Media Create Sales: Week 50, 2014 (Dec 08 - Dec 14)

Oct 10, 2007
4,117
0
0
www.wiitalia.it
With online sales 3DS/WiiU Smash may be the best selling Smash already but this week it will be counting only retail. 3DS version total sales were over 2M 1-2 weeks ago, it will outsell Brawl not long after holidays.
That's one of the most unexpected results of the year, really. SSB for 3DS was always going to be a hit, but so big...?

Level 5 has shipped more than 2M for Shin Uchi. There weren't supply problems at launch, there won't be supply problems this week.
MC has a shipment of about 1,4m units. Perhaps 2m includes also the following week?
 

vinnygambini

Why are strippers at the U.N. bad when they're great at strip clubs???
Aug 7, 2013
8,548
0
0
People should be accustomed by now that 3DS software releases are sparse in H1.

It's the same conversation every year - H2 is where it shines.
 
Mar 13, 2013
12,412
3
0
Well, those are also incentives, but I don't think one could really explain this otherwise.

Like why on earth would a bunch of Western publishers make PSP games in 2010 based on games like Army of Two without this, to take one of the most flagrant cases?

We've had various people explain how these types of deals work before, and we see Sony signing things like Street Fighter, so I really don't feel it's a stretch. However, I don't have any specific publicly available article declaring this, you are correct.

It is not impossible these developers all signed on to a basically dead platform with moderately sized games solely for technological reasons, though I personally find it improbable.

Also a key note is that they're not literally paying, but rather opting to not take money in licensing fees and doing things like comarketing in which money theoretically never changes hands since generally you always want to keep cash in a business.

Edit:

Here is a guy at SCEA who lists his job as signing comarketing and exclusivity deals: https://www.linkedin.com/in/geralddmartin

I feel it's very likely SCEJ has similar positions.
You might be right with that, it's probably the number one reason, but I perhaps I overestimate the scale of it when I say that I feel that Vita's software support is too numerous for that to viable.

I would also have to wonder at what point it weighs on a publisher's mind that there's a non-negligible chance Sony turns around in two years and goes "We're releasing another handheld, good luck!". It seems a lot of developers are going to jump over to PS4 which is an even more trickier scenario to me.
 
Aug 15, 2010
12,060
0
0
twitter.com
Code:
[B]Top 10 biggest second week sales:[/B]

01. [PSX] Dragon Quest VII: Fighters of Eden (Enix) {2000.08.26} - 1.072.286 / 2.934.351
02. [NDS] Pokémon Black / White (Pokémon Co.) {2010.09.18} - 772.172 / 3.409.457
03. [NDS] Dragon Quest IX: Sentinels of the Starry King (Square Enix) {2009.07.11} - 602.856 / 2.946.296 
04. [3DS] Pokémon X / Y (Pokémon Co.) {2013.10.12} - 591.025 / 2.687.075
05. [PS2] Dragon Quest VIII: Journey of the Cursed King (Square Enix) {2004.11.27} - 559.524 / 2.796.405
06. [PSP] Monster Hunter Portable 2nd G (Capcom) {2008.03.27} - 552.701 / 1.375.966
07. [PSP] Monster Hunter Portable 3rd (Capcom) {2010.12.01} - 514.198 / 2.660.665
08. [NDS] Pokémon Heart Gold / Soul Silver (Pokémon Co.) {2009.09.12} - 492.385 / 1.901.365
09. [GBA] Pokémon Ruby / Sapphire (Pokémon Co.) {2002.11.21} - 471.538 / 1.716.541
10. [WII] New Super Mario Bros. Wii (Nintendo) {2009.12.03} - 464.824 / 1.401.558
I almost forgot how insanely big Dragon Quest VII second week sales were, it's a record I don't think will ever be broken. The only title that came relatively close to beat it was Pokémon Black / White with almost 800.000 units sold. It's worth noting that Dragon Quest VII was heavily supply constrained. Its initial shipment was 2 million units, a low figure considering the genre was at its peak during the PlayStation era and it was the first mainline Dragon Quest on that platform. If Final Fantasy VIII managed to sell 2,5 million units in its first week, imagine how much Dragon Quest VII could have sold with enough stock, at least a similar amount. Even Final Fantasy IX released a month before (what a crazy combo!) sold nearly 2 million copies in its launch. For the second week Enix shipped an additional 1,2 million units.

With Dragon Quest VIII they had already learned the lesson and this time they shipped 2,8 million units.

[PS2] Dragon Quest VIII: Journey of the Cursed King (Square Enix) {2004.11.27} - 2.236.881 / NEW <79,7%> [2.808.051 units shipped]
That was really interesting. Thanks for sharing it.

I wonder how much the userbase might be on PSX/PS2 during the release of each of the Dragon Quest games. Were these the first DQ games on the respective hardware or did we get a spin-off, re-release of other games before them?

This will just give a good insight on what to expect from DQ XI on PS4 :p
 
You might be right with that, it's probably the number one reason, but I perhaps I overestimate the scale of it when I say that I feel that Vita's software support is too numerous for that to viable.

I would also have to wonder at what point it weighs on a publisher's mind that there's a non-negligible chance Sony turns around in two years and goes "We're releasing another handheld, good luck!". It seems a lot of developers are going to jump over to PS4 which is an even more trickier scenario to me.
Well, one thing I should note is that I would be very surprised if these deals were continuous at the same level.

Like the hardest transition to make is getting on a new platform and making appropriate tier art assets. If the incentive goes down notably after the first (like say you still pay 80% of the licensing fee and only get some comarketing), you still had your biggest risk amortized for the riskiest game and you now know what your audience size is on the platform.

If I had to guess I'd imagine that most incentives at this point aren't for Vita, which has momentum and a stable library, but rather adding PS4 SKUs to these games, hence the results of the Fall conference.

Also one advantage of Japan is that budgets are really low so for the same cost as exclusive DLC in the West you can probably get one or more games onto the Vita, similar to how Sony and Microsoft can vacuum up a ton of indie games but have extremely few AAA exclusives.

But yeah the idea of doing this early is that eventually you don't pay people to make software anymore for your platform and they simply do it because they see similar games there (or already have their fan base there) and want to target the same audience.
 
Feb 20, 2007
7,957
0
0
Spain
Well, those are also incentives, but I don't think one could really explain this otherwise.

Like why on earth would a bunch of Western publishers make PSP games in 2010 based on games like Army of Two without this, to take one of the most flagrant cases?

We've had various people explain how these types of deals work before, and we see Sony signing things like Street Fighter, so I really don't feel it's a stretch. However, I don't have any specific publicly available article declaring this, you are correct.

