Forums

Topic: Star Ocean 5 Coming to PS3/PS4

Posts 1 to 20 of 20

DownUrchin

Basically yesterday Star Ocean 5 was announced for Playstation 3 and 4. Whilst I'm very happy that they received the game, I'm a bit baffled (in comes the argument JRPGs don't sell on Xbox One. Well if that's the case how come JRPGs are often voted quite high on Xbox Suggestions.) Regardless I feel Xbox gamers are missing out. So shoot Square Enix a message at https://twitter.com/squareenix and mention you want Star Ocean 5 on Xbox One. We might see the day Star Ocean 5 is released on Xbox One.

Edited on by tylertreese

DownUrchin

tylertreese

I'm sure the publisher did the research to indicate that another SKU isn't the right decision for them. If Square Enix thought it made sense to bring it to Xbox then they would.

"Eat light, you stupid machine!" - Lex, Bioforge

Xbox Gamertag: tylertreese | Twitter:

Cloud3514

About the only JRPG I can think of that did well on Xbox is Final Fantasy XIII. While I'm not going to get into why FFXIII was a terrible, terrible game, it is the exception to the rule that JRPGs don't do well on Xbox.

Star Ocean: The Last Hope, while also not a very good game, sold very poorly to the point where it was ported to PS3 specifically because of the Xbox version's poor sales. Tales of Vesperia did the exact same thing. Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey, while never ported to PS3 due to Microsoft's involvement in the publishing, also sold rather poorly (a shame too because Lost Odyssey is absolutely brilliant).

So, the history is there. Without the Final Fantasy name, JRPGs always have trouble on Xbox. And they always have.

Besides, the last two Star Oceans SUCKED and I frankly don't care about Star Ocean 5.

Edited on by Cloud3514

Cloud3514

Xbox Gamertag: Xaris3514 | Twitter:

Tasuki

You do realize that creating a thread for this purpose is against the rules here.

RetiredPush Square Moderator and all around retro gamer.

My Backlog

Gamer83

SquareEnix is giving the Xbox consoles Tomb Raider, and PlayStation Star Ocean. Quite frankly, given the quality of both series I'd take Tomb Raider any time. Don't really know why Xbox owners would be bothered about this but this is why it's best to own multiple consoles. $$$$$ going all different ways by the console makers means inevitably there's going to be something on a different console that you want.

Gamer83

tylertreese

Gamer83 wrote:

SquareEnix is giving the Xbox consoles Tomb Raider, and PlayStation Star Ocean. Quite frankly, given the quality of both series I'd take Tomb Raider any time. Don't really know why Xbox owners would be bothered about this but this is why it's best to own multiple consoles. $$$$$ going all different ways by the console makers means inevitably there's going to be something on a different console that you want.

Pretty sure Tomb Raider and Star Ocean are exclusives for pretty different reasons. Really doubt Sony is funding this.

"Don't really know why Xbox owners would be bothered about this"
Because some people like JRPGs?

"Eat light, you stupid machine!" - Lex, Bioforge

Xbox Gamertag: tylertreese | Twitter:

Cloud3514

Tomb Raider: Xbox exclusive because Microsoft handed Square-Enix a giant bag of money.
Star Ocean: PlayStation exclusive because the last one sold like ass despite being Xbox exclusive.

One of these is a good reason to be exclusive. The other is an extremely underhanded reason to be exclusive. Though isn't Rise of the Tomb Raider only a timed exclusive?

Cloud3514

Xbox Gamertag: Xaris3514 | Twitter:

SuperKMx

Cloud3514 wrote:

One of these is a good reason to be exclusive. The other is an extremely underhanded reason to be exclusive. Though isn't Rise of the Tomb Raider only a timed exclusive?

Indeed it is.

Not sure entirely how underhanded it is though, if I'm honest. The console manufacturer wants to make money by selling consoles, so they pay a publisher to take away a reason to own a competing product.

At the end of it all, even though it is technically not particularly "fair" to gamers, they're a business. I don't see it as being any different to having a first-party studio. Whether you pay a big bundle of cash to an already established publisher for an exclusive, or you pay a big bundle of cash to set up a new first-party studio, you're still essentially handing over money so that a game can be exclusive to your platform.

If they lose a few people who are so outraged by a timed exclusive that they jump ship, only to pick up a million new gamers because of the timed exclusive, then I'm all for it. If someone's that eager to jump ship, then they're going to jump sooner or later anyway.

