Jump to content
IGNORED

Rllmuk's Official Sales Figures Thread

Boyatsea

By Boyatsea
in Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Boyatsea

Boyatsea

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Any particular reason why you think that? S-E are only the publishing partner on that game, it's like saying EA's Orange Box :)

Isn't the Star Ocean team developing it? I don't think Microsoft are doing anything but helping publish/promote it. All I've read suggested it's being made by the Enix side of the partnership.

EDIT - Yeah, just checked up on it. It's being developed by tri-Ace for Enix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
M.M.S

M.M.S

Posted
Posted
the 360 is dead in Japan. Dead. Nothing... absoloutely nothing... can turn its fortunes around in Japan now. It'll be it's failing long term when the PS3 sales pick up worldwide.

.

When you're dead, you're dead. There's no coming back. The 360 was practically stillborn in Japan, it's doing even worse than the original Xbox.

I have to laugh at the guy who wrote that article, it shows absolutely zero perspective on the situation. Just because the fanboys turn out on mass on launch day doesn't mean it's the second coming :)

Great posting Boyatsea, keep 'em coming ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mushashi

mushashi

Posted
Posted
Isn't the Star Ocean team developing it? I don't think Microsoft are doing anything but helping publish/promote it. All I've read suggested it's being made by the Enix side of the partnership.

EDIT - Yeah, just checked up on it. It's being developed by tri-Ace for Enix.

When the game was originally announced in April 2006 with no official name, it was a title being developed by tri-Ace in conjunction with Microsoft Game Studios and presumed to be published by MGS at the time, the S-E publishing announcement was only decided for whatever reasons sometime this year. It's as much a Square-Enix game as Crysis or The Orange Box is an EA game :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Boyatsea

Boyatsea

Posted
  • Author
Posted
When you're dead, you're dead. There's no coming back. The 360 was practically stillborn in Japan, it's doing even worse than the original Xbox.

It's not, actually.

Two years in, the 360 has sold 429,928 units in Japan. At the end of its life, the original Xbox had only sold around 480,000 units in Japan, so it's highly likely the 360 will surpass this total. Yes, it's doing badly, but there's no need to go over the top.

I have to laugh at the guy who wrote that article, it shows absolutely zero perspective on the situation.

Yeah. That Tim Rogers guy. I mean, he's only living out there.

Just because the fanboys turn out on mass on launch day doesn't mean it's the second coming :lol:

Estimates say Ace Combat 6 sold 50,000 units plus. I don't think that's too bad, in Japan, the same week Super Mario Galaxy launches. No-one is saying that it's the second coming - just that it's a timely piece of software.

When the game was originally announced in April 2006 with no official name, it was a title being developed by tri-Ace in conjunction with Microsoft Game Studios and presumed to be published by MGS at the time, the S-E publishing announcement was only decided for whatever reasons sometime this year. It's as much a Square-Enix game as Crysis or The Orange Box is an EA game :lol:

I'm not sure why you're finding this hilarious, to be honest. That's a bit odd.

And your analogy is wrong. It's being developed by tri-Ace and published by Square Enix, so it's as much a Square-Enix title as Burnout is an EA game.

Though I have no idea why you keep trying to lump the Orange Box into the conversation, following it up with random hysterics. My original point still stands - Star Ocean has an audience, and so having the team that worked on that (and Namco's 'Tales of' franchise) work on a new RPG is no bad thing for any format.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mushashi

mushashi

Posted
Posted
And your analogy is wrong. It's being developed by tri-Ace and published by Square Enix, so it's as much a Square-Enix title as Burnout is an EA game - EA never published The Orange Box. Just worked on the PS3 conversion.

Ok... So a game being developed by an independant company in conjunction with MGS but published by S-E is the same as a game developed by a wholely-owned internal developer? :lol: at least make sure the facts are correct before making statements like this

Link to comment
Share on other sites
M.M.S

M.M.S

Posted
Posted
It's not, actually.

Two years in, the 360 has sold 429,928 units in Japan. At the end of its life, the original Xbox had only sold around 480,000 units in Japan, so it's highly likely the 360 will surpass this total. Yes, it's doing badly, but there's no need to go over the top.

They'll be lucky to beat 500k in the same 3-year period IMO. Overall they'll beat it just by keeping it on the shelves longer but it doesn't mean it isn't "dead" there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Boyatsea

Boyatsea

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Overall they'll beat it just by keeping it on the shelves longer but it doesn't mean it isn't "dead" there.

That doesn't really matter - you insisted that it was doing worse, when in reality it's not. So maybe the Tim Roger's article isn't so off the wall, after all.

