Square-Enix: "Anyone who tries to make an original game will be fired"

Square-Enix has indeed gotten too sequel-happy, and the backlash from the gaming public is deserved. There's no two ways about it.

At the same time, if we're talking about money and nothing more, I fail to see how their current viewpoint differs from that of any other major publisher these days. I'm also sick and tired of seeing people complain bitterly about sequels. We are in the midst of one of the best gaming stretches in history, and what do we have?

Grand Theft Auto IV
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots
Devil May Cry 4
Gran Turismo 5
Final Fantasy XIII
Gears of War 2
Halo 3
Bioshock 2 and Mass Effect 2 (start of series)
Guitar Hero IV
Resident Evil 5
Marios
Maddens

The biggest games of this generation are almost ALL sequels, and oh yeah, they're also some of the best games ever made. I just find it immensely ironic (and a little bit funny) that we have all these threads pining over the loss of IPs, and then millions are sold of the preceding games, and they're raking in ridiculous review scores. This being the current state of gaming, why SHOULDN'T S-E adopt this approach? Their only problem is that their sequels aren't of the high quality we're familiar with, but that doesn't make the concept wrong. Furthermore, S-E's slacking only affects these lacking sequels; in no way will it affect FFXIII, and I doubt anything thinks it will. On top of which, no entry in the primary FF series can be considered a "sequel," anyway (save FFX-2), which only proves that S-E simply has to kick things up a notch if they want to play the sequel game.

See above.

fathoms_basic

You're getting a little off-topic. The sequels aren't the major issue where Square-Enix are concerned, but rather the "sequels" and spin-offs on the PSP/DS/mobile phones that are receiving a backlash. In fact, compared to other developers/publishers, Square-Enix have had MORE original IPs last and current gen.

Your criticism for people generally complaining about sequels is rather unjust. I didn't buy GTA IV, DMC IV, Gears of War (nor will I buy GoW2), Halo 1, 2, or 3, or any Madden since 1998. Some people really are disgusted not only with sequels and fan fodder, but also with the state of the industry in total (including both companies and the consumer). Nothing is more obnoxious than someone that thinks GTA IV is "one of the greatest games in history." I am not alone in this sentiment either. Some of us are dismayed - three generations ago we had a number of astounding franchises that enjoyed sequels, while a large portion of critically acclaimed games were original IPs, some of which became franchises and some of which have faded into history. This doesn't extend to all franchises. Resident Evil, Silent Hill, Super Mario Brothers, and MGS all deserve sequels. No intelligent person could ever conclusively state that all sequels are a bad thing. While we have to consider the fact that the industry has become more inclusive and thus panders to the lowest common denominator, this doesn't validate the nature of the industry or nearly every company's business model. The truth is that anyone critical of the industry in it's current state has to come to terms with is the simple fact that popular support and financial growth often stifle creativity and originality in ANY medium, whether it be music, literature, or video games. What's worse, there are few possibilities for independent developers outside of Flash media, 8-bit hacks, et cetera. Given the inherent characteristics of video games, how could a developer independently produce something substantial with the requisite levels of production on par with games published through major companies? The video game industry may end up as the first entertainment industry without a thriving independent alternative, which will inevitably create a brain drain within the community. To be frank, the current state of the industry is informed by millions of morons and/or children with bad taste and low IQ scores. Can anyone say "I'm a moron because I bought GTA IV and not Okami?" I can't. This is the same reason that Hip Hop is dead and Post-Rock lost it's immediacy and originality. The same reason that Film Noir became little more than self-parody. The same reason Post-Modernism has become passe. Everything becomes bland with repetition, and everything that is profitable in the consumer market experiences ceaseless repetition.

Yes, yes, I know, I got a little off-topic myself.

And we all know that MGS4 doesn't belong in that group. We all know that Kojima is the Fellini, Bergman, or Kubrick of video game development (in talent and accomplishment, not thematics or plot).

But if SE is taking a hit on profits, then perhaps consumers are no longer the problem. It reflects a decline in brand name confidence.MarcusAntonius

its because people want them but they dont buy/like them.

it will probably happen so take a note about this, when FF7 will be remade, you'll see so many "this is not FF7" sayings, but right now everyone wants a remake.

they way they feel then it would be stupid not to do ff7 remake.insanewolfninja

um....I are in agreement with you.:?

[QUOTE="fathoms_basic"]

Square-Enix has indeed gotten too sequel-happy, and the backlash from the gaming public is deserved. There's no two ways about it.

At the same time, if we're talking about money and nothing more, I fail to see how their current viewpoint differs from that of any other major publisher these days. I'm also sick and tired of seeing people complain bitterly about sequels. We are in the midst of one of the best gaming stretches in history, and what do we have?

Grand Theft Auto IV
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots
Devil May Cry 4
Gran Turismo 5
Final Fantasy XIII
Gears of War 2
Halo 3
Bioshock 2 and Mass Effect 2 (start of series)
Guitar Hero IV
Resident Evil 5
Marios
Maddens

The biggest games of this generation are almost ALL sequels, and oh yeah, they're also some of the best games ever made. I just find it immensely ironic (and a little bit funny) that we have all these threads pining over the loss of IPs, and then millions are sold of the preceding games, and they're raking in ridiculous review scores. This being the current state of gaming, why SHOULDN'T S-E adopt this approach? Their only problem is that their sequels aren't of the high quality we're familiar with, but that doesn't make the concept wrong. Furthermore, S-E's slacking only affects these lacking sequels; in no way will it affect FFXIII, and I doubt anything thinks it will. On top of which, no entry in the primary FF series can be considered a "sequel," anyway (save FFX-2), which only proves that S-E simply has to kick things up a notch if they want to play the sequel game.

See above.

YourChaosIsntMe

You're getting a little off-topic. The sequels aren't the major issue where Square-Enix are concerned, but rather the "sequels" and spin-offs on the PSP/DS/mobile phones that are receiving a backlash. In fact, compared to other developers/publishers, Square-Enix have had MORE original IPs last and current gen.

Your criticism for people generally complaining about sequels is rather unjust. I didn't buy GTA IV, DMC IV, Gears of War (nor will I buy GoW2), Halo 1, 2, or 3, or any Madden since 1998. Some people really are disgusted not only with sequels and fan fodder, but also with the state of the industry in total (including both companies and the consumer). Nothing is more obnoxious than someone that thinks GTA IV is "one of the greatest games in history." I am not alone in this sentiment either. Some of us are dismayed - three generations ago we had a number of astounding franchises that enjoyed sequels, while a large portion of critically acclaimed games were original IPs, some of which became franchises and some of which have faded into history. This doesn't extend to all franchises. Resident Evil, Silent Hill, Super Mario Brothers, and MGS all deserve sequels. No intelligent person could ever conclusively state that all sequels are a bad thing. While we have to consider the fact that the industry has become more inclusive and thus panders to the lowest common denominator, this doesn't validate the nature of the industry or nearly every company's business model. The truth is that anyone critical of the industry in it's current state has to come to terms with is the simple fact that popular support and financial growth often stifle creativity and originality in ANY medium, whether it be music, literature, or video games. What's worse, there are few possibilities for independent developers outside of Flash media, 8-bit hacks, et cetera. Given the inherent characteristics of video games, how could a developer independently produce something substantial with the requisite levels of production on par with games published through major companies? The video game industry may end up as the first entertainment industry without a thriving independent alternative, which will inevitably create a brain drain within the community. To be frank, the current state of the industry is informed by millions of morons and/or children with bad taste and low IQ scores. Can anyone say "I'm a moron because I bought GTA IV and not Okami?" I can't. This is the same reason that Hip Hop is dead and Post-Rock lost it's immediacy and originality. The same reason that Film Noir became little more than self-parody. The same reason Post-Modernism has become passe. Everything becomes bland with repetition, and everything that is profitable in the consumer market experiences ceaseless repetition.

Yes, yes, I know, I got a little off-topic myself.

