• Akira Toriyama passed away

    Let's all commemorate together his legendary work and his impact here

Square Enix output strategy | Discussion thread.

What platforms do you believe Dragon Quest XII will release on?

  • Nintendo platform (Switch and/or Switch successor)

    Votes: 58 89.2%
  • PlayStation 5

    Votes: 38 58.5%
  • PlayStation 4

    Votes: 28 43.1%
  • PC

    Votes: 36 55.4%
  • Xbox (One and/or Series)

    Votes: 25 38.5%

  • Total voters
    65
  • Poll closed .
The point of that new team is for Platinum to self publish their own games, not to convince other publishers. Babylon's Fall budget and direction was guided by Square Enix so it doesnt have much bearing on what will come next in that department, besides giving even more incentive for PG to decide for themselves how they want to make their games.

Actually it does. Gamers have become alot more vary about their games which will be even a bigger problem if BF gets shut down within its first two years. BF also was supposed to generate revenue for years, that's the very reason for GAAS projects in general. They could get into a very problematic situation if they don't find another revenue stream immediately. Could become even worse than after they had to abandon the Scalebound Project. As much as I like Platinum Games, they can't compete as an independent publisher yet.
 
Actually it does. Gamers have become alot more vary about their games which will be even a bigger problem if BF gets shut down within its first two years. BF also was supposed to generate revenue for years, that's the very reason for GAAS projects in general. They could get into a very problematic situation if they don't find another revenue stream immediately. Could become even worse than after they had to abandon the Scalebound Project. As much as I like Platinum Games, they can't compete as an independent publisher yet.

It's a SE published game, SE is the one losing money here. Platinum is not going to be in a problematic situation lol.
 
Actually it does. Gamers have become alot more vary about their games which will be even a bigger problem if BF gets shut down within its first two years. BF also was supposed to generate revenue for years, that's the very reason for GAAS projects in general. They could get into a very problematic situation if they don't find another revenue stream immediately. Could become even worse than after they had to abandon the Scalebound Project. As much as I like Platinum Games, they can't compete as an independent publisher yet.
Contracted development typically doesn't have a percentage revenue share with the developer. The target for contracted developers is to renegotiate a longer term contract for long-term GAAS with better terms after the game launches. Most likely, the contract for Babylon's Fall only stipulated a set amount of content (probably less than a year). The company that would retaining the revenue would be Square Enix with maybe bonuses for Platinum awarded for achieving a certain level of performance. I'd assume Platinum already expected BF to underperform that they wouldn't be getting that bonus since at least a year ago.
 
Contracted development typically doesn't have a percentage revenue share with the developer.
That depends on the deal, it's not so simple. An outsourced project underperforming can have direct negative impact on the developer besides publisher and we've seen this happening more than once.
 
BFs performance most likely means SQEX won't continue to invest in the game going forward. If Platinum Games had a cut or not on revenue we don't know, it depends on the deal, but ongoing work would have been paid and was an important part of why Platinum Games pitched the idea in the first place.
 
I don’t expect any major changes for PlatinumGames because of Babylon’s Fall. They must’ve known what they had in hand when Inaba was talking about their new direction of self-owned IP and bigger scale games in February, so I don’t see why they would switch direction again by May.
 
the biggest risk for Platinum is the loss of partner work because who wants to team with someone who made Babylon's Fall?
 
The thing that should concern Platinum is how unappealing the prospect of a platinum developed GaaS title is. Obviously PG isn't known for their big sellers outside of a couple of hits like Revengeance and Automata, but they do (or did) have a dedicated audience, that audience clearly had no interest in BF.
 
The thing that should concern Platinum is how unappealing the prospect of a platinum developed GaaS title is. Obviously PG isn't known for their big sellers outside of a couple of hits like Revengeance and Automata, but they do (or did) have a dedicated audience, that audience clearly had no interest in BF.

They also didn't seem to care about The Wonderful 101 or Sol Cresta which bodes well...
 
