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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Xenoblade Chronicles X Needs to be on another system

 

Xenoblade Chronicles X on PC

Yes 101 13.76%
 
No 632 86.10%
 
Total:733
sc94597 on 14 April 2015
Hynad said:

You're just playing on words now. My point still stands. It doesn't cost that much to develop a game like Xenoblade. 

And, by the way, It's been confirmed that FFXV doesn't rely on CGI as much as older games to tell the story. The producer explained that because the visual quality from in-game graphics were now as high as they are, there was no need for them to make CGI as much as in the older games.

As for the cost of a game 10 years in production, yeah, it's a given that any FF game now cost much more than any Nintendo games. No matter the genre for various reasons. But S-E isn't the only developer making JRPGs. I don't think Tales of games cost more than a Xenoblade game to make. Yet they could very well decide to make there games perfectly on scale. When it comes to content, they're not that far behind already depending on the title. 

But that's beside the point. I think it's short-sighted to believe a game like Xenoblade is difficult to emulate. For all we know, an other developer will make a similar game that will be of better in the near future. 

It isn't a play on words though. It is ridiculous to assume that different developers will have the same costs involved to produce the same exact game. Different developers belong to different companies with different expenses, wages, and implicit costs (opportunity costs) to consider. Why would Namco, for example, make a Xenoblade clone when they have a few successful RPG series? 

If you read HollyGamer's post, the argument made was for another company to clone Xenoblade Chronicles/Xenoblade Chronicles X. Adding an open-world to a Tales of game doesn't do that. The average Tales of game probably has a smaller budget than Xenoblade Chronicles X. Tales of games take heavily from their standards, and it would seem quite odd for one to entirely change the Tales of standard - ARPG with a fantasy storyline. It would probably be cheaper for Namco to just buy/make another team for a game like Xenoblade Chronicles X than to use the Tales of teams.  Namco already attempted funding Xenosaga, and they showed that they weren't interested after Episode III with the sale of Monolith Soft to Nintendo. So I think we can cut them out, unless Xenoblade Chronicles X is a bigger success than we all expect it to be. That really only leaves Atlus, and they're a company with a unique style of games which have been giving them a consistent amount of success. So then it depends a lot on first party publishers. HollyGamer said that From Software could be a developer and Sony a publisher, but I don't think I've ever played a story-heavy From Software game, and I've played King's Field, Souls, and Lost Kingdoms. 

I don't think anybody is arguing that a game won't eventually come out that is similar to Xenoblade Chronicles X in type of content and quality, but it isn't as easy or desirable as HollyGamer makes it out to be. It would cost money, time, and resources that only a few big companies have, and big companies aren't often interested in cloning games. 



Around the Network
Materia-Blade on 14 April 2015
Hynad said:
Wyrdness said:


Except in this case the exceptions do make the rule because games like Okami and WW prove it's purely art direction not whether a game is 2D or 3D that determines it, highlighting TP makes no difference in what you're claiming as it's plain false. The are games like JSR, Red Steel 2, XIII, DQVIII etc... that all show this, even games like Metroid Prime still look good today so what you claim is wrong no matter what game you put forward as one exception debunks the whole argument.


So it's because OoT and MM aged so well that they deemed it proper to remake the graphics instead of just porting the games as is and just adjust the controls for handheld. I see.

What you're saying still doesn't apply to the majority of old 3D games. And you know it. So, why do you argue? It's true that most 3D games don't age well. You bring up the examples that haven't aged as bad as the others, and they're almost all cell-shaded games. How many of those are there? Compared to the ones who did age badly?

And come back in 10 years when your most recent examples will have aged more.

the bolded doesn't have any argument. those were from the first 3d generation and weren't mentioned in the previous post. updating their graphics when remaking is just standard business. wind waker, on the other hand, only received extra resolution and lightning when remastered.



Hynad on 14 April 2015
Materia-Blade said:
Hynad said:


So it's because OoT and MM aged so well that they deemed it proper to remake the graphics instead of just porting the games as is and just adjust the controls for handheld. I see.

What you're saying still doesn't apply to the majority of old 3D games. And you know it. So, why do you argue? It's true that most 3D games don't age well. You bring up the examples that haven't aged as bad as the others, and they're almost all cell-shaded games. How many of those are there? Compared to the ones who did age badly?

And come back in 10 years when your most recent examples will have aged more.

the bolded doesn't have any argument. those were from the first 3d generation and weren't mentioned in the previous post. updating their graphics when remaking is just standard business. wind waker, on the other hand, only received extra resolution and lightning when remastered.

Still brining up the exceptions, not the rule. 

So you're saying I can't bring up these two games because they weren't mentioned before I brought them up? What the heck is that kind of way of arguing?

I brought them up because they illustrate quite well my argument that 3D games age badly. A few exceptions that didn't age as badly doesn't make this less of a fact. Most games from the 5th gen aged quite badly. A majority of the 6th gen games are already showing their age. And things only get worse as time goes by. Let those games age and come back to me in 10 years if you want to make a case.






Materia-Blade on 14 April 2015
AnthonyW86 said:
There is about a 90% chance this game is going to be remastered for the NX so it will sell well enough in the end.

Considering NX is probably a handheld and even if it wasn't, nintendo doesn't remakes/remasters games from the previous generation (retrocompatibility exists for that). XC3d isn't for wii u, so it doesn't count. That makes the chances are about 0%.



Jumpin on 14 April 2015

Another thread with a very uneducated thread starter. The game is developed by a first party Nintendo studio and is published by Nintendo. The game should be ported to the NX, that much I agree with.

Moderated - Starcraft



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Around the Network
Materia-Blade on 14 April 2015
Hynad said:
Materia-Blade said:

the bolded doesn't have any argument. those were from the first 3d generation and weren't mentioned in the previous post. updating their graphics when remaking is just standard business. wind waker, on the other hand, only received extra resolution and lightning when remastered.

