• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Media Create Sales: Week 24, 2017 (Jun 12 - Jun 18)

extralite

Member
Jun 27, 2011
1,843
0
485
electrolit.net
Don't forget DQIX was originally targeted 2007 release. it was pushed to 2008, than March 2009, finally July 2009. Also keep in mind how late DQVII came out during PSX life cycle. It came out after PS2 launch. DQX was confirmed in 2008, yet people only learned it's a MMO in 2011. It came on fucking Wii in 2012 which was pretty much dead at that point. Let's not pretend Enix side is much better than Square when it comes to scheduling.
Releasing late in a platform's life never hurt DQ before though. VII, IX and X all set new sales records (X for an MMO in Japan).

But I admit, you have some better examples than XI there. I guess Square has gotten worse and Enix better? They release a lot of DQ games other than the mainline ones too.
 

Crom

Junior Member
Nov 18, 2006
1,445
0
0
Valhalla
Wow
The two biggest (only?) third party games on switch are ending up as disappointments
One is a late port of an underperforming spinoff even less relevant after the reveal of the true new mainline game that is skipping get the console
The other is becoming get a ghost of a project that will at best a very late and inferior part due to logistic and technological issues
You got all of that from a tweet in Japanese?
 

duckroll

Member
Jun 7, 2004
114,759
1
0
37
It's not about conspiracies; when they talk about having difficulty with the development I'm wondering if it's because they started out with an old version of UE4 on Switch, or if they ran into a hardware bottleneck somewhere, and what kind of work they had to put in to get around it. Etc.
Not referring to you anyway. :p

I think the difficulty in development is very much resource based. They're all hands on deck to ship the existing versions and that includes the producer and directors not spreading themselves too thin by having to supervise some other smaller team to port something at the same time.
 

Cerium

Member
Mar 25, 2015
9,789
1
0
Not referring to you anyway. :p

I think the difficulty in development is very much resource based. They're all hands on deck to ship the existing versions and that includes the producer and directors not spreading themselves too thin by having to supervise some other smaller team to port something at the same time.
Makes sense.

Wow
The two biggest (only?) third party games on switch are ending up as disappointments
One is a late port of an underperforming spinoff even less relevant after the reveal of the true new mainline game that is skipping get the console
The other is becoming get a ghost of a project that will at best a very late and inferior part due to logistic and technological issues
Relax. We know there's more Monster Hunter coming, and they're taking the time to do DQ right rather than rush it.
 

MoonFrog

Member
Jul 25, 2015
4,129
0
265
Once again I'm going to say the same thing I've been saying for maybe 6 months now. Concerned Nintendo fans here are just overthinking it because your perspective is tainted. There is no conspiracy or complicated mystery here. They developed two games in parallel for two very different platforms. They announced a commitment to support a third platform as well to cover all the bases they need to in Japan. That's all. It's business. With the development of the game taking longer than expected, it is obvious they would want to focus on the main platforms and release those first. Are there likely other deals with first parties with regards to marketing and so on? Absolutely. But that's how every big publisher these days operates.

DQXI Switch is not ready to be shown. DQXI Switch will most likely be a port of the PS4 version with maybe some extra bells and whistles to make up for lower technical specs. It will come out later and it will be full price. I think we can reasonably expect all that. There is no immediate rush for S-E to start marketing it before they even release the game on other platforms. The Switch userbase will only increase with time. If the game is good, word of mouth will make people who don't already have it more willing to buy it on a brand new platform that's popular. Even if word of mouth is lukewarm, it's still DQ.

As for the "omg protect people from spoilers" thing people keep throwing around to insist that the Switch version has to be close... well... lol no one really cares. It's just something Horii says. He's not even the producer of the game. Business and development realities change what Horii can "want". Remember that Horii also wanted DQIX to be somewhat realtime action based. He also once said that DQ will always be only on the platform which sells the most in a market. He also willing works with a far right war crime denier.

Okay maybe the last part isn't relevant. :)
Hmmm...I guess I just assume Switch early adopters are pretty likely to have the one or the other of the other consoles? Idk. Makes me a bit confused what they're trying to accomplish with that version.

Like, put it out really close and maybe people buy that version instead, but SE wants to sell 3DS/PS4 versions at launch. No need to cut into that with Switch versions.

