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

Forums - Gaming - FFXV's Sales In Japan: It Is Time For Japanese Devs To Support Switch?

Swordmasterman on 08 December 2016
Soundwave said:
Swordmasterman said:

That makes no sense. Street Fighter V would have sold 5-6+ millions on the PS4.

That thread is too offensive and the base of the owner is that Switch will be a extremely success. Nintendo will only ship 2 millions at launch. The Switch will be successful on Japan, but we don't know by how much. Nintendo is jumping from a generation in which they sold 12-14 millions of consoles.

So here's a fucking radical concept ... why not SUPPORT the system and help it become a success? You know, like instead of expecting Nintendo to work like a dog and do all the heavy lifting? 

They seem very keen to give Sony/MS plenty of support before they sell even 1 single console, maybe once (just once) Nintendo could be afforded a little bit of the benefit of the doubt given that they've sold 50 million DS and 3DS units in the last 10 years in Japan (more than any 10 year stretch of any combined Playstation systems). 

Japanese developers need to do some soul searching and ask themselves if they really want a future of traditional gaming in Japan and if there is to be such a future which platform has the best realistic chance of giving them that future. 

Because I think it's becoming painfully obvious which system that is and it isn't the Playstation 4, but even then I'm not saying don't support the PS4. I'm just saying maybe, just freaking maybe it's time to look at the Switch, and I mean really look at it without the usual bullshit third parties tend to pull on Nintendo platforms. 

Nintendo is only one in Japan that can move hardware en masse and that is PROVEN, that's not a hypothetical, even bearing the brunt of the smartphone/tablet storm, the 3DS is going to outsell the Famicom, Super Famicom, Playstation 1, Playstation 2, GBA, Wii, PSP, and Playstation 3 in Japan.  

The Vita sold 5-7 millions of units on Japan despite not being a Success. Nintendo didn't proved nothing, its just that the Japanese market is more focused on mobile consoles, that can be said when you look at their Mobile gaming market.

Microsoft and Sony never had the "thing of doubt". Microsoft wasn't very popular with the first Xbox, so they kicked Nvidia and tried harder with the Xbox360, purchased a lot of exclusives and ended with almost 90 millions of units sold. With that in mind, any investor would start making games for the next Xbox and next Playstation.

 

The Wii sol 100 millions but the Third Party software sale, the AAA, was very bad. If it was only Nintendo, we would not have AAA games anymore. The same focus that you want to shift from the mobile market, Nintendo would bring with the gimmick of the Wii.

The PS3 multiplatforms and the Xbox 360 multiplatforms sold much more than the Wii, with the exception of Lego and Just Dance.



Around the Network
Valdath on 08 December 2016

Wait... OP do you think FFXV should have been released on the 3DS?

FFXV is supposed to have cutting edge graphics, i don't even think the Switch can play it without butchering textures and other stuff.


Why not make every single japanese game for the 3DS aswell? who cares about graphics, gameplay and complex mechanics when you can just make every game look like a ps2 port?

I for one i'm glad SquareEnix supports PS4, i care about the quality of a game more than the sales.
FFXV will be fine, it's going to sell a lot on the west.
Making FFXV tailored for the japanese market would have meant less overall sales.

I'm also glad SE is also finally making another big budget Dragon Quest game, there's the 3DS version too so it's the best of both worlds.


If anything, i really hope more developers abandon handhelds and try their luck with homeconsoles with worldwide sales in mind.

Don't get me wrong i love my 3DS, but i will always take a home console game over a handheld one.



HollyGamer on 08 December 2016

Dont worry Nintendo will have Final fantasy like Gamecube was , But dont expect to be the main series. And also SE will port the games to PC and all problem will be solve.



ABizzel1 on 08 December 2016

I agree it's a huge overreaction, especially if the game is doing well in western markets. People are comparing it to FF13 which was average, but did very well, but the problem with that was people were unaware / didn't believe it / or just flat out bought 13 anyway and once they played it had a bad taste in their mouth. And instead of Square fixing it with a new game, they took the easy route and made 2 more sequels.

It wasn't just FF13, it was the sequels as well sales tanked after that.

FF13 : 1.5m JP week 1
FF13-2: 540k JP week 1
FF13-3: 285k JP week 1

FF15: 690k week 1

If anything this is a huge gain from were the franchise was headed.

FF15 has sold more in it's first week than FF 13-3 has sold in it's lifetime already in JP, and by next week it should also pass 13-2 lifetime sales in JP as well.

People are just trying to bash 15 by comparing it directly to 13 sales, but there was a ton of hype for 13 until the actual game came out. Week 1 numbers were huge, but the drop off afterwards was incredibly hard.

See if the same happens to FF 15.

FF 13-2 struggled to break 1m global in week 1 sales. FF 13-3 struggled to break 1m global in lifetime sales.

