|
Super Ninja Fish posted:So what were the sales of FF11 for PC compared to a typical FF like FFX? Unfortunately, I have no idea. It's doing well enough that Square keeps putting out expansions even after 14 has dropped though and that SE is willing to humor the idea of bringing it instead 14 to PlayStation Vita. I imagine the game has paid for itself many times over now.
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2011 06:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 18:06 |
|
|
Skeezy posted:http://www.andriasang.com/e/blog/2011/09/06/dragon_quest_x_famicom/ The website it cites is called "虚構新聞," which could literally be translated as "Faux News."
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2011 06:09
|
|
|
TurnipFritter posted:The website it cites is called "虚構新聞," which could literally be translated as "Faux News." Ahahah I didn't catch that, welp. Here's another thing that says S-E confirmed the fees to play DQX. http://www.andriasang.com/e/blog/2011/09/06/dqx_fees/
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2011 06:12
|
|
|
thetrin posted:I think it was pretty obvious that the game is meant to be a Guild Wars/MH/PSO style game. Even if you strip out multiplayer, you're still just one person with a bunch of AI partners you can't control. Might as well play with competent players at that point. Yeah, this is why I suggested that while we don't know much, what we DO know might not actually make it to the street, citing the AI party members as a likely candidate for change. I am honestly disappointed that no matter what, this WILL be an online game first (as best we can tell), but I am hopeful because A) this is dragon quest. At worst there will be a lot of attention to detail everywhere. B) this is dragon quest... I don't necessarily think it will be subject to the same sort of pitfalls that have hurt other online RPGs, because a LOT of what makes Dragon Quest fun is a generally fun atmosphere. Between NPCs that do almost nothing but dance, and attacks like "Golden Oldies", I am at least partly confident there will be enough humor in content to put my inner sperglord at bay.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2011 06:16
|
|
|
If they wanted to be cool they'd release a pseudo-NES version of the game for 3DS that let you transfer your character data from the console game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2011 06:18
|
|
|
Adam Bowen posted:Are you picturing Reggie sitting in an EVIL tower twirling his mustache and laughing maniacally as he prevents another RPG from being published, or what? As much as I hate this justification sometimes, it's a business and business don't generally set out to lose money. None of those games would have sold well over here, especially not on the Wii, and anyone who knows anything at all about the games industry knows that. Operation Rainfall (I feel lame just typing that, loving nerds) had what, 10k signatures or so? That's significantly less than 1/10th of 1% of total Wii owners. You seem to be casting it as this gigantic uprising of unhappy Nintendo customers when it was clearly an extremely loud minority. You know a good way of losing money? Not selling games (That's you making no Money) and then pissing off the same audience you're trying to get again after short shifting them for a causal audience who, on average, has one game for their Wii Fit/Sports/Dance machine and will probably not follow onto buying the next Wii. The percentage of project rainfall signatories might be small, but if you take away the One Game Wonders who will not (at this point, for all I know there will be a casual supergame that will pull them in) buy a Wii U and that percentage suddenly gets a lot bigger. Xenoblade sold perfectly fine (and, more to the point Sold Out, as far as I'm aware. Suggesting an Atlus Low Print Run, the Right strategy for this situation) in Europe and the only loss Nintendo of America are making at this point is in the far more precious commonalty known as PR.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2011 06:25
|
|
|
PaletteSwappedNinja posted:If they wanted to be cool they'd release a pseudo-NES version of the game for 3DS that let you transfer your character data from the console game. But they wouldn't be able to charge you monthly fees for that one. I can imagine how that meeting went: "Hey, we are in the red. FFXIV was a huge loss and is not going to give us money any time soon." "Maybe if we made another MMO?" "FFXVI?" "No, too soon." "You guys, I got it! Dragon Quest!" "Brilliant! Everyone buys that."