It is not impossible these developers all signed on to a basically dead platform with moderately sized games solely for technological reasons, though I personally find it improbable.


Also a key note is that they're not literally paying, but rather opting to not take money in licensing fees and doing things like comarketing in which money theoretically never changes hands since generally you always want to keep cash in a business.

Edit:

Here is a guy at SCEA who lists his job as signing comarketing and exclusivity deals: https://www.linkedin.com/in/geralddmartin

I feel it's very likely SCEJ has similar positions.
Are we talking about Vita or PSP here?
Because in early 2009, when that push was announced (Rockband, LBP, Army of Two, ... and that was basically it) PSP was far from dead in the west, EA had found success on the platform and the game was farmed to an external developer for cheap.

In the west (for Vita) I feel SCE finds port houses and maybe cuts royalty deals with some indie developers, sure, but I can't think of any outrageous japanese announcement that made me think Sony was paying anything. The games announced are all very safe.
 
Mar 13, 2013
12,412
3
0
Well, one thing I should note is that I would be very surprised if these deals were continuous at the same level.

Like the hardest transition to make is getting on a new platform and making appropriate tier art assets. If the incentive goes down notably after the first (like say you still pay 80% of the licensing fee and only get some comarketing), you still had your biggest risk amortized for the riskiest game and you now know what your audience size is on the platform.

If I had to guess I'd imagine that most incentives at this point aren't for Vita, which has momentum and a stable library, but rather adding PS4 SKUs to these games, hence the results of the Fall conference.

Also one advantage of Japan is that budgets are really low so for the same cost as exclusive DLC in the West you can probably get one or more games onto the Vita, similar to how Sony and Microsoft can vacuum up a ton of indie games but have extremely few AAA exclusives.

But yeah the idea of doing this early is that eventually you don't pay people to make software anymore for your platform and they simply do it because they see similar games there (or already have their fan base there) and want to target the same audience.
That all makes sense but I just realised I missed the word "not"(like a moron)... Like what are Namco and Koei Tecmo going to do with God Eater and Toukiden if there is no Vita successor. Is it just PS4 then? Mobile? Try to jump to 4DS? Let the series die?
 
Are we talking about Vita or PSP here?
Because in early 2009, when that push was announced (Rockband, LBP, Army of Two, ... and that was basically it) PSP was far from dead in the west, EA had found success on the platform and the game was farmed to an external developer for cheap.

In the west I feel SCE finds port houses and maybe cuts royalty deals with some indie developers, sure, but I can't think of any outrageous japanese announcement that made me think Sony was paying anything.
Well, let's take the sea of hunting action type games.

Why would they all go onto Vita instead of following Monster Hunter onto the 3DS? The Vita wasn't selling anything, and it's not like it was impossible to take a PSP spec game and get it on to 3DS.

Similarly, taking this back to the West for a second, do you agree that console vendors give financial incentives for exclusive DLC, and if they do, why do you feel Sony wouldn't be offering financial incentives in Japan?
 
That all makes sense but I just realised I missed the word "not"(like a moron)... Like what are Namco and Koei Tecmo going to do with God Eater and Toukiden if there is no Vita successor. Is it just PS4 then? Mobile? Try to jump to 4DS? Let the series die?
Oh, I expect them all to go to 4DS.

I guess a Sony console version isn't out of the question, but once there is no other portable option, you go with the only option that is left even if you don't get incentives.

At least at this point you have a following (and assets/technology which should at least look acceptable on 4DS) and your audience is likely to show up on the last platform standing if there is only one left.

This is why I've said in the past that I feel the 4DS's biggest strength is that it is likely to have nigh-zero dedicated device competition, since it should inherit at least some notable games without even trying.
 
Mar 13, 2013
12,412
3
0
Are we talking about Vita or PSP here?
Because in early 2009, when that push was announced (Rockband, LBP, Army of Two, ... and that was basically it) PSP was far from dead in the west, EA had found success on the platform and the game was farmed to an external developer for cheap.

In the west (for Vita) I feel SCE finds port houses and maybe cuts royalty deals with some indie developers, sure, but I can't think of any outrageous japanese announcement that made me think Sony was paying anything. The games announced are all very safe.
I know I mgiht have harped on it a bit and we haven't really seen anything of it but SaGa 2015 kind of stands out to me. Kawazu hasn't worked on a Sony platform game since FFXII(lolLast Remnant) and it's an anniversary game for a series that started its life on the Gameboy.

Now Kawazu is the type of guy that I can definitely believe just decided to do it on Vita but I would have had my money on Vita/PS3/PS4 or 3DS before Vita exclusive.

EDIT
Oh, I expect them all to go to 4DS.

I guess a Sony console version isn't out of the question, but once there is no other portable option, you go with the only option that is left even if you don't get incentives.

At least at this point you have a following (and assets/technology which should at least look acceptable on 4DS) and your audience is likely to show up on the last platform standing if there is only one left.

This is why I've said in the past that I feel the 4DS's biggest strength is that it is likely to have nigh-zero dedicated device competition, since it should inherit at least some notable games without even trying.
That isn't out of the question but isn't there a bit of a risk that you might be out maneuvred by competitors? Would it not be best to try to establish yourself before it comes to that?

Like hypothetically if FF Explorers takes off and God Eater 4, Toukiden 3 and FF Explorers 2 are all 4DS games is not possible that the former two will be less relevant to the userbase than the latter?
 
Feb 20, 2007
7,957
0
0
Spain
Well, let's take the sea of hunting action type games.

Why would they all go onto Vita instead of following Monster Hunter onto the 3DS? The Vita wasn't selling anything, and it's not like it was impossible to take a PSP spec game and get it on to 3DS.

Similarly, taking this back to the West for a second, do you agree that console vendors give financial incentives for exclusive DLC, and if they do, why do you feel Sony wouldn't be offering financial incentives in Japan?
There have been zero hunting games released on Nintendo consoles and Sony consoles. It's either one or the other.

Also Vita has no notable exclusive hunting game* from a third party. The games are always shared with PSP, PS3 or PS4, so here enters my previous points of third parties releasing less games, ease of porting and shared audiences.
And let's not forget that Vita is the successor of the PSP. A lot of developments were based on this assumption.

I could be wrong, but it's not like Vita is swimming on exclusive high profile games, as I said the games all feel very safe and almost always are shared with another Sony console.

*PSO2 can't run on a 3DS, also not exclusive. And PSNova was most likely greenlighted because PSO2 was a success and the series had history on PSP.
 
Feb 5, 2009
9,008
63
715
Nirolak: i have a very basic understanding of inner workings of game development and even withouth solid evidence is not an stretch to imagine there might be more incentives to develop for a Sony system. But there's not much we can gain here by speculating what and how many those incentives are.
You might be right with that, it's probably the number one reason, but I perhaps I overestimate the scale of it when I say that I feel that Vita's software support is too numerous for that to viable.