I would like to put forth that most people don't buy games based on the pedigree of the developer, but rather based on the game itself being interesting

Now obviously there are franchise fans, but I think those fall more under the latter than the former
 
I would like to put forth that most people don't buy games based on the pedigree of the developer, but rather based on the game itself being interesting

Now obviously there are franchise fans, but I think those fall more under the latter than the former
Nier Automata would like a word. I don't think the games industry would have sought to conceal the real names of developers in the 90s to avoid losing talent if that was the case. However, it depends on the game & the people involved, plus the size of the audience, sometimes you may be right. Probably best to see it as a sliding scale of factors rather than one or the other.

Mentioned it elsewhere but people are more important than brands, even if you don't know all the names of the people involved it does eventually filter through if key people are no longer involved such as director or character designer which matter in getting people interested. Might take a few games but eventually the sales data will suggest the public does notice.

It might not even be a deciding factor but knowing the senior members of a development team is largely the same as the previous game (especially if you enjoyed it), is worth considering. As a sign of continuity from one game to the next, it can be reassuring to be familiar with the previous work of the people involved & their reasoning behind any changes when buying a new game, especially at full price. One of the key distinctions between Dragon Quest & Final Fantasy, the latter is largely unrecognisable after Final Fantasy X whilst you can still trace a direct path from the original to Dragon Quest XI.

But it only goes so far as the recent examples @Oregano mentions above. Perhaps it's best to see it as a push rather than pull factor, it can help but it won't make people buy a game that doesn't appeal. Seems like a PlatinumGames output thread would be a good idea, unable to create threads at the moment, will make notes for one later down the line.
 
Nier Automata was a very interesting game, is the thing, in a way its predecessor was not

Visually nice, with instantly engaging character designs complimented by hauntingly beautiful key art, a sumptuous soundtrack that spread through wildfire throughout the larger hardcore gaming community, and, most of all, fantastic word of mouth

The problem of headhunting developers is real, though probably not as real as it was 30-40 years ago, but I don't think it's germane to the matter at hand. Video games are not made by individuals, they are made by villages, but even those villages aren't very well-known to the average buyer, I would argue. Platinum making Babylon's Fall has a lot less to do with its failure than the fact that Babylon's Fall is terminally uninteresting
 
Nier Automata was a very interesting game, is the thing, in a way its predecessor was not

Visually nice, with instantly engaging character designs complimented by hauntingly beautiful key art, a sumptuous soundtrack that spread through wildfire throughout the larger hardcore gaming community, and, most of all, fantastic word of mouth

The problem of headhunting developers is real, though probably not as real as it was 30-40 years ago, but I don't think it's germane to the matter at hand. Video games are not made by individuals, they are made by villages, but even those villages aren't very well-known to the average buyer, I would argue. Platinum making Babylon's Fall has a lot less to do with its failure than the fact that Babylon's Fall is terminally uninteresting
Characters designed by Akihiko Yoshida, music composed by Keiichi Okabe. These key positions do matter, to what extent is most likely unknowable but worth considering. It's notable how Japanese game announcements tend to include names in senior positions on the development team & their previous work. In this case, when the game was announced people were excited to see a game directed by Yoko Taro with a (then) near universally, critically acclaimed studio in PlatinumGames rather than Cavia or Access Games.

With regards to head hunting, worth pointing out issues recruiting talent at Square Enix, pay rises at major Japanese publishers & international tech companies investing in Japan.
Square Enix honestly had more to do with the failure of of BabyFalls than Platinum did.
Agreed. While the developer is never blameless* ultimately the publisher is in the position of power & responsibility. It makes the final decision over budgets, time allotted, scope, marketing, release dates & post-launch support. Sadly, more often than not its the developer alone whose reputation takes a real beating as is happening with PlatinumGames.

They can delay titles like Forspoken or insist they release come what may as they have with several titles each March these last few years. In the case of 'live' games, publishers can do whatever it takes to turn things around like Final Fantasy 14 or not as happened with EA moving BioWare on from its preliminary work for rebooting Anthem.

*Scalebound & Granblue Fantasy Relink feed perceptions that PlatinumGames is out of its depth on certain projects recently, making its push towards GAAS difficult to comprehend.
 
