dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jul 26, 2019 17:08:05 GMT -6
私は日本の支援者です。 日本リリースが10月に決定した事は予定より遅れたのが残念ですが仕方ないと納得します。 しかし私はそれ以上に日本リリース版の一般ユーザー全員が事前予約をするだけで100$以上支援者の報酬であるサウンドトラックCDを入手出来るということや、それに加えてショップ毎にスチールブックケースやポスター等々の高額支援者報酬を入手出来るという情報に戸惑っています。 しかもこれらの報酬は追加料金無しで入手出来るとなっています。 我々日本を含め既にゲームを手に入れている支援者の中にはこの発表に納得がいかない仲間が多数いると思います。 あなた方は多大な遅延に悩まされた我々日本の支援者に謝罪と感謝の言葉以外何を与えてくれるのでしょうか? 今回の日本リリース版の発表に対して我々支援者が納得出来る説明と日本の支援者に対してのスケジュール発表をしてもらいたい。 日本版のパブリッシャーは香港のGame Source Entertainmentさんなのですが、キックスターター及びこのフォーラムは海外版のパブリッシャーである505さんが担当です。残念ながら、ArtPlayさんからの報せなどはパブリッシャーを通して出るので、日本版についての返答はそう簡単に得られないでしょう。 恐らくはですが、販売店側から予約特典や初回特典などがないとお断りですと言われ、そこでキックスターターとは直接に関わらなかったGame Source Entertainmentさんがその対応を取ったでしょう。キックスターターの落とし穴の一つ、というわけです。 しかし、おっしゃる通り、$100以上も出した支援者が納得できるような扱いではありません。 そこで、もし良かったら、フォーラム運営の方々が直接ArtPlayさんにお問い合わせ出来るよう、 akr さんの投稿内容を私が英語に直してみたらいかがでしょうか? これでも一応、日本のゲーム企業さんで通訳・翻訳を担当した者です。
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jul 25, 2019 15:05:01 GMT -6
Anyways Bloodstained is at 500k-1M copies sold on steam alone now in case anybody was still somehow worried about this. So happy to read it just climbed from the 200k-500k tier to the 500k-1M tier! If Steamspy is to be believed and we go with the lowest number possible (500k) it must man that at least another 500k have been sold combining PS4, XB1 and Switch sales, right? This game must be past 1,000,000 copies sold right about now! But I'd figured we would've heard about it by now if that was the case so who knows? Maybe they're saving that announcement for later? Like I said before: if they're smart, they won't gloat about the numbers until the issues with the Switch version are settled, either because there's a patch that fixes them, or because they announce there are no more patches planned to improve performance. People are up in arms about the mere mention of paid DLC before the Switch version is fixed - trumpeting how well the game is doing sales-wise is not going to win them any sympathizers, much less if the Switch version sold well.
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jul 20, 2019 19:55:07 GMT -6
To be fair, the nerfs are coming first because they're easier to do (like, just edit some spreadsheets, run a macro and recompile the source code easy).
What's true is that the community at large doesn't know this. Most people didn't know the costume DLC won't delay any updates to the Switch version.
That's the problem, I think: they assume people know, when in reality they don't. They need to work on communication, again.
