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

Forums - Sales - Dear JRPG Developers; You’ve made your bed, now lie in it. (HONEST article)

Loud_Hot_White_Box on 25 March 2009
Bitmap Frogs said:
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:

In Japan, and to a lesser extent in Europe, people prefer to think the goods they buy are of high quality.  And low price is not as much of a selling point as it is in America: it tends to connote shoddy quality.

 

Yeah, that's why el cheapo nokia phones massively outsell the n-series. 

That's why LCDs outsell plasmas.

Etc...

Look at you, trying to score cheap shots distorting the facts. 

 

Look at you missing my point.  It's not that price doesn't matter, it's that it matters less there.  I'm also not denying that companies like Nokia can score marketing wins even if they're 'cheapo'.

No, no.  The explanation is consistent when discussing US vs Japan and EU sales.  Don't muddy the waters by discussing different products in different industries in EU only.  The question might be, do cheap phones outsell expensive ones in the US by and even greater margin.  The answer is probably yes.



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 25 March 2009
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
Kasz216 said:
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
The Anarchyz said:

Like i said, we discussed the Japan issue with consoles in a lot of threads, and we came to the same conclusion about the Xbox brand being American...

And about the other brands, i said "survived", not "beat down the competition" because i don't have the sales of them vs the competition (and i might add, Windows doesn't have J-competitors and the other brands are not having a war like the Xbox is having with the Playstation)...

But if you like to give a better explanation of why the Xbox brand is not that popular in Japan despite having a JRPG with part of the Chrono Trigger Dream Team, a JRPG with part of the Final Fantasy original team, a Tales JRPG and two Tri-Ace JRPGs (one of them a popular established franchise), be my guest...

In Japan, and to a lesser extent in Europe, people prefer to think the goods they buy are of high quality.  And low price is not as much of a selling point as it is in America: it tends to connote shoddy quality.

 

 

i believe the effects of the 360 price drop would disagree with you there.

The reason it's doing bad in japan is because JRPGs outside a few namebrands don't matter.

The reason why Playstation is doing better in Europe is becuase osny was the first company to make a real effort in europe.

Sega and espiecially Nintendo's distribution and setups in europe were laughable.

 

What I said is consistent with price drop effects: yeah, lower prices have an effect, but in the areas that aren't so discount-oriented, but instead quality-oriented, PS3 does better in general vs. 360.  PS3 will see a boost in EU and Japan from a price drop, too.

As for Japan: does the PS3 have exclusives on those JRPG namebrands you mentioned?  Because it's beating the hell out of 360.

As for Europe: then it was a horrible blunder for Microsoft not to make an effort there when they wanted to be successful in the console business...oh wait, as I type that, it does't sound reasonable at all.  Nope, the more consistent explanation of sales, given how much cheaper 360 is, is that there's a perception that the 360 is a second-rate console.


FF13.

It also has the other games that matter in Japan

MGS4, Everybody loves Golf, GT5: Prologue.

The PS3 has every game that was big last generation in japan that isn't a JRPG.  360 does not.



Bitmap Frogs on 25 March 2009
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:

Look at you missing my point.  It's not that price doesn't matter, it's that it matters less there.  I'm also not denying that companies like Nokia can score marketing wins even if they're 'cheapo'.

No, no.  The explanation is consistent when discussing US vs Japan and EU sales.  Don't muddy the waters by discussing different products in different industries in EU only.  The question might be, do cheap phones outsell expensive ones in the US by and even greater margin.  The answer is probably yes.

 

Your point is that in the territories where the 360 isn't doing as hot it's because the buyers prefer quality, implying that the 360 is low quality. Well, guess what in Europe and Japan low-quality products sell over high-quality products. There's no such quality-bias in the behaviour of european or japanese consumers. 

This is about brand, not about quality. But you wouldn't get to cheapshot MS and the 360 so that's why you build that baseless argument about consumer bias. 





Current-gen game collection uploaded on the profile, full of win and good games; also most of my PC games. Lucasfilm Games/LucasArts 1982-2008 (Requiescat In Pace).

Loud_Hot_White_Box on 25 March 2009
Bitmap Frogs said:
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:

Look at you missing my point.  It's not that price doesn't matter, it's that it matters less there.  I'm also not denying that companies like Nokia can score marketing wins even if they're 'cheapo'.

No, no.  The explanation is consistent when discussing US vs Japan and EU sales.  Don't muddy the waters by discussing different products in different industries in EU only.  The question might be, do cheap phones outsell expensive ones in the US by and even greater margin.  The answer is probably yes.

 

Your point is that in the territories where the 360 isn't doing as hot it's because the buyers prefer quality, implying that the 360 is low quality. Well, guess what in Europe and Japan low-quality products sell over high-quality products. There's no such quality-bias in the behaviour of european or japanese consumers. 

This is about brand, not about quality. But you wouldn't get to cheapshot MS and the 360 so that's why you build that baseless argument about consumer bias. 

 

360 doesn't need me to imply anything.

There is a quality-bias in Japan and Europe much more so than in the US.

If it were about brand, why the much harder reversal for Playstation in the US?  There must be some difference between the US and the EU/Japan.  I've said what it is.