Last edited:
The push towards GaaS from PG part is totally understandable , PG struggles with having a constant source of revenue that's why they even needed Tencent money, due to all their big games being contracted work they have almost no catalog sales like other developers do to have a constant flow of revenue, that forces PG to take all projects they can , which is what they have done and still doing, to the point of having too many of them. Having a 'hit' GaaS would be mean for PG a constant source of revenue which would help them be in a good financially state even without them taking contract work which would allow them to be more picky with what they choose and also fund their own big games so they gain propriety of the IPs they work on and all money from sales go to them. I think Babylon's Fall is 50/50 fault from both parties but the idea of SE 'pushing' PG to make a GaaS game makes no sense when PG have said multiple times that's part of their buisness going forward, SE just financed the project because the idea of a 'Nier-like GaaS' from PG it's something with high potential of sales and revenue.
 
I forgot Platinum was involved with Granblue Fantasy Relink at all. Wonder what happened there.
 
Square Enix honestly had more to do with the failure of of BabyFalls than Platinum did.
Eh I think this infantalises Devs. Platinum are hardly not sitting on a giant pile of mediocre and poor titles. Babylon Falls just couldn't compete in rh GAAS market.

Their model is to be in control. You can't blame Square Enix for simply publishing the game.
 
If someone else doesn't make a PlatinumGames output strategy thread then I will once I'm able to do so we can discuss these issues & its forthcoming line up.
The push towards GaaS from PG part is totally understandable , PG struggles with having a constant source of revenue that's why they even needed Tencent money, due to all their big games being contracted work they have almost no catalog sales like other developers do to have a constant flow of revenue, that forces PG to take all projects they can , which is what they have done and still doing, to the point of having too many of them. Having a 'hit' GaaS would be mean for PG a constant source of revenue which would help them be in a good financially state even without them taking contract work which would allow them to be more picky with what they choose and also fund their own big games so they gain propriety of the IPs they work on and all money from sales go to them. I think Babylon's Fall is 50/50 fault from both parties but the idea of SE 'pushing' PG to make a GaaS game makes no sense when PG have said multiple times that's part of their business going forward, SE just financed the project because the idea of a 'Nier-like GaaS' from PG it's something with high potential of sales and revenue.
Blame it on posting while tired, my previous comment about 'the push' was from PlatinumGames not Square Enix. Some of this gets into the management decisions & hiring practises at PlatinumGames meaning they feel compelled to sign multiple contracts to retain staff but that gets into territory the aforementioned dedicated thread. We're also unsure of what royalties terms are in the contract, but the recent financial statement from People Can Fly aren't promising in that regard. There's a reason why SIE are rolling out the red carpet for Bungie to gain know how to help its own first parties.

We can also look at the difficulties 343i are facing with Halo Infinite to see why its not a strategy taken lightly especially from a developer with no experience in this style of game making (arguably the most challenging & resource intensive) by a publisher with little either is very risky. It's a course of action the publisher signed up for, paid for & even requires a Square Enix account for so I think (this last part is more aimed at @unkindlynice ) more than simply publishing the game.

In general I feel that if the publisher get the majority of rewards for success the same must apply to any criticism for the outcome, even if it's only 51/49 according to the power of napkin math! That's not infantilising the developers @unkindlynice either but rather I'd frame it as a call for some of the comments towards PlatinumGames (or clickbait stories about a single player being online for that matter) be tempered by a realisation that people spent years trying to make something for the public to enjoy playing. Anyway, that's all I've got on this issue for now, Square Enix Japan has a very interesting lineup this financial year to discuss & we'll hopefully get a clearer indication of its post-Eidos plans in the financial reports arriving shortly.
 
Sony has also backtracked on numerous occasions. "We believe in generations"

I think you are aware that "we believe in generations" was taken out of context. Also, even then Jim Ryan literally implied that they will support PS4 in next few years. Before when Sony announced cross-gen games
 
I think you are aware that "we believe in generations" was taken out of context. Also, even then Jim Ryan literally implied that they will support PS4 in next few years. Before when Sony announced cross-gen games
Here is the context from the GI article

"
One way to keep PS4 users engaged would be to make upcoming PS5 games playable on the older machine, just like Microsoft is proposing with its Xbox Series X games being playable on Xbox One. Yet Ryan says that's not something PlayStation is interested in doing.

