Frikkinjerk on 15/3/2006 at 20:50
I recall reading in an interview, and again later in an article on a "game theory" conference, where Warren Spectre took offense to what the fans of Thief and Deus Ex considered the "dumbing down" of the new games in those series. He then chanted the mantra of "it's a business" and the need to "appeal to the largest audience possible". So I was wondering: does anyone happen to know what the sales figures for each of these games are? I'm curious as to how they stack up to his "marketing theory":
Thief:TDP/Thief Gold
Thief 2: TMA
Thief: DS
Deus Ex
Deus Ex: IW
Fig455 on 16/3/2006 at 01:00
Quote Posted by Frikkinjerk
Warren Spectre
Lol, he's undead now?
Frikkinjerk on 16/3/2006 at 01:14
Quote Posted by Fig455
Lol, he's undead now?
Ooops! My bad. On the other hand, after T3 & DX2, he is dead to me as a gamer :mad:
Gingerbread Man on 16/3/2006 at 09:47
Sales figures for specific titles are among the hardest things in the universe to find. Sometimes you run across them in quarterly reports, but more often than not they're just projections (if they're expected to do well) or vague mutterings (if they actually sold poorly). Or just flat-out fudging for one reason or another. For instance, the 1999 annual report from Eidos PLC says:
Nineteen new titles were launched in the year, including Tomb Raider 3, Final Fantasy VII, Deathtrap Dungeon, Ninja, Gex III: Deep Cover Gecko, UEFA Champions League, Championship Manager 3, Gangsters, Thief: The Dark Project and Commandos. Eight titles managed to achieve sales in excess of 350,000 units.
Assuming that among the eight were Final Fantasy 7, Championship Manager 3, and Tomb Raider 3, and that Ninja and Gex III weren't huge sellers, I'm still left none the wiser.
After the release of Thief: The Dark Project and Deus Ex, Eidos reported being "very pleased" with the performance of these titles and optimistic that they would both become strong franchises.
2002 is where things start to get weird at Eidos. They're still pleased with the performance of Deus Ex, but are already shifing focus heavily towards console releases. If you read the whole thing, you can see them inhaling water for the first time... in retrospect, the flailing probably started a few months before the annual report was published. I don't know much about the markets, but when I see a company vote itself the authority to buy its own shares, I start to wonder about things.
By 2003, they're praying that DX:IW will save them. Along with such seminal blockbusters as Backyard Wrestling (why Spector got involved with that, I'll never know), and Spanx (yeah, that's the first I heard of that game, too). The language of the 2003 Interim Report is subtly panicked without being overtly frightening to investors... but I've been immersed in the double-speak and euphemisms of marketing and investment since I was a smally on account of my Dad, so I aren't fooled.
You'd wonder why, even at the end of the fiscal year, Eidos was clinging frantically to the hope of DX:IW to save their asses... Well, also to the Tomb Raider and Championship Manager franchises. But the thing is, and they gleefully point this out in the middle of all the EVERYTHING'S FINE THE RETAIL PRICE OF GAMES IS GOING UP NO THAT'S NOT A LIFE PRESERVER I'M WEARING IT'S UM IT'S A NEW AWARD FOR CLEVER BUSINESSMEN THEY'VE DECIDED TO GIVE US ALL, is that Deus Ex is still selling well.
Then the poo becomes enfanned. bbrrrrrrrWHAPspluttter ew there is poo on the walls.
You don't even have to READ the reports to see the fear. Just notice that the list goes:
1999 Annual Report
2000 Annual Report
2001 Annual Report
2002 Interim Accounts
2002 Annual report
2002 General Meeting
2003 Interim Accounts
2003 Annual Report
2003 EXTRAORDINARY GENERAL MEETING OH SHI
The Extraordinary General Meeting was attended by Eidos' Board of Directors, two lawyers from Norton Rose, one lawyer from Taylor Wessing, and a representative from Kepler Associates.
Um.
Kinda got off-track there.
Point is that even in the corporate blurbs given out to investors and shareholders and Interested Parties, hard sales figures are about as findable as gorillas at the bottom of the Marianas Trench.
But yeah, the games...
Off the top of my head, I'd rank them in descending order thusly:
Deus Ex
Thief 2: TMA
Thief: TDP / Thief Gold
Deus Ex: Invisible War
Thief: Deadly Shadows
I don't think I've seen any of them show up on a list of One Million Units Or More... mind you, I've not looked very hard. Possibly DX broke a million, but I don't know.
Frikkinjerk on 16/3/2006 at 10:11
Thanks for the info, G. I have the same impression regarding the sales hierarchy. Deus Ex was big, of course, and Thief was at least well-received (Thief was well enough received to warrant a "Gold" edition). Despite some dubious game reviewers best intentions to convince the public otherwise, the feedback from gamers that I've seen has almost without fail been less than positive about DXIW & T3.
So, why can't game companies realise that it's in their own financial interest to create their own vision and be satisfied with the few hundred thousand or million copies they sell, instead of selling their souls and creating mass-appeal market garbage that nobody loves, fans of the original hate, and a legacy of what could have been?
