Square-Enix: This Generation Has Been Way Too Long
- Thread starter The Wooster
- Start date
i dont think you got what he said right. he said the next gen shouldnt be about more graphical power, but more power in general so that you dont feel youre in the uncanny valley and you dont feel like the AI of the game is stupid. these are the barriers to surpass in game development. gameplay has no technological barrier to speak of, but AI and animation have had for a long time. AI is possibly the most important, because it opens up avenues for new more complex challenges for the player.Don Savik said:
hes dead right on what he said. the next gen step shouldnt be more pixels, it should be more IPS.
The current condition of the economy can NOT support the quick turn-around of new consoles
The longer the console generation the more apparent the lack of original games you have released beyond the countless re-remakes/spinoff AND prequels, you did well in the long Era of the PS2 so what gives? FFXIII may have been the prettiest FF game you've made but that doesn't change the fact that was generally unlikeable to play the first FIVE hours in so stop buying doughnuts with a leftover fanboy money you made from the days of FFX Squareenix and have a consistent release with quality "dedicated to gameplay" rather than the CGI cut-scenes
Get with program! you have been dethroned as the RPG Kings for a long time now and was just trailing behind dragging your feet!
The longer the console generation the more apparent the lack of original games you have released beyond the countless re-remakes/spinoff AND prequels, you did well in the long Era of the PS2 so what gives? FFXIII may have been the prettiest FF game you've made but that doesn't change the fact that was generally unlikeable to play the first FIVE hours in so stop buying doughnuts with a leftover fanboy money you made from the days of FFX Squareenix and have a consistent release with quality "dedicated to gameplay" rather than the CGI cut-scenes
Get with program! you have been dethroned as the RPG Kings for a long time now and was just trailing behind dragging your feet!
Translation: People are realizing most of our games are stunningly rendered, but absolutely shallow, boring, badly written piles of tripe and we need another console generation to distract them less they call us out. This is the same kind of short-sighted, ignorant attitude Cliffy B keeps spouting, one that makes me wanna smack him until he forcefully grows a brain.
Uggh, just shut it, Square! You're making it harder for me to keep my faith on you!
So what, they're just gonna wait for the next gen. of consoles to release FFXIII Versus, KH3, FF whatever is next and TWEWY2?!
Look, know they're working on Hitman and Tomb Raider and stuff like that and that they have a bunch of titles out there. But really, you can release games that don't look like a movie. It's okay, Square. Your graphics are awesome and gameplay and story are better. Just look at your PS1 era FFs. We know you wanna make movies, but just give it a shot.
Again, we got the previous FF games that are amazing and incredibly fun. Less power = better games. They got the right tools alright. They just don't know how to use them. In fact, look at any other great games of this gen. They wanna keep making movies and that's fine, but they're sacrificing everything else for that.
So what, they're just gonna wait for the next gen. of consoles to release FFXIII Versus, KH3, FF whatever is next and TWEWY2?!
Look, know they're working on Hitman and Tomb Raider and stuff like that and that they have a bunch of titles out there. But really, you can release games that don't look like a movie. It's okay, Square. Your graphics are awesome and gameplay and story are better. Just look at your PS1 era FFs. We know you wanna make movies, but just give it a shot.
TheKasp said:
Again, we got the previous FF games that are amazing and incredibly fun. Less power = better games. They got the right tools alright. They just don't know how to use them. In fact, look at any other great games of this gen. They wanna keep making movies and that's fine, but they're sacrificing everything else for that.
Their loss of market share is in part to their obsession with pretty hi-res. iphones etc are selling games with cartoon graphics that people like just fine. Angry Birds sells well because it is playful cartoon fun. People would be less eager to play a game with images of real birds and pigs.
I can see why Squeenix wouldn't want this generation to continue; it hasn't been kind to them or the JRPG market in general.
That tech demo gave me the feeling that we'll see a continuation of bad writing on the part of Squeenix. You know, the whole convoluted plot, just because/ roll with it, ass pull crap.
Why, Squeenix, aren't you hiring better writers, who are ACTUAL writers, instead of various techies who have "ideas"?
Why, Squeenix, aren't you hiring better writers, who are ACTUAL writers, instead of various techies who have "ideas"?
Am I the only one who honestly thinks that we'd be better off without another generation, if we just stuck with the consoles we have now? I mean, every time a new generation begins the new games look either the same or slightly better than what we had before. Only after countless releases and devs slamming their heads against a brick wall do we finally get to see what the system is truely capable of (something which E3 just showed us has now happened with the PS3). And what we now know the current generation is capable of is phenomenal, so far beyond what we ever imagined it could do. What I wonder now is, is this not enough? Photo-realism at a breathtaking level running in huge games with complex NPC A.I. running at a buttery-smooth fps rate and somehow we need something more? Why bother? Why go through the painful teething again so soon after we start really laying down a solid infrastructure for the consoles we have?
Rant end.
Rant end.
Because spending a billion or two researching and releasing a $400 piece of entertainment hardware in the middle of a recession is a GREAT idea, particularly when your main competition is ALSO sitting on their hands. (Okay, Nintendo isn't, but given what I hear when I can be arsed to listen, the WiiU is hardware-wise a catch-up release. Correct me if I'm wrong.)
But no, Mr. Game Developer, tell me again how you know so much more about the hardware market than the companies that form it.
Flunky: "Boss! People in New York City prefer to take the bus instead of driving cars!"
Boss: "Well, obviously the solution is to make cars that are faster and more expensive! That's clearly exactly what a New Yorker needs in a vehicle!"
And releasing something that can push twice the polygons for twice the price counteracts this how? Is he suggesting we strap a car battery and an LCD to a PS3? People are playing simple, cheaper, portable games, so we need something that does more complex, expensive, and nonportable games?