Ken Barnes,
Freelance Writer, Full-Time Idiot.

Xbox Gamertag: SuperKMx | Twitter:

tylertreese

SuperKMx wrote:

At the end of it all, even though it is technically not particularly "fair" to gamers, they're a business. I don't see it as being any different to having a first-party studio. Whether you pay a big bundle of cash to an already established publisher for an exclusive, or you pay a big bundle of cash to set up a new first-party studio, you're still essentially handing over money so that a game can be exclusive to your platform.

Yeah, I don't really get the huge uproar over this stuff but then again I came to grips with this being a business a long time ago. Lots of fans still think MS/Sony/Nintendo are their friends.

"Eat light, you stupid machine!" - Lex, Bioforge

Xbox Gamertag: tylertreese | Twitter:

Cloud3514

It's not so much a huge uproar as much as it is criticizing for the fact that Rise of the Tomb Raider isn't a Bayonetta 2 situation where money had to come from another source for it be even made. It's Microsoft handed Square-Enix a check and told them to delay the PS4 version. Criticizing it and calling it out for the underhanded tactic it is is perfectly fair.

That said, even when I say this and do think that we shouldn't excuse anti-consumer deals like it, I still most say that with a bit of tongue in cheek because it's such an old tactic that we've been seeing since at least the era of the PS2 and original Xbox, likely even earlier than that.

Edited on by Cloud3514

Cloud3514

Xbox Gamertag: Xaris3514 | Twitter:

tylertreese

Not sure how it is underhanded. They made a business deal, dude. You act like it was some sort of black market dealing.

"Eat light, you stupid machine!" - Lex, Bioforge

Xbox Gamertag: tylertreese | Twitter:

Gamer83

mindtwang wrote:

Gamer83 wrote:

SquareEnix is giving the Xbox consoles Tomb Raider, and PlayStation Star Ocean. Quite frankly, given the quality of both series I'd take Tomb Raider any time. Don't really know why Xbox owners would be bothered about this but this is why it's best to own multiple consoles. $$$$$ going all different ways by the console makers means inevitably there's going to be something on a different console that you want.

Pretty sure Tomb Raider and Star Ocean are exclusives for pretty different reasons. Really doubt Sony is funding this.

"Don't really know why Xbox owners would be bothered about this"
Because some people like JRPGs?

I realize people like JRPGs but Star Ocean? I'm sorry, this series has been in a decline for a while now. Tomb Raider is actually good and it sold best on PlayStation, I can understand the anger of the PS fanbase over that one. Missing out on a mediocre, niche JRPG is not a huge deal in comparison. Just my opinion, but if Xbox owners want to petition for JRPGs there have to be much, much better ones than Star Ocean. How about flooding Phil Spencer's twitter feed with requests to work with Mistwalker instead? At least that company makes games worth a damn. SE owns or has partnerships with some Western Studios that make good action games, when it comes to good JRPGs, SE stopped making those a long time ago.

Edited on by Gamer83

Gamer83

tylertreese

"SE stopped making those a long time ago."

lol okay

bravely default wasn't critically acclaimed or anything

"Eat light, you stupid machine!" - Lex, Bioforge

Xbox Gamertag: tylertreese | Twitter:

Cloud3514

Eh, the market has shown greatly that JRPGs struggle on Xbox. Gamer83, you say Microsoft should work with Mistwalker to get JRPGs on Xbox. They did. It was near disastrous for them. Both Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey were commercial failures, despite being Xbox exclusive and critical successes. It was to the point where ASH was left without a release outside of Japan. There's a reason Mistwalker went to Nintendo to publish The Last Story and that The Last Story was only localized in North America after Xseed asked Mistwalker for permission to do so.

mindtwang wrote:

Not sure how it is underhanded. They made a business deal, dude. You act like it was some sort of black market dealing.

So anti-consumer practices like these aren't underhanded? Here's the thing: Rise of the Tomb Raider was going to be a thing, regardless. The only reason Microsoft is getting timed exclusivity on it is because they handed Square-Enix a check in exchange for it. I never said it wasn't a business deal, but that doesn't mean it isn't anti-consumer. Remember, the consumers get absolutely nothing to gain out of this deal. Xbox owners were getting the game regardless of the deal, while this hurts PlayStation owners for no reason other than Microsoft wanted to buy another exclusive.

