Square, weaker than expected, kills studio

[Jagos]

Link (http://kotaku.com/5806511/bankrupted-studio-says-square+enix-demanded-code-by-fax-didnt-recognize-ffxii-screenshots)

I can say I'm not a fan of Square's business practices. If you've heard my rant on Crimson Echoes, you know how I feel about copyright issues. I'll leave it at that.

However, I will say that karma is really a bitch. And maybe, just maybe, Square got what they deserve.[/soapbox]

Regardless, it's come to my attention that they did kill off a studio that was making a game for them.

This is according a story (translated via Google) published today by Aftonbladet, an often provocative tabloid but, with 1.2 million readers, a newspaper of record for Sweden. In direct quotes, co-founders Ulf and Bo Andersson allege that Square Enix didn't pay a cent on a roughly $20 million (USD) contract for "Fortress," (concept art pictured) the code name for a Final Fantasy spinoff that diverged from the series' JRPG roots. The Anderssons say they met all project milestones up to the company's August 2009 bankruptcy.

Now if it's a true story, I can say I'm not surprised. Square has been damn near a fortress, where they try to hoard creativity within with a select group set of designers and engineers, using the programmers to work for a small set of ideas.

Yes, every year, Square lays off a ton of talented people, to hire them all over again for a new project. Meanwhile, at Valve... (http://www.develop-online.net/features/1192/Gabe-Newell-on-Valve)

Interviewer: So, honestly, is it true that everyone at Valve has wheels on their desks and can change what floor they work at whenever they like?
Gabe: Yeah, you know why right?

Factory work…
Yeah. In fact, factories were reorganised around the military concepts in the early twentieth century.
But if you’re trying to invent things, or do novel things, a really strong hierarchical organisation can get in the way of that.
The point being that, if you’re constantly having to change, rigid notions of organisation get in the way. If you look at how quickly the video game environment is changing, what works really well in one generation becomes pretty irrelevant in the next. You go from sprites to polygons. From 256-colour 64x64 bitmaps to shaded polygonal models. Game development studios have to constantly keep reinventing themselves, processes have to change over and over.

Square hasn't learned that. The Crimson Echoes fiasco, their rigid business practices has actually hurt Square at what they do best when compared to other successful companies.

So it's kind of sad to hear GRIN go out the way of the dodo, but perhaps Square can respond to the accusations eventually. For now, I just hope they eventually get back on their feet with a better way of doing business than what they currently do.

-E- Basically GRIN was told to work with Square on an FF game, that they made their own. From what the rumor mill is saying, they did everything that Square asked, but it wasn't what Square wanted. So GRIN lost money, Square lost direction. Ain't politics grand?

[Arcanum]

I especially like this bit:

Feeling like they'd been set up to fail, GRIN sent Square Enix an image taken from Final Fantasy XII saying it was a production shot from "Fortress." The Anderssons say Square Enix replied "It does not look like Final Fantasy."

On the plus side, The Anderssons have a new company now (and they plan to rely less on large companies) and will be revealing something new at E3. Hopefully it goes better than their last three games.

[phil_]

I especially like this bit:It's based on a Swedish tabloid with no other sources.This is just kotaku trawling for page-views, which they got, I guess.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Are you suggesting that tabloids lie to me?

[Meister]

Well not to you specifically.

[Melfice]

There's always two sides to a story, so I'll remain sceptical of this until Square Enix decides to comment on this. If they ever deem it important enough.

Especially the bit about the screenshot seems very much an exaggeration. It could be true! Ho! But... well...

[Kim]

Squeenix does make poor business decisions, and I expect they're in some need to turn things around in that regard, but unless I see other sites covering this story with better sources than Kotaku, I'm just not gonna give the story itself that much credibility.

Fuck Kotaku.

[Bells]

What's the name of that other triple A major game studio that never made poor business decisions, had problems with other developers/studios, projects canceled and alternate periodos of great game releases and not so great/bad game releases?

[Kim]

What's the name of that other triple A major game studio that never made poor business decisions, had problems with other developers/studios, projects canceled and alternate periodos of great game releases and not so great/bad game releases?

Bells, for the love of God, deal with it. People are allowed to criticize Square-Enix and other companies you like. Stop getting so damnably bent out of shape whenever someone criticizes a company you're fond of. "Other companies make similar mistakes," does not excuse Square's mistakes. It's a terrible argument, and it's beginning to get on my nerves that whenever someone says something bad about a company you have to jump in to defend them.

[Azisien]

New source reveals Square-Enix is weak as shit. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Fantasy_XIV)

[Kim]

Yeah, I'd wager FFXIV is more responsible for Square-Enix's current problems than anything else going on right now.

