THE iDOLM@STER > THE iDOLM@STER Platinum Stars

Pre-release thread: THE iDOLM@STER: Platinum Stars

<< < (102/133) > >>

Yukibro:

--- Quote from: MetalPredat0r on June 10, 2016, 08:49:22 am ---I'm personally not a fan of this anymore. I get it's the point of the series to raise your idols to the top, but it also means they've been telling the exact same story for ten years with the same characters. Chihaya's dead brother and warming up to people, Yukiho being scared and trying to get away from that, Azusa trying to find love, etc. They may be told slightly differently with different events, but the overall plot is the same every single time.

--- End quote ---

That's pretty off, and I honestly think that's the biggest problem going forward. People think the execution has grown stale because there's an assumption that they've done everything, that no stone's been left untouched. In reality, Namco has been playing it safe since 2nd Vision blew up in their face, and I don't think that the current issues are 765's fault more than it is Namco's.

Like when you consider how much focus has shifted from 1st Vision into 2nd Vision, you'd see the problem is moreso about how 2nd Vision is handled rather than a problem with 765 overall. Let's bring Takane up from earlier, for example. I feel like 2nd Vision Takane hasn't really been established yet. They ran with the mystery and secrets persona they had for her in 1st Vision, yet the context of her as a rival has been gone for years, so I personally never got the sense of her obligations and problems being a burden to her like I saw in SP (though I haven't touched her OFA EX content yet, I should get to that). Or take Chihaya, whose 1st Vision character was more stuck between her parental issues and her stern dedication to singing that would eventually develop to address both as she moved up in the idol ranks. Yet in 2nd Vision, much of her content is focused on her brother and her mother, practically making her father a non-character. Then you look into other idol families: Yukiho's father played a pretty significant part in Yukiho's developing story in 1, but he seems more a reminder that Yukiho may or may not be yakuza nowadays. Makoto's dad plays a pretty big role in how Makoto ended up being so boyish, but 2nd Vision likes to skate around that issue enough anyway. And Iori's personal goals are pretty centered on being independent from her family, but nowadays she seems like just another rich tsundere. Hell, Miki seems a bit lost as here Awakened form proved so popular that it's basically what she becomes in most stories nowadays. And I'm pretty sure her blonde hair is legit now, too.

If there's going to be new developments or curveballs, then they should do just that, because the issue of staleness isn't because there's nothing to do with the 765 girls. Why not change up the pairings? Haruka and Chihaya are always together, so what would it hurt to have them pair up with another idol they rarely interact with? And better yet, why not have them exhibit more of their stories to said other characters and actually have them develop together? Don't just do it like the anime where everyone's always together but don't do anything, have the focus placed on the girls either alone or with someone who can complement them. In the end, proper execution can bring life back to even the stalest formulas just as much as lazy execution can make them stick out like sore thumbs. And while I do think they've done pretty well as of recent with the console games (OFA EX routes are particularly satisfying), it's iM@S in general that needs to stop being so safe and aiming just for what's expected.

I also double-dipped on PS, so you better get your stuff up to snuff, Namco

Setsuna:
Then to add to that mix, you have the problem of risk aversion, then a whole slew of other stuff that isn't im@s related, but affects im@s anyway. (But unless you care for things such as demographics, trends, market share etc, you probably won't believe anything I'd say anyway.)

Adding new elements is a risk - and with risk you include loss.

It's stupidly easy to say now "Well, adding in the guys as idols was a stupid idea due to the backlash." mostly due to the fact that we know the result. Try figuring that out in 2011, when you're told 'Okay, now you need to come up with something new, oh, and if you get it wrong, you're fired and you're out of the industry cause no one's going to trust you.'

If anyone realistically says they can do it, then in no uncertain terms 'screw you and the high horse you think you can claim, because if you're demanding the ability to see the future as a requisite to doing a job, why the hell would they be game developers? They'd be playing the stock market, or the lottery and be making a killing there.'

So with risk, comes with rewards, but with it, comes the ability to incur a loss.

Given the costs, and the current state of NBGI and the industry as a whole, playing conservative and securing what you have is far more beneficial, because the changes would only net marginal gains, and would incur significant risk.

Like take for example pairing switchups - how many more people would you seriously expect to gain? Then take the opposite - how many people do you think you'll tick off?

