Wow, you guys must be working for Sony/Sega. You can even conclude what the development cost is. *_*

I'm talking about the Japanese market specifically, which is where Valkyria saw a push on par with both Star Ocean or Last Remnant, and sold comparatively actually (100-200k).  It was pretty much Sega's biggest promotional push in 2008 outside Yakuza 3, with a huge ad campaign, tv spots and mag coverage for months even after release.  Sega pretty much treated it like a AAA release, which hasn't happened for a SRPG since... well, the heydays of Sakura Taisen.  This wasn't a cheap effort.

And R&D from the 360 build was totally scrapped, they made the Canvas engine ground up on PS3 (which is why they didn't want to re-invest in a 360 version after the fact, despite being continually asked about it).  Shame all that investment's going to waste now, I actually think it'd have been smarter for the VC team to plan ahead with 2 games sharing assets/tech and lowering investment/risk (like Nagoshi's team did for Yakuza 3 and Kenzan, which made them profitable despite relatively low-ish sales).

Really though, this is all side debate.  I'd say it's pretty likely that SO4 was the bigger disappointment of the two sales wise, given it's own pedigree and brand.

So, you're basing the assumption that it failed solely on the fact the sequel is on PSP? That's seems a little dumb to me.

The engine costs were bulk of the cost of the game, but whenever it's used again (and they've stated they will and are using a modified version of it for the PSP sequel) the cost of developing that engine not longer lies solely on Valkyria Chronicles. The anime, manga, and figures are nothing but profit and counter active to the point you're trying to make. The game also did not have a huge promotional push in Japan. Don't stop by posting the TV ads because nearly every game in Japan gets some type of short tv spot.

Yes, I'd agree that Valkyria is probably the most expensive non-licensed SRPG to date in Japan, but even then, the bar is set very low. I'd throw in the possibility of Final Fantasy Tactics being just as expensive if not more, depending on the development time.

Not just the platform switch, there's been a lot of conscious design choices in VC2 to make it more palatable to a general audience.  The shift in artstyle, shift in setting, focus on local multiplayer... there's been a lot of clear rethink here.  Sega's really going all out to make VC2 work, which sort of implies something wasn't working before.

I'd actually say promotion was probably the bulk of cost with the game though, again Valkyria got a AAA push.  And not just the (heavy rotation) tv spots, I'm talking billboards, insane mag coverage (for months even after release, which is generally unheard of) and the like... this was a AAA game, with a AAA push, and B sales.  Really, there's no way around that.

I'm also a bit wary of buying any comments about a shared/adapted engine between VC1 and VC2.  It's like saying FFXIII and Crystal Bearers share the same engine, since both use Crystal Tools.  I think at best, they're just using a modified toolset to bring over/downgrade assets easier (this is what Crystal Tools does, as well as Capcom's MT Framework, which is also being adapted to Wii now) but I have a hard time believing there's actually any degree of shared code between PS3 Canvas and PSP Canvas.

FFT might've been comparable for it's day relative to general industry costs, but not in terms of raw (adjusted for inflation) investment.  Games are just more expensive to make now, HD games especially.

Are we sure on CB?  I thought it'd been implied, but never definitely stated?  I know FFXIII, FFvsXIII and FFXIV were all confirmed CT games, I'd expect it probably applied to all SE's internally developed upcoming console games?

As for VC2... well, putting it on PSP certainly won't make it more popular outside Japan.  The game's being made pretty much for Japan to exclusion of western concerns at this point, otherwise it'd be HD multiplatfom, DS or Wii. :P

Are we talking about the same game? Valkyria did not get a heavy advertisement push. I'd like a picture of those said billboards, because I'd love to see one.  It did not receive a great deal of marketing, just a decent amount comparable with Crystal Bearers. Hardly AAA push which it the definition of the advertising FFXIII has seen which has been in tv ads since 2007.

Also, the changes with the PSP version can also be largely due to the different platform and the success of the anime. The art style is the same as the anime, the setting is exactly the same (2 years later in the same country), and every PSP game these days has a local multiplayer option. Hardly lots a rethinking other than, "How do we make a successful PSP game?"

As far as FFT is concerned, Square has always had high development costs with PS1 games costing well over 20 and 30 million.

Funny enough, there's a new story about Crystal Bearers getting a prime Shibuya billboard this past week.  Valkyria's push was big, bigger than anything last year out of Sega besides RGG3/Kenzan.  Huge media coverage, huge advertising, an anime... I'm just not sure what's to debate here?  No, it's not FFXIII, but then what is?  If that's the standard for a AAA campaign, then pretty much nothing on PS3 has gotten a AAA push except it and MGS4.

I'd attribute the VC2 shifts more to "How do we make a successful Valkyria game".  I guess it's a semantic argument though, we both seem to be in agreement that there's been a lot of changes since VC1, we're mostly at odds at to why that is.

And can you source anything on FFT's budget being between 20 and 30 million?  Because frankly, the idea of that is laughable.

What other games did Sega advertise last year outside of Yakuza 3 and Kenzan?

Also, I agree that FFXIII and MGS4 are the only games so far on PS3 that has had a huge marketing push in Japan. Yakuza 3 and RE5 come close.

Also, if you read, I disagreed with you on every one of the changes you brought up except for one. The setting is the same, art style is the same as the anime. If the game was put on Wii, there probably wouldn't be any multiplayer. You make the game suit the platform.

Lastly, I did not say that FFT was 20-30 million, but that Square's main Final Fantasy titles in the PS1 era were 20-30 million. Hell, Square and Sony spent $100 million on Final Fantasy VII's advertising alone.

not really, it looks like tweaked FF12 + GC FF crystal chronicles engine.

not really, it looks like tweaked FF12 + GC FF crystal chronicles engine.