Mass Effect Andromeda has sold millions under sales projections

www.vgchartz.com/article/252306/dragon-age-inquisition-sells-114m-units-worldwide-first-week-ps4-xbox-one-x360-ps3-pc/

DA:I sold 1.14 physical copies first week.  Add it digital sales and you may get to two million or a little more.  At the quarterly earnings call after DA:I was released they said it was the best opening ever for a Bioware.  If ME:A had beaten these numbers, we would have heard the same thing on the last earnings call, but they didn't mention it at all.  

The animations were easily meme'd so spread fast.  I'm not forgetting the problems that happened with MET games, but I've never had a Bioware game as glitchy and buggy as Andromeda.

Is it so? Hm, the shitstorm following Ubisofts "For Honor" had its particular smell, not gone now, doubt ever will. Though, it never was that (MEA) bad, as the anticipation was (compared to MEA) pretty low.

YOu are not wrong, but keep in mind: showing the facial animations is way easier and less time consuming then talking and explaining why everything else wasnt that good, also, try to explain this to people who were 7 years old in 2007 and actualy never played the original (actualy there are MANY such people who did not play ME until "now" and are "now" complaning about the "cringeworthy and clumsy" combat mechanics of ME... just lol). The facial animations are a symptom of the core problem with MEA and very easy to show and EVERYONE understands it.

I wonder why people keep throwing sales numbers of diffrent games around as if that would mean anything.

Any company developing any product has certain projections for this product to be a success. Based on production costs, man hours and overall development cycle. So ME3 selling X amount of copies can't be compared to MEA selling X amounts of copies. Same for DAI or any other game. Unless you are privy to how the company calculated, not even the precise numbers of copies sold tells you anything of value.

It's all pure speculation. Based on the official statements coming from the PR departments, neither denying nor confirming the downsizing of Bioware Montreal, it seems their sales projections haven't been met. Which still doesn't mean they didn't make a profit and are abandoning the franchise. It only means, they stopped to analyze where to go from here. If the rumors had been totall untrue, any PR department worth it's money, would have stepped up to counter them vehemently. Being non commital as they are, doesn't cut it.

Edit: After watching the video, I see that YonYea takes all of this into account. I'd say he did a pretty decent job with the data being available to him.

Yeah but that does not mean anything, its EA's word and that has no value whatsoever. EA also said the same thing about sim city, that they were sorry for that game controversial release in 2013, and that they would not do this again. Well at the end of the same year, there was a game called battlefield 4 that was also broken at launch : 





They said the same thing for ME 3, that they were pushing it back from october or november 2011 to march 2012 because they wanted to make a better game. The problem is, it was still not bioware decision to release it at that moment, they wanted more time to make a palaven mission and work on it for more time, but that could not happen due to time restraints. 

I do not care to indulge your inane ramblings Suikoden. 

You're right, the 78th best rated PS4 game of 2017 probably exceeded sales expectations! It's not that this forum is out of touch, all of the analysts and critics must be wrong!

These restraints being the fiscal year, as they were with MEA.

I'm certainly not defending the practice, but there's one thing that everybody should keep in mind. Games may be art in some fashion, but for the companies developping and publishing them, they are products that need to meet certain sales projections. They are multi million projects that have been calculated to the last dime, just the same as any mundaine product is. This isn't lala land where the goal is to make players happy. That's business by large shareholder companies where 90 percent of the employees probably haven't played a single game in their lifetime and only look at the projected numbers, fiscal years, shareholder approvement and other economical restraints. There's also a large marketing machine tied to these releases. Advertising slots are booked months in advance, and they can't be changed at a whim.

So, all of this considered, them pushing Dylan back into the next fiscal year is a huge step. A step that in itself is saying something about a lot of restructuring going on behind the curtains. They already lost some of their calculated gains by pushing it's release into the next fiscal year. And losing isn't in the nature of shareholder business.

Yes, the capabilities for making a rational analysis for one. And PC sales for another. He is dumb enough to make a big thing of MEA dropping to 7th place second month without checking how it's predecessor did. I will stop embarrasing him there.

Oh you like to quote VGchartz do you. I'm not sure from where he got the 1,14 mil when their own charts give 985106 sold copies first week for DAI. Anyway MEA sold 1031628 first week according to their charts so if we're going to make any assumptions from VGchartz it has to be that MEA did better than DAI not the other way around. IF you apply rational analysis to it.

Again, all of these naysayers said Inquisition was a commercial failure to, but now that's apparently the success we are comparing this game to based on sales figures nobody but EA know.

I agree that if the game had sold amazingly they would have said something by now, surely? There is no evidence that it sold badly though either, from the looks of it the game sold ok but I just don't know because I don't know the full figures.