Put it out farther from launch but nowhere near "remake" time and it probably should be a GotY like edition? (edit: which makes me curious what they could do).

But I guess I'm overemphasizing launch? Hmmm...maybe I should look into what kind of legs DQs have and how much of their sales is done at launch.
 

KtSlime

Member
Feb 28, 2009
9,062
0
0
Tokyo
It's not about conspiracies; when they talk about having difficulty with the development I'm wondering if it's because they started out with an old version of UE4 on Switch, or if they ran into a hardware bottleneck somewhere, and what kind of work they had to put in to get around it. Etc.
That tweet does not say they are having difficulty with development, rather that it is unexpectedly difficult how to approach/plan the development.
 

extralite

Member
Jun 27, 2011
1,843
0
485
electrolit.net
Hmmm...I guess I just assume Switch early adopters are pretty likely to have the one or the other of the other consoles? Idk. Makes me a bit confused what they're trying to accomplish with that version.

Like, put it out really close and maybe people buy that version instead, but SE wants to sell 3DS/PS4 versions at launch. No need to cut into that with Switch versions.

Put it out farther from launch but nowhere near "remake" time and it probably should be a GotY like edition? (edit: which makes me curious what they could do).

But I guess I'm overemphasizing launch? Hmmm...maybe I should look into what kind of legs DQs have and how much of their sales is done at launch.
If they can put it out for the holidays it will sell for the sake of being a holiday release with big brand recognition.
 

extralite

Member
Jun 27, 2011
1,843
0
485
electrolit.net
That tweet does not say they are having difficulty with development, rather that it is unexpectedly difficult how to approach/plan the development.
But that could include that they're looking at requirements for making their UE4 version run on Switch. Full support for Switch wasn't added until recently and you don't want to change engine versions mid project.
 

Zedark

Member
Feb 22, 2016
5,220
0
290
But that could include that they're looking at requirements for making their UE4 version run on Switch. Full support for Switch wasn't added until recently and you don't want to change engine versions mid project.
I mean, projects like Snake Pass didn't have trouble getting their game running with a version of UE4 that wasn't officially supported yet. I don't think that is an issue for them when it wasn't for other developers. The most likely reading here to me seems to be that they got swamped in developing the 3DS/PS4 versions and therefore had to shift the development of the Switch version further back.

Edit: This is worded badly. This is what I mean:

Sure, of course you can't translate one development process into the other seamlessly. I didn't want to suggest that there's no way they could run into issues, as they might use effects/mechanics that don't work well with the version of UE4 that they are using without official support. However, what I wanted to indicate was that the engine itself, even the old version that doesn't have official support, has shown good compatibility for other projects, so to fear it is a problem is not the logical conclusion to draw imo, especially when translations of the tweet given in this thread indicate that the issues are with planning, not with the actual development of the version.

I didn't want to say (and my wording was a bit too direct in the original comment) that there's no way they can have issues when Sumo Digital didn't. What I wanted to say was that it isn't logical to draw such a conclusion based on what has been presented.
 

KtSlime

Member
Feb 28, 2009
9,062
0
0
Tokyo
But that could include that they're looking at requirements for making their UE4 version run on Switch. Full support for Switch wasn't added until recently and you don't want to change engine versions mid project.
Certainly, I just mean to say, "Switch has bottlenecks, Switch version looking to be hard to complete" should not be how that message is interpreted.
 

Aostia

El Capitan Todd
Sep 2, 2011
18,552
4
0
Relax. We know there's more Monster Hunter coming, and they're taking the time to do DQ right rather than rush it.
It could be, but so far facts are pretty tough for Switch third party development, if the only 500k+ possible games announced so far have actually these factual problems


You got all of that from a tweet in Japanese?
All of what?
All of these are known info and facts, with today's addition about further/official issues with DQXI Switch development that clarify why/how far away that misterious version is
 

duckroll

Member
Jun 7, 2004
114,759
1
0
37
I mean, projects like Snake Pass didn't have trouble getting their game running with a version of UE4 that wasn't officially supported yet. I don't think that is an issue for them when it wasn't for other developers. The most likely reading here to me seems to be that they got swamped in developing the 3DS/PS4 versions and therefore had to shift the development of the Switch version further back.
One of my biggest pet peeves is how people love to go "this is not a problem for <developer/publisher A> therefore it can't be a problem for <developer/publisher B>." That is not how things work in practice.
 