Ok... So a game being developed by an independant company in conjunction with MGS but published by S-E is the same as a game developed by a wholely-owned internal developer? :lol:

No! I never started this bizarre 'let's compare it to random EA titles' theme! :lol:

All I said was, here's an RPG from Square-Enix - that could do quite well. Apparently, that's an utterly hilarious statement to make, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mushashi

mushashi

Posted
Posted
That doesn't really matter - you insisted that it was doing worse, when in reality it's not. So maybe the Tim Roger's article isn't so off the wall, after all.

No! I never started this bizarre 'let's compare it to random EA titles' theme! :lol:

All I said was, here's an RPG from Square-Enix - that could do quite well. Apparently, that's an utterly hilarious statement to make, though.

My original post was asking why you thought it would do better than Lost Odyssey, the rest was just a factual correction :lol:

Please stop saying it's a new game from Square-Enix, they're name is on the box as the publisher, that is it (the same as having EA's name on a game being made by other companies not owned by EA).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom_B

Tom_B

Posted
Posted
Please stop saying it's a new game from Square-Enix, they're name is on the box as the publisher, that is it (the same as having EA's name on a game being made by other companies not owned by EA).

But really, who gives a toss? It's not an uncommon practice, especially in the mainstream media, to use the publisher's name rather than the developer's name. Especially in cases like this, where even avid videogame players may not know who Tri-Ace are - even people into their RPGs would probably think of Valkarie Profile 1 and 2 and Radiata Stories as SquareEnix games (like I did, until I just saw them on Tri-Ace's website).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
M.M.S

M.M.S

Posted
Posted
That doesn't really matter - you insisted that it was doing worse, when in reality it's not. So maybe the Tim Roger's article isn't so off the wall, after all.

Erm no. It is doing worse, it's just going to sell more eventually because it will have been on sale longer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mushashi

mushashi

Posted
Posted
But really, who gives a toss? It's not an uncommon practice, especially in the mainstream media, to use the publisher's name rather than the developer's name.

So you'd be happy to talk about your favourite developer's games in terms of who the publisher is? if it was id, Bungie, Valve, Epic, Bioware or Harmonix's newest game, we'd all be saying how great Activision/EA/Microsoft or Midway's latest game was? :lol:

That maybe fine for the ignorant mainstream media but I'd hope gamers had more respect for the people who actually make the actual content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Boyatsea

Boyatsea

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Please stop saying it's a new game from Square-Enix..

But it is from Square-Enix. Publishers don't just stick their name on the box, y'know. Enix and tri-Ace have a long history, it would seem. What's the problem in saying that it's from Square-Enix? Would you have a similar problem if I said the next Driver game is a Ubisoft title?

Erm no. It is doing worse.

No it isn't. It's doing badly, but it's actually selling more per week than the Xbox managed. The Xbox was selling about 600 a week at this stage in its life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom_B

Tom_B

Posted
Posted
So you'd be happy to talk about your favourite developer's games in terms of who the publisher is?

Wherever possible, I like to use the developer rather than the publisher's name, but I'm not going to get all agitated because someone else said Project Gotham Racing was 'from Microsoft', or Pokemon was 'from Nintendo'. Life's too short. Especially when, in this case, Infinite Undiscovery is very specifically branded as 'a SquareEnix game' (on Tri-Ace's website, it is described as a "next-generation RPG by tri-Ace and Square Enix") to appeal to an audience, apparently sceptical of Microsoft-published JRPGs...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Boyatsea

Boyatsea

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Regradless of how it compares to the xbox - it's still doing very badly in Japan.

I'm being pedantic. It's doing very badly, but people passing things off as 'fact' - like it doing worse than the Xbox - when that isn't the case is a little annoying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mushashi

mushashi

Posted
Posted
Especially when, in this case, Infinite Undiscovery is very specifically branded as 'a SquareEnix game' (on Tri-Ace's website, it is described as a "next-generation RPG by tri-Ace and Square Enix") to appeal to an audience, apparently sceptical of Microsoft-published JRPGs...

This is the root of it. It's PR spin to say this is a Square-Enix game when it never was to begin with (which is what I was objecting to basically).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vorgot

Vorgot

Posted
Posted

Have to laugh, just got this on my RSS feed

http://www.pro-g.co.uk/news/05-11-2007-6816.html

Japanese monthly console sales see PS3 closing gap on Wii for fourth consecutive month.

According to Enterbrain figures, reported by Reuters, Sony's PlayStation 3 console continues to gain ground on the Wii. For the month of October the Wii sold 110,415 units, compared to the PlayStation 3's 47,183 units - a ratio of a little more than two-to-one.

Back in June the Wii outsold the PlayStation 3 by six-to-one, but this sales dominance has been slowly but steadily reduced. The gap could be reduced even further with the imminent release of a cheaper 40GB PlayStation 3 model in Japan, available in both black and white.

So 6:1 was bad, 2:1 is far better.

Not baiting this on either side, but it smacks of fanboy journalism, which I thought Eurogamer didn't do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept