Does critical acclaim translate to healthy sales?

[Gladguy]

So we're gearing up for the launch of Iron Storm in the coming weeks. Hopefully, if I've done my job, you've heard of the game. I know some of you have even seen the press preview.

We've done our ads in the magazines, our banners on the websites, and we've gotten a fair amount of preview coverage.

Those previews that risked taking a position on the game were quite positive. We're not kidding anyone here, we don't expect the game to outsell MoH:AA, but we think we've got a pretty good title here that will appeal to a large portion of the same audience.

I was having a discussion with one of my colleagues here today, and we both recalled excellent games (Kohan: Immortal Sovereigns) which got excellent reviews (Avg Ratio: 85% acc. to GameRankings) and yet only sold about 35,000 (NPD numbers).

I'm just wondering if anyone anywhere has done any kind of empirical analysis on the true impact of critical reviews on sales. I mean, does a 75% avg. ratio mean 60,000 units and a 95% ratio mean 150K? Is it meaningless to even pose this question? Are we all just spinning our wheels, and the reality is that only Blizzard and/or Sims games can make any money?

Opening the floor for discussion...

[Case]

I think that good reviews are useful, but not an end-all. A number of
really poor reviews has a greater chance of killing your title than
a lot of great reviews in helping your title.

I personally think that placement is key. You have to make sure the game is visible. That means spending gobs of money on things like endcaps, better shelf placement and so on. Don't underestimate the power of the impulse buy -- but for an impulse buy to happen, the buyer has to see the game.

Buzz in the gaming community is good, too. Right now, the buzz on Iron Storm is mixed. Some think it's great, some think it's way too hard (based on the demo). If a core gamer thinks it might be too hard, they'll never recommend it to their casual gaming friends, which will also cost you sales.

As ever,

Loyd Case

[Menzo]

Good reviews are just one part of the picture.

It's extremely difficult to sell well with poor reviews.
But getting good reviews doesn't mean you'll sell well.

It's about the total picture: marketplace, economic conditions, competition, reviews, some luck, sales presence, sell-in, pre-orders, "buzz," etc.

[Bub, Andrew]

I'm going to step in and mention something seemingly minor but a bigger factor than most people think. (Not the "be all - end all" but a factor.)

Iron Storm is a bad name.

Sure, I get why the game is called that but barring that it makes me first think of Ion Storm (and that has a negative connotation). The name itself is like one of those "lets pick two nice words out of the dictionary" titles. We have "Iron" and a "Storm". Ok. Boring. Whatever. Sometimes a game can overcome a dull title. Half-Life is a good example of that. So is "Combat" "Mission". I mean, gameplay is still key.

But it can't hurt to pick a name that's more evocative or exciting... like "Steel Panthers", for example.

[Dave Long]

Eh...it's not a bad name, but it was used before, and fairly recently. I don't equate Iron Storm with an FPS game, I equate it with this... http://www.workingdesigns.com/museum...m/contents.htm

The game looks ok... I'll give the demo a try.

--Dave

[Sean Tudor]

This is the first I have heard of Iron Storm. Downloading demo now. The setting looks interesting - a 50 year old WWI. How this translates to a decent storyline and gameplay - well we will see.

[Tom Chick]

Given the tradition of computer games, Iron Storm is a perfectly decent name. Coupled with the pictures of the guy in the gas mask, it's a strong and distinctive enough image.

And, uh, Half-Life is a bad title, Bub? Man, you're harsh. Half-Life is a fine title. It evokes technology, science, spilled radiation. If you want to talk about bad titles, you should probably stick to taking potshots at stuff like Divine Divinity.

-Tom

[Anonymous]

A totally non-empirical impresion: Reviews can have an impact. And the bigger the outlet, the bigger the potential impact.

When I was writing a gaming column for a big newspaper, and liked something, I'd get boatloads of email from folks all over asking where they could buy the game. These weren't seasoned gamers; they were just regular folks who wanted to get something for their husband or girlfriend. Or themselves. It got so bad that I had to stop replying personally and start sending out form letters.

Peter

[Derek Smart [3000AD]]

I'm just wondering if anyone anywhere has done any kind of empirical analysis on the true impact of critical reviews on sales. I mean, does a 75% avg. ratio mean 60,000 units and a 95% ratio mean 150K? Is it meaningless to even pose this question? Are we all just spinning our wheels, and the reality is that only Blizzard and/or Sims games can make any money?

Opening the floor for discussion...

Unfortunately - for you - critical acclaim doesn't amount to squat. If quotes and such reviews sold games, we'd all be rich or richer. Reviews only go so far. At the end of the day, the game has to stand on its own merits.