Aug 30, 2007
14,209
0
0
It could be, but so far facts are pretty tough for Switch third party development, if the only 500k+ possible games announced so far have actually these factual problems

All of what?
All of these are known info and facts, with today's addition about further/official issues with DQXI Switch development that clarify why/how far away that misterious version is
How many platforms in the history of gaming have had a mainline DQ and monster hunter released within their first year on the market? the fact that the switch will also fit that category doesn't mean anything.
 

Laplasakos

Member
Jan 11, 2017
935
8
210
People need to understand that even if Switch supports UE4, it doesn't mean that it can run fine any game that it's running on UE4 or that it can be ported fast or easy. People in here were expecting that the game would be out on Switch in no time just because there is an UE4 version around.
 

duckroll

Member
Jun 7, 2004
114,759
1
0
37
How many platforms in the history of gaming have had a mainline DQ and monster hunter released within their first year on the market? the fact that the switch will also fit that category doesn't mean anything.
This is a stupid ass comment though, given that Monster Hunter is a very young new franchise and has only been super popular for about a decade. In that time a grand total of 2 mainline DQ games have been released, and one of them is a MMO. So not sure how that is particularly relevant if you want to talk about "the history of gaming" lol.
 

Principate

Saint Titanfall
Dec 17, 2011
16,592
0
570
Also Snake Pass is a relatively non-complex game compared to a larger scale RPG, and made by people who are very experienced with both Unreal Engine 4 and AAA development. They even have lots of experiencing with porting across systems with huge power gaps.
It is a technically very demanding game even for high end pc (looking at it'a bencgnarks), so I can't remotely believe it was a simple endeavour to port it.
 

cw_sasuke

If all DLC came tied to $13 figurines, I'd consider all DLC to be free
Sep 9, 2006
27,410
1
0
Relax. We know there's more Monster Hunter coming, and they're taking the time to do DQ right rather than rush it.
Its very likely yeah, but unless officially announced or teased by Capcom themselves we dont know it.

I expect a portable Spin on MHW hitting Switch late 2018 or Early 2019 - but Capcoms communication in regard to their Switch plans have been less than consistent.
It is a technically very demanding game even for high end pc (looking at it'a bencgnarks), so I can't remotely believe it was a simple endeavour to port it.
They said it was an easy process though.

Also the optimizing/testing cycles take alot more resources on a project like DQXI that has more variables going on than Snakepass. Especially if they wanna have the best looking/performing version of DQXI on Switch - dock and undocked. So even if they are using the same engine, the difference in power means alot of testing will be necessary to find the perfect balance between performance and graphics for the different Switch modes.
 

Zedark

Member
Feb 22, 2016
5,220
0
290
One of my biggest pet peeves is how people love to go "this is not a problem for <developer/publisher A> therefore it can't be a problem for <developer/publisher B>." That is not how things work in practice.
Sure, of course you can't translate one development process into the other seamlessly. I didn't want to suggest that there's no way they could run into issues, as they might use effects/mechanics that don't work well with the version of UE4 that they are using. However, what I wanted to indicate was that the engine itself, even the old version that doesn't have official support, has shown good compatibility for other projects, so to fear it is a problem is not the logical conclusion to draw imo, especially when translations of the tweet given in this thread indicate that the issues are with planning, not with the actual development of the version.

I didn't want to say (and my wording was a bit too direct in the original comment) that there's no way they can have issues when Sumo Digital didn't. What I wanted to say was that it isn't logical to draw such a conclusion based on what has been presented.

Also Snake Pass is a relatively non-complex game compared to a larger scale RPG, and made by people who are very experienced with both Unreal Engine 4 and AAA development. They even have lots of experiencing with porting across systems with huge power gaps.
It definitely isn't as complicated as DQXI is for sure, although Snake Pass isn't a simple game either from a development standpoint.
 

antonz

Member
May 12, 2010
22,354
0
0
Seems pretty simple. Switch Tease was just that a tease. Yeah people took it to be that it was being developed at the same time but now we know that was not the case.
No real reason to say how easy or uneasy Switch development will be. All we can gather from this is SE had its development resources completely tied up in the 2 very distinct versions of DQXI. Now they will be able to devote the resources to whatever Switch ends up as
 
It is a technically very demanding game even for high end pc (looking at it'a bencgnarks), so I can't remotely believe it was a simple endeavour to port it.
What can often be key in porting though is the parts that are demanding that aren't just based on visuals.