And we all know that MGS4 doesn't belong in that group. We all know that Kojima is the Fellini, Bergman, or Kubrick of video game development (in talent and accomplishment, not thematics or plot).

[QUOTE="insanewolfninja"]they way they feel then it would be stupid not to do ff7 remake.MarcusAntonius

um....I are in agreement with you.:?

Maybe I'll finally get a sequel to The Bouncer!aspro73

[QUOTE="ikwal"]who cares, JRPG's are all the same game anyway. MarcusAntonius

Goodness, how brilliant and insightful, why didn't I think of that!? Why bother to actually address the topic when we all very well know that all JRPGs are the same, right?

Well Holy ****, /thread.

All this time I never fully realized just how similar Valkyrie Profile is to FF VII. Or just how closely Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturne resembles Breath of Fire. You have truly shown me the light.

With such brilliant powers of analysis in the gaming industry you could review games for EGM or 1up.com. Now that I think on it, it just might be an improvement.

Lol like every shooter is the same. every racer has wheels. every action game has action. thier all the same.

[QUOTE="fathoms_basic"]

Square-Enix has indeed gotten too sequel-happy, and the backlash from the gaming public is deserved. There's no two ways about it.

At the same time, if we're talking about money and nothing more, I fail to see how their current viewpoint differs from that of any other major publisher these days. I'm also sick and tired of seeing people complain bitterly about sequels. We are in the midst of one of the best gaming stretches in history, and what do we have?

Grand Theft Auto IV
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots
Devil May Cry 4
Gran Turismo 5
Final Fantasy XIII
Gears of War 2
Halo 3
Bioshock 2 and Mass Effect 2 (start of series)
Guitar Hero IV
Resident Evil 5
Marios
Maddens

The biggest games of this generation are almost ALL sequels, and oh yeah, they're also some of the best games ever made. I just find it immensely ironic (and a little bit funny) that we have all these threads pining over the loss of IPs, and then millions are sold of the preceding games, and they're raking in ridiculous review scores. This being the current state of gaming, why SHOULDN'T S-E adopt this approach? Their only problem is that their sequels aren't of the high quality we're familiar with, but that doesn't make the concept wrong. Furthermore, S-E's slacking only affects these lacking sequels; in no way will it affect FFXIII, and I doubt anything thinks it will. On top of which, no entry in the primary FF series can be considered a "sequel," anyway (save FFX-2), which only proves that S-E simply has to kick things up a notch if they want to play the sequel game.

See above.

YourChaosIsntMe

You're getting a little off-topic. The sequels aren't the major issue where Square-Enix are concerned, but rather the "sequels" and spin-offs on the PSP/DS/mobile phones that are receiving a backlash. In fact, compared to other developers/publishers, Square-Enix have had MORE original IPs last and current gen.

Your criticism for people generally complaining about sequels is rather unjust. I didn't buy GTA IV, DMC IV, Gears of War (nor will I buy GoW2), Halo 1, 2, or 3, or any Madden since 1998. Some people really are disgusted not only with sequels and fan fodder, but also with the state of the industry in total (including both companies and the consumer). Nothing is more obnoxious than someone that thinks GTA IV is "one of the greatest games in history." I am not alone in this sentiment either. Some of us are dismayed - three generations ago we had a number of astounding franchises that enjoyed sequels, while a large portion of critically acclaimed games were original IPs, some of which became franchises and some of which have faded into history. This doesn't extend to all franchises. Resident Evil, Silent Hill, Super Mario Brothers, and MGS all deserve sequels. No intelligent person could ever conclusively state that all sequels are a bad thing. While we have to consider the fact that the industry has become more inclusive and thus panders to the lowest common denominator, this doesn't validate the nature of the industry or nearly every company's business model. The truth is that anyone critical of the industry in it's current state has to come to terms with is the simple fact that popular support and financial growth often stifle creativity and originality in ANY medium, whether it be music, literature, or video games. What's worse, there are few possibilities for independent developers outside of Flash media, 8-bit hacks, et cetera. Given the inherent characteristics of video games, how could a developer independently produce something substantial with the requisite levels of production on par with games published through major companies? The video game industry may end up as the first entertainment industry without a thriving independent alternative, which will inevitably create a brain drain within the community. To be frank, the current state of the industry is informed by millions of morons and/or children with bad taste and low IQ scores. Can anyone say "I'm a moron because I bought GTA IV and not Okami?" I can't. This is the same reason that Hip Hop is dead and Post-Rock lost it's immediacy and originality. The same reason that Film Noir became little more than self-parody. The same reason Post-Modernism has become passe. Everything becomes bland with repetition, and everything that is profitable in the consumer market experiences ceaseless repetition.

Yes, yes, I know, I got a little off-topic myself.

And we all know that MGS4 doesn't belong in that group. We all know that Kojima is the Fellini, Bergman, or Kubrick of video game development (in talent and accomplishment, not thematics or plot).

Um... Sorry, but you lost me once you said that it is obnoxious to think that Grand Theft Auto 4 is one of the best games ever. There are a ton of games that are totally popular and totally awesome, and since 3, GTA has been one of them.

You can bring up sales all you want, but for the most part, the best games sell quite a bit. GTA4 was great, it sold well. COD4 was great, it sold well. Video games aren't like the film industry where every Oscar winner is some movie the majority of the film watching public hasn't seen.

[QUOTE="YourChaosIsntMe"][QUOTE="fathoms_basic"]

Square-Enix has indeed gotten too sequel-happy, and the backlash from the gaming public is deserved. There's no two ways about it.

At the same time, if we're talking about money and nothing more, I fail to see how their current viewpoint differs from that of any other major publisher these days. I'm also sick and tired of seeing people complain bitterly about sequels. We are in the midst of one of the best gaming stretches in history, and what do we have?

Grand Theft Auto IV
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots
Devil May Cry 4
Gran Turismo 5
Final Fantasy XIII
Gears of War 2
Halo 3
Bioshock 2 and Mass Effect 2 (start of series)
Guitar Hero IV
Resident Evil 5
Marios
Maddens

The biggest games of this generation are almost ALL sequels, and oh yeah, they're also some of the best games ever made. I just find it immensely ironic (and a little bit funny) that we have all these threads pining over the loss of IPs, and then millions are sold of the preceding games, and they're raking in ridiculous review scores. This being the current state of gaming, why SHOULDN'T S-E adopt this approach? Their only problem is that their sequels aren't of the high quality we're familiar with, but that doesn't make the concept wrong. Furthermore, S-E's slacking only affects these lacking sequels; in no way will it affect FFXIII, and I doubt anything thinks it will. On top of which, no entry in the primary FF series can be considered a "sequel," anyway (save FFX-2), which only proves that S-E simply has to kick things up a notch if they want to play the sequel game.

See above.

AtomicTangerine

You're getting a little off-topic. The sequels aren't the major issue where Square-Enix are concerned, but rather the "sequels" and spin-offs on the PSP/DS/mobile phones that are receiving a backlash. In fact, compared to other developers/publishers, Square-Enix have had MORE original IPs last and current gen.

Your criticism for people generally complaining about sequels is rather unjust. I didn't buy GTA IV, DMC IV, Gears of War (nor will I buy GoW2), Halo 1, 2, or 3, or any Madden since 1998. Some people really are disgusted not only with sequels and fan fodder, but also with the state of the industry in total (including both companies and the consumer). Nothing is more obnoxious than someone that thinks GTA IV is "one of the greatest games in history." I am not alone in this sentiment either. Some of us are dismayed - three generations ago we had a number of astounding franchises that enjoyed sequels, while a large portion of critically acclaimed games were original IPs, some of which became franchises and some of which have faded into history. This doesn't extend to all franchises. Resident Evil, Silent Hill, Super Mario Brothers, and MGS all deserve sequels. No intelligent person could ever conclusively state that all sequels are a bad thing. While we have to consider the fact that the industry has become more inclusive and thus panders to the lowest common denominator, this doesn't validate the nature of the industry or nearly every company's business model. The truth is that anyone critical of the industry in it's current state has to come to terms with is the simple fact that popular support and financial growth often stifle creativity and originality in ANY medium, whether it be music, literature, or video games. What's worse, there are few possibilities for independent developers outside of Flash media, 8-bit hacks, et cetera. Given the inherent characteristics of video games, how could a developer independently produce something substantial with the requisite levels of production on par with games published through major companies? The video game industry may end up as the first entertainment industry without a thriving independent alternative, which will inevitably create a brain drain within the community. To be frank, the current state of the industry is informed by millions of morons and/or children with bad taste and low IQ scores. Can anyone say "I'm a moron because I bought GTA IV and not Okami?" I can't. This is the same reason that Hip Hop is dead and Post-Rock lost it's immediacy and originality. The same reason that Film Noir became little more than self-parody. The same reason Post-Modernism has become passe. Everything becomes bland with repetition, and everything that is profitable in the consumer market experiences ceaseless repetition.