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2011 06:28
|
|
|
Super Ninja Fish posted:So what were the sales of FF11 for PC compared to a typical FF like FFX? I checked the JP Wikipedia on FFXI numbers. According to their figures, they had over 550,000 active accounts and 1,500,000 characters across 30 servers at the peak (around 2004). Now they're down to half the number of servers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2011 07:20
|
|
|
I guess it'll all really come down to how well the game plays for me. I was skeptical about DQIX being on the DS and it was one the best Dragon Quest games ever, in my opinion. Certainly has the most hours sunk into it compared to any other. Hell, I'm willing to wager I've played IX more than all the other Dragon Quests put together. A IX-ish online thing sounds cool. I'm hesitant, what with the "Nintendo is bad at the Internet" thing, but this could be the thing that MAYBE gets their act together? (Who am I kidding, it won't.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2011 17:29
|
|
|
I played 1 waaaaaaaaaay back in the day and beat it on my NES. Still one of my favorites but god drat it didn't age well. Played 2 (During JR High School), got towards the end but never could finish it. Picked up 3 and 4 during my High School days of playing emulated games on school PC's, but never beat either. Picked up 7 a while back and dear god I loved it, the class system is grindy as hell but I really loved the premise. I got towards the end and couldn't finish, I start playing again every so often but I never could reach the end. Same with 8 - it's such a great game but I just can't finish it. I get so far then lose interest and blah. I don't know what it is about DQ games and me starting but not finishing them, most other games I can stick with it but something about the Dragon Quest games makes me lose interest and give up, despite the fact that I enjoy them thoroughly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2011 17:45
|
|
|
khy posted:I played 1 waaaaaaaaaay back in the day and beat it on my NES. Still one of my favorites but god drat it didn't age well. If you have a DS, I strongly advise you pick up 5 and 6 (and 4, if you really want to play it again). If you don't have time for all three, I would advise you get 5, the best of the bunch. Absolutely brilliant game in all aspects. You seem to really like DQ, so you'll really like 5. You might even finish it!
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2011 18:33
|
|
|
ConanThe3rd posted:You give Reggie far too much credit, at this point, he is the right hand that doesn't know anything, let alone what the left (NCL) is doing whilst being being kicked sore by the foot (NOE). Right, but the "hardcore gamers" that buy lots of games that you're suggesting Nintendo should be courting are not buying Japanese games. They're buying Halo, Madden, Call of Duty, and other poo poo like that. Japanese games and especially JRPGs are pure niche now. Look at the big sellers on any platform in the US and other than first-party Nintendo games and huge names like Final Fantasy, they're almost all western games about shooting people or sports. Basically, people like us (that is, the kind of people who would be reading a Dragon Quest thread) are a niche audience now. Sometimes members of a niche audience overestimate their own relevance. The fact that less than 10k people signed an internet petition for more RPGs on the Wii should make that pretty drat clear, considering how easy it is to get huge numbers of people to sign internet petitions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2011 00:38
|
|
|
Overbite posted:9 was worse than 8 due to the lack of actual characters, and 10 being an MMO is just horrible. I want another like 8! This. Gameplay wise I liked 9 better than 8, story wise I didn't even finish 9. Dragon Quest is one of my favorite series but I just can't stand MMOs. It's super disappointing waiting on the next installment of DQ only to find out it's going the route of final fantasy. I guess if it's like 9 just with human party members it could be good, so I'll wait to see more gameplay before passing a judgement . Now that I think about it the reason I wasn't that into 9's story is the fact that your entire party is pretty disposable VVVV Agnostic watermelon fucked around with this message at 16:47 on Sep 8, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2011 16:38
|
|
|
I've recently been satiating my terrible addiction to reading horrific customer reviews by reading Gamestop.com Dragon Quest reviews, and you'd be surprised how many people who post reviews there dock DQVI marks for having premade characters, rather than letting you make faceless, nameless characters with no personality. They also go on to say that DQVI looks like an old game, and isn't a worthy sequel to DQIX. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2011 16:44
|
|
|
I finally finished all the character backstories in Dragon Quest IV and I'm ready to get going with the main character. Is Torneko worth keeping in the party once I get him? Getting all those rare drops in his chapter was pretty awesome (I had an iron lance within five minutes of leaving town the first time), but I'm concerned that most of that was just set up for his chapter and the drops I'll get for the rest of the game will be lackluster.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2011 17:18
|
|
|
Armor-Piercing posted:I finally finished all the character backstories in Dragon Quest IV and I'm ready to get going with the main character. I honestly didn't use him past his chapter, but there's no "wrong" party to use in DQIV.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2011 17:20
|
|
|
Armor-Piercing posted:I finally finished all the character backstories in Dragon Quest IV and I'm ready to get going with the main character. I'll give it to you straight - The drops in Chapter 3 are unique to that chapter, and won't ever be like that again. Now, Torneko isn't the best character in the game. He's a fighter, with no magic, who can equip medium-heavy gear. He is a bit "special" in combat though! I'll leave you to discover that on your own.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2011 17:27
|
|
|
He's a fighter that occasionally doesn't do what you want him to, uses weaker equipment, and has a few field spells I don't care about. Getting drops that are useful (or at least valuable) is really the only reason I would've wanted to use him, so it looks like I'll just pass. Also, I have to say I'm not enjoying this one as much as I'd hoped so far. I hadn't played any Dragon Quest games before, so earlier this year I started from DQ1, figuring I'd play them in order. I think I'll start enjoying it a bit more once I can actually switch party members around, but mostly I just want to steamroll through this one so I can get to 5 and 6 (those are both supposed to be really good, right?). Then I will probably try to play 7, never finish it, and give up without ever having played 8. Actually, that reminds me that I did have the opportunity to play through a little bit of DQ9, but two or three hours in that is the most experience I'd had with a DQ game before I started from the beginning.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2011 18:29
|
|
|
Armor-Piercing posted:He's a fighter that occasionally doesn't do what you want him to, uses weaker equipment, and has a few field spells I don't care about. Getting drops that are useful (or at least valuable) is really the only reason I would've wanted to use him, so it looks like I'll just pass. It's the things he does when he doesn't follow orders that make him interesting to use. As you gain levels he learns some pretty neat tricks and is worth using while roaming about the world map or exploring a dungeon. I wouldn't drag him along to a boss fight, though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2011 20:26
|
|
|
If being able to switch party members is a requirement of your enjoyment how the hell did you like DQ 1 and 2?
