How can one above average game sink an entire franchise?

Sigh,

DAO was released a full 2 years after ME1 and was riding off of the success of ME1. Furthermore, ME1 was initally just released on the Xbox 360 then the PC a few months later. ME1 was NEVER individually released on the PS3. DAO however was released on 3 platforms out of the gate.

It is no secret that Mass Effect was Bioware's flagship franchise with DA as a second. So again, you are just being defiant when you compare the failure of DA2 to that of MEA. DA2 did not have nowhere near the hype and pressure to succeed as MEA did. Also, people already had a sour ME aftertaste in their mouth from the ME3 endings which added more pressure for MEA to change the subject and make Bioware even again. DA2 did not have such expectations. So when MEA had the reception that it did and being dubbed "Meme Effect", that could give EA enough reason to finally just pull the plug on the ME brand and move onto other things like Anthem, DA4, and possibly a new AAA single player action RPG to replace the slot held by ME. Depending on how well DA4 does, that brand could continue on with DA5 and DA6.

Because EA sees Anthem as their main priority. The game will be their Call of Duty, with tons of microtransactions for skins, loot and gear and maps. Thus a game they can make far more money (in theory) from. Mass Effect simply isn't a EA priority, because it is mostly a single player rpg. And most of the industry is starting to say that single player, story driven games are obsolete.


(Translation)

"We can't milk fans for money in single player, story driven games."

WTF are you saying, MAss effect 1 has been release on the psn since 2012 and yes you can buy it individually, get your fucking fact straight. store.playstation.com/#!/en-us/games/mass-effect/cid=UP0006-NPUB31052_00-MECOMPILATION000

and that is exactly why I was speaking of ME 3 and not the first ME, because ME 3 was released simultanisously on all 3 platform and yet DAO sold just as much. that is exactly why I spoke about this episode and not the first mass effect.

And I could say that ME was riding on the huge sucess of Kotor.  So no unless you bring me an actual proof that dragon age is just their secondary franchise you are not proving anything

And as I said previously, yes the ME 3 ending did made a problem, BUT for the most part, people have got over with it. Lot of people have been warming up to ME 3 once the extended cut was released, lot of people were satisfied with this new ending. You do remember that the popular saying was "ME 3 was perfect until the last 10 minutes", the problem people had with the game was the conclusion not the rest of the journey which for many was just magnificient.

And with the releases of the dlc citadel and leviathan, way more people have been warming up to the game and today if ME 3 was released with all its dlc, it would not be as trashed as it used to be, it is now considered way differently than it was at release. Sure there is always the people obsessed about it but for the most part, people have gotten over with it, especially with the dlcs both paid one and the free one.

No such thing happened with DA 2, the problem there was not the ending (maybe it was but it was the least of its problems) it was the hole game that was problematic and the dlc barely made thing better, so there was just as much "pressure" on DAI because their previous game was underwhelming. Not just the ending like ME 3 that dlc partially fixed, MEA had pressure certainly but their previous game was not as criticized as DA 2, the most problem people had was the conclusion, and a lot of them came to be fine with the content that was given or sold after release.

By the way, the fact that they made their story in a completely different galaxy, did you think that MAYBE its because they just don't want to take a canon ending? Because that's how they did the fucking game, they did not want to choose an ending for the people who played, they want them to write their own story, they don't want them to impose something.







"We acknowledged it in the endings of Mass Effect 3 and I think that's where we want to leave it for now," Flynn said.

They did not wanted to impose an ending to the players. That's how things works. They finish the story in the milky way and while wanting to tell more stories in the ME universe, they did not want to impose some endings to their customers, letting them the freedom to write their own stories.

Oh you can repeat that I am in denial again again and again, that won't make your arguments better. I could tell you the fucking same thing

At the release of mass effect andromeda, Bioware already released dragon age inquisition which won hundreds of game of the year awards of 2014, it had a very good reputation among the public. So it was not the game that was supposed to win back the crowd because it already did, back in november 2014. Bioware never had to prove they could do good rpg's, they already did at that point.

And people at bioware were saying the exact same thing about DA 2, about how it would be an extremly good game, about how it would push the narratives. You saw way more videos about DA 2 then you saw for MEA, there was way more marketing aobut it. And when the game came out, well people ripped it apart like it was the worse game ever. At this very moment DA 2 as even worse user score than mass effect andromeda, the toxicity on the forums or the internet was everywhere about how DA 2 did not lived up to the exceptation, about how it was not as good as the previous dragon age. It was THE dissapointment of 2011 and yeah there was a lot of pressure on it.

BEcause DAO was the sucessor to the legendary baldur's gate, it was the game that push the narratives further, so yeah there might have been more pressure on MEA in terms of money and quality, but there was a lot on DA 2 and it failed on those exceptations and no you did not wanted to be a DA 2 defender on any forums or anywhere on the internet at that moment, it was THE game to trash.

And in terms of money as I said before, if the 40 million budget is accurate, they already their money, not the huge sucess they hoped to make but definetely enough to make a profit, and since the engine is already built, well an eventual sequel would be chaeper to make since they have a fondation already there, no needs to build from scratch.

You're still at it, aren't you? Number crunching. Are you privy to their business plan in terms of manpower tied for half a decade to a single project? Do you know if and when a 40 million dollar investment pays off according to their projections. If they'd made 40 million dollars and spare this would be considered a fundamental failure. Breaking even isn't something you expect from a project that tied a whole studio down for the better part of fice years.

Fact is, we don't even know their finals sales. Maybe it was a success, maybe it wasn't. But one can't say one way or the other unless they come out to let us in on what they expected. The only thing to go on is their silence. If this would have been a tremendous success they would have bragged about it openly. If for no other reasons than for pleasing their shareholders.

in my opinion You are mistaking autodialogue with comentary. Personaly the banter ryder makes is a buoware highpoint for me. Still i can see your point where you have to input every single line.
Besides that there is tons of dialogue choosing. unlike me3

I always get a good laugh when I see this tweet. It's cute the way they still expect us to believe that "we take player choice seriously"  

As it stands now, it appears that MEA has failed to match or exceed the sales figures set by DAI.

Remember after DAI launched EA was bragging about how well DAI sold?

Yes and? It is possible that considering the controversy around MEA and the facial animation, EA did not wanted to rub things in the face with sales, which would have mean to double the controversial parts.

Randy pitchford braged about the sales of alien colonial marines and duke nukem forever in spite of the controvery the games were facing, that did not go over too well with the general public.

You can call it a high point if you like but when my character says and does things without any input from me then I call it sacrilege and nothing to do with role playing.

Or they just knows about fucking PR, and saying the game sells well and brag about it when people are trashing it, rubing into their faces that the game sold well just make the internet more furious, more determined into trashing it again again and again. 

That is what happen with alien colonial marines, randy pitchford hided behind the sales of the game and the public reacted with more anger it just double down on the already bad reputation of the studio and the game itself. PR is important and company knows you don't try to provoke the public, and the one who do underestimates the reaction (just like gearbox with ACM), and that is exactly what would have happen if they were saying that sales were good because the internet was furious.

By the way investor can be informed of the financial situation without the public knowing anything about it, they can totally learn if the sales are good or not but that does not mean we have to be.

Your wrong. I am talking about investors....you know....the people that fund their projects and give them capital. If I was an investor I could careless what the internet thinks, I want to know how well it did, especially since their last game was 2014 GOTY. You think EA will ignore the investors just to not come across as arrogant? You must not know the Business and Investor relationship.