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jul 20, 2019 14:55:10 GMT -6
You all are overreacting over some nerfing. It’s called game balance and yes, shards like Arrows and Welcome Company were incredibly powerful when you get them early in the game. Good for them. Having said that I’m very sad it’s been a month since release and two weeks since the already delayed confirmed date for Iga’s Backpack for PS4/XB1 and we still have no date for that. It’s out from day one on PC and now on Switch but not ps4/x1. What gives? Well, their logistics have been abysmal, to put it mildly. Both the game and their planning needed a few more months - that much is clear. Hope they learn from this experience. I mean, the forum is pretty toxic right now (people overreacting all across the board, imho), and that's somewhat to be expected - this is the internet, after all - but there's no denying that the toxicity would be far less had 505 done a better job with the launch. The issues: 1) Game crashes. On all platforms (even PC). 2) Frame-rate drops. On all platforms (even PC). 3) Loot getting stuck on walls half of the time. 4) Day 1 patch that erased progress for many PS4 players. 5) Xbox One patches delayed 6) IGA's back pack delayed on PS4 / Xbox 7) Switch version with frame rate issues, loading issues, crashing issues and input lag. 8) Japanese version launch will be 3 months after the rest of the world. This comes after the linux and Mac versions were cancelled with no refunds, and the IGA's back pack was made available to non-backers. Now, personally, save for the no refund thing, I think the cancellation decisions and making IGA's back-pack available to non-backers were the right calls - but there's no denying they rubbed many people the wrong way. What's a bit frustrating here is that the eight issues listed could have been dealt with by devoting more time to optimization, bug fixes and QA, and releasing the game two or three months later (say, September). The game would have been just as good, sold just as well, and the toxicity in the forums would be at lower levels, I think. It would have definitely been better for the long-term success of the brand. Also, I think they should be a bit more specific on how much improvement may be expected for the Switch version - because if people think that all of the issues that version has are going to be fixed, and when the patch finally releases, not all of them are ... well, there'll be quite a bit of fuss, I imagine. Finally, they need someone who can write clean, clear messages to look over the updates and streamline their communications. I'm not clear on when the update is coming, which of the items previously mentioned it has, and what's happening overall. And it's also irritating that so much of the communication coming from the publisher is spread out over different mediums (Kickstarter updates, forum posts, tweets, discord), meaning you're never sure you have the full story on something.
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jul 17, 2019 13:20:22 GMT -6
I feel like everybody is getting too caught up in the weeds and throwing random personal accusations and community accusations instead of the talking about actual subject. I don't think many people have an issue with paid DLC as a concept for this game. But what is currently being proposed is what people have an issue with. Let's review what people have issues with. 1. Paid DLC is getting floated before any of the free DLC has been released. Hell, before all the baseline quality of life/bug killing patches are done. It's a bad look no matter how anybody wants to spin it. And that's why there is so much fight against this right now. Just speaking for myself, but if this poll came out in the fall after the dust has settled, I would be fine with it. Likely, many more people would be as well. It doesn't have to do with people "liking things" or not, it's a matter of bad timing. Even if the DLCs themselves are a long way off, bringing them up now paints an ugly picture. 2. What's being proposed is five items and a shard per DLC "pack." Anything more than two dollars for a pack is going to be overpriced for the content given. And it's not going to be two dollars. If people want to buy these for five bucks a pop it's on them, but in no universe will it be a good deal. 3. Due to the lack of cosmetic item slots, the DLC items will in fact have stats. So they'll either be high level so people would want to equip them at the cost of unbalancing the hell out of the game. "Pay for these items and never have to use the crafting system again!" Alternatively they'll have low level stats and people will complain that they're gimping themselves gameplay wise by equipping the items that they paid real money for. In a perfect world these DLC items would start low level and could be upgraded somehow to be better as the game goes on, but if I'm being honest, all signs point towards "minimum effort-maximum profit" with what's being proposed, so expecting a system like that is unrealistic. So game balance is at risk of getting fucked sideways. Personally, and like I said above, I think it's just a bad look all around. At the very least they should have dropped the first post launch "free DLC" before even bringing this up. When it comes to DLC I want value. I want new areas/bosses/enemies/etc. I'll happily drop twenty bucks for two new areas of the castle to be bolted on. Cosmetic DLC packs are not value, and just taking a wild guess at what the votes are going to point towards, I'm not really going to be super interested in playing the game with Miriam dressed in lingerie or fetish outfits in the first place. I think the unspoken core of the issue is this: 1) Many who want the items don't want to pay for them (because they feel taken advantage of, seeing as how they'd have to pay more money on top of the retail price) 2) Those who don't want them don't like the fact that the company is developing content for someone else, especially content that clashes with their tastes and preferred image for the brand (i.e., they consider selling cosmetic items as exploiting people's fetishes for corporate greed, and they naturally don't want the game they otherwise like to be associated with that). But the fact is people were disappointed for other, very legitimate reasons: platform cancellations, lack of refunds for Mac/Linux, poor day one patch management, late DLC, irregular performance and game crashes on all platforms, and not least of all the quality of the Switch version. These are legitimate reasons for disappointment, disappointment that people haven't gotten over (and I'm not saying they should, mind you). So, when update 94 arrives... 1) The people who are upset for other reasons pile on 505 for bringing up DLC - it's the latest topic, so people will read their grievances. 2) The people who have an issue with the DLC itself (either for 1 or 2) criticize the decision to bring up paid DLC at this time. Those of us who want the DLC and are OK with it being paid DLC, are actually happy 505 chose to ask us which outfits we'd like and what we'd consider a fair price. Naturally, we argue that we don't find it exploitative, and that wanting to make money does not equal being evil (now, if the outfits are not to our liking or end up being priced too high, we simply won't buy them and that'll be it). The idea that the timing is wrong for bringing up paid DLC is predicated on the notion that surveying players on cosmetic DLC itself is something that naturally expends goodwill... but if this is the case, then there might be a better or worse time to do it, but there will never be a good time to do it. And such may be the case for some people, but not for all of us.
