Dragon Quest I, II, and III coming to PS4 and 3DS in August in Japan

Started by BasilZero, Aug 06, 2017, 10:10 AM

previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

BasilZero

They can't.  I'm 100% sure that Enix signed some deal with Nintendo that involves Dragon Quest and Nintendo.  Nintendo publishing the games was probably part of that deal.
They can, they just wont because they dont see the series as vital in the west as FF.


I highly doubt Enix signed any deal considering Enix merged with Squaresoft back in 2002/2003 and after that DQ8 was exclusive to PS2 for a long time. I think Squareenix sees Nintendo's portables as a potential sale magnet for the DQ series (but not for the FF series? mind boggling lol).

Anyways, I think after the success of DQXI in the east and the future release of DQXI in the west, I cant see DQ being exclusive to Nintendo anymore.

darkknightkryta

They can, they just wont because they dont see the series as vital in the west as FF.


I highly doubt Enix signed any deal considering Enix merged with Squaresoft back in 2002/2003 and after that DQ8 was exclusive to PS2 for a long time. I think Squareenix sees Nintendo's portables as a potential sale magnet for the DQ series (but not for the FF series? mind boggling lol).

Anyways, I think after the success of DQXI in the east and the future release of DQXI in the west, I cant see DQ being exclusive to Nintendo anymore.
I'm pretty sure they did.  Nintendo published the DS games in the west and had an iron grip on them.  Enix didn't make this commercial:

BasilZero

Aug 08, 2017, 02:30 AM Last Edit: Aug 08, 2017, 02:43 AM by BasilZero
I'm pretty sure they did.  Nintendo published the DS games in the west and had an iron grip on them.  Enix didn't make this commercial:

DQIX came out in 2009 - 6 years after "Enix" ceased to exist.

Squareenix only published the game in Japan alongside other games like Bravely series. They didnt want to publish it in the west for whatever reason.

Nintendo published it because SE wouldnt do it themselves. Not the first time Nintendo had to publish a game that a third party dev made. Plenty of other games made by third party devs who released the game on their own turf themselves were released WW published by Nintendo other than DQ - examples included are Ninja Gaiden 3 Razor's Edge (WiiU), Bravely Series (3DS), etc. The same in the opposite region too, like Trine 2, a western developer game, was released WW by the original publisher but released in Japan by Nintendo themselves who published it there.

If Nintendo did really have rights to the DQ series, then we wouldnt see Dragon Quest games on Playstation, iOS and Android.

DQ1, 2, and 3 are coming to PS4

DQ11 is coming to PS4

DQ1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,  7, 8 are on iOS and android. It wont be a matter of time before IX will come out and X too. I wouldnt doubt on XI coming either based upon the 3DS ver.

darkknightkryta

DQIX came out in 2009 - 6 years after "Enix" ceased to exist.

Squareenix only published the game in Japan alongside other games like Bravely series. They didnt want to publish it in the west for whatever reason.

Nintendo published it because SE wouldnt do it themselves. Not the first time Nintendo had to publish a game that a third party dev made. Plenty of other games made by third party devs who released the game on their own turf themselves were released WW published by Nintendo other than DQ - examples included are Ninja Gaiden 3 Razor's Edge (WiiU), Bravely Series (3DS), etc. The same in the opposite region too, like Trine 2, a western developer game, was released WW by the original publisher but released in Japan by Nintendo themselves who published it there.

If Nintendo did really have rights to the DQ series, then we wouldnt see Dragon Quest games on Playstation, iOS and Android.

DQ1, 2, and 3 are coming to PS4

DQ11 is coming to PS4

DQ1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,  7, 8 are on iOS and android. It wont be a matter of time before IX will come out and X too. I wouldnt doubt on XI coming either based upon the 3DS ver.
When I say Enix, I mean the enix half of the company and I'm assuming whatever deal they had ended around the time those iOS ports got made or other (read below).  I also doubt Square would not want to publish Dragon Quest here.  They most likely had a deal in place.  They may also still have a deal in place considering the Vita didn't get Dragon Quest 11 when it got both heroes and builders.  I'm assuming Nintendo's deal was for mainline titles and handheld exclusivity.  Phones probably don't fit that language since their deal is pretty old.  That's my guess anyways.

