• pjhenry1216@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Tbf, a lot of people misjudged it, including Larian. I don’t think a lot of people really believed the “choices and decisions matter” would work as well as it did. Prior to release, I read an article that talked about how it was gonna be neat that the in-game news would update based on your actions. Like, that was the noteworthy function to discuss about the game. “NPCs might talk about your actions in passing to each other”.

    Did Microsoft underestimate it more than others? Sure. But pretending like every corporation, including Larian, didn’t underestimate it a whole lot is a bit crazy.

    Edit: and isn’t the game Divinity: Original Sin II? Did it have other names in other international markets?

    Edit: this was submitted as a response to https://lemmy.world/comment/3615435 but Kbin didn’t seem to actually tie them together. It shows me that it was written as a reply on Kbin, but seems to have lost connection to the comment hierarchy.

    • bouh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      1 year ago

      The degree of success couldn’t be predicted, sure. But larian is not a new studio, BG is a big ip, DOS2 was a big success, the witcher 3 was a tremendous success, and the game was in early access for 3 years so you could very easily gauge how it was going.

      If a decider can’t see that coming at least as a significant possibility, they’re all clowns who don’t deserve more than the lowest wages.

      • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        easily gauge how it was going.

        Except virtually everyone got it wrong still. Even the head of Larian thought it’d top out at 100k max. That’s currently it’s average now with it’s max being more than 800% higher.

        BG is a big IP, but it’s never had this level of success. Look at Diablo III’s release (similar IP with a long break between games). It had better advertising campaign and still kind of became noise fairly quickly. Game news sites barely covered BG3 until it hit it big.

        Microsoft definitely undershot, but it was likely basing it on a lot of the aggregated news as well. It had barely any coverage prior to its official release. This is usually a sign that the game will be mediocre.

        Larian is a big studio but its last expected game from its really only known IP was cancelled after being put on hold for four years (granted BG3 was also being developed during this time). It’s biggest games prior to this got at least partially funded on Kickstarter (not a knock against KS, but it’s not generally seen as the sign of a strong studio to exec-types).

        I don’t blame an executive for not seeing this coming.

        Executives obviously didn’t see this coming. But neither did game journalists or even gamers.

        Its a mistake in hindsight, but with what everyone generally knew at the time, it was the expectation of most.

        • bouh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          There is a difference between misjudging the success and betting on the failure.

          Did you read the paper? BG3 was assessed far below just dance or let’s sing ABBA! It was at the very bottom of the list!

          I bought the game blind a year before release. Not to test it but because I knew were I was going. Of course I had big fears about it because many games pretended to be BG successors and I didn’t want to get my expectations too high. But I didn’t know anything about it because I didn’t want to spoil the surprise.

          The information was there. I don’t know why journalists to whatever didn’t saw it coming but I was prepared for it being a big thing for me. It is litteraly their job to assess whether a game will work or not. They bet on failure. They couldn’t be more wrong, and I don’t think there was any sign of failure.

          • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            It was expected to be a second release after being a Stadia exclusive. This isn’t judging quality, just impact.

            Edit: and let’s not pretend by adding “far below” when it was in the same group. And the ranking isn’t even totally based on expected sales. The asking prices and the levels aren’t in order. You’re misinterpreting one quote entirely incorrectly and trying assuming too much from a chart.

    • Player2
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Divinity Original Sin 2 was their previous game from some years ago

      • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m well aware of that. That’s why I named it. They said “Divinity of Sin 2”. I was asking if they meant Divinity: Original Sin 2 and if it went by a different name in other markets. I thought that was clear. I’m not sure how you got to think I was asking what it is.

    • Danc4498@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think it’s just an interesting story since we have actual internal emails from Microsoft that we wouldn’t have if it weren’t for the justice department’s lawsuit to stop the Activision buyout.