Square To Merge With Enix

SquareAMP writes "The makers of the 'Final Fantasy' video game series will be merging with the makers of the 'Dragon Quest' series to produce an RPG powerhouse to be re-named Enix Square Co. Reuters has all the details of the planned merger, that includes the dismantling of Square's assets and absorption into Enix. For Square fanboys fearing that this may ruin their favorite RPG company, Square's current CEO Yoichi Wada will be running the combined entity."

Comments

and the name of the new organization is...

[sczimme]

Squenix.

In other news, rumor has it that "Square's current CEO Yoichi Wada" will now be called 'Yoda' for short.

So will the next game be called....

[Audity]

Final Saga or 7th Fantasy?

What next?

[Castolari]

"PLAGUE OF LOCUSTS, FIRE AND BRIMSTONE, CATS AND DOGS, LIVING TOGETHER!!!"

I mean, wow. That's my response. Just consider that the last time member from both companies really collaborated, it resulted in Chrono Trigger.

Re:What next?

[Space Coyote]

What exactly did Enix have to do with Chrono Trigger?

Quite a bit actually, according to this site.

It even takes you through some of the names you come across in the developers' ending and lists which people came from Enix and which from Square.

Hopefully

[Rik Sweeney]

Square and Enix will skip the next 18 Final Fantasy games and give us the one we're all waiting for:

Final Fantasy XXX

Did you read the article ?

[sweede]

Here's the story from Yahoo

"Under the accord, 0.81 Enix share will be exchanged for one Square share, with Enix emerging as the surviving entity. "

and

"The postmerger entity, to be called Square Enix, "

while you where correct in that Enix is going to absorb square assets,

"Square, in its current company structure, will be disbanded, and (on paper, anyway) Enix will absorb Square's assets and liabilities. However, Yoichi Wada, current president of Square, will head up the new company, suggesting that Square will have more power than Enix in the merger's final structure. "

all of this was also repeated here

Re:Did you read the article ?

[analog_line]

This isn't uncommon. I take for example, my perennial example in such instances, the Digital/Compaq merger and the HP/Compaq merger. When Digital was bought by Compaq, there was some low key but intense infighting in which many of the former Digital management people gained the upper hand, making many at Compaq HQ that I knew when I was working as a consultant there joke that Digital bought Compaq with Compaq's money.

As well with HP, many of those in HP were none too please about the atmosphere that was coming into HP with all the merger talk and post-merger layoffs. From everything I've seen, it sounds much more like Compaq than HP these days.

Square took a HUGE blow after the Final Fantasy movie. They sunk millions into Square Studios and the movie just didn't make any real money (though I'm quite fond of it... one of the greatest pieces of computer animation ever in my opinion and it'll change the way that kind of thing is done). Sony had to come in and bail them out, and in doing so gained a hefty share of Square, so in actuality, Sony may have had a larger hand in this merger than anyone may have realized, seeing as they would get a much firmer hand on one of the best game development houses in Japan (even though we don't see much of it over here...Dragon Quest 7, I believe, is still the largest selling game ever in Japan). With Sony's backing of Square, I'm not surprised to see a Square executive at the top.

wow

[tps12]

What'll that be, some sort of dodecahedron? How many sides in an enix again?

The state of the game industry.

[Bethor]

As a game developer myself, I am quite worried about the state of the industry, and this merger further aggravates the problem.

During the 80s and early 90s we had a healthy number of development houses, and lots of them took risks in order to differentiate themselves. The result was of course innovation. Plenty of it.

Nowadays development costs are absolutely HUGE. Only a few hits actually sell enough to cover their costs. Nobody can afford to take risks, and there is very little innovation going on.

Here in Japan, I know Nintendo has been funding small development teams that come up with interesting ideas, but I havent seen any fruits yet.

What else can be done? Is there any hope?
--

Re:The state of the game industry.

[Obsequious]

Yeah, I've been pondering this myself. To be considered a "great game" today you have to have dazzling graphics, great video cut-scenes, detailed in-game models and physics, etc. Oh, and of course you have to have great game-play.

The problem with this is that only the game play can really be done by "one person with a vision." Everything else takes real human blood, sweat, and tears to produce. That is a huge cost, and is a heavy burden to bear.