[Meister]

This is just kotaku trawling for page-views, which they got, I guess.
Incidentally this is one reason why I like full quotes of news articles in OPs: so I don't have to give shitty sites like kotaku page views when I want to see the full text for myself.

[Bells]

Bells, for the love of God, deal with it. People are allowed to criticize Square-Enix and other companies you like. Stop getting so damnably bent out of shape whenever someone criticizes a company you're fond of. "Other companies make similar mistakes," does not excuse Square's mistakes. It's a terrible argument, and it's beginning to get on my nerves that whenever someone says something bad about a company you have to jump in to defend them.

Not the case at all!

Also... 2 things. 1... the argument you see as terrible, was not my Argument. and 2, not jumping on the Hatewagon is not automatically "jumping in to defend them". If you can't understand that there might be opposing opinions about stuff, well, what can i say?!

But c'mon, there is a big difference between picking a single company out and bashing it just for bashing it, and an actual critique. I'm not even coming from fond memories of games, the last Final Fantasy i ever completed was 9, and the last RPG from Squeenix i recall playing to the end was Kingdom Hearts 2, there were others, just not to the end... Just Cause 2 was published by Squeenix, i enjoyed that. Front Mission Evolved was by them too, and that one felt boring as shit (even for me, a Giant Robot Aficionado)

You want to hear a honest, real problem that Squeenix has that none of you addressed, it's not on any tabloid, and doesn't have a "I hate them cause they suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck sooooooooo muuuuuuuuuuch" vibe to it?

At one time, they represented the Global standard for high quality RPG, back in a time where peopel didn't automatically divided WRPG's and JRPG's and stuff like Icewind Dale were the rare gems.

Now, the global status evolved, Squeenix not so much. Their methods of production are too slow

FF13 was being developed on 2005, it got released in 2009. Versus13 came around the same time, it's 2011 and no release in Sight. Agito was around too, it started as a cellphone game, it's now a PSP game and it's not even out yet, but so far it seems to be pretty much a cross of The 3rd Birthday and Birth by Sleep. All these games have in common the same sense of Gameplay, even though they are all pretty different and unique on their own.

For major title releases that is just too damn slow and there is no justification for that. In that same time frame, many other companies releases multiple titles that were pretty amazing AND a few duds. So Squeenix production turnaround is becoming pretty damn slow over the years.

Now, are you bashing Squeenix or are you bashing Final Fantasy? Because, more often than not people mix those.

Squeenix developed Mario Hoops 3-3 For the DS, in Japan they published Blur (which i really enjoy, rare for racing games that aren't Burnout Paradise), they distributed both Kane and Lynch 2 AND Batman Arkham Asylum...

So, really, what's the point you're trying to make? Have they become a weaker Developer than they used to be? A Publisher? A Distributor? Is it all just "Final Fantasy isn't as good as it used to be?" ? What? Becuase right now i'm just seeing whining all over the place... and guess what, yes, every major studio (and the medium ones and a ton of the little ones) make terrible decisions and choices...

what i'm seeing here is like people saying that the Mac is dead because the new iPhone and iPad aren't very good. Yeah... same company, not the same thing though.

It's not a matter of "jumping in" or "defending" a company, it's just trying to understand what the fuck people are complaining about. To me, at least, answering "what's wrong with squeenix" with "Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeverything eveeeeeeeeeeerrr" just sounds childish.

[Kim]

And simplifying the complaints that have been made to "EVERYTHING EVER" is rude as fuck, misleading, and makes you look like you're jumping in to defend them.

And yeah it's going to look like a habit of yours when this isn't exactly the first time you've pulled this stuff recently.

[Marc v4.0]

Bells, I would say most of this thread so far has been about the importance of finding reliable sources, and not a single person said anything to the effect of whatever the hell you just went off about.

Maybe -I- read the wrong thread, though...

[Kim]

Bells, I would say most of this thread so far has been about the importance of finding reliable sources, and not a single person said anything to the effect of whatever the hell you just went off about.

Maybe -I- read the wrong thread, though...

You didn't.

[Azisien]

I'm thinking they should cancel funding to Final Fantasy XIV entirely, and re-route it into a full power black ops cover-up of Final Fantasy XIV. Then release a proper jRPG Final Fantasy XIV in like, say, 2013.

Some people will be like "Hey didn't they release that game a few years back?" Most will shake their heads, a few will look a little nervous, but eventually shake their heads as well. The questioner would disappear in the night, never to be heard from again. Conspiracy websites touting 2012 and Nemesis and Greys and so on would gain Final Fantasy XIV headings, with blurry screenshots of the game, or accounts of anonymous people claiming to have played it.

