I unfortunately know about the Dragon Age fan community, they are rabidly left wing even around the time of inquisition, a lot more than Mass Effect. Had one of them who I was chatting friendly with suddenly block me because I dared to critique inquisition to point out it's flaws.
So I think this will do moderate sales, this won't flop like Concord or a Ubisoft game just because of how rabidly devoted and left wing the Dragon Age fan base is.
A game needs more people than just its 'fan base'. Though these reviews may be just from the fan base, because normies obviously aren't going to be aware that a game was released.
Also, how much stupidity is there in the game. Could it be that they have not encountered it yet, or that they do not consider 2 minutes to be disqualifying (not my opinion, but probably pretty common)?
Western games, yeah they need more thanks to their bloated budgets.
Asian games, they live off having niche audiences that CONSISTENTLY buy their games each year, bringing in a few more by it's quality.
I'm just saying don't expect a flop like others this year because of that fanbase. Hell look at their reddit for example, they banned EVERYONE from their subreddit who is also subbed on Asmongold, they really live inside a leftist bubble.
I don't have a problem with games that have their niche and the developpers knowing how to cater to their fan base.
However, here I presume 0.05% of the fan base actually desire the troon pronoun flagellation ritual scene and the rest of the troon stuff, and 5% want the racial diversity. This isn't organic. The ''strong whammen'' fantasy in most games and media however seems popular.
It's so predictable that when the cartoon I'm currently watching ( a 5.5/10 Zom 100: Bucket List of the Dead ) had a ''badass masked samurai slicing zombies up like a pro'', I automatically assumed ''this is going to be a woman. probably a foreigner. you're not suverting my expectations, you're annoying me''.
It also peaked at 70k players on release day. Not anything like Concord's awful release, but also not good for a worldwide release of a 10 year development AAA game. We'll see what happens over the first weekend, but given that it currently has 38k playing while the Monster Hunter Wilds beta test has 319k playing I don't think the sales numbers are going to be all that hot.
Concord was a new IP in a dead end genre. Its woke nonsense didn't help, but it likely would have failed without it. Just like Battleborn and Lawbreakers and all the others before it, that at least had the sense to come out when the iron was hot.
People seeking another Concord will be disappointed almost everytime because its unique in its cataclysm. Its like the guys on /v/ that need every single game to be another TORtanic.
That's what I was thinking- you can figure out a game is really bad in a short amount of time but to tell if a story driven game, especially an RPG, you need a lot more time.
In a world where you can look however you want, be whatever you want and magically become whatever you want ... there are still trans scars in the character creator.
There's whole segments where you're chastised for something a character does. Not you, not your character, just a character. And you have to sit there and watch it.
It used to be that if a dialogue choice was just too much to sit through, even if it was lore and interesting, you could hit space to skip it, and just get what I liked to call a 'catch up popup' that would get tucked into the journal. Wanna know what it was? Go and check. Otherwise, almost the entire thing could be skipped and you'd be given footnotes on what was said if you wanted to check.
Not as good as hearing it from someone directly of course, but you get what they were saying without having to sit through an otherwise boring conversation that dragged on too long.
This is just ... what have people been calling it. A humiliation ritual, I think.
I can't think of any other reason why it was injected into the game other than that.
If you're into being lectured on how to talk to a fictional character in a fictional setting who can, by the way, look however they want and BE whatever they want magically, they choose to look like that, and choose to be as obnoxious as possible about it.
It's a real shame dragon age has been a total pile of ass since the first game and has sucked, with every title, ever since. Glad I boycott EA, nothing of value lost with this piece of shit IP.
Ya origins was pretty fun and then everything went to total shit. Regardless if wokeness, idk how people consume these games anymore. They just aren't fun.
DA2 had a lot of good ideas, but fumbled the ball on them so hard that it shot its own "oppression" message in the foot. Because anyone who walked out of that game not thinking all mages needed to be controlled and watched was a retarded bleeding heart, because they turn to blood magic if they stub their fucking toe.
I still think the "Rivals" mechanic is one of the better additions to the WRPG genre, if only because it finally allows you to disagree with your companions dogshit opinions and still "progress" their relationship.
I remember only playing a bit of da2 and it was too much on the rails after the open world of origins. Origins was basically up to you how the story went.
That's part of its whole failed "oppression" thing, where its separated into multiple "acts" with time skips in between to simulate the growing not-racial tension and changing city. Which again, good idea that was incredibly poorly done.
Also I don't think any game with the entire Mage Tower section, with the entire Fade section in the middle of it, can call a different game out for being on rails. DAO isn't as open as it seems, its just really smart about how it presents its linear progressions and the combat being good enough to let you not have to play it purely linearly (which DA2 fails it, as you get one shot super quickly and have literally only one healer available for extended combat sections).