Still brining up the exceptions, not the rule. 

So you're saying I can't bring up these two games because they weren't mentioned before I brought them up? What the heck is that kind of way of arguing?

I brought them up because they illustrate quite well my argument that 3D games age badly. A few exceptions that didn't age as badly doesn't make this less of a fact. Most games from the 5th gen aged quite badly. A majority of the 6th gen games are already showing their age. And things only get worse as time goes by. Let those games age and come back to me in 10 years if you want to make a case.

You were shown examples of games that aged well, then you talked about two games that weren't mentioned and, most importantly, are from the dawn of 3d gaming. 5th gen games didn't visually age well because it was the start of 3d. 6th gen games and onwards aged much better.

So of course a game from N64 will get updated graphics during a remaster, because it can use the upgrade and it won't cost much. starting from 6th gen games, their remasters otend to nly change resolution and effects, because their graphics aged better.



Materia-Blade on 14 April 2015
AnthonyW86 said:
Volterra_90 said:

I'm not so sure. Nintendo consoles are usually BC, so maybe there will be no need to remaster the game. 


I have my doubts it will be, Nintendo must realise the benefits of being able to re-release you're games on a new system. Not to mention that it's pretty much impossible to keep the same system architecture(powerpc) for their new system.

That said even if it would be backwards compatible there will be people picking up the game if they missed it on Wii-U.

 

 

 

 

"Nintendo must realise the benefits of being able to re-release you're games on a new system."

So, none? Not making a console backwards compatible for the sole reason to cash in on making people rebuy a few games is imoral to say the least. Besides, they make more money with BC because the previous gen games will sell more, even if through e-shop and the audience will have more than half a dozen remasters available.

It doen't need the exact same architeture for BC, but nothing is stopping nintendo from keeping the power pc.

"That said even if it would be backwards compatible there will be people picking up the game if they missed it on Wii-U."

I think the e-shop already covers that. It's also perfect for those games with limited supply that quickly get rare.



Hynad on 14 April 2015
Materia-Blade said:
Hynad said:

Still brining up the exceptions, not the rule. 

So you're saying I can't bring up these two games because they weren't mentioned before I brought them up? What the heck is that kind of way of arguing?

I brought them up because they illustrate quite well my argument that 3D games age badly. A few exceptions that didn't age as badly doesn't make this less of a fact. Most games from the 5th gen aged quite badly. A majority of the 6th gen games are already showing their age. And things only get worse as time goes by. Let those games age and come back to me in 10 years if you want to make a case.

You were shown examples of games that aged well, then you talked about two games that weren't mentioned and, most importantly, are from the dawn of 3d gaming. 5th gen games didn't visually age well because it was the start of 3d. 6th gen games and onwards aged much better.

So of course a game from N64 will get updated graphics during a remaster, because it can use the upgrade and it won't cost much. starting from 6th gen games, their remasters otend to nly change resolution and effects, because their graphics aged better.

You and I have nothing to discuss, on any matter implying Nintendo. You jump at everyone who doesn't paint that company as godly. It's tiresome. There is absolutely no reason for me to give further examples, and I could provide countless from the 6th gen, because I know all too well the kind of response to expect from you.

I'll leave it at that. 



bigtakilla on 15 April 2015
HollyGamer said:

out of topic but i will try to answer all.

"But is it not Monolith Softs duty as a developer to surpass Xenogears, therefore 3D maps?" Is not there only duty is a natural thing for every studio and developer to make better game then the previous one,and many game has surpassed Xenogears and many games that surpassed by Xenogears had been surpassed by XCX (in my opinion) and XCX will be surpassed by many as well in the future.

"Is it wrong for Monolith Soft to look back at what is considered their "Greatest Game" to get inspiration for XCX" Who said it's wrong , i am saying every studio will , intentionally and unintentionally adopt some aspect, which is great and some minor problem will be fix, to make " new Greatest game  in the future " because XCX is the greatest game for present not for the future, and it will be mark by histories but other will emerge in the future.

"Has Square lost the vision of Final Fantasy simply because they are SO worried about the past and being different than it to make a 3D game like FFVII?" My answer is yes they had been lost their vision and their games quality in past fiew years, but they fixing it  that now, and change their strategy by changing ATB style for battle with real time.

"If not then why not make a FFVII remake and not come out and confirm we will NOT be getting a FF VII remake until a game surpasses it?" My answer and i think other  people will answer the same that is clear that they still moving forward and keep changing, the reason they telling us that they will make FF VII until a game surpasses it" it's just a sweat talks  to entertain the nostalgic fans. It will not be the same game like it was when FF VII came out if they make the remake. because a lot of games have surpassed FF VII in terms of quality etc. maybe not from FF series but from another studio and company like XCX maybe.

 

 

1: True, but it's all based on opinion. There are still people here who believe Xenogears is the best of the Xeno series.

2: I'm not saying you said it's wrong. I'm bringing up the point that if they specifically take something from a previous game to try to surpass it, it obviously equals quality. 

That said XCX may not be the Greatest Game at present. It's a matter of personal opinion.

3: Fixing it?... I guess we'll see. You seem to be jumping to the conclusion that every new game is the "Greatest Game Ever"! In fact, Type-0 for the most part was only mediocrely recieved worldwide, XIV needed two releases, and we all know of the travesty of XIII. Notice the world as a whole almost stops even today with an anouncement for FF VII (even if it does just turn out to be the PC port), yet again another sign of quality.

4: You're opinion, and one that is greatly not shared. Heck, I even agree that games have come out that are better in terms of quality than FF VII (if we are talking about outside of SE), but that's not what the majority of people think.