By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
jarrod on 02 November 2009
Edit Thread
outlawauron said:
jarrod said:
outlawauron said:
jarrod said:
Carl2291 said:
jarrod said:
Aprisaiden said:
@jarrod you do realize that SRPG's do not sell big. Hell what was the last SRPG to break 1 million excluding FF:Tactics ?

VC has sold incredibly well for a SRPG and a new IP.

I'm not arguing genre popularity, though even then it can be argued that SRPGs are generally low tech, low end, low promotion affairs (like Disgaea, FFTA, Luminous Arc, Fire Emblem, SRT, Cross Edge, etc, etc), which is something Valkyria goes against.  You can't really compare it to other genre entrants that still look 2 gens older, it got a vastly bigger budget and bigger push than any SRPG in recent memory (probably since... well FFT comparably).   If it'd really sold incredibly well, it's sequel wouldn't have jumped ship to PSP...

It must have sold well, hence... The sequel.

And they are already hinting at bringing Valkyria 3 to PS3.

Underperformers often get sequels, all it takes is confidence in the concept.  Which is what Sega has in Valkyria, though they're definitely taking a more consumers friendly route with the sequel (more generic art, school setting, PSP rather than PS3, local multiplayer).

Again, Sakura Taisen is the model, Sega probably expects Valkyria will eventually get there...

You have two assumptions that create a big problem in your argument:

1. Assuming the expectations of Valkyria Chronicles based on zero information from Sega

2. Assuming that Valkyria Chronicles had vast budget. It's true that it certainly cost more than Cross Edge or Disgaea, but was not a very expensive game.

Well, for Sega's expectations, all we can go on is assumptions given they never released them publicly.  I'm inclined to believe they probably didn't hit what they wanted given the shifts we've seen for the sequel though, which isn't exactly a huge leap to make.

Also, I like how for your 2nd point you decry me for assumptions, then declare Valkyria "was not a very expensive game".  What's this based on again?  How cheap do you think a ground up PS3 engine is again?  What about the scrapped 360 R&D?  Anime tie-in?  Huge promotional push it saw in Japan?  I'd be pretty confident in "assuming" Valkyria Chronicles was likely the most expensive (non-licensed) SRPG to date in Japan.  There's more evidence pointing that direction than to the contrary...

So, you're basing the assumption that it failed solely on the fact the sequel is on PSP? That's seems a little dumb to me.

The engine costs were bulk of the cost of the game, but whenever it's used again (and they've stated they will and are using a modified version of it for the PSP sequel) the cost of developing that engine not longer lies solely on Valkyria Chronicles. The anime, manga, and figures are nothing but profit and counter active to the point you're trying to make. The game also did not have a huge promotional push in Japan. Don't stop by posting the TV ads because nearly every game in Japan gets some type of short tv spot.

Yes, I'd agree that Valkyria is probably the most expensive non-licensed SRPG to date in Japan, but even then, the bar is set very low. I'd throw in the possibility of Final Fantasy Tactics being just as expensive if not more, depending on the development time.

Not just the platform switch, there's been a lot of conscious design choices in VC2 to make it more palatable to a general audience.  The shift in artstyle, shift in setting, focus on local multiplayer... there's been a lot of clear rethink here.  Sega's really going all out to make VC2 work, which sort of implies something wasn't working before.

I'd actually say promotion was probably the bulk of cost with the game though, again Valkyria got a AAA push.  And not just the (heavy rotation) tv spots, I'm talking billboards, insane mag coverage (for months even after release, which is generally unheard of) and the like... this was a AAA game, with a AAA push, and B sales.  Really, there's no way around that.

I'm also a bit wary of buying any comments about a shared/adapted engine between VC1 and VC2.  It's like saying FFXIII and Crystal Bearers share the same engine, since both use Crystal Tools.  I think at best, they're just using a modified toolset to bring over/downgrade assets easier (this is what Crystal Tools does, as well as Capcom's MT Framework, which is also being adapted to Wii now) but I have a hard time believing there's actually any degree of shared code between PS3 Canvas and PSP Canvas.

FFT might've been comparable for it's day relative to general industry costs, but not in terms of raw (adjusted for inflation) investment.  Games are just more expensive to make now, HD games especially.