Dragon Quest IX is coming out on Nintendo DS

[Planet]

You know, they're making Crisis Core: FF VII for PSP.

LOL yes, i am not sure, whas this announced before or after Free Running (which is due soon)? Meanwhile, between the announcemend of Crisis Core and the first screenshots, they announced and released quite some DS games. Yet still there is no real information what Crisis Core is about, not even a gameplay video, let alone a date. From the looks of it, the development team can hardly be larger than 2-2 trainees working half-day.

@london-boy: they undersupported (if zero counts as "under") the PSP from day one. Back then, it wasn't so clear that the DS will dominate the market the way it does today.

OK, not to be too harsh: later in PSP life, they ported a game or two to it.

 

[London Geezer]

LOL yes, i am not sure, whas this announced before or after Free Running (which is due soon)? Meanwhile, between the announcemend of Crisis Core and the first screenshots, they announced and released quite some DS games. Yet still there is no real information what Crisis Core is about, not even a gameplay video, let alone a date. From the looks of it, the development team can hardly be larger than 2-2 trainees working half-day.

@london-boy: they undersupported (if zero counts as "under") the PSP from day one. Back then, it wasn't so clear that the DS will dominate the market the way it does today.

OK, not to be too harsh: later in PSP life, they ported a game or two to it.

The point was that it's nothing to do with "hatred". I never said that it's not true that they haven't supported PSP much.

They support the biggest userbase first. The rest is all gravy, but the point is that it's nothing personal, it's just a matter of targeting the platforms with the largest userbases and make one amazing title every so often for that one platform.

 

[nonamer]

The problem is that they seem to be cashing in, not making a good game. This is a huge downgrade from DQ8 and I'm not sure if fans will appreciated this.

 

[Bobbler]

The problem is that they seem to be cashing in, not making a good game. This is a huge downgrade from DQ8 and I'm not sure if fans will appreciated this.

I'd be surprised if this didn't sell 4million in JP alone -- I'd be surprised if it wasn't the best selling DQ. Which, if you ask me, is kind of sad. Even shit sells well on the DS in Japan (not to say DQ9 will be shit, even though I'm rather disappointed with their decision to go with what is probably the worst choice of platform they could for this game). I don't really understand Japan's sales at the moment, either. I love my DS as much as I do my other gaming machines, but I've not seen anything on DS that says to me "this system should sell faster than any other gaming machine ever" (and I don't think PSP should either for that matter, but it's sales are more in line with what I think both machines deserve).

The more I think about it, the more I realize most of what I feel is wrong with the way the industry is going relates to Nintendo's platforms -- as much as I love Nintendo (sort of feels weird to be annoyed at them, actually!), I think they are sort of ruining my favorite hobby, not directly, but by their success and publishers slowly supporting them more and more (obvious a lot of people love it, but this trend is starting to come at the cost of the gaming I love -- DQ9 has been marginalized, what next?). My fears are a little bit premature, I admit, but I'm still a little bit worried that in 2-3 years I might be having to find a new hobby, or at least find something else to fill more of my time (which is something I find scary -- I never wanted to give up gaming!).

I sound like a complete Nintendo hater, I know. But, I feel like they have gone for the completely wrong things as far as giving me the experiences I want in games and their massive success makes me scared that I'm not really going to get the amount of games that matched my tastes that I previously was for the last 10 years or so.

I imagine after I've calmed down, I won't care anymore and I'll play my games and be happy, but at the moment I'm frustrated.

 

[fearsomepirate]

This is all slightly hilarious. Why? Because PC gamers said the exact same thing when their favorite developers migrated to PS2 and Xbox. "This sucks. My favorite hobby is being ruined, because everything's moving to these RAM-starved consoles with their quickly-obsolete graphics hardware, aliasing, and low resolutions."

Now the console guys are saying the same thing...power somehow didn't matter when various devs focused on PS2 instead of PC (the difference was especially painful by the time DQ8 and FF12 came out), but now it is !!!OF UTMOST IMPORTANCE!!! when their favorite devs are focusing on low-powered Nintendo hardware.