[Jagos]

Bells, I addressed that. On the very first post I seriously took time out to compare what Square could do better as a company and where their problems lay. And you've just undermined that argument to say it was me bitching about the company because "it's Square".

This is really becoming an annoying habit that you're taking the Devil's Advocate approach to this. I'm not saying the story can't possibly be false or true. Hell, I'm making a bluntly honest opinion that Square has decent games, but shitty overhead. I used to love what Square did. But the problem is, they played it too safely, put all their eggs into the FF basket and relied on the MMO formula for three games.

FFXI - Major focus on party mechanics, soloists feel left out.

FFXIV - Out and out bad game. People left in droves. Wada should be out the door.

Now, when you look at their older line up, which would you rather have? Ehrgeiz, Tobal, or another FF game?

Yes, I'm critical of Square's mistakes. I'm critical that they took gameplaying to such an Serious level that they tried to prosecute three fans for making their own game. I hate a company that wants to stop 3D remake of CT, which would have helped them if they had worked with their audience.

I hate how Square is stuck in the business culture mindset instead of thinking how a game can be fun. I am allowed to have an opinion. I looked at the reasons why Square is messing up and why I won't buy *any* of their games on Steam. I have no interest in 3rd Birthday. I don't have a DS, so no World Ends. I gave up on FF after X. There's no Chrono Break in the future and even though Square has the resources (Toriyama), they don't have the original team, who left to pursue their own endeavors. That's a signal that Square is run as a shell of its former self.

And when they continue to have massive layoffs of people and personnel, it tells me that their way of doing business isn't sustainable. So am I critical of their losses? Am I biased against them, or have I satisfied the argument that it's because I look into a lot more than just shallowly thinking "Square sucks?"

[rpgdemon]

I'm thinking they should cancel funding to Final Fantasy XIV entirely, and re-route it into a full power black ops cover-up of Final Fantasy XIV. Then release a proper jRPG Final Fantasy XIV in like, say, 2013.

No no no. Black ops is made by that other company that Bells mentioned.

[Bells]

No no no. Black ops is made by that other company that Bells mentioned.

Treyarch? Activision? Squeenix just published in Japan...

This is really becoming an annoying habit that you're taking the Devil's Advocate approach to this. I'm not saying the story can't possibly be false or true. Hell, I'm making a bluntly honest opinion that Square has decent games, but shitty overhead. I used to love what Square did. But the problem is, they played it too safely, put all their eggs into the FF basket and relied on the MMO formula for three games.

Actually that's not their real problem. They keep Final Fantasy as a Safe Port, but since 2007 they've been literally shooting in all directions. And Shifting their own paradigms of game making. They are trying MUCH more genres, they are trying other roles (publisher, Distributor) much more aggressively, and they tried to "westernize" the core mechanics they used to imply on most of their games...

Actually, ever since Vagrant Story they have been pushing to a more "Action RPG" approach. And that was back in 2000, so it's been happening for at least 10 years.

If anything, i think they did the exact opposite from playing it safe, they just spread their bets too thin, too many projects, too many departments, too many frontlines at once... something is bound to break. And the funding to actually do that comes from rehashing and re-releasing sure sell games... considering that they have a really slow turn a round on those games that bring the big bucks and that there were some honest to goodness global financial troubles in the last 10 years, layoffs were to be expected. Still, they have over 3000 people working there...

[Azisien]

No no no. Black ops is made by that other company that Bells mentioned.

If they just made FFXIV into Black Ops it would be a step in the right direction at least. The direction of higher quality, anyway.

Of course now I'm thinking about gritty moogles and chocobos and spikey-haired characters murdering each other in Vietnam, which again, step in the right direction.

[Kerensky287]

Square-Enix is, unfortunately, a dying company and it seriously needs a fall at some point so that it can get back up, and by that I mean that they need to get desperate again and start trying new things.

I don't mean buying other companies to do their dirty work for them. At this point I still consider games like Just Cause 2 and Deus Ex to be Eidos properties, not S-E properties. Square Enix has yet to branch out of its own accord, for the most part, and the unfortunate thing is that a lot of that has to do with the power of the Final Fantasy brand.

Quick question, guys. If The World Ends With You had been named Final Fantasy: Reaper's Game or something similar (I'm bad at thinking of names), would you have bought it on release? Honestly, I probably would have, and so would a lot of other people. It would've sold a lot better, and S-E would've been rewarded for trying new things (also, Neku might've been in Dissidia, which would fucking rock).

