Torment Was Planescape: Torment really a commercial failure? Fallout sold fewer copies but got a sequel

[Vault Dweller]

Not to jump face-deep into this PoE v. NuTorment shitpostfest, but...I think the most damning indictment of NuTorment (relative to PoE) is how well each sold relatively in their first few weeks out, in light of the fact that they had about the same number of idiots kickstarter backers, similarly overexcited reviews from mainstream reviewers, and similar premises (we're here necrophiliac IE engine games that you loved back in your youth).

Because the best games always sell more

BG sold well, BG2 sold well, Fallout sold well, Fallout 2 sold well, PS:T sold pretty well, Deus Ex sold pretty well, Witcher 3 did Carlos Slim numbers...most of the (non-Troika) games before which we prostrate ourselves on the Codex sold well. It is childish to act as if there is NO positive correlation between the quality of a game and its sales, especially if you are comparing a green apple from California to a green apple from California (i.e. same genre, same perspective, same engine, similar sized-studios and publishers, within a few years of one another), as I am when comparing PoE and TToN.

Fallout 1 sold 80k copies on release, BG sold over a mil. By the time BG2 rolled out, BG sold almost 2 mil. BG2 sold 2 mil on release, the entire franchise with expansions sold over 5 mil copies within the first few years, which was a big fucking deal in those days. Fallout 2 sold over 100k copies on release. By the time BIS went out of business Fallout sold 400k copies (I assume heavily discounted), so Fallout and BG were never on the same page in terms of sales and effect. There's a reason why two games are credited with starting RPG reneissance (aka "holy fuck, RPGs can actually make money!") - Baldur's Gate and Diablo.

PST didn't sell "pretty well". It sold very poorly and marketing (dead guy on the cover, etc) was blamed for it, which is why we had Fallout 2 but not PST2.

 

[Once more unto the Codex]

Senpai noticed my shitpost.

 

[RationalLunatic]

Fallout 1 sold 80k copies on release, BG sold over a mil. By the time BG2 rolled out, BG sold almost 2 mil. BG2 sold 2 mil on release, the entire franchise with expansions sold over 5 mil copies within the first few years, which was a big fucking deal in those days. Fallout 2 sold over 100k copies on release. By the time BIS went out of business Fallout sold 400k copies (I assume heavily discounted), so Fallout and BG were never on the same page in terms of sales and effect. There's a reason why two games are credited with starting RPG reneissance (aka "holy fuck, RPGs can actually make money!") - Baldur's Gate and Diablo.

PST didn't sell "pretty well". It sold very poorly and marketing (dead guy on the cover, etc) was blamed for it, which is why we had Fallout 2 but not PST2.

 

[ga♥]

PST didn't sell "pretty well". It sold very poorly and marketing (dead guy on the cover, etc) was blamed for it, which is why we had Fallout 2 but not PST2.

Not true. It was profitable and it was already said ton of times even on this thread and there are a lot of sources about it on the web.


Oh here's a reputable source :

http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...-torment-sale-numbers-like.13985/#post-251010

 

[Infinitron]

Probable reasons why Fallout got a sequel and PS:T didn't despite selling more:

1) The Fallout IP was owned by Interplay, while PS:T was a licensed title - with all the hassle and lessened profitability that comes with that.

2) Rightly or wrongly, Fallout was perceived as the sort of game that you could quickly slam-dunk a sequel to (which is what happened). A Planescape game would require more time, effort and budget.

3) Fallout came out in 1997, PS:T came out in 1999. Financial circumstances and expectations had changed. Maybe Fallout wouldn't have gotten a sequel either if it had come out in 1999.

4) Despite its meager sales, Fallout was seen (as it turns out, correctly!) as an IP with growth potential, while Torment was definitely inaccessible to wider audiences.

 

[ga♥]

PS:T wasn't very open for a sequel to begin with, i mean story wise.
Why they didn't make another game in the Planescape setting it's probably what this guy above me said.

 

[Lhynn]

PST almost killed MCA and he wasnt about to write part 2 to a self contained and complete story, for several reasons. So im guessing that also played a big role.

 

[Lurker King]

PST almost killed MCA.

What? Citation needed!

 

[ga♥]

Also you have to keep in mind that they had to pay licence fees for the engine AND the setting.

I think, but I may be wrong, that by the time PS:T went out Interplay financial situation (and with it Black Isle) wasn't particularly happy with all those ventures who brought home nothing (like interplay cinema studio or w/e it was called).

 

[Vault Dweller]

PST didn't sell "pretty well". It sold very poorly and marketing (dead guy on the cover, etc) was blamed for it, which is why we had Fallout 2 but not PST2.

Not true. It was profitable and it was already said ton of times even on this thread and there are a lot of sources about it on the web.