Yes, yes, I know, I got a little off-topic myself.

And we all know that MGS4 doesn't belong in that group. We all know that Kojima is the Fellini, Bergman, or Kubrick of video game development (in talent and accomplishment, not thematics or plot).

Um... Sorry, but you lost me once you said that it is obnoxious to think that Grand Theft Auto 4 is one of the best games ever. There are a ton of games that are totally popular and totally awesome, and since 3, GTA has been one of them.

You can bring up sales all you want, but for the most part, the best games sell quite a bit. GTA4 was great, it sold well. COD4 was great, it sold well. Video games aren't like the film industry where every Oscar winner is some movie the majority of the film watching public hasn't seen.

Case in point. You exemplify my entire post, hahaha. There HAVE been amazing games released into what could be considered the definition of mainstream "hardcore" games. You're getting indignant in your defense of one of the most tired franchises in the history of gaming. GTA IV was not totally awesome, though it is totally popular. The same can be said for San Andreas; GTA III and Vice City, on the other hand, were original and astounding games, as was GTA I (not so much for GTA II). Sales figures say NOTHING for an IP/artist/director/musician/developer within the entertainment industry. Though I will admit that where the video game industry is concerned, sales figures CAN be more reflective of enjoyable gameplay, though only on a cosmetic or shallow level. Sure, GTA IV was well-made, enjoyable, and had a high production value. The same can be said for CoD4. Regardless of this, they were both repetative, stale, and underwhelming. Their existence and success underlines my criticism of the industry. A LARGE PORTION OF THE GREATEST GAMES OF ALL TIME HAVE EXPERIENCED UNDERWHELMING SALES. I'm screaming the obvious, man. Are you serious? " aren't like the film industry where every Oscar winner is some movie the majority of the film watching public hasn't seen." You haven't seen most of the films that receive Oscars every year? What do you spend your money on? Oscar winning films are pretty mainstream in my opinion. GTA IV is the equivalent of a film that would win an Oscar....well-produced, interesting, enjoyable...and all together vapid, contrived, and often unoriginal. An exploitation of the mainstream consumer's general tastes, which is simultaneously enjoyable, if uninteresting, for more discerning tastes. My entire criticsm related to the fact that the video game industry lacks a thriving alternative outside of the handheld and mobile phone markets. With each successive generation, such originality becomes more and more scarce. The majority of astounding games still suffer from lower sales or public awareness, just as it is within both the music and film industries. This is all pissing in the wind, because everyone will continue to believe GTA is a super totally awesome franchise, and everyone will go see the new Indiana Jones movie. These are games and movies that convince people that they DO have good taste in between all of the worthless garbage that gets watched, played, and listened to. Millions of people bought GTA IV. You know, millions of people have gotten themselves in to more than $20,000 worth of credit debt too, because people are inherently intelligent. The more inclusive a community becomes, the more simplistic, obtuse, and ignorant it becomes. This isn't criticism, but a recognition of the nature of the human species and it's unavoidable flaws. Groupthink perpetuates repetition. It's the chattering crowd, so to speak. A million people saying "GTA IV. GTA IV. GTA IV." As a group, man is ignorant and simple. It is only the exception that reflects man's possibilities in every facet of life. Anyone expecting the industry to ever become MORE original than it once was is in for an infinite wait, because I can't see video games ever losing their popularity again. I don't expect you or just about anyone else to agree with me and say "Oh yeeaaah, now that I think about it, GTA IV was pretty boring." That wasn't my purpose.

"GTA IV was great, it sold well. CoD4 was great, it sold well." A succinct and astute appraisal.

"Persona 3 sucked, it sold poorly. Oddwold: Strangers Wrath sucked, it sold poorly."

WTF are you talking about? they already announced sigma harmonics, last remnant, infinite undiscovery and that horror game for the DS

I'm just completely shocked that an entire company can be so full of themselves that they actually do nothing but release the same games under the Final Fantasy name... and Dragon Quest to a lesser extent. TWEWY is one of those rare moments where Square-Enix finally tried something a bit different, but now it's onto the next 4 or 5 Final Fantasy remakes.

Personally, I haven't cared for Square, Enix, or Square-Enix in over 15 years. Their brand of RPG is not my style at all.

[QUOTE="TheLegendKnight"]

i'm lazy to write long but i think the problem lies with consumers too. yes they make many ports, spin-offs or any other attempts to make money but thats because of people want them.

MarcusAntonius

But if SE is taking a hit on profits, then perhaps consumers are no longer the problem. It reflects a decline in brand name confidence.

Thats a very good point to bring up and that is one idea that has been flowing through my head, especially, as you guys have brung up, SE's arguably rediculous reproduction of their games. Moreso than anything recently, they've been porting this, remaking that, and spinning off every power I.P. they have.

Indeed its an obvious trend that name recognition is the safest/most reliable mentality towards project production, I believe the extent as well as the methods SE has been milking their I.P.'s is over-exploitation and adversely weakening the strength of the names as well as thethe name of the company, itself.

Of course, I take issue with Wada's direction considering recent releases, including those I'd assume he'd classify as original or non-mainstream (The World Ends With You) are relatively overpriced. Granted, I haven't played Crisis Core or The World Ends With You, I can picture a consumer browsing a store shelf in Walmart, seeing most portable games selling for $9.99-$29.99, and also notice these "outliers" priced at $39.99 and getting turned off almost immediately. I seriously have to look past the idea of desperation to recouperate dev costs and question the level of arrogance of Square Enix with these prices. Who do they think they are to charge those inflated prices?

Maybe Wada needs to question the executive management of the company longer before threatening the jobs of the developers if they don't turn into monotone robots.

Case in point. You exemplify my entire post, hahaha. There HAVE been amazing games released into what could be considered the definition of mainstream "hardcore" games. You're getting indignant in your defense of one of the most tired franchises in the history of gaming. GTA IV was not totally awesome, though it is totally popular. The same can be said for San Andreas; GTA III and Vice City, on the other hand, were original and astounding games, as was GTA I (not so much for GTA II). Sales figures say NOTHING for an IP/artist/director/musician/developer within the entertainment industry. Though I will admit that where the video game industry is concerned, sales figures CAN be more reflective of enjoyable gameplay, though only on a cosmetic or shallow level. Sure, GTA IV was well-made, enjoyable, and had a high production value. The same can be said for CoD4. Regardless of this, they were both repetative, stale, and underwhelming. Their existence and success underlines my criticism of the industry. A LARGE PORTION OF THE GREATEST GAMES OF ALL TIME HAVE EXPERIENCED UNDERWHELMING SALES. I'm screaming the obvious, man. Are you serious? " aren't like the film industry where every Oscar winner is some movie the majority of the film watching public hasn't seen." You haven't seen most of the films that receive Oscars every year? What do you spend your money on? Oscar winning films are pretty mainstream in my opinion. GTA IV is the equivalent of a film that would win an Oscar....well-produced, interesting, enjoyable...and all together vapid, contrived, and often unoriginal. An exploitation of the mainstream consumer's general tastes, which is simultaneously enjoyable, if uninteresting, for more discerning tastes. My entire criticsm related to the fact that the video game industry lacks a thriving alternative outside of the handheld and mobile phone markets. With each successive generation, such originality becomes more and more scarce. The majority of astounding games still suffer from lower sales or public awareness, just as it is within both the music and film industries. This is all pissing in the wind, because everyone will continue to believe GTA is a super totally awesome franchise, and everyone will go see the new Indiana Jones movie. These are games and movies that convince people that they DO have good taste in between all of the worthless garbage that gets watched, played, and listened to. Millions of people bought GTA IV. You know, millions of people have gotten themselves in to more than $20,000 worth of credit debt too, because people are inherently intelligent. The more inclusive a community becomes, the more simplistic, obtuse, and ignorant it becomes. This isn't criticism, but a recognition of the nature of the human species and it's unavoidable flaws. Groupthink perpetuates repetition. It's the chattering crowd, so to speak. A million people saying "GTA IV. GTA IV. GTA IV." As a group, man is ignorant and simple. It is only the exception that reflects man's possibilities in every facet of life. Anyone expecting the industry to ever become MORE original than it once was is in for an infinite wait, because I can't see video games ever losing their popularity again. I don't expect you or just about anyone else to agree with me and say "Oh yeeaaah, now that I think about it, GTA IV was pretty boring." That wasn't my purpose.