I hope you have your next gig lined up - because I can tell you for free, that breaking the 50K+ unit sales barrier these days, for a new title not based on an existing or ground breaking property, is a toss up. It can go either way.

Your first clue? The demo didn't light up anyone's world. Case in point? BF1942. See how that took the net by storm? Was there ANYTHING ground breaking in it? Not by a bloody long shot. But the developers did a damn fine job and EA spent a frigging fortune pimping it.

And nobody gives a damn about the opinions of the regular website preview/review fanbois. Gamers vote with their wallet and word of mouth. They're past the point of sheer and utter stupidity that comes with running out and buying a game based soley on what you read in a review.

Oh, and your publishers suck. That right there, is a reason to start lining up your next gig. Post here again once you get to see your first royalty statement - or better yet, the first feedback about sell through numbers, from your publishers. I hope you don't cry easily - because its gonna hurt like hell.

From one dev to another, I wish you all the best though. You're gonna need it. A lot of people have NO idea just what it takes to develop a game from start to finish. Nor the angst that comes with waiting to see how it sells.

FWIW, I liked the demo and I plan on buying the full game

[Ben Sones]

]Unfortunately - for you - critical acclaim doesn't amount to squat. If quotes and such reviews sold games, we'd all be rich or richer. Reviews only go so far. At the end of the day, the game has to stand on its own merits.

Actually, I'd argue that at the end of the day, the game has to get lucky. Plenty of games get good reviews and stand very tall on their own merits, and yet fail in the marketplace nonetheless. To a consumer, a game can only stand on it's own merits once the consumer knows what those merits are (so they'd have to buy the game to realize that they should, er, buy the game). I'd guess that reviews can help sales, but probably a lot less than people think. Good marketing certainly helps. But in the end, a healthy dose of luck can take you a long way...

[Derek Smart [3000AD]]

]Unfortunately - for you - critical acclaim doesn't amount to squat. If quotes and such reviews sold games, we'd all be rich or richer. Reviews only go so far. At the end of the day, the game has to stand on its own merits.

Actually, I'd argue that at the end of the day, the game has to get lucky. Plenty of games get good reviews and stand very tall on their own merits, and yet fail in the marketplace nonetheless. To a consumer, a game can only stand on it's own merits once the consumer knows what those merits are (so they'd have to buy the game to realize that they should, er, buy the game). I'd guess that reviews can help sales, but probably a lot less than people think. Good marketing certainly helps. But in the end, a healthy dose of luck can take you a long way...

Good point. Thanks for completing my frame of thought. I agree 100%, hence my Reviews only go so far

[Bub, Andrew]

]
Your first clue? The demo didn't light up anyone's world. Case in point? BF1942. See how that took the net by storm? Was there ANYTHING ground breaking in it? Not by a bloody long shot.

Hmmm... tanks, planes, ships, WWII setting in a commercial release, what else is offering that exactly? I mean except WWII Online.

But the developers did a damn fine job and EA spent a frigging fortune pimping it.

They did? I didn't notice. The only things I noticed about BF: 1942 was that it was the talk of E3 and when, suddenly, fifteen threads praising the demo popped up here. BF: 1942 is the first demo I've downloaded in about 4 years.

I think word of mouth coupled with fantastic gameplay helped sell BF1942.

Now, Iron Storm, I actually hadn't heard about it until this thread. The name of the game told me it was a WWII Flight Sim (even though I hadn't heard about the Saturn game Long mentioned) or, more likely, a WWII Tank game. Now someone says it's a WWI game (or some altern-reality WWI) with a gasmask on the cover?
Ok.

[Rob de los Reyes]

I was having a discussion with one of my colleagues here today, and we both recalled excellent games (Kohan: Immortal Sovereigns) which got excellent reviews (Avg Ratio: 85% acc. to GameRankings) and yet only sold about 35,000 (NPD numbers).

It's extremely difficult to sell well with poor reviews.
But getting good reviews doesn't mean you'll sell well.

Even with sales of "only" 35,000, I suppose it's fair to ask how much lower that figure might have been had Kohan not received all those good reviews. In other words, good reviews clearly didn't turn Kohan from a 35,000-seller into a million-seller. But mightn't the good reviews have turned an 8,000-seller into a 35,000-seller? Moreover, mightn't good reviews of Kohan 1 offer some hope for better luck with a putative Kohan 2? I'm not sure there's any way to piece it out with scientific certainty (self-interested polls conducted by Gigex notwithstanding). Still, as Adam and others point out, all other things being equal, you'd rather have a plate full of good reviews than bad reviews.

