Whether I liked it or not it appears that Wolfenstein didn't grab consumers interest and has failed to exceed 60,000 units sold on any platform leading to poor overall sales.
Quote:
When the NPD Group released its non-PC US game sales figures for August earlier today, one of the month's highest-profile titles was missing in action. Neither the Xbox 360 nor the PlayStation 3 version of Wolfenstein cracked the top 10, despite the classic id shooter reboot being promoted by Activision--which was shut out of the top 10 entirely.
How poorly did Wolfenstein fare? According to NPD numbers obtained by GameSpot, the 360 version sold just over 59,000 units, with the PS3 edition barely clearing 30,000. Add in the PC iteration's 17,000 units, and Wolfenstein sold only around 106,000 units in the five days from its August 25 launch to August 29, when NPD's monthly reporting period ended.
Is 106K units sold in five days actually considered disappointing?
I think not being top-ten in your release week is a bad sign for a "major" release.
This game really did suffer from poor marketing and poor design. The game tried to capitalize on the PC hardcore brand of Wolfenstein, but ended up looking like generic console FPS #5. It reminds me of the console Bard's Tale.
What they need to do is take the old, OLD Wolfenstein games, the original two that came out for Apple and IBM and Commodore 64 and give them the 'Prince Of Persia Classic' treatment. Just remake those two old games and put 'em up on XBL and PSN. It's been SOOOO long since I played those games and I'd love to do them again. Those things were stealth espionage games before the genre even existed!
This new one just looked pretty generic, IMO. I passed on it.
__________________
Taiso? Yeah, he's dead. He's all messed up.
Doesn't that really depend on how much cash went into development? That's ~$5.3 million by my count, if you assume $50 avg. I don't even know if that's what it sold for. But, if it costed a million bucks to make, the it's doin' well.
For me personally, the IP isn't big enough to sell me a game based on its name alone, and the game looked good, but it didn't look great. I think it would be a lot of fun, but I don't think it would particularly excite me.
I plan to look into it next year when Ive made my way through the holiday titles, and this can be found for a good price.
I think not being top-ten in your release week is a bad sign for a "major" release.
This game really did suffer from poor marketing and poor design. The game tried to capitalize on the PC hardcore brand of Wolfenstein, but ended up looking like generic console FPS #5. It reminds me of the console Bard's Tale.
Talk about an identity crisis.
I think that was the real problem. if eel like it was promoted fairly well. I mean, I knew about. I knew much more about it than I actively tried to go out and discover.
But ultimately it just looked like generic. There wasn't anything about it that looked interesting, new, or thought it. It didn't look like it was trying to say anything.
No one cares about this series anymore. I was surprised to see they were making a new one considering apart from the multiplayer, the last one was crap as well.
__________________
PSN & Steam: shadow763 XBOX Live: clearedmoss
Doesn't that really depend on how much cash went into development? That's ~$5.3 million by my count, if you assume $50 avg. I don't even know if that's what it sold for. But, if it costed a million bucks to make, the it's doin' well.
Most games cost $10+ Million to make. Subtract out the cost of development, advertising, manufacturing and the % of sales that goes to the retailer and this title would be a huge loss for Activision.
I blame piss-poor marketing people. Every screenshot and video I saw for this title looked like complete ass, but the game itself doesn't look bad at all and is pretty damn fun.
__________________ Play Gears of War with it - "Marcus, take cover. Yes...over by the couch!"
I actually enjoyed the new one for what it was worth. It's not terribly long, the story is a complete throw away, and the gameplay elements are all borrowed, but there are much, much worse ways to kill time.
It will probably be on sale for 20 bucks before most people find out that it was actually a pretty fun game marred by its inability to think outside the box. It's a fun romp, and though it does absolutely nothing unpredictable or risky, it's entertaining all the same.
As for its look, I felt it looked incredible in motion, but somewhat boring when you stop to actually examine things. I will say that engine is capable of some magnificent looking graphics, especially when you're outdoors in the area being bombed, and you switch to the Veil sight. The game hardly even ever slowed down on my two year old machine, and I have it running max on a 22'' widescreen.
So yeah, it's not the best looking game, but it's extremely solid. If I were forced at gun point to give a number score for it, it would sit somewhere around an 8.
No one cares about this series anymore. I was surprised to see they were making a new one considering apart from the multiplayer, the last one was crap as well.
I think most people do have a soft spot in their heart for Wolfenstein. I think the problem is trying to figure out what Wolfenstein means today.
I think the thing people keep coming back to in regard to the game is that it looked generic. Nothing about it stood out.