BasilZero

When I say Enix, I mean the enix half of the company and I'm assuming whatever deal they had ended around the time those iOS ports got made or other (read below).  I also doubt Square would not want to publish Dragon Quest here.  They most likely had a deal in place.  They may also still have a deal in place considering the Vita didn't get Dragon Quest 11 when it got both heroes and builders.  I'm assuming Nintendo's deal was for mainline titles and handheld exclusivity.  Phones probably don't fit that language since their deal is pretty old.  That's my guess anyways.
Thats because Vita means No life.

darkknightkryta

Thats because Vita means No life.
Not when it had 3 Dragon Quest titles that were brand new alongside the PS4.  I mean, the first game is one thing, but it got a sequel.  These titles were also announced a few years back.  It made no sense to not have a Vita version and ONLY have a 3DS version for handheld.

BasilZero

Aug 08, 2017, 11:34 PM Last Edit: Aug 08, 2017, 11:41 PM by BasilZero
Not when it had 3 Dragon Quest titles that were brand new alongside the PS4.  I mean, the first game is one thing, but it got a sequel.  These titles were also announced a few years back.  It made no sense to not have a Vita version and ONLY have a 3DS version for handheld.
As you said, those titles were announced few years ago when companies still had hope the Vita would go somewhere, but it flopped just like the WiiU. Other than the PS4, what other platform can they focus on that is actually worth making money on that isnt mobiles or PC? 3DS and Switch.


Switch is effectively the next Vita but without the downfalls that the Vita had like expensive memory cards and lack of first party support.

darkknightkryta

As you said, those titles were announced few years ago when companies still had hope the Vita would go somewhere, but it flopped just like the WiiU. Other than the PS4, what other platform can they focus on that is actually worth making money on that isnt mobiles or PC? 3DS and Switch.


Switch is effectively the next Vita but without the downfalls that the Vita had like expensive memory cards and lack of first party support.
But Dragon Quest titles sold well on the Vita and they announced Dragon Quwst XI around that time.  Vita has tons of first part support, those Assassin's Creed and Call of Duty games weren't free.  Sony ported Borderlands 2 and Resident Evil Revelations 2 themselves.

BasilZero

Aug 09, 2017, 12:33 AM Last Edit: Aug 09, 2017, 12:36 AM by BasilZero
But Dragon Quest titles sold well on the Vita and they announced Dragon Quwst XI around that time.  Vita has tons of first part support, those Assassin's Creed and Call of Duty games weren't free.  Sony ported Borderlands 2 and Resident Evil Revelations 2 themselves.
Years ago though.

When was the last AC game that came out on Vita? 2012

When was the last CoD game that came out on Vita? 2012

When was the last Sony first party title that came out on PSVita that wasnt a PSN legacy title (PSX, PSP, etc)?  2012

Even borderlands vita, a title that Sony had to publish because 2k didnt want to publish it was released in 2012.

5 years ago, the only lifeline that the Vita has now its just niche Japanese titles being announced but that support is dwindling thanks to the Switch, a platform that even if it fails like the WiiU is still expected to get first party support and more third party support considering it is Nintendo's main platform and sole future platform.

darkknightkryta

Years ago though.

When was the last AC game that came out on Vita? 2012

When was the last CoD game that came out on Vita? 2012

When was the last Sony first party title that came out on PSVita that wasnt a PSN legacy title (PSX, PSP, etc)?  2012

Even borderlands vita, a title that Sony had to publish because 2k didnt want to publish it was released in 2012.

