Has Anyone Ever Considered Resurrecting This Awesome Series?

[Solo_Wing]

Really though, I think we have a better chance of continuing the Panzer Dragoon legacy via a new IP created by Panzer Dragoon fans than from Sega. Besides the original developers, we're the ones who understand what makes Panzer Dragoon special in the first place. An independent game inspired by Panzer Dragoon could capture the Panzer spirit better than a sequel from a publisher who probably no longer understands Panzer Dragoon.

Maybe Sony should buy the IP and get some of their devs working on a Panzer game. They seem to be happy to fund creative titles. Blasphemy I know.

[Terramax]

How did you manage to endure the Batman and Robin film? >:)

To hell with that, how did you endure a Christopher Nolan film?!? XD

Maybe Sony should buy the IP and get some of their devs working on a Panzer game. They seem to be happy to fund creative titles. Blasphemy I know.

In all seriousness though, I'm not sure where you get this idea from. Recently, Sony have been content in making almost nothing but sequel after sequel after sequel, if they aren't pretentious TPS or FPS games. Not that I think Nintendo or MS are any better (although MS are starting to invest in new, original IPs because, well, they kinda have to in order to stay relevant right now).

I think a 3rd party company would be more at home making a PD game for Sega. I'd allocate it to Access Games, if I had the choice. They're responsible for flawed, but appreciated games such as Deadly Premonition, Drakengard 3 (a game with emphasis on Dragons and a dystopia world, no less), and the up and coming D4.

Many of their games come short-changed due to funding issues i.e. they get bugger all in the way of money, but turn out to have very interesting and unique stories. I can't think of any other company that tells a video game story that wasn't trying to act out a cliched Hollywood schlock i.e. The Last of Us.

[Solo_Wing]

In all seriousness though, I'm not sure where you get this idea from. Recently, Sony have been content in making almost nothing but sequel after sequel after sequel, if they aren't pretentious TPS or FPS games. Not that I think Nintendo or MS are any better (although MS are starting to invest in new, original IPs because, well, they kinda have to in order to stay relevant right now).

Games like Heavy Rain, Journey, and The Last Guardian are examples of arty games from Sony. We don't really see games like these from Microsoft and Nintendo.

[Terramax]

Well, one of those games hasn't even been released yet, and has been in limbo for the best part of a decade. And I don't think the developers of Heavy Rain are even Sony, but a 3rd party with an exclusivity contract (Quantum Dream, whom made games such as Fahrenheit and The Nomad Soul for PC and other consoles prior, right?).

I mean, if you look at the PS3 generation, yeah, there's the odd original title by Sony, like Gravity Rush for the Vita (which I quite liked, despite its flaws), Little Big Planet, and Urban Jungle, but lets be honest; original titles from 1st party developers in the last 10 years have been at an all-time low since gaming began, and the new generation looks to continue this trend.

Just because Sony might have contributed a little bit more than the competition last gen, IMO, doesn't justify to call them a company that actively goes out of its way to support 'creative games'. Or at least, not enough to celebrating them for the rare title of theirs that didn't have a numeric in front of it.

Not only that, but I'll also suggest that a game being 'arty' doesn't necessarily mean it's any good. On the contrary, there are definitely gamers out there that would argue arty games are, more often than not, made for all the wrong reasons i.e. they're not very fun.

Panzer Dragoon was no arty game. It was an arcade game accustomed with a rich world world, and later an expanded story / universe, but never forgot to be a fun game first, rather than made for pretentious artistic reasons.

And besides, who honestly out there wants a Sega title to be released exclusively on one games console? I reckon, if a Sega game isn't on a Sega console, it should be allowed to be experienced by everyone, no matter which console they choose to own.

[Geoffrey_Duke]

Sony was just forced to compete more, which is always a good thing for a soulless bloodsucking money making corporation.

[Solo_Wing]

Not only that, but I'll also suggest that a game being 'arty' doesn't necessarily mean it's any good. On the contrary, there are definitely gamers out there that would argue arty games are, more often than not, made for all the wrong reasons i.e. they're not very fun.

Panzer Dragoon was no arty game. It was an arcade game accustomed with a rich world world, and later an expanded story / universe, but never forgot to be a fun game first, rather than made for pretentious artistic reasons.

Panzer Dragoon is both an arcade-style game and art. That's fine - a game can be both.

