Slashdot Mirror


Square Enix Facing Big Losses For 2010

eldavojohn writes "It's no secret that Final Fantasy XIV took a lot of heat early on, which required extensive damage control. And the Japanese tsunami (which appears to have added $7.5 million to their losses) certainly didn't help. But if what early investor reports are saying is true, then Square Enix is expected to report $148 million in losses for the closing fiscal year. Expect title cancellations (which might add to the hurt) and a very painful realization for the owner of Final Fantasy and Dragon Warrior (PDF). Perhaps a move to re-releasing classics will prove more fruitful than high development cost MMORPGs?"

210 comments

  1. Worst merger, ever by assemblerex · · Score: 2

    In square-enix, the square is silent.

    1. Re:Worst merger, ever by tudsworth · · Score: 1

      I'd have to agree there, with some notable exceptions, Square-Enix's only good games post merger have been new IPs (The World Ends With You being the most notable) and... Dragon Quest. That's it.

      This is, of course, excluding their constant re-releases of older games (mostly FF, Dragon Quest and a whole host of Square's PS1 games).

    2. Re:Worst merger, ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      doesnt matter if they are silent or not, their management is still working fine, remember what debacle slit squares throat in the first place where they were forced to merge to survive

    3. Re:Worst merger, ever by DanTheStone · · Score: 2

      The Kingdom Hearts games for PS2 are pretty good.

    4. Re:Worst merger, ever by ildon · · Score: 1

      Kingdom Hearts 1 was released before the merger, and KH2 was released shortly after the merger. Short enough that you could argue the merger had no major impact on its development.

    5. Re:Worst merger, ever by squall14716 · · Score: 1

      Kingdom Hearts 1 was released before the merger, and KH2 was released shortly after the merger. Short enough that you could argue the merger had no major impact on its development.

      And sure enough, there's been pretty much nothing about KH3, just a bunch of "side" games.

    6. Re:Worst merger, ever by timftbf · · Score: 1

      Great graphics, music, characters, story. Horrible, horrible combat.

      I was very annoyed, I had to give up in frustration a *long* time before seeing the end - and I really wanted to play the game through to completion.

  2. Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hope it keeps happening until they make a new Final Fantasy that doesn't suck. Cold day in hell, I know.

  3. Flame went higher. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I haven't been able to play through an FF game since. I keep trying, but I think I can now draw a parallel between trying candy corn every year and still hating it every attempt.

    1. Re:Flame went higher. by Skarecrow77 · · Score: 1

      I have to agree. I keep trying to like new final fantasies because the old ones were some of the best games every made.

      Every time, the game LOOKS phenomenal, and then I sit down to play and begin wondering "what the hell happened to this development house?"

      The last good one was 7, and even it wasn't -nearly- as good as the hype produced of millions of kids whose first console was the ps1 seem to think it was. 8 looked so retarded I didn't even try it. I gave 9 a good 6 or 7 hours and it still wasn't drawing me in. to this day I can't remember anything about it except that one of my characters had a tail? I tried to play 10 like four times, and every single time I couldn't get past the fact that in the first 2 hours of the game you have about 30 seconds of button mashing actual playtime, and the rest is cinematic. 11 seemed like such a good idea and turned out to be worse than mmos that were out before it. "hey, yeah, I LOVE the idea of killing one mob, and then sitting for 5 minutes before I can kill another one. that's fun for a newbie! also, why can't i play on the same server as my friends without grinding gil for several days?" I didn't bother with 12. I am -still- trying to get into 13 but it seems to have suffered from the same disease as 10, and the fact that it keeps giving me new main characters every 20 minutes isn't doing much to endear itself to me. it's hard to get involved when you're presented with a new character, given vague hints about their personality and character motivation, and then they're gone (and back again!) in less time than a sitcom episode.

      Final Fantasy 6 was a masterpiece, which is still the yardstick by which jrpgs are compared against, 2d or 3d. Final Fantasy 4 would have held that spot if not for 6. Final Fantasy 1 was and still is one of if not my favorite games of all time. I've bought it like 5 different times for 4 different systems.

      What happened? Square's descent into "I don't remember how I did the excellence of my youth so I'm going to replace it with the pretty pretty 3d models!" makes even George Lucas look good.

    2. Re:Flame went higher. by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      8 looked so retarded I didn't even try it.

      If you liked 7, you will like 8, except for perhaps the nostalgia factor you would likely have with 7 by now. Every game after that seems more than questionable to most of those that have played 7 or 8 though.

    3. Re:Flame went higher. by Vectormatic · · Score: 1

      so you hate all post 7 FFs, but you still bought the majority of them? perhaps Square are getting mixed signals then, people bitching about your games but still buying them in droves doesnt exactly tell you that you screwed up.

      Not trying to be an ass here, just pointing out that so long as people still buy their stuff, square thinks they're golden.

      Apparently that trend seems to have shifted for FFXIV

      my only real expierence with FF is crisis core on the PSP, which i liked, if not for the suddenly inbeatable bosses

      --
      People, what a bunch of bastards
    4. Re:Flame went higher. by Skarecrow77 · · Score: 2

      in retrospec, 8 doesn't look as dumb as some of the ones after it, but at the time it looked like such a huge departure that I didn't have any interest in it, and never bothered to pick it up. not when I had competition like Skies of Arcadia and Grandia II on the Dreamcast (It took me awhile to get a Playstation).

    5. Re:Flame went higher. by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 2

      I felt that FF12 was pretty good - you might want to give that a try.

      FF13 was a massive disappointment after 12.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    6. Re:Flame went higher. by Skarecrow77 · · Score: 1

      It's all pure optimism that "this time, it'll be like the old days", combined with respect for previous work. It's like people who keep going to see anything lucas, whedon, or tarrantino put out.

      Crisis core was ok. I played it for several hours but the incomprehensible square plot "it'll all make sense by hour 30, we swear. just sit there and be confused at who these people are and why they're doing what they're doing for now" kinda drove me off. And this is from a guy who loved Grandia xtreme, which had one of the thinnest rpg backstories of all time (because the gameplay was worth it).

      I will say that I haven't paid full price for any FF post-7, at least.

    7. Re:Flame went higher. by JMJimmy · · Score: 0

      I own every non-Crystal Chronicals/non-MMO FF and I honestly think the FFX/X2 games were the last good ones made. It didn't translate to the MMO genre very well. FF12 was a "setup and forget" game where once you had a combat order setup properly all you really had to do is walk around and wait. FF13... well we all know about that steaming pile.

      Personally, as great as FF7 was, I think FFX was my favourite and FFX2 had my favourite combat system when setup in wait mode.

      Sad thing is, I didn't even know FFXIV had been released...

    8. Re:Flame went higher. by Psmylie · · Score: 1

      Mileage varies, of course... I didn't like 8 because none of the characters were all that likable, but every other game they've done I've enjoyed. 12, my only real complaint was the whiny teen hero. 13 was good, pretty much what I expected, though it could have cut down on the opening cinematics and guided gameplay.

      That's something they need to cut down on in general. They need to allow us to get IN to the game faster and actually start doing things. Cut down on the cutscenes, get us interacting with the characters asap. But other than that, I enjoyed the story and the look and feel of the game.

      11, I played that at release, and I still play it today. They've put a lot of work into that game and they're continuing to revamp it. I'd say it's better than ever now.

      14 was very pretty, but suffered with a clunky, laggy interface. I haven't played it enough to really get into the story, but so far it seems pretty engaging. I think they were pushed to release that game WAY too early, it's still in beta phase. They're listening to customer feedback, though, and I think they'll make good changes to it. In a few months, it will be a game worth playing.

      So, my advice to SE:

      Stop with the Whiny Teen Hero. Angst is good for characters only when they have a REASON to be angsty, and only when it moves the plot along
      Cut down on the cutscenes. Those are the most expensive parts of the game anyway. Short, occasional cutscenes can enhance a game, but longer ones detract from gameplay by basically taking control away from the player. If I wanted to watch a CGI FF movie, I'd just pop in Advent Children again.
      Do more to connect the player to the character. We need to empathize with the characters we play, we need to like them, and we need to feel like we're sharing the adventure.

      --

      psmylie's dictionary: Godzillion (noun) Any number large enough to destroy Tokyo

    9. Re:Flame went higher. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually think that X and X-2 were the best FF games. They really seemed to be tweaking and improving mechanics with each game, to the point that X had nearly perfect turn-based combat and X-2 had nearly perfect real-time combat. XI was an MMORPG, and so (in my mind) doesn't matter.

      XII was a HUGE disappointment, and the only FF game I've played that I actively dislike. Strangely, I'm impressed by a lot of aspects of it; the music, art, design, setting was great. One of the least fun RPGs I've ever played, though.

      XIII was decent, but minor. It felt like a spin-off game. The combat was great, but you don't really get access to it until 20 hours into the game; and there is no other gameplay to the game besides combat. No puzzles, no exploring, no minigames.

      XIV is an MMORPG, and so (in my mind) doesn't matter either.

    10. Re:Flame went higher. by grikdog · · Score: 1

      I would agree about FF 12. I've been waiting for Fran and Balthier to make a comeback in their own skins ("The gods are toying with us") for a couple of years, preferably on PS3, and preferably with fewer schizophrenic cliches about "crystals."

      FF 13 had some gorgeous girl warriors, but I've seen enough smouldering lesbian rage in 67 years to last a lifetime. Give me a scathingly funny neurotic like Lady Ga Ga any day.

      --
      ``Tension, apprehension & dissension have begun!'' - Duffy Wyg&, in Alfred Bester's _The Demolished Man_
    11. Re:Flame went higher. by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      I agree with you about 100% on FF12. I thought the story was good (though it certainly could have been better if they'd stuck with Basch as the protagonist) and it was pretty, and i liked having a relatively open world. However the combat bored me to tears. Rather, it bored me into stopping halfway(?) through the game when the story went on hiatus during the various fetch quest stuff and the gameplay was left trying to maintain my interest by itself.

      I did eventually pick it up again and force myself through to the ending shortly before FF13 came out, and i'm glad i did for the sake of the story, but even FF13's combat system was better than FF12. At least in FF13 i had _something_ to do during combat, even if 95% of it was automated.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    12. Re:Flame went higher. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can you not like candy corn?! Are you a martian?

    13. Re:Flame went higher. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you liked 7, you will like 8

      Nope, sorry. I loved 7, and the only thing about 8 that I didn't absolutely despise was the music.

  4. Tomb Raider by Grindalf · · Score: 0

    What happened to the Tomb Raider Series? You could buy that on proper disks and it worked well.

    --
    The purpose of existence is to make money.
    1. Re:Tomb Raider by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honest question from somebody who isn't attracted to women: Is there any appeal to these games besides the horrid polygonal T&A? The new downloadable game on Xbox Live is the only one in the series that I've ever genuinely enjoyed playing.

    2. Re:Tomb Raider by magnusrex1280 · · Score: 1

      My girlfriend LOVES the Tomb Raider games, in spite of the T&A. She loves the mythological aspects combined with the platforming/puzzle gameplay. Tomb Raider Underworld was so freaking buggy though, she gave up on it several times over the course of a year.

    3. Re:Tomb Raider by delinear · · Score: 1

      I loved the first TR - what many people forget is that at the time it was incredibly innovative, it was the first big 3D platform puzzler. I was always a big fan of games like Flashback, that weren't just about combat and timing but had some logic problems to solve along the way, and this game took that idea and put it into a 3D world.

      That and a smattering of mythology (I wasn't so keen on the later levels when the aliens showed up), and the fact that back then the spaces you were exploring felt huge compared to what we'd seen before, not to mention the clever way that combat was managed, meaning you felt you were in the thick of the action without managing a million button combos all added up to a fantastic experience. I don't think I really cared at the time that the in game avatar was a female, although it was still pretty unusual to see a strong female character lead in a game.

      Of course, once the media picked up on it it became just a novelty game about a stereotypical big boobed protagonist (who seemed to get enlargment surgery between iterations) and the whole series turned into a self parody - that was a real shame, but yes, that first experience of that first game WAS something special at the time.

    4. Re:Tomb Raider by Psmylie · · Score: 1

      I agree, the first one was a breakthrough. It wouldn't have mattered WHAT the character was; male, female, hermaphrodite, small blob of goo, the gameplay was just that good that it still would have been successful. Maybe not AS successful, but still...
      And as for T&A... hah, polygonal uniboob, no thanks :P

      --

      psmylie's dictionary: Godzillion (noun) Any number large enough to destroy Tokyo

    5. Re:Tomb Raider by grikdog · · Score: 1

      Croft inherited her billions, rewrote her family pedigree, trashed the manse and has been in a smouldering petulant rage ever since. I think she's miffed because Amanda is straight, so we'll never see the old Tomb Raider again.