"GTA IV was great, it sold well. CoD4 was great, it sold well." A succinct and astute appraisal.

"Persona 3 sucked, it sold poorly. Oddwold: Strangers Wrath sucked, it sold poorly."

YourChaosIsntMe

Oh boy, I see what has happened here! You, my friend, have fallen into the trap where you believe you are the sole voice of reason in a world gone crazy. Nobody ACTUALLY liked GTA4, they just liked it because everybody else did. However, when you like a game such as Persona 3, it is because you alone recognize what an excellent piece of software it is. In effect, you have become one of the emo kids at high school who all try to be different for the sake of being different.

I'm not saying there is a 100% match up between sales and quality, but at least off the Wii it seems pretty fair. Advertising and brand recognition has a lot to do with it as well, but for the most part, if you put out an awesome game, it finds and audience and becomes profitable, even Persona 3. Not every awesome niche game sells millions, but there is still totally a market for top-down shooters and even adventure games.

A company is only as successful as it's consumer base wants it to be. Wake up, they put out these games because people want them. I actually think Every FF up to this point has been exceptional minus the FF1 remake.

Get out of FF7 mode, if people want it back enough, they will remake it.

Oh boy, I see what has happened here! You, my friend, have fallen into the trap where you believe you are the sole voice of reason in a world gone crazy. Nobody ACTUALLY liked GTA4, they just liked it because everybody else did. However, when you like a game such as Persona 3, it is because you alone recognize what an excellent piece of software it is. In effect, you have become one of the emo kids at high school who all try to be different for the sake of being different.

AtomicTangerine

Could you just stick to addressing his points?

[QUOTE="YourChaosIsntMe"]

Case in point. You exemplify my entire post, hahaha. There HAVE been amazing games released into what could be considered the definition of mainstream "hardcore" games. You're getting indignant in your defense of one of the most tired franchises in the history of gaming. GTA IV was not totally awesome, though it is totally popular. The same can be said for San Andreas; GTA III and Vice City, on the other hand, were original and astounding games, as was GTA I (not so much for GTA II). Sales figures say NOTHING for an IP/artist/director/musician/developer within the entertainment industry. Though I will admit that where the video game industry is concerned, sales figures CAN be more reflective of enjoyable gameplay, though only on a cosmetic or shallow level. Sure, GTA IV was well-made, enjoyable, and had a high production value. The same can be said for CoD4. Regardless of this, they were both repetative, stale, and underwhelming. Their existence and success underlines my criticism of the industry. A LARGE PORTION OF THE GREATEST GAMES OF ALL TIME HAVE EXPERIENCED UNDERWHELMING SALES. I'm screaming the obvious, man. Are you serious? " aren't like the film industry where every Oscar winner is some movie the majority of the film watching public hasn't seen." You haven't seen most of the films that receive Oscars every year? What do you spend your money on? Oscar winning films are pretty mainstream in my opinion. GTA IV is the equivalent of a film that would win an Oscar....well-produced, interesting, enjoyable...and all together vapid, contrived, and often unoriginal. An exploitation of the mainstream consumer's general tastes, which is simultaneously enjoyable, if uninteresting, for more discerning tastes. My entire criticsm related to the fact that the video game industry lacks a thriving alternative outside of the handheld and mobile phone markets. With each successive generation, such originality becomes more and more scarce. The majority of astounding games still suffer from lower sales or public awareness, just as it is within both the music and film industries. This is all pissing in the wind, because everyone will continue to believe GTA is a super totally awesome franchise, and everyone will go see the new Indiana Jones movie. These are games and movies that convince people that they DO have good taste in between all of the worthless garbage that gets watched, played, and listened to. Millions of people bought GTA IV. You know, millions of people have gotten themselves in to more than $20,000 worth of credit debt too, because people are inherently intelligent. The more inclusive a community becomes, the more simplistic, obtuse, and ignorant it becomes. This isn't criticism, but a recognition of the nature of the human species and it's unavoidable flaws. Groupthink perpetuates repetition. It's the chattering crowd, so to speak. A million people saying "GTA IV. GTA IV. GTA IV." As a group, man is ignorant and simple. It is only the exception that reflects man's possibilities in every facet of life. Anyone expecting the industry to ever become MORE original than it once was is in for an infinite wait, because I can't see video games ever losing their popularity again. I don't expect you or just about anyone else to agree with me and say "Oh yeeaaah, now that I think about it, GTA IV was pretty boring." That wasn't my purpose.

"GTA IV was great, it sold well. CoD4 was great, it sold well." A succinct and astute appraisal.

"Persona 3 sucked, it sold poorly. Oddwold: Strangers Wrath sucked, it sold poorly."

AtomicTangerine

Oh boy, I see what has happened here! You, my friend, have fallen into the trap where you believe you are the sole voice of reason in a world gone crazy. Nobody ACTUALLY liked GTA4, they just liked it because everybody else did. However, when you like a game such as Persona 3, it is because you alone recognize what an excellent piece of software it is. In effect, you have become one of the emo kids at high school who all try to be different for the sake of being different.

I'm not saying there is a 100% match up between sales and quality, but at least off the Wii it seems pretty fair. Advertising and brand recognition has a lot to do with it as well, but for the most part, if you put out an awesome game, it finds and audience and becomes profitable, even Persona 3. Not every awesome niche game sells millions, but there is still totally a market for top-down shooters and even adventure games.

...your sense of logic and reasoning is absurd. You saw what happened here! You, my friend, have fallen into the trap of making generalizations an art form. I am not the sole voice of reason. I am one of the few, perhaps. You see, even if everyone else liked GTA because of the marketing blitz and word of mouth, they still legitimately enjoyed the game. The only thing I am doing is criticizing their taste in video games. It's funny how you relate to "high school kids," because these are the kids who I could say have good taste in liking GTA IV - primarily because many of them didn't spend the last decade of their lives playing the GTA series. No one is trying to be different, man. Your analysis both undermines my intelligence and presupposes that I am of a certain age group. The Emo kids were different in 1994. So, if you're talking about a different period in time, your criticism might be a little more astute. As it stands, you're just making token gestures with little to no relevance. Advertising and brand recognition have EVERYTHING to do with it. Don't overestimate the intelligence of other human beings, the only thing that will do is get you into a rear-end collision. We're talking about capitalism and the consumer market, not the Fine Arts. You're also considering my posts in an "either/or" way, which you shouldn't do. I'm not saying that GTA IV wasn't a "good" game. It isn't that simple, is it? We're not considering the technical achievements of the game, but what it accomplishes and what it reflects. No, for the most part, that isn't how it works within any industry. It goes against the nature of capitalism and the human condition as they relate to one another. In theory, of course, your statement would be correct. Realistically, the human condition informs economic and political constructs, and thus both reflect the inadequacy of human reasoning/intelligence.