That's part of its whole failed "oppression" thing, where its separated into multiple "acts" with time skips in between to simulate the growing not-racial tension and changing city. Which again, good idea that was incredibly poorly done.
In general in RPGs we move from location to location. Modern games have the issue more, that you cannot backtrack between acts and are stuck on the new continent or whatever.
DA2 did basically the same - except you didn't move in space between acts but in time. Which is fine in general.
But it leads to people revisiting the same map multiple times. Which is also okay, since other games can deal with having the same cave layout for multiple caves. Yet DA2 combined the thing. Same layout for multiple caves and revisting those locations. With not enough variation over the time axis (unlocking a new area in an old map, ...).
The wave system is also a nice idea. It makes sense when you infiltrate the thieves den that thieves come running and join the fight over time.
But again - they overdid it. Open world ambush where the enemy would throw everything at you at once? Reinforcements. It also doesn't make sense when ancient constructs, undead or elementals do the same thing.
(which DA2 fails it, as you get one shot super quickly and have literally only one healer available for extended combat sections).
I modded the game on my first playthrough and kept my mage sister in the party. Companions were already boring that I don't felt I missed out one dialogue.
Because starving people will eat absolute garbage, and due to a lack of options, will tolerate it.
Every medium of media and entertainment has become infected and the quality has massively collapsed. What people used to enjoy, now leaves a bitter taste in their mouth. But, since the infection has been so widespread, it's difficult to find alternatives. Since people are reluctant to change habits, and creating, researching, and seeking alternatives is difficult, people are more likely to accept the bad stuff. The degrade in quality, in terms of the people making this stuff, also results in fewer products being released, which results in the people becoming starved for it, so will be more willing to accept the bad stuff. A starving person will almost never turn down terrible food.
This limitation on products, much less good products, has become really apparent in gaming, and even moreso in specific genres, like RTS games, which used to be common and almost universally great games back in the 90s and 00s. But, this phenomenon goes way beyond gaming.
Yeah. Played origins, it was decent. The DLC was kinda suspect and I should have abstained because it just made origins worse, but whatever. Played 2, but I could see the writing on the wall even then. Didn't even touch 3.
The reviews for the game are wierd. Many of them say the game is bad but recommend it anyway. They all mention the lack of the ea launcher as a huge positive (who even cares? How many steam players know about the ea launcher). They all say performance is good. None of them talk about the tranny stuff. They don't sound remotely like other steam reviews
Seems like it wouldnt be hard to buy a bunch of fake reviews from India.
Max concurrent users was 70k, let's say triple that was unique users for the day, or 210k. We'll also assume no returns.
Let's say half bought the base and the other half got the digital deluxe. That means the game sold $6.3mil + $8.4 mil. $14.7 mil total.
Let's quadruple that to account for other platforms. $58.8 mil.
Steam/EGS/Etc. take a 30% cut, so that brings it down to $41.16 mil.
Next, we'll estimate costs:
Let's say the team size averaged 250 people per year. Less early on and more in the late stage. For estimation purposes, the general rule of thumb is that each dev costs about $200k. This includes salaries, benefits, equipment/license costs, realty, etc. That's $50 mil per year.
It's been in production since 2015. That bumps production costs up to $450 mil.
Marketing is double that. $900 mil.
Veilguard would need to sell 22x more units at the same standard/premium edition ratio to break even, which is about 4.6 million units. Sales aren't going to get any better. The first week tends to be the best sales week and it's down hill after that. It's also unlikely to sell more units in the latter days of that first week than on the first day.
As of this comment, there are more people playing Monster Hunter World than Dragon Age Veilguard.
The Wilds beta had almost 7x the peak concurrent players of Veilguard.
The wokes are favorably comparing DAV to Concord, as if anything that sells more than 25k copies and doesn’t lose $200-400 million is somehow a success.
EA is calling DAV it’s most successful single player steam launch ever - when most of their previous SP games were launched on other platforms first.
A journo compared DAV’s peak CCU to the current CCU of BG3 - a game that is over a year old and had almost 20x CCU closer to launch.
Maybe things change drastically over the weekend, but early returns are not, in fact, good for the great woke hope.
they've successfully alienated the anti-woke audience, and there are plenty of people who eat slop and call it good. the games also been heavily marketed, so I'm not too surprised.
Starfield peaked at >330K concurrent players and we all know how that went. Also, all the positive reviews have gotten clown emoji'ed and some of them are troll reviews.
Not to mention, this game has been in development for 9 years. There's a reason EA decided to launch it Day 1 on Steam and not try to milk the 100% cut on their own store.