(If you haven't realised yet, it's surprisingly negative.)

Now, if they changed a LOT in one go, they might have significant gains, but then again, they could suffer what happened re: im@s2. Of course, experience says they got burned significantly on that one, and like any entity, they rather not get burned twice, at least so badly.

Incidently, I'm still looking for someone who's based in Japan - I require a proxy to do some purchases, and will commission as per negotiations.

Yukibro:
I can understand that Namco would rather risk less if it means avoiding losses as well, and I understand that judgments made in hindsight are easy considering what's happened so far. I still feel like there were some missteps made concerning 2010/2011, at least regarding the timing and tone of said announcements. I don't condemn them for risking changes back then, I just question the manner in which they handled it. This also applies less so with the move to the PS3 with the iM@S2 port not even a year after the 360 release, though the risk of losing more fans was likely taken for the reward of gaining even more fans. Namco was already jumping off the Microsoft ship anyway, so my suspicions or criticisms are more... personal, I guess.

As far as it goes with PS, I don't mind if they aren't taking risks. I would like to see what I posted above be done sometime, but I also know I'm looking at the series' first PS4 iteration and don't expect them to break out of the box so quickly, especially considering prior history with the franchise. A lot remains to be seen about the game anyway, so until then I'll be pipe-dreaming and hoping that the steps forward from OFA will continue even if it's playing safe right now.

Setsuna:
Well, the history of im@s 1, 2 and im@s L4U is interesting, mostly because the summary of it is this: NBGI was actually offered a significant amount of money to NOT make a game, at all.

(Initially, the negotiations were to release the game on the PS2, but the PS2 didn't cut it technically, so after a bit of back and forth, Sony Japan actually put forward an offer.)

It's a bit of history of im@s that got buried in the myriad of contracts, that's the executive summary.

The reason why they jumped to MS at all in the first place was cause they were offered MORE money to beat said bribe to not make something.

The terms of the deal was for a flat period, actually, which ran out roughly a year after im@s2 Xbox 360 showed up. Even then, MS offered a deal, but Sony offered a better one, and we have im@s where it is right now.

The amount of money that was offered wasn't chump change either. Portions of the deal cut by Sony and MS show up in the relevant balance sheets, under Other income (if I recall correctly) and if you read it, you'll actually see a line item in the Other item list which is extremely outlandish, and this is where the contract part of the deal was booked.

The long and short of the whole 'jumping ship' was one of technology improvements, and ironically, various sides paying lots of money to NOT do anything (Sony for im@s 1/L4U/2, Microsoft for 2/OFA) as they were trying to convince NBGI to wait for new technology for this franchise (Among other things of course).

NBGI didn't take the bait, but we were surprisingly closer than you'd think to im@s radio silence, and a couple of debut games for a console or two.

mariokirby:
@Okayu

Thanks, for your input.  You brought up some good points about the idols not having much direct interactions outside the group since other characters (like family members) don't have character models or voice actors.


--- Quote from: Okayu on June 12, 2016, 01:56:18 am ---Something else to note is that while Chihaya's backstory is mentioned each game, the amount of time spent on it has been greatly reduced as games go on. In 1 it got a lot of focus since it was our introduction to her, in 2 the backstory itself is kept to one communication, and in OFA it's reduced to a few sentences. While the topic comes up again in the DLC route, it expands on what was presented in the original game by giving more details.

--- End quote ---

I think I recall in im@s 2 that there were several communications regarding her backstory such as couple scenes losing her voice, graveyard scene, even the Okayu scene (not you, I meant the food) where she first reveals about her little brother’s passed away. 

As for One for All, I had the impression that Chihaya’s full story was purposely split into 2 parts.  The first part being about growth and finding herself outside of singing.  And, the second part about overcoming Chihaya’s past (Ex episodes).  I mean, I don’t like separating them both since I felt both were important for Chihaya’s full development.  In Idolm@ster 2, I recall her route does sort of delve into those two parts (both the singing and past).  I just felt that One for All kind of splits it, so that they can sell the other half of Chihaya’s development as DLC.



@Yukibro and Setsuna

You do bring up some good points.  I think the take home message you guys brought up for this entire discussion is that companies usually play it safe (because making money with less risk is the route that companies usually take).


 

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page