I don’t think it helped that all the gameplay looked like a partial effect explosion which was otherwise extremely generic and uninteresting.

Well it’s good that they were able to find a scapegoat as for why their bland and uninspiring magic shooter didn’t make any money, now they can get EA to greenlight more mediocre games.

The thing about really good games is that it doesn’t matter when you release them. If they’re exceptionally well made, people will find them and play them. Immortals isn’t even the most interesting magic Doom clone on the horizon, with Witchfire already looking better and more interesting.

Aveum’s sales would have been better if the game was more interesting. It’s around the level of Hogwarts Legacy without the built in fanbase. Utterly forgettable.

I don’t think he’s wrong about the busy release year and I would even agree that most people didn’t expect Baldur’s Gate to be as massive as it was. I think everybody knew it’d be big, but it pulled in a significant amount of people that likely never imagined playing D&D. There are probably people who have had sex playing it. I don’t know what the numbers are, but from the amount of people that played it in early access I’d imagine way more actually bought the full game after hearing the good praise it got. I also think he should acknowledge that Immortals shouldn’t have been a near full price ($59.99 USD) game; that’s honestly my only issue with the game. It’s got good gameplay, a fun over-the-top story and it’s a new IP that doesn’t have scummy monetization practices. It’s a perfect buy on sale game that will surprise more people than not.

nobody could have EVER seen this coming

Some games don’t sell well but go on to become cult classics, so if it was just bad timing maybe Immortals of Aveum will too.