My point is really just that you don't see titles like Shadow of the Colossus from the likes of Microsoft and Nintendo. The other titles I mentioned are or are planned to be published by Sony. They are still rare, agreed. Nintendo tends to focus on family friendly games, Microsoft on more mainstream genres. When we do get less mainstream titles from MS there's usually a catch - in Crimson Dragon's case it was the "free to play" style gameplay. Out of the big three, only Sony stands out as potentially suitable.

I agree that a third party might be more suitable if they could acquire the necessary funding.

[The_Ancient]

It generally pains me whenever I see such mainstream generalizations echoed around though Solo, MS have also funded games like Phantom Dust, Alan Wake, Fez, even Toy Soldiers or Stubs the Zombie are as artsy / ballsy in their own way as any of the usual suspects from the other camps. Even the usual tendency of trying to extend the argument to all sorts of other fringe Japanese games is fallacious, because of the market differences that is more parallel to the sector PC games have afforded in the west.

Shadow of the Collossus is a highly singular case, for any time and any platform, so to say no one else does that kind of game is effectively a disingenuous argument to me.

Yeah MS was really sucking Xballs last few years, mostly credited to Don Mattrick's tenure, seemingly with some justice. But again these types of generalizations always bother me anymore, it's no different from the litany of media and culturally vetted half-truths that made sure everyone knew why the Saturn or the Dreamcast were not worthy of equivalent consideration as... well... you know.

[Solo_Wing]

My view is based on my own observations, rather than conforming to a mainstream generalisation. If what I've said reflects the mainstream view, that's coincidental. I've been primarily an Xbox gamer for the last two generations and that may have tainted my view though.

You make a good point about Phantom Dust. I tend to forget about that game's existence since there was never a PAL release.

Alan Wake is an interesting example. I enjoyed it, but for me it still fit the third person shooter/survival horror mold.

To put my point about MS tending to publish mainstream games another way: do you see a Panzer game coming out of Microsoft without significant trade offs? We can look at Crimson Dragon as an example of what a Panzer game published by MS might be like.

[Geoffrey_Duke]

Hey Solo, did you play Dead Space? It had a pretty dark sci-fi story with a good twist at the end.

Personally, I think that any gems we see now will be created by accident.

[The_Ancient]

I gave my take on the Crimson Dragon mess already, which is to say it is so unfathomable that I can't even have a clear take on it. But since you bring it up, there were three games at launch of the Xbone representing the microtransaction model: Forza 5 attracted a shitstorm of course, but opinions were highly divided on how bad the actual impact on the game was, and seemed to me to be more about the fact it effectively preyed on completionist impulses, rather than held anyone back from advancing in the game or being competitive. I also saw claims that Gran Tourismo 6 employed virtually the same model, but you didn't get the same shitstorm. Score another one for Sony, shit just won't stick to them.

Then there was Killer Instinct, which seemingly everyone has been very happy with the F2P model employed, since it is not exploitative at all and even has the option of essentially buying the full package for a fair price. But since it's not negative you don't even hear about that.

And then CD, which is tragic, the only thing that seems obvious is that it fell through the cracks of the beuracrasy at MS, and no one who had any concern for the project was left to have its back. It is of course very personal to us here, but it is also an anomaly, rather than the rule.

Remember it was MS who wanted some SEGA magic in the first place, hence why we got the last Panzer Dragoon game at all. It's too bad they lost so much of the attitude that Ed Fries started the brand with, but as I've watched this story all along I can't entirely blame them, it's not like it pays off for them, financially or even in media cred. Orta got a decent little fanfare, then the Xbox went right back to being the "Halo adaptor" in the pop-core dialectic. So I'm commenting on the generalization itself, how you personally arrived at it is not a concern, it still does not seem fair to me. What else makes Sony so different? SotC is also an 8 year old game, the only other game I can think of with that sort of cache is Journey, which is a good one but also a very singular, small budget project from an otherwise independent dev who have now left Sony's protective shadow.

Again, even if there's a half truth in there, such generalizations are the fuel of such vicious circles, whereby people are ever more inclined to forget those exceptions, because they don't fit the stereotype.

[Geoffrey_Duke]

Sony are expert politicians. It's depressing really.

If they are forced to compete though, they can provide a neutral platform for games to grow.

That's all I'll say about the soulless money making machine known as Sony.

I wonder how Sega would take the story forward. They might be tempted to recycle old stories for a new audience if they ever did make a new PD game. I could live with that if the game remained true to its dark roots.

Otherwise no thanks. The last thing I want is Final Fantasy: Panzer Dragoon

I suspect that the games industry will be a very different place in 10 years. If people are content with graphics that aren't state of the art then it opens up a lot of possibilities.