"We have always said that we believe in generations. We believe that when you go to all the trouble of creating a next-gen console, that it should include features and benefits that the previous generation does not include. And that, in our view, people should make games that can make the most of those features. "

What context was I missing here?
 
Here is the context from the GI article

"
One way to keep PS4 users engaged would be to make upcoming PS5 games playable on the older machine, just like Microsoft is proposing with its Xbox Series X games being playable on Xbox One. Yet Ryan says that's not something PlayStation is interested in doing.

"We have always said that we believe in generations. We believe that when you go to all the trouble of creating a next-gen console, that it should include features and benefits that the previous generation does not include. And that, in our view, people should make games that can make the most of those features. "

What context was I missing here?

So, you ignored the other part, hm?
 
The preceding part? I'm not sure why that would trump "Yet Ryan says that's not something PlayStation is interested in doing."

Let's be honest, it was taken out of context. The other part. Or will take full qoute or will take few words out of context and weaponize it?

semi.PNG
 
Let's be honest, it was taken out of context. The other part. Or will take full qoute or will take few words out of context and weaponize it?

semi.PNG
Disagree. The context of the article says point blank that Sony isn't interested in criss gen games. That's the impression people were left with at the time too!
 
Disagree. The context of the article says point blank that Sony isn't interested in criss gen games. That's the impression people were left with at the time too!

In that interview Jim Ryan literally implied it they will support PS4 in coming years :

We realised a couple of months ago that we were going to have to spend a lot more time paying attention to the PS4 community than we had anticipated, as that community, along with everybody else in the world, went into lockdown.

We have always felt that we had a responsibility to serve that [PS4] community for several years after the launch of PS5 and that it represented a huge business opportunity for us," Ryan says. "The numbers are quite straightforward. If you say in broad brush figures that we have a community of 100 million PS4 owners right now, and in the first couple of years... I don't know, somewhere between 15 and 25 million might migrate to PS5, that still leaves a huge number of people with PS4s. And that community is demonstrating an amazing stickiness, and willingness to stay engaged that, I think, the events of the past few months have just reinforced what we knew already.

Whatever. Take it how you want it.
 
In that interview Jim Ryan literally implied it they will support PS4 in coming years :





Whatever. Take it how you want it.
Yes I am aware. I read the article bur again that is immediately followed with the quote I posted. So taken together it sounds like we'll support the PS4 with some games and 3rd party support but the PS5 experiences are going to be exclusive. And again it's not just how I took it. If you look at articles and forum posts at the time that's how everyone understood it!
 
I think you are aware that "we believe in generations" was taken out of context. Also, even then Jim Ryan literally implied that they will support PS4 in next few years. Before when Sony announced cross-gen games
I think you are misunderstanding support in that statement. In that statement, support means they'll keep allowing PS4 games to be sold and keep supporting the infrastructure on the platform. It can be extended to mean that they'll keep PS+ going for PS4/ It does not mean cross-gen games (or new PS4 games) from Sony since the point of the second half of the quote is to imply that they can't do cross-gen games
 
And again it's not just how I took it. If you look at articles and forum posts at the time that's how everyone understood it!

Not everyone. Bunch of people took it out of context and weaponize it

I think you are misunderstanding support in that statement. In that statement, support means they'll keep allowing PS4 games to be sold and keep supporting the infrastructure on the platform. It can be extended to mean that they'll keep PS+ going for PS4/ It does not mean cross-gen games (or new PS4 games) from Sony since the point of the second half of the quote is to imply that they can't do cross-gen games

It also meant supporting PS4 with cross-gen games. Saying not interested in doing than doesn't mean it won't be at all. But whatever
 
Let's be honest, it was taken out of context. The other part. Or will take full qoute or will take few words out of context and weaponize it?

semi.PNG

Thanks for the full context. I had only seen the clickbaity version that had implied they were not interested in crossgen games, when they were merely trying to sell the features of nextgen and still determine how to transition their install base to PS5. Obviously, crossgen period will be longer than anybody expected in 2020. I will note that social media at the time really took that quote out of context.
 