Also remember that Sony is just as guilty of this kind of underhanded anti-consumer policy, so I'm not picking on Microsoft here.

Edited on by Cloud3514

Cloud3514

Xbox Gamertag: Xaris3514 | Twitter:

tylertreese

"So anti-consumer practices like these aren't underhanded?"
No.

Edited on by tylertreese

"Eat light, you stupid machine!" - Lex, Bioforge

Xbox Gamertag: tylertreese | Twitter:

Cloud3514

The idea that Tomb Raider was a "failure" is so ridiculous that it really just shows that Square-Enix kinda has their heads right up their own ass. However, you do bring up a good point. The deal is a good idea... from a business standpoint.

Here's the thing: We as consumers have no reason to be happy about business deals that are beneficial towards multi-billion dollar corporations. As consumers, we gain nothing from such a deal. Xbox consumers may lose nothing as well, but PlayStation consumers are forced to wait for no reason other than Square-Enix and Microsoft saw mutual benefit in such a deal.

It isn't a deal for the consumers, it's a deal for the corporations.

Cloud3514

Xbox Gamertag: Xaris3514 | Twitter:

SuperKMx

Cloud3514 wrote:

It isn't a deal for the consumers, it's a deal for the corporations.

Indeed it is. Nobody's disputing that at all. But as you've said earlier, it's been going on since way before this generation. In fact, it's been going on since the days of the Commodore 64/Amstrad CPC/Spectrum and the Master System/NES. I remember a few titles I wasn't happy about not being able to play on the system I owned.

That isn't to excuse it, but I genuinely don't think anything needs to be excused. You say that the practice is anti-consumer, but you have to consider WHICH consumers are being affected. Is it anti-consumer to any of Microsoft's consumers? Hell no, it isn't. It's understood that consoles will have exclusives. Microsoft wants consumers to buy and use their console, so they secure exclusives as best they can. They don't care what PS4 owners think, and neither should they.

Square Enix however, will be trying to sell games to people on Xbox One and PS4 in the future. They SHOULD care what gamers on both systems think. When Microsoft came calling, they had the opportunity to turn them down and they didn't. Quite frankly, I don't believe that they had financial issues that required Microsoft's assistance. I think that they just decided to take a guaranteed sum rather than chancing their arm in a marketplace that seems to be less and less happy to hand over more than $5 for any game.

Ken Barnes,
Freelance Writer, Full-Time Idiot.

Xbox Gamertag: SuperKMx | Twitter:

SuperKMx

Utena-mobile wrote:

and as for Jrpgs in general, I do think there's a decent size of Xbone owners that will support Jrpgs.

Without a doubt. I'd support them, for sure!

Ken Barnes,
Freelance Writer, Full-Time Idiot.

Xbox Gamertag: SuperKMx | Twitter:

Cloud3514

Back to the topic of JRPGs, they generally sell quite poorly on Xbox. The only exception to this is Final Fantasy. But even when they do sell well on Xbox, they still do better on PlayStation.

According to VGChartz (I know, not the most reliable source, but I don't have access to the NPD data) and ignoring the Japanese numbers, FFXIII sold 2.1 million copies on Xbox 360. The PlayStation version? 2.8 million. Final Fantasy Type-0 HD sold four times better on PS4 than it did on X1. Other JRPGs are not so lucky. Keep in mind that last generation, there was about 3:2 Xbox to PlayStation split, while this generation has a 1:2 split.

Lost Odyssey: .89 million.
Blue Dragon: .9 million.
Eternal Sonata: .31 million on Xbox 360, .42 million on PS3, despite timed exclusivity.
Star Ocean: The Last Hope: .77 million on 360, .69 million on PS3, again despite timed exclusivity.
Tales of Vesperia: .71 million on 360, .44 million on PlayStation, despite timed exclusivity and a lack of PS3 release outside of Japan.

So the precedent is there. While I agree that there is a market or JRPGs on Xbox, the numbers show that their sales are usually either poor or mediocre. Hell, Eternal Sonata sold better on PS3, despite releasing a year earlier on 360.

What I don't get is why Square-Enix doesn't experiment with digital releases on Xbox One. Bandai-Namco has seen some success releasing obscure games like One Piece: Pirate Warriors outside of Japan in digital form, so I think Square-Enix could see some similar success, even if PlayStation versions still got physical releases.

Cloud3514

Xbox Gamertag: Xaris3514 | Twitter:

  • Page 1 of 1

This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.