So yeah there was a huge decline beforehand.

Now if it comes to the Switch then good more people can play, but this has nothing to do with PS and everything to do with Square. That being said making a low end version just for Switch doesn't seem like it's going to happen.



burninmylight on 08 December 2016
Intrinsic said:
burninmylight said:

The PS2 games would have worked on GameCube just fine. At most, they would have required extra discs.

And I always take the size of current games with a grain of salt, because devs these days don't give a shit about size optimization/compression. Now that every consumer has a hard drive built into their console and has shown a willingness to deal with it being filled up quickly, why should they care about tightening up file sizes? It's your problem now.

Heres a little thing aboutsize optimizations (aka compression). Comoressed data has to be decompressed in realtime to be  used on a frame by frame basis. That usually adds significant CPU load to a render pipeline. With games what they are today, using higher rez textures, shadow maps, tons of audio and a lot of all the things I just mentioned, and with the complex systems these games have to run alongside all those things, aggressive compression just isn't an option. And don't even get started with memory bandwidth.

if you just tried a little to understand why these things are the way the are now instead of just assume that they are doing something wrong because they are lazy then maybe you would understand. There is a reason why Nintendo games generally are built, look and sound a certian way. Most call it charm, in truth its more due to technical limitations. 

Wonder why even in BotW NPCs don't talk?

No, I've never wondered why BotW NPCs don't talk? Know why? Because a LoZ game has never had full voice acting, ever. Blaming that on technical limitations gave me a chuckle.

As far as the load that compressed data takes on a console, I'm not going to pretend to be a technical wizard who knows console architecture that well, so I'm not going to go back and forth with you on that. If someone else wants to chime in on the matter, then feel free to do so. I will say this though: It was barely a factor in the GC/PS2/XB days, and it's not the reason why mainline FF games never came to the GCN.



Around the Network
Intrinsic on 08 December 2016
burninmylight said:

No, I've never wondered why BotW NPCs don't talk? Know why? Because a LoZ game has never had full voice acting, ever. Blaming that on technical limitations gave me a chuckle.

As far as the load that compressed data takes on a console, I'm not going to pretend to be a technical wizard who knows console architecture that well, so I'm not going to go back and forth with you on that. If someone else wants to chime in on the matter, then feel free to do so. I will say this though: It was barely a factor in the GC/PS2/XB days, and it's not the reason why mainline FF games never came to the GCN.

Believe it or not, audio is one of the reasons games have such large file sizes. Uncompressed audio to be exact. And when you make a game that has a lot of audio in it, that size is gonna skyrocket. 

not just Zelda, almost all of Nintendo main franchises have silent protagonists and silent NPCs. You think that's all just keeping with tradition?

And you really need to educate yourself on this whole matter before you start talking. 

Square explicitly said that FF7 would have been impossible to make on the N64. All due to it using carts. Then Nintendo again went with a proprietary disc format for the GC which could store only 1.5GB of data as opposed to the 4.8GB on thr PS2. 

Point is, with HD era (high rez textures, audio, maps...etc) game sizes has gotten bigger than ever. Games aren't just pushing 40-50GB today because devs are lazy. You can't just shave off 25-35GB of content and make it fit into a 16GB cart  and call it a day. And while data limits isn't the primary reason mainline FF games never came to Nintendo platforms since the SNES, it's one of the most imoortant ones. 

And Nintendo keeps making the same mistakes over and over again. 

And since you admit you arrn't the most technical person out there I'll leave you with this. It's no coincidence that Nintendo games look the way they do. You call it charm but while they are charming just know they all look a certain way for a reason. Its not magic, Sony and MS don't invest so heavily in CPUs and GPUs because they are stupid. They do it to enable a certain level of technical freedom. And mind you, Sony are better engineers than Nintendo. The technical freedom afforded to devs by Sony and MS will just never be there on the Switch. This is not my assumption, it's a fact. You aren't going to make a 50GB game fit onto a 16GB cart without having g to butcher the game to all hell and back. Hell by the time you are done, it won't be the same game anymore. 



pastro243 on 08 December 2016

People are overstimating the switch really, this has more to do with how SE has managed the franchise than anything

Anyway, Final Fantasy should stay PlayStation if they want healthy sales in the west. Btw I have no doubts the japanese market will support NS, dragon quest multiplat is a good idea.



- Our album on spotify https://open.spotify.com/album/56mEbEgyBYGzcDyZ1eMQ1v?si=hYKgir5YRSCrzywgGmV4oQ

- Our videoclip 

- My manga: https://www.webtoons.com/en/challenge/blanca-the-world/list?title_no=313068

PotentHerbs on 08 December 2016

Would it even make a difference?



soulripper31 on 08 December 2016
Intrinsic said:
burninmylight said:

No, I've never wondered why BotW NPCs don't talk? Know why? Because a LoZ game has never had full voice acting, ever. Blaming that on technical limitations gave me a chuckle.

