CEO: Square Enix Has Become "Weaker Than Expected"
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
Uh the "next Generation" don't get too excited about that.SpaceMedarotterX said:
The next Nintendo Console is only going to catch up with PS3 and 360 and then it won't arrive till late 2012.
The Next Xbox will not be out till 2014 and likely won't have any worth-while games developed for it till 2015. Sony is sticking to it's 2016 release for their next gen console.
I started playing RPGs with Final Fantasy VII.
This puts Final Fantasy III (NES) firmly in the "before my time" category.
Yet I'd rather play Final Fantasy III than Final Fantasy XIII. I think that says a thing or two. (Also, The World Ends With You was awesome.)
This puts Final Fantasy III (NES) firmly in the "before my time" category.
Yet I'd rather play Final Fantasy III than Final Fantasy XIII. I think that says a thing or two. (Also, The World Ends With You was awesome.)
It doesn't surprise me honestly, it seems like Square-Enix is one of those RPG companies that was gradually dumbing down it's product to try and appeal to the broadest possible audience, but ultimatly wound up producing products that didn't appeal to many people at all. That's one of the risks that comes from forsaking a dedicated audience to appeal to a bigger one, if you fail, it can do a lot of damage.
To be brutally honest, I think Square-Enix's fortunes are unlikely to change much based on that line up. For example I notice *TWO* "Final Fantasy XIII" titles there, yet to be honest I haven't heard all that many positive reactions to the base game to warrent sequels and spin offs. Whether it's people talking about how annoying Vanille was, or how the entire game amounts to walking down one hallway while the battles are fought on what amounts to auto pilot, it seems like only the really hardcore fanboys and the REALLY casual "oooh it's preeetty" games had anything nice to say about it overall. When you consider that the core audience for their games are people who want a pretty deep game engine full of menus and number crunching along with those cinematics... with people screaming that they want remakes of games like "Final Fantasy VII" it's kind of telling that they push ahead with "XIII" which seems like one of their least popular properties even if it sold okay based on the brand name, rather than say re-making "VII" or working on a new chapter in the franchise that's based around the conventions/play style of the earlier games that got the fan base interested.
That's just my opinions/observations, only time will tell.
To be brutally honest, I think Square-Enix's fortunes are unlikely to change much based on that line up. For example I notice *TWO* "Final Fantasy XIII" titles there, yet to be honest I haven't heard all that many positive reactions to the base game to warrent sequels and spin offs. Whether it's people talking about how annoying Vanille was, or how the entire game amounts to walking down one hallway while the battles are fought on what amounts to auto pilot, it seems like only the really hardcore fanboys and the REALLY casual "oooh it's preeetty" games had anything nice to say about it overall. When you consider that the core audience for their games are people who want a pretty deep game engine full of menus and number crunching along with those cinematics... with people screaming that they want remakes of games like "Final Fantasy VII" it's kind of telling that they push ahead with "XIII" which seems like one of their least popular properties even if it sold okay based on the brand name, rather than say re-making "VII" or working on a new chapter in the franchise that's based around the conventions/play style of the earlier games that got the fan base interested.
That's just my opinions/observations, only time will tell.
Not that next generation. The next generation of RPGs, the FUCK does console matter?Treblaine said:
Atlus are truly the benevolent overlords of RPG's that I would gratefully bow down to. Look at the DS game The Dark Spire the most simply made RPG of the last 20 years, but also one of the deepest and better than anything SE has put out in 15 years except maybe DQ9 (I loved that game) and not counting games they just published like Arkham Asylum.OutrageousEmu said:
Plus every Atlus game is pretty much a throwback in as much as they REWARD customers by giving them awesome bonuses 90% of the time (just check out the awesome pre-order bundle you get with Dark Souls this fall http://www.destructoid.com/check-out-the-dark-souls-limited-edition-box-art-200975.phtml) I know bonuses cost the companies money, but it's a way to build a customer base and goodwill that equals hire sales and more money. All SE does is give you a piece of paper that advertises things you can buy separately (and we all wanted that exclusive Hope action figure with whining action and sound) and if I remember correctly, FFIX (the last good FF game IMO) forced you to go online and sign up at their site to see the instruction booklet for Gods sake (I could be wrong about that since it's been so long ago, so if someone can tell me otherwise I'd appreciate it). Even the 19.99 Dark Spire DS game I mentioned came with the soundtrack.
