naznatips said:
Words Of Wisdom said:
RolStoppable said:
Words Of Wisdom said:
RolStoppable said:
The issue with JRPGs is that they are a genre that traditionally has development cycles of 18-24 months (or longer), thus developers try to make sure that they make their game for a console with a big enough userbase to easily turn a profit. It's perfectly normal that there are next to none JRPGs in the first year after the Japanese launch of each system, this isn't just unique to this generation. Just look back at PS2, GC, Xbox or even further. Now there are only few JRPGs early in a generation, but in return their are boatloads at the end of a generation. Well, for the winning system that is. Late high profile releases like for example Star Ocean (SNES, 1996), Final Fantasy IX (PS1, late 2000) and Final Fantasy XII (PS2, late 2006) are perfectly normal. Besides these top tier games there are tons of smaller JRPGs like Tales of, Shin Megami Tensei etc. What I am trying to say is that JRPG developers are among the last ones to switch to the next generation and they usually pick the winning system. A common misconception is that the system that gets the most JRPGs wins, in reality the opposite is the case. A system has to be already winning, before it gets the flood of JRPGs. |
What are your thoughts on titles such as Eternal Sonata, Blue Dragon, and Lost Odyssey then? Obviously the 360 is older than its two competitors but 1~2 years in is not the end of the generation. |
The games you mentioned went to the 360 because Microsoft was paying for them in one form or another.
I don't get what you want to imply with your second sentence. Care to elaborate? |
So you're saying the only reason the 360 is getting RPGs is because of Microsoft? |
Er... you're not? Microsoft paid for every single JRPG on the Xbox 360. This isn't exactly a carefully guarded secret. They are purchased exclusives... |
I'm not saying anything yet. I'm just wondering if I should be cheering Microsoft on. ^_~