The fact is, great developers will make great games.

 

[Bobbler]

This is all slightly hilarious. Why? Because PC gamers said the exact same thing when their favorite developers migrated to PS2 and Xbox. "This sucks. My favorite hobby is being ruined, because everything's moving to these RAM-starved consoles with their quickly-obsolete graphics hardware, aliasing, and low resolutions."

Now the console guys are saying the same thing...power somehow didn't matter when various devs focused on PS2 instead of PC (the difference was especially painful by the time DQ8 and FF12 came out), but now it is !!!OF UTMOST IMPORTANCE!!! when their favorite devs are focusing on low-powered Nintendo hardware.

The fact is, great developers will make great games.

It isn't even the fact that the hardware is anemic. It's the whole "control method is now the most important part -- forget everything else!" concept that doesn't jive with me. Control should be transparent, not the focus -- sure there are contrived cases where the remote or touch screen works well, but it's turned into a novelty that can quite easily take focus away from other things (we'll see what happens with Wii in this regard -- launch games certainly aren't helping my fears, but they are launch games, so it's not really fair to judge based on that). I already said my fears are possibly a bit premature, so I'm willing to happily recant and enjoy gaming as long as my gaming experience is still giving me what I want.

DQ8 to DQ9 is essentially backwards progression though -- we're going from PS2 hardware to N64 -- Soundtrack is guaranteed to be poorer quality, voice is possibly not going to happen (which is arguable in its value), game variety/length/depth can quite easily suffer from being on a flash cart, graphics will surely suffer (but as I've stated previously, it was never the focus of the game -- but it still hurts to see what is possible in something like Blue Dragon and then think instead we'll get N64 quality on a tiny screen instead). They're also switching to a more DS platform friendly design (which means they're essentially going to stray away from what many love about DQ games)... how is this exciting to see a franchise "ruined"? (with it's inevitably success, I don't see them going back to the old model with DQ10 or beyond). They should have made this as a spinoff, not a main series DQ.

What PC devs switched from PC to PS2? I know a couple started making Xbox ports and if I still cared about PC gaming I'd probably still be annoyed (I know a few friends who still are). PC gaming started dying off long before Xbox came out though, if you ask me. I know there's been racket about Bioware's output recently and some have blamed Xbox, for example.

Also, what does that matter that a similar situation happened? It doesn't invalidate that some portion of those that complain probably still feel that way. A similar situation happened with an unknown outcome all of a sudden means my concern is comical in nature? Who says it wasn't ruined for those people since Xbox/PS2 started stealing devs? It'd only be "hilarious" if all those that were saying that actually recanted and realized there was no issue, if many of those still feel that way though, then it was fairly legitimate concern. PC devs switching may not have been the end of the world for you, but it probably was/is for some.

 

[Angelcurio]

From a business point of view, it makes a lot of sense for SE to put the title on the DS. That would mean less graphical word + maximum profit.

Now for the gamers, that was a very bad decission. We all know that the franchise is really big, but i am one of the people that thinks that iterations of main franchises on a portable console should be limited to spin offs, unless its a new ip. Why do you ask? well, having the proper Dragon Quest game released on a portable equals a AAA game with the least amount of production values possible due to limitations of hardware, that is lack of voice acting, ochestrated music, cut scenes, etc.

I personally would have prefered that game to have been released on a proper console (no matter which one) so the could exploit that machine and add some great production values. I also dislike the decission since they decided to put that franchise on a handheld just when the franchise was starting to appeal the international market.

 

[Bobbler]

From a business point of view, it makes a lot of sense for SE to put the title on the DS. That would mean less graphical word + maximum profit.

I definitely agree it was probably one of the smartest things SE could have done from a financial standpoint -- I've no doubt that DQ9 will be the best selling DQ ever made (and probably the cheapest to make in the last 8 years). SE will be swimming in money with it. I'd have done the same thing if I was in charge of the company.