      --
      ``Tension, apprehension & dissension have begun!'' - Duffy Wyg&, in Alfred Bester's _The Demolished Man_
    6. Re:Tomb Raider by Grindalf · · Score: 0

      I stand corrected, Eidos controls the game and can make it with anyone they see fit. Maybe Core Design can set up a manufacturer here in Sheffield / chesterfield again. The last PC games were second to non and had a British Military straightness that made them big sellers in the supermarkets here in the UK, lets keep it that way!

      --
      The purpose of existence is to make money.
  5. Re-release classics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why not...uh...find out what made the classics classic and do a bit more of that?

    You know, games with interesting, non-whiney characters, non-linear story with some exploration in gameplay, music that is better tailored to each scene so it doesn't sound like they just put a track in to fill the silence.

    1. Re:Re-release classics? by gilleain · · Score: 1

      Why not...uh...find out what made the classics classic and do a bit more of that?

      You know, games with interesting, non-whiney characters, non-linear story with some exploration in gameplay, music that is better tailored to each scene so it doesn't sound like they just put a track in to fill the silence.

      Totally agree : make VAGRANT STORY II...

    2. Re:Re-release classics? by blahplusplus · · Score: 1

      The worst part is the developers have no idea what made those games good. I was hoping when they re-released and updated the art in the earlier final fantasies they'd you know re-imagine it and make what was already there 10x better. Instead they end up copying the games almost verbatim and it kind of sucks because it just proved to me that the devs have no imagination. The updated art is great but why oh why do they not take what is already there to the next level and add to it? The early final fantasies were so sparse (FF1 especially) that they could really do a lot with it in terms of gameplay/items/loot/story and characters.

    3. Re:Re-release classics? by RichiH · · Score: 1

      Secret. Of. Mana.
      Chrono. Trigger.

      That is all.

      I am not buying any games these days. No time and no motivation. I would shell out 100 Euro for a _proper_ remake of either without a blink.

    4. Re:Re-release classics? by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 1

      I want an update and re-release of Final Fantasy VII. Preferably for 3DS. Then they can have my money.

      I'm sure I'm not the only one.

    5. Re:Re-release classics? by Mprx · · Score: 1

      The biggest reason: you were younger and had lower standards back then.

    6. Re:Re-release classics? by Aladrin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's even simpler than that. STOP spending so much money on the parts of the game that people don't really care about!

      Sure, FF13 is beautiful, but the gamers would rather have had a better plot and characters. They'd rather have had open exploration, instead of that railroad. They'd rather have had real weapon customization instead of that linear just-keep-adding-things crap with no choices. Even the job system didn't have any real choices.

      Gamers don't want a movie. They want an interactive experience.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    7. Re:Re-release classics? by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 1

      I would shell out 100 Euro for a _proper_ remake of either without a blink.

      If you could manage to shell out $148 million for a remake then they would probably do it for you. :-)

    8. Re:Re-release classics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chrono. Trigger.

      They did remake it. For the DS.

      And they fucked it up. They added Dragonball Z-style cutscenes (without removing the original in-game cutscenes), and screwed with the gameplay for no apparent reason.

      I would shell out 100 Euro for a _proper_ remake of either without a blink.

      Ah, well, Square Enix doesn't know there is a Europe, so you're probably out of luck there. That and apparently a Chrono Trigger remake means "up the Akira Toriyama to 11" to them.

    9. Re:Re-release classics? by RichiH · · Score: 1

      What an unexpected comment ;)

      Still, a _lot_ of people who loved those old games have little time but paying jobs, now.

    10. Re:Re-release classics? by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      They've made releases of FF 1, 2 & 3 for iOS, but they're pretty pricey by iOS standards ($8.99 for 1 & 2, $15.99 for 3). They've also made a couple of other RPG's for iOS that have been well received (Chaos Ring & Song Summoner).

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    11. Re:Re-release classics? by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      Secret of Mana is available on iOS for $8.99. Link goes to iTunes web page.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    12. Re:Re-release classics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about re-releasing the PC version without the bugs?

    13. Re:Re-release classics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're still not thinking correctly. Finding out why a classic game works does not mean sequel. Usually it means the exact opposite. What made vagrant story was the deep and interesting plot line that grabs you from the start, the alternative art style pushing aesthetics to the extreme, a unique sound (for square), and a complex battle system. That's it really, that's all square has to do to make a new classic. It doesn't need the Vagrant Story name attached to it.

    14. Re:Re-release classics? by CronoCloud · · Score: 2

      They'd rather have had open exploration, instead of that railroad. They'd rather have had real weapon customization instead of that linear just-keep-adding-things crap with no choices. Even the job system didn't have any real choices.

      Ha ha ha. You don't realize that the hardest core of Final Fantasies Japanese playbase is very conformist and doesn't want that. They want to buy the game on the same day everyone else buys it, play it the same optimal way, do the same things, develop their characters the same way. and have th exact same experience everyone else does. Didn't you play FFX!?

      FFXII had some of the things you wanted...and that fanbase complained. In fact, Basch was originally going to be the main character until Square decided that the hardcore japanese fanbase (even some that had been playing FF's for years and were as old or older than Basch) wouldn't be able to identify with the 36 year old adult Basch, so they added the kids...Vaan and Penelo.

    15. Re:Re-release classics? by HAKdragon · · Score: 1

      I'm going to have to agree with this statement. Also I had a lot more free time on my hands when I was in middle and high school than I do now as an adult.

      --
      "Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs. We have a protractor."
    16. Re:Re-release classics? by RogueyWon · · Score: 1

      You're probably right about the tastes of the hardcore Japanese market - though I would add that I actually really enjoyed FF10.

      Is that info about the FF12 main character reliably sourced? I've not heard it before, but it would certainly explain a few things. Vaan starts out as the game's main character, but by the half-way point, he's pretty much reduced to a spectator. In fact, there was a point towards the end of the game when I really did start to wonder why they were still letting him tag along. Ashe or Balthier always felt like more natural main characters.

      I loved the free roaming stuff in FF12. I particularly loved that if you did some fairly short power-levelling early in the game, you could essentially switch yourself onto a different gameplay track, being fed with new and interestingly designed super-bosses via the hunts system as you went through the game. I think if anything hurt FF12 outside of Japan, it was the fact that the gambit system was never particularly well explained and understood. It was a much more sophisticated system than the likes of Penny Arcade were preaching at the time, but a lot of people were put off it before they actually understood it. One good step might have been to make all of the conditions available from the start of the game, rather than making people purchase them as the game went on - put some of that depth up front for players to experiment with early on.

    17. Re:Re-release classics? by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      I disagree. I loved the Xenosaga games, and I like what they tried to do with FF13, they just screwed up the execution, if the characters and story were as stupid as they were I would have absolutely loved it.

    18. Re:Re-release classics? by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      Yes Vaan and Penelo were tagged on later. The best way to go through the game is to view them in the same manner as Tom Cruise's character in "The Last Samurai" an outsider watching the main character.

    19. Re:Re-release classics? by RichiH · · Score: 2

      Thanks, but I still have my cartridge at home thus emulators are legal.

      Also, iOS? No thanks.

    20. Re:Re-release classics? by CronoCloud · · Score: 2

      though I would add that I actually really enjoyed FF10

      So did I, except for the @#$#@ lightning dodging that I was never able to do, and the grinding you had to do to be able to take on some of the stuff in the Monster Arena. X is probably my second or third favorite Final Fantasy, VII being #1 and VI being #2 or #3 depending. It's the cast, they're likable and they behave like people on some "serious business".

      On another note Square ought to learn "economy of characters" XII would have been fine without Vaan and Penelo, especially if you 4 characters (Basch, Ashe, Balthier, Fran) at once which the game probably could have handled...since you can have 3 and Larsa FFIX is the worst in this regard. The core party in IX is Zidane, Steiner, Vivi and Garnet. They could have dropped the other 4, wouldn't have missed Amaranth, Quina or Eiko.

      Is that info about the FF12 main character reliably sourced?

      Most certainly, FFXII's developers said it themselves.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Fantasy_XII#Development

      I loved the free roaming stuff in FF12. I particularly loved that if you did some fairly short power-levelling early in the game, you could essentially switch yourself onto a different gameplay track, being fed with new and interestingly designed super-bosses via the hunts system as you went through the game.

      Yeah, the Hunts...that was a great idea. Those things were tough! It was fighting them that I figured out that FFXII in many ways is more like FFXI. A good example is how status effects are more useful., even against the boss-style hunts.

    21. Re:Re-release classics? by Gravatron · · Score: 1

      no. Just no. VS was magnificent, and I'd rather it stay a one shot. They have reused the world a few times, for FFTA and FF12 though.

    22. Re:Re-release classics? by Gravatron · · Score: 1

      FF13 had an interesting idea: Everything is a facade. The characters all put one up to hide their emotions. the world of cocoon itself was a facade build by the fal'cie. It sounds like they wanted to build a game about breaking down those facade, till at last, in the end, you had the truth laid bare. They just didn't pull it off, and the entire thing felt rushed. Current thoery was they spent so much time trying to build a next gen engine that they just didn't have the time to actually make a game for it. This seems to be a common problem for eastern developers these days.

    23. Re:Re-release classics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's fine that you dislike FF13, but any losses in the past fiscal year have nothing to do with FF13, since FF13 came out before the past fiscal year.

    24. Re:Re-release classics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, FF13 is beautiful, but the gamers would rather have had a better plot and characters. They'd rather have had open exploration, instead of that railroad. They'd rather have had real weapon customization instead of that linear just-keep-adding-things crap with no choices. Even the job system didn't have any real choices.

      Gamers don't want a movie. They want an interactive experience.

      I definitely do not prefer the open exploration style of gameplay. I think this has to do with cultural differences between Asian and North American players. I enjoy playing an interactive movie which has an advantage of having a tighter plot. I had no qualms about the plot in FF13, the gameplay was just a bit too removed from the original FF experience. There are millions of fans of the FF series and they've never complained about the "railroad" experience. For those who are interested in the Dragon Age experience, that's the game for you, no need for FF to become another DA clone.

    25. Re:Re-release classics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not...uh...find out what made the classics classic and do a bit more of that?

      You know, games with interesting, non-whiney characters, non-linear story with some exploration in gameplay, music that is better tailored to each scene so it doesn't sound like they just put a track in to fill the silence.

      Face facts: A LOT of what made the classics "classic" was simply that there wasn't anything else similar at the time. That's all. Child-Of-The-90s Syndrome: The nostalgia filter makes the memories of being a child at that point look happier and betterer. A lot of the time you were just "playing" an overpriced movie* whose only actual "interaction" or "gameplay" was "whatever they threw in to prevent you from seeing the next pre-planned cutscene and inflate the gameplay time advertised on the box".

      Looking back at the classics for inspiration won't work. It'll just lock them in a loop where they rehash the same outdated territory over and over again until they're run out of business after enough children of the 90s grow up and look for something new. Well, besides those still fawning over how much better and classicer games were back when they were kids.

      I swear, this generation got OLD reeeeeeeeal fast. And I mean capital-O, get-off-my-lawn, when-I-was-your-age, remember-the-good-old-better-days, gotta-keep-living-in-the-past O-L-D.

      *: Or, in the case of what they called "non-linear stories", a batch of mismatched, detached movies that could be done in any order with no real effect on the others besides one character holding a bigger badder set of numbers as a weapon.

    26. Re:Re-release classics? by Psmylie · · Score: 1

      I didn't realize that Vaan and Penelo were tacked on, but it makes sense that they were. They felt tacked on even while I was playing it the first time. Most of my attention was on the other characters. And I REALLY didn't like Vaan at all.

      --

      psmylie's dictionary: Godzillion (noun) Any number large enough to destroy Tokyo

    27. Re:Re-release classics? by cgenman · · Score: 1

      Square in the 90's was responsible for some very un-square like classics, such as Einhander, Brave Fencer Musashi, Parasite Eve, Super Mario RPG, Bushido Blade, Tobal, All-Star Pro Wrestling, etc.

      They need to get back to pushing into smaller, lower-cost, more experimental titles. Ridiculous production values will only get you so far. And always making the same games will burn out the creativity of your teams faster than any hamfisted merger might.