I read an article about John Romero a day or two ago and he reminisced about how he was basically out-voted on the design of the first Quake game, which he left IDsoftware right as they released it. He wanted a tight game and everyone else wanted to just slap some Doomish crap in and release it. So, Quake 1 and 2 had no story, and Quake 3 didn't even have a singleplayer campaign. Have you played Doom 3? Incredible graphics and some clever voice-acting in an otherwise shitty game.
Holywhippet on 21/3/2006 at 04:49
I'd still like to know the definitive word on the dual console/PC version of DX 2 and Thief: DS. Spectre at the time claimed that he was always interested in making console games but I don't know if it wasn't just him trying to avoid bad mouthing his bosses. From what I understand, one of the main complaints of DX 2 was the plotline and the finish - there were multiple endings and none of them were "good".
I don't know if I'd say Thief: DS was dumbed down. It lacked rope arrows, swimming and a number of the additions from the second game. On the other hand it added in the lockpicking minigame which I preferred over the "keep switching the lockpicks" trick of the earlier games. Loot glint was a welcome additions and the climbing gloves were decent enough. I liked it about as much as the first two games - it certainly didn't feel dumbed down to me.
For that matter, I object to the claim that console games have to be dumbed down. Final Fantasy Tactics required you to put a fair bit of thought into your party and each battle. The Metal Gear games have a lot of nice little tricks and features.
Spitter on 21/3/2006 at 05:41
Quote Posted by Frikkinjerk
So, why can't game companies realise that it's in their own financial interest to create their own vision and be satisfied with the few hundred thousand or million copies they sell, instead of selling their souls and creating mass-appeal market garbage that nobody loves, fans of the original hate, and a legacy of what could have been?
I read an article about John Romero a day or two ago and he reminisced about how he was basically out-voted on the design of the first Quake game, which he left IDsoftware right as they released it. He wanted a tight game and everyone else wanted to just slap some Doomish crap in and release it. So, Quake 1 and 2 had no story, and Quake 3 didn't even have a singleplayer campaign. Have you played Doom 3? Incredible graphics and some clever voice-acting in an otherwise shitty game.
The guys at id are driving Ferraris and John Romero is making shitty cell phone games. There's some moral of the story for you.
And let's not go for the zomg PC/console gaming depth warz please.
Domarius on 22/3/2006 at 09:24
Quote Posted by Holywhippet
I don't know if I'd say Thief: DS was dumbed down. It lacked rope arrows, swimming and a number of the additions from the second game. On the other hand it added in the lockpicking minigame which I preferred over the "keep switching the lockpicks" trick of the earlier games. Loot glint was a welcome additions and the climbing gloves were decent enough. I liked it about as much as the first two games - it certainly didn't feel dumbed down to me.
Yeah it definetly added some good elements, but it
was dumbed down
as well.
Go play any T1 or T2 mission and tell me when you ever crossed a single load zone.
Load zones are not a bad thing inherently, but occouring so often as they did in T3 is nothing but a limitation of the RAM on the XBox.
And it's not as simple as "removing them" for the PC version. When you develop a game, you need to specifically develop it for PC OR Console, both have different focuses - but developing 2 seperate versions of the game takes more time that developing one, so the current trend is to develop for XBox (the biggest market) then do the least work possible to get it to run on the PC.
Best example I have ever seen - Sims 2. PC and Xbox versions are very different, the game is designed best for the target system, but retain the same feel. On the XBox, there is no way it can handle all the variety of peoples ages, genetics, etc, that the PC version has, so they cut it down to everyone is just young adults and the genetics is very very basic. But to copmensate, you can play 2 player on split screen, and you control your characters with the joystick, and they added a "cooking" feature which lets you create your own meals with different ingredients.
Frikkinjerk on 22/3/2006 at 10:04
Quote Posted by Spitter
The guys at id are driving Ferraris and John Romero is making shitty cell phone games. There's some moral of the story for you.
And let's not go for the zomg PC/console gaming depth warz please.
I'm not going to argue about the merits of John Romero, despite the fact that IDsoftware wouldn't even exist if it weren't for him. John Carmack was a complete nobody when Romero met him and offered him a job. The point I was making is that Romero wanted depth to the games he was making. If you're posting on this forum then I'm assuming you do too. None of IDsoftware's titles have any depth. That's not to say that they aren't good games. Quake 3 is a solid multiplayer game and I play it on the Dreamcast with my son. However, just because IDsoftware makes millions does not mean that what they are selling is a great product. Unreal Tournament was a far better multiplayer game, and IDsoftware could see that, hence they went back to the singleplayer Doom formula that was so successful prior to them having any real competition in the 3D fps market.
Oh, and to underscore how crappy Doom3 is (graphics aside) - did you notice they lifted the whole PDA thing from System Shock 2 to give the illusion it had the latter game's depth? Instead of doing anything inventive though, like SS2 did, they kept the tired formula of teleporting in enemies all around you and kept you basked in darkness for the easy "boo!!!" factor. For scary that's like shooting fish in a barrel.
I could cite some really shitty games, movies, TV shows, books, and Presidents that were very successful. Success does not equal quality though.
Spitter on 22/3/2006 at 10:26
If you'd read my post again you'd notice I never claimed so.