I would also have to wonder at what point it weighs on a publisher's mind that there's a non-negligible chance Sony turns around in two years and goes "We're releasing another handheld, good luck!". It seems a lot of developers are going to jump over to PS4 which is an even more trickier scenario to me.
This exactly what im trying to comunicate and why i think is a dubious strategy for the future. With the 3DS launch, 3rd party developers yet again failed to stablish an stronger prescense or move their user bases to the most succesful portable.

Now, there's a chance Sony won't have a traditional handheld device to succeed the Vita. So what exactly developers supporting it (that will still want to make games for this market segment not mobile) do in a couple of years? Even Nirolak says: "Support the 4DS". Well then, these Vita devs will start fighting the battle to move their audience there, when they could have an stronger showing from day one if they began to take action years ago. That's why i said their strategy is too rooted in the day by day.
 
That isn't out of the question but isn't there a bit of a risk that you might be out maneuvred by competitors? Would it not be best to try to establish yourself before it comes to that?

Like hypothetically if FF Explorers takes off and God Eater 4, Toukiden 3 and FF Explorers 2 are all 4DS games is not possible that the former two will be less relevant to the userbase than the latter?
Well, my response there would be two parts.

For the first, it only matters if Final Fantasy Explorers actually takes off on a scale larger than God Eater or Toukiden, since otherwise it would be like the game launched on Vita, and also only if it eats away at the same audience that the other two appeal to. If it primarily sells to people who liked FF but don't buy other hunting action style games, it's not eating the same audience. It's eating some hypothetical expansion audience, but if that audience needed FF to get into the genre, then those two weren't going to win them over.

Now, obviously if the game goes and sells 600K or 1 million copies, then yeah there was potentially a giant missed opportunity for these brands, and that's the risk you always run when being conservative. Level 5 is currently reaping the benefits of being one of the first companies to make a truly serious run at Pokemon.

The second would be that presumably the audience that is buying God Eater and Toukiden currently would transition to 4DS as well, so they would keep buying the series they were buying before.

Like, as an example of this, Resident Evil 4 was never on Xbox, but Resident Evil 5 sold a gazillion copies on Xbox 360, since people who owned PS2s now owned Xbox 360s and didn't stop buying Resident Evil just because it was never on Xbox, because why would they even care?

Now if they never buy a 4DS, then that becomes a notable problem for these companies, since their previous audience didn't show up on the new platform. But in that case, they probably weren't going to be on the 3DS either, so they found customers they wouldn't have encountered anyway.

There have been zero hunting games released on Nintendo consoles and Sony consoles. It's either one or the other.

Also Vita has no notable exclusive hunting game* from a third party. The games are always shared with PSP, PS3 or PS4, so here enters my previous points of third parties releasing less games, ease of porting and shared audiences.
And let's not forget that Vita is the successor of the PSP. A lot of developments were based on this assumption.

I could be wrong, but it's not like Vita is swimming on exclusive high profile games, as I said the games all feel very safe and almost always are shared with another Sony console.

*PSO2 can't run on a 3DS, also not exclusive. And PSNova was most likely greenlighted because PSO2 was a success and the series had history on PSP.
But are the Vita + PS3 and/or PS4 a more compelling platform than the 3DS for the genre, or is that only true if they are incentivized to be so?

I don't think we have a clear display that Vita/PS3/PS4 is a super obvious choice to make a hunting action game on over the 3DS. It's not like there's a series selling about as much (or even anywhere close to) Monster Hunter once you add up all three SKUs. Obviously if there was, then the decision would be extremely obvious.

Also, I am still curious about this point you skipped:

Similarly, taking this back to the West for a second, do you agree that console vendors give financial incentives for exclusive DLC, and if they do, why do you feel Sony wouldn't be offering financial incentives in Japan?
---

Edit:

Nirolak: i have a very basic understanding of inner workings of game development and even withouth solid evidence is not an stretch to imagine there might be more incentives to develop for a Sony system. But there's not much we can gain here by speculating what and how many those incentives are.

This exactly what im trying to comunicate and why i think is a dubious strategy for the future. With the 3DS launch, 3rd party developers yet again failed to stablish an stronger prescense or move their user bases to the most succesful portable.

Now, there's a chance Sony won't have a traditional handheld device to succeed the Vita. So what exactly developers supporting it (that will still want to make games for this market segment not mobile) do in a couple of years? Even Nirolak says: "Support the 4DS". Well then, these Vita devs will start fighting the battle to move their audience there, when they could have an stronger showing from day one if they began to take action years ago. That's why i said their strategy is too rooted in the day by day.
Okay, so let's take this back a bit again and look at the two scenarios:

1.) Let's say there is a Vita successor. At this point, they'd presumably be going with that along with the PS4 given that the vast majority of these games are cross-platform on a bunch of different Sony devices, and whatever externalities that made them choose to go with Sony in the first place presumably still exist, since sales of the hardware was almost assuredly not one of them.

2.) Let's say there isn't a Vita successor. Okay, at this point, what battle are they fighting to move their users? What else is their audience moving to at this point if not the 4DS? The PS4? They could still pretty easily put the game on both PS4 and 4DS. It's not like it's impossible to go across vendors. I guess we could assume they all move to mobile, but that's a battle a lot of these companies are already trying to fight (being successful on mobile) and have been working on for a while.
 
Feb 20, 2007
7,957
0
0
Spain
But are the Vita + PS3 and/or PS4 a more compelling platform than the 3DS for the genre, or is that only true if they are incentivized to be so?

I don't think we have a clear display that Vita/PS3/PS4 is a super obvious choice to make a hunting action game on over the 3DS. It's not like there's a series selling about as much (or even anywhere close to) Monster Hunter once you add up all three SKUs. Obviously if there was, then the decision would be extremely obvious.
How many hunting games have been created and released for PS3/PS4/PSV?

The only one I can think of is the upcoming God Eater 2. Expansion of a game with ~400-500k sales on Vita. A game that was released on PSP, which was the main platform at the time of the announcement.

I can't think of any other. Maybe Gundam Breaker? Started on PS3, home of Gundam games this generation. Toukiden? Same as God Eater 2.

Also, I am still curious about this point you skipped:



---
I edited the message just before you posted that to specify that I was talking about Vita.

me said:
In the west (for Vita) I feel SCE finds port houses and maybe cuts royalty deals with some indie developers, sure, but I can't think of any outrageous japanese announcement that made me think Sony was paying anything. The games announced are all very safe.
And I sure expect Sony to pay and give incentives other than engines and devkits for certain games. I only asked because in your original message it seemed like you were implying that Sony was giving money for almost every Vita game in development and that's why 3DS wasn't getting them.
 