If this guy was in a sinking boat, he'd be bailing the ocean back into the boat.
Head hurts. This is an absolute lack of understanding of how hardware works. As much as I dislike the executives at Sony and MS for some of the stupid stuff they do, I don't believe they sat there saying "MAKE THE HARDWARE HARD FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND SO DEVELOPERS WON'T WANT TO CODE FOR IT! MWAHAHAHA!"
Look at the Commodore 64. 64K of RAM. 1 MHz processor. So simple that it can be emulated in full on anything you can get now. So simple that I own a book telling me what every last location in its memory is for. The games from later in its life cycle were better-designed and had things like speech and digitized music and stuff because people had figured out the tricks of the hardware. It's not that the hardware was obtuse, it's that thousands of people playing with it and tinkering over years had found quirks and tricks that were never intended by the creators, and used those tricks to make games better.
Newsflash: If you practice with something, you get better at using it. Is a bike too "complex and inaccessible" because when a kid starts with it he needs training wheels?
You are stupid and you should feel stupid. Casual/online/browser games are less complex not because of the hardware being magically more accessible but because YOU DON'T NEED MOTION CAPTURE FOR ANGRY BIRDS! Simple hardware = simple games. Complex hardware = complex games.
Yeah, Rockstar's Grand Theft Android is gonna be great. And Dead iSpace is sure to amaze. (Sigh.) It's a different set of developers, dumbass! Small outfits without the resources to make a AAA title that exploited a market that wasn't expecting AAA titles!
But prove me wrong. Give up the FMVs and make the next Final Fantasy game work on smartphones. Get back to your 8-bit or even 16-bit roots. Show me you don't need or want all that complex hardware.
Bah, I'm gonna go kick something and vent some steam. I've had a bunch of stupid customers today and now I'm seeing a bunch of stupid pundits.
Man, they make such a legitimate point. I mean, I do actually agree with most of what they say, and I still think the current gen is already a few years too old. Its just that this is square. They take years to work on projects that they announce "coming soon" years beforehand, and their games are basically only advancing on the graphics and animation front.
I WANT to agree with you Squeenix, but you make it so hard to take you seriously!
I WANT to agree with you Squeenix, but you make it so hard to take you seriously!
Coming from the company just known for their pretty faces? I think the indie market and ios/droid market are proving that not only do you not need the most impressive graphics, that you can succeed with retro graphics.
Also, why doesn't Square just develop for the PC? I'm sure they could make absolutely stunning graphics on a powerful gaming rig.
Also, why doesn't Square just develop for the PC? I'm sure they could make absolutely stunning graphics on a powerful gaming rig.
I WAS going to rail against this statement until I actually...read it. Who is writing the headlines for the Escapist? I will still read the articles even if they're not as dramatic or flamebaitish.
aaaanyway
He is right about consoles being pretty unapproachable, but it was a combination of factors which drove people to seek out the faster buck on the other platform, many of which seemed avoidable without hindsight. I feel in some ways this has set us back since the standards for those platforms are not as high, and their instability is on many occasions much worse than what they left behind, but on the whole, this change was needed. They needed to see that coasting on past successes and not improving your games at an intrinsic level would allow competition from people who had no respect for the process to begin with and knew how to get to the bottom line much faster and more efficiently.
HOWEVER, this does not mean that we need to bury the older means of distribution. Consoles don't need to be all trial and error...the work just has to be solid and engaging, rather than pushing it out to fill the shelves during Christmas. Sadly, the focus (as also mentioned in the article) seems to fall on the wrong types of things, leading to games that try too hard in one particular direction before they even set the groundwork for what they need to make the game enjoyable. Instead of sitting on your duff and saying "welp, I've got nothing else", look to the people who made more with less, and think about how having the same standard system for roughly a decade might work in your favor since you have the time to master the development rather than chasing the next thing which may or may not add more meaning than something you can put together based on experience.
Time will tell if these people learned their lessons fast enough to save their asses.
edit: I would like to note that for the most part, when you were not ambling across the largely forgettable overworld map on the FF games up to like, say, FF4, most of the dungeons were just tiny rooms/platforms with pretty long corridors between them anyway, so you're focusing on the wrong part of the game to criticize.
aaaanyway
He is right about consoles being pretty unapproachable, but it was a combination of factors which drove people to seek out the faster buck on the other platform, many of which seemed avoidable without hindsight. I feel in some ways this has set us back since the standards for those platforms are not as high, and their instability is on many occasions much worse than what they left behind, but on the whole, this change was needed. They needed to see that coasting on past successes and not improving your games at an intrinsic level would allow competition from people who had no respect for the process to begin with and knew how to get to the bottom line much faster and more efficiently.
HOWEVER, this does not mean that we need to bury the older means of distribution. Consoles don't need to be all trial and error...the work just has to be solid and engaging, rather than pushing it out to fill the shelves during Christmas. Sadly, the focus (as also mentioned in the article) seems to fall on the wrong types of things, leading to games that try too hard in one particular direction before they even set the groundwork for what they need to make the game enjoyable. Instead of sitting on your duff and saying "welp, I've got nothing else", look to the people who made more with less, and think about how having the same standard system for roughly a decade might work in your favor since you have the time to master the development rather than chasing the next thing which may or may not add more meaning than something you can put together based on experience.
Time will tell if these people learned their lessons fast enough to save their asses.
edit: I would like to note that for the most part, when you were not ambling across the largely forgettable overworld map on the FF games up to like, say, FF4, most of the dungeons were just tiny rooms/platforms with pretty long corridors between them anyway, so you're focusing on the wrong part of the game to criticize.