By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
TRios_Zen on 13 September 2009
Edit Thread
Torillian said:
TRios_Zen said:
themanwithnoname said:
Seraphic_Sixaxis said:
kowenicki said:
lets face it... they all sold pretty badly.

For a JRPG BD did do crap sorta.

But for VC a game that had a really low budget + a low selling Genre of RPG... it did BETTER then any JRPG in general this gen, so please refrain from thorwin VC in with the bunch since its not quite the failure the rest semi were. (As far as Sales go.)

Lost Odyssey has something to say about that.

Furthermore, didn't sega create the "Canvas" engine for this game?  What's the rationale for calling it a low budget game?  Do we have proof of that?

As to the quality, VC is a damn good, and awfully fun game, I could not recommend it higher.  But damn, so was LO, I'd hate having missed one of these games.

Low budget probably comes from the advertising campaign, which was basically non-existent.  If you had to make a guess at which game was more costly between LO and VC, just based on the advertising campaign (which usually is related to the overall budget of the title) you would most likely guess LO.

Advertising cost money, no doubt, but that is hardly definitive proof, don't you think?  I don't want to de-rail the thread, so am totally willing to let this go.  VC is a damn fine game and deserving of sales. 

Just to stay on topic I'll say this, given the demographic generalizations of these two platforms and the PS3's dominance over the 360 in Japan, I'd be disappointed if a quality JRPG did NOT sell better on the PS3.  I think we could all agree that both LO and VC would sell better if they were multi-plat.