The gaming industry as it currently exists has been based on a studio model as you point out. That worked fine when a small team could realistically accomplish all the work to make a game. Unfortunately, that model doesn't work as well when you have huge teams, it seems, because the cost outruns the productivity gains. Or something, anyway; maybe I'm talking out of my arse.

But the key insight to me is that people have been saying for years that eventually games and movies will "merge" into some kind of interactive entertainment. Well, maybe, maybe not, but I do think that it is obvious that games are becoming more like movies. Consequently they are sooner or later going to develop movie-like budgets.

Only large organizations can fund that kind of thing (indie film community aside for the moment.) As a result I can't see anything in the future of gaming communities except consolidation to the point where the companies ARE large enough to fund high-end games.

Maybe it'll turn out something like the (primarily European) auto industry (which to a degree it already is:) a number of studios work on concept and prototype contracts, and large corporations productize the prototypes.

Today, the game studios make entire games while the publishers (like EA) handle distribution. I suspect that the balance will shift a bit, so that instead of producing entire completed games, the smaller studios will produce an upgrade game engine, or a new set of character models, or whatever. Compare this with car studios that produce new engine upgrades and tweaks, aggressive new body styles, and so on. The studios then sort of sell this technology and art to the large manufacturers/publishers.

This also sounds somewhat like what Nintendo is trying to do with their small groups: let the groups focus on innovation and new ideas while the large institutional development shops actually make games. I think it's a model that can work, although I don't think it'll be quite the same atmosphere that the industry has enjoyed up until now.

I'm also not sure how I feel about it. The best games I've seen have been really works of art created by a single group. Grand Theft Auto, StarCraft/WarCraft, Final Fantasy, etc., and of course the classic games from years past. There are some mainstream movies that I've enjoyed as much that clearly have the same kind of hand-crafted feel, but they are few and far between. I am afraid that as the game industry "matures," it will go along a similar route.

But, maybe not. Who knows, really? I guess we will have to wait to find out.

Squarenix

[jokercito]

Sounds like some sort of distro.

Re:Stick to games, gang!

[macshit]

Which is not to say I thought the plot was good for a movie.. it isn't. All I'm saying is games and movies are very different at a core level as far as what story-telling techniques can and should be used, and Square ignored that difference at their own peril.

I think it's also the case that standards are simply lower for game (RPG) plots. You often don't notice as much, because the interactivity sort of grabs you and sweeps you along, but really, if you think about them afterwards, the plots are usually very simplistic and overly melodramatic, and the characters crudely drawn (in the story-telling sense, not the art!).

[But -- silly me -- I still seem to play them anyway... :-]

Re:Could be called the "shaft Sony" merger

[Anonymous Coward]

Huh? The Square and Nintendo fallout came years before The Spirits Within. It actually goes back to the N64 and Nintendo's decision to use cartridges instead of the CD format. Square, who was already planning to make a FF game for the 64 (there were already screenshots), dumped Nintendo and went over to Sony. The feud was only beginning though. Ads for Final Fantasy 7 made the point that a cartridge-based system had no chance of making such a beautiful game. Worse though, and this only became widely known this year, they convinced Enix to dump Nintendo as well. The bad blood lasted until early this year, when Nintendo struck a deal to bring Square games back to Nintendo consoles. Of course, the millions lost on the movie probably had something to do with that, but not everything.

Square Enix on new platforms...

[Alric]

It is my understanding that Square produced games exclusively for Sony for two reasons.

1. Sony helped Square pay off some massive debt after the failing of Spirits. This gave Sony a voice in the company, but there was no contract of exclusivity signed.

2. Square ended the love affair with Nintendo primarily because Nintendo refused to move away from a cartridge based system. Square wanted to move towards games with astounding amounts of high resolution graphics. This began with the N64, but it is still relevant. The GameCube uses optical disks with 1.5GB storage capacity. The PS2 uses DVD's with 4.7GB capacity.

Square Enix will most likely continue to ignore the GameCube. However, with Sony having a smaller voice in the new company (if Sony can ever have a small voice), we can probably expect a few Square Enix games for the XBox. The XBox uses DVD's with 9GB storage capacity and has more powerful graphics processing. But maybe Square Enix will choose to support its fellow Japanese company (Nintendo) and will choose to ignore the American rival (MS). These are exciting times for RPG fans.

What can come of this?