Still sucks. I'll probably still buy it (I'll probably not be so annoyed by the time it comes out), but I'd have been happier if this was a spinoff and I could still expect a DQ9 for a home console. It's disappointing knowing DQ9 could inevitably have been more than it was and is being artificially limited because of the recent SE cash grab mentality.

There was once a time when S/E could, honestly, do no wrong -- every single game they made from SNES through the end of PS1 was absolutely top tier (even their junk side franchises were enjoyable -- they've more or less completely abandoned development on side projects now days).

 

[fearsomepirate]

It isn't even the fact that the hardware is anemic. It's the whole "control method is now the most important part -- forget everything else!" concept

So what was the most important part about the PS2 compared to the PC? The graphics weren't good and the online was pretty lame. The whole "storage medium is the most important part--forget everything else!" approach sure is worse than thinking about controls (WiFi is nice, too--4 players each with their own screens without playing preteens online? Count me in!).

DQ8 to DQ9 is essentially backwards progression though -- we're going from PS2 hardware to N64

Playing anything on PS2 is essentially backward progression if you've ever played a game on, well, just about anything that's out right now. Yet people still buy, play, and enjoy games on that tired, dated, aged hardware! And playing DQ8 was a backward progression already from most PS2 games. When Sonic the Hedgehog and Mario went backward onto DS with true, proper iterations of their franchises (whatever that means), most people were pretty pleased with the results. When Final Fantasy Tactics went backward from PS1 to GBA, the result was neither bad nor unpopular. Castlevania's had 5 proper iterations on the handhelds, which despite lacking the cinematics of the latest PS2 games in the series, are hardly disappointing experiences.

game variety/length/depth can quite easily suffer from being on a flash cart

Once you're up to 64 MB or so, gameplay isn't really hindered by media size. The multimedia aspects are what are affected.

how is this exciting to see a franchise "ruined"?

I dunno, after they ruined Final Fantasy with all those stupid FMV cutscenes, not too many people seemed to mind. They change up the gameplay formula in Final Fantasy all the time, and most people seem to like it. They keep releasing games on the broken and dated PS2, and no one's complaining. And I sure didn't think a touchscreen ruined Advance Wars...or Final Fantasy 3. I'm sure after SE is done with DQ9, using thumbsticks to fiddle through spell menus will feel positively archaic.

It'd only be "hilarious" if all those that were saying that actually recanted

The console boys pointed to the gamepad as infinitely superior to K&M due to its versatility and said "The graphics may be worse, but the gameplay is overall better." But now that the graphics are worse and the gameplay possibly improved, it's suddenly all about the graphics. That is what I call a recant. Graphics don't matter unless my console has better graphics than yours, then they're all that matter. It doesn't matter how fun the game is...we look at pretty cutscenes for next-gen JRPGs and weep.

Hey, some of us wept when we saw the pretty bump-mapping in Xbox games and realized we wouldn't see it on PS2. Then we realized that bump-mapping didn't make Bloodwake fun. But yeah, if the main reason you play games is to watch cutscenes, then this is a horrible move. Otherwise, it may turn out to be a fantastic game.

For many people, this is great news. Because rather than being forced to buy an overpriced, rare, unproven (as in durability) PS3 to play the next DQ game, or have a rehashed experience on the PS2 (how much more can be done with that machine, really?) we can play it on our ever-popular DS's.

 

[Planet]

The point was that it's nothing to do with "hatred".

Being a little mad influenced my choice of words. It's not like i think they flood the forums with "PSP SUXX0RZ" postings. I was thinking more of a busines kind of hatred, as in: "We judge this platform will never succeed and we will support it as little as possible".

They support the biggest userbase first. The rest is all gravy, but the point is that it's nothing personal, it's just a matter of targeting the platforms with the largest userbases and make one amazing title every so often for that one platform.

So on the day the DS arrived on the market, while the PSP was to come out a few days later, it sold its first device, while the PSP obviously sold none. And that was it, DS has 100% market share, let's ditch PSP. Correct?