In my unprofessional opinion it seems to me that S-E knows it needs to change but doesn't know how. They're hiring other studios to make it seem like they're doing the work, but they aren't LEARNING anything from it. It's like a kid failing high school who pays a friend to write an essay for him.

What they need to do is branch out on their own, look at what they've done well in the past (FF13's gameplay, FFTactics' story, all of TWEWY), look at where they can improve (FF14's gameplay, FF13's story, all of Dirge of Cerberus), and add in a liberal amount of trying random shit to see what works, and THEN use the Final Fantasy name brand to make sure they can keep a profit.

Also they need to hire new writers because goddamn.

EDIT UPON REREAD: That was a little haphazard but in that last paragraph I didn't mean literally mashing everything good together from every game, I just meant, if they set out to make a shooter, look at what's worked/what hasn't for them in the past, and so forth. I mean, if Eidos is working for them now... who here wants to see Deus Ex stat growth mixed with Just Cause environments and Final Fantasy setting/magic? Me, me!

EDIT2: Okay I'll be honest, that last idea there is just "Just Cause 2 except you play as Bartz Klauser or Ramza Belouve." But I fucking dare you to tell me you wouldn't play that.

[Azisien]

If you can't improve on FFT's job system in 14 years, and in fact can only manage to move backwards, you're right fucked.

[Bells]

If you can't improve on FFT's job system in 14 years, and in fact can only manage to move backwards, you're right fucked.

They almost got it on FF12 Zodiac Job System though... but that was Jp only, and, yes... just "almost".

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Bells, for the love of God, deal with it. People are allowed to criticize Square-Enix and other companies you like. Stop getting so damnably bent out of shape whenever someone criticizes a company you're fond of. "Other companies make similar mistakes," does not excuse Square's mistakes. It's a terrible argument, and it's beginning to get on my nerves that whenever someone says something bad about a company you have to jump in to defend them.

This...seems sorta weird to me.
Like, criticizing something I can understand, and I don't really like Square to begin with so I can see where you're coming from with that. But Bells just made an observation of other companies having similar faults, not really jumping in just to defend them.
Even further, in that case: lets just say Bells did jump in just to defend a company he likes...so what?

People are allowed to criticize, but nobody should defend that company against the criticism?

[Kim]

This...seems sorta weird to me.
Like, criticizing something I can understand, and I don't really like Square to begin with so I can see where you're coming from with that. But Bells just made an observation of other companies having similar faults, not really jumping in just to defend them.
Even further, in that case: lets just say Bells did jump in just to defend a company he likes...so what?

People are allowed to criticize, but nobody should defend that company against the criticism?

If he made a solid argument, I'd be less annoyed, but we come to this thread after the whole Sony thread. There was a lot to complain about how he handled the Sony thread.

So, we come to this. People level legit criticisms against Squeenix, and his response is, "Well they aren't the only ones!" The thread was in response to a specific article and event. It wasn't like we were unfairly singling them out or anything. However, he has to jump in as though we're picking on them, using an argument that barely qualifies as such. When called out on it, he then made an argument that was just all sorts of headshakingly bad.

But Bells just made an observation of other companies having similar faults, not really jumping in just to defend them.

Just emphasizing something, but in a thread wherein people are criticizing a company because due to recent events there is discussion to be had on the company, "They're not the only ones!" is jumping in to defend them.

Right or wrong, were we having a thread wherein we criticized a political party because of something that political party did, and someone jumped in with "Well, this other party..." They're defending it, because it's introducing something off topic to make the faults of the those being discussed seem less bad.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

If he made a solid argument, I'd be less annoyed, but we come to this thread after the whole Sony thread. There was a lot to complain about how he handled the Sony thread.

So, we come to this. People level legit criticisms against Squeenix, and his response is, "Well they aren't the only ones!" The thread was in response to a specific article and event. It wasn't like we were unfairly singling them out or anything. However, he has to jump in as though we're picking on them, using an argument that barely qualifies as such. When called out on it, he then made an argument that was just all sorts of headshakingly bad.

The first one just seemed more like an offhanded comment than a defense, and the second was pretty poorly worded, but the base of it seemed pretty sound.

The gist, as I saw it in any case was that even though their days of one after another hit it out the ballpark Final Fantasy titles are over, they're still publishing a lot of good games, at least trying to find a new niche to work in, with some success. They're nowhere near a dead studio as of yet, and as said before it's pretty likely Kotaku is blowing things out of proportion, and they didn't actually go out of their way to bring GRIN to its knees for no good reason.


Just emphasizing something, but in a thread wherein people are criticizing a company because due to recent events there is discussion to be had on the company, "They're not the only ones!" is jumping in to defend them.