EDIT.

Did anyone else notice that I used "You're" rather than "Your" at the beginning of my reply? I should really stop priding myself on my grammar, huh?

Squaresoft died the day they merged with Enix. This to me is no surprise.foxhound_fox

I wouldn't go that far. Gamers had every reason to have high expectations. The innovation of Enix combined with the more well-known Squaresoft brand, I had visions of Final Fantasy games brimming with bright new implementations into FF's core gameplay to go with Square's big budget production values. Sadly, these hopes were quickly dashed by Star Ocean 3, a trainwreck of a RPG with few redeeming qualities.

VP2 showed that some of the magic is still there, granted not full voltage anymore, but still some static electricity. Again, with major projects on the way out, the verdict is still out on SE. Infinite Undiscovery, Last Remnant, FF XIII, and Star Ocean 4, will define SE as a company once and for all, IMO.

WTF are you talking about? they already announced sigma harmonics, last remnant, infinite undiscovery and that horror game for the DS

vicmackey39

Actually Infinite Undiscovery is developed by tri-ace (Star Ocean-series) not Square-Enix,who are just the publisher.I don´t know if the Last Remnant is Square or Enix-based title...the dev-teams are still split in most cases afaik.Í don´t think a Original Title for a Handheld like the DS really counts,because the development costs are MUCH lower.

...Infinite Undiscovery, Last Remnant, FF XIII, and Star Ocean 4, will define SE as a company once and for all, IMO.

MarcusAntonius

I agree. Squaresoft and Enix may not have enjoyed effective synergy, which, like you said, has actually been kind of anti-climatic. The two companies should have theoretically been the perfect match, and maybe they eventually will be. Even if they remain underwhelming in the short-term, who's to say a new CEO/Board of Directors/etc. won't drastically alter the direction of the company?

I also wonder how it was "no surprise?" If anything, it was a surprise that Square-Enix hasn't been a publishing juggernaut (in terms of innovative and/or exceptionally profitable titles).

Squaresoft died the day they merged with Enix. This to me is no surprise.foxhound_fox

Actually I don´t think so.They died before.Square was bought by Enix because they lost a lot of money (because the movie and the PlayOnline-Stuff,includig the successless FFXI, had been too expensive and didn´t make money) and Enix Games had much more success in Japan (the Dragon Quest-Series alone sold MUCH better).But after all the development teams are still split in case of Original Titles.And FFX-2 was finished before they merged which started the downfall even if honestly it began with The Bounces,Driving Emotion something and in certain cases FFX which felt rushed (opinions split there).

FFX which felt rushed (opinions split there).

Ash2X

And I'm one of those split opinions. FFX seemed fairly polished, although the obscure details on some of the hidden areas and items made one wonder about the rushed part. I swear, reading an FAQ almost made me feel like I played a completely different game.

FF X was solid, it just didn't do enough evolving in terms of gameplay.

i hate this quick reply/quote things...........

ok now as a quote or confirmation to YourChaosIsntMe ( and others )...........

FFS i wont (be able to) write that long post again......so in short;

games are expensive,period.

people dont want to risk wasting their money on unknown games. ( new games/series)

SE doesnt look like they put their all efforts in all games anymore like they do for FF series. recently we didnt see anything close to FFXII quality ( voice acting, musics, visuals, graphics were all top notch with so many details ). in old times they produced Chrono Cross, Xenogears, Vagrant Story equally. all of them were better than Final Fantasy games, were unique, were new. but sadly compared to FF games they didnt do well. so its disencouraging for a company.

as a note, Persona 3 was successful ( because Atlus dont do mass production, they know their financial power, they are not greedy to risk, they have good amount of die-hard fans which are extremely happy with P3), one of the most popular game on PS2 and RPG of the year on GS. so its not possible to be different by playing P3.

i'm really sorry for writing everything short but i'm really pissed off right now...

[QUOTE="Ash2X"]

FFX which felt rushed (opinions split there).

MarcusAntonius

And I'm one of those split opinions. FFX seemed fairly polished, although the obscure details on some of the hidden areas and items made one wonder about the rushed part. I swear, reading an FAQ almost made me feel like I played a completely different game.

FF X was solid, it just didn't do enough evolving in terms of gameplay.

For me,it seems liek they created a nice world and put a storyline in it that fits.Not really interesting but if you make egnough cutscenes no one will care.Too bad it was at the cost of dungeon design...exploring the game world was almost no-existend.Congrats to the designers making a nice to look at world,blame the level-designers and the writers of the poor storyine.And no,kicking the world map didn´t improve the game,it just says that the devs had no time left to make at leat that ineteresting.

Thanks to the god basic fighting-system it wasn´t a bad game after all,but nothing outstanding aside from the graphics back then and the fact that the PS2 had not many RPGs anyway.

I think JRPG's have been largely superseded in the West. I mean cinematic/graphics, leveling/loot, exploration are all done better in other genres. The way JRPG's traditionally handle story and art style now seem to be out of touch with what the western market wants.

I think JRPG's have been largely superseded in the West. I mean cinematic/graphics, leveling/loot, exploration are all done better in other genres. The way JRPG's traditionally handle story and art style now seem to be out of touch with what the western market wants.

Nikalai_88

Nah,I don´t think so.The problem is the hunger to re-invent the genre and destroy it through that.This is not limited to JRPGs.Look at all those WRPGs that try to copy Morrowind+Oblivion...all failed because they just tried to make small things better or re-invent it,but left half of the game undone.And it´s not like there are many good WRPGs.But this happens to all genres.All Point´n Click adventures had been better then those who got direct control over the character.Sometimes they should just do what they can.

Things started out great:

First there was Dragon Warrior on NES, then came Final Fantasy.

Then came a bunch of incredible SNES RPG's, Secret of Mana, ActRaiser and Soul Blazer...

__________

Things started to get iffy around the PSOne:

There was some game with the numeral VII in it. There was XenoGears, the absolutely excellent Vagrant Story, Valkyrie Profile, Star Ocean: Second Story and Dragon Warrior 7.

__________

Things went downhill from there on PS2:

The only game worth noting by this company was Dragon Quest 8... a little company by the name of Atlus came along and turned Squenix on it's ear...

__________

Then came the DS and a bunch of remakes. Just when EVERYTHING seemed lost they put out: "The World Ends With You."

[ The true title of which should have been: "Originality Ends With This Game." ]

I am VERY MUCH looking forward to Dragon Quest(s) V, VI and IX. Two of those are remakes, but all are brand new to this country. I don't know what to say. The future looked incredibly bright in the 16-bit age. They had a few surprise hits in the PSOne era, but after that everything has been a fuzzy, not so great memory...

...Until TWEWY, that is. Just when things looked as if they were going back in the right direction, Square having restored my faith in one fell swoop, THEN they put out the comments that started this whole topic and crushed my spirit all over again.

I DON'T like wishy-washy, indecisiveness, and Square seems to be nothing BUT that lately! :evil:

__________

I can't rave enough about TWEWY. It's just it's Publisher that seems to be waffling unpredictably lately, and that makes me sad!

[QUOTE="Nikalai_88"]

I think JRPG's have been largely superseded in the West. I mean cinematic/graphics, leveling/loot, exploration are all done better in other genres. The way JRPG's traditionally handle story and art style now seem to be out of touch with what the western market wants.

Ash2X

Nah,I don´t think so.The problem is the hunger to re-invent the genre and destroy it through that.This is not limited to JRPGs.Look at all those WRPGs that try to copy Morrowind+Oblivion...all failed because they just tried to make small things better or re-invent it,but left half of the game undone.And it´s not like there are many good WRPGs.But this happens to all genres.All Point´n Click adventures had been better then those who got direct control over the character.Sometimes they should just do what they can.

I am not sure what you mean so allow me to simply elaborate.