    28. Re:Re-release classics? by Omestes · · Score: 1

      Why not...uh...find out what made the classics classic and do a bit more of that?

      Part of the problem is that the original team (from FFI to FFIX) all went away, the creative synergy (pardon the marketing speak) was awesome, but slowly they got promoted to non-creative rolls, or moved on to their own projects. One of my biggest problems with the new ones is that they got rid of Amano (the artist/character designer of every game up to X, sans VII and VIII) and stuck with the guy who did the graphics/design for FF:Tactics.

      That and the plots became hugely political, not political as in "there is stuff behind the scenes", but as in "I'm watching interactive CSPAN, with swords", this is what killed XII for me, I just couldn't care one bit about the plot. The characters were okay... I didn't mind the gambit system, even. But the plot was boring. X was okay, until someone decided, for the first time in the franchise, to make the mini-game mandatory for progress. I don't want to play water-soccer, damn it. The theme was a bit wonky too, and it seemed smaller than all of the other games, less complex.

      Looking back, there isn't a single "Squenix" era Final Fantasy game that I really liked. It might just be the fact that I'm older, though. My tastes may have changed. Though I have the whole original franchise (I-VI) on the DS, and still enjoy the hell out of them. Chronotrigger hasn't lost its spark either. The last Dragon Quest game on the PS2 was also brilliant.

      I think Square had one of the best creative teams out there for a long period of time, and benefited greatly from it. These times are now long past.

      The series has hit the same list as George Lucas and Spielberg (and basically every other creator trying to cash in off my childhood), I won't purchase, or watch, anything by them until I hear more unabashedly positive reviews than negative ones, starting a week after release (to minimize the shills, and paid reviews). Each positive review is worth 1 point, each negative is worth -1. If the balance hits a positive 10, then I'll go spend the money.

      As a superfluous addendum, another problem I have with all next-gen JRPGs is that somehow they decided that I really don't want to play a game, I want to sit through two hours of dialogue before I'm allowed to do anything whatsoever. I remember when Xenosaga came out, I was really excited by it. But then I sat down to play it on my roomate's console, and got about 45 minutes into the dialogue, before deciding I had much better things to do with my life than stare at a screen, hitting "x" occasionally. I went and sat under a tree and read a book instead. Just to make it interactive, I occasionally waved my arms around and said "swish! BANG! Pow!". I figure I captured the experience well.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    29. Re:Re-release classics? by scot4875 · · Score: 1

      Ah, well, Square Enix doesn't know there is a Europe, so you're probably out of luck there. That and apparently a Chrono Trigger remake means "up the Akira Toriyama to 11" to them.

      Oh the irony. Don't you know that one of the biggest selling points for Chrono Trigger was the fact that it was a "dream team" of Squaresoft and Toriyama? The only reason there weren't cutscenes in the original is that it was beyond the ability of the technology of the time.

      --Jeremy

      --
      Jesus was a liberal
    30. Re:Re-release classics? by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      Is that actually true? Or is that just what the Japanese marketing teams say is true? You know, the same kind of marketing teams that say americans want stuff Darker and Edgier, or that we want our facebook/twitter feeds spammed with everything we do in a game, or that we want our Civ games more accessible? Did Japanese gamers _actually_ want Vaan and Panelo, or was that just what the marketing people said?

      Marketing is really good at distilling what they think we think is cool down into something completely wrong. They tells us that's what we want, most of us say "this is dumb" and don't buy it. The games/movies/whatever flop and eventually someone does something interesting rather than design by committee following the latest "what's hot or not" chart. The new thing takes off and all of the sudden that's the cool new thing which needs to be copied and exaggerated to death.

      Then again, the massive success of the Transformers movies *gag* shows that the marketers aren't always wrong i guess =P

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    31. Re:Re-release classics? by improfane · · Score: 1

      Those two games are brilliant. There was so much thought in them. Shining Force is really good too. Some good modern games are Boktai 2 and Golden Sun (GBA).

      --
      Slashdot needs Geekcode | Can anyone recommend any good SCIFI? My tastes: Foundation, Startide Rising, CITY, Ringworld,
    32. Re:Re-release classics? by improfane · · Score: 1

      Why should Apple profit from such an amazing game?

      --
      Slashdot needs Geekcode | Can anyone recommend any good SCIFI? My tastes: Foundation, Startide Rising, CITY, Ringworld,
    33. Re:Re-release classics? by rjhubs · · Score: 1

      Interesting you feel FFXII had too many characters when your favorite games are VII and VI, off the top of my head: VI: Terra, Locke, Edgar, Sabin, Celes, Seltzer, Mog, Shadow, Umaro, Girl that draws, Gau, Cyan, Gogo VII: Cloud, Tifa, Barrett, Red XIII, Yuffie, Vincent, Aeris, Cid, Cait Sith

    34. Re:Re-release classics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They appear to be affiliated with a French company called Ankama on a game called Dofus [dofus.com] and Wakfu [wakfu.com], the latter still being in closed beta. I've played both and IMO they are leaps and bounds above your typical MMO.

    35. Re:Re-release classics? by RavenLrD20k · · Score: 1

      I say re-release the PC version without the bugs, without the MIDI, without the horrible models, and replace it with a proper PC Port (Proper High Res, Smooth models, Dynamic environments (instead of static rendered backgrounds) and High Fidelity Music.

    36. Re:Re-release classics? by jbonomi · · Score: 1

      These games should be played with buttons. Touch screen virtual buttons are awful for these things.

    37. Re:Re-release classics? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Were they ever interesting?

    38. Re:Re-release classics? by Golddess · · Score: 1

      Also, it was the first re-release (on the PSX) that added the FMV cutscenes, not the DS re-release. And I believe there is an option to disable them on the DS.

      Wish AC had expanded on what they meant by "screwed with the gameplay". Aside from some GUI placement changes, gameplay felt the same between the SNES and DS. Maybe AC meant the (optional) ability to control the game with the stylus?

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    39. Re:Re-release classics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not a remake. Also, playing console games on a capacitive touch screen sucks, it has always sucked and will always suck.

    40. Re:Re-release classics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Face facts: A LOT of what made the classics "classic" was simply that there wasn't anything else similar at the time. That's all.

      I disagree. I hadn't played Chrono Trigger or Final Fantasy 6 until their respective portable remakes, they are definitely superior to anything Squeenix has made in the past decade or so. By comparison, I grew up playing Final Fantasy 4, and it's aged like a fine egg. Also, there was certainly no shortage of games like this back on the SNES, just that very few of them were as good.

    41. Re:Re-release classics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, what is up with the music??? Get *away* from the orchestral stuff or actually put some ingenuity and uniqueness into the final score. I can't think of a single theme from FF12, but I sure as hell remember (and still love) Shadow's Theme from FFIII (FFVI).

    42. Re:Re-release classics? by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Is that actually true? Or is that just what the Japanese marketing teams say is true?

      That's a good question. In FFXII's case, Square said made the decision to add Vaan and Penelo because of the "failure" Vagrant Story, a game with a mature main character.

    43. Re:Re-release classics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If you like any game that's more than a day old, then your opinions are wrong."

  6. Sad state of affairs for a once great company by mjhacker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How could a company that consistently produced quality entertainment for nearly two decades be reduced to a mere shadow of its former self? What happened? As probably one of the few people on /. that actually loved FFXI, I have to say, FFXIV was a complete waste of time. FFXI was fun, but it didn't age well, and there were a lot of things that SE could have learned from and done better. Instead of learning from their mistakes, they ended up making a less fun, more frustrating version of FFXI, and thought that making it pretty would solve everything. Well, it didn't, and now they're paying the price for it. SE needs to go back to the mindset that they had when they were just Square. They need to stop cranking out duds every 3 months. We need games that are on the caliber of FFVI, Chrono Trigger, and Xenogears. Otherwise, the world will simply stop caring about them... that is, if we haven't stopped caring already.

    1. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by flimflammer · · Score: 1

      Things started going downhill when they merged with Enix. Ever since then Enix has seemingly been running the show into the ground. Both companies were good on their own and had their own baggage as well, but when they got together, it just mucked everything up.

    2. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by rekenner · · Score: 4, Informative

      I feel like being a bit of a pedant, here.
      If it wasn't for the merger with Enix, Square likely wouldn't be around. See, it wasn't so much a merger as a Square-fucked-up-when-they-made-The-Spirits-Within-and-needed-bailing-out. Further, they had a lot of great years after that merger, given that it was... almost a decade ago. They considered merging before that, but at the point they merged, TSW lost Square a bunch of money and they would have had a hard time making it back on their feet.

    3. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by RogueyWon · · Score: 2

      Yes, absolutely right. Spirits Within should be remembered as one of the greatest disasters in the history of the entertainment industries.

      And yes, Square continued to put out great games for a while after the merger. Kingdom Hearts 2 was probably the best game of the PS2 console generation. FF12 is probably my second favorite installment in the series (behind FF7, and a little bit ahead of FF6 and FF10). But I suspect that those games had a lot of their development work done pre-merger, or in the immediate aftermath of the merger before corporate identities had really come together.

      If you look at the pre-merger Enix, you see a lot of the behaviours that Square-Enix manifests these days. Grind-heavy, innovation-light games with underwhelming technical standards, aimed primarily at a hardcore Japanese market, with little understanding of what the international market (or even the mainstream Japanese market) wants out of a game.

      In any sensible world, a merger between the two companies would not have seen the limited-appeal (and long-term dead end) Enix methodology come out so comprehensively on top. However, given that Squaresoft basically had to beg for a rescue, it was perhaps inevitable that their risk taking wouldn't survive.

    4. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by Vectormatic · · Score: 1

      i dont really understand the animosity towards spirits within. Sure it wasnt traditional final fantasy, but it provided a decent Sci-fi storyline/setting and breathtaking visuals. This was in the DVD age, and the visuals just blew me away.

      I remember walking into a gamestore where they had it playing on a ps2, and i watched the scene with the drop-troopers landing in that green goo, and my instant response was "what is that game? i must have it, even if i have to buy a PS2 for it"

      --
      People, what a bunch of bastards
    5. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, Deus Ex is the best game of the PS2 console generation (it came out for the PS2). You can't do better than Deus Ex (well, maybe both parts of Ultima VII).

    6. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by LordLucless · · Score: 2

      It also cost millions, made next to none of it back, and virtually bankrupted Square. People don't like it because of the repercussions of making it, not because of the quality of the end product.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    7. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, for starters, they could have just called it "The Spirits Within" instead of adding the "Final Fantasy" name just for marketing. It gave people who knew about the game the wrong impression of what to expect about the movie. I even remember when I was on line to watch the movie and saw a bunch of kids talking about the games, and after the movie, I happened to see them again, talking about the dissapointment that it was because it wasn't anything like the games.

      I don't think the movie was bad at all, but calling it Final Fantasy just to attract the people that knew about the games was bound to become a dissapointment after they realized that it had absolutely nothing to do with it.

    8. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      People don't like it because of the repercussions of making it, not because of the quality of the end product.

      That and because it wasn't a very good movie.

    9. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but it wasn't Battlefield Earth either. It gets hate disproportionate to its suckiness, and I think my post above outlines the reason why.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    10. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by Gravatron · · Score: 1

      a lot of critics panned it as well. It was strange, in those days, to see a realistic CG animated film, rather then the more cartoony/whimsical cg of stuff like toy story. Triggered an uncanny valley effect as well.

      Interestingly, when FF7: AC came out, it was much better received, and actually looked better then TSW. The 'Complete' version is even better, as it filled in quite a few holes in the story.

    11. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by chispito · · Score: 1

      How could a company that consistently produced quality entertainment for nearly two decades be reduced to a mere shadow of its former self? What happened?

      Simple: JRPGs, as a genre, are outdated and most young gamers don't have the patience to put up with them when there are so many more enjoyable games out there.

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    12. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by JustSomeProgrammer · · Score: 1

      You haven't played Pokemon have you? That's a fairly traditional JRPG with a crap load of very simple characters

    13. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by chispito · · Score: 1

      You haven't played Pokemon have you? That's a fairly traditional JRPG with a crap load of very simple characters

      Good point. Perhaps the handheld, lower-powered platform has something to do with it?

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    14. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      But I suspect that those games had a lot of their development work done pre-merger, or in the immediate aftermath of the merger before corporate identities had really come together.

      It seems like when companies merge, or get bought out, the integration process is quite slow. They still get to exist for awhile as separate companies doing what they'd been doing (unless they were REALLY on the wrong track), and then they start slowly getting knitted together. A little executive interference here, a talented VP fired due to redundancy there, and you get a very slow death spiral. At least, if it ends up being a bad merger in the long term.