Mar 13, 2013
12,412
3
0
This exactly what im trying to comunicate and why i think is a dubious strategy for the future. With the 3DS launch, 3rd party developers yet again failed to stablish an stronger prescense or move their user bases to the most succesful portable.

Now, there's a chance Sony won't have a traditional handheld device to succeed the Vita. So what exactly developers supporting it (that will still want to make games for this market segment not mobile) do in a couple of years? Even Nirolak says: "Support the 4DS". Well then, these Vita devs will start fighting the battle to move their audience there, when they could have an stronger showing from day one if they began to take action years ago. That's why i said their strategy is too rooted in the day by day.
See I am still not convinced that they would move to the 4DS. God Eater and Toukiden both seem to be heading to PS4. Surely that send the messaging that they are going to continue on Sony platforms whether portable or home console.

Well, my response there would be two parts.

For the first, it only matters if Final Fantasy Explorers actually takes off on a scale larger than God Eater or Toukiden, since otherwise it would be like the game launched on Vita, and also only if it eats away at the same audience that the other two appeal to. If it primarily sells to people who liked FF but don't buy other hunting action style games, it's not eating the same audience. It's eating some hypothetical expansion audience, but if that audience needed FF to get into the genre, then those two weren't going to win them over.

Now, obviously if the game goes and sells 600K or 1 million copies, then yeah there was potentially a giant missed opportunity for these brands, and that's the risk you always run when being conservative. Level 5 is currently reaping the benefits of being one of the first companies to make a truly serious run at Pokemon.

The second would be that presumably the audience that is buying God Eater and Toukiden currently would transition to 4DS as well, so they would keep buying the series they were buying before.

Like, as an example of this, Resident Evil 4 was never on Xbox, but Resident Evil 5 sold a gazillion copies on Xbox 360, since people who owned PS2s now owned Xbox 360s and didn't stop buying Resident Evil just because it was never on Xbox, because why would they even care?

Now if they never buy a 4DS, then that becomes a notable problem for these companies, since their previous audience didn't show up on the new platform. But in that case, they probably weren't going to be on the 3DS either, so they found customers they wouldn't have encountered.
That is and excellent point but it does differ from Resident Evil because the genre king is already on 3DS. Someone who was primarily fan of Monster Hunter but wanted a second series to play would have gone with God Eater or Phantasy Star on PSP. When this gen rolls around MonHun goes one way and the other two goes another; as they are primarily a MonHun fan they decide to just get a 3DS. Now their only option for a second series if FF Explorers so they invest in that. When the 4DS rolls around if all four series are on it are they going to go back to God Eater or Phantasy Star or stick with the two they have been playing most recently? On top of that there is the MonHun and FF Explorers developers are also likely going to get their hands on dev kits earlier and release their games earlier in which case people that went from Vita to 4DS might decide to grab one of those instead.

That hypothetical scenario would probably be quite pessimistic but is it not something that should be a concern?

---

Edit:


Okay, so let's take this back a bit again and look at the two scenarios:

1.) Let's say there is a Vita successor. At this point, they'd presumably be going with that along with the PS4 given that the vast majority of these games are cross-platform on a bunch of different Sony devices, and whatever externalities that made them choose to go with Sony in the first place presumably still exist, since sales of the hardware was almost assuredly not one of them.

2.) Let's say there isn't a Vita successor. Okay, at this point, what battle are they fighting to move their users? What else is their audience moving to at this point if not the 4DS? The PS4? They could still pretty easily put the game on both PS4 and 4DS. It's not like it's impossible to go across vendors. I guess we could assume they all move to mobile, but that's a battle a lot of these companies are already trying to fight (being successful on mobile) and have been working on for a while.
The lack of ability to cross save and cross play would be a problem for PS4/4DS releases. It is likely the only reason MH Tri Ultimate was on Wii U instead of PS3 although some think MH 4 Ultimate will get a PS4 release.
 
How many hunting games have been created and released for PS3/PS4/PSV?

The only one I can think of is the upcoming God Eater 2. Expansion of a game with ~400-500k sales on Vita. A game that was released on PSP, which was the main platform at the time of the announcement.

I can't think of any other. Maybe Gundam Breaker? Started on PS3, home of Gundam games this generation. Toukiden? Same as God Eater 2.



I edited the message just before you posted that to specify that I was talking about Vita.


And I sure expect Sony to pay and give incentives other than engines and devkits for certain games. I only asked because in your original message it seemed like you were implying that Sony was giving money for almost every Vita game in development and that's why 3DS wasn't getting them.
Sorry, I certainly didn't mean every title. I do think it's plausible they approached 15-20 different games at the beginning (when the system was REALLY desperate) though with offerings of various quality from developers they thought would be willing to go for it, and that after that point they turned those way down or stopped handing them out, with the exception of really high gain titles.

Basically I think they paid for the first wave of titles post launch to show up by getting things ported from PSP or PS3 earlier than they would have otherwise through a mix of technology and some small to moderate offerings (which would be very cheap in the grand scheme of things given the market and the platform) and then let momentum do most of the work afterwards.

I do think that the marketing campaigns around "Vita x Hunting Action" or whatever it was would be part of a co-marketing agreement to get titles that were on PSP or PS3 to also show up on Vita. I wouldn't be surprised if they got some breaks on licensing too, especially for something like Phantasy Star that was announced so far out on a platform that really wasn't looking super sure of itself at the time. It gave a "big game in the horizon" effect to help mindshare, and that to me seems like something they'd be willing to pay for.

If I implied they were paying across the board then I explained myself poorly, my apologies. I had a specific timeframe and scope in mind that I think I didn't share, and feel that set up the system for the support it gets now.

Similarly I think a lot of Japanese publishers are porting games to PS4 that they would have otherwise hesitated on due to some incentives from Sony, though by this I don't mean that I feel they're running up with millions of dollars to each publisher, rather offering an easy way to do it and perhaps offering co-marketing or other incentives regarding licensing fees as well.

I would expect that to largely stop if/once the PS4 finds some solid footing outside of really high value titles.

How were they one of the first?
Well (making the assumption of what you're implying) I do feel that Digimon and Monster Rancher were the first two chronologically, and had success for a while.

However, unless I'm forgetting something very obvious, I feel this was the third one with a really large transmedia, advertising, and merchandizing push to go along with the game, which I'd still consider to be one of the first.

To give context to what I mean by that statement, I wouldn't have considered Battlefield a serious competitor to Call of Duty (4 and after, not earlier when it was a much smaller series) until either Bad Company 2 or Battlefield 3 where they started spending $50-$100+ million on marketing, putting in all the expected features, and actually trying to get the game to sell like Call of Duty instead of simply being in the same conceptual space.