Cinematics/Graphics-JRPG's and especially the Final Fantasy series has some of the best production values in any game. Now technically Western developers hold the upper hand. At the same time the traditional wow factor of JRPG's has been CGI, but now many other forms of presentation have become more popular, especially in-game real time.

Loot/Leveling- I am by no means an expert on JRPG's but the ones I played like say FFVII and FFX had somewhat mediocre loot. Item progression was relatively linear, with you upgrading your sword to a more powerfull one, and other than a few exceptions I found it to be the norm. It just does not have that reward feeling that MMOs give you. The same for the leveling/character customization, MMOs give you more options in classes, in the customization of your classes and a larger spell selection. I heard that older JRPGs had the job system, hopefully they would go back to that.

Exploration- I am not sure how to explain this one, so in the west you have games like Stalker and Morrowind, I am not sure there is something that compares to those games in Japan.

I am not stating that WRPG's are better and you might think that it is unfair that I am taking the best elements from many genres but I believe that most people play a variety of games and can compare the elements that they share. And as I said before the art and story of JRPG's seem to have fallen out with western audiences.

I mean what is a JRPG? What is essentially needed to make something fit into the genere? I think that the designers need to look at each element and ask how they can make it better. Maybe they should come up with a more versatile TB combat system, one that allows you to interact with the environment and blow it up, similar to Silent Storm. Why not limit the amount of encounters but make the rest more unique and feel less of a grind? Maybe they should try different forms of presentation; I mean for story use the scripted stuff but if a city is being destoyed why not let the player experience that in real time? What if they create more fun side quests that still tie into the main plot?

And what about the stories? When JRPGs became popular in the west there seemed like there was nothing really like them on consoles. Now the effeminate angsty teenager of the JRPG has become as much of a cliché as a gruff space marine in an FPS. One genre relies on story telling while the other doesn't and its clear which one will be impacted more. And the artstyle, I liked that of Persona 3 and will try to find more Atlus games, but the artstyle of many JRPGs has become just as cliché as their stories. I know people say that this is what popular in Japan, but if you always continue to do what is simply popular it will stop being unique and eventually get stale. I mean look at the west you have Stalker, Bioshock, Age of Conan, WoW, Team Fortress 2 etc. each game with different style ranging from realistic to cartoony, if they all had a similar influence than people will eventually get bored with them.

__________

Things started to get iffy around the PSOne:

There was some game with the numeral VII in it. There was XenoGears, the absolutely excellent Vagrant Story, Valkyrie Profile, Star Ocean: Second Story and Dragon Warrior 7.

Phantom_Leo

How do you have a generation containing a handful of the greatest console RPGs (you named three of them in that sentence) of all time and call it "iffy?' You don't make any sense or you simply have no clue as to what a good RPG is. No offense.

i hate this quick reply/quote things...........

ok now as a quote or confirmation to YourChaosIsntMe ( and others )...........

FFS i wont (be able to) write that long post again......so in short;

games are expensive,period.

people dont want to risk wasting their money on unknown games. ( new games/series)

SE doesnt look like they put their all efforts in all games anymore like they do for FF series. recently we didnt see anything close to FFXII quality ( voice acting, musics, visuals, graphics were all top notch with so many details ). in old times they produced Chrono Cross, Xenogears, Vagrant Story equally. all of them were better than Final Fantasy games, were unique, were new. but sadly compared to FF games they didnt do well. so its disencouraging for a company.

as a note, Persona 3 was successful ( because Atlus dont do mass production, they know their financial power, they are not greedy to risk, they have good amount of die-hard fans which are extremely happy with P3), one of the most popular game on PS2 and RPG of the year on GS. so its not possible to be different by playing P3.

i'm really sorry for writing everything short but i'm really pissed off right now...

TheLegendKnight

Grammar, man. I'm not sure if that warrants a reply so much as correction.

Why are you pissed off? You really didn't explain that...

Yes, games are expensive, and yes, people don't like to take risks on expensive purchases. Thank you for enlightening everyone.

Furthermore, you refer to FFXII as an example of one of Square-Enix's recent amazing titles, and then express the idea that Vagrant Story is somehow superior to any of the Final Fantasy games on the PSX. Did you actually PLAY Vagrant Story?

P3 was Gamespot's RPG of the Year. I DIDN'T know that. Regardless of this fact, as compared to what could be considered "major" releases, P3 has only moved a marginal amount of copies, as compared to anything from GTA IV to God of War 2 or Final Fantasy X. While it is obviously critically and publicly recognized, it is still inarguably a niche title. The general gaming consumer has not only never played P3, but haven't even heard of it. Would you like a link to sales numbers? If you believe that we all represent the majority of that demographic, then you're misguided. In fact, most market analysts would urge Atlus to cease doing exactly what they've been doing and attempt to gain greater market saturation in North America, in part due to Square-Enix's status. Yes, as compared to many other niche titles, P3 is exceptionally successful, do you believe that you're supplying previously unknown information? Also, you seemed to have missed the sarcasm when I wrote "Persona 3 sold poorly, it sucked." Importantly, you may one day understand that once you've hit a certain age, being "different" and zealously individualistic becomes inconsequential. The consistent reference to P3 has also been primarily in comparison to Square-Enix and Final Fantasy/Dragon Quest/etc. Though I did refer to it in comparison to less, uh, inventive franchises which sell an exorbitant amount of copies with each iteration.

...think before you reply. Interestingly, I agreed with a lot of what you covered in your original post. I may have thought your prosaic style was absolute garbage, but I still agreed with many of your points. Then you fire back with whatever the hell this response was to supposed to accomplish....what? Setting me straight about P3 not making me indie or something? Yeah thanks dude, because if I wanted to name drop obscure games like an arrogant douche, I would. In such a conversation, most people want their statements to contain reference for the general reader, did that not occur to you? No?

As a note, I'm not pissed. In fact, I've never been pissed on a message board. :)

Well,I whouldn´t say you can compare the awfully flat MMOs to a JRPG.Yeah you have progress and stuff like that,you got much to explore but you don´t have a storyline,likeable characters or anything .I play some MMOs myself and most of them are just weak after a few hours.I personally think combat should be turn-based or real-time.This wannabe fighting-system gets old too quick thanks to no tactical value.That´s a big problem of WRPGs in general...many of them are just feeling like a flat MMO that has so many sidequests that some people don´t see that the Main Storyline is almost non-existend and the game itlesf is pretty aimless.I personally like great told storys,and if I want many sidequests that make sense I play a Tales-of which got much story to explore after the main-storyline and has something to do with the game.Kill 20 Lizard,5 Bees and 7 Werepigs isn´t what I call a sidequest,it´s a try to make the game seem longer.You just can´t compare a WRPG (which is usually a simple Hack´n Slay or a "Click Enemy once and wait until he dies") to a JRPG which is usually much more tactical and is Storybased.

Compare KOTOR,Diablo and WoW to SMT: Digital Devil Saga,Dragon Quest 8 and Grandia and look which is more fun for ya.I take the JRPGs.Even if I played and liked many WRPGs,they didn´t feel so rewarding for me.I played many MMOs too and the only one with a (optional) Storyline I found was Dream of Mirror Online.I hate it if I´m forced to play with others too.I like the Option,but only as an option.

[QUOTE="TheLegendKnight"]

i hate this quick reply/quote things...........

ok now as a quote or confirmation to YourChaosIsntMe ( and others )...........

FFS i wont (be able to) write that long post again......so in short;

games are expensive,period.

people dont want to risk wasting their money on unknown games. ( new games/series)

SE doesnt look like they put their all efforts in all games anymore like they do for FF series. recently we didnt see anything close to FFXII quality ( voice acting, musics, visuals, graphics were all top notch with so many details ). in old times they produced Chrono Cross, Xenogears, Vagrant Story equally. all of them were better than Final Fantasy games, were unique, were new. but sadly compared to FF games they didnt do well. so its disencouraging for a company.

as a note, Persona 3 was successful ( because Atlus dont do mass production, they know their financial power, they are not greedy to risk, they have good amount of die-hard fans which are extremely happy with P3), one of the most popular game on PS2 and RPG of the year on GS. so its not possible to be different by playing P3.

i'm really sorry for writing everything short but i'm really pissed off right now...