    15. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      a lot of critics panned it as well. It was strange, in those days, to see a realistic CG animated film, rather then the more cartoony/whimsical cg of stuff like toy story. Triggered an uncanny valley effect as well.

      The makers of Toy Story specifically chose plastic and fabric toys for characters in their first film because that's what renderers of the time could make look good. Not surprising that they knew the limitations of the Renderman software that they (and Square) used, since they also wrote it.

    16. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      I don't think the movie was bad at all, but calling it Final Fantasy just to attract the people that knew about the games was bound to become a dissapointment after they realized that it had absolutely nothing to do with it.

      Then again, each Final Fantasy title is in its own self-contained universe, so Spirits Within wasn't too far off from that. It was made shortly after FF7's successful "future dystopia fantasy" and went for the same sci-fi feel. But really, other than a character named Cid, it could have been any random sci-fi movie.

    17. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by MogNuts · · Score: 1

      It's funny you brought this up. It's the market. I had no idea. I figured I'd take a break reading crap drivel by online gaming sites, crap comments, or even /. crap comments. I went and checked out the annual reports and all the other financial reports. I read capcom (a Japanese company with the pulse of the Japanese market), EA, and Activision. A highly reccomended, interesting read. Very easy to read too--you should check it out.

      Basically, the general consensus is that it doesn't matter about the duds. The area of demand and revenue is in DLC, MMO's (F2P or subs), micro transactions, and mobile games. I can't believe how much growth and money was derived from this in 2009 and 2010 and what it's predicated to be in 2011 and 2012. It's astounding. For example, you figured that the bulk of EA's revenue was from traditional console/PC games. Nope. IIRC like 60 or 70% is all from micro transaction/mobile/DLC/PC. Insane!

      Though one odd thing I can't understand is why PC is treated like garbage when not only is this the re-emerging market, but it represents a pretty significant revenue area for most publishers/developers. The PC actually generates revenues on par (or more than) the Wii, PSP, or even the DS's. So why the poor ports and missing DLC/features (which should be in considering this is where the $$$ is at). Any ideas?

    18. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by SpecTheIntro · · Score: 1

      For example, you figured that the bulk of EA's revenue was from traditional console/PC games. Nope. IIRC like 60 or 70% is all from micro transaction/mobile/DLC/PC. Insane!

      Though one odd thing I can't understand is why PC is treated like garbage when not only is this the re-emerging market, but it represents a pretty significant revenue area for most publishers/developers. The PC actually generates revenues on par (or more than) the Wii, PSP, or even the DS's. So why the poor ports and missing DLC/features (which should be in considering this is where the $$$ is at). Any ideas?

      I'm not sure where you're seeing that on their 10-K. I found this interesting myself, so I pulled down EA's annual report and I see the following:

      Net Revenue by platform:

      Consoles - 2342m
      Wireless - 472m

      That's the current breakdown, and mobile is really only half of that. The numbers add up to the total topline revenue EA reported, so it would seem that right now, wireless revenues only account for ~ 10-15% of their total revenue. Forecasts may paint it differently, but that's because everyone wants to be Zynga.

    19. Re:Sad state of affairs for a once great company by timftbf · · Score: 1

      Simple: JRPGs, as a genre, are outdated and most young gamers don't have the patience to put up with them when there are so many more enjoyable games out there.

      That most young gamers aren't interested, I'll give you.

      That there are better games out there? Maybe some 2D platformers (but they are just as "outdated"), or whatever you put the 3D explorer / platformers into (I'm thinking Zelda, Metroid Prime).

      If I had to stick exclusively with one genre of game, though, turn-based RPGs (which mostly points towards JRPGs these days) would certainly be it!

  7. yeah by magnusrex1280 · · Score: 1

    Ha, I forgot FF XIV even existed...

  8. Sod Final Fantasy by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If Deus Ex: Human Revolution is done right, they'll be well into the black again.

    August 11th, folks. Diaries should be marked.

    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    1. Re:Sod Final Fantasy by _xeno_ · · Score: 1

      Given Deux Ex 2, and the last several Square Enix releases, I have every faith in their ability to fuck that up.

      I suppose I should limit that to Eidos releases. Let's see, Eidos's last big release was... Kane & Lynch 2: Dog Days. And that was... ummm...

      So, yeah, I think I'll wait for the reviews before running out to purchase.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    2. Re:Sod Final Fantasy by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      If Deus Ex: Human Revolution is done right, they'll be well into the black again.

      August 11th, folks. Diaries should be marked.

      Atleast the game looks damn good and fascinating so far. Of course it's possible they totally ruin the game, but.. it also has absolutely tremendous potential. If they don't goof up with buggy release and so on it could well become a serious hit.

      I atleast have added it to my "Wait for review and buy if it's good" - list.

    3. Re:Sod Final Fantasy by pjh3000 · · Score: 1

      On Steam it now says August 23rd. So much for just holding it back until the next financial year.

    4. Re:Sod Final Fantasy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you fucking retard, it'll be a cold day in hell before square-enix release something on par with monkey island, let alone more modern classics

      into the black or not, their products suck ass.

    5. Re:Sod Final Fantasy by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      it can't bring such huge huge money flows, due to genre, it is however the only game from them that i'm looking forward to.

      what i'm more interested in, is WHERE THE FUCK IS THE MONEY GOING? I mean, for that much loss you're paying some guys a lot of money! I mean, you could build a fucking stadium with the money and still have enough cash left to keep twenty engine coders and forty artists for the year(you could run the paycheck etc office stuff with the staff from the stadium building project and at least you'd end up with a stadium). consumer cash isn't something that can be just pumped out by increasing teams and team sizes to infinity.

      problem with final fantasy 14 is in the title itself, actually.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    6. Re:Sod Final Fantasy by c0p0n · · Score: 1

      August 11th, folks. Diaries should be marked.

      We should pass a congress bill to make this mandatory. And nuke from orbit those countries which don't comply.

      Most important event this year, without a shadow of a doubt. Even more than groundhog day I dare say.

      --

      Your head a splode
    7. Re:Sod Final Fantasy by bonch · · Score: 1

      No location-specific body damage, auto-regenerating health, a cover system...yeah, I'll pass.

    8. Re:Sod Final Fantasy by jbonomi · · Score: 1

      What? Is this true!? It's so strange how some game development studios seem hellbent on abandoning everything that their fans enjoy. It seems to happen very often.

    9. Re:Sod Final Fantasy by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      what i'm more interested in, is WHERE THE FUCK IS THE MONEY GOING? I mean, for that much loss you're paying some guys a lot of money!

      If you play Final Fantasy 13 for awhile, you'll see where the money is going. That game's production values are amazing. Art is expensive, effects are expensive, and it's clear they had a lot of artists working on that game. They probably did the same for the dead-out-of-the-gate FF14. Now look at all the games that Square-Enix makes, and you might see where that money is going -- the games' expenses are rising, but the units purchased are not.

    10. Re:Sod Final Fantasy by schnell · · Score: 1

      what i'm more interested in, is WHERE THE FUCK IS THE MONEY GOING?

      When businesses report losses in their earnings reports, it doesn't necessarily mean that they actually spent that much money more than they brought in during the process of doing business. What is usually the source of very large losses is that they are taking on charges for future liabilities or writing down assets.

      I am of course too lazy to actually look through their quarterly reports, but my guess is that $158 million loss has a lot do with things like saying "we need to hand out large severance checks to people we are firing because we cancelled their game projects" or "we had developed stuff (code, graphics) built for this game that we valued on our books as assets worth $X million dollars but now they're cancelled so they're worthless" or even "we planned to spend $X million on advertising for these games but had to cancel our contract and pay some or all of that money upfront."

      --
      "95% of all Slashdot .sig quotes are incorrect or completely fabricated." -Benjamin Franklin
  9. Everything they make sucks by Andtalath · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's really that simple, squeenix has lost all manner of quality.
    They just make ugly designs, annoying musc, 100% grindy gameplay and stories which grow less and less cool.

    The main problem is that japans gaming culture and western gaming culture has grown more and more widely apart.

    This really hurts their market.

    1. Re:Everything they make sucks by TheEyes · · Score: 1

      It's really that simple, squeenix has lost all manner of quality.
      They just make ugly designs, annoying musc, 100% grindy gameplay and stories which grow less and less cool.

      The main problem is that japans gaming culture and western gaming culture has grown more and more widely apart.

      This really hurts their market.

      There's a lot to like about FF XIII. The Active Time Battle system is actually pretty cool when you really start delving into it (though the limitation of only six Paradigms is super-limiting in the late/post-game when you have a total of 216 possible combinations) The music and backgrounds were extremely well done; whoever was in charge of character art and scenery did a great job.

      Unfortunately the game ended up failing because of the rather boring and horribly linear plot, which to my knowledge didn't have any of the humor of the previous FF greats (III, VI, VII), and the awful, awful, awful dialogue (at least in the English version, though I can't imagine how it could have been better in Japanese, given the plot).

    2. Re:Everything they make sucks by Tridus · · Score: 1

      Well, that and the whole corridor simulator problem. FF XIII doesn't feel like an RPG world. It feels like a giant hallway.

      --
      -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
    3. Re:Everything they make sucks by Ironhandx · · Score: 1

      Seriously? I'm still not sure what the plot was. I'm a huge fan of FF games, and I own every single one, a couple of them multiple times.... and I have to say, FF XIII was a complete load of crap. Top to bottom.

      I played for 4 hours. I subjected myself to that game for FOUR HOURS. I was trying, very hard, to like it, but.... 4 hours in, the combat system STILL felt like I was wading through that 1 or 2 turn tutorial in some of their other games. It was like "WTF, let me play already". Instead I could probably have taped down my A button and control stick to beat the stupid game.

      They dumbed it down way way too far in a scenario that already needed no dumbing down.

      I'll admit the plot line to that point was very linear/hallway-ish however I could have probably still played through the game if it didn't just suck great big sweaty balls, top to bottom. The only single good thing about it were the graphics, and even those I personally didn't like some of the art style choices.

    4. Re:Everything they make sucks by TaggartAleslayer · · Score: 1

      I actually played all the way through. The world only opens up at the very end, just before the final confrontations. The problem is that the game was on rails for 90% of it. Had they started with the open world, instead of introducing it at 30 hours of play, it might have been a passable entry.

      Even so, and after finishing it, I have no idea what the story was about. It's pretty sad when you're longing for the coherence of VI and VII.

      Even with all of that, the spark is just missing. The little gems from the early entries are almost entirely gone. No canoe, no boat, no free-roaming airship, and there haven't been any appreciable mini-games or side-ventures in a long time. It's all so clinical and linear now that it hardly resembles the original franchise.

    5. Re:Everything they make sucks by jandrese · · Score: 1

      To be fair, nonsensical plots are not exactly uncommon in the FF series. FFX was a huge hit and a big seller and it didn't make a lick of sense by the time you got to the end of it.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    6. Re:Everything they make sucks by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      FFXIV was horrendous
      FFXIII was horrible
      Front Mission Evolved wanted to make me kill people in real life

      You know your company is in trouble when people start running out of bad adjectives to describe your games.

    7. Re:Everything they make sucks by Gravatron · · Score: 1

      That's not a world problem, that's a dungeon design problem.

    8. Re:Everything they make sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The combat system gets a *lot* better... around halfway into the game, when they finally give you full control of your party. :/

    9. Re:Everything they make sucks by Gravatron · · Score: 1

      the story was actually quite interesting. Spoilers ahoy!





      Basically, the Fal'cie were purposely trying to kill the human population, as a sacrifice to bring back their creator, who had long since left them. The war of transgression was a giant setup for this, and it fell to two women, Fang and Vanille, to ultimately commit this act of genocide against cocoon. Fang was willing, but Vanille wasn't. So fang went out it alone, and failed. Vanille's resistance to her focus, the task given her, is the catalyst for all other events in the game. It doomed Pulse's residents, who were mostly whiped out after the war. It doomed all the characters in the game, who all got drug into it by her inaction after waking up.

    10. Re:Everything they make sucks by Ironhandx · · Score: 1

      That plot I could understand fine in FFX. Even if there were a couple of spots that made you tilt your head in confusion, it usually cleared those up somewhere, and the game was fun. The problem with FFXIII is there isn't ANY information. Theres no explanation as to who anyone is for the most part, its like you're expected to just know. Theres not even any help in the blurbs in the manual, and as I said, taping the controller down is an effective method of progressing through the battles in the game.