Yeah, this doesn't come up with ideas that will bring back that 140+ million bucks SE lost, but doing simple things like what Atlus does for it's fan base as a way to thank them and basically bribe them to continue supporting them, could help SE build an even larger fan base and maybe smooth things over with the many, many former fans that they have pissed off.
Even then, Atlus is 100X better than SE jujst because they take chances and feel more like gamers than just a faceless company (sort of like how Gearbox and CD Projekt seem more like gamers who make games than say Treyarch who make games but have no interest in gamers other than what they will give them from their wallets or bank accounts)
wrong approach...
the purchase of eidos might've been a good idea but you're overdoing it
concentrate on your cash cow FF, Dragon Quest and co.... and then maybe one or 2 of the good eidos properties in a year
and maybe some classic games for the psn for some extra money
you are a company that makes the best and most innovative jrpgs out there
that's what made you great and what you can do best
so do that and people might forget this FF14 mistake of yours
the purchase of eidos might've been a good idea but you're overdoing it
concentrate on your cash cow FF, Dragon Quest and co.... and then maybe one or 2 of the good eidos properties in a year
and maybe some classic games for the psn for some extra money
you are a company that makes the best and most innovative jrpgs out there
that's what made you great and what you can do best
so do that and people might forget this FF14 mistake of yours
Something about Kingdom Hearts, what? I'm there.
I'm not surprised Square Enix is "weaker than expected." I mean, come on.
I'm not surprised Square Enix is "weaker than expected." I mean, come on.
They should straight port their back catalogue onto XBLA, maybe a disc release as well. Seriously they're sitting on all these classic rpgs (a genre that's virtually non-existent on XBLA), they would be inexpensive to port (it's not like they need to develop anything new) and would sell.
Granted that won't turn the company around, but it would generate a solid on-going profit (downloadable games have a longer tail than conventional retail) at almost no risk for comparatively little expense.
Granted that won't turn the company around, but it would generate a solid on-going profit (downloadable games have a longer tail than conventional retail) at almost no risk for comparatively little expense.
How weak were they expecting development to become?Tom Goldman said:
Revamping it will probably take a little longer if they insist on working on FF XIII-2.
Geezus H tapdancing Xist, someone get Wada out of the top position of Square!
He's too blind to exactly what he's doing, which is focusing too much on too many small variables in the equation.
First, Square has a great backlog of games that they refuse to put into the 21st century.
Second, they continue to stick to a few games, at the expense of any innovation whatsoever. People are TIRED of Final Fantasy as a franchise. Just like people got TIRED of Mega man after 3. Yes, you have the same company producing games, but think about Inafune's statements with Capcom in regards to bringing about new IPs. It damn near cost them an IP like Lost Planet or Dino Crisis!
Third, let's be honest. Square always has a MASSIVE layoff of employees once a game is done. They hire a programmer to do a programming job. They hire an artist to do an artist's job. The Japanese system is so damn rigid, that it keeps people from really finding out ways to make games or have a say in the process.
Say that one person, who's hired onto the FF team, has a brain storm to help with a Chrono Break team. It isn't going to happen.
What frustrates me is that Square has become a bureacracy of gaming. EA, same problem. Activision, you already know the details. If all anyone cares about is that a game is on schedule and the profits behind it, they're doing it wrong.
I doubt my lowly voice is going to be heard, but I figure Square is going to have even MORE problems in the future simply because they can not change.
He's too blind to exactly what he's doing, which is focusing too much on too many small variables in the equation.
First, Square has a great backlog of games that they refuse to put into the 21st century.
Second, they continue to stick to a few games, at the expense of any innovation whatsoever. People are TIRED of Final Fantasy as a franchise. Just like people got TIRED of Mega man after 3. Yes, you have the same company producing games, but think about Inafune's statements with Capcom in regards to bringing about new IPs. It damn near cost them an IP like Lost Planet or Dino Crisis!
Third, let's be honest. Square always has a MASSIVE layoff of employees once a game is done. They hire a programmer to do a programming job. They hire an artist to do an artist's job. The Japanese system is so damn rigid, that it keeps people from really finding out ways to make games or have a say in the process.
Say that one person, who's hired onto the FF team, has a brain storm to help with a Chrono Break team. It isn't going to happen.
What frustrates me is that Square has become a bureacracy of gaming. EA, same problem. Activision, you already know the details. If all anyone cares about is that a game is on schedule and the profits behind it, they're doing it wrong.
I doubt my lowly voice is going to be heard, but I figure Square is going to have even MORE problems in the future simply because they can not change.