The market doesnt have a problem with GaaS games. They're talking about an over saturation problem, too many choices for and money being spread thin. One of the unexpected market competition games they referring to is no doubt Apex Legends.There can only be so many Gaas Loot shooter on the market before people burnt out on all of them.....
No. There was always going to be new entries to The Witcher, Elder Scrolls, Assassin's Creed, Zelda, etc.Sorry for the dumb question, but isn't the big sellling point of a GAAS game that there are no more sequels?
True, but then D1 didn't launch in a world with PUBG, Fortnite and APEX.Division 2 PC sales being in line with Division 1 doesn't seem like a great result either.
This too. The atmosphere in the first was just fantastic!The snowy city was the most interesting character of the first game, the second one didnt have that same ffeling nor atmosphere
If they going to release the avatar game with the film(end of 2021), they couldnt be giving more time to division 2.they should have taken more time and made it a next gen game, would have been wiser.
Maybe they should have aimed for realistic rather than ambitious. Surely the point of financial estimates is to produce as accurate a figure as possible? Putting forward the best case scenario is rarely going to match reality.
Where I am it's the complete opposite. Every single kid in my god sons class are on console including those on his football team. About 70% of them are on ps4 and he's the 30% on xbox.
And they don't have a clue what to do when something goes wrong with it, as things invariably do with Windows and PCs. And they don't want to learn how to fix it either, it will be left to gather dust whilst they get on with gaming on their consoles again. Seen it happen.
True, but then D1 didn't launch in a world with PUBG, Fortnite and APEX.
It was always going to be a more difficult sell in the current climate
Imo repeating whole elaborate set of activity is not necessarily grind if the activity itself (and by extension the whole game) is designed with that replayability in mind.You play the same activities over and over hoping for better loot, if that's not grindy then I don't know what is... On a side note I love grindy stuff so don't see that as a bad thing, the setting/story on the other hand sucks.
And i was laughed at when i told people that TD 2 was not going to be as successful as TD.
Yup that's exactly why the PC market is shrinking......oh wait.And they don't have a clue what to do when something goes wrong with it, as things invariably do with Windows and PCs. And they don't want to learn how to fix it either, it will be left to gather dust whilst they get on with gaming on their consoles again. Seen it happen.
Imo repeating whole elaborate set of activity is not necessarily grind if the activity itself (and by extension the whole game) is designed with that replayability in mind.
I see grind as something like farming materials by killing enemies, going around to respawn them, then kill them again and so on....i.e. doing an activity that's not as elaborately designed or even designed in the first place but you do it anyway to gain the advantage and because of how monotonous it is it feels like you are slogging/grinding your way through.
But what do you say when the game has activities themselves that are elaborately designed to be played from start to finish repeatedly. I think there needs to be a certain distinction to be made between these two even if on the surface level they are the same.
Having no idea about this game other than it is another Division, can someone explain what is "boring" about the setting? It's Washington DC, right? That sounds interesting to me.
I skipped Div 2 because I didn't enjoy Div 1. Not sure why the setting bears any blame.
I think the location is actually pretty great once you dive into it. They did an amazing job recreating the city.Having no idea about this game other than it is another Division, can someone explain what is "boring" about the setting? It's Washington DC, right? That sounds interesting to me.
I skipped Div 2 because I didn't enjoy Div 1. Not sure why the setting bears any blame.
Idk, I thought it was a tremendous improvement over the first game.
If it wasn't for the museum's DC would be a boring ass setting though.
Progression in the game works amazing. You can find improved gear and guns everywhere. There is no cap on powerful gear (looking at you destiny)
Matchmaking for everything raids (still looking at you Bungie)
They should be proud of this game.
Unfortunately we live in this fortnite world fucking Everything up.
From the way people are talking in this thread you'd think the game is a flop.
Matchmaking for everything but raids, I didn't type that? Maybe I just thought it.
Shows just how ignorant you are.
Division 2 is not grindy at all.
I stand by what I said previously, they should've stayed in NYC. Kept it in summer, expanded into the whole of upper Manhattan, added half of Brooklyn and the Bronx, expanded the subway system, and they could've rolled all content forward seeing as many didn't play the content released after launch.The boring ass setting probably didn't help. Massive step back after the first one.
Bingo. I bought the game but I already have Fortnite to play as a live game, and on top of that, I also had Anthem the month before... and still dabble in Destiny 2.There can only be so many Gaas Loot shooter on the market before people burnt out on all of them.....
big disagreement there pal, that's exactly what people do wantPeople want a better pay-off for their time investment than repeatedly playing the same pieces of content, earning the same rewards, weapons and armours but with higher numbers on them, until the numbers are eventually high enough that they can progress.
Right. It doesn't make sense to make ultra challenging content aimed at 1% of players and simultaneously hope that it will bring people to the game. For every one person it serves, 99 others are twiddling their thumbs wondering why they should bother. I think resources are almost always better aimed at content that will serve a wider number of people.Not sure if I'd cite the Raid as an area to expect growth upon release since it only applies to such a small fraction of players. I know I wont get to it for awhile, level wise. Then there's the matchmaking to deal with.
Still love the game though.
Yeah, didn't TD1 sale like 6M early on or something? Unless official numbers are out there on sales and Ubi tells us what they expected this report is mostly useless. I love this series with all it's warts and the understanding that Massive will never give me the perfect iteration of the game I want nor the one any other player wants and the fact that this game will change a ton over it's lifespan (with the toughness/armor/health systems being at the center of most of those changes).Don't forget that The Division 1 is the game with the biggest opener ever at Ubi, if the expectations were beyond that and it failed to meet those expectations....then it's still a very very successful game even by AAA standards.
You could say the success of The Division 1 was an anomaly, it was a brand new IP that just sold unexpectedly but had little to no legs, unlike other games from Ubi. And I doubt even Ubi knows why it sold as much. I guess it was because people bought it for the cool visuals and perhaps didn't realise what kind of game it was and it wasn't really as fleshed out at launch. That's one of the reasons for the less than expected sales on consoles. How many looter shooters exist out there best Destiny, Warframe and Anthem (which is what a real flop looks like) in the first place for it to be a heavy competition enough to make the game a "flop"?
If the publisher keeps supporting the franchise then the player base can grow even with "less than expected" sales at launch.
Also no the lower sales is not because of the setting like some people are implying. While it may seem worse in one glance, the Div 2 is a lot more atmospheric and unique in look than The Div 1. It's also the only looter shooter that launched without any issues and was already content rich. In short the quality of the game is high.
And they don't have a clue what to do when something goes wrong with it, as things invariably do with Windows and PCs. And they don't want to learn how to fix it either, it will be left to gather dust whilst they get on with gaming on their consoles again. Seen it happen.
Yup that's exactly why the PC market is shrinking......oh wait.
Whether the individual thinks it sold well or not is irrelevant, the relevant fact is that Ubi say it sold under expectations, and what ramifications that may have on the franchise.