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jul 17, 2019 11:18:52 GMT -6
Alright so this is a complicated issue with many considerations: 1. Even though it is a fact that artists working on cosmetics has nothing to do with the programmers working on the Switch port, the average gamer either doesnt know that or will just ignore you and call you an apologist. The mere mention of paid DLC while there is a port in need of fixing and other content that needs to be added will create bad publicity, period. 2. In addition to point one are the people who will fan the flames of that publicity. Just for one example: I've followed Jim Sterling for years, I know his habits, the man WILL make a video calling Bloodstained out for adding paid dlc to the game at this point in time, and if he considers it microtransactions (which people are already calling this because anything that isnt a proper expansion is now a microtrnsaction) he will make a point of saying it no longer qualifies for his "game of the year" awards because he bans all games with microtransactions from consideration regardless of how good they are. Now obviously Jim Sterling is just one person, but he wont be the ONLY one who jumps on this if it moves forward. 3. People are going to rip into the game asking for money to fund the free DLC even though the game had a successful KS and is selling like crack. The multiple recent piles of crap from Shenmue 3 are only making things worse and worse for ANYTHING related to Kickstarter. At this point that game might end up having such a negative effect on the platform it may never recover. Now me? I wouldnt ind kicking the game a couple bucks for a sweet Vampire Miriam set of gear, as Im assuming this would work exactly like the Valkyrie set in the game now. But I think even putting this poll out at this point in time was a bad move, they shouldnt have even MENTIONED paid DLC when the Switch port is in such dire straights AND console backers are still waiting on their IGA boss fight and swordwhip. Nevermind there are still backers who flat out dont even have their game yet still. It may have been a bad PR move, yes - but only because there are so many people with an attitude of entitlement (i.e., "if I don't get what I want, you're evil and I'll take you down.") I know people don't want to hear this word, and I'll add that I'm not personally here to pick a fight with anyone (my apologies to the mods if I was confrontational before). But I do think it is important for all community members to be heard, and not just those disappointed by 505's decisions. After all, myself and other users want paid DLC, and what they're saying is " no, we don't want you to have it, because we think it should be free or not in there, and we'll drop the game otherwise." Well, they're free to do that, but we're free to disagree and say why we disagree. Getting into pointless arguments instead of agreeing to disagree is not good - but, imho, neither is letting only the disaffected control the narrative. If you want paid DLC, then you should say so. If you always keep an attitude of not saying anything when you feel people are acting negatively (instead of simply saying "I don't care for it, and I don't agree with the practice, but to each his own"), then it can be even worse - because they're not gonna stop, no matter how quiet you keep.
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jul 16, 2019 21:16:44 GMT -6
They are not asking for money. They are asking what kind of items you are interested in, so they can make them. If you don't want them, you don't have to buy them. It's called taking our opinion in consideration. Entitlement is whining about a publisher not giving away for free things that cost money to make. Entitlement is demanding they not talk about it until disaffected players get something else they want first. AGAIN: making assets has ZERO to do with how fast they can patch the game. ZERO. So now you get to define what entitlement means? it's always on the gamer's side and not the developer's side Great! I think Actiblizz is hiring community manager, you definitely fit for the job. If they pay well, I'm all for it (j/k)
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jul 16, 2019 20:39:28 GMT -6
I don't think people would have been negative about this if the survey would have had an option to not purchase cosmetic DLC. Could people simply not do the survey if they feel so strongly against it?