I think Activision once summed this up quite well on the competition between Call of Duty: World at War and Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway: http://kotaku.com/5020879/activisio...arboxs-hells-highway-a-crappy-war-game-update

Kotaku said:
Asked about Gearbox Software's take on the genre, the newest iteration of which will be Brothers In Arms: Hell's Highway, Heller said "I watched the trailer and I'm was like 'These guys aren't even in the same league.'" Heller has even more gentlemanly things to say about the Brothers In Arms series.

"We don't even think about them," Heller noted, giving his opinion about the other WWII hold out. "They're not a game we even think about when we're playing, we think about the best shooters, we play [Call of Duty 4] Modern Warfare, we play... Gears of War, we play Halo, you know, that's the competition. We want to look at the games that do great storytelling."

Heller sums up, "We don't want to look at someone who's just making a crappy war game."
Or, put less bluntly, simply being in the same genre doesn't make them a real competitor. World at War went on to obliterate Brothers In Arms sales by like 5-6 times IIRC.

That is and excellent point but it does differ from Resident Evil because the genre king is already on 3DS. Someone who was primarily fan of Monster Hunter but wanted a second series to play would have gone with God Eater or Phantasy Star on PSP. When this gen rolls around MonHun goes one way and the other two goes another; as they are primarily a MonHun fan they decide to just get a 3DS. Now their only option for a second series if FF Explorers so they invest in that. When the 4DS rolls around if all four series are on it are they going to go back to God Eater or Phantasy Star or stick with the two they have been playing most recently? On top of that there is the MonHun and FF Explorers developers are also likely going to get their hands on dev kits earlier and release their games earlier in which case people that went from Vita to 4DS might decide to grab one of those instead.

That hypothetical scenario would probably be quite pessimistic but is it not something that should be a concern?
It is certainly a concern. However, we are talking about an audience that likes the genre enough to be interested in buying a second game, was not interested enough to buy a Vita despite the large number of genre titles there, and is also not interested enough to consider all the available options if a bunch of "new" series suddenly show up on 4DS.

Like the question becomes how many people would have bought Toukiden, God Eater, or Phantasy Star if they were on 3DS, but not on Vita, are going to buy Final Fantasy Explorers, and will not be willing to consider those other series again in the future.

It could be a large number of people, but that's the kind of prognostication that each of these publishers have to make versus any opposite scenarios on the Vita plus any potential incentives they received. I think a publisher brimming with confidence in their series would have selected the 3DS and went for the biggest possible audience and then heavily marketed to them. I don't think there are many Japanese publishers that actually have that kind of confidence.

For further details on that, see my above response about Pokemon competitors.

The lack of ability to cross save and cross play would be a problem for PS4/4DS releases. It is likely the only reason MH Tri Ultimate was on Wii U instead of PS3 although some think MH 4 Ultimate will get a PS4 release.
I actually don't see this as an issue because for it to be a problem, that means the customers actually own both systems, at which point they can simply pick the one that makes more sense for them to play on.

The audience they would miss by not releasing on PS4 would be the audience that does not buy a 4DS, at which point they would simply get the PS4 version, and the audience they would miss by not releasing a 4DS version would not have a PS4, and would simply get the 4DS version.
 
They should of just told the Osaka team to do KH3 with some help from Nomura and the Versus team since they probably weren't doing much......in fact thats what's happening now isn't it?
Actually we don't know what the leads on Versus are doing anymore since they were largely replaced by Type-0 staff.

Well, I guess we know like at least a third of them left Square Enix. But yes, Osaka is making Kingdom Hearts 3.
 
Jun 9, 2012
26,506
0
0
Multiplatform PS4/4DS games would be great for the industry. Hopefully Nintendo is working to make sure it's easy to port to \. Of course, I question if the next handheld will even be as strong as Vita.
 

Mpl90

Two copies sold? That's not a bomb guys, stop trolling!!!
Mar 10, 2011
22,885
0
775
28
theflyingthoughtsblog.wordpress.com
Multiplatform PS4/4DS games would be great for the industry. Hopefully Nintendo is working to make sure it's easy to port to \. Of course, I question if the next handheld will even be as strong as Vita.
Yeah, if 4DS is powerful enough (like...capable of outputting Wii U-like visuals on smaller screens, which is something I always insist on, I know :p ), it could certainly get a good amount of games shared with PS4 in Japan.

And, if Iwata stands by his words, it would also mean that next Nintendo's home console gets those games as well.
 
Aug 7, 2011
2,898
0
0
Multiplatform PS4/4DS games would be great for the industry. Hopefully Nintendo is working to make sure it's easy to port to \. Of course, I question if the next handheld will even be as strong as Vita.
I'd much prefer Vita/PS4, and I think that is what we will continue to see even after the 4DS is launched. With Vita/PS4 you get cross-saves (and potentially, cross-buy), whereas that is surely out of the question for any hypothetical PS4/4DS release. So Vita/PS4 is better for the consumer.
 
To make porting easy basically what they'd have to do is make sure they have a DirectX 11.1 and/or OpenGL ES 3.0 hardware feature set (this is different from running the APIs, but rather ensuring the pieces of hardware defined by those standards exist), the power level expected of having that feature set, and then be fairly generous with RAM (I'd say at least 1 GB available to games, if not more).

That should be able to support the vast majority of what developers in Japan are likely to use outside of the biggest games.

Less than that doesn't make things impossible, but it does make it a lot harder to go (low to mid tier) PS4 -> 4DS instead of 4DS -> PS4 and would presumably limit some ports that would otherwise happen.
 
Mar 13, 2013
12,412
3
0
To make porting easy basically what they'd have to do is make sure they have a DirectX 11.1 and/or OpenGL ES 3.0 hardware feature set (this is different from running the APIs, but rather ensuring the pieces of hardware defined by those standards exist), the power level expected of having that feature set, and then be fairly generous with RAM (I'd say at least 1 GB available to games, if not more).

That should be able to support the vast majority of what developers in Japan are likely to use outside of the biggest games.

Less than that doesn't make things impossible, but it does make it a lot harder to go (low to mid tier) PS4 -> 4DS instead of 4DS -> PS4 and would presumably limit some ports that would otherwise happen.
I don't know how optimistic to be about that. The Pica in the 3DS is unorthodox but relatively capable, but there seems to be indications that the Tegra was the original plan for the 3DS. It also seems AMD is the likely vendor for the 4DS so I think it would be a modern design owing to the fact that AMD doesn't have existing designs suitaible for mobile(according to those much more in the know than me).