5 years ago, the only lifeline that the Vita has now its just niche Japanese titles being announced but that support is dwindling thanks to the Switch, a platform that even if it fails like the WiiU is still expected to get first party support and more third party support considering it is Nintendo's main platform and sole future platform.
Resident Evil Revelations 2 wasn't 2012?  Sony gave the thing full support for about 3 years.  People didn't give a shame, so they cut support and just did a few things that they could.  You said Take 2 didn't want to port borderlands, Sony did it themselves.  That's called "support".  Sony gave what was financially feasible till about last year.  The game launched with Uncharted.  Gran Turisimo had other issues and honestly couldn't have had time to put into a portable game.  Especially considering how long it took them to get the PSP game made.  God of War was scraping the bottom of the barrel and is getting revitalized in a new mythology and needs the PS4 for that.  Killzone got a game made.  They're not going to make a side The Last of Us considering what the first game was, even The Last of Us 2 is iffy because of how well the first game ended.  What other big franchise does Sony have to put on there?  They ported Jak and Daxter collection and the Sly Collection.  They made Sly 4 a cross buy with the PS3 version.  It's not like Sony has a cheap 2D side scroller they can throw together and call it a "game" like Nintendo can (Well Little Big Planet has a VIta port).  Sony doesn't have a Pokemon to put on the thing.  Sony did what else they could and work with third party publishers to put what games they could put on it.  Sony Japan doesn't make that many games, they work with 3rd party devs to make games, which is what most of those japanese games are.  Not to mention Sony was actively listening to fan input for games to port there, which is where Borderlands and Resident Evil came from.  I mean, I wish Nintendo listens to their fans the way Sony does.  And when it's all said and done, the Vita has more games than the 3DS does, on top of that it has more higher rated games than the 3DS.  So yes, Sony supported it.  Oh and Gravity Rush, greatest game no one ever bought or played.

BasilZero

Aug 09, 2017, 02:53 AM Last Edit: Aug 09, 2017, 03:10 AM by BasilZero
Resident Evil Revelations 2 wasn't 2012?  Sony gave the thing full support for about 3 years.  People didn't give a shame, so they cut support and just did a few things that they could.  You said Take 2 didn't want to port borderlands, Sony did it themselves.  That's called "support".  Sony gave what was financially feasible till about last year.  The game launched with Uncharted.  Gran Turisimo had other issues and honestly couldn't have had time to put into a portable game.  Especially considering how long it took them to get the PSP game made.  God of War was scraping the bottom of the barrel and is getting revitalized in a new mythology and needs the PS4 for that.  Killzone got a game made.  They're not going to make a side The Last of Us considering what the first game was, even The Last of Us 2 is iffy because of how well the first game ended.  What other big franchise does Sony have to put on there?  They ported Jak and Daxter collection and the Sly Collection.  They made Sly 4 a cross buy with the PS3 version.  It's not like Sony has a cheap 2D side scroller they can throw together and call it a "game" like Nintendo can (Well Little Big Planet has a VIta port).  Sony doesn't have a Pokemon to put on the thing.  Sony did what else they could and work with third party publishers to put what games they could put on it.  Sony Japan doesn't make that many games, they work with 3rd party devs to make games, which is what most of those japanese games are.  Not to mention Sony was actively listening to fan input for games to port there, which is where Borderlands and Resident Evil came from.  I mean, I wish Nintendo listens to their fans the way Sony does.  And when it's all said and done, the Vita has more games than the 3DS does, on top of that it has more higher rated games than the 3DS.  So yes, Sony supported it.  Oh and Gravity Rush, greatest game no one ever bought or played.
Revelations 2 is one game out of hundreds that came out prior and after that didnt even hit the platform. You dont buy a system just for one game especially one that is practically on all platforms or will be.

Sony gave support for just 3 years but nothing more, stopping 1st party support for a system you create is one way to kill it off.

Of course Sony did it themselves, its the same reason why Nintendo publishes certain games when the original dev/pub doesnt want to publish it. Because the original dev wants incentive to allow those companies to release the game without having themselves do it cause they dont consider it worthy enough and think of it as a loss.

It doesnt matter if the company listens to fans, what comes down to the end is fans or lets say the proper terminology, one that the industry actually uses to determine if they should release a game on a platform:  consumers - want a platform that will have dedicated 1st party AND 3rd party support otherwise why would you buy a game system? To follow a cult following of "fans"? lol

The Vita flopped to the consumers because (amongst other reasons like memory card prices) it lost first party support after 3 years, and lost AAA support soon after that. It was left with niche titles, doesnt matter how their rated. People dont buy games because of ratings.