    11. Re:Everything they make sucks by jandrese · · Score: 1

      I dare you to explain to me if Sin is/was real, or just a dream, or a ghost, or what. Or for that matter, explain exactly what Tidus was.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    12. Re:Everything they make sucks by Ironhandx · · Score: 1

      Done.

      Sin was a monster summoned by that super powerful summoner guy you kill at the end. The summoner gave his whole being over to the summoning of the city that Tidus came from, and Sin was the protection that he built for himself. Tidus really was just a dream, of sorts. He was a part of the massive city that the super powerful summoner guy was summoning into existence to preserve it after it was completely destroyed in a war a thousand years prior to the time that the actual events of FFX took place. However, just as Sin, and the other Aeons that could be summoned had some free-will of their own, so did the residents of the city. The residents lived for a thousand years in isolation, thus they created first Jecht, and then Tidus in a plot to end their own existence. Since Tidus and Jecht were part of the summoning of the city, when the summoner that was maintaining said city died, Tidus went with him.

      Is that good enough for you?

    13. Re:Everything they make sucks by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      That's not a world problem, that's a dungeon design problem.

      It's both when the game (frequently the plot) prevent you from revisiting previous areas. If you can only explore the area that you're in and advance the plot, then you have a dungeon and world problem.

      I loved FF13's worlds, but I'd love a little more flexibility.

    14. Re:Everything they make sucks by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      To expand upon what the other guy said, as explained towards the end of FFX, a thousand years ago the kingdom of Zanarkand was at war with the kingdom of Bevelle. Fearing for its destruction, the high priest of Bevelle, Yu Yevon, channeled the most massive spell the world had ever (or would ever, probably) know: the creation of Sin, which he merged with. Yevon/Sin quickly laid waste to Zanarkand as shown in the game introduction. The survivors of Zanarkand become the Fayth, people who give up their lives to have their souls sealed in statues. This allows them to commune with the summoners, the only people capable of channeling the energy needed to defeat Sin. So in a way, the war never ended, you have the people of Spira fighting against Sin, and the only people to know the truth are the inner circle of Bevelle's priesthood who outlawed technology in an effort to appease Sin and to hide Bevelle's true role in Sin's creation.

      The Fayth use their combined forces in various ways:
      *) They keep a pristine copy of pre-destruction Zanarkand in their living memory. This is where Tidus and Jecht came from. Since he was a resident in the channeled Zanarkand, Tidus exists only as long as the Fayth exist and as long as they keep the Zanarkand summon going. At the end of the game, the Fayth depart as spirits, and Tidus fades from existence.
      *) The Fayth send Aeons forth at the summoner's call.
      *) The Fayth enable the "final summon" to defeat Sin.

      Unfortunately, the spirit of Yu Yevon still exists, and passes to the final summon. It incubates for several years, then is reborn anew as Sin. So every generation, a summoner dies defeating Sin, and the summoner's guardian merges with Yevon to become Sin (which is why Sin was Jecht). This is why the group decides not to go through with the Final Summon, since it would kill Yuna, and would only cause Sin to go into hibernation for a few decades anyway. The only way to defeat Sin was to kill Yevon, the (surprisingly easy) final boss of the game.

      So. The Zanarkand you see destroyed was a dream/projection of the Fayth. (There are several clues that things are not quite real in the game's opening movie, such as the bending and warping of buildings when Sin drew near)
      Tidus and Jecht were also dream/projections of the Fayth.
      Auron was an unsent spirit; he'd died 10 years earlier after confronting Lady Yunalesca.
      Seymour is a normal Guado, but is killed halfway through the game, and exists as a unsent spirit for the rest of the game.

      Final Fantasy X-2 may have changed this continuity, but I didn't play much of it so I wouldn't know.

    15. Re:Everything they make sucks by _xeno_ · · Score: 1

      I have described FFXIII as having this wonderfully complex and beautiful world that you are absolutely forbidden from seeing.

      Throughout the game you get this sense of this vibrant world with an interesting history. But you're never allowed to see it, the most you get are long text-dumps.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    16. Re:Everything they make sucks by TheEyes · · Score: 1

      Heh, I guess I got kind of lucky. I actually didn't even play the game until my dad got stuck near the end of chapter 9. Apparently I got the good part of the game. :)

  10. Supreme Commander 2 not so supreme by macraig · · Score: 1

    They and GPG might have had another big money-maker with Supreme Commander 2, but they went overboard trying to solve the resource demands in big (skirmish) games (the TA-SC games are CPU-intensive). It wound up oversimplified to an embarrassing degree relative to its predecessors, to the point where many gamers loyal to the TA-SC franchise just didn't want to play it and stuck with Supreme Commander (I) and SC:Forged Alliance instead, in spite of the aforementioned demands. I learned to change my expectations and enjoy it, but it earned a lot of negative karma for what was done. I don't know whether it was Square Enix or GPG making those design choices, but it cost them.

    1. Re:Supreme Commander 2 not so supreme by RichiH · · Score: 1

      > where many gamers loyal to the TA-SC franchise just didn't want to play it and stuck with Supreme Commander

      I would argue that the true fans are still sticking to TA Spring. SC is (was?) so unbalanced, it wasn't even funny.

    2. Re:Supreme Commander 2 not so supreme by ifrag · · Score: 1

      but they went overboard trying to solve the resource demands in big (skirmish) games (the TA-SC games are CPU-intensive)

      I think it's more like they don't have a clue what they are doing. AI-War manages skirmishes which handle 1000's of ships flying around. And that's from a little indie shop with like 2 programmers. Granted, it's probably not trivial to optimize something like that, but the Supreme Commander titles are an absolute embarrassment on performance.

      --
      Fear is the mind killer.
    3. Re:Supreme Commander 2 not so supreme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1000's of ships flying around is all nice until you start making realistic physics calculations for each one of them and each and every bullet they fire.

    4. Re:Supreme Commander 2 not so supreme by macraig · · Score: 1

      That's a worthy argument. I didn't mention Spring to skip a little confusion.

    5. Re:Supreme Commander 2 not so supreme by scot4875 · · Score: 1

      Because, you know, realistic physics for each ship and every bullet adds *so* much to the game.

      Just like when I play chess, I like it because of the realistic physics when someone starts throwing pieces around.

      --Jeremy

      --
      Jesus was a liberal
  11. the RPG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think we all know that nothing can possibly match the venerable "Final Fantasy 7" in freedom, storyline, immersion, and... who the fuck am I kidding. They're all bad, folks.

  12. So what? They could make that any time they want by XahXhaX · · Score: 1

    They've been sitting on remaking FF7 for years. $150 million would probably be covered by just the initial release if they were to produce an updated version with modern tech.

    Not that I care either way--I hated that game and pay less attention to Square with each year. But they _could_ do it any time if they only wanted to.

  13. Final? by M8e · · Score: 1

    So are we finally getting a final final fantasy?

  14. They need to kill FFXIV by _xeno_ · · Score: 1

    Who knows exactly how much FFXIV is costing them in development costs and server costs, but that ship has sailed. There's no point sinking money into something that will never turn a profit.

    It's been seven months now. The improvements the game has made are minor at best. (The two biggest are that leveling combat classes is now possible, and that the market place works. Not well, mind you, but it works.) If you ask anyone playing whether or not you should, they'll tell you flat-out it isn't worth it.

    This is not the sign of a game on the road to profitability. With every week that goes by, the ability to earn new players goes down.

    Once they've stopped throwing money at a failed game, then they can start worrying about creating new games that people actually want to play.

    But first, they've got to stop the bleeding.

    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    1. Re:They need to kill FFXIV by Tridus · · Score: 1

      They probably think that the PS3 version will fly because the competition for a PS3 MMO is so much weaker then in the PC MMO market. That and FF XIII proved a lot of people will buy anything that says "Final Fantasy" on the box no matter how bad it is, but relying on that is a great way to destroy your franchise in the long term.

      Square's problem is that the market has changed, and they refuse to move with it. FF XIV is the best example there is: they basically remade FF XI and ignored every lesson learned in the genre since it came out. Unfortunately in that period of time World of Warcraft came out in there and redefined player expectations.

      It's kind of silly, really. Rift came out from an unknown company with a fraction of the budget and managed to blow FF XIV out of the water simply because they looked at what everybody else was doing that worked, and refined it a bit. Square on the other hand is too bloody arrogant to do that, and now they're paying the price.

      I do agree with you though, the game is beyond redemption. Even if they performed a miracle and made it worth playing, the name is so tainted in the market that they'll never get players back.

      --
      -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
    2. Re:They need to kill FFXIV by RogueyWon · · Score: 2

      Agreed. I've heard of plenty of attempts at resurrecting an MMO that's had a poor start and so far as I can tell, these have a 0% success rate. The PS3 version won't save it - particularly not in the aftermath of the PSN leak fiasco, which is going to make people particularly cautious about online gaming on the PS3.

      The game's a failure - abject and total. At this point, keeping it going is doing nothing bar drawing resources from more promising endeavours. If there are any players out there who actually like the game (and I can't say I've come across any, even when logged into it myself), then it's a bit rough for them, but you're always going to back a loser once in a while.

      I suspect the biggest reason why S-E haven't killed it already is pride. To have a main-series FF game acknowledged as a failure that could not be redeemed will be a huge blow to morale, likely not just for executives but throughout the company. It's never happened before; Final Fantasy is part of Square's mythology, with the first title having famously saved the company when it was on the verge of failure (the "Final" in the name was because they expected it to be the last game they ever released). Even the games which have been seen as underwhelming with hindsight (probably 5, 9 and 13) have sold well enough that the company could reasonably present them as successes. 11 was the most successful full-subscription MMO going, until World of Warcraft hit the scene and smashed all previous records. S-E have only themselves (and their cheap Chinese subcontractors) to blame for 14, but that isn't going to make them feel any better about it.

    3. Re:They need to kill FFXIV by Shadow99_1 · · Score: 1

      I'd love to see them keep the graphics engine, and retool the rest for use in a new game... The only thing they got right was the visual appeal. Everything else was fail even from closed beta. I was a beta tester. They didn't even bother to listen to us either. Long standing complaints from day 1 where never solved and the beta site sucked. So after a bit of time I simply stopped even testing it. It was awfully pretty though with compelling visual characters. If it wouldn't cost me just to go in, I'd love to play around with the character generator again. Maybe it's a bad sign when the funnest part of the game was the character creator?

      --
      we are all invisible unless we choose otherwise
    4. Re:They need to kill FFXIV by _xeno_ · · Score: 1

      I'd love to see them keep the graphics engine

      I wouldn't. The engine is a horrible piece of shit.

      Ignoring the fact that it's unnecessarily slow, you still have crazy things like shadows not working. It (was) 2010. How the hell do you manage to screw up shadows?! (I should explain: there is a single parallel light source, and all "mobile objects" - that is, things that aren't part of the map - cast a shadow based on that. And not on, say, the light sources in the map. Which leads to crazy things like you being able to cast a shadow onto a lit fire.)

      Oh, and then there's the bit where the graphics engine crashes if you Alt-Tab out of the game. Still. In 2011. Everyone else fixed that a decade ago. (And, yes, there's a windowed mode. You can still crash it by doing something similar to an Alt-Tab, like locking the desktop or having a UAC prompt appear.)

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    5. Re:They need to kill FFXIV by muridae · · Score: 1

      I would like to take that complaint you linked to seriously, but wow. They don't demonstrate a memory leak, or confuse a memory leak with having lots of stuff in memory; I don't know which is worse. "Oh noes, the game uses 1.5 gigs of RAM" immediately following "Why don't you make the game better by using more cores" seems like the stupidest thing I have seen. Running at 60 to 80% usage doesn't cause damage to your CPU unless you have a crappy heatsink. And if your graphics card is overheating and you are talking about watercooling your system as the solution, you probably screwed up the thermal paste when you bolted a 'new super heatsink' on it and started overclocking.

      Not to say that the FF MMO doesn't have issues. Just that the post should have been titled "Hey Developers, listen to my nonsensical whine-fest." I simply do not understand people who want to play the newest, shiniest game, and then go on to complain that it uses too much resources.

    6. Re:They need to kill FFXIV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone who actually plays FFXIV, primarily for lack of much else to do currently, the game has 2 aspects that is above any other MMO I have played.

      1. Graphical Fidelity of course. Beautifully made character and equipment designs, and take a 10 minute jaunt off of the roads and some solid environments. The problems with this is that there is rarely a reason to leave the roads, so copy & paste all over the place.