As far as the load that compressed data takes on a console, I'm not going to pretend to be a technical wizard who knows console architecture that well, so I'm not going to go back and forth with you on that. If someone else wants to chime in on the matter, then feel free to do so. I will say this though: It was barely a factor in the GC/PS2/XB days, and it's not the reason why mainline FF games never came to the GCN.

Believe it or not, audio is one of the reasons games have such large file sizes. Uncompressed audio to be exact. And when you make a game that has a lot of audio in it, that size is gonna skyrocket. 

not just Zelda, almost all of Nintendo main franchises have silent protagonists and silent NPCs. You think that's all just keeping with tradition?

Super Mario Sunshine had voice acting. People didn't like it. Metroid: Other M had voice acting. People didn't like it. Metroid: Prime 3 Corruption had voice acting. People liked it because Samus stayed silent. Metroid Fusion also gave Samus Aran dialogue though and people liked it. Star Fox has voice acting. Xenoblade Chronicles had voice acting on the Wii, and that's a franchise that is created by people who worked on Final Fantasy in the past. It's an ambitious game with a grand scale and is considered by many to be the best jrpg of the last generation. So what excuse does Square have of not releasing a decent FF game on the Wii? And yes, silent protagonists are a tradition of Nintendo, so the player can identify with the avatar better.

And you really need to educate yourself on this whole matter before you start talking. 

Square explicitly said that FF7 would have been impossible to make on the N64. All due to it using carts. Then Nintendo again went with a proprietary disc format for the GC which could store only 1.5GB of data as opposed to the 4.8GB on thr PS2. 

Point is, with HD era (high rez textures, audio, maps...etc) game sizes has gotten bigger than ever. Games aren't just pushing 40-50GB today because devs are lazy. You can't just shave off 25-35GB of content and make it fit into a 16GB cart  and call it a day. And while data limits isn't the primary reason mainline FF games never came to Nintendo platforms since the SNES, it's one of the most imoortant ones. 

Actually, games are pushing huge data files because devs are too lazy to compress their games. That's a straight up fact. Pokémon Red and Blue, the best selling RPG game of all time, only takes up 0.367 MB. Pokémon Gold and Silver, which are jam packed with content, only take up 1MB. It's an amazing feat to fit so much content on one Gameboy cartridge. All thanks to the work of one of the most talented programmers the gaming industry has ever seen: Satoru Iwata. And 16GB will be the standard cartridge, not the maximum one. Huge difference.

And Nintendo keeps making the same mistakes over and over again. 

We barely know anything about the Switch, so a bit early to say something like this.

And since you admit you arrn't the most technical person out there I'll leave you with this. It's no coincidence that Nintendo games look the way they do. You call it charm but while they are charming just know they all look a certain way for a reason. Its not magic, Sony and MS don't invest so heavily in CPUs and GPUs because they are stupid. They do it to enable a certain level of technical freedom. And mind you, Sony are better engineers than Nintendo. The technical freedom afforded to devs by Sony and MS will just never be there on the Switch. This is not my assumption, it's a fact. You aren't going to make a 50GB game fit onto a 16GB cart without having g to butcher the game to all hell and back. Hell by the time you are done, it won't be the same game anymore. 

Actually, all of this is assumption.

And how do Ninteno games look exactly? Have you ever looked at Wii games running on a Dolphin Emulator? Super Mario Galaxy 1 & 2 and Metroid Prime 3 can rival many PS3 and XBOX360 games. It's developers that make games, not hardware engineers. At best, developers can give feedback on what kind of hardware they want.



Zekkyou on 08 December 2016
soulripper31 said:
Intrinsic said:

Actually, games are pushing huge data files because devs are too lazy to compress their games. That's a straight up fact. Pokémon Red and Blue, the best selling RPG game of all time, only takes up 0.367 MB. Pokémon Gold and Silver, which are jam packed with content, only take up 1MB. It's an amazing feat to fit so much content on one Gameboy cartridge. All thanks to the work of one of the most talented programmers the gaming industry has ever seen: Satoru Iwata. And 16GB will be the standard cartridge, not the maximum one. Huge difference.

I have no interest in getting involved in this general discussion, but looking specifically at this part; how is the size of a game like Pokemon at all relevant? Pokemon Sun & Moon is 3.2GB. Have they gotten several thousand times lazier?

There are some developers that could do more to optimize the size of their games, but in general game files continue to grow because the quality and number of assets they utilize has grown exponentially. Even Nintendo, when when faced with certain types of projects, aren't unable to overcome this. XCX, which benefits (file size wise) from being on a console that's limited in the quality of the assets it can render, is 23GB. That increases to 33GB when you include the loading patches. If it were a PS4/X1 title, with assets befitting those consoles, it'd be even larger.