Its competition (being 3DS directly) completely destroyed it. There were 3DS games that was not on other platforms (i.e. Bravely Default, Kingdom Hearts 3D, Shin Megami Tensei IV, Etrian Odyssey, Dragon Quest) while Vita had piss poor versions of console ports that came out originally on PS3. Especially now, majority of Vita games can be played in a better version through the PS4 or PC - and the support for the Vita like I said is dwindling as devs from the east are focusing on the Switch since they consider that as the actual successor to how they been releasing games. A platform that is more powerful than previous handhelds, has a strong first party support and is portable is far more appetizing than a system that actually only sells well in one region and gets next to nothing in terms of first party support.

Why would I buy a Vita to play Gravity Rush when I can just buy the PS4 version?

The WiiU flopped to the consumers because it had no third party support and the third party support it had was like Vita's AAA third party support. shaming versions of its competitor platforms. Mass Effect 3 was released with some DLC not even available for an example AND Mass Effect Trilogy was released on competitor platforms exactly 1 month after ME3 came out on WiiU.

Why would I buy third party games on the WiiU if there are other platforms that give me better options and actually include content that is related to the game?

You can sugarcoat it as many times as you want. Vita and WiiU are two of the worst flops in each company's line of platforms. Even the N64/GCN had better third party support than the WiiU AND it sold more.  The Vita is nothing compared to the PSP which had a decent amount of first party support and actual decent AAA support, not as good as home consoles, but it was way better than the Vita. Vita couldnt even get a FF game yet its competitor got a FF clone in the form of Bravely Default and I guess that awful music FF game.

darkknightkryta

Aug 09, 2017, 03:17 PM Last Edit: Aug 09, 2017, 03:18 PM by darkknightkryta
Revelations 2 is one game out of hundreds that came out prior and after that didnt even hit the platform. You dont buy a system just for one game especially one that is practically on all platforms or will be.

Sony gave support for just 3 years but nothing more, stopping 1st party support for a system you create is one way to kill it off.

Of course Sony did it themselves, its the same reason why Nintendo publishes certain games when the original dev/pub doesnt want to publish it. Because the original dev wants incentive to allow those companies to release the game without having themselves do it cause they dont consider it worthy enough and think of it as a loss.

It doesnt matter if the company listens to fans, what comes down to the end is fans or lets say the proper terminology, one that the industry actually uses to determine if they should release a game on a platform:  consumers - want a platform that will have dedicated 1st party AND 3rd party support otherwise why would you buy a game system? To follow a cult following of "fans"? lol

The Vita flopped to the consumers because (amongst other reasons like memory card prices) it lost first party support after 3 years, and lost AAA support soon after that. It was left with niche titles, doesnt matter how their rated. People dont buy games because of ratings.

Its competition (being 3DS directly) completely destroyed it. There were 3DS games that was not on other platforms (i.e. Bravely Default, Kingdom Hearts 3D, Shin Megami Tensei IV, Etrian Odyssey, Dragon Quest) while Vita had piss poor versions of console ports that came out originally on PS3. Especially now, majority of Vita games can be played in a better version through the PS4 or PC - and the support for the Vita like I said is dwindling as devs from the east are focusing on the Switch since they consider that as the actual successor to how they been releasing games. A platform that is more powerful than previous handhelds, has a strong first party support and is portable is far more appetizing than a system that actually only sells well in one region and gets next to nothing in terms of first party support.

Why would I buy a Vita to play Gravity Rush when I can just buy the PS4 version?

The WiiU flopped to the consumers because it had no third party support and the third party support it had was like Vita's AAA third party support. shaming versions of its competitor platforms. Mass Effect 3 was released with some DLC not even available for an example AND Mass Effect Trilogy was released on competitor platforms exactly 1 month after ME3 came out on WiiU.

Why would I buy third party games on the WiiU if there are other platforms that give me better options and actually include content that is related to the game?

