@BlackSize23-ITA wrote:
@zbran1
So let's try to strike up a discussion then!
What you don't understand in my comparing the "success" of Cyberpunk2077 to the "success" of Battlefield 2042
I'm still lost but whatever. 2042 has done 5 million plus sales in a week. I think Cyberpunk is around 14 million copies so far. Are they not good numbers?
@BlackSize23-ITA wrote:
@zbran1
In strictly numerical terms? Of course they are big numbers!
In terms of product quality ...
I want to imagine that for you then Cyberpunk 2077 is better than a Fallout New Vegas (a real RPG if we want to consider it as such) or a Doom Eternal (if we want to consider it a shooter) simply because it has sold more of them right?
You see now you're "arguing" about something completely different. This started out on the previous page when I stated that negative reviews on Steam are not a gauge of anything with regards to the success of a game.
I then mentioned Cyberpunk2077 as an example. A game that got absolutely slaughtered on Steam yet it's sold millions of copies. The makers of the game offered a full refund to everybody yet it still is successful and has a healthy player base.
Now here we are and you want to discuss the merits of another two random games that you've decided to bring into this discussion.
Can i ask where it is we are going with this?
@BlackSize23-ITA wrote:
@zbran1
very simple: you and many others just need to know that a game sells well on the day of its release to conceive it as a success ...
Now putting the example of cyberpunk 2077 I am trying to show you how a game INDEPENDENTLY from how it is made on a technical level and whether it is bug free or not sells a bang on the day of its release (and even earlier thanks to pre-orders). ..
This because? Because it is a good game or because today the important thing is to have everything immediately and so you just have to do a memorable marketing campaign that then EVERYONE will go and buy you the game regardless of whether it will be completely broken with Cyberpunk 2077 or "incomplete" (but I could use other terms) like Battlefield 2042 compared to previous Battlefields?
But they'll fix it later, you can tell me, like No Man Sky!
Of course! But it may very well end up like BF5 ... Are you aware of this right?
2042 has sold well over it's first week according to the numbers. I'm sure those numbers will continue to look healthy going forward.
Marketing? Virtually every product, good or bad has Marketing. Battfield is no different. We has a Beta that was a mess, but because I don't buy into group think or listen to know nothing idiots on YouTube I could see that under it all the core of the game was very much Battfield.
Are you seriously suggesting that previous titles launched "with everything there ready to go"? Really?
I hate to break it to you but Battfield 5 turned out to be an unbelievably good game, I was fuming when they pulled the plug after Pacific was released.
I understand why they did it as the numbers didn't add up, but to say it was a bad game makes me think you've never played it or didn't put enough time into it.
I walked away from Battfield 4 and in hindsight I regret that now, but life got in the way, family and kids first, all that good stuff.
Then of course if all this suits you because "the title sells" and all in all "you like it" I'm happy for you.
Maybe I expect too much from the game and from a company that makes billions.
@BlackSize23-ITA wrote:Then of course if all this suits you because "the title sells" and all in all "you like it" I'm happy for you.
Maybe I expect too much from the game and from a company that makes billions.
At least just a server browser and joystick support.
@Furbatr0n wrote:
@BlackSize23-ITAi think this guy is payed by ea/dice...not sure but it seems
I think your tinfoil hat is overheating your brain..... I can assure you I don't work for EA, I just happen to like some of the games they make.
@SirBobdk wrote:
@zbran1
I hate to break it to you but Battfield 5 turned out to be an unbelievably good game, I was fuming when they pulled the plug after Pacific was released.
I understand why they did it as the numbers didn't add up, but to say it was a bad game makes me think you've never played it or didn't put enough time into it.
——————————————————————————————————
Made me look at my BFV stats. I stopped playing BFV 17 months ago, but still managed to play 1500 hours. It was not a bad game, but it still ranks at the bottom of my BF list mainly due to very poor air play and bad vanilla map design. I would have stopped before if it had not been for the Pacific which was quite good.
Wow that's a lot of hours, I put 400 hundred in but 8m just a filthy casual. Yeah it wasn't a bad game in the end. The vehicles didn't bother me too much as I don't fly and ground vehicles get boring after a while. I would love to have seen a propper go at a North African campaign though and Stalingrad too.
@BlackSize23-ITA wrote:Then of course if all this suits you because "the title sells" and all in all "you like it" I'm happy for you.
Maybe I expect too much from the game and from a company that makes billions.
Like I am entitled to like the game you are entitled to not like it. You see when I don't like something I tend to just walk away, yet here you are still complaining about something you don't like. There's a reason EA don't respond to "all the haters" the reason is you are statically insignificant in the grand scheme of things.
I actually have a long list of things that I'm not happy with in this game, but I point blank refuse to discuss them here as I for one will not throw fuel on a fire created by a minority of people. I'll just wait until you all get tired of screaming into the void, then I'll let EA know what my concerns are.
You see if people just aired their grievances in a polite and calm manner then maybe they might engage more on here, just a thought. The screaming like a spoiled brat approach has gotten you all nowhere has it?
@BlackSize23-ITA wrote:Then of course if all this suits you because "the title sells" and all in all "you like it" I'm happy for you.
Maybe I expect too much from the game and from a company that makes billions.
Like I am entitled to like the game you are entitled to not like it. You see when I don't like something I tend to just walk away, yet here you are still complaining about something you don't like. There's a reason EA don't respond to "all the haters" the reason is you are statistically insignificant in the grand scheme of things.
I actually have a long list of things that I'm not happy with in this game, but I point blank refuse to discuss them here as I for one will not throw fuel on a fire created by a minority of people. I'll just wait until you all get tired of screaming into the void, then I'll let EA know what my concerns are.
You see if people just aired their grievances in a polite and calm manner then maybe they might engage more on here, just a thought. The screaming like a spoiled brat approach has gotten you all nowhere has it?