Right or wrong, were we having a thread wherein we criticized a political party because of something that political party did, and someone jumped in with "Well, this other party..." They're defending it, because it's introducing something off topic to make the faults of the those being discussed seem less bad.

I just kind of read "Jumping in to defend it" as if you mean that he has no reason to defend it other than for the sake of doing so. And, again: It just seems sorta weird that you'd jump in here to attack Square, but Bells is doing wrong for defending it.

That might not be what you're meaning to say, but it's how I've seen events unfold over the course of these pages.
For clarity what I mean isn't that you're inheirently wrong for voicing your opinion, but that you seem to be trying to imply that Bells is, rather than just sticking to the point that he made a poor job of it.

[Kim]

The first one just seemed more like an offhanded comment than a defense, and the second was pretty poorly worded, but the base of it seemed pretty sound.

He doesn't get much leeway with me after the Sony thread.

The gist, as I saw it in any case was that even though their days of one after another hit it out the ballpark Final Fantasy titles are over, they're still publishing a lot of good games, at least trying to find a new niche to work in, with some success. They're nowhere near a dead studio as of yet, and as said before it's pretty likely Kotaku is blowing things out of proportion, and they didn't actually go out of their way to bring GRIN to its knees for no good reason.The second one included simplifying the complaints of others in an incredibly rude way. "You guys are just bashing." "Now, are you bashing Squeenix or are you bashing Final Fantasy?"

And my personal favorite: "To me, at least, answering "what's wrong with squeenix" with "Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeverything eveeeeeeeeeeerrr" just sounds childish." This second one was especially frustrating as the bulk of the complaints had nothing to do with Final Fantasy.

Given that this is how Bells went about things in the Sony thread, this is why he doesn't get any leeway with me.

I just kind of read "Jumping in to defend it" as if you mean that he has no reason to defend it other than for the sake of doing so. And, again: It just seems sorta weird that you'd jump in here to attack Square, but Bells is doing wrong for defending it.

That might not be what you're meaning to say, but it's how I've seen events unfold over the course of these pages.
For clarity what I mean isn't that you're inheirently wrong for voicing your opinion, but that you seem to be trying to imply that Bells is, rather than just sticking to the point that he made a poor job of it.It's a thread about Square-Enix, and how they've done something wrong, in response to a particular event which was recently reported on by a (shitty) news site. Me criticizing them isn't "jumping in" because it's the topic of the thread. Defending them wouldn't even be off-topic. By saying, "They aren't the only ones!" Bells is bringing up something irrelevant. The quality of other companies doesn't matter, because it's not a thread about other companies. It's a thread about Square-Enix. If you want to defend them, then defend them, don't try and excuse them by bringing up that they aren't the only bad companies, which is a really shit defense anyways.

Besides that, he did it in an assholish way.

[Bells]

There was a lot to complain about how he handled the Sony thread.

...there was?

wait wait wait... hold one just a second here.

the only thing i saw before my first post was people shitting on Squeenix due to the whole Crimson Echoes deal. Which as much as a dick move as you can call it to be, it was STILL within their rights, and never considered out of question, and EVEN SO in no way reflects the state of that company or it's product not even in part. A couple of "Rumor Mill" gossip crap stories and a dubious article on some tabloid, and this, by you...

Squeenix does make poor business decisions, and I expect they're in some need to turn things around in that regard,

Where in fucking hell is this "legit Criticism"?

Opinion maybe, "I guess", "i think", "i feel" perhaps... and even on that note how is it that what i said, is not in the same league as your Legit Cirticism? Is it just because you disagree with it?

Because really, this is what i'm looking at... you call something bad, someone (not just me) comes around to disagree with that, and you turn around going full blast on "All your arguments are awfull! You always have to be contrary!!" I mean, c'mon already! It's not like you're even presenting some sort of "why" to your reasoning... it's just "bad cause it's bad"

I honestly apologize if i said anything that felt insulting or hurtful, because that was never in my mindset. Nor is trolling or picking fights...

i think it's an exagheration going about saying that a company is bad because it's big or because it's old... it's the same with pretty much any TV show ever after a couple of seasons where it surfaces that sect of former fans to cry out all the time "This show is sooooooooo over", "this show should be put to death already!"

For the things Squeenix do Wrong, i still see some right. They may be bent out of shape and ridiculously outdated in some productions aspects, but i can't honestly remember a big studio or company from japan (and maybe even worldwide) that took as many bets and as many risks (and as many blows) as they have in the last few years. What Jagos said is not really wrong, they did play it safe, maybe too safe. But at the same time they played loose, with thin bets on too many fronts. Like betting All red and All black at the same time, and a few times the roulette goes on 00.