YourChaosIsntMe

Grammar, man. I'm not sure if that warrants a reply so much as correction.

Why are you pissed off? You really didn't explain that...

Yes, games are expensive, and yes, people don't like to take risks on expensive purchases. Thank you for enlightening everyone.

Furthermore, you refer to FFXII as an example of one of Square-Enix's recent amazing titles, and then express the idea that Vagrant Story is somehow superior to any of the Final Fantasy games on the PSX. Did you actually PLAY Vagrant Story?

Yeeeeow! I felt an arctic chill through my computer screen.:lol:

I tend to skip over posts with subpar grammar and spelling, so I didn't catch on to his statement about Vagrant Story. Now that you've pointed it out, I ended up reading it and nearly choked on my tea. Vagrant Story better than any of the PSX FF games? Unreal. I usually don't call opinions wrong, but in this case, I'll make a rare exception. VS blew chimps.

Grammar, man. I'm not sure if that warrants a reply so much as correction.

Why are you pissed off? You really didn't explain that...

Yes, games are expensive, and yes, people don't like to take risks on expensive purchases. Thank you for enlightening everyone.

Furthermore, you refer to FFXII as an example of one of Square-Enix's recent amazing titles, and then express the idea that Vagrant Story is somehow superior to any of the Final Fantasy games on the PSX. Did you actually PLAY Vagrant Story?

P3 was Gamespot's RPG of the Year. I DIDN'T know that. Regardless of this fact, as compared to what could be considered "major" releases, P3 has only moved a marginal amount of copies, as compared to anything from GTA IV to God of War 2 or Final Fantasy X. While it is obviously critically and publicly recognized, it is still inarguably a niche title. The general gaming consumer has not only never played P3, but haven't even heard of it. Would you like a link to sales numbers? If you believe that we all represent the majority of that demographic, then you're misguided. In fact, most market analysts would urge Atlus to cease doing exactly what they've been doing and attempt to gain greater market saturation in North America, in part due to Square-Enix's status. Yes, as compared to many other niche titles, P3 is exceptionally successful, do you believe that you're supplying previously unknown information? Also, you seemed to have missed the sarcasm when I wrote "Persona 3 sold poorly, it sucked." Importantly, you may one day understand that once you've hit a certain age, being "different" and zealously individualistic becomes inconsequential. The consistent reference to P3 has also been primarily in comparison to Square-Enix and Final Fantasy/Dragon Quest/etc. Though I did refer to it in comparison to less, uh, inventive franchises which sell an exorbitant amount of copies with each iteration.

...think before you reply. Interestingly, I agreed with a lot of what you covered in your original post. I may have thought your prosaic style was absolute garbage, but I still agreed with many of your points. Then you fire back with whatever the hell this response was to supposed to accomplish....what? Setting me straight about P3 not making me indie or something? Yeah thanks dude, because if I wanted to name drop obscure games like an arrogant douche, I would. In such a conversation, most people want their statements to contain reference for the general reader, did that not occur to you? No?

As a note, I'm not pissed. In fact, I've never been pissed on a message board. :)

YourChaosIsntMe

i was pissed because i was using quick reply then accidently i clicked on a sig then when i clicked on "back" button i found my long text was gone...... in normal "new message" option this wouldnt happen...:cry:

so its not about you or someone else dont be upset because of that.

yes I played Vagrant Story, that short game like 60+ hours in my first playing because its deep customization was never done before. in Vagrant Story you were able to customize your character/items however you want, thats what a RPG actually, Fantasy Role Playing, its your role you do what you want. however in JRPGs you cant do that actually... and if you look at picky GS' score, its 9.6 while even famous FFVII had 9.5. for me gameplay is more important than your cliche "lets save the world with love" stories. Final Fantasy series is one of my favorite series, so i'm not saying they are bad, just there are better games than FF games.

about P3, my reply was not meant for you, it was for the other guy... why did you take it for yourself ">.>

and P3 is an Atlus game. its procuded in limited number as always and they did enough sales so thats a success for them and they released P3F additionally. in sales it may not be big, you cant compare it to those games but it was successful enough for Atlus. Atlus is not a company that takes so much risks, they produce SMT series for 20 years but still they are not big as SE. i dont know what are they thinking but i think they are happy with it. While they try new things in many games they also know what they should not break, just like Disgaea series.

[QUOTE="YourChaosIsntMe"][QUOTE="TheLegendKnight"]

i hate this quick reply/quote things...........

ok now as a quote or confirmation to YourChaosIsntMe ( and others )...........

FFS i wont (be able to) write that long post again......so in short;

games are expensive,period.

people dont want to risk wasting their money on unknown games. ( new games/series)

SE doesnt look like they put their all efforts in all games anymore like they do for FF series. recently we didnt see anything close to FFXII quality ( voice acting, musics, visuals, graphics were all top notch with so many details ). in old times they produced Chrono Cross, Xenogears, Vagrant Story equally. all of them were better than Final Fantasy games, were unique, were new. but sadly compared to FF games they didnt do well. so its disencouraging for a company.

as a note, Persona 3 was successful ( because Atlus dont do mass production, they know their financial power, they are not greedy to risk, they have good amount of die-hard fans which are extremely happy with P3), one of the most popular game on PS2 and RPG of the year on GS. so its not possible to be different by playing P3.

i'm really sorry for writing everything short but i'm really pissed off right now...

MarcusAntonius

Grammar, man. I'm not sure if that warrants a reply so much as correction.

Why are you pissed off? You really didn't explain that...

Yes, games are expensive, and yes, people don't like to take risks on expensive purchases. Thank you for enlightening everyone.

Furthermore, you refer to FFXII as an example of one of Square-Enix's recent amazing titles, and then express the idea that Vagrant Story is somehow superior to any of the Final Fantasy games on the PSX. Did you actually PLAY Vagrant Story?

Yeeeeow! I felt an arctic chill through my computer screen.:lol:

I tend to skip over posts with subpar grammar and spelling, so I didn't catch on to his statement about Vagrant Story. Now that you've pointed it out, I ended up reading it and nearly choked on my tea. Vagrant Story better than any of the PSX FF games? Unreal. I usually don't call opinions wrong, but in this case, I'll make a rare exception. VS blew chimps.

well, why is it unreal ? it had more replay value than any Final Fantasy games because of its endless customization. in my first play i spent 60+ hours in that short game. its cartoon style dialogues, musics, great graphics ( for its time ) and the gameplay were all unique and you can see Final Fantasy XII used the same graphics style as VS.

personally, i never liked FF's battle themes or other annoying musics that give me headaches but VS had nothing like that, its musics were overall better. FF games always had some of the greatest musics but they also had really irritating musics too. thats one of the reasons I liked FFXII more than previous FF games. the musics are very important in games because they make a game magical, so you cant do that with only one music. yes i like specific musics more than many other musics but i'm comparing overall quality. oh also, FFVII had midi quality...

even though i dont care about graphics much, Vagrant Story's graphics was one of the best at its time and recently when I opened the game again I can easily play it unlike FFVII graphics which gives me creeps when i look at its square shaped graphics.

and i dont even think writing about the gameplay. just a short comparison, nonlinear things are better than linear ones.

in short Vagrant Story is better than Final Fantasy VII, VIII, IX

[QUOTE="YourChaosIsntMe"][QUOTE="TheLegendKnight"]

i hate this quick reply/quote things...........

ok now as a quote or confirmation to YourChaosIsntMe ( and others )...........