Oh here's a reputable source :

http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...-torment-sale-numbers-like.13985/#post-251010

400k worldwide over the years isn't a lot. What matters (as always) is what a game sells on release (meaning at full price) in the full price markets (North America and Western Europe). BG expansions sold more than Torment, for fuck's sake.

 

[ga♥]

PST didn't sell "pretty well". It sold very poorly and marketing (dead guy on the cover, etc) was blamed for it, which is why we had Fallout 2 but not PST2.

Not true. It was profitable and it was already said ton of times even on this thread and there are a lot of sources about it on the web.


Oh here's a reputable source :

http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...-torment-sale-numbers-like.13985/#post-251010

400k worldwide over the years isn't a lot. What matters (as always) is what a game sells on release (meaning at full price) in the full price markets (North America and Western Europe). BG expansions sold more than Torment, for fuck's sake.

First of all that quote from Scott is from 2004, so citation needed for that "over the years" since the 400k seems at release. Secondly what it matters is how much money you invest in the making and how much you get back from it. Nothing else.
The fact that BG sold better doesn't mean PS:T sold poorly.

 

[MRY]

Yeah... "profitable in the end" doesn't necessarily mean "not a disaster economically." "I will take all of your money and return it, adjusted for inflation and with $10 extra, in 10 years" is not ideal, but it is "profitable."

 

[ga♥]

Yeah... "profitable in the end" doesn't necessarily mean "not a disaster economically." "I will take all of your money and return it, adjusted for inflation and with $10 extra, in 10 years" is not ideal, but it is "profitable."

Exept this doesn't seem to apply to PS:T.

 

[MRY]

Yeah... "profitable in the end" doesn't necessarily mean "not a disaster economically." "I will take all of your money and return it, adjusted for inflation and with $10 extra, in 10 years" is not ideal, but it is "profitable."

Exept this doesn't seem to apply to PS:T.

Well, I just mean that "it was profitable" doesn't necessarily tell the whole story.

In terms of the quote above, I'm not sure that the fact it's from 2004 matters. I would be very surprised if PS:T sold much of anything between 2004 and whenever it was added to GOG.com. Where would it have been purchased from? It wasn't on Steam, I'm not sure how much it would've been stocked or sold in stores... The market was pretty different back then. And by the time it was on GOG, wasn't Interplay already done for? (Black Isle was gone by 2003.)

[EDIT: Note that Feargus uses similar lingo here, and seems to be talking about ultimate total sales:

Our goal in Black Isle is to steadily move towards about a million units in worldwide sales per product. Some of our products have chance to sell that much and some won't. And in some cases we will take the shot with a certain title to push it towards that goal, where with others we will be happy with 300K or 400K of worldwide sales. If we could hit a home run with a product, it would certainly give Black Isle and Interplay some financial breathing room.

]

 

[ga♥]

Yeah... "profitable in the end" doesn't necessarily mean "not a disaster economically." "I will take all of your money and return it, adjusted for inflation and with $10 extra, in 10 years" is not ideal, but it is "profitable."

Exept this doesn't seem to apply to PS:T.

Well, I just mean that "it was profitable" doesn't necessarily tell the whole story.

In terms of the quote above, I'm not sure that the fact it's from 2004 matters. I would be very surprised if PS:T sold much of anything between 2004 and whenever it was added to GOG.com. Where would it have been purchased from? It wasn't on Steam, I'm not sure how much it would've been stocked or sold in stores... The market was pretty different back then. And by the time it was on GOG, wasn't Interplay already done for? (Black Isle was gone by 2003.)

Since Scott Warner says in 2004:

We did sell-through around 400k worldwide on Torment. There seems to be an ongoing legacy that the game did very poorly at retail, which isn't true. It actually sold more copies than the Fallouts did.

Those aren't Final Fantasy numbers, but it certainly was profitable for the company.

He is telling us that it was profitable with 400k units sold and ofc this doesn't mean they made 10 bucks on it, and the fact that it sold poorly is FAKE NEWS, whats to argue here?

Even if it didn't sell anything from 2004 to 2200 it was still good money for Interplay, capish?

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

PST almost killed MCA.

What? Citation needed.

It's common knowledge that he almost worked himself to exhaustion on that game. Which is why it's hilarious watching people rant every time about how we just need to lock Chris in a basement for 2 years and have him work on a game full time. He doesn't want to do that.

 

[Vault Dweller]

He is telling us that it was profitable...

Which may or may not be the case and mean what you think it means.

with 400k units sold and ofc this doesn't mean they made 10 bucks on it, and that it sold poorly is FAKE NEWS, what there's again to argue?

When the goal is to sell a million copies within a year, 400k copies over 5 years is "sold poorly".

Also you have to keep in mind that they had to pay licence fees for the engine AND the setting.

Didn't stop them from making two IWD games with two expansions.

 

[MRY]

What it matters is how much money you invest in the making and how much you get back from it. Nothing else.

quote from Scott is from 2004, so citation needed for that "over the years" since the 400k seems at release.