      2. Writing. The writing for each of the characters and how they speak is the best and more entertaining that I have come across. They even integrate Lodestone (community website) with in-game events. The recent Hatching-Tide (easter) event had a reporter character give back story and explanation of the events and even tease at the 7th Umbral Era to come (main plot of the game, which I'm thinking is Mid-July based on the prophets).

      Now this is also a key problem. They don't follow the method of "Show don't tell." The biggest issue with the game is lack of things to do aside grinding up jobs, the lead developer before Yoshi-P seems to hate fun. They are working on it, as June's patch actually includes 2 instanced dungeons (rank 30 & rank 50) & a new quest node in each of the three major regions (looks like a farming community from screen shots).

    7. Re:They need to kill FFXIV by _xeno_ · · Score: 1

      I linked to the thread more to demonstrate that I'm not the only one having issues rather than because the OP in that thread makes any sense. If you read through the thread (hell, just the first few pages, really) you'll come across plenty of valid complaints.

      The game requires a ridiculous amount of CPU and GPU power and if we're at all honest looks no better than a game that came out years ago.

      Hell, I've recently been playing through Crysis and Crysis at max settings requires less CPU and GPU time than FFXIV, and there's no way FFXIV looks as nice as Crysis. That's seriously messed up.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    8. Re:They need to kill FFXIV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, and then there's the bit where the graphics engine crashes if you Alt-Tab out of the game. Still. In 2011. Everyone else fixed that a decade ago.

      Well, everyone else besides Team Meat (try alt-tabbing out of Super Meat Boy sometime). But, given they somehow seem blatantly offended by the very concept of PCs playing video games in the first place, I guess that's not too surprising.

  15. Q: If a $5 title can support one developer by Rogerborg · · Score: 1
    ...then how many developers can a $60 title support?
    1. One.
    2. Twelve.
    3. A hundred.

    For extra credit, how much do you have to charge to cover sales, marketing, legal, management, blow and hookers.

    Perhaps the game is just changing, and hojillion yen AAA titles aren't the sure thing they once were, is all. I believe it's still the case that no movie costing over $100,000,000 to make has ever lost money (yes, including Waterworld), but it doesn't follow that the same applies to games.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    1. Re:Q: If a $5 title can support one developer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um. Am I being "wooshed" or something?

      Profits are not in perfectly linear proportion to revenue.

      Revenue is not in perfectly linear proportion to price.

      The portion of revenue earmarked to defray development costs is not a constant.

  16. They sorely miscalculated what we wanted and when by mykos · · Score: 1

    They could have made a new Thief, a new Hitman, Legacy of Kain, or Timesplitters. What did we get?

    A couple of lackluster entries from the tired Tomb Raider franchise while everything else sat on the back burner. They held back some of the most revered franchises of all time, and for what? What were they waiting for?

  17. two obvious reasons come to mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Japanese need to realize you can only rehash classics from the 80s and 90s so many times. Final Fantasy was ahead of it's time with FF7 but they didn't keep innovating and most of the games 5 or 10 years later is still the same kind of character and plot of FF7. But most importantly they should never have gone Playstation exclusive with their flagship titles. Even though the last FF game they released for PC was kind of boring (FF8) I still would have bought FF9 had it been released for PC. But after getting bored of FF8 half way through there's no way I would buy a console just for that! Now ten years later they want to release an MMORPG for PC? Shea right! My brand loyalty is dead by now.

    Oh, also my mom actually tried to play FF Online and they wouldn't take her perfectly valid credit card because Square-Enix wanted some weird special verification from the card company that you had to call and wait on hold forever to get it authorized and she was like "oh, screw it" and went back to playing Mass Effect 2 or whatever she plays. I was like "Shoulda got Warcraft dude, the Japanese haven't innovated since like 1994".

    So basically they shafted all the PC fans years ago and now expect us to take a chance on this half baked MMORPG? Ok, for the people they actually get a sale with they can't even complete the transaction cuz of some security theater nonsense with the credit cards! You don't need a Harvard MBA to see this business isn't going to be going "from good to great". Haha.

  18. Re:They sorely miscalculated what we wanted and wh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They could have made a new Thief, a new Hitman, Legacy of Kain, or Timesplitters. What did we get?

    A couple of lackluster entries from the tired Tomb Raider franchise while everything else sat on the back burner. They held back some of the most revered franchises of all time, and for what? What were they waiting for?

    it's been almost 10 years since legacy of kain defiance and that series has one of the best storylines ever. but all they do is keep spamming a new tomb raider title every year with the old dev group which sucks that they keep that game on the back burner. it's beyond pathetic anymore that this great franchise has wasted away.

  19. I have an idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe they could make GOOD games!

  20. Not just Square-Enix in a quagmire right now by RogueyWon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Square-Enix's problems mirror, to a large extent, those that have afflicted the wider Japanese gaming industry (including, once you discount early Wii hardware sales, Nintendo), during the current console cycle.

    At the heart of this is a failure to evolve their games and franchises to reflect changing times and tastes. If often feels like the modern Japanese games industry doesn't recognise anything between "no change at all" and "total ground-up redesign". It's instructive to compare how the most successful Western developers have managed franchises and general gaming concepts over this time. If you look at the likes of Bioware, Bethesda, Bungie, Blizzard, Valve, even some of EA's own internal development efforts, you can see a pretty ruthless evolutionary approach to design. When a game comes out and the studio begins development either on a sequel or even a new property, the first thing that seems to happen is a look at what people liked and didn't like about the previous game, with this being factored into the development of the sequel.

    Take Bioware as a case-study here. Baldur's Gate came out in 1998 and was pretty successful. However, it was the sequel, which came out a couple of years later, that really revolutionised Western RPGs. Why? Because Bioware had evolved the franchise, removing aspects of the original game that had been "a bit too pen and paper" for CRPG players (such as no-pausing-on-the-inventory-screen mechanics and large amounts of wilderness crawling) and had expanded the areas that had been well received (adding further complexity to the casting system, expanding character dialogue trees and so on). Once Bioware moved on from the Baldur's Gate series, they continued releasing RPGs that very clearly had BG in their DNA, but which shed some of the pricklier aspects of the old series, while borrowing popular elements of Japanese RPGs (such as the "active party" system). Then having reached a point where they faced a serious conflict between hardcore RPG gamers and the more casual crowd, they essentially "fork" their games, with the Dragon Age series pitched for the hardcore and the Mass Effect series for the action demographic. That isn't to say that Bioware don't make mis-steps - Dragon Age 2 feels very much like a mis-step, and Jade Empire can probably be seen as one with hindsight - but an evolutionary approach like this makes it much easier to get back on track after a wobble.

    Then compare Square-Enix's management of its premier RPG property - the Final Fantasy series. There's no evidence of a planned evolutionary approach to the development of the series - just an odd mixture of clinging to past certainties combined with random-throw-of-the-dice leaps into the dark. There are elements of the Final Fantasy series on show in FF13 which feel like products of another era. Random encounters (and I'm sorry, but making them visible on the field map doesn't make them any less random encounters) have been pretty much entirely ditched in the West. Our developers have figured out that - surprise surprise - gamers don't like spending a couple of hours runnng in circles in a dungeon just to level up. Yes, levelling up is part of RPGs, but any Western RPG worth its salt these days ensures that it is done via interesting sidequests and subplots. And yet there they are, still at the centre of the flagship Japanese RPG series (and pretty much every other JRPG).

    The throw-of-the-dice element seems to come in the way that Square-Enix completely changes its battle and level up systems (and often even wider mechanics) for each installment in the series. At times, this has been a strength. It does keep the games from feeling a bit too samey. But when the throw of the dice produces a result that people actually like, it inexplicably never seems to get developed any further. So, for example, FF12's move towards more open-world gameplay was pretty widely welcomed, even by people who didn't like much else about the game. Yet then FF13 comes out and is basically a 30 hour tunnel for the player to

    1. Re:Not just Square-Enix in a quagmire right now by MemoryDragon · · Score: 1

      Actually the problem with japanese development is mostly that once a formula works for them they stick with it in every detail until the steam has run out, exception to the rule is Nintendo. Their luck was mostly that console gamers until recently were very reliable on not being too much angry about constant rehashes that might have changed by a huge influx of former pc gamers to the modern consoles and a so called mass market.
      The entire game design of a japo rpg is basically stuck in the mid 80s when the western crpgs split to some degree with ultima 4 5 and 6 away from the pen and paper dice roll random encounter scheme. The japanese stuck with it and never changed it just added more story visuals and being on rails while western crpgs quickly removed the rails wherevery possible (Bioware being the exception)
      You can see this to some degree in many japanese gaming series and genres. From time to time they try a completely different formula which 90% fails and then they stick back to their copy cat road and 10% it works so they follow that road then.

    2. Re:Not just Square-Enix in a quagmire right now by RogueyWon · · Score: 1

      Agree, save that Nintendo are NOT the exception to the rule. All they do these days is hope that their latest hardware gimmick gets traction (DS and Wii did, 3DS looks like it won't) and remake the same few games - primarily Super Mario World, Super Mario Kart, Super Smash Bros, Mario 64 and Zelda Ocarina of Time - with a different label on the box. Except on the 3DS, they aren't even going to bother changing the label on the Zelda box.

      But yes, the mid-series Ultima games (up to and including 6) were massively influential on the development of JRPGs as a genre. Now, these were great games in their day, but they do feel like curious historical artifacts now.

      It does feel like once a Japanese gaming company has a major success, they try to freeze time at that point. So Nintendo have never moved on mentally from the days of the SNES. Square-Enix is still stuck in the mid-90s when Dragon Warrior ruled the roost (given that the company is more Enix than Square these days) and Sega has only recently and reluctantly started to move on from Sonic (and would dearly love to go back if they could). Nippon-Ichi stopped innovating the moment the first Disgaea became an unexpected international success. The list goes on and on...

    3. Re:Not just Square-Enix in a quagmire right now by Lifyre · · Score: 1

      Very nicely written. Their single console mentality of the previous generation also didn't help and while they've relaxed on that a bit it still seems like anything not Japanese in origin is an afterthought. I owned an original XBox and loved it, the ONLY reason I ever considered a PS2 was for FF and it's relatives. There could have easily been a large number of sales had they taken a truly multi-platform approach and I think that would have improved this generation of games by forcing them to expand their horizons outside of Japan. The US market isn't their target yet, maybe this will be the kick that cracks the ethnocentric wall they've been hiding behind for a couple thousand years.

      Maybe the new Nintendo system will spark some intelligent development and progress but I'm not holding my breath.

      --
      I'll meet you at the intersection of "Should be" and "Reality"
    4. Re:Not just Square-Enix in a quagmire right now by Lifyre · · Score: 1

      Taking something that works and running with it isn't a bad way to go. The difference is Nintendo has managed to do it without completely screwing the game underneath. SE takes the core game then completely changes everything above it. They throw out good and bad mechanics and world environments with little or no logical purpose. The GP argues that there needs to be an evolutionary approach not a wholesale slaughter every generation or no change at all (your examples are perfect) which is what the Japanese game industry seems to do with little or no middle ground.

      --
      I'll meet you at the intersection of "Should be" and "Reality"
    5. Re:Not just Square-Enix in a quagmire right now by RogueyWon · · Score: 1

      The sad thing is, Japanese game development hasn't always been inward looking. As recently as 10 years ago, it was the Japanese developers who were at the forefront of most genres (aside from the fps and RTS, which has always been Western things). Western developers were adopting mechanics from Japanese games like crazy as they rushed to catch up. Then just as the West started to draw level... the Japanese developers just gave up and started to focus exclusively on a slice of the domestic audience where they just didn't have to try as hard.

      At risk of going off-topic, there are parallels with the course of the anime industry in recent years. After the whole bubble and burst in the middle of the last decade, and particularly the US anime industry crash, we saw fewer and fewer anime series that aimed for mainstream appeal - certainly fewer that you could use to introduce interested friends to anime. Instead, the focus shifted towards fanservice laden series with little to no plot and next to no wider-audience potential, but a hardcore fanbase willing to buy the DVDs and figurines at any price.

      Over time, Japan's shifting demographics (ie. the aging population) will turn this into a dead-end. Japanese game and anime developers alike need to recognise this before it's too late.

    6. Re:Not just Square-Enix in a quagmire right now by RogueyWon · · Score: 1

      I think whether Nintendo screws up the core concept varies a lot from franchise to franchise. I personally felt that Mario Kart Wii was a disaster - and I know a good few people who agreed. It put too many karts on the track at once, with too many weapons available and saw the exit of the last vestige of "racing" from the series in favour of weapon spam and random chance.