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jul 16, 2019 20:37:22 GMT -6
Asking for more money before fixing the mess, that's developer entitlement. They are not asking for money. They are asking what kind of items you are interested in, so they can make them. If you don't want them, you don't have to buy them. It's called taking our opinion in consideration. Entitlement is whining about a publisher not giving away for free things that cost money to make. Entitlement is demanding they not talk about it until disaffected players get something else they want first. AGAIN: making assets has ZERO to do with how fast they can patch the game. ZERO.
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jul 16, 2019 10:33:43 GMT -6
I couldn’t care less for the cosmetic DLCs, either free or paid. I just want the Switch version to be fixed and then let the team finish the DLCs they have to do. And then begin work on Bloodstained 2. They're not taking resources from the Switch to make cosmetic DLC. The Switch requires programmers, the DLC requires artists. There's little to no overlap.
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jul 16, 2019 10:32:30 GMT -6
IMHO, here is where consumers need to understand that everyone either works at a business or for a business, or for people who work at a business.
As such, they should be able to understand the following:
1. Every business needs to make money. That does not make them greedy. It's what puts bread on the table and, if things go well, maybe a nice family vacation. Yes, people at the top tend to be greedy at many businesses, but that doesn't mean the company doesn't need to do well for everyone else to share in the breadcrumbs.
2. Adding cosmetic items doesn't come for free. You need to pay the artists who work on them. Because they need to put bread on the table, and, if things go well, maybe save enough for a nice family vacation. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Someone paid for it.
3. If you don't want to pay for cosmetic DLC, don't buy it. It's cosmetic - it doesn't affect the gameplay at all. If you feel it would add something to your play experience, because the visuals are part of it, then you need to pay for that added value because 1 and 2.
I'm all for paid DLC that doesn't affect gameplay; I'm decidedly against DLC that does, and also against RNG based exploitation such as loot boxes.
The thing with paid cosmetic DLC is that if you don't like it you don't have to buy it. I want me some Succubus, for example (and least I think I do - will have to wait and see the design), but I couldn't care less for any maid or schoolgirl outfit. Some people, though, are really into those; so let them buy them, and I'll buy the Succubus outfit, and everyone's happy.
If you don't want to feel you were denied items that cost money to make, pay for them. It's that simple.
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jun 30, 2019 15:44:03 GMT -6
I'm sure it will be improved - what I'm not sure is that the input lag will ever be on par with the other versions, if they are able to significantly improve it at all.
What you can expect as far as improvements are shorter load times and a more stable frame rate. Textures are not going to get better, and as for the input lag... honestly, if it could be significantly improved, my guess is they would have done it already. They might be able to tweak it, but I doubt it'll ever be to anyone's satisfaction. The UE4 Engine is notorious for causing input lag in fighting games that run at 60 fps - again, I'd love to be proven wrong, but unless they manage to somehow achieve parity in the frame rate itself, I'm not sure we can hope for improvements in this area.
I think people are eventually going to have to face the fact that promising the game on Wii U and Vita, and then designing the whole game without taking into account those consoles' limitations, and then assuming that porting to the Switch would go smoothly, was a huge, tremendous mistake, bigger than all those other stretch goals put together.
I've seen very capable developers make more asinine decisions first hand, so I'm not surprised, but still... and by the way, the blame for this falls on IGA's, Inti's, and Ben Judd's shoulders, too. They thought adding Wii U and Vita versions was a good idea, after all, and when they cancelled them they had to provide an alternative in the form of the Switch.
So yeah, I was hopeful they'd somehow designed around the limitations of the consoles on the lower end at least in mind, but now it's clear they didn't.
