By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Ni no Kuni

 

Ninokuni or SE?

Ninokuni 169 82.44%
 
SquareEnix 36 17.56%
 
Total:205
DigitalDevilSummoner on 18 January 2013

 

 

NobleTeam360 said:
Well plenty of RPG's have proved Square Enix wrong well before Ni No Kuni so I'm not voting for either of them.


Not a single rpg from Japan came close to FF XIII-2 sales, let alone FF XIII.  Some of you folks don't realise this is not the 90s.  Jrpgs IS A DEAD BREAD

As an Altus fan it pains me to admit the only studio that brought innovation to the table this gen (next to Square) is From Software.

On top of everything, the story of Ni no kuni looks painfully typical and familiar.

Objectively in a genre that has its glory days behind it, Square is the only studio that managed to make a multimillion success.

 

 

deskpro2k3 said:

After all the sales Final Fantasy XIII got, Square Enix got a lot of hate mail. So much so they were compelled to make a XIII-2 to make things right.


Disagree. I'm certain XIII-2 was in the plans from the beginning. The X-2 success was pretty much the reason.

-same writer/director

-a game (FF XIII) guaranteed to do great

-a very expensive engine to let it go to waste after one game



Around the Network
sales2099 on 18 January 2013
DigitalDevilSummoner said:
deskpro2k3 said:

After all the sales Final Fantasy XIII got, Square Enix got a lot of hate mail. So much so they were compelled to make a XIII-2 to make things right.


Disagree. I'm certain XIII-2 was in the plans from the beginning. The X-2 success was pretty much the reason.

-same writer/director

-a game (FF XIII) guaranteed to do great

-a very expensive engine to let it go to waste after one game

 

 

NobleTeam360 said:
Well plenty of RPG's have proved Square Enix wrong well before Ni No Kuni so I'm not voting for either of them.


Not a single rpg from Japan came close to FF XIII-2 sales, let alone FF XIII.

As an Altus fan it pains me to admit the only studio that brought innovation to the table this gen (next to Square) is From Software.

Jrpgs IS A DEAD BREAD. On top of that, the story of Ni no kuni looks painfully typical and familiar.

 

 

Ever consider that FF sells on brand name alone? Many feel the games this gen, had they been another title, would have flopped misreabely.



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

Boutros on 18 January 2013
sales2099 said:
Lostplanet22 said:
AAA is about the production costs.

Now now, it can mean both. Words throughout history have adopted different definitions. I think this is one such example.

Not really. It's always been production costs. Only some people on some forums seem to still misunderstand its meaning.

Epic Mickey 2 is considered an AAA title.

More information:

http://www.polygon.com/2012/10/1/3439738/the-state-of-games-state-of-aaa



sales2099 on 18 January 2013
Boutros said:
sales2099 said:
Lostplanet22 said:
AAA is about the production costs.

Now now, it can mean both. Words throughout history have adopted different definitions. I think this is one such example.

Not really. It's always been production costs. Only some people on some forums seem to still misunderstand its meaning.

Epic Mickey 2 is considered an AAA title.

More information:

http://www.polygon.com/2012/10/1/3439738/the-state-of-games-state-of-aaa

But it has the capacity to change if the people adopt it. Words really do change in meaning over time.

I think Lair is what changed things. With its horrible metacritic rating, to call it a AAA game seemed idiotic for everybody involved. Calling bad games AAA is the general idea that made the term a dual meaning.

Not saying is one or the other, it can and IMO is referred to both. I dont know why ppl such as yourself cling to the old definition. It doesnt affect you personally.



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

DigitalDevilSummoner on 18 January 2013
sales2099 said:

Ever consider that FF sells on brand name alone? Many feel the games this gen, had they been another title, would have flopped misreabely.


The answer is: yes the brand name sells SOME copies, not millions. FF XIV is here to prove noone gets a free ride.

Production quality is what i believe that sold XIII.

On the second part, please be specific, and name names.



Around the Network
Lostplanet22 on 18 January 2013
sales2099 said:
Lostplanet22 said:
AAA is about the production costs.

Now now, it can mean both. Words throughout history have adopted different definitions. I think this is one such example.


Not really,  it just happened in the past that AAA production cost for games like GTA/MGS/Resident evil etc also end up with a +90 high score..



 

sales2099 on 18 January 2013
DigitalDevilSummoner said:
sales2099 said:

Ever consider that FF sells on brand name alone? Many feel the games this gen, had they been another title, would have flopped misreabely.


The answer is: yes the brand name sells SOME copies, not millions. FF XIV is here to prove noone gets a free ride.

Production quality is what i believe that sold XIII.

On the second part, please be specific, and name names.

Make a poll thread and find out. Im not prepared to give you a works cited page :P



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

Boutros on 18 January 2013
sales2099 said:
Boutros said:
sales2099 said:
Lostplanet22 said:
AAA is about the production costs.

Now now, it can mean both. Words throughout history have adopted different definitions. I think this is one such example.

Not really. It's always been production costs. Only some people on some forums seem to still misunderstand its meaning.

Epic Mickey 2 is considered an AAA title.

More information:

http://www.polygon.com/2012/10/1/3439738/the-state-of-games-state-of-aaa

But it has the capacity to change if the people adopt it. Words really do change in meaning over time.

I think Lair is what changed things. With its horrible metacritic rating, to call it a AAA game seemed idiotic for everybody involved. Calling bad games AAA is the general idea that made the term a dual meaning.

Not saying is one or the other, it can and IMO is referred to both. I dont know why ppl such as yourself cling to the old definition. It doesnt affect you personally.

I'll stick with the definiton that people who really matter in the video game industry use.



DigitalDevilSummoner on 18 January 2013
sales2099 said:

Make a poll thread and find out. Im not prepared to give you a works cited page :P


Whatever. I think I was clear anyway, a brand name sells some copies not millions.

I think we are a little offtopic though. I am ogling Ni no kuni as a matter of fact but as i have said many times its story comes to me as way too cliched all over, a common problem with jrpgs, and we are talking about story driven games.

What FF XIII did was to treat me as an adult.

With Altus essentially out of the game this gen, my cold approach to this matter is that only From Software and Square Enix made bold moves in this blase genre.

 



deskpro2k3 on 18 January 2013
DigitalDevilSummoner said:
deskpro2k3 said:

After all the sales Final Fantasy XIII got, Square Enix got a lot of hate mail. So much so they were compelled to make a XIII-2 to make things right.


Disagree. I'm certain XIII-2 was in the plans from the beginning. The X-2 success was pretty much the reason.

-same writer/director

-a game (FF XIII) guaranteed to do great

-a very expensive engine to let it go to waste after one game


Not going to speculate on uncertainties. Both games is garbage, and holyshit X-2 a success? lmao.

The development team wanted to exceed Final Fantasy XIII in every aspect and make the story's tone mysterious and darker than the previous game and with a more non-linear design from before. Still failed to surpass XIII sales.