FFS i wont (be able to) write that long post again......so in short;

games are expensive,period.

people dont want to risk wasting their money on unknown games. ( new games/series)

SE doesnt look like they put their all efforts in all games anymore like they do for FF series. recently we didnt see anything close to FFXII quality ( voice acting, musics, visuals, graphics were all top notch with so many details ). in old times they produced Chrono Cross, Xenogears, Vagrant Story equally. all of them were better than Final Fantasy games, were unique, were new. but sadly compared to FF games they didnt do well. so its disencouraging for a company.

as a note, Persona 3 was successful ( because Atlus dont do mass production, they know their financial power, they are not greedy to risk, they have good amount of die-hard fans which are extremely happy with P3), one of the most popular game on PS2 and RPG of the year on GS. so its not possible to be different by playing P3.

i'm really sorry for writing everything short but i'm really pissed off right now...

MarcusAntonius

Grammar, man. I'm not sure if that warrants a reply so much as correction.

Why are you pissed off? You really didn't explain that...

Yes, games are expensive, and yes, people don't like to take risks on expensive purchases. Thank you for enlightening everyone.

Furthermore, you refer to FFXII as an example of one of Square-Enix's recent amazing titles, and then express the idea that Vagrant Story is somehow superior to any of the Final Fantasy games on the PSX. Did you actually PLAY Vagrant Story?

Yeeeeow! I felt an arctic chill through my computer screen.:lol:

I tend to skip over posts with subpar grammar and spelling, so I didn't catch on to his statement about Vagrant Story. Now that you've pointed it out, I ended up reading it and nearly choked on my tea. Vagrant Story better than any of the PSX FF games? Unreal. I usually don't call opinions wrong, but in this case, I'll make a rare exception. VS blew chimps.

I disagree. Vagrant Story is amazing. A deep battle system which enables one to chain attacks and target specific parts of an enemy, tons of weapon customizability, a big and varied cast of enemies, a complicated plot with a superb localization (VS seemed to the first localization in which Squenix shot for the moon), massive, kickbutt bosses, a gorgeous art style and stellar audiovisuals all make Vagrant Story my favorite PS1 rpg.

Ashley Riot could have used a pair of pants, and the puzzles were a little too box oriented, but other than that, I have no complaints.

I can see why some people might be upset after Squenix's misleading ad campaign comparing VS to MGS.

[QUOTE="Phantom_Leo"]

__________

Things started to get iffy around the PSOne:

There was some game with the numeral VII in it. There was XenoGears, the absolutely excellent Vagrant Story, Valkyrie Profile, Star Ocean: Second Story and Dragon Warrior 7.

MarcusAntonius

How do you have a generation containing a handful of the greatest console RPGs (you named three of them in that sentence) of all time and call it "iffy?' You don't make any sense or you simply have no clue as to what a good RPG is. No offense.

I shouldn't have put it exactly that way, BUT:

The PSOne generation was not nearly as significant as the SNES era. There was such a larger percentage of timeless games on the SNES than the dozens of throw away titles on the PSOne, that somehow some cosmic scale had been tipped.

VII took the average Square-RPG and made it into the mainstream, more movie than game "thing" it is today.

People pretty much ignored Vagrant, Valkyrie and DW7. XenoGears was overshadowed by being released the same day as Metal Gear Solid AND the mainstreamers who only knew RPGs due to VII, actually complained because Gears had too much reading and plot! UGH!

I'm sorry. I agree with the person above who wrote Vagrant Story was better than most Final Fantasies. VII to me was nowhere near the game people still claim it to be. Vagrant gave you much more freedom of customization, a more interesting plot, battle system and replayability. It was a game, VII was a movie (Knights of the Round... Every single time we had to see it? Bleh!)

It had its greats, but that generation was the start of the downfall of the RPG genre.

Now that I think about it, I've been avoiding posting in this topic for as long as it's been up for a reason. There was no way I was going to be able to come in here and NOT sound like a sarcastic b*stard. I'm too emotionally charged on this topic right now to reply in a non-offensive way.

TWEWY to me was a breath of fresh air. A return to form for Square-Enix. I thought it was a sign of better things to come, but Squenix's reaction was: "Whoa! Let's not do THAT again!" It hit me like a left hook!

I'm not entirely against the rehashes either. DQ4 was a masterpiece worth revisiting. V and VI never made it out in this country in the first place, so THANK GOD for remakes on those two!

[I'll have you know Marcus, DQ V was one of the most popular games in Japanese history. It is a multi-generational RPG where you marry and your offsprings take up your quest to defeat the evil of the realm... kinda like... Nah, nevermind... too easy...]

If you're going to make it better and introduce a game to a whole new generation of players, FINE. Just DON'T do it at the expense of never creating anything ORIGINAL ever again! THAT is what is upsetting me the MOST!

[QUOTE="MarcusAntonius"][QUOTE="Phantom_Leo"]

__________

Things started to get iffy around the PSOne:

There was some game with the numeral VII in it. There was XenoGears, the absolutely excellent Vagrant Story, Valkyrie Profile, Star Ocean: Second Story and Dragon Warrior 7.

Phantom_Leo

How do you have a generation containing a handful of the greatest console RPGs (you named three of them in that sentence) of all time and call it "iffy?' You don't make any sense or you simply have no clue as to what a good RPG is. No offense.

I shouldn't have put it exactly that way, BUT:

The PSOne generation was not nearly as significant as the SNES era. There was such a larger percentage of timeless games on the SNES than the dozens of throw away titles on the PSOne, that somehow some cosmic scale had been tipped.

VII took the average Square-RPG and made it into the mainstream, more movie than game "thing" it is today.

People pretty much ignored Vagrant, Valkyrie and DW7. XenoGears was overshadowed by being released the same day as Metal Gear Solid AND the mainstreamers who only knew RPGs due to VII, actually complained because Gears had too much reading and plot! UGH!

I'm sorry. I agree with the person above who wrote Vagrant Story was better than most Final Fantasies. VII to me was nowhere near the game people still claim it to be. Vagrant gave you much more freedom of customization, a more interesting plot, battle system and replayability. It was a game, VII was a movie (Knights of the Round... Every single time we had to see it? Bleh!)

It had its greats, but that generation was the start of the downfall of the RPG genre.

I strongly disagree. The relative unpopularity of rpgs in the NES/SMS/SNES/Genesis days not only kept the riff raff out, it kept out many quality games (think SMT and Dragon Quest). Also, those games that did come out tended to boast low quality localizations (though there are some notable exceptions to the rule) and came out at high prices (partly because big cartridges were expensive, partly because rpg makers didn't expect to sell many copies).

I don't think FF7 is even in the top five rpgs of the PS1 era, but the fact it popularized the genre benefitted jrpgs tremendously. Without FF7, its a safe bet games like the SMTs, Xenogears, Shadow Hearts and the NIS rpgs would never have seen Western release. Also, companies competing fiercely for a sizable base of consumers started offering high quality localizations as a matter of course (though this improvement didn't happen until well after FF7 and even FF8 had hit shelves).

So I guess that means we can expect FF eleventy-billion huh?

Not all companies are capable of innovation. It's just isn't their role, anymore. Look at EA, once upon a time they single- handedly rejuvenated the PC racing game, the sports game. Going back further, they did great stuff like Desert Strike, MULE and One on One. Nowadays, this is simply not their role. Same goes for SE, probably. Their role now is to keep producing blockbuster japanese RPGs. That's how they make their money. Anyway, my take on the matter is that innovation without quality is a lost cause, while quality games can get by without being innovative.

Not all companies are capable of innovation. It's just isn't their role, anymore. Look at EA, once upon a time they single- handedly rejuvenated the PC racing game, the sports game. Going back further, they did great stuff like Desert Strike, MULE and One on One. Nowadays, this is simply not their role. Same goes for SE, probably. Their role now is to keep producing blockbuster japanese RPGs. That's how they make their money. Anyway, my take on the matter is that innovation without quality is a lost cause, while quality games can get by without being innovative.

nopalversion

oh really ? yes, so true.

look at ea before ps1 enters the market and after that. maybe se should just make graphically and musically magical games, same games with better graphics and musics, just like ea.

but maybe not, because still i cant think them like this. ( bleh i'm becoming emotional ? haha... )