I unfortunately know about the Dragon Age fan community, they are rabidly left wing even around the time of inquisition, a lot more than Mass Effect. Had one of them who I was chatting friendly with suddenly block me because I dared to critique inquisition to point out it's flaws.
So I think this will do moderate sales, this won't flop like Concord or a Ubisoft game just because of how rabidly devoted and left wing the Dragon Age fan base is.
A game needs more people than just its 'fan base'. Though these reviews may be just from the fan base, because normies obviously aren't going to be aware that a game was released.
Also, how much stupidity is there in the game. Could it be that they have not encountered it yet, or that they do not consider 2 minutes to be disqualifying (not my opinion, but probably pretty common)?
Western games, yeah they need more thanks to their bloated budgets.
Asian games, they live off having niche audiences that CONSISTENTLY buy their games each year, bringing in a few more by it's quality.
I'm just saying don't expect a flop like others this year because of that fanbase. Hell look at their reddit for example, they banned EVERYONE from their subreddit who is also subbed on Asmongold, they really live inside a leftist bubble.
I don't have a problem with games that have their niche and the developpers knowing how to cater to their fan base.
However, here I presume 0.05% of the fan base actually desire the troon pronoun flagellation ritual scene and the rest of the troon stuff, and 5% want the racial diversity. This isn't organic. The ''strong whammen'' fantasy in most games and media however seems popular.
It's so predictable that when the cartoon I'm currently watching ( a 5.5/10 Zom 100: Bucket List of the Dead ) had a ''badass masked samurai slicing zombies up like a pro'', I automatically assumed ''this is going to be a woman. probably a foreigner. you're not suverting my expectations, you're annoying me''.
And it was a female foreigner.
It also peaked at 70k players on release day. Not anything like Concord's awful release, but also not good for a worldwide release of a 10 year development AAA game. We'll see what happens over the first weekend, but given that it currently has 38k playing while the Monster Hunter Wilds beta test has 319k playing I don't think the sales numbers are going to be all that hot.
Concord was a new IP in a dead end genre. Its woke nonsense didn't help, but it likely would have failed without it. Just like Battleborn and Lawbreakers and all the others before it, that at least had the sense to come out when the iron was hot.
People seeking another Concord will be disappointed almost everytime because its unique in its cataclysm. Its like the guys on /v/ that need every single game to be another TORtanic.
Not sure I can trust any review of an RPG that has single-digit hours of playtime on record.
That's what I was thinking- you can figure out a game is really bad in a short amount of time but to tell if a story driven game, especially an RPG, you need a lot more time.
This is what I've heard of Baldur's Gate 3, that even if you ignore the woke and degenerate stuff, the late game wasn't polished or finished.
Peterson said that the amount of oppression that people will face is the amount that the critical mass of people will put up with.
The same applies to games. When you are content with garbage, you will get more garbage.
In fairness, it is garbage buying the garbage.
No.
In a world where you can look however you want, be whatever you want and magically become whatever you want ... there are still trans scars in the character creator.
There's whole segments where you're chastised for something a character does. Not you, not your character, just a character. And you have to sit there and watch it.
It used to be that if a dialogue choice was just too much to sit through, even if it was lore and interesting, you could hit space to skip it, and just get what I liked to call a 'catch up popup' that would get tucked into the journal. Wanna know what it was? Go and check. Otherwise, almost the entire thing could be skipped and you'd be given footnotes on what was said if you wanted to check.
Not as good as hearing it from someone directly of course, but you get what they were saying without having to sit through an otherwise boring conversation that dragged on too long.
This is just ... what have people been calling it. A humiliation ritual, I think.
I can't think of any other reason why it was injected into the game other than that.
If you're into being lectured on how to talk to a fictional character in a fictional setting who can, by the way, look however they want and BE whatever they want magically, they choose to look like that, and choose to be as obnoxious as possible about it.
And you're supposed to sit there and like it.
Just ... no.
It's a real shame dragon age has been a total pile of ass since the first game and has sucked, with every title, ever since. Glad I boycott EA, nothing of value lost with this piece of shit IP.
Ya origins was pretty fun and then everything went to total shit. Regardless if wokeness, idk how people consume these games anymore. They just aren't fun.
DA2 had a lot of good ideas, but fumbled the ball on them so hard that it shot its own "oppression" message in the foot. Because anyone who walked out of that game not thinking all mages needed to be controlled and watched was a retarded bleeding heart, because they turn to blood magic if they stub their fucking toe.
I still think the "Rivals" mechanic is one of the better additions to the WRPG genre, if only because it finally allows you to disagree with your companions dogshit opinions and still "progress" their relationship.