10 years ago they were the Final Fantasy studio, and that's it. From then on they started to branch out more and more. My bet is that at E3 and TGS this year we'll see a more modest return to their roots, they are going to scale down everything, because they tried to spread too wide and it didn't pay off... that's the good thing about a big studio, they can take that heat. A lot of the smaller studios cannot.

As for the Sony thing, here is a video that changed my views on some of those fronts and tackled points i hadn't even though of

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/3306-NOT-a-Security-Episode

[Kim]

the only thing i saw before my first post was people shitting on Squeenix due to the whole Crimson Echoes deal....That was barely more than a single sentence in Jagos' post.

Which as much as a dick move as you can call it to be, it was STILL within their rights, and never considered out of question, and EVEN SO in no way reflects the state of that company or it's product not even in part.Once again, a single sentence.

A couple of "Rumor Mill" gossip crap stories and a dubious article on some tabloid, and this, by you...Yes, and most of the posts in the thread were stating that it was a single source and a post by Kotaku.

Where in fucking hell is this "legit Criticism"?

The full of the post you quoted was actually along the lines of, "Yeah, Squeenix is fucking up lately, but I don't trust this article." Which is actually an incredibly harmless post. It's a thread about how Squeenix fucked up in some regard, and most of the posts are giving them the benefit of the doubt, including my own, but you respond with...

What's the name of that other triple A major game studio that never made poor business decisions, had problems with other developers/studios, projects canceled and alternate periodos of great game releases and not so great/bad game releases?Which is bringing up other companies in an attempt to make Squeenix's flaws look less bad by comparison, cuz "Other companies are doing it!" Why else would you bring it up. That aside, the phrasing of it is jackassy as hell.

Opinion maybe, "I guess", "i think", "i feel" perhaps... and even on that note how is it that what i said, is not in the same league as your Legit Cirticism? Is it just because you disagree with it?Well, to be perfectly honest it wasn't meant as in-depth critique of them, because the point of the post was to say, "Fuck Kotaku." That you responded to a majority of posts that were more in favor of Squeenix than against with a jackassily phrased "Well, they aren't the only ones" in an attempt to make them look less bad by comparison comes off as you jumping in to defend them. Interpreting it as such isn't exactly hard to understand, especially given your recent posting history.

Because really, this is what i'm looking at... you call something bad, someone (not just me) comes around to disagree with that, and you turn around going full blast on "All your arguments are awfull! You always have to be contrary!!" I mean, c'mon already! It's not like you're even presenting some sort of "why" to your reasoning... it's just "bad cause it's bad"You continue to oversimplify my point in an insulting manner, and then wonder why I have negative assumptions about your posts.

I honestly apologize if i said anything that felt insulting or hurtful, because that was never in my mindset. Nor is trolling or picking fights...I have a hard time believing that.

i think it's an exagheration going about saying that a company is bad because it's big or because it's old...Nobody made that argument. This constant oversimplifying into arguments that people aren't actually making is more than a little frustrating and I'd like you to knock it off.

it's the same with pretty much any TV show ever after a couple of seasons where it surfaces that sect of former fans to cry out all the time "This show is sooooooooo over", "this show should be put to death already!"Keep on keeping on with your bad habits.

[McTahr]

Chill. We're talking about vidja games here, guys. If we can't have a civil discussion about the latest Squeenix hearthrob, then what can we?

Anyway, do continue. I for one would love to see some of the legacy companies take a nod from the indie developers (aside from the ones who hack a single genre to death because it's the "big thing", I'm looking at you physics puzzle games), but it's about as likely as Final Fantasy getting a gritty movie reboot starring Carrot Top.

Which, honestly, I kind of want to see now...

[Jagos]

the only thing i saw before my first post was people shitting on Squeenix due to the whole Crimson Echoes deal. Which as much as a dick move as you can call it to be, it was STILL within their rights, and never considered out of question, and EVEN SO in no way reflects the state of that company or it's product not even in part.

Noncon said it best. I'm adding. The correct answer is what Valve did and allow the mod to go through, maybe even buy it and work on it. The wrong answer? Litigation. That was the point. Not trashing them. Now, they have no products coming up that equal AAA quality. They have no pool of ideas to really pull from because (and you seem to have absolutely ignored this part) they get rid of the programmers after a project is done.





Where in fucking hell is this "legit Criticism"?

I can say I'm not a fan of Square's business practices...

Yes, every year, Square lays off a ton of talented people, to hire them all over again for a new project. Meanwhile, at Valve...