EDIT: I think RAM has been the one place Nintendo has done good recently. New 3DS has 128mb RAM available to games I think and 256mb RAM total.

I also think you're right about publishers in general not having confidence. I guess we can even see that with Square Enix not being sure about a western releasemof Bravely Second despite the first game's success. I definitely think publishers will struggle if they wait until the Vita is dead to transition though.
 
Jun 9, 2012
26,506
0
0
I'd much prefer Vita/PS4, and I think that is what we will continue to see even after the 4DS is launched. With Vita/PS4 you get cross-saves (and potentially, cross-buy), whereas that is surely out of the question for any hypothetical PS4/4DS release. So Vita/PS4 is better for the consumer.
Sure, but I think a successful multiplatform environment between the 4DS and PS4 that helps both platforms is better for the consumer in the long run to keep the dedicated Japanese games industry going strong. Also by the time the 4DS is released Vita will be a decaying platform. This all assumes Sony is not releasing another handheld.
 
I don't know how optimistic to be about that. The Pica in the 3DS is unorthodox but relatively capable, but there seems to be indications that the Tegra was the original plan for the 3DS. It also seems AMD is the likely vendor for the 4DS so I think it would be a modern design owing to the fact that AMD doesn't have existing designs suitaible for mobile(according to those much more in the know than me).
They used to actually, but they sold it to Qualcomm.

Qualcomm's GPU line is called Adreno, which you'll notice is an anagram of Radeon.

The problem with the Pica is that it's not a true OpenGL ES 2.0 device, so it doesn't have programmable shaders in the way that modern engines like Unreal Engine 3 or Unity expected, or as you would expect for something to be compliant with technology that ran on the Xbox 360.

Shaders are actually one of the biggest reasons to make sue they're OpenGL ES 3.0 compliant since modern engines like to use Compute Shaders and having them recompile to be complaint with Shader Model 4.0 instead will result in terrible performance, making the engines bad to use on the platform.

I also think you're rigt anout publishers in general not having confidence. I guess we can even see that with Square Enix not being sure about a western releasemof Bravely Second despite the first game's success. I definitely think publishers will struggle if they wait until the Vita is dead to transition though.
If they're transitioning to 4DS I'm expecting them to get on it pretty early after launch assuming they have any amount of confidence in their brands, since that's the best time to run in before Monster Hunter does and try to steal some of the audience.
 
Mar 13, 2013
12,412
3
0
They used to actually, but they sold it to Qualcomm.

Qualcomm's GPU line is called Adreno, which you'll notice is an anagram of Radeon.

The problem with the Pica is that it's not a true OpenGL ES 2.0 device, so it doesn't have programmable shaders in the way that modern engines like Unreal Engine 3 or Unity expected, or as you would expect for something to be compliant with technology that ran on the Xbox 360.

Shaders are actually one of the biggest reasons to make sue they're OpenGL ES 3.0 compliant since modern engines like to use Compute Shaders and having them recompile to be complaint with Shader Model 4.0 instead will result in terrible performance, making the engines bad to use on the platform.
Yeah that is what I meant by unorthodox. It's definitely seems to be efficient though.

AMD being the vendor is based on the comments last year about wanting in on the handheld market and the recent comment about them having a contract for a gaming device being released in 2016. It might not be the 4DS but considering they already provide Nintendo's console GPUs it's a strong possibility.

If they're transitioning to 4DS I'm expecting them to get on it pretty early after launch assuming they have any amount of confidence in their brands, since that's the best time to run in before Monster Hunter does and try to steal some of the audience.
As I said though they might be at a disadvantage there because the teams already working on Nintendo platforms are going to hear about the new platform first and get first dibsmon dev kits. The MonHun team in particular is probably going to get a kit before even some Nintendo teams.
 
Aug 26, 2005
4,504
0
0
44
Japan
retrogamesheaven.com
Level 5 has shipped more than 2M for Shin Uchi. There weren't supply problems at launch, there won't be supply problems this week.
Not properly correct.

Launch day, if you didn't preorder you couldn't buy
but Sunday was available

last week was available all around even if some shops were supply constrained (Yodobashi iirc, hiska will remember for sure)

saturday available and probably restocked due to anime debut, yesterday available but probably high demand (there were warnings such as "don't bring this copy to cashier but just ask for it", it means that both customers and demand was very high)

It will have a very good 2nd week (how much were YSO predictions?) but far from DQ7 crazy numbers (thanks Bruno for the list, I also forgot the craziness DQ7 sales :D )
 
As I said though they might be at a disadvantage there because the teams already working on Nintendo platforms are going to hear about the new platform first and get first dibsmon dev kits. The MonHun team in particular is probably going to get a kit before even some Nintendo teams.
If Nintendo is shorting development kits from Namco Bandai, Sega, and Koei Tecmo, I feel Nintendo will have much larger problems to worry about than Namco, Sega, and Koei do about lower than optimal sales of their Hunting Action games.
 
Sep 2, 2014
16,385
0
0
Essentially Sony pulls a lot of financial levers to secure support and as far as I can tell Nintendo is largely unwilling to play the same game.
Wasn't it Nintendo who did the marketing and localization of Bravely Default? I don't think its so much unwilling as it is that Nintendo is seemingly more picky...
 
Mar 13, 2013
12,412
3
0
If Nintendo is shorting development kits from Namco Bandai, Sega, and Koei Tecmo, I feel Nintendo will have much larger problems to worry about than Namco, Sega, and Koei do about lower than optimal sales of their Hunting Action games.
Well it seemed to me that at least with the 3DS Nintendo approached individual teams and producers with dev kits. I remember Takeuchi from Capcom talking about how they personally approached him. If that is the case with their next system then I expect that the publishers will have dev kits but they're more lilely to be with Harada's team at Bamco and Team Ninja and the Project Zero team at Tecmo Koei. Either way the MonHun team and Level 5 are still going to be top priority when it comes to third parties.
 

Scum

Junior Member
Jun 8, 2004
23,430
0
0
London, England
To make porting easy basically what they'd have to do is make sure they have a DirectX 11.1 and/or OpenGL ES 3.0 hardware feature set (this is different from running the APIs, but rather ensuring the pieces of hardware defined by those standards exist), the power level expected of having that feature set, and then be fairly generous with RAM (I'd say at least 1 GB available to games, if not more).

That should be able to support the vast majority of what developers in Japan are likely to use outside of the biggest games.

Less than that doesn't make things impossible, but it does make it a lot harder to go (low to mid tier) PS4 -> 4DS instead of 4DS -> PS4 and would presumably limit some ports that would otherwise happen.
Nirolak, do you have any particular ideas as to what NCL could ask of their chosen vendor(s) for the 4DS Nintendo Advance? In some ways, I'm kind of glad that most of these companies don't dabble in the affairs of "exotic" era tech and that Nintendo asking for such a thing would be disgustingly expensive.
 