[Supertanker]

I don't claim to know how the causal gamer's mind works. If the world were full of 6 billion people that thought like me, there would never have been a second hunting game or any Sims expansions. Among the heavy gamers, I agree with the idea that good reviews don't likely help sales, but bad reviews hurt them. It is like I argue with my wife about women's evaluation of male behavior: Perfect performance means that you remain at zero, but falling short of perfect means you lose points. People buy the games if they want to, and the positive reviews usually just validate the previous buying decision.

Personally, I look for the reviews from CGM, CGW, Gamespy, and Gamespot. They are really the only ones I trust anymore, and I trust them more if I recognize the author. If I am on the fence, one of them can (and has) sway me into buying.

Now, specifically to Iron Storm. The marketing campaign got me interested, so I downloaded the gameplay video that was released recently. That got me interested enough to download the demo (even on broadband, I hestitated at a 200MB demo). After trying the demo, I agreed with the conclusion it was too hard after dying for the 100th time. Other aspects of the game, like the very slow scrolling speed for messages, added to the feeling of frustration and sealed my decision to skip buying the full game. Nice graphics, though.

There is a chance I will buy it after it is patched. I did that with Ghost Recon - I didn't enjoy having my sniper get out-shot by some tribesman with an AK-47, but when the patches toned down the enemy accuracy (hint, hint), I decided to buy it and enjoyed it. As Winston Churchill said, "Nothing is more exhilarating as to be shot at without result." (hint, hint)

[Gladguy]

]Oh, and your publishers suck. That right there, is a reason to start lining up your next gig. Post here again once you get to see your first royalty statement - or better yet, the first feedback about sell through numbers, from your publishers. I hope you don't cry easily - because its gonna hurt like hell.

Ummm... Derek? I'm sorry if I mislead you in any way, but I'm actually the Product Manager at DreamCatcher. :shock:

I certainly don't want to get into any kind of a flame war with you, because, believe it or not, I really respect you. While I may not agree with your methods, as a fellow "builder" in the game business, I respect your accomplishments. You have truly left your mark, and for that you are to be commended.

I'm familiar with your history, and I can understand why you have a hate-on for the publishers you've worked with in the past, but I don't know why you assume all publishers operate the same. Because we don't.

I like to think we've dealt with our devs in the manners in which we'd like to be treated. In fact, and this is way off topic for this thread, I'd encourage you to speak to the guys at any of the dev houses I've worked with during my tenure here. PM me, and I'll be happy to give you references if you're interested.

FWIW, I liked the demo and I plan on buying the full game

Thanks! At least we can count on one sale! :wink:

[Gladguy]

Supertanker:
Thoughtful comments, thanks.

The demo was, admittedly, too hard. The AI has been tuned down for the final release.

Rob de los Reyes:
Good point made on Kohan! I can only hope that's not the situation we're in.

[Jason Cross]

It's about the total picture: marketplace, economic conditions, competition, reviews, some luck, sales presence, sell-in, pre-orders, "buzz," etc.

I would add "mainstream press" to that list. Maybe that counts as "buzz." If a game is talked about in a lot of mainstream press publications, it tends to fly off the shelves, at least for a very short while.

State of Emergency is maybe a good example. It was referred to in the same breath as GTA3 in the mainstream press, and hardcore gamers mostly avoided it because it was all over the 'net and the magazines how bad it sucked before release. It still sold very well out of the gate, though. That all ended quickly, of course (and if it was a great game with great reviews, maybe not). But I don't think it would have even registered after all the horrible reviews and word of mouth if it wasn't for the mainstream press attention.

[Murph]

]
Oh, and your publishers suck. That right there, is a reason to start lining up your next gig. Post here again once you get to see your first royalty statement - or better yet, the first feedback about sell through numbers, from your publishers. I hope you don't cry easily - because its gonna hurt like hell.

Ummm... Derek? I'm sorry if I mislead you in any way, but I'm actually the Product Manager at DreamCatcher.

Ouch. Ooooh...Whoopsie! :-)

Is it wrong of me to have totally cracked up at that?

[Chris Nahr]

Is the name "Iron Storm" inspired by Ernst Jünger's In Stahlgewittern by any chance? That's what I was thinking of when I heard about the title and the WW1 setting. In that case I might feel compelled to buy a copy. :)

[Gordon Cameron]

Regarding bad game titles, I'm starting to think it might not always be a bad thing. As long as they're *so* bad they get people talking. A bland title is no good, but a spectacularly bad title such as "Divine Divinity" seems able to generate some buzz in its own right. :)

[Anonymous]

Opening the floor for discussion...

I have just played the Iron Storm Demo 2. Not bad - actually it's pretty good. My only criticism is that the weapons lack the viceral feel and sound of those in MOH:AA. They need a bit more kick.

