Driver - June 7, 2000 - Chris Jones
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this column are those of
the participants and the moderator, and do not necessarily reflect those of the GIA. There
is coarse language and potentially offensive material afoot. Way down there it's raining
dust, and snakes police the road. Don't say we didn't warn you.
Finally got a chance to look over the most recent news. I read something about PS2
becoming an open platform, but I need to double check that. Also need to take a good long
look at PlayOnline.com.
Otherwise not a lot else comes to mind, except that I really want some of those FFT
character playing cards. Although not enough to buy a Japanese copy of a game I already
have in English.
Onward.
| Mistake #1 |
| It's the 55th anniversary of D-Day? *scratches head* Meaning it was June
7th, 1945? That's kinda weird... especially since V-E day was April 25th, 1945. -Anson |
As someone else pointed out, 2000 - 1944 = 56 years. Like I said, I ain't real bright.
Have pity.
(But I do know it's June 6th, not 7th.)
| Japanese marketing rationale, take 2 |
| Chris, The idea that Japanese think Americans "too stupid"
for RPGs, or that there is or was some conspiracy to keep some games out of the USA (or
Europe more glaringly at present) is simply ridiculous. This is a company, with the
purpose of making money (no matter what the game designers or founders of the company
wanted, once a company reaches a certain size, they *have* to think about the bottom line
first in order to successfully perpetuate themselves). This leads to pretty simple
reasoning for the evolution of Japanese RPG localization strategies.
#1 They look at the number of the game console owned by the target populations.
#2 They look at the sales of other games in the particular genre within the target
population, as well as the *total* number of games within this genre sold.
#3 They look at differences between "successful" (i.e., selling enough copies
that similar sales would make the cost of localization of one of their games potentially
profitable), and "unsuccessful" games. Remembering that these appelations are
not the same when comparing numbers sold in the game designers own population, versus the
extra costs associated with moving the game to other markets.
#4 Determining the number of games that they believe they can put in the market without
creating a deluge of games that will sour the sales of each other, with this highly
different now versus then.
#5 Other minor (maybe major that I didn't cover above?) details that will factor in
potential sales.
Companies like Square see an increasing number of consoles in this target population
(even so, thee are still more consoles in the japanese market in a population half the
size of ours), increasing sales of the kind of games they make in this market, so slowly
expand their products here in order to make money. The reason they don't localize all
their games is most likely due to the fact that they see the potential loss of profit by
releasing too many games, and do not know our "saturation point" yet, and they
are not willing to risk losses by guessing at significantly higher values than have sold
prior. So they adopt what is *still* a cautious approach by continuously localizing more
and more games as they see them remain profitable, and if they come to a point where they
lose money on too many games, they will cut back the number localized to "profitable
levels" and probably remain there for awhile (especially if the number of consoles in
the market do not increase significantly).
There will likely always be more games there than here because it costs more money to
localize to the US or Europe due to shipping costs (and more shipping destinations than
the more densely populated Nippon), and the costs of translation added to the cost of the
game. Higher cost=higher risk for loss, and less likelyhood of localization by the
cautious Japanese company.
Abazagaroth |
Your analysis is pretty much dead on for any generic Japanese RPG company, but things
are a little more complicated for someone like Square. I'd start talking about things like
"monopolistic competition", but any further attempts to use technical economic
terms would likely blow up in my face, I'll try to keep this simple.
A Final Fantasy game, a main-series DQ, and maybe a few other titles are substantially
different from a plain vanilla RPG. Such games don't live or die by the percentage of
existing market share they can capture, they make market share, for themselves and for
other titles. In other words, there's something qualitatively different about an FF title
(or a Mario or Zelda or even a Metal Gear game) that can't be accurately measured by mere
numeric comparisons to how other games in that genre are doing. It'd be like trying to
figure out how much business Star Wars: Episode 2 will do based on looking at the box
office numbers for something like Pitch Black. (Good flick, by the way.)
That said, even from Square we'll probably never get all the games that are released
over there. And that's just as well, because I'd just as soon not play something like
Another Mind anyway.
| Favorite son |
| Actually, Sakaguchi recently said in an interview that FF9 is his
favorite FF title, replacing FF5. So...Er...There. I personally think that bodes well
for the game.
~Ian P. |
I'd say that definitely bodes well for FF9, although what Sakaguchi likes best may not
necessarily equate with what actually is best. FFV was good, and I actually played a bit
of it prior to VI so I know what it was like in the time context, but I still think each
of the three following games were better.
A lot of creators have skewed feelings about their games compared to what might be
considered objectively good. I'm not saying they're wrong, I'm just saying it's difficult
to understand something like the apparent lack of affection Stephen King has for The
Stand. These people think differently, you see, that's the whole point.
| Mistake #2 |
| Chris, Bravo on the Cryptonomicon references. In fact, I'm reading
that book right now, so the lizard/WWII/addiction references struck me immediately. I must
point out, however, that Shaftoe is addicted to morphine, not heroin.
-Matt Blackie |
Yep, screwed up there too. I'd say more, but I don't want to spoil the book for people
who haven't read it yet. I'll just point out that I read it more than a year ago, but
still keep coming back to read particularly choice bits like the Yamamoto chapter over and
over.
| I just had to fit a Mana letter in here
somewhere |
| Hey Chris, I got Seiken Densetsu: Legend of Mana when it was released
and. I played it, I beat it, I enjoyed it. However, I realized as I played this that
people are going to hate this game. I hear everyone saying how great Secret of Mana and
Seiken Densetsu 3 were, and saying how glad they are that the series is coming back over
here. The game is not a whole lot like Seiken Densetsu 2 and 3, and people are afraid of
change.