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jun 30, 2019 12:09:35 GMT -6
I would also like the textures to be improved, I think they can do it and keep fixed 30 fps if they get help from experienced developers in Switch ports. Sorry to burst your bubble, but as the video points out, that's very unlikely to happen. It's just not about whether the developer is experienced in Switch ports. Games with better textures on Switch were designed from the ground up as exclusives for the platform. When this happens, and the developer has a target frame rate, they design both the assets and the levels around these constraints, making sure that they look good and play well on the system first and foremost. This was clearly not done (impossible to do, as the system wasn't out yet!), and thus you could put the best developers in the world on this, with the most experience on Earth on Switch, and it won't happen. See that jump that takes 10 seconds to load? There are two basic ways around it: reducing the geometry and texture quality, and eliminating the jump completely. If the game had been built for Switch from the ground up, they would have either reworked the map, or they would have changed the look of the map so that the textures can look good enough despite being lower-res. As for the texture quality, raising it increases the memory footprint (load times) and the number of pixels processed (performance). This can be offset by cutbacks in other areas, but that'll raise other issues. I hate to sound ranty, but one recurring theme when discussing the Switch version is how the game should be able to run at 60 fps on the platform and you just need more time or better developers, because you've seen better looking games on the platform run smoother. NO, I can't stress this enough: that's not how it works. EVERYTHING, from the size of the game areas, to the art style, to the number of different areas, enemies, weapons, and their design (both look and features) is decided based on a console's technical limitations. You'll say " the number of weapons? what does that have to do with performance?" Well, because each weapon has it's animations for regular attacks and special attacks, and those animations take up memory. This is where you decide things like whether or not your game features weapon switching on the fly. If it does, then the animations for all the weapons you're going to be switching mid-combo need to be always loaded, cutting back on your memory pool; and if they're not, you have to do something like shortcuts - fast, but not as fast - to allow you a least a bit of a breather to load those new animations. Every wonder why developers don't incorporate those "simple" features that in hindsight would appear to make the game better? Because they already made a trade-off decision in the early stages of development, and designed everything on the game with the constraints they'd settled on in mind. Now, this is just an example, mind you - it may or may not be how Bloodstained's game engine manages assets - but what I'm trying to say is that there's a lot of design constraints in games that are there because of the lead development platform that people are not aware of when they judge a game's performance and visuals. It is not, I repeat, it is not about hunkering down and optimizing with really good devs. The game was never going to perform well technically on Switch. The only question is how well it can be reasonably made to run. Also, about the input lag...if it's roughly twice as that of the other consoles, and it's running at half the frame rate, there's a good chance the two are fundamentally tied together in the game engine. Would not expect great things here, either, but then again, this is not my area of expertise, so I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jun 28, 2019 22:13:12 GMT -6
Haha, I can't begin to tell you how bitter I was about 3D taking over in the 90s. I boycotted FF7 for years because they betrayed me by going "3D, edgy, curse words, low-hanging fruit" etc. I wouldn't have used those terms back then, but it's roughly how I felt lol. I never thought that stuff looked good at any point, and didn't enjoy a 3D game until (and only) the cases of Resident Evil and MGS1. Oh, I hated FF7...actually no, I didn't - but I was very disappointed by the story and gameplay (basically, the game) and I did hate the fact that everyone else thought it was the second coming. FFIV and VI were better, dammit! The first 3D game I really liked was Mario 64 (got all the stars!). And Panzer Dragoon Saga for the Saturn might have looked like sh!t, but it's a freakin' masterpiece, as far as I'm concerned. I await the inevitable remake for Switch with bated breadth (I mean, they're already remaking the original, and I know someone's gonna wanna tap into that nostalgia eventually). 8 ceiling would happen for "weird Japanese games", too. I remember Valkyrie Profile 2 and Bully came out at around the same time, and Gamespot gave Bully equal marks for graphics and overall. VP2 is to this day one of the best looking PS2 games that ever was, and Bully looks like this (first images on google image search). Yeah, once Western console games started getting big (with Halo and GTA, basically), it was like only Nintendo ever got a pass for being Japanese. But a picture is worth a thousand words, and those comparison shots of yours speak volumes.
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jun 28, 2019 16:08:39 GMT -6
Remember when there was a time some of you (not me, though) honestly thought they could pull off a WiiU and Vita ports of this game? Remember that? Because I'm glad they canceled those, though. Yeah, Armature was on crack when they confidently declared that porting the game to the Vita would be easy for them, because they were such good programmers, and all they had to do was port the UE4 engine to the platform... damn, I can't find the face-palm emoji.