Like if your game runs badly because you have incredibly detailed foliage, that's a lot easier to scale than if your game runs badly because of gameplay critical elements.
 

Cerium

Member
Mar 25, 2015
9,789
1
0
When it comes to Snake Pass I'd point out that after full official UE4 support kicked in, it did take a while for the time trials patch to come through.

the only 500k+ possible games announced so far have actually these factual problems
Are we counting Minecraft?
 
Aug 30, 2007
14,209
0
0
This is a stupid ass comment though, given that Monster Hunter is a very young new franchise and has only been super popular for about a decade. In that time a grand total of 2 mainline DQ games have been released, and one of them is a MMO. So not sure how that is particularly relevant if you want to talk about "the history of gaming" lol.
That's the point though, it's hard to make huge seeeping judgements based on something like this. If you want me to rephrase how many platforms have had mainline releases for the current 2 biggest 3rd party franchises in their first year on the market? The fact that the switch isn't seeing those 2 games in its first year means nothing.

Also im not sure the 'stupid ass' is necessary.

It is a technically very demanding game even for high end pc (looking at it'a bencgnarks), so I can't remotely believe it was a simple endeavour to port it.
They're demanding in different ways though.
 

Principate

Saint Titanfall
Dec 17, 2011
16,592
0
570
What can often be key in porting though is the parts that are demanding that aren't just based on visuals.

Like if your game runs badly because you have incredibly detailed foliage, that's a lot easier to scale than if your game runs badly because of gameplay critical elements.
True that but I'm referring to lowest settings in regards to benchmarks rather than more complex graphical effects which are stil very demanding.
 

Zedark

Member
Feb 22, 2016
5,220
0
290
What can often be key in porting though is the parts that are demanding that aren't just based on visuals.

Like if your game runs badly because you have incredibly detailed foliage, that's a lot easier to scale than if your game runs badly because of gameplay critical elements.
Well, to be fair, that is one of the reasons why Snake Pass is hard to run: the snake is made up of an incredibly detailed physics system that make its movement quite realistic and provides the hook of the game (manoeuvring a snake quasi-realistically around the world), and as a result the game is hard to run. Of course, that's a CPU thing, but CPU considerations are really important in game mechanics and gameplay elements I think.
 

zeromcd73

Member
Mar 21, 2014
5,061
0
0
And it looks like by the end of the day Yodobashi did get Switch shipments today.

Random photo of people lining up for Switch because everyone loves Japanese people lining up for stuff photos:
 
Noodle is definitely shiny in the NS version, unless you're talking about something else.
Physically based material shading is about making materials reflect based upon much more accurate physical properties.

You can still make things look shiny without it, but in those two screens, you'll notice some differences in how the snake lights and the approximate accuracy of how the scales look compared to how scales actually work.

It can be subtle, but it's computationally very costly in comparison.

For example, compare how the metal looks here, even though both are shiny:



It's one of the major differences between PS4/XB1 era rendering and 360/PS3 era rendering.
 

Kanann

Member
Sep 5, 2014
2,009
0
0
And it looks like by the end of the day Yodobashi did get Switch shipments today.

Random photo of people lining up for Switch because everyone loves Japanese people lining up for stuff photos:
I want to turn these photos into blog diary myself if I live in Japan and being rich NEET (dream) on both the thrust of PSVR and Switch.
 

cw_sasuke

If all DLC came tied to $13 figurines, I'd consider all DLC to be free
Sep 9, 2006
27,410
1
0
Ban me forever if MHXX is the last Monster Hunter on Switch.
I like your input and wouldnt wanna see you banned.
Yes, additional MH title son Switch are likely...but lets wait until they are actually announced. This only leads to hyperbole reaction posts when it doesnt end up being announced on the next event. Just like every was expecting Stars for Switch to be at the Pokemon Direct.
 