Sep 2, 2014
16,385
0
0
As I said though they might be at a disadvantage there because the teams already working on Nintendo platforms are going to hear about the new platform first and get first dibsmon dev kits. The MonHun team in particular is probably going to get a kit before even some Nintendo teams.
That's never going to happen. Nintendo designs for themselves first and foremost, and the most they've ever done from external input was speak with Factor 5 on sound chips and overall builds of the hardware. Factor 5 in that day is a different beast from any of the devs you just mentioned, I even doubt any of them are as close as Factor 5 then/now was/is with Nintendo.

They are still designing the thing with their own developers in mind, not hypothetical developers out in the wild and that are not 100% guaranteed.

Nirolak, do you have any particular ideas as to what NCL could ask of their chosen vendor(s) for the 4DS Nintendo Advance? In some ways, I'm kind of glad that most of these companies don't dabble in the affairs of "exotic" era tech and that Nintendo asking for such a thing would be disgustingly expensive.
ARMv8-A will be their chip base without doubt as that's also what AMD has experience in from their ARM server arm and work, and I don't expect AMD to have the capabilities or need to start from scratch on R&D for the mobile chip and, from what I recall, they already had good power draws and thermal efficiency even in their server builds. That, alone, will guarantee healthy RAM and ES 3.0.
 
Well it seemed to me that at least with the 3DS Nintendo approached individual teams and producers with dev kits. I remember Takeuchi from Capcom talking about how they personally approached him.
Jun Takeuchi is the Head of Consumer Games Development Division 1. I guess they could have approached the CEO instead, but the head of development seems pretty normal.

What did you feel was unusual about it?

If that is the case with their next system then I expect that the publishers will have dev kits but they're more lilely to be with Harada's team at Bamco and Team Ninja and the Project Zero team at Tecmo Koei.
Generally a vendor doesn't dictate who can touch development kits within a publisher. If they hand them over, unless they want to employ someone to sit monitoring them every day, they can't guarantee who is using them.

Either way the MonHun team and Level 5 are still going to be top priority when it comes to third parties.
Well sure, when development kits are limited they normally go to the biggest developers.

Do you feel that by releasing on 3DS, God Eater and Toukiden would have sold 2+ million copies? That's the bar you're setting here.

Nirolak, do you have any particular ideas as to what NCL could ask of their chosen vendor(s) for the 4DS Nintendo Advance? In some ways, I'm kind of glad that most of these companies don't dabble in the affairs of "exotic" era tech and that Nintendo asking for such a thing would be disgustingly expensive.
Well, I'd imagine it would pretty much just be whatever they normally offer, but perhaps with some faster RAM since LPDDR isn't exactly the world's most optimal graphics RAM.

Sony had very few customizations over the standard ARM/PowerVR setup used in the iPhone, with a couple of tiny tweaks to improve game performance and putting in a bit of GDDR3 RAM to help with visuals instead of relying solely on standard mobile RAM.

That said the newest variants of LPDDR might be fast enough. I haven't researched that in a while.

Edit:

I agree with the person above who says they will use an ARM CPU. Nintendo tends to like backwards compatibility and if they don't have to worry about both the CPU and GPU, it should be easier.

Wasn't it Nintendo who did the marketing and localization of Bravely Default? I don't think its so much unwilling as it is that Nintendo is seemingly more picky...
Yes, in the West they started taking up more aggressively competitive positions to get titles over.

However, they did that by bringing over the games *and* taking a cut of the profit as publisher. It was more of a give and take scenario than a solely give scenario to my understanding.
 

heidern

Junior Member
Jun 7, 2004
2,288
0
0
Sure, but I think a successful multiplatform environment between the 4DS and PS4 that helps both platforms is better for the consumer in the long run to keep the dedicated Japanese games industry going strong.
It might be good for the consumer but Nintendo won't want to help the PS4. They'll be aiming for some kind of multiplatform environment between 4DS and their own console.
 
Sep 2, 2014
16,385
0
0
Yes, in the West they started taking up more aggressively competitive positions to get titles over.

However, they did that by bringing over the games *and* taking a cut of the profit as publisher. It was more of a give and take scenario than a solely give scenario to my understanding.
I feel like a localization is also a lot more of an investment than what Sony does in Japan-only for its incentives, and so its not surprising for Nintendo to partake in a give-&-take scenario.

Nintendo basically did what Sony did + fully localized and shipped the product.
 
Feb 5, 2009
9,008
63
715
Okay, so let's take this back a bit again and look at the two scenarios:

1.) Let's say there is a Vita successor. At this point, they'd presumably be going with that along with the PS4 given that the vast majority of these games are cross-platform on a bunch of different Sony devices, and whatever externalities that made them choose to go with Sony in the first place presumably still exist, since sales of the hardware was almost assuredly not one of them.

2.) Let's say there isn't a Vita successor. Okay, at this point, what battle are they fighting to move their users? What else is their audience moving to at this point if not the 4DS? The PS4? They could still pretty easily put the game on both PS4 and 4DS. It's not like it's impossible to go across vendors. I guess we could assume they all move to mobile, but that's a battle a lot of these companies are already trying to fight (being successful on mobile) and have been working on for a while.
The answer is quite simple, Devs are wasting their time which is hughely important by itself but also the potential to eventually reach a higher user base. What's the point of splitting the market like that when there's a pretty clear cut dominant platform?

Back in the PS2 days, it was no surprise to see games released in the console that would also make sense in Nintendo paltforms, yet they weren't. PS2 vastly bigger user base guaranteed the games were there. While no example is perfect, i think it fits in this case.
 

vinnygambini

Why are strippers at the U.N. bad when they're great at strip clubs???
Aug 7, 2013
8,548
0
0
Estimates for this week Box-Office in Japan:

Top All-Time Opening Weekends [ADMISSIONS]
Admissions [Screen Count] - Film (Distributor)

01 :: 1,486,743 [631] - The Matrix Reloaded (Warner Bros.)
02 :: 1,475,000 [408] - Yo-Kai Watch: It's the Secret of Birth, Nyan! (Toho) *Est*
1.475 Billion Yen

Shiiiiittttttt
 
Mar 13, 2013
12,412
3
0
Jun Takeuchi is the Head of Consumer Games Development Division 1. I guess they could have approached the CEO instead, but the head of development seems pretty normal.

What did you feel was unusual about it?
Wait, was he already in thay position at that point? I thought he was promoted afer Inafune left.

As for why it would be unusual I was under the impression they approached him specifically for Resident Evil.