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2011 20:30
|
|
|
Captain Vittles posted:It's the things he does when he doesn't follow orders that make him interesting to use. As you gain levels he learns some pretty neat tricks and is worth using while roaming about the world map or exploring a dungeon. I wouldn't drag him along to a boss fight, though. It's a shame they took out his best one in the remake though. I remeber the army of merchants actually saving my rear end in a boss fight once.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2011 21:03
|
|
|
I don't think I did like DQ2 much, but I've already mostly forgotten it. DQ1 is short and the hero is a one-man party fighting individual enemies, so it's a little different. Saying it's a requirement for my enjoyment is stretching what I said a bit, too. I just meant that it'll be nice being able to put together a full party of characters I can control. Also, with RPGs of this age I never find myself really caring much about the characters beyond "this is my fighter," so I'm not really any more attached to the DQ4 cast than I am my generics in DQ3 (and in a way I like my generics more). As a result, the first four chapters of DQ4 have left me feeling like I just made seven different characters in DQ3, split them into four groups, and started grinding them separately, only to drop half of them in chapter five.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2011 21:06
|
|
|
Agnostic watermelon posted:This. I think the only DQ's where the party even MATTERS are 4, 5, 7, and 8 but even then, it's still mostly revolved around the events that take place more so than it's about the characters. The only DQ where it's arguably about the characters are 4 and 5. I think if you are playing DQ for characters (as in, your party), you're playing DQ for entirely the wrong reasons, because they are rarely, if ever, emphasized outside of DQVIII. Jupiter Jazz fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Sep 8, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2011 21:10
|
|
|
Himuro posted:I think the only DQ's where the party even MATTERS are 4, 5, 7, and 8 but even then, it's still mostly revolved around the events that take place more so than it's about the characters. The only DQ where it's arguably about the characters are 4 and 5. I think if you are playing DQ for characters (as in, your party), you're playing DQ for entirely the wrong reasons, because they are rarely, if ever, emphasized outside of DQVIII. Gotta agree with this. Where the last 5 games (prior to 9) had a static cast of characters, it wasn't really until 8 where they took on very strong personalities and active roles in the plot. I mean, 6 did sort of require your characters be static, but their role in events were really more like McGuffins. I honestly think this setup would have worked much better had you actually generated your own party (on the game start) and eventually uncovered their role in fighting Murdaw etc. Think FFI, but then you find out your cast was actually unique because they were all "heroes" that fought (and failed) to defeat Murdaw. Basically, I think 6 could have just as easily been accomplished without a static cast, even if your characters still had some sort of destiny, like the Light Warriors. Didn't play enough of 7 to comment. Seemed like characters were being tossed in and out of your party too frequently to have them exist as much more than guest "NPCs", similar to Final Fantasy Tactics/XII. 4 is obviously a more linear III with predefined "recruits". As far as I am concerned 5 and 8 are really the only games that were character driven. Party chat helped other games, but while a nice idea, it really is more of a patch job to justify a static cast in most cases. Having said that, I think a Final Fantasy Tactics setup for parties would really benefit Dragon Quest games. Let us pick our party from generic recruits, but don't shy away from throwing some plot "NPCs" in our group from time to time. They can follow us around in the wagon, if not the active party. After they serve their role in dialog/events maybe the player can keep using them, or send them on their way. IX DID suffer from a lack of consistent NPCs to tie the narrative together. They didn't even need to necessarily be party members, either. That is just an easy solution to explain how they get from one plot point to the next.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2011 22:09
|
|
|