[Maul]

First of all, the "Final Fantasy" movie was a huge mistake. Square should have known that they'd only attract fans of the FF series, who would immediately be disappointed that the movie had nothing to do with any of the games AT ALL, but was just a crappy sci-fi movie titled "Final Fantasy" to get them into the theaters. Besides, the track record for video game based movies should have told Square not to make the film.

Second of all, Square is getting pretty sloppy, IMO. Instead of creating a new game, they are getting lazy and making "FF10 Part 2." While Square might spout some PR garbage that FF10 is so popular that they wanted to give players another chance to play in the FF10 world, the real reason for this FF10 side-story is so they don't have to put cash into developing an all new game.

To top it off they are considering "FF7 Part 2." Hopefully plans for at least the second of these will be canned thanks to this merger, but I doubt it.

I don't have very good impressions of this merger because it seems that the "Square" entity of this merger will have more control. I'd rather see Enix on top, since their most recent games have not been as crappy as FF10 or Kingdom Hearts.

More than likely things will stay the same for the time being. The new company will continue to develop games from their most popular series for the Playstation 2. The focus will continue to fall away from the story and world and will emphasise more and more on pretty graphics.

Remember that Square was still working on some games for Game Cube and GBA. This might open Square games up a little more for release on multiple platforms, but there is probably going to still be a huge emphasis on Playstation 2.

This has nothing to do with the Sony/Nintendo/Square politics, but rather the fact that there are something like 50+ Million PS2s out there and only like 20 Million X-Box and Game Gubes (combined). While it might benefit them to release a version of FF11 for every console, given it has a subscription, it probably wouldn't be worthwhile for them to abandon the PS2.

Re:This sucks.

[Sylver Dragon]

Great, can we expect 4 hours of FMV in the next Dragon Quest game?

Not only will the next Dragon Quest game have 4 hours of FMVs, there'll be no way to skip the $@#%ing things. Am I the only one that hates sitting through a cut-sceen, getting killed shortly afterwards, before you can save, and then being forced to sit through the damn thing again? Its pretty once or twice, but after that its just annoying.
The other thing that scares the hell out of me with this merger, is that Enix might start to put out that "steam-punk" crap. This is just my opinion, but I'm going to rant about it anyhow, so if you don't want to read it, skip a bit brother.
(Start rant)
What ever happened to good old swords and sorcery fantasy? No technology, no god-damn desert submersable castles (ala FF3, stateside). The only Final Fantasy title that even came close to doing this was the first one, at least the tiny bit of tech in it was truly alien to the world. (mind, I haven't seen all of the ones released in Japan) To this day FF1 is still my favorite of the series. FF2 started getting wierd, FF3 was just too much. I've watched people play 7 and 8 enough to know that I don't want to bother. The series stopped being "fantasy" somewhere in the middle of FF3, and turned more into "sci-fi" with one wierdo, usually the hero, still slinging a sword. Would somone please just shoot the idiot with the sword and be done with it? Afterall, which would you rather have, a magic sword that does shitloads of damage, or a magic mini-gat with each bullet doing shitloads of damage, and no kick. One cuts the enemy open if you can get next to them, the other turns the enemy to hamburger at 100 yards.
(End Rant)
Anyway, I hope that this will lead to more, high quality RPGs. And God willing, they will be more than just eye-candy. I don't care that a game has 5 million hours of FMV with a quadrillion polygons for a character's butt hair, if the game play sucks then the game sucks. Yes, those Final Fantasy magic animations are nice, but it would be nice if the story wasn't just a re-hash of the last Final Fantasy. (Town/Family killed, start self discovery, find other chacaters, more self discovery, have conflicting love interests, get close to figuring self out, discover some relationship to "Big Enemy", play through self doubt sequence, discover mentor, resolve love interest when somone makes a sacrifice, fight "Big Enemy", win for a bit, "Big Enemy" reveals "True Self", get real close to losing, defeat "Big Enemy", listen to "Big Enemy" make inspiring final speech, game end.) That's the plot of almost every FF game after the first. They go for a deep twisting plot, but its the same deep twisting plot every time, no suprises, nothing innovative, just prettier graphics, more FMV, more zeros in the hit points, and longer spell casting sequences. Could we please get a plot that is fresh? Oh well, I'm ranting again, I'll stop.