intent. Sorry if it seems rude.
Good sales means more RPG fodder in the future and maybe a D:OS3.
I applaud all of that. I'm glad I bought the game in EA, it's already a ton of fun (got > 100 hours on Steam), I will closely follow the development process in the future, it made me buy dice even (Amazon told me they will be here tomorrow) and it even made consider starting tabletop D&D.
So... I'm happy with Larian, with BG3, with D:OS2 and I hope this will help giving birth to a new era of RPGs on computers, one, where this genre I love so much (since days of Ultima VI actually, yes, I'm THAT old) will be seen by more gamers as something they can really enjoy.
Good sales means more RPG fodder in the future and maybe a D:OS3.
I wouldn't say that good sales [of BG3] means maybe a D:OS3. If anything, relatively disappointing sales of BG3 would be more likely to give us a DOS3, as Larian would decide that making D&D games isn't profitable and go back to their golden goose. Assuming of course that sales of BG3 are good enough that Larian doesn't go bankrupt, which is already true I think.
Whereas if BG3 sells 10M+ copies, then I doubt we'll see another DOS game for a while.