Kiggles posted:Didn't play enough of 7 to comment. Seemed like characters were being tossed in and out of your party too frequently to have them exist as much more than guest "NPCs", similar to Final Fantasy Tactics/XII. I'll agree with the first guy. I don't that's true about 7 at all. Characters were hugely important on 7. The talk feature added a lot and they always had something funny or something interesting to say that revealed stuff about their personalities. It was around three hours before the first battle took place. Most of that time was the hero talking to Maribel and Kiefer. They couldn't be further from guest "NPCs". I remember feeling really bummed out when Kiefer fell in love and left the party for good and Maribel left for a while. Starting with DQ4, characters were becoming more and more important for the series. The fact that DQ9 has generic recruits can't be seen as anything but a massive step backwards. The last two DQs I played were DQ5 and DQ9 and I actually do believe I was continuing to play DQ5 more for the characters than any other reason. They were really enjoyable. Seeing them start as kids, grow older and get married, then have kids of their own, and your kids grew up to be party members besides you. That was awesome. In fact, that's all I remember about the game. I don't remember what the main story was, I only remember the characters and what happened to them. Playing DQ9 right after DQ5 and discovering that characters are back to being generic was such a big turn off for me. That was one of the biggest reasons I couldn't get into it. DQ3 had also been one of my least favorite DQ games ever since it was released. As a child, even though the characters in DQ2 didn't say more than a few sentences. I liked that they had backstories and weren't just random people you hired that didn't have anything to do with the story. In DQ2, you could sort of fill in the rest with your imagination. With DQ3, you couldn't do that. You weren't even given a starting point to work with.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2011 23:07
|
|
|
Keep in mind that DQ9 was designed for a market in which lots of people have handheld gaming devices and it's perfectly normal to play them while out and about. It's also a country with some areas of ridiculously dense population, meaning it's easy to find other people to team up with for multiplayer shenanigans. Focussing the story on one player character and giving you blank slate PCs to fill the gaps encouraged players to get out there and team up. DQ10 looks to be following the same concept, for better or worse. It's not really a step backwards, but a great leap sideways. And really, let's be honest about this series; it's always been about world-building first and foremost, with characters taking a backseat. Even in DQVIII this holds true.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2011 23:14
|
|
|
It's not that characters take a backseat in DQ. It's that YOUR characters always take a backseat. Your characters are caught up in the events, but it's never -- EVER, except in the case of DQ5 -- about you. It's about the towns people and people you come across. As much as I didn't like DQ9 not having DQ8-like characters, as soon as I remembered this fact, I didn't really care.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2011 23:41
|
|
|
To be honest, DQV is my favorite because of how well it crafts a generational story. It's my favorite in the series because of how it tells the story of a family of heroes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2011 23:44
|
|
|
Captain Vittles posted:Keep in mind that DQ9 was designed for a market in which lots of people have handheld gaming devices and it's perfectly normal to play them while out and about. It's also a country with some areas of ridiculously dense population, meaning it's easy to find other people to team up with for multiplayer shenanigans. Focussing the story on one player character and giving you blank slate PCs to fill the gaps encouraged players to get out there and team up. DQ10 looks to be following the same concept, for better or worse. It's not really a step backwards, but a great leap sideways. Then it should have leapt out of the main series and became Dragon Quest Online 1, Dragon Quest Online 2, etc.. quote:And really, let's be honest about this series; it's always been about world-building first and foremost, with characters taking a backseat. Even in DQVIII this holds true. But just because the characters take a backseat doesn't mean they aren't extremely important. Characters from DQ4 didn't talk a whole bunch but if you replace them with generic characters, the game becomes considerably worse and may even be too boring to enjoy. The same goes for DQ5, DQ7, and DQ8. Plot takes a backseat to characters in Final Fantasy, but that doesn't mean it's okay for the plot to be lovely.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2011 00:12
|
|
|
Super Ninja Fish posted:I'll agree with the first guy. I don't that's true about 7 at all. Characters were hugely important on 7. quote:Starting with DQ4, characters were becoming more and more important for the series. The fact that DQ9 has generic recruits can't be seen as anything but a massive step backwards. Kiggles fucked around with this message at 00:17 on Sep 9, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2011 00:14
|
|
|