There was a time when it looked like the DS and PSP could hold a somewhat even share of the handheld market (of course only when ignoring GBA here). And in the US in the first year the PSP sold better than the DS, getting close to overtake despite being 4 months and a million devices later at start. Yet still some companies like Squenix decided to virtually not supporting the PSP at all. The matter is not as simple as biggest userbase.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Maybe that is because Japan is the most important for SE. And the DS always sold alot more than the psp in Japan so why dev for psp if you can earn the most on DS? I dont hear anyone complain how SE and alot of other companies never really gave Gamecube a chance.

I dont really see the problem. Gfx wont be great but DQ never had great gfx. Im not worried about the lenght either. DScards can be up to 128mb so you can easily have a game 40 - 50 hours long. FF3 and contact last for more than 20 hours and those are 64mb games. THough i am worried about the small screen. I dont mind it in contact and ff3 but playing on a big screen with a controller is alot more comfortable.

 

[fearsomepirate]

And cheer up, it doesn't mean the series is permanently on the DS. DQX could very well be on PS3 or Wii. But it looks like they're planning to release DQIX relatively soon, i.e. too soon to predict what the install bases of those two systems will be in ~2 years.

Zelda's also had several major installments on handhelds, and it didn't disappear from home consoles, either.

 

[Shark Sandwich]

Wow this is some thread going on here. I'm trying to keep track of all the cliched arguments in progress, but I'm losing track. So far I see:

- PSP vs. DS
- consoles vs. PC
- graphics matter vs. graphics don't matter
- control pad vs. keyboard/mouse
- consoles vs. handheld
- oldschool FF vs. newschool FF

Am I missing any? Why don't we throw in a Mario vs. Sonic argument so we can add even more inflammatory ***boy bullshit to this thread.

 

[Rolf N]

I think the original Super Mario Bros and many of its continuations are rooted firmly in the mastering-the-rules group of games, while Sonic The Hedgehog leans heavily towards the "exciting experience".

While both have their merits Nintendo lives a healthy life while Sega does not*. That ought to tell you something!

*Sega is busy with the destruction of itself and the games market around it. They even inserted agents into other companies to accelerate the process. And from the charred pile of poo shall blossom a single rose to mark a new beginning.

 

[Droid]

So what was the most important part about the PS2 compared to the PC? The graphics weren't good and the online was pretty lame. The whole "storage medium is the most important part--forget everything else!" approach sure is worse than thinking about controls (WiFi is nice, too--4 players each with their own screens without playing preteens online? Count me in!).

The DVD drive was a selling point of the PS2?

I don't know, I always felt the selling point of the PS2 was:

-Graphics
(at the time it came out, it was pretty good, only highend video cards could match it, which most PC games don't take advantage of due to low install base, the fact that the PS2 is a closed platform also helped performance)

-Games
(it's the next version of the PS1, basically more of the same and some. Which in this case is not all that bad.)

I to some extend shares bobbler's view. It seems the industry at the moment is fascinated with new input devices which I for one don't care much for, due to the type of games I like - RPGs mostly. Technologically graphics are more important to me.
Sometimes it is actually gets annoying when developer use the new inputs just for the sake of it. Eg. Animal Crossing: Wild World on the DS. The use of the stylus is completely unnecessary, but due to the way the interface is designed, it's the quickest way to sell stuff to Nook. Result : I have to keep taking out and put back the stupid stylus. RPG since the SNES days have a perfectly effective way of selling stuff from the player inventory, what is wrong with using the existing perfectly working system.

 

[Shark Sandwich]

I can really go either way on this. Since I'm undecided, here are what I see as the pros and cons:

PRO:
- DQ has never been about pretty graphics
- Everybody I know owns a DS and will buy this game
- The simple, lighthearted, quest-oriented style of DQ lends itself to a multiplayer game
- I love the idea of hanging out at IHOP with a few friends playing this game
- The series (IMO) definitely could use a breath of fresh air

CON:
- ~N64-level graphics
- Unclear if/how the stylus can enhance the RPG experience at all
- Unclear if/how dual screens can enhance the experience
- The DS isn't ideal for long gaming periods that DQ demands (cramped hands and strained eyes)
- Can't chill out on the couch and play on the big screen

We'll see how it turns out. Any others to add?