I remember only playing a bit of da2 and it was too much on the rails after the open world of origins. Origins was basically up to you how the story went.
That's part of its whole failed "oppression" thing, where its separated into multiple "acts" with time skips in between to simulate the growing not-racial tension and changing city. Which again, good idea that was incredibly poorly done.
Also I don't think any game with the entire Mage Tower section, with the entire Fade section in the middle of it, can call a different game out for being on rails. DAO isn't as open as it seems, its just really smart about how it presents its linear progressions and the combat being good enough to let you not have to play it purely linearly (which DA2 fails it, as you get one shot super quickly and have literally only one healer available for extended combat sections).
In general in RPGs we move from location to location. Modern games have the issue more, that you cannot backtrack between acts and are stuck on the new continent or whatever.
DA2 did basically the same - except you didn't move in space between acts but in time. Which is fine in general.
But it leads to people revisiting the same map multiple times. Which is also okay, since other games can deal with having the same cave layout for multiple caves. Yet DA2 combined the thing. Same layout for multiple caves and revisting those locations. With not enough variation over the time axis (unlocking a new area in an old map, ...).
The wave system is also a nice idea. It makes sense when you infiltrate the thieves den that thieves come running and join the fight over time.
But again - they overdid it. Open world ambush where the enemy would throw everything at you at once? Reinforcements. It also doesn't make sense when ancient constructs, undead or elementals do the same thing.
I modded the game on my first playthrough and kept my mage sister in the party. Companions were already boring that I don't felt I missed out one dialogue.
Can sister heal? I don't remember her being able to. Only Anders and Mage Hawke.
Because starving people will eat absolute garbage, and due to a lack of options, will tolerate it.
Every medium of media and entertainment has become infected and the quality has massively collapsed. What people used to enjoy, now leaves a bitter taste in their mouth. But, since the infection has been so widespread, it's difficult to find alternatives. Since people are reluctant to change habits, and creating, researching, and seeking alternatives is difficult, people are more likely to accept the bad stuff. The degrade in quality, in terms of the people making this stuff, also results in fewer products being released, which results in the people becoming starved for it, so will be more willing to accept the bad stuff. A starving person will almost never turn down terrible food.
This limitation on products, much less good products, has become really apparent in gaming, and even moreso in specific genres, like RTS games, which used to be common and almost universally great games back in the 90s and 00s. But, this phenomenon goes way beyond gaming.
Yeah. Played origins, it was decent. The DLC was kinda suspect and I should have abstained because it just made origins worse, but whatever. Played 2, but I could see the writing on the wall even then. Didn't even touch 3.
The reviews for the game are wierd. Many of them say the game is bad but recommend it anyway. They all mention the lack of the ea launcher as a huge positive (who even cares? How many steam players know about the ea launcher). They all say performance is good. None of them talk about the tranny stuff. They don't sound remotely like other steam reviews
Seems like it wouldnt be hard to buy a bunch of fake reviews from India.
Let's run some numbers and be really generous.
First, we'll find out how much it made:
Next, we'll estimate costs:
Veilguard would need to sell 22x more units at the same standard/premium edition ratio to break even, which is about 4.6 million units. Sales aren't going to get any better. The first week tends to be the best sales week and it's down hill after that. It's also unlikely to sell more units in the latter days of that first week than on the first day.
tl;dr: Veilguard is a bomb.
agreed, which makes it puzzling why the shills are out in force trying to call this a success, i guess when in doubt just lie
As of this comment, there are more people playing Monster Hunter World than Dragon Age Veilguard.
The Wilds beta had almost 7x the peak concurrent players of Veilguard.
The wokes are favorably comparing DAV to Concord, as if anything that sells more than 25k copies and doesn’t lose $200-400 million is somehow a success.
EA is calling DAV it’s most successful single player steam launch ever - when most of their previous SP games were launched on other platforms first.
A journo compared DAV’s peak CCU to the current CCU of BG3 - a game that is over a year old and had almost 20x CCU closer to launch.
Maybe things change drastically over the weekend, but early returns are not, in fact, good for the great woke hope.
they've successfully alienated the anti-woke audience, and there are plenty of people who eat slop and call it good. the games also been heavily marketed, so I'm not too surprised.
Is this the Charles Clyburne game?
This game is a disaster lol. 10 year development, probably 200-300 million development cost, and it's selling what a few hundred thousand units?
It will likely need 3, maybe 4+ million units sold in order to break even.
Starfield peaked at >330K concurrent players and we all know how that went. Also, all the positive reviews have gotten clown emoji'ed and some of them are troll reviews.
Not to mention, this game has been in development for 9 years. There's a reason EA decided to launch it Day 1 on Steam and not try to milk the 100% cut on their own store.