Himuro posted:It's not that characters take a backseat in DQ. It's that YOUR characters always take a backseat. Your characters are caught up in the events, but it's never -- EVER, except in the case of DQ5 -- about you. It's about the towns people and people you come across. Also, even in Dragon Quest V the events of world don't revolve around the main character even if the viewpoint of the story does, since it's his kid that's the legendary hero, not him. That said, DQX really needs to be "Dragon Quest Online" or something instead, and I can't fathom this Japanese idea of throwing MMOs into the main title release path. But Japanese-made MMOs are basically never good to western eyes, so it's probably safe to just ignore it, for better or worse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2011 00:18
|
|
|
Asimo posted:That said, DQX really needs to be "Dragon Quest Online" or something instead, and I can't fathom this Japanese idea of throwing MMOs into the main title release path. But Japanese-made MMOs are basically never good to western eyes, so it's probably safe to just ignore it, for better or worse. Also agree with this. Well, I agree it should be DQ Online, not a main series release. I am interested in seeing what Horii does with an online focused game, however. DQX will PROBABLY be pretty good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2011 00:27
|
|
|
Asimo posted:Also, even in Dragon Quest V the events of world don't revolve around the main character even if the viewpoint of the story does, since it's his kid that's the legendary hero, not him. It's actually really awesome when you finally realize that. "The tale of the father of the legendary hero".
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2011 01:05
|
|
|
quote:Didn't play enough of 7 to comment. Seemed like characters were being tossed in and out of your party too frequently to have them exist as much more than guest "NPCs", similar to Final Fantasy Tactics/XII.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2011 06:11
|
|
|
I'll be honest, 7 is the only DQ I've played that I haven't beaten. I still haven't played 6. It's just so long and it gets boring. On top of that, if you haven't played in a few months and forget where you are, you better hope you picked up all the shards available or you're pretty much cursed to go through every dungeon (past and present) searching for the poo poo. For all these reasons, 7 is my least favorite DQ. I don't think I'd even buy a DQ7 remake. God, gently caress that game.
Jupiter Jazz fucked around with this message at 10:56 on Sep 9, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2011 10:54
|
|
|
In comparison to VII, VIII is a wholly reasonable and likable game. Major points for not outstaying its welcome the way VII does.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2011 15:55
|
|
|
Adam Bowen posted:Are you picturing Reggie sitting in an EVIL tower twirling his mustache and laughing maniacally as he prevents another RPG from being published, or what? I picture him sitting at a desk in front of a bunch of spreadsheets coming to the conclusion that he wants to and should bring out the right games, namely those that will be cheap to localize while likely to bring in high revenue. That's perfectly fine in and of itself. The problem is that none of his spreadsheets have a "Fan loyalty" column. Nintendo certainly seems to not care very much about my money, evidenced by the absence of this column. I've basically dropped all plans to buy anything Nintendo for the foreseeable future, including Skyward Sword (no, seriously) and the Wii U. I've also done the same with Capcom (no AAI2 in the US, MML3 canceled, no MMZX3, no BoF6, insultingly awful DMC reboot? Must not want my money!) and am considering doing the same with Konami (Suikoden team dissolved two years ago, bad Silent Hill developer outsourcing, no ZoE3) and Square-Enix (3rd Birthday is offensively bad, FF13/14 debacles, killed off the Mana series with increasingly terrible games, overpriced and lazy iOS game ports). Maybe I'm unique like that, I don't know. But pretty much the only games that seem to be worth the effort these days are Dragon Quest and Assasin's Creed, and if DQ10 is indeed Wii U only in the US, then I'll likely have to skip it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2011 19:14
|
|
|
Terpfen posted:Suikoden team dissolved two years ago  Is... is that really true?
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2011 19:42
|
|
|
Terpfen posted:I picture him sitting at a desk in front of a bunch of spreadsheets coming to the conclusion that he wants to and should bring out the right games, namely those that will be cheap to localize while likely to bring in high revenue. I'm pretty much in this situation too. A lot of game series I like are either not being made (MML3) or being made for another audience (Xcom). I have zero excitement for the WiiU (can't remember another time I wasn't excited for a new nintendo console). You can't really do anything besides not buying the games that aren't appealing to you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2011 19:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 18:06 |
|
|
Agrias120 posted:
I guess you missed the public announcement that Konami had "forgotten" how to make RPGs, because the Suikoden team pretty much doesn't exist now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2011 19:51
|
|