You can sugarcoat it as many times as you want. Vita and WiiU are two of the worst flops in each company's line of platforms. Even the N64/GCN had better third party support than the WiiU AND it sold more.  The Vita is nothing compared to the PSP which had a decent amount of first party support and actual decent AAA support, not as good as home consoles, but it was way better than the Vita. Vita couldnt even get a FF game yet its competitor got a FF clone in the form of Bravely Default and I guess that awful music FF game.
So let's get this right.  After 3 years of Sony supporting the Vita.  Keyword here: "support".  They rightfully killed it off.  In those 3 years no one bought a VIta because there wasn't "support".  Notice the contradiction?  Sony supported the console, but it didn't sell because Sony didn't support it, which one is it?  You can't say they supported the thing for 3 years, losing god knows how much money, then say they didn't actually do it.  The Vita has every Final Fantasy game up until 10-2.  Why would you want a pretty ugly clone instead?  Hell let's ignore World of Final Fantasy is on the thing and has a far higher production value than anything Square released on the 3DS.  Gravity Rush was ported to the PS4 YEARS after the game originally released.  Yes, buying a Vita for Gravity Rush was the only way.  Wii U has more third party support in its first month than the Switch has for its first year.  What are you going on about?  Also back on point, you're rambling about irrelevant things.  Vita is a failure, sure, so's the Wii U, what does that have to do with anything?  The reason I brought up the 3DS is because that was "supported", yet when you look at the numbers the Vita has more games, and has more higher rated titles.  So Vita has no support, then the 3DS has no support?  Our argument is over Sony's support for the Vita.  Which I explained to you it did, you agree it did, but because Sony ended support after 3 years, which is also wrong since they still released what they could within budget up until last year, it doesn't.  If you can't see the contradiction I don't know what to tell you.  The reason I bring up Dragon Quest, is because Dragon Quest 11 was announced a little after Dragon Quest Heroes which was more or less designed for the Vita, and sold well on the VIta.  While I'm not saying the 3DS version of Dragon Quest doesn't  make financial sense, Vita not getting Dragon Quest 11 makes no sense, since at announcement the Vita was getting a lot of Dragon Quest support, and the titles sold well on it.  Hell even the 3DS title is suspicious considering Horii was going on and on for a while on how he wanted the next Dragon Quest to have the console quality, just for resources to be wasted on the ugly 3DS version.  Hell Dragon Quest XI PS4 version was developed externally while the 3DS version was developed internally.  Why waste the resources?  PS4/Switch version makes the most sense to have been developed internally, unless Nintendo has something on Dragon Quest and a 3DS version needed to be made?

BasilZero

So let's get this right.  After 3 years of Sony supporting the Vita.  Keyword here: "support".  They rightfully killed it off.  In those 3 years no one bought a VIta because there wasn't "support".  Notice the contradiction?  Sony supported the console, but it didn't sell because Sony didn't support it, which one is it?  You can't say they supported the thing for 3 years, losing god knows how much money, then say they didn't actually do it.  The Vita has every Final Fantasy game up until 10-2.  Why would you want a pretty ugly clone instead?  Hell let's ignore World of Final Fantasy is on the thing and has a far higher production value than anything Square released on the 3DS.  Gravity Rush was ported to the PS4 YEARS after the game originally released.  Yes, buying a Vita for Gravity Rush was the only way.  Wii U has more third party support in its first month than the Switch has for its first year.  What are you going on about?  Also back on point, you're rambling about irrelevant things.  Vita is a failure, sure, so's the Wii U, what does that have to do with anything?  The reason I brought up the 3DS is because that was "supported", yet when you look at the numbers the Vita has more games, and has more higher rated titles.  So Vita has no support, then the 3DS has no support?  Our argument is over Sony's support for the Vita.  Which I explained to you it did, you agree it did, but because Sony ended support after 3 years, which is also wrong since they still released what they could within budget up until last year, it doesn't.  If you can't see the contradiction I don't know what to tell you.  The reason I bring up Dragon Quest, is because Dragon Quest 11 was announced a little after Dragon Quest Heroes which was more or less designed for the Vita, and sold well on the VIta.  While I'm not saying the 3DS version of Dragon Quest doesn't  make financial sense, Vita not getting Dragon Quest 11 makes no sense, since at announcement the Vita was getting a lot of Dragon Quest support, and the titles sold well on it.  Hell even the 3DS title is suspicious considering Horii was going on and on for a while on how he wanted the next Dragon Quest to have the console quality, just for resources to be wasted on the ugly 3DS version.  Hell Dragon Quest XI PS4 version was developed externally while the 3DS version was developed internally.  Why waste the resources?  PS4/Switch version makes the most sense to have been developed internally, unless Nintendo has something on Dragon Quest and a 3DS version needed to be made?
My responses below may look a bit disjointed - thats because I was working overtime and came back - tired and also because I'm responding to different parts of the post lol

Anyways...