Cerium

Member
Mar 25, 2015
9,789
1
0
I like your input and wouldnt wanna see you banned.
Yes, additional MH title son Switch are likely...but lets wait until they are actually announced. This only leads to hyperbole reaction posts when it doesnt end up being announced on the next event. Just like every was expecting Stars for Switch to be at the Pokemon Direct.
&#10084; you too.

Yeah actually the only point I was trying to make was that Nintendo fans tend to freak out about stuff they really shouldn't.
 

Mario007

Member
Dec 26, 2011
6,999
1
590
Chinese knowledge is very useful for familiarity with kanji as a word form, being able to recognize characters and how to write them. It is a lot less helpful in actual meaning because there are many cases where they are completely different. Japan steals our words and can't even get some -colors- right!!!! :)
Oh right, cheers for that! I always thought that the actual hanzi and kanji share the same meaning while differ with pronunciation.
 

lherre

Accurate
Feb 6, 2007
1,741
0
0
www.beta-zero.com
People need to understand that even if Switch supports UE4, it doesn't mean that it can run fine any game that it's running on UE4 or that it can be ported fast or easy. People in here were expecting that the game would be out on Switch in no time just because there is an UE4 version around.
Remember the "magic button" to port things between platforms.

It is a technically very demanding game even for high end pc (looking at it'a bencgnarks), so I can't remotely believe it was a simple endeavour to port it.
Demanding!=complex.

Seems pretty simple. Switch Tease was just that a tease. Yeah people took it to be that it was being developed at the same time but now we know that was not the case.
No real reason to say how easy or uneasy Switch development will be. All we can gather from this is SE had its development resources completely tied up in the 2 very distinct versions of DQXI. Now they will be able to devote the resources to whatever Switch ends up as
This is most likely the correct answer as Duckroll said before.
 

Kresnik258

Member
Jan 25, 2014
9,210
0
0
Nowhere in the press release does it say the game they're developing for Switch is Medarot. It could be, but it could also be the shovelware mascot games they've been pumping out on 3DS for a while. They mention that this year marks Medarot's 20th anniversary but they also mention some of their other games, like a kanji teaching series. That's more of a summary of their history in the games industry.

I find it difficult to believe they'd shutdown the development studio behind the mainline 3DS Medarot games to work on a more expensive Switch game from scratch only a year later.
I guess you didn't hear the good news about Medabots, friend.
 

Aostia

El Capitan Todd
Sep 2, 2011
18,552
4
0
Ban me forever if MHXX is the last Monster Hunter on Switch.
this...doesn't matter.
what I meant before is that in this very moment two games that were supposed to be pillars of the Switch third party support (the only two games actually important in terms of sales potential, on paper) have been unveiled to be way less relevant that what we supposed
this leave a very thin/weak landscape in terms of sales potential for third party games on Switch
I know that it is selling strongly, that it seems to be well supported by Nintendo and that it could continue selling well with Nintendo only games and that continuing selling well it could see a stronger third party support coming, but at the same time it is pretty obvious that the situation is dire in terms of third parties and that even if they are planning more games coming due to initial strong sales, these supposed-to-be Switch games could also arrive too late
 

Chauzu

Member
Jan 8, 2017
840
0
0
this...doesn't matter.
what I meant before is that in this very moment two games that were supposed to be pillars of the Switch third party support (the only two games actually important in terms of sales potential, on paper) have been unveiled to be way less relevant that what we supposed
this leave a very thin/weak landscape in terms of sales potential for third party games on Switch
I know that it is selling strongly, that it seems to be well supported by Nintendo and that it could continue selling well with Nintendo only games and that continuing selling well it could see a stronger third party support coming, but at the same time it is pretty obvious that the situation is dire in terms of third parties and that even if they are planning more games coming due to initial strong sales, these supposed-to-be Switch games could also arrive too late
Too late for the 3rd parties you mean? Because it sounds to me like Nintendo will just be hogging all the cash while they get their shit together.
 

sphinx

the piano man
Nov 21, 2006
15,739
0
1,350
Germany
I wonder if Switch version will be put out as a "complete" version then to try and get people to double dip/make it more attractive despite being later.