Loud_Hot_White_Box on 25 March 2009
Kasz216 said:
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:

 

What I said is consistent with price drop effects: yeah, lower prices have an effect, but in the areas that aren't so discount-oriented, but instead quality-oriented, PS3 does better in general vs. 360.  PS3 will see a boost in EU and Japan from a price drop, too.

As for Japan: does the PS3 have exclusives on those JRPG namebrands you mentioned?  Because it's beating the hell out of 360.

As for Europe: then it was a horrible blunder for Microsoft not to make an effort there when they wanted to be successful in the console business...oh wait, as I type that, it does't sound reasonable at all.  Nope, the more consistent explanation of sales, given how much cheaper 360 is, is that there's a perception that the 360 is a second-rate console.


FF13.

It also has the other games that matter in Japan

MGS4, Everybody loves Golf, GT5: Prologue.

The PS3 has every game that was big last generation in japan that isn't a JRPG.  360 does not.

 

Ok, down to Japan only then.  I thought you were talking about 1) JRPGs 2) that were already released.  Anyway, overall I agree that PS3 still has the more Japan-friendly game lineup.  I actually really wonder why MS focused on stealing the specific exclusives that it has, other than some naive sense that "those kinda games are the ones need to win Japan!!!"  Maybe the price of other ones was too high, I dunno.  Maybe Kojima didn't care, didn't want to be on 360.  GTP is a Sony game.  Isn't Everybody loves Golf?  hmm.



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 25 March 2009

Kinda my point. PS3 has prety much allt he PS2 biggies.

As for Europe.

Microsfot wasn't around in the PS1 era.

Therefore wasn't the first to make an effort in europe.

Duh.



Loud_Hot_White_Box on 25 March 2009
Kasz216 said:
Kinda my point. PS3 has prety much allt he PS2 biggies.

As for Europe.

Microsfot wasn't around in the PS1 era.

Therefore wasn't the first to make an effort in europe.

Duh.

 

Really?

Sony wasn't around in the US during the NES/SNES/part of the N64 days.  On their first effort, in a foreign territory, they threw all other suckers to the ground.

The "not first" explanation doesn't fly.



Kasz216 on 25 March 2009
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
Kasz216 said:
Kinda my point. PS3 has prety much allt he PS2 biggies.

As for Europe.

Microsfot wasn't around in the PS1 era.

Therefore wasn't the first to make an effort in europe.

Duh.

 

Really?

Sony wasn't around in the US during the NES/SNES/part of the N64 days.  On their first effort, in a foreign territory, they threw all other suckers to the ground.

The "not first" explanation doesn't fly.


No the fact that the xbox launched late,a nd that the PS2 was the heir to the PS1 does... and that the PS2 made no mistkes unlike the Atari 7600, N64 and PS3.



Bitmap Frogs on 26 March 2009
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
Bitmap Frogs said:
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:

Look at you missing my point.  It's not that price doesn't matter, it's that it matters less there.  I'm also not denying that companies like Nokia can score marketing wins even if they're 'cheapo'.

No, no.  The explanation is consistent when discussing US vs Japan and EU sales.  Don't muddy the waters by discussing different products in different industries in EU only.  The question might be, do cheap phones outsell expensive ones in the US by and even greater margin.  The answer is probably yes.

 

Your point is that in the territories where the 360 isn't doing as hot it's because the buyers prefer quality, implying that the 360 is low quality. Well, guess what in Europe and Japan low-quality products sell over high-quality products. There's no such quality-bias in the behaviour of european or japanese consumers. 

This is about brand, not about quality. But you wouldn't get to cheapshot MS and the 360 so that's why you build that baseless argument about consumer bias. 

 

360 doesn't need me to imply anything.

There is a quality-bias in Japan and Europe much more so than in the US.

If it were about brand, why the much harder reversal for Playstation in the US?  There must be some difference between the US and the EU/Japan.  I've said what it is.

 

Yeah, that's what your avatar and username are for. So you don't have imply anything. 

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Bring now market studies backing your position or GTFO. Otherwise you are just making shit up to follow on your biased and agenda-driven posts.

Yep, there must be. And you said what it is - but you didn't bring any supporting argument for it. Any. Therefore your whole post is just lies built atop your own biases.

You are running a circular argument there: you are saying that the ps3 is favored in europe because the europeans like quality backing it up saying europeans like quality which is proved by the continent favoring the ps3. 

You are biased, your posts lack consistency and you post just to further your agenda. 





Current-gen game collection uploaded on the profile, full of win and good games; also most of my PC games. Lucasfilm Games/LucasArts 1982-2008 (Requiescat In Pace).

badgenome on 26 March 2009
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
Kasz216 said:
Kinda my point. PS3 has prety much allt he PS2 biggies.

As for Europe.

Microsfot wasn't around in the PS1 era.

Therefore wasn't the first to make an effort in europe.

Duh.

 

Really?

Sony wasn't around in the US during the NES/SNES/part of the N64 days. On their first effort, in a foreign territory, they threw all other suckers to the ground.

The "not first" explanation doesn't fly.

The PS1 was not a quality console. In fact, it was rather a heap of shit, much like the one in your avatar. Yet it took off in Europe and Japan, despite their supposed obsession with quality, and despite the fact that Nintendo was making (and continue to make) much more reliable consoles.

The software, however, was off the fucking chart. That probably has something to do with its success.

Also, the Xbox was a better piece of hardware than the PS2. Why didn't it take off?