      Super Smash Brothers came through ok on the Wii, and so did Mario via the Galaxy games - but even those aren't feeling particularly fresh and need a revamp to get rid of some of the more irritating elements (like having limited lives in Mario, plus the fact that the controls never felt quite right on the Wii). Zelda... really does feel like the same thing over and over again by this point. And Okami did it better anyway.

    7. Re:Not just Square-Enix in a quagmire right now by hansamurai · · Score: 1

      Just wanted to say: excellent post!

    8. Re:Not just Square-Enix in a quagmire right now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mario Galaxy uses lives and it's a classic. Lives are a non-issue and a bad example. The games that don't need them don't get them (Zelda).

      As far as physics-based games, what about Katamari Damaci? That was fun (for a few dozen hours at least).

      Otherwise, I think you are spot-on on your assessment.

    9. Re:Not just Square-Enix in a quagmire right now by Winckle · · Score: 1

      Great post.

    10. Re:Not just Square-Enix in a quagmire right now by _xeno_ · · Score: 1

      Mario Galaxy gets away with using lives the same way Super Mario World did: by making them overly abundant and ridiculously easy to get, along with making the consequence of reaching game over be practically non-existent.

      Overall, "lives" is a pointless mechanic and has been for basically the past two decades. The games that still have them do so by making the mechanic entirely meaningless.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    11. Re:Not just Square-Enix in a quagmire right now by bonch · · Score: 1

      For the most part, Western gamers have come to expect more open-ended, free-roaming gameplay, or at least customization options when completing a linear path. Burnout: Paradise switched to an open city in which you may drive freely, manually starting races yourself at various intersections. Batman: Arkham Asylum allows you to gain points that you can spend on customizing your abilities, and the levels are designed with multiple solutions. Infamous and Prototype give you superpowers and dump you in a big city to do what you want.

      When I play a Japanese game, it's often the same anime characters in the same old storylines. How many times am I going to save a steampunk world from corporations stealing the planet's magic?

    12. Re:Not just Square-Enix in a quagmire right now by Locklear93 · · Score: 1

      Nippon Ichi games can be formulaic, it's true. It's not really true to say they "stopped innovating the moment the first Disgaea game became an unexpected international success." It's just that the games where NIS has tried things haven't been the commercial successes about which people hear. Phantom Brave and Makai Kingdom both tried to do completely new, different things with the SRPG genre, but neither took off. Both eliminated the grid, and introduced new, unique means of unit creation. I don't find the gridless system to work for me, but they weren't just pushing a Disgaea clone. Soul Nomad and the World Eaters is an entirely different subgenre of SRPG. It plays drastically differently from traditional SRPGs in the Tactics Ogre/FFT mold, and is quite a lot of fun, in my personal opinion, provided you're willing to take a back seat during battle and let your squad design carry the day. ZHP takes the old roguelike formula, updates it in interesting ways, and does more to revitalize it than any game since probably Nethack. NIS keeps the Disgaea series Disgaea, and as far as I'm concerned, there's nothing wrong with that. When I buy a sequel, I want evolution; I don't want to buy something that's wildly different from the thing that I liked enough to want a sequel in the first place. Outside of Disgaea, they really are trying things. The only truly unifying aspect of NIS titles (in terms of gameplay at least) is a large emphasis on powerleveling, but I wouldn't call that a lack of innovation, so much as an acknowledgment that it's something their core audience enjoys.

    13. Re:Not just Square-Enix in a quagmire right now by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      My girlfriend really hates that about Burnout Paradise. She has one of the older games and she'll just start up one of those crashy races (Road Rage maybe?) and play that for awhile. We got Burnout Paradise and she was pissed off that she can't just start a Road Rage game, she has to wander around looking for the right kind of intersection, and then when she's done with it she's in some entirely new part of the city and has to find a new intersection of the right kind. I have to say that i agree with her on that, though i don't feel as strongly about it since i wasn't a fan of the series before. Would it really have been that hard for them to give us an optional menu to just jump to whatever type of event we wanted?

      I guess perhaps we're just not typical "Western gamers"?

      You seem to have wandered off track a bit about the storylines though. Sure Burnout and Batman and other games are getting more open worlds, but the storylines are still the same. And how many times am i going to play a space marine saving the world from an alien threat? The gameplay can remain static while the storyline changes and vice versa. If anything what people have complained the most about in the latest Final Fantasy games is Squenix trying to change the gameplay _too_ much.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    14. Re:Not just Square-Enix in a quagmire right now by ildon · · Score: 1

      Super Mario Bros. Wii is what you might call an evolution or perfection of a gametype, rather than a repetition or a derivation. But it really has to be played multiplayer to appreciate it, I think. The Zelda series in particular has gotten pretty derivative since Zelda 64, but I don't think it's fair to paint all their products with that brush.

    15. Re:Not just Square-Enix in a quagmire right now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's instructive to compare how the most successful Western developers have managed franchises and general gaming concepts over this time. If you look at the likes of Bioware, Bethesda, Bungie, Blizzard, Valve,

      Oh, I see it! They nearly all start with "B"!

    16. Re:Not just Square-Enix in a quagmire right now by MemoryDragon · · Score: 1

      Actually the japo rpgs never reached ultima 6 level gameplaywise. They were mostly stuck on Ultima 3 level and then added some story elements of Ultima 4. But I would not say Ultima really was that influental the games were designed like that in the 80s top down view was common random encounters were induced by the pen and paper rpgs and being on rails was a design element which was caused by the limitation of the hardware. Ultima always tried to break away from linearity and succeeded while the japanese mostly ramped up the graphics and cut scenes and did not change the core elements mostly inherited from pen and paper and computer limitations. The usual stick which worked until the death mentality of the japanes, I guess.
      Funny thing is when Final Fantasy 7 came out and people from the console crowd said it was better than Ultima, I gave the game a try, and felt like being catapulted back in time gameplaywise 10 years, never could find out why the consolers were praising the game so loudly. Now that I know more about the console scene I basically knew, they did simply not know better that there were other rpg designs.
      Not to say FF7 was a bad game, but it was not the style I preferred and was used to at that time (freeform heavy story driven sandbox)

  21. Whats the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Perhaps a move to re-releasing classics will prove more fruitful than high development cost MMORPGs".

    They've already re-released almost all of their classics for GBA and Wii.

  22. Listen! by Rie+Beam · · Score: 2

    Get me:

    (1) A New Final Fantasy on a tablet and other portable device that, (2) While still pretty, (3) Has a fun and exciting mechanism incorporating touchscreen RPGing and (4) Isn't prepared by a poll of "things teenagers like". Make sure that it (6) Has a triage that goes: Gameplay, Immersiveness, Storyline, and then Graphics; and (7) Has an ability, in some form, to interact with other players, be it via Bluetooth or over the Internet.

    You risk falling victim to being another dead game company if you continue to emphasize high-budget "Wow!" games over ones that will actually draw new players into the series. You don't have to abandon the concepts you've developed, but please, just try something new. Is that so much to ask?

    1. Re:Listen! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where did (5) go?

    2. Re:Listen! by MemoryDragon · · Score: 1

      Actually id rather have another decent Ultima on a tablet than yet another jrpg with random encounters dice roll battles and endless statistics and cutscenes.

    3. Re:Listen! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now I'll be left forever wondering what point (5) was...

    4. Re:Listen! by HeckRuler · · Score: 1

      Sephrioth killed it.
      (and you lost all your white materia)

    5. Re:Listen! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure the three or four other tablet-using, hard-core-RPG-loving gamers would agree with you, but you'd have to be living under a rock to think an RPG for tablet/mobile would be profitable. Mobile gamers have plenty of much better options than an iPad or "smart" phone (DS, PSP, and their ancestors).

      Also, I doubt any real game publisher will enter the mobile/tablet market. The industry is saturated with thousands of tiny studios pumping out hundreds of crappy action/puzzle flash games along with Zynga, the fucknuts and thieves of the game publishing world, who will only make games as a frontend to Facebook.

  23. subject by Legion303 · · Score: 0

    And nothing of value was lost.

  24. Absolutely.. by Junta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Looking back, FFVII remains one of my favorite experiences. I tried to think more carefully about why on a recent replay.

    The top thing had to be the music. It was just fantastic. Maybe I just like chiptunes, but even as late as FFX, it seemed like they had some notable 'background' tracks. Now it seems like they are all generic toned down orchestral pieces that aren't noticable at all and just barely tweak to fit the mood. Except for when they make some pop song to prop up somewhere in the middle of the game...

    The open ended nature of exploration absolutely was up there. There are a lot of games that continue to get this part at least. One of the big moments when playing FFVII for the first time was leavinig midgar. Up until that point, I thought it was going to be a game like FFX or later turned out to be. Then when the world map presented itself, the contrast did a lot (for me) toward making midgar feel more like a cramped place with little control of your destiny relative to the larger world.

    Another thing was how the story panned out. The general theme was certainly not new, but the details were so convoluted, I liked it. Of course, I like Crono Trigger and there was nothing partiuclarly complex about the story at all.

    Finally, I think the lack of definition and no voice actors helped. I fill in the details with whatever I like. Crisis Core tought me I really won't like the voice actors if I get to make up my mind about how they should sound ahead of time.

    The worst thing was the translation.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    1. Re:Absolutely.. by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      Some (actually most) of Uematsu's orchestral pieces are simply stunning.

      The problem - Uematsu is taking lesser and lesser roles as time goes on. He basically had no hand in the FF13 soundtrack, and IT SHOWS. Elevator music in one area? (the Whateveritwascalled Massif) - You've got to be kidding me!

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    2. Re:Absolutely.. by Junta · · Score: 1

      I will admit FF pretty much ended at FFX for me, so I can't comment much on his work in recent games when present. I don't want any MMO, so X1 and XIV are out. XII's gameplay really turned me off so badly I couldn't get past it (basically making the game an offline MMO simulator in many ways). 13.. just... well... yeah....

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    3. Re:Absolutely.. by Rakarra · · Score: 2

      Some (actually most) of Uematsu's orchestral pieces are simply stunning.

      The problem - Uematsu is taking lesser and lesser roles as time goes on. He basically had no hand in the FF13 soundtrack, and IT SHOWS. Elevator music in one area? (the Whateveritwascalled Massif) - You've got to be kidding me!

      Well FFX was Uematsu's last real Final Fantasy soundtrack (although he shared scoring duties in that one too). He and executive producer Hironobu Sakaguchi left Square afterwards to form their own company, and Uematsu works morely on a contract/hired gun basis now.

  25. Read the PDF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The extreme losses are from the "Entertainment facilities" from damage from the earthquake (0.8billion yen)

    The FFXIV was so slapped together that I completely forgot I bought it since I haven't logged into it after the first month. It only appealed to me for the FF storyline, but it's too bloody grindy just to get to the storyline bits.

  26. Re:So what? They could make that any time they wan by RogueyWon · · Score: 2

    I've wondered about this for years myself. A remade FF7, for PS3 and 360, with modern graphics, a few user interface tweaks and possibly a bit of bonus content on the side (like a new optional dungeon or something) would be an absolute gold-mine. Unfortunately, I remember some comments that came out of them last year, to the effect that it would simply be too expensive to remake FF7.

    I'm not sure I can understand how this could possibly be. In terms of size and scale, the game isn't particularly different to other JRPGs. Lost Odyssey, which came out a few years ago now for the 360, had a perfectly acceptable level of current-gen graphics. Factor in that FF7's cutscenes are on the short side compared to those in... say... FF13 and it's hard to see how the price could truly be that prohibitive. I can only assume that S-E were thinking that if they were to remake FF7, they'd need to quadruple the length of all of the cutscenes, adding in a bunch of new Advent Children-style fight scenes and whatnot. That in itself illustrates a good chunk about why the company is going wrong.

  27. Re:They sorely miscalculated what we wanted and wh by MemoryDragon · · Score: 1

    Well the last tomb raider was quite good and a good break from the 20th rehash of the same the same goes for the next tomb raider, there is a new deus ex in the line as well. Ah yes I would love to see another Thief title. But for me both series are not really the same without Warren Spector and Doug Church at the helm.