At the same time, say it is UE4 version:

-For PS4 version owners, a portable version of what they already have.

-For 3DS owners, a new portable version

Would that be enough to resell the product?

IDK. They did a lot of work to make the 3DS game attractive side-by-side with the PS4 version, and I think it will pay off (at least quality wise, and probably sales wise--the whole 2D/3D thing). I wonder what sort of mindset they are going to take to the Switch version.
if I were into bets, I'd bet they will release the switch version with a 6 month delay, the minimum, most likely longer and do some sort of "complete" version, definitely not an identical version of either of the original versions

let's say combined PS4 and 3DS get 3~ 3.5 million. That would mean the DQ fanbase has been served and there are very few users late to the party.

At that point all you are trying to do is lure double dippers, be it for the convenience of a PS4 version on the go or because "I just buy DQ games on principle" or mix of different factors.

putting a bare bones identical PS4 version versus a "with new HAT!" version could mean the difference between 150k and 300k. not to shabby
 

MoonFrog

Member
Jul 25, 2015
4,129
0
265
3DS is still getting DQXI (speaking to the Nintendo third party sucks stuff).

Switch version was always a curveball. It's been a mysterious curveball because SE hasn't talked about it.

What is the Switch version?

Why does it exist?

Expanding to 3DS made sense. It is the leading platform in Japan, DQ's traditional home. Moreover, it is the leading platform over PS4 by far, so expanding from PS4 in particular makes sense. It gives the DQXI launch much needed breadth.

Switch has to be about long term sales (and selling the game a second/third time). It doesn't have the install base atm to add much to the breadth of target for a DQXI launch. It has to be about having the game on a growing portable going forward rather than about starting the game off right. It would be pointless to over-devote themselves to it to make launch, at the expense of getting the other versions out.

I do think that putting it out later raises questions about its shape, as I've said. Is this a "new" DQXI in a tangible way on Switch? How much later does it come? Etc.
 

Earthpainting

Member
May 7, 2006
5,407
0
0
Ban me forever if MHXX is the last Monster Hunter on Switch.
Normally I'd say the Switch would need the Frontier kiss of death for it to be its last one, but Monster Hunter World happened in spite of Frontier Z. Anything is possible now.
 

Cerium

Member
Mar 25, 2015
9,789
1
0
it is pretty obvious that the situation is dire in terms of third parties and that even if they are planning more games coming due to initial strong sales, these supposed-to-be Switch games could also arrive too late
Too late for what?

I swear some of y'all can't relax for a moment.
 

Mpl90

Two copies sold? That's not a bomb guys, stop trolling!!!
Mar 10, 2011
22,885
0
855
28
theflyingthoughtsblog.wordpress.com
Too late for the 3rd parties you mean? Because it sounds to me like Nintendo will just be hogging all the cash while they get their shit together.
I still can't believe we're saying it's too late for third parties when we're just IN THE THIRD MONTH since the console's release. It would be much more understandable if the platform had a problematic start, sales-wise, but Switch's first months do not fit into this cathegory (well, unless you want to say that the shortages situation is problematic; but still, a different problem :p). I just can't comprehend this kind of fanxiety so early in the lifespan of a successful platform.
 

MoonFrog

Member
Jul 25, 2015
4,129
0
265
if I were into bets, I'd bet they will release the switch version with a 6 month delay, the minimum, most likely longer and do some sort of "complete" version, definitely not an identical version of either of the original versions

let's say combined PS4 and 3DS get 3~ 3.5 million. That would mean the DQ fanbase has been served and there are very few users late to the party.

At that point all you are trying to do is lure double dippers, be it for the convenience of a PS4 version on the go or because "I just buy DQ games on principle" or mix of different factors.

putting a bare bones identical PS4 version versus a "with new HAT!" version could mean the difference between 150k and 300k. not to shabby
Yeah I think it's got to be something like this. It won't be as unique as 3DS version. They're not going to put that much work in. But still they've been very conscious of making various versions attractive and I think they'll do it for Switch, but their ambitions are probably a lot lower with reason.

I am still curious what kind of tail DQ has usually, if anyone's got numbers on that.

If it has a heavy tail, an ascendant Switch could pick up a lot of that.

I just thought JRPG tended to be particularly front heavy, but DQ is DQ.