Technically speaking if you look at the list of software of this so called support, they bulk of the releases were in 2012 which was the year the Vita was available WW. After that it fell apart, less and less first party titles were made. More moneyhats to get third party titles did come however they were inferior ports due to time constraints and of course because the specs on the platform. You got shaming versions of games like Borderlands 2 and inferior ports of games like God of War Collection, Jak and Daxter, etc. These titles which excelled more on the home consoles and PC.

Nobody in their right mind would buy these games on the Vita unless you are a masochist who wants to play games  that peform worse on a smaller screen.

The last original IP title that was released on the Vita from Sony's development group was Freedom Wars and that was 3 years ago.

If you want to sell your system, you're gonna have to put in the effort to release original titles , not lazy ports, not poorly optimized moneyhatted ports.

You cant use legacy titles as a argument for the Vita either. Saying it has every single FF game playable from 1 - X-2. In the most shittiest of ways, not only did it perform worse in the actual game's performance but it was sold separately. Like why would you buy FFX and FFX-2 separately for when they were first released when you can get a better version of the game on the PS3, hell even the PS4 and PC got the games bundled together later on as well.

World of Final Fantasy, I give you that I guess but even that, why would I bother buying a inferior version of a game when I can buy a superior version of it on the PS4?

There's no incentive to buy these multiplat titles on the Vita when there are other platforms that have the games, which have better support, better performance and are also better pricing.

Bravely Default isnt even a "ugly" clone and its not necessarily a bad title either (sure its story kinda falls a bit halfway through but all other aspects were amazing), its an original title that was released on 3DS and still remains to that day. Thats 4 years and its still exclusive. According to VGChartz (I know its sad this is the only available closest source to numbers) has WoFF for Vita at 0.33 mil and the PS4 respectively 0.44 - lets give it a little boost due to digital, I doubt it sold more than a mil, if anything lower million overall digital + physcial. Thats both PS4 and PSV titles combined.

Bravely second - a far less popular title than the first title sold 0.54 mil physical which is more than either the PS4 or PSV versions of WoFF alone. The first game sold 1.39 mil physical copies. This isnt counting digital sales cause who knows how much that is.

Ratings dont mean shame, userbase means everything for a Developer/publisher. If the bravely series were to debut on the Vita, it wouldnt sell even half of what it sold on the 3DS.

I mean no offense to WoFF, I'm sure its a great game and all and way better than that garbage music FF game on 3DS, but again, the Vita ver had a lot against it - especially being released a month before FFXV didnt help it and made people forget the title more.

Also "higher production" doesnt necessarily equals sales which devs/pubs actually care for. You mention WoFF has high production values, well I wouldnt be surprised ,its actually a PS4 title that was ported over to the PSV compare to that titles like Kingdom Hearts 3D (which btw is the 2nd best portable KH game imo and sold 1.58 mil - which is twice as WoFF, a title that consists of many FF characters), Bravely Default, Dragon Quest VII/VIII, etc. You calling these games low production value is funny especially considering SE made more money on the 3DS games than the Vita version of WoFF.

Yes, I know Gravity Rush was the only way to buy a Vita during that time, but not anymore. Vita's value lowers as time goes by. More than half of its library is already playable on other platforms such as PS3, PS4, 3DS, and PC. Why would you invest on a platform that has games that perform worse, lackluster first party support after its first year, horrible memory card prices? Its the reason why I chose not to buy a PSV. Just like I chose not to buy a Xbox One, why would I buy a Xbox One when I can play all the games I want on PS4 or PC?

WiiU has more third party support in its first month than the switch? Good one. The Switch has more first party support in its first week than the Vita in the last 3 years. l0l.

Its not irrelevant. Both WiiU and Vita had similar issues. Both had one key support line lacking, both were horrible for those who want to go digital but couldnt because of storage issues, both suffered from pisspoor versions of ports of games. It is relevant to compare the two platforms.

Vita might have more games, doesnt necessarily mean its a good thing. You can have a ton of shame, but its still gonna be shame no matter how pretty you make it to be (give it good ratings).