  28. Re:They sorely miscalculated what we wanted and wh by Vectormatic · · Score: 1

    Timesplitters

    yes fucking please! Bring me a new timesplitters and i will buy it outright, hell, if needed i will buy a new console to run it on. TS2 was pure unadulterd briliance, the most fun i've had multiplaying any FPS and TS:FP put in an awesome storyline too, not to mention a much more expanded multiplayer mode, the level editing was groundbreaking

    --
    People, what a bunch of bastards
  29. Re-releases by Cloud+K · · Score: 1

    Perhaps a move to re-releasing classics will prove more fruitful than high development cost MMORPGs?

    Isn't that pretty much all they've been doing tons of already?

    But they keep insisting on remaking crap like FF2j.

    What they should probably do is something like
    1) Remake Final Fantasy VII
    2) ????
    3) Profit!

    People have been screaming and shouting for an FFVII remake for 10+ years. There are people who would sell their souls to Sony for a remake of that game. Yet they're absolutely adamant that it's never going to happen. There's a market here waiting to give them full high-end retail prices for a game that is already done and just needs a graphical revamp.. take the money!!

    I think there are quite a few who wouldn't mind a remake of VI either.

    It's all well and good saving an FFVII remake for a "special occasion" but that's never going to happen if S-E go bankrupt.

    Either that or go back to making *new* FFs that don't suck. For that they'll probably need Sakaguchi back (preferably Uematsu too)

  30. Sony. by Xacid · · Score: 1

    Sony is what has kept me from playing any of the new FF series. Why?

    Initially the incredibly high cost of buying into the PS3. I can just about by a shitty used car for what they wanted for it when it was first released.

    Then what happened? The price remained relatively high. This part is fairly normal - I typically wait for the price to drop a bit (and it has) and then start measuring out ways to justify such a purchase. But here's the thing - Sony's given me absolutely no reason to *invest* in their console. Particularly with their maneuver of removing OtherOS which was a major selling point for me. And hell, now the recent nonsense with them getting hacked AND losing critical customer data doesn't help one bit.

    So let's take a look at the market now:

    We've got the Wii - which has a few games I absolutely love. The Mario franchise is one that almost always tries to be innovative in some manner and defines new game styles (Mario Galaxy and Paper Mario are some examples that come to mind). Plus the ability to download and play SNES games on there is a big selling point as well (Super Mario RPG anyone?). However, there isn't much more for me beyond that unfortunately. One big con for me is the relatively small list of games that can be played over the network with friends. But the price is spot-on for what I feel it's worth all things considered.

    Now, the Xbox 360: I'm not a huge Halo or teabagging fan but the Xbox 360 DOES have a shit-ton of games out - MANY of which are supported by the Live system. The price is a bit higher but I haven't seen Microsoft shaft their customers on the Xbox nearly as bad as we've seen Sony do. While the titles aren't my absolute faves that I've played so far - I feel confident I could find something I'd enjoy and could play with friends online.

    For those reasons I'm considering heavily in investing in an Xbox 360. I think it'd make a good media player - from what I've read so far it supports a pretty robust set of features for that functionality (by all means correct me if I'm wrong). I think the game selection wont leave me hanging. And fuck, it's not Sony.

  31. Well.... by d.the.duck · · Score: 1

    you shoulda made another Dragon Quest for the PS console. Dragon Quest Valley of the Cursed King was one of the greatest games ever.

    --
    Where does the signature go?
  32. A bad thing can be a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As selfish as this may be it increases the odds of a FFIX re-release! FFIX is my favorite videogame in existence, so I'm all for it. Mildly crash and burn squenix. Only enough so you are forced to re-release FFIX in HD, perhaps enhancing the storyline while you're at it!! :) And maybe throw in a new addition to the Chrono Trigger franchise too (a true sequel, with the same charm and feel as CT, not a travesty like CC).

    Oh yeah, also don't crash and burn for real. I really do love square enix games and would rather have them occasionally release a gem (with a handful of turds in between) than have them not exist at all!

  33. Re-releases are part of the problem by 0racle · · Score: 2

    Many people will not pay again and again and again for the same game. I bought them once, I personally am not going to buy them again.

    Unless they are happy to exist simply as the shadow if their former self, they are going to have to make new games that people want to pay for.

    --
    "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    1. Re:Re-releases are part of the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This a thousand times this! The ff series is trying to recapture ff7.

      Which was about a boy who took on the establishment and won.

      For some reason they are stuck on that story. Oh they change the characters out. But it is the same story over and over.

      FF3/6 were seriously cool as you were part of the establishment. Then you found out it was bad. The first half of the game was you being the bad guy. But you didnt find that out until halfway thru. That was a decent twist that everyone liked. FF7 and onwards just dropped the twist.

      We want a new story... Not the FF7 over and over...

  34. Secret of Mana remake by festers · · Score: 1

    Everyone talks about a FFVII remake (and with good reason, that's a huge cash cow waiting to be milked), but personally I would pay top dollar for a SoM remake that allowed me to play the co-op multiplayer feature over PSN.

    --


    -------
    "Every artist is a cannibal, every poet is a thief."
  35. New art director please by SpinningCone · · Score: 1

    honestly all the FF games seem to look the same to me. i think they need new art direction and to focus on what made their old games classics to begin with. actually a more open hybrid game breeding games like elder scrolls/FO3 and the Final Fantasy franchise could be cool.

    re-release couldn't hurt if they add value, and i'm not talking about just porting chrono trigger to the iPhone. i would totally buy a re-release of FF7 with updated graphics and gameplay for the Wii or the PC.

  36. Remakes aren't something I'd guess most pass on. by JustAnotherIdiot · · Score: 1

    I'd rather just fire up my NES again then shell out more money.
    The only time I'd buy a remake is if it got significant improvements, FF7 comes to mind as a game every nerd wants remade.

    --
    What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
  37. Re:Remakes aren't something I'd guess most pass on by indecks · · Score: 1

    VII isn't even that great. I 'enjoyed' it when I played it back in 97 but it wasn't mind-blowing like III/VI was. I think the SNES Final Fantasy III/VI was their crowning achievement for the series.

    If a Final Fantasy game MUST be remade, I say do a word-for-word, scene-for-scene remake of Final Fantasy III/VI or, even better - Chrono Trigger. That was another amazing game. I've played through Trigger at least 10 times and I probably haven't even gotten all the endings. I'd also love a true sequel to Chrono Trigger, seeing as how Chrono Cross was just... awful.

  38. Re Release Tactics for Xbox Live, then do a sequel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I loved FF tactics for PSX. Please release it for Xbox live arcade and I will gladly give you $15. Take the engine, make a new game and release that and I will gladly give you another $15. I'm sure I'm not the only one

  39. How to fix Square by AdamHaun · · Score: 1

    I think two simple things would go a long way towards recapturing the magic that Square game used to have:

    1. More interactivity
    2. A fucking editor

    Actually, that would help other games too (I'm looking at you, Metal Gear Solid). The fan favorites all have these attributes -- there is no more of the game than there needs to be, and the player is actually allowed to play it. Up through FF7 Square did both of these well. Things like stopping a speeding train or doing exercises to keep warm in a blizzard required the player to push buttons in sequence. Cut scenes were only used for huge vistas or key events, which made them more exciting. Dialogue was short and (mostly) meaningful. Things got slowly worse after that, culminating in FF12, which had almost no world interaction (it's an MMO engine) and was so padded with side-quests that the main plot lost all urgency. I haven't played FF13, but I hear it's even worse.

    If Square can make the jump back to good game design, I think there's hope for Final Fantasy. It's not like Metal Gear or Star Wars where the director's vision is inherently a bad game.

    --
    Visit the
    1. Re:How to fix Square by luther349 · · Score: 1

      yep they need to look back at all the game all they way up to 10-2 and say that style worked and worked for 11 friggen games why did we change it. there last good ff game was for the psp and that was crises core. it was that style of ff game once again and it sold well for a psp game dispite it being easly pirated i have a cfw psp but i have the umd of that game.

  40. becouse ff was changed by luther349 · · Score: 1

    its becouse after 10-2 they tryed to chgange the ff games from the classic hits they have always been. from the turn based battle systems attempted to make them realtime all failers then 13 comes out and they took out freeroam. 14 is a mmo that was a bug ridden mess still tryed to change the game. and yes 10-2 was pre merger.

  41. Re:Remakes are something I'd guess most pass on by JustAnotherIdiot · · Score: 1

    I just realized the subject should say are, not aren't.

    And yes, I agree wholeheartedly with chrono trigger being remade/getting a sequel, though, didn't it get a DS remake?

    --
    What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
  42. Re:Remakes are something I'd guess most pass on by indecks · · Score: 1

    Trigger got a re-release on the DS or Advance, I believe and it had a small bit of extry content to make it meld better with the terrible Chrono Cross, but it was just a re-release much like the PSX version. I'd like to see a true current-gen graphics version. There was actually an amateur remake out there but it was killed off by Square pretty quick. I'm pretty sure there are still some screenies of it out on the Intertubes.

  43. Troubled Times for Square-Enix by Stregano · · Score: 1

    After their latest RPG game did not do very well, then they have one last shot to make it up. If they made an RPG, a really good, innovative one, as their one final shot at making it again. It will be make or break, their final chance. Maybe make it an RPG set in a fantasy world. They could call it Final Fantasy since it could very possibly be there Final Fantasy.

    --
    The world is how you make it
  44. Here's an idea... by John+Pfeiffer · · Score: 1

    ...maybe they could stop releasing TERRIBLE GAMES?

    I'm still waiting for a proper Chrono Trigger re-release/remake.

    High res character sprites, environments in 3D using hand-drawn textures. Leave the original story as-is, but add a bunch of side quests, and some more cause/effect time travel events...

    They do that while us original Chrono Trigger players are STILL ALIVE, and they just might make people forget about a couple-few years worth of TERRIBLE GODDAMN GAMES.

    --

    Friend: "The NIC is misconfigured..." Me: "No prob, I'll just telnet in and fix it." *Silence*
  45. It's hip to be square by Cutting_Crew · · Score: 1

    nm

  46. And it gets worse for square enix. by JustAnotherIdiot · · Score: 1

    Apparently they got hacked too.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13394968

    --
    What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
  47. Re:Remakes are something I'd guess most pass on by JustAnotherIdiot · · Score: 1

    I'll be sure to look for them when I have the time.

    --
    What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
  48. "A move to re-releasing classics"? by TheBlackSwordsman · · Score: 1

    They've been doing that for years. Just look at how many times two of their best games, Final Fantasy IV and VI, have been re-released or remade.

  49. Kingdom Hearts?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope that they don't have to cancel their KH series, it's popular among teens and younger even, Personally I'm waiting for the third to come out because the graphics on a mere PS2 and pretty tiny screen were breathtaking. Can't wait to see what they do with the new technology!!

  50. Final Fantasy is obsolete by manwargi · · Score: 1

    The big problem with Final Fantasy games getting worse with age, the way I see it, is that the series, and many classic turn based RPGs, didn't evolve enough where many other genres and series have. Twenty years ago when Final Fantasy had such a strong following despite tiny pixellated graphics, they had something other games didn't. In an age where points were what mattered and most games had but the simplest of plots, Final Fantasy had characters with personality and background (relatively speaking to other games at the very least), and there was drama. While the rest of the game was spamming "Fight" over and over and healing when necessary, there was a story with endearing characters traveling together and meshing in odd ways. Fast forward to the turn of the century and Final Fantasy still tries to make their games this way. However, the other games have grown up by now. Castlevania, Grand Theft Auto, even Metroid and Super Mario are fleshing in their characters and trying to create a story. Except these series were already actual games. The end result is that pretty much any game you pick up will attempt Final Fantasy's dramatics alongside actual gameplay. Now I'm sure some will argue that some people don't want to play games that require cat like reflexes or hold greater chances of failure, but the classic RPG engine doesn't necessarily have to evolve towards action. Strategy RPGs continue the turn based tradition of Fight/Magic/Item/etc but with added depth that keeps random encounters or grinding or whatever from being the monotonous chore that it usually winds up being. Final Fantasy Tactics went this route as a matter of fact. Now while I haven't played FFXIII word has it that they made it linear, took away from the town going experience, and I know that as far back as FFX the World Map stopped being a thing. That sounds to me like a step backwards from precisely the thing that gave FF its magic.

  51. Good luck with that by Alimony+Pakhdan · · Score: 1

    How about actually coming up with some new content instead of rehashing the same tired crap?

  52. Re:Remakes are something I'd guess most pass on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    CT is great as it is and do not need any remakes. It only needs a sequel!
    I really liked the DS version since it allowed several fun hours during long trips, but I still prefer the SNES version.

  53. Nintendo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe they should have supported the most popular console of the generation instead of releasing off-brand titles with "Crystal" in the name.