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jun 28, 2019 15:59:01 GMT -6
The score also doesn't seem to quite match up with the words, but I'm sure we're all well aware of the classic "8 ceiling". When Symphony of the Night came out, a magazine run by what is now IGN called Next Generation called it "a triumph" but gave it 4 out of 5 stars, because the magazine had a policy of not giving anything that was not "innovative enough" (read: 2D) a full score. You see, it was "N ext Generation," and 3D graphics (which were ugly, by today's standards) were all the rage, so it couldn't possibly give anything with 2D graphics (or 2D gameplay, for that matter) any more than an 80% score. It's funny, though: a lot of the games that got full marks from that magazine are considered dated today (looking at you, Shenmue), while Symphony of the Night's basic gameplay continues to hold up well twenty some years later. Better to always be an 80% than to go from 100% to 30%, in a few years, I say.
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jun 28, 2019 2:10:40 GMT -6
asterra I lived in Japan for 8 years and worked as a translator/interpreter/programmer at a Japanese game company. I'm also a native Spanish/English bilingual, and also work as college language professor and have a Master's degree in modern languages, and I also had the opportunity and pleasure of translating a history book on my home town originally written originally in Spanish to Japanese (not the other way around). I played the entire game with English voice overs and Japanese subtitles. You are obviously proficient in Japanese, and are entitled to your own opinion. But, as someone whose life basically revolves around language - and has always revolved around it, really - I must say that I thought the English version was exceptionally well done. I believe it's a very good 意訳, a translation meant to convey intent rather than raw information. So, taking the example of the first exchange between Miriam and Johannes... Japanese: ジーベル! やっぱりあなたなの? どうしてこんなこと? Translation: Gebel! So it was you? Why did you do this? English script: Gebel! Tell me you didn't do this. It doesn't make any sense! So basically, Miriam's expressing her disbelief and disappointment at Gebel's conduct. The English translation very poignantly does this, and sounds a lot like something a native English speaker would say to express this. Breaking it down... やっぱりあなたなの? expresses disbelief and disappointment at the fact that it's Gebel. It's expressed as a question, but it is not an actual question, so it need not be translated as one. And with どうしてこんなこと she's basically expressing disbelief and disappointment at the fact that he would do such a horrible thing - which is actually a critical element that's missing from the translation you provide: it's not " why did you do this" it's " how could you do such a thing." The distinction is important, because in the translation you provide she's merely asking for a reason, as opposed to expressing her shock and disappointment. In this way, I'd be willing to say the official English translation is more accurate. Japanese: 「どうして」? 人間達が俺達にしたことを考えるなら分かるだろう? Translation: "Why"? Considering what humans did to us, you should understand. English script: How does it not? After all the sins humans wrought upon us? He's expressing that he's doing this as retribution for what humans did to them, something which should be obvious to Miriam. I think this nuance is conveyed very well by the rhetorical question " how does it not?" It's also fitting to call the things that humans did to them sins, given the context: the notion of a sin being something that's morally reprehensible in an of itself, as opposed to a mere violation of social norms, is far more engraved in the western psyche than in the Japanese mindset, and we're talking about a country - England - that's far more religious than Japan will ever be. Japanese: 十年前の出来事なら、ヨハネスから聞いた。 Translation: If you mean the incident from 10 years ago, Johannes told me about it. English script: Johannes told me what they did to you. Here they indeed omitted the fact that the incident took place 10 years ago in the English translation; but it's difficult to make the line as poignant with that little factoid in there, and it's information the player already has that is further implied by the context. Repeating it here serves no dramatic purpose. Anyhow, I doubt I'll change anyone's mind with this post, but if anyone who doesn't speak Japanese wants a second opinion from someone who does, and who's actually done this for a living, here it is. My view is that the English translation (or "localization," if you will) is very well done, and the few true liberties taken with the script are in comedic exchanges that work very well. Any and all deviations from a denotative translation in the drama portions are all called for in the connotative sense, which is what you're required to maintain when translating drama. In my opinion, the observations made in this thread are not blow out of proportion, because they are completely misguided in the first place.
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jun 27, 2019 20:23:36 GMT -6
What is a forum? A miserable little pile of registered members!But enough talk! Have at you!