Generally a vendor doesn't dictate who can touch development kits within a publisher. If they hand them over, unless they want to employ someone to sit monitoring them every day, they can't guarantee who is using them.


Well sure, when development kits are limited they normally go to the biggest developers.

Do you feel that by releasing on 3DS, God Eater and Toukiden would have sold 2+ million copies? That's the bar you're setting here.
Oh no I am just suggesting that it will be hard to for them to get out before Monster Hunter because they will be at a disadvantage there. Considering how long it took Namco to get God Eater 2 out they probably have no chance. :p

@Vena I would say that the CP Pro and by extension New 3DS shows that if Nintendo is going to take input from anyone it is the Monster Hunter team. I think they will be given access to the hardware as soon as possible.
 
Aug 26, 2005
4,504
0
0
44
Japan
retrogamesheaven.com
Comg Comg

Youkai Watch 2: Shinuchi
First week: 1894pt
Second week: 1413pt
a 25% drop would mean more than 850k (890k precisely), that should be the second best week 2 and the best one on nintendo platform

insane... but that numbers would put YW2.5 at 2mln, matching L5 announcement of last week (YW2 globally sold 5mln)


it will be an interesting Xmas eve... :D
 
Sep 2, 2014
16,385
0
0
@Vena I would say that the CP Pro and by extension New 3DS shows that if Nintendo is going to take input from anyone it is the Monster Hunter team. I think they will be given access to the hardware as soon as possible.
Why would the CP Pro be an indication of listening to MH team? That was simply the title they marketed with it but the "baking in" of CP Pro was a thing that a hardware revision and streamlining would have made sense to have. Their own software (Kid Icarus) uses the thing, you'll probably NEED it to play Xenoblade. Similar to how the DSi actually improved on the wifi by baking it in rather than making it require a stupid dongle.

The guts of the design are going to be EAD vetted and possibly run by Retro/Monolith for further input. Monolith has been design a lot of the tech on the engine side for Nintendo since their joining and Retro has been seeing more and more proliferation in their assistance as well. The MH team or others will get devkits...
 
Mar 13, 2013
12,412
3
0
Why would the CP Pro be an indication of listening to MH team? That was simply the title they marketed with it but the "baking in" of CP Pro was a thing that a hardware revision and streamlining would have made sense to have. Their own software (Kid Icarus) uses the thing, you'll probably NEED it to play Xenoblade. Similar to how the DSi actually improved on the wifi by baking it in rather than making it require a stupid dongle.

The guts of the design are going to be EAD vetted and possibly run by Retro/Monolith for further input. Monolith has been design a lot of the tech on the engine side for Nintendo since their joining and Retro has been seeing more and more proliferation in their assistance as well. The MH team or others will get devkits...
Monster Hunter Tri G was the first game to use the CP Pro and it was announced alongside the game, that was a long time before Kid Icarus. Monster Hunter 4 was also the first 3DS game to use the full system resources. Nintendo had already collaborated with the team on the Classic Controller Pro for the original Tri as detailed in Iwata Asks.
 
Wait, was he already in thay position at that point? I thought he was promoted afer Inafune left.

As for why it would be unusual I was under the impression they approached him specifically for Resident Evil..
On this front I'm not entirely sure. After Resident Evil 5/Lost Planet 2, he said he was moving to do more corporate things for the next couple of years.

Inafune didn't leave until later, but I assumed he was already primarily a business person by then.

Oh no I am just suggesting that it will be hard to for them to get out before Monster Hunter because they will be at a disadvantage there. Considering how long it took Namco to get God Eater 2 out they probably have no chance. :p

@Vena I would say that the CP Pro and by extension New 3DS shows that if Nintendo is going to take input from anyone it is the Monster Hunter team. I think they will be given access to the hardware as soon as possible.
Well I think you kind of got to the crux of it here.

Namco isn't likely to launch God Eater before Monster Hunter even if they receive the first dev kit in existence, Phantasy Star's retail incarnations seem like a dead series, and Toukiden is from Koe Tecmo, who manages to get out a Musou game out at launch on just about every system, so I can't imagine Toukiden would be incredibly more difficult.

I don't really see which of these vendors benefit tremendously from some hypothetical scenario where they could get kits before/at the same time as Capcom.

Like, actually, let's roll in Refreshment's post for a minute:

The answer is quite simple, Devs are wasting their time which is hughely important by itself but also the potential to eventually reach a higher user base. What's the point of splitting the market like that when there's a pretty clear cut dominant platform?

Back in the PS2 days, it was no surprise to see games released in the console that would also make sense in Nintendo paltforms, yet they weren't. PS2 vastly bigger user base guaranteed the games were there. While no example is perfect, i think it fits in this case.
What kind of upside are you even expecting on these series in this situation?

God Eater: 617,828

God Eater 2 (Vita): 393,531
God Eater 2 (PSP): 205,276
Total: 598,807

Toukiden (Vita): 232,577
Toukiden (PSP): 155,743
Total: 388,320

Phantasy Star Portable: 636,973
Phantasy Star Portable 2: 590,527

Phantasy Star Nova: 135,961

God Eater seemed to do about the same on Vita/PSP, and Toukiden almost hit 400K. Phantasy Star totally collapsed, but given how God Eater and Toukiden did, it suggests that was much more driven by the series/PSO2 than the platform.

Are we expecting Final Fantasy Explorers to sell notably more than God Eater or even Toukiden LTD? Were these games on 3DS, do you envision a 50K bump in LTDs? 100K? More?

There seems to be an implication here that they captured an audience that wouldn't be fine with playing the series on 4DS, because otherwise my argument would hold that it doesn't matter if they just move to 4DS since their entire audience would move with them. So, to have a notable benefit here, they'd have to capture everyone that would have bought the games on 3DS instead, and also capture more people than the purportedly non-negligible amount of people who would have never bought these games if they were on 3DS instead.

I guess I'm just not seeing this vast well of untapped potential or a future fraught with danger of losing major amounts of their audience by switching over to the dominant platform next generation instead of this one. I mean by definition here they would have had to switch platforms anyway to have been on the 3DS to begin with, which would risk the audience they had on the PSP.

Maybe if Final Fantasy Explorers hits 800K and then we see signs that God Eater isn't appealing anymore, but I think I need to see something more than just an undefined probability to get a feeling there is strong reason to believe they dug their own graves for the series' future.

Like if we really wanted to hunt the biggest 4 player co-op hunting action series, Monster Strike on mobile is by far the most played and highest grossing, and made by star Capcom staff from the past, but so far most of these same publishers seem fine with leaving that hypothetical potential laying on the table as well, so I don't think this kind of reserved behavior is egregious compared to everything else.