The game is probably going to remind people of SaGa Frontier, with the non-linearity
and all. Even the movement is a lot like SaGa Frontier. People are going to treat this
game like SaGa Frontier. I don't mind saying that I really liked SaGa Frontier, and, I'm
going to say this pre-emptively, I really liked Legend of Mana.
People are going to be whining that the music isn't done by Hiroki Kikuta, even though
the soundtrack is still one of the greatest with Yoko Shimomura doing the music. Seiken
Densetsu 1's music wasn't done by Kikuta either, it was Kenji Ito.
They're probably going to whine about the game being non-linear. They're not going to
like the character design, they're going to compare the hand-drawn artwork with that of
SaGa Frontier 2, even though they're done by different people in games that have
completely different settings. They'll come up with some BS like it's too
"cartoony." They are definitely not going to like the landmake system, because
it's probably too complicated.
I've watched over a decade of RPGs go by, and the way people reacted to them, and the
way Legend of Mana is, not a whole lot of people are going to like it. The game's not
going to sell very well, because Square didn't advertise it (That's the only reason
Vagrant Story sold well, because Square put it on TV and said "BUY THIS" so the
people complied, little did they know about the deep plot and satire against Christianity
that they couldn't possibly understand). Only a handful of the underground understand
games like Vagrant Story, not the mainstream.
Just wait until the letters start pouring in on how much people hate this game
(naturally they're going to be comparing it to Secret of Mana, conveniently forgetting how
different Seiken Densetsu 1 and 2 are). You can't compare two games that have infinite
differences. When I review a game, I review a game as the game, I don't compare it to
something else. That's how people should look at Legend of Mana not as "THE SEQUEL TO
SECRET OF MANA!!!!!" That's not what the game is like.
-Zane Merritt |
Er, gosh, you're not, like, an elitist or anything are you?
I picked up LoM on my way home today (and I'm somewhat ticked because they didn't have
the soundtracks in yet) but I'm not gonna look at it until I've finished Vagrant Story,
hopefully this weekend. In the meantime, I thought it was worth putting your hypothesis
down in HTML so we can compare it to the reviews we're sure to get in the future. You
could be right, but I seem to have a little more faith in the general gaming population
being able to handle something new and complex than you. We shall see.
| Slow down there, cowboy |
| Dear Agent dude: Despite what you might think, I was very good at
videogames as a kid. I could play better than most of my friends in fact. I was able to
just pick up a game and play it like a pro. Even though I couldn't run in SMB1, I beat the
game nurmerous times.
As for R-type, I beat R-type 3 the first time I ever played it. It was the first of the
series I ever played mind you.
-Antimatter |
Calm down, amigo. I didn't mean to insinuate that you were some kind of gaming retard -
when I published your letter I figured that it must have been because of something like
the explanation you gave AK. (That you were very young when you first got it, didn't spend
all that much time with it and didn't come back to it for years.) I just thought, as you
did, that your tale of a severe gaming snafu was interesting and well worth sharing with
my readers. That's all.
| <Insert Jar Jar joke here> |
| Just look at Episode One? WTF? Episode One made at least 300 million
dollars or more in the US alone (it may be a lot more but I don't feel like looking it
up). I wouldn't really call it a botched entry. The only reputation Lucas hurt was the
reputation among freaky scifi trekkies. OoOoOo big freakin deal. I'm sure he's just having
sobbing fits daily just because of it. Using Episode One as your example is just totally
ridiculous. You could have used something that was at least halfway viable as an example. If
Square really is ignoring the marketing for FF9 a lot more than the last 2 previous FF
games then why do YOU think they are if you are so smart? You've shot down just about
everyone else's theories. My only guess is that they are just getting cocky. FF7 and FF8
were huge successes and they think that don't have to waste as much money pushing the game
because they think people will come out in droves to buy it anyway.
Pendy (that zany, wacky DQ/DW freak)
Maintainer of the Dragon Quest Dragon Warrior News Network |
Considering the strength of the Star Wars brand and the hype surrounding the film's
release, Episode 1 probably would have made 100 million had it consisted entirely of Lucas
telling jokes in front of a brick wall for an hour and a half. I'm not saying it was a bad
film, but it wasn't a great one, and didn't live up to the expectations people had for the
series. That's the opinion of just about everyone I've talked to personally on the matter,
diehard fan and disinterested observer alike.
I don't think Square's ignoring the marketing for FF9, quite the opposite, so the
question is moot.
| Double Agent: tastes great, less filling |
| The term "Po'boy" came from when the sandwiches were provided
free to longshoremen during their strikes, "those po'boys." anyhow, thats what
the history channel said on their special "American Eats" --
"Itchy. Tasty." -- Resident Evil
Aaron Gover (aka VincentValintine) |
I only regret that the school year is over for many school students, because now they
can't point to this letter when asked by their teachers if they're getting educational
material off the web.
Closing Comments:
Good to be home. I suspect I'll be more animated once I've had a chance to soak up some
more news, including what the potential repercussions would be for the X-Box if Microsoft
really does get broken in two. But for now, let's hear whatever you want to talk about.
Later.
-Chris Jones, back in Austin, which has a cool statue of a great guitar player |
|
|
|