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jun 27, 2019 17:19:17 GMT -6
I don't know, my math works out differently. The 5.5 million would have been close to the original, full budget. So let's say the game would have initially cost 6 million to make. After the Kickstarter, they would have had around 2 to 3 million in funds left to put into the game (remember that Kickstarter fees and the funds for backer rewards are also taken from the money raised). Let's be conservative and say 2 million. That would mean they needed the publisher to put up about 4 million to complete the game. Now, the game suffered delays, which obviously increase the budget. That said, if we assume that most of the budget was eaten up by asset creation, then the budget increased caused by the delay was not substantial; what may have been substantial was the funds needed to bring WayForward on board. Now, if WayForward's help cost them, say, another 2 million, that gives you a budget of about 8 or 9 million. Thus, I doubt the budget went past 10 million... and then there's the marketing budget. However, what ArtPlay put up through the Kickstarter might make up for this, so that 505 might have ended up spending ballpark 10 million in total, maybe even a lot less (3 million from ArtPlay with a total budget of 7 million equals 4 million from 505). So, 5 to 10 million is probably a good estimate of the money invested by 505, which means profitability just needs to exceed that amount. The "free" DLC is cheap to produce, because it simply requires programmers and game designers, as opposed to anything asset related (which requires scores of artists). Paid DLC is likely to come later, and this may be assumed to be priced to be profitable. As for profits per sale, it's 70% for Steam and I would assume something like 80% for GOG - since Steam is the market leader, you can be sure it charges more than GOG. If the Steam version sells 200 k, that's about 5 million right there. If the budget was on the low end, then they've broken even on Steam sales alone; if the budget was on the high end, then they'd need to sell twice as much, which is a bit under the high-end estimate of initial Steam sales. We can't know how the sales on GOG relate to the sales on Steam, but it does seem like total sales on consoles would double the Steam numbers; and while profit per unit sold is likely less on consoles, that's still a substantial amount. My guess is that the game won't lose money, and will very likely make a good deal of money. I'm not as optimistic as purifyweirdshard (though I'd love to be proven wrong), but I can easily see the game moving over a million units across all platforms over its lifetime. If the game weren't having issues on Switch, I'd be even more bullish about it. That said, I wouldn't expect 505 to gloat or tout sales numbers until the Switch version is fixed; doing otherwise might be bad PR. So I expect the publisher to be quiet on sales for the time being, but maybe make noise about it after the Switch version is fixed, or before releasing a Game of the Year Edition further down the road.
|
|
dareka
Dhampyr
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 345
inherit
Dhampyr
1332
0
Mar 8, 2023 13:21:18 GMT -6
724
dareka
345
Jun 17, 2016 16:09:16 GMT -6
June 2016
dareka
|
Post by dareka on Jun 27, 2019 12:10:20 GMT -6
Has anyone on here had experience working with UE 4? The impression I get is that it's a high level tool to simplify game creation, and for a lack of a better phrase, it's like "game programming for dummies." Is this perception somewhat correct? From my experience, these tools rarely do a good job in terms of performance because of too many layers. Anyways, just curious on the topic, so putting it out there knowing I might be completely wrong. Well, I haven't worked on it directly, but UE4's not a simple to use tool; something like Unity, which I have worked with, is like game programming for dummies, but even then you really need to know your away around things like shaders to get the most of it. What UE4 does is basically provide developers with high-level programming libraries that have different implementations for each platform, as well as development tools that work with those libraries. It offers ways to access graphic features in modern GPUs that developers know how to implement and use, but not necessarily how to incorporate into a single game engine that's also flexible. Doing this takes a lot of time, money, and people who really know what they're doing, and it's basically a requisite for modern game development. So UE4 essentially alleviates this issue, saving companies like 5 years worth of R&D. Also, despite being a high-level tool, it provides low-level tweaking options for increasing and optimizing performance. Of course, companies with their own R&D departments don't need it as much, but the bigger the project, the more UE4 comes in handy (see Square Enix using it for DQ XI and FFVII Remake, after their own Luminous Engine turned out to be more trouble than its development was worth). As far as performance issues go, it's been known to cause some input lag issues in fighting games, but these issues can be resolved.
|
|