[Solo_Wing]

Hey Solo, did you play Dead Space? It had a pretty dark sci-fi story with a good twist at the end.

Haven't played it. Thanks for the recommendation.

Personally, I think that any gems we see now will be created by accident.

These corporations can be thought of as "engines" that produce games. Given the right conditions, some will be produced that fall outside outside the norm if the inputs into the engine are different. The motivations and results are (in some respects) distinct, even if the motivations usually cause the results. What you said about gems being made by accident might be due to the right conditions coming together at the right time.

So I'm commenting on the generalization itself, how you personally arrived at it is not a concern, it still does not seem fair to me. What else makes Sony so different? SotC is also an 8 year old game, the only other game I can think of with that sort of cache is Journey, which is a good one but also a very singular, small budget project from an otherwise independent dev who have now left Sony's protective shadow.

I mentioned Quantic Dream's games. There's also The Last Guardian which will hopefully still see the light of day. I agree that many of these examples are singular cases, but together they're not singular.

If we're including smaller budget titles like Journey, the Microsoft camp admittedly does have some gems that go against the mainstream formula. A Panzer Dragoon game could be done on a smaller budget (it could be of high quality even if it's no Saga). If we're just examining larger budget titles (not XBLA/PSN titles), then it's difficult to find examples, at least in the Xbox 360 generation onwards.

[Geoffrey_Duke]

I agree Solo, but monopolies are never good. Sony will monopolize if they can. The PS2 was one of the most poorly designed consoles of all time (it was even worse than the Saturn). Devs literally cried when they had to make games for it. But they made games for that piece of junk nevertheless because they didn't have a choice.

I played Shadow of the Colossus when it was new and I wonder if we would have even seen it if Sony didn't face competition from the Xbox and Gamecube. Sony were really forced to compete with Microsoft.

People disagree with me on this because they don't seem to believe that companies need to compete to make a better product. I wish they didn't but companies like Sony don't care about anything except making money. They just operate from gigantic deficits and invest in long term investments. They won't push the boundaries if people have nowhere else to go because they know they can be cheap because people will always buy their products.

I'd be open to a new PD game but only if it respected the source material. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if today's gamers would want that.

Anyway, check out Dead Space. Also, forget the sequels exist. I like to pretend that the story ended with the first game...

Edit: edited to clarify.

[Pyteo]

Geoffrey,

It's funny that you keep saying that Sony is a soulless money making machine and they had to compete with Microsoft when it's was was always the complete opposite.

When Microsoft came into the business, Sony was already pretty well established, there was never a moment when they had to switch strategies. In fact, they always chose a different path.

When Microsoft based the X360 selling point on generic space marine shooters, being Halo and Gears of War the main titles, Sony was supporting studios to develop original exclusives(Little Big Planet, Infamous, Heavy Rain, Journey, Demon Souls, Ni No Kuni, Ratchet and Clank and so on).

Also, when Microsoft announced the all the Xboxone always connect, No used games, forced Kinnect features (speaking of souless), Sony refused to follow and Microsoft where the ones that had to change to compete.

In short, I rather play more Jouney like games, than Halo ones.

[Geoffrey_Duke]

I remember Sony during the 32 bit era. I also remember Sony during the PS2 era.

The bribes (especially for exclusives) and the lies were unbelievable.

Bribes are fine in a free market like this, but lies aren't. I'm still waiting for the PS2 to render 75 million polygons per second.

They screwed up the PS3 as well. The 360 is simply better designed. It's way more efficient. Sony's solution was to throw money at the problem even though it was a problem that they themselves created, and now they are drowning in debt. Sony's net worth is questionable.

Do you know why Sony deliberately made their consoles hell to program for? So that games couldn't be converted to other consoles.

Now if anyone wants to claim that Sony is good for gaming, I have no problem with that. We will just have to agree to disagree.

All I am saying is competition is good for gaming. Companies have to compete for consumers. It's perfectly healthy in this arena.

The bottom line is, none of us here would want a mainstream Panzer Dragoon game. It would destroy the series.

It's best that PD hibernates for a while until someone is prepared to take it seriously.

I remember how much I loved Shining Force 3 and how much I wanted a sequel, but I did the mature thing and let it go. I moved on. Sometimes that's for the best otherwise you will be stuck in the past.

[Pyteo]

Brides? It's just a business strategy like any other. They pay third parties for exclusives. Exclusives define the identity of the console and that's the way to go.

Also, what is Microsoft doing with Tomb Raider and Crystal Dynamics right now? Is that what you call a bribe?