Vita doesnt have the same support line as the 3DS. The 3DS trashed it left and right, the only year the Vita was comparable in its releases was in 2012 and maybe 2013 I guess but afterwards, it was a slaughterfest as sad as that might seem.

You dont end support for a platform YOU made, The WiiU sold less than the Vita but the creator kept on releasing games up to the point of when production ended. Vita was still being sold and the support dried up.

Dragon Quest Heroes was not designed for the Vita, who the hell told you that lmao. The first game didnt even come out on the PSV, it was PS3/PS4/PC.

The 2nd one was announced for Vita but there's no plans for a Western release, just to show you how much faith the Japanese devs have for the Vita.

Vita not getting DQ11 does make sense, SE doesnt see Vita as a platform that will sell the title - this is possibly because how bad WoFF performed and how bad the expectations were for DQH2 even if it was low for a Japan exclusive title.

You mention that Horii (whoever the hell that is) said he wants a console quality DQ title, and well he did get it, its on the PS4. How do you know the 3DS ver is ugly, did you play it? Can I have your time machine so I can try it out too? lol.

Also where are you getting your information on DQXI being externally developed for the PS4 and internally developed for the 3DS? If anything, you got your information mixed up unless you can post a source for it.

Also like WoFF, DQ11 is exactly like it. A home console title that also gets a portable version. Except in this case, the DQ team seem to be more dedicated than the FF team that developed WoFF.

DQ11 is a PS4 platform title that SE decided to port to the 3DS but in a different fashion. Even though its a multiplat title, its actually different and gives incentive to people to buy it alongside the better PS4 version.

Infact, I can provide a source that actually reports this.

Dragon Quest XI was originally PS4-only, 3DS version was added later on - Nintendo Everything

^ It even mentions the common view on portable versions of games as "inferior versions" and that led to the reason why the 3DS version is developed the way it is now rather than being a exact port of the PS4 version.

And oh here's a reason why they decided to release it on the 3DS (and very likely ignored the Vita)

"Originally, development started as only a PlayStation 4 title. 3DS production began later due to its increase in userbase and Square Enix wanting more fans to experience the game."


You see that? USERBASE, not fans. SE released the game on 3DS because the userbase is there.

Why waste resources on the 3DS version? You mean why waste resources to release it on a platform like the vita where the userbase wont be there to support the title......




Thats the reason why they chose to release/develop the game for the 3DS and not the Vita.


PS4/3DS makes the most sense because they can maximize sales to the best on two of the biggest platforms right now in the market.



From the media crate for DQXI's release in Japan

Software Sales (followed by lifetime sales)
  • [3DS] Dragon Quest XI: Echoes of an Elusive Age (Square Enix, 07/29/17) - 1,148,888 (New)
  • [PS4] Dragon Quest XI: Echoes of an Elusive Age (Square Enix, 07/29/17) - 950,315 (New)


Source: Media Create Sales: 7/24/17 - 7/30/17 - Gematsu


Thats the reason why they released/developed the 3DS version because they knew that it would actually sell on it. Vita ver wouldnt even sell half.



zzzzzzzzzzzz - not really in the mood to post this but its w/e

ethomaz

Aug 10, 2017, 05:18 AM Last Edit: Aug 10, 2017, 05:26 AM by ethomaz
Seems like DQI is free if you get the true ending in DQXI in Japan.

About the DQXI on Vita discussion I can say only that the 3DS version was made to Japan only where 3DS matters a lot... só SE was smart and it won't probably be localized to west.

PS4 (Japan/West) and 3DS (Japan) makes perfect sense with Switch (Japan/West) port late for double/triple dipping.

Vita version should fail hard... so SE didn't even bother.

BasilZero

Seems like DQI is free if you get the true ending in DQXI in Japan.

About the DQXI on Vita discussion I can say only that the 3DS version was made to Japan only where 3DS matters a lot... só SE was smart and it won't probably be localized to west.

PS4 (Japan/West) and 3DS (Japan) makes perfect sense with Switch (Japan/West) port late for double/triple dipping.

Vita version should fail hard... so SE didn't even bother.
I wonder how the Switch version will be like - if its like the 3DS version except with better visuals, Ill get that than the 3DS ver.

As for myself, I'm planning to buy the PS4 ver.

Go Up