Was responding to these points, which both were, if not wrong, misconceived.

He is telling us that it was profitable with 400k units sold and ofc this doesn't mean they made 10 bucks on it, and the fact that it sold poorly is FAKE NEWS, whats to argue here?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

"Not very poorly at retail" "certainly profitable" "more copies than games on which we weren't paying double licensing fees" all seem somewhat hedging to me. Still, 400k copies back before digital distribution is nothing to sneeze at, and I think people overstate PS:T unpopularity.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Probable reasons why Fallout got a sequel and PS:T didn't despite selling more:

1) The Fallout IP was owned by Interplay, while PS:T was a licensed title - with all the hassle and lessened profitability that comes with that.

IWD.

2) Rightly or wrongly, Fallout was perceived as the sort of game that you could quickly slam-dunk a sequel to (which is what happened). A Planescape game would require more time, effort and budget.

Why? To slum-dunk you need the engine with all systems and assets (models, animations, spells, items, monsters, etc). They could have as easily made a PST sequel IF there was money in it. Sadly, there wasn't.

3) Fallout came out in 1997, PS:T came out in 1999. Financial circumstances and expectations had changed. Maybe Fallout wouldn't have gotten a sequel either if it had come out in 1999.

Didn't stop them from making two IWD games.

4) Despite its meager sales, Fallout was seen (as it turns out, correctly!) as an IP with growth potential, while Torment was definitely inaccessible to wider audiences.

A logical conclusion is that Fallout did better than PST.

 

[Infinitron]

2) Rightly or wrongly, Fallout was perceived as the sort of game that you could quickly slam-dunk a sequel to (which is what happened). A Planescape game would require more time, effort and budget.

Why?

*shrug* An IWD game is a slam-dunk, a Torment game isn't.

4) Despite its meager sales, Fallout was seen (as it turns out, correctly!) as an IP with growth potential, while Torment was definitely inaccessible to wider audiences.

A logical conclusion is that Fallout did better than PST.

Or maybe things are more nuanced than that. We have a more recent example of something like this happening. Mass Effect and Dragon Age: Origins. The latter game actually sold more copies, but EA clearly had more confidence in the former becoming a bankable franchise. It's not hard to see why.

 

[ga♥]

He is telling us that it was profitable...

Which may or may not be the case and mean what you think it means.

English isn't my main language but I think one the dev is telling us that the company made enough money on it.
Otherwise I don't see the point to post on a forum to correct ppl misconceptions... like that it sold poorly and was a commercial failure.
Feel free to correct me if I missed something.

When the goal is to sell a million copies within a year, 400k copies over 5 years is "sold poorly".

Since we don't know what Fargo expected to sell (unless you have some kind of source), I don't see why someone would jump to this conclusion.
Also since most games sell the most on release, the vast majority of those 400k are necessarily at the beginning, unless you want to say that Torment sold 80k a year for 5 year (or 4 year and something).

Didn't stop them from making two IWD games with two expansions.

That's a good point, maybe they found a better deal with Bioware/WotC who knows.
But ppl (and therefore companies) don't always make logical decisions.

 

[MRY]

I think timing is significant. If Torment's initial sales were not great, resources could be allocated to other projects that made a sequel infeasible, particularly if you only have one Avellone. They might've asked him and he might've said no.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Why?

*shrug* An IWD game is a slam-dunk, a Torment game isn't.

IF Torment did better than Fallout then milking this success and making a Planescape dungeon crawler a-la IWD would have made way more sense than starting a brand new series.

Or maybe things are more nuanced than that. We have a more recent example of something like this happening. Mass Effect and Dragon Age: Origins. The latter game actually sold more copies, but EA had more confidence in the former becoming a bankable franchise. It's not hard to see why.

Um, they have two franchises (fantasy and sci-fi). I assume Bethesda bought Fallout for the same reason. It makes more sense to develop both.

 

[Infinitron]

I think timing is significant. If Torment's initial sales were not great, resources could be allocated to other projects that made a sequel infeasible, particularly if you only have one Avellone. They might've asked him and he might've said no.

Yes, that's another thing. PS:T's reliance on Avellone made it non-scaleable. It's like how BioShock just went away when Ken Levine got tired of it. Like PS:T, somewhat underwhelming sales likely had something to do with that, but it's not the whole story.

 

[ga♥]

I think timing is significant. If Torment's initial sales were not great, resources could be allocated to other projects that made a sequel infeasible, particularly if you only have one Avellone. They might've asked him and he might've said no.

Yes, that's another thing. PS:T's reliance on Avellone made it non-scaleable. It's like how BioShock just went away when Ken Levine got tired of it. Like PS:T, somewhat underwhelming sales likely had something to do with that, but it's not the whole story.

Also McComb who was the "resident DND guy" left the company after PS:T.
At least he called himself so during a recent "let's play planescape: torment" twitch videos.