Because really, this is what i'm looking at... you call something bad, someone (not just me) comes around to disagree with that, and you turn around going full blast on "All your arguments are awfull! You always have to be contrary!!" I mean, c'mon already! It's not like you're even presenting some sort of "why" to your reasoning... it's just "bad cause it's bad"

Bells, you came in and read one sentence, thought everyone was blasting on Square. Then you went full out to left field fences and hit a home run by saying everyone's grievance is with your debate style. Here's exactly what I laid out in the first one.

Square's business tactics are unsustainable. I've yet to hear one word about how they get a programmer, use them for XYZ, then throw them away. That's like wasted money. And what if the bishie girl has other skills but is only meant to program? It's stupid. I linked to that Valve interview for a reason. Less people, but less corporate culture and more fun games. It's not that hard. Seriously.

I have a problem when they go against their fans. It was one sentence about how I felt on a personal level about their business tactics. I was giving the audience (ie you and anyone who reads this) an idea of where I stand in regards to Square and their tactics. Call it bias, call it mean, but I'd like it a lot better if you know up front I'm not a Square fanboy that's been jaded or going to gloss over the flaws of the company because FF15 is coming out next week.


i think it's an exagheration going about saying that a company is bad because it's big or because it's old... it's the same with pretty much any TV show ever after a couple of seasons where it surfaces that sect of former fans to cry out all the time "This show is sooooooooo over", "this show should be put to death already!"

That was never the argument. The argument has been about how they perform and the consequences of their actions. I'm not moving the goalposts.

For the things Squeenix do Wrong, i still see some right. They may be bent out of shape and ridiculously outdated in some productions aspects, but i can't honestly remember a big studio or company from japan (and maybe even worldwide) that took as many bets and as many risks (and as many blows) as they have in the last few years. What Jagos said is not really wrong, they did play it safe, maybe too safe. But at the same time they played loose, with thin bets on too many fronts. Like betting All red and All black at the same time, and a few times the roulette goes on 00.

Square has been hedging on FF for the past 15 years. What other series gives them fanboys out the ass loads that hasn't had another franchise romp? Why is it that I can still remember their NES racing game but I can't remember them trying anything outside of the RPG field? They didn't play loose at all. If a game wasn't popular in Japan, it wasn't coming stateside. They have no classics collection and are just now re-releasing their older games on the handhelds. It's kind of too little too late if you ask me. Square has a lot of franchises that could use some love. They really aren't spread thin, but again, notice what I said about it being corporate now. It's not about the games but making the money come in to sustain itself.

10 years ago they were the Final Fantasy studio, and that's it. From then on they started to branch out more and more. My bet is that at E3 and TGS this year we'll see a more modest return to their roots, they are going to scale down everything, because they tried to spread too wide and it didn't pay off... that's the good thing about a big studio, they can take that heat. A lot of the smaller studios cannot.

I don't know if you saw the same things as I did, but they're still known for FF and that's it. If they were returning to their roots, it would have to be dependent on letting the artists and programmers making the game they want to make, not what's successful.

[Kim]

The problem is less with their FF emphasis, because FF is just a name really and doesn't mean anything, but that they have very poor quality control for their other titles, regardless of whether there's two Fs in the name or not. They can keep doing what they're doing with Final Fantasy, because those games sell, but if they want to they need to do a better job with all their FF spinoffs and non-FF titles.

EDIT: I must concede the main basis for this claim are the sales of Crystal Bearers.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Didn't read the article till now, they demand the source code to be faxed to them? There is no way that's real. Who the fuck uses faxes anymore. And faxing a source code... wouldn't that take like a month?
And you would need people on both end to transcribe the code to paper then back into computer.

[Kim]

Didn't read the article till now, they demand the source code to be faxed to them? There is no way that's real. Who the fuck uses faxes anymore. And faxing a source code... wouldn't that take like a month?
And you would need people on both end to transcribe the code to paper then back into computer.

Yeah, that sounds like make belief.

[phil_]

But they're crazy, Smarty! Crazy and foreign and a threat to Swedish business interests!

[Jagos]

Non, here's the problem with being a AAA company. You sell well on maybe 2 months out of the year. But then you have almost nothing to do but work to the grind stone the rest of the year. Square has only FFXI that keeps money coming in, but Square's basic problem is their "formula" of making games. I mean seriously, what the hell does it matter if they sell well, but then nothing to show for the rest of the year? It's like they're doomed to fail.

Jagos.
I'm so sorry.
You were in such a blissful place of ignorance.
How could we do this to you?

Let's just say that when I swore off Square games, I wasn't kidding...

