D&D 5E BG3 is once again a Platinium Selling Game in 2024, without selling a DLC.

[MGibster]

If the main point of your game is PVP grabass or a resource management sim, you can get away with less advanced tech, but graphics and VA definitely matter for emotional storytelling. FAR fewer people would have connected with the characters if they looked like Bethesda's dead eyed jank or minecraft block people.

I don't want to sound like I'm against better graphics, but I feel as though there's a point where diminishing marginal returns on your investment in improved graphics takes place. Does sinking all that time and money into improving the graphics really matter for gameplay? I joked about horse testicles in Red Dead Redemption 2, but apparently the developers were quite proud of them shrinking when the weather was cold. That's a little hard to quantify I suppose. With my new graphics card, Cyberpunk 2077 doesn't look significantly better during play though I can see an improvement. Night City looks more alive though because there's more pedestrians and automobiles on the road. While the improved graphics hasn't made gameplay any better, it's improved the overall atmosphere of the game making the city look more alive and vibrant.

 

[Mistwell]

By nephew just got BG3, and I recommended it to a friend who may get it soon. It's that good, though admittedly I don't play a lot of video games these days. So far I only own Hogwart's Legacy as my other game on my Xbox S. Though I may be about to get Indiana Jones and the Great Circle.

 

[Zardnaar]

Agreed on game costs (if there's no abusive microtransactions) buuut to say that games aren't selling more than PS2 days? Can you elaborate on that? The market as a whole has expanded a ton but I'm guessing you mean something more specific.

High selling titles aren't selling more in a lot of cases than previous generations.

PS2 is still biggest selling console of all time and old Mario games or whatever are still big selling titles of all time.

Games like Minecraft and other technical
technically free games might be an exception.

Less titles to go around as well at least AAA ones. Look at 90%+ games on anything and the number of them vs 16 bit, PS2 or PS3/360 era.

We used to update the PCs every few years as well buy stopped as the PCs games we play are either retro or don't need the graphics power.

PS5 I quite like the machine over PS4 and Xbox One buy F all games worth buying relatively speaking (less than PS4/Xbox One and that was anemic vs PS3/360).

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I spent a thousand dollars kitting myself out with my first console* since the Sega Genesis** in order to play BG3 with my wife, who has NEVER played video games (other than a few spins at Mario Kart).

BG3 is THAT good.

*Obviously it wasn't just the console - controllers, chargers, sound system, etc was part of that grand - but I still forked over a thousand bucks just to play BG3. I don't have plans to play anything else any time soon. I just don't have the time.

**Seriously. My son has a Wii and a Switch, but I haven't personally owned a console since the Genesis. In fact, I've barely played video games since the mid-nineties, other than a few small forays, such as New Mario Brothers & Skylanders with my son when he was little, and Minecraft on a PC for a short time 10 years ago. And the occasional time-waster like Candy Crush (again I got over that addiction relatively quickly). I may be a hardcore tabletop gamer, but I'm pretty far behind the curve on digital gaming, in more ways than one.)

 

[Dross]

Maybe they should try harder?

Agree that they should try harder, but that may not be enough.
Larian had a couple of other things occur that usually would not be allowed. Delayed for what, approximately 2 years (including covid), were allowed to work without interference by WotC, Larian being privately owned so can control its own fortunes.
Plus they had enough $ to expand and get people to sure up capabilities.

Solaria was a decent games made with very limited resources, saying they should make a game the equivalent of BG3 is not realistic.

 

[Zardnaar]

I spent a thousand dollars kitting myself out with my first console* since the Sega Genesis** in order to play BG3 with my wife, who has NEVER played video games (other than a few spins at Mario Kart).

BG3 is THAT good.

*Obviously it wasn't just the console - controllers, chargers, sound system, etc was part of that grand - but I still forked over a thousand bucks just to play BG3. I don't have plans to play anything else any time soon. I just don't have the time.

**Seriously. My son has a Wii and a Switch, but I haven't personally owned a console since the Genesis. In fact, I've barely played video games since the mid-nineties, other than a few small forays, such as New Mario Brothers & Skylanders with my son when he was little, and Minecraft on a PC for a short time 10 years ago. And the occasional time-waster like Candy Crush (again I got over that addiction relatively quickly). I may be a hardcore tabletop gamer, but I'm pretty far behind the curve on digital gaming, in more ways than one.)

Genesis was great.

 

[MerricB]

Where is this published? What’s does veilguard bronze mean? This all platforms?

The thread title should really say that it's a platinum seller on Steam.

(Who knows what other platforms are doing).

Cheers,
Merric

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

We just gonna' pretend like these studios aren't making a huge profit still? Sorry, I don't think they need to be making more money.

Well, the profitable ones make huge profits. But then you get something like Concord, that had barely people playing it at launch, and cost hundreds of millions to make.
This is kinda similar to Hollywood, if you think about it - making very expensive movies and some succeed wildly - and others flop hard.
Entertainment is a risky business, and clearly no one has found the secret trick to guarantee success. Some manage a good streak (like Marvel did). Or maybe they did figure it out, but thought they could optimize the process to churn out more or make it cheaper or both and then realized that they optimized the reason for their success away.

One problem for games specifically might be- t he market has gone much bigger, but there is also more competition. And particular multiplayer games benefit from network effects - if you don't achieve a certain threshold of players, you start losing the ones you had because there aren't enough people they can play with, and you also can't afford making enough content or changes to encourage the existing gamers to stick with you.

 

[Bae'zel]

Good, BG3 was my gateway back into tabletop fantasy RPGs after having had a falling out. Hell, after 25 years into D&D, Larian studios actually made me interested in the Forgotten Realms (for the first time ever).

And they made me see the Githyanki as not just some wannabee mummy Klingons with elbow scrotums (from the original Fiend Folio).

 

[Velderan]

Agreed on game costs (if there's no abusive microtransactions) buuut to say that games aren't selling more than PS2 days? Can you elaborate on that? The market as a whole has expanded a ton but I'm guessing you mean something more specific.

If you look at the top 50 selling games of all time, only a few such as Elden Ring and Cyberpunk 2077 are recent games. Nintendo still manages good sales numbers for their 1st party Switch games (Mario, Zelda, Animal Crossing) but you still have games like Mario 3 for the NES on the list despite the industry being so much bigger as a whole than it was in 1988.

I am no expert but my guess is it’s much harder to sell a lot of one title these days because there’s so much competition out there. My Steam wishlist is full of games I would play if I had unlimited time, while in 1988 there was probably only 1 or 2 games I was interested in at any given time.