The enemies have a rather strange floating motion when you kill them. They sort of float backwards. :D

The levels seem quite interesting and the demo left me wanting more - so that is a good thing. I find the setting quite interesting - sort of an Orwellian nightmare. :)

[Sean Tudor]

Sorry - that was me.

[Anonymous]

Divine Divinity's title has this going for it: It can be abbreviated as "DD," which makes most men think of breasts and as you know, boobs sell.

[Mark Asher]

"Even with sales of "only" 35,000, I suppose it's fair to ask how much lower that figure might have been had Kohan not received all those good reviews. In other words, good reviews clearly didn't turn Kohan from a 35,000-seller into a million-seller. But mightn't the good reviews have turned an 8,000-seller into a 35,000-seller?"

I think that's possible, though Rails Across America from Strategy First also got good reviews and probably sold that 8000 copies.

It's a bit discouraging to me as a game fan that a game like Kohan, which not only got good reviews but generated lots of good buzz, only sold 35,000 copies (more like 70,000 probably, since you can usually double NPD's numbers to get worldwide figures).

We had this discussion before, but I blamed it in part on the title and the unique fantasy setting that was a bit hard to figure at times. I don't think it would have sold like Warcraft if it had elves and dwarves and orcs instead of ceyah and whatever else they had (see, I've forgotten already), but I think it would have done better.

[Gladguy]

I think that's possible, though Rails Across America from Strategy First also got good reviews and probably sold that 8000 copies.

Rails Across America:
2002 YTD - 6,088
2001 - 6,238

Pretty close, Mark... :(

I'd say "well, that's because Railroad games don't have a market," but we all can acknowledge the Railroading freaks out there who bought the RT games (more than 300K units sold acc. to NPD), not to mention Train Simulator (225K units).

Clearly, in the case of Rails Across America, the positive reviews did nothing for sales.

So did Strat. First drop the ball by not marketing the game enough? I dunno... I seem to remember seeing quite a few ads for the game. Maybe it was the packaging that didn't resonate with buyers?

[Troy S Goodfellow]

On Rails Across America, Railroad Tycoon's mainstream success may have worked against RAA. How many railroad business sims will the casual gamer play? If you compare the box graphics of the two, there is no indication that RAA will be a great and fun business game. RT2 has very pretty pictures. Without a compelling reason to pickup RAA, most will stay satisfied with RT2.

A lot depends on how we define healthy sales, but The Longest Journey had an appropriate slow crawl to very big numbers, largely built on critical acclaim (the year it was released, it was widely hailed as the best adventure game to come around in a long time) and word of mouth.

Phenomenal numbers in the millions require some kind of mainstream press buzz, though the big outlets are more leaders than followers. Both The Sims and GTA3 were successes before the mainstream press caught on, though their coverage certainly kept sales strong. Black and White is the only game I can think of that received wide mainstream coverage before its success was assured.

What are Black and White's sales figures like?

Troy

[VegasRobb]

[quote="Bub, Andrew"]

]

But the developers did a damn fine job and EA spent a frigging fortune pimping it.

They did? I didn't notice. The only things I noticed about BF: 1942 was that it was the talk of E3 and when, suddenly, fifteen threads praising the demo popped up here. BF: 1942 is the first demo I've downloaded in about 4 years.

I think word of mouth coupled with fantastic gameplay helped sell BF1942.

Putting up all those servers and paying for the bandwidth certainly wasn't cheap. This is a great thread btw. As soon as I read the title, the first thought that crossed my mind was "Kohan:IS and Kohan:AG". Such is a great game and it never really caught on. If Kohan was made by a Microsoft Developer would it have been another Age of Empires? I would say yes.

[Mark Asher]

"If Kohan was made by a Microsoft Developer would it have been another Age of Empires? I would say yes."

Even Microsoft has its share of sales duds, though a dud for Microsoft surely sells more than 6000 copies. And no, I don't think Kohan would have sold AOE numbers if MS was behind it. It probably would have done better than 35,000 units, though.

Seems to me that hardcore gamers usually have their minds made up about buying a game before it's released. Good reviews and buzz may turn some of them into buyers, and I'm sure some will impulse buy when browsing the racks looking for something, but I'm not sure that marketing can change too many minds. Hardcore gamers are a hard sell, I think.

[Mark Asher]

"What are Black and White's sales figures like?"

Very very good, as I recall.

[Dave Long]

So what's your reason for not believing Kohan would have done better with a big name publisher, Mark? Kohan's setting? Let's hear that one more time how it's so unique and you'd much rather have it be Orcs and Elves. :roll:

--Dave