[Kim]

Non, here's the problem with being a AAA company. You sell well on maybe 2 months out of the year. But then you have almost nothing to do but work to the grind stone the rest of the year. Square has only FFXI that keeps money coming in, but Square's basic problem is their "formula" of making games. I mean seriously, what the hell does it matter if they sell well, but then nothing to show for the rest of the year? It's like they're doomed to fail.

But my point is they do have stuff coming out the rest of the year. You have your KH titles, your FF spinoffs, and the loads of stuff they're publishing but not developing in-house, and the occasional other title developed by them but isn't FF. They've also got a fair amount of remakes. The problem isn't that they aren't putting stuff out. The problem is what they're putting out, and between Crystal Bearers and FFXIV, I'm going to guess it's the stuff that they are putting out and is failing miserably is what the problem is.

[Nique]

However legit this tabloiding adventure is or isn't, Square deserves lots of critisism for other pretty much valid reasons. They've built their empire partly on the time and money of consumers who supported them (break out the old story about Final Fantasy's cryptic title) and are now, at best, hit or miss with games in the very series that made them huge. AS a Sqaure fan, I feel little betrayed by what seems like a wavering commitment to quality.

Now everytime they introduce some completely sub-par game into their library (or make poor buisness decisions that lead to crappy games) it's hard to give what is meant to be objective critisism of it without being accused by certain fans of being unnaccepting of change or whatever.

Anyway, just my 2 cents becuase I felt like commenting on it that's why shut up Kingdom Hearts Re:Coded made me want to rip out my eyes.

[Kim]

Re:Coded was better than I expected.

I'm not saying it was good, but I went in expecting Numbery Days, and it actually fell halfway between Numbery Days and Birth By Sleep. So that's somethng.

[Nique]

I actually liked 358/2, except for the graphics, suprisingly. Or I'm just forgetting how bad it was. I just remember liking the card-slot system pretty well.

[Jagos]

Is it rather telling that I didn't even know they came up with more games than KH1 and 2?

[Solid Snake]

Man, the only Square-Enix title I enjoyed that was released in the past year and a half or so was Just Cause 2, and I'm guessing Square-Enix actually had very little to do with that.

Oh, and Nier. Wasn't that title Square-Enix, too?
...No I guess it wasn't really Square-Enix either.

I'm still baffled as to why Square-Enix hasn't chosen to remake Final Fantasy VII. Not for the stereotypical reasons of "it was such a great game, it must be remade!" or "the graphics are hopelessly outdated, it needs a reboot!"
But simply because the core mechanics of FFVII are so strong (in regards to the battle system, level progression, Materia, etc.) that you'd think it'd be a great way to teach Square-Enix's new cadre of developers how to actually make a halfway decent game. It's a combination of guaranteed profits and a nice way to remind Square-Enix what it's capable of if it actually invested as much time into gameplay mechanics as it's investing into state-of-the-art graphics. And since all S-E seems to have done in the past few years is exclusively graphics-oriented, they're well equipped to make FFVII look pretty.

...But I guess that strategy didn't work with the Chrono Trigger port to the DS or the FFIV remake, either.

EDIT: Jagos.
I'm so sorry.
You were in such a blissful place of ignorance.
How could we do this to you?

[Nique]

Is it rather telling that I didn't even know they came up with more games than KH1 and 2?


It saved you a lot of heartache is you liked those games and didn't know about these ones is what.

You might get a kick out of Chain Of Memories. Maybe.

...But I guess that strategy didn't work with the Chrono Trigger port to the DS or the FFIV remake, either.

I am totally certain that the FFIV 'remake' was a graphic skin on top of a port + cutscenes. I don't know how game programming works at all so I'm going to go ahead and belive that.

[Kim]

It's important to keep in mind the difference between Square developed titles and Square published titles. Square's main failing this time around is FFXIV, which is killing them more than anything anyone else would like to blame. FFXIII regardless of if you think it was a good game, sold well. I'm generally of the opinion that their spinoffs and remakes probably aren't helping them, but I know Four Warriors of Light did well, though I think it's probably the only one that did well enough to comment on. I can't really compare how much the cost to money made thing is on their remakes, though. Needless to say, they could be using their funding more responsibly, but the stuff that they're just publishing, rather than developing, is often a lot stronger than what they're developing. Kingdom Hearts fills the role of constant new releases, but I'm not sure how long that can keep paying off for them.

Overall, I think the main thing is they're wasting money on projects they don't have any quality control with, FFXIV failed miserably, and XIII Versus has been in the works for years. Between all these I think that's what's hurting them so much. Type-0, Kingdom Hearts 3DS, and Birth by Sleep 2 will probably carry them well enough until XIII Versus hits and sells like cocaine.