And I will not talk about hardware, don't want to turn this into a fanboy flame war.

My point was that Sony is indeed the best choice when it comes to revive PD considering their policy and open mind on game diversity, while providing the studios the freedom to create the game they want, mainstream or not. PS3's catalogue is the proof of it.

You guys keep saying "move on", "leave it in the past" like we are are taking about an ex girlfriend or something. Jesus Christ, as much as I like PD , it's just a game.

At the end of the day, you don't want a new PD game because you're the ones stuck in the past, taking all this too seriously and afraid that a new game will mess up all the good memories you have.

I would love a new Pd game. Mainstream? I'm ok with it. Why not? All the original PD where aspiring to be mainstream to begin with. Mainstream doesn't mean Bad.

It's an amazing Ip. with lots of potential left to explore and it's a shame to see it collecting dust in the Chest.

[Geoffrey_Duke]

Brides? It's just a business strategy like any other. They pay third parties for exclusives. Exclusives define the identity of the console and that's the way to go.

Also, what is Microsoft doing with Tomb Raider and Crystal Dynamics right now? Is that what you call a bribe?

If you live by the sword you die by the sword.

I have no problem with healthy free market competition.

The point is, Sony doesn't simply try to make a better product. They outright destroy their competition by any means.

And I will not talk about hardware, don't want to turn this into a fanboy flame war.

My point was that Sony is indeed the best choice when it comes to revive PD considering their policy and open mind on game diversity, while providing the studios the freedom to create the game they want, mainstream or not. PS3's catalogue is the proof of it.

You guys keep saying "move on", "leave it in the past" like we are are taking about an ex girlfriend or something. Jesus Christ, as much as I like PD , it's just a game.

At the end of the day, you don't want a new PD game because you're the ones stuck in the past, taking all this too seriously and afraid that a new game will mess up all the good memories you have.

I would love a new Pd game. Mainstream? I'm ok with it. Why not? All the original PD where aspiring to be mainstream to begin with. Mainstream doesn't mean Bad.

It's an amazing Ip. with lots of potential left to explore and it's a shame to see it collecting dust in the Chest.

The PD games weren't mainstream. They were dark and bleak. The gameplay was certainly accessible to casual players but a mainstream PD would completely change the story.

Suddenly Panzer Dragoon would become a story about how an evil white male emperor is oppressing women and minorities, and if the game is Japanese, then a sexually confused young man who looks like a woman will have to save the world with the power of friendship.

No thanks.

I am perfectly ok with Panzer Dragoon being made for the Playstation 3-4 as long as it respects the source material and has great production values.

Otherwise it's destined to suck. That doesn't mean it has to have state of the art photorealistic graphics.

[Pyteo]

The point is, Sony doesn't simply try to make a better product. They outright destroy their competition by any means.

Welcome to the world of big corporations.

I think you're confusing mainstream with generic or commercial.
The Last of Us, for example, is mainstream game developed by a triple A studio and it isn't by any means, stereotyped in any of its parts.

I would also like the see the original source material followed and respected in a new game. I never mentioned that I was ok about changing its core essence to make it accessible to a broader audience.

It's not like a good PD game would ever need that...

[Geoffrey_Duke]

When you have to make games for the majority, things are inevitably dumbed down. The Last of us benefits from being a big budget exclusive for an audience that is almost guaranteed to buy it.

The devs had more freedom because of that.

I doubt the movie will be as good.

Console manufacturers have to make exclusive games in order to draw attention to their consoles, so they can afford to be creative as long as they sell more consoles. It's an investment strategy. Nothing more and nothing less.

[Pyteo]

When you have to make games for the majority, things are inevitably dumbed down

I disagree, that's a hipster attitude. You can have a complex and elaborate game, with several layers of depth, that appeals to a broad audience. Each different group will find different things they like about it.
I'll give you examples. Mainstream games that re not dumb: Mass Effect; Demon Souls, GTA 5, Fallout 3, Batman(arkham series), Deus Ex. Portal? Half Life?

The Last of us benefits from being a big budget exclusive for an audience that is almost guaranteed to buy it.

Can you elaborate? What benefit? what guarantees? The only thing it benefits from is being a good game, nothing else, you're not making any sense.

Console manufacturers have to make exclusive games in order to draw attention to their consoles, so they can afford to be creative as long as they sell more consoles. It's an investment strategy. Nothing more and nothing less.

Now you're repeating what I said:

It's just a business strategy like any other. They pay third parties for exclusives. Exclusives define the identity of the console and that's the way to go.