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

I don't know, I always felt the selling point of the PS2 was:

-Graphics
(at the time it came out, it was pretty good, only highend video cards could match it, which most PC games don't take advantage of due to low install base, the fact that the PS2 is a closed platform also helped performance)

Really? Dreamcast gfx looked alot better than ps2 games that came out the first year. Still DC flopped.

-Games
(it's the next version of the PS1, basically more of the same and some. Which in this case is not all that bad.)

DC was king over ps2 in the beginnen, still DC flopped.

The reason ps2 sells is because of sony's awsome marketing. And ofcourse now because of the games but the reason it got so populair is because of marketing, not really because of the games.

 

[fearsomepirate]

The DVD drive was a selling point of the PS2?
-Graphics
(at the time it came out

Which was 5 years ago. It's 2006 now. When you played DQ8, graphics most certainly weren't the selling point of the PS2.

-Games

Which is the reason DS is popular. It's just got some fantastic games.

The use of the stylus is completely unnecessary, but due to the way the interface is designed, it's the quickest way to sell stuff to Nook.

The use of a mouse is completely unnecessary, but the way the interface is designed, it's the fastest way to get around your PC.

RPG since the SNES days have a perfectly effective way of selling stuff from the player inventory, what is wrong with using the existing perfectly working system.

Adventure games since the Zork days have a perfectly effective way of moving around and interacting with the world, what's wrong with using the existing, perfectly working command-line system?

 

[Droid]

Really? Dreamcast gfx looked alot better than ps2 games that came out the first year. Still DC flopped.

DC was king over ps2 in the beginnen, still DC flopped.

The reason ps2 sells is because of sony's awsome marketing. And ofcourse now because of the games but the reason it got so populair is because of marketing, not really because of the games.

Well v.s. the PC, graphics was a selling point, v.s. the DC at least for the more technically inclined crowd the DVD drive (looks like I have to take some of the things I said that back ) mean like disc swapping which is obviously a good thing and it the PS2 does have more RAM.

But yupe, Sony's hyper marketing campaign was heavily responsible for the DC fall, and if I'm right also around that time, one of SEGA larger investors kicked the bucket, that can't be good for them.

 

[V3]

I can really go either way on this. Since I'm undecided, here are what I see as the pros and cons:

PRO:
- DQ has never been about pretty graphics
- Everybody I know owns a DS and will buy this game
- The simple, lighthearted, quest-oriented style of DQ lends itself to a multiplayer game
- I love the idea of hanging out at IHOP with a few friends playing this game
- The series (IMO) definitely could use a breath of fresh air

CON:
- ~N64-level graphics
- Unclear if/how the stylus can enhance the RPG experience at all
- Unclear if/how dual screens can enhance the experience
- The DS isn't ideal for long gaming periods that DQ demands (cramped hands and strained eyes)
- Can't chill out on the couch and play on the big screen

We'll see how it turns out. Any others to add?

It'll be better than N64 graphics, afterall DS can have bigger memory cart. Stylus can be used to equip your character. It will feel more natural to dress your character like most PC RPG. As for Dual screen, I belive one of them will display map.

You are right about DS isn't ideal for long gaming period however. I only game for max 10 minutes on DS, before getting cramped hands and strained eyes. So the idea of 30 hours game isn't that comforting. Maybe this game will be like DQ1. DQ1 is a pretty short game.

If it does turn out to be a long game, Nintendo better release a DS player for Wii, or I'll write a DS emulator for PS3 Linux so I can play it on a big screen with mouse and pad.

But before all that, this game is an action RPG. This bit worry me. Neither Square Enix or Level 5 has a good track record when it comes to action RPG. They should have farmed it out to Nintendo IMO. Nintendo has better developers for making action RPG.

When I first read the title, I thought the game was going back to 2D sprite and old school, I was gonna scream awsome, until I saw what it is, now I am not so sure anymore.