Not everyone. Bunch of people took it out of context and weaponize it



It also meant supporting PS4 with cross-gen games. Saying not interested in doing than doesn't mean it won't be at all. But whatever
The problem with this is that it ignores that after this article they did their showcase and neglected to mention that miles, hfw, gt7, etc were all crossgen at that time. Their framing even after the quote was 100% leading the general public to believe they were ps5 exclusive
 
Last edited:


Square Enix will be showing more footage of Live A Live during a livestream on May 20.
 
The problem with this is that it ignores that after this article the dud their showcase and neglected to mention that miles, hfw, gt7, etc were all crossgen at that time. Their framing even after the quote was 100% leading the general public to believe they were ps5 exclusive
Go see the first individual trailers for Horizon, Sackboy and Miles and you'll see this in the end - PlayStation exclusive. Does PlayStation Exclusive means PS5 only? It can mean both or not. Later was clarified
GT7 was decided it will be cross-gen game during development.
 
For PS5, Sony had a great marketing strategy and they executed it equally well. Ryan's comment about how PlayStation believes in a generation was exciting - especially considering how Spencer and Booty mentioned earlier how there won't be Series X exclusive games from their internal studios for a while. In the PS5 reveal showcase there were no clarifications given that some of these games actually were cross-gen titles AND Sony + their 1st party studios refused to clarify afterward when media outlets and gamers asked this on Twitter. The PS5 showcase was aired in June. It took ~3-4 months for Sony to confirm that Miles Morales will be released on PS4 as well.

To be clear. I'm not villainizing Sony for this, since this was a great way to garner excitement around the upcoming console. Having said this, I also get how plenty of gamers were surprised and even agitated due to the lack of transparency.
 
Go see the first individual trailers for Horizon, Sackboy and Miles and you'll see this in the end - PlayStation exclusive. Does PlayStation Exclusive means PS5 only? It can mean both or not. Later was clarified
GT7 was decided it will be cross-gen game during development.
I'm sorry man but look at the announcement press. There was no mention of PS4 anywhere at the time. And for miles in particular they 1000% knew of the pa4 version at the time.

I'm not sure why you are trying to gaslight this topic. They were clearly leading the public on in a direction that wasn't true


 
Go see the first individual trailers for Horizon, Sackboy and Miles and you'll see this in the end - PlayStation exclusive. Does PlayStation Exclusive means PS5 only? It can mean both or not. Later was clarified
GT7 was decided it will be cross-gen game during development.

IMG_5232.png
 
I'm sorry man but look at the announcement press. There was no mention of PS4 anywhere at the time. And for miles in particular they 1000% knew of the pa4 version at the time.

I'm not sure why you are trying to gaslight this topic. They were clearly leading the public on in a direction that wasn't true




Of course they will mention no PS4 because it was a.....PS5 conference. Why would they. And therefore, games there, on PS5 conference, were advertised for PS5 and captured on PS5. Later it can be clarified will it come to PS4 or not through social media. People taken "we believe in generation" out of context DELIBERATELY and ignore the FULL quote. And Jim clearly implied also that they will support PS4 in next few years. With which games? It was (is) up to them to decide. OK. You have one opinion, i have another one. And will end up right here.

I'm not sure why you are trying to gaslight this topic. They were clearly leading the public on in a direction that wasn't true

Didn't read the topic week and a half ago, so, i've just started to read it few days ago.


That picture is from this trailer from Dec. 2020



You'll see in ad for Miles or Horizon or Sackboy - PlayStation exclusive label. For Rift Apart, Demon's, Returnal, Project Athia, GT7 ( coming 2021 ) you'll see - PlayStation 5 exclusive

Only outlier in that trailer is GT7. Why? Later in 2021 ( i think September ) it was announced it will be also a PS4 version. Which definitely suggests that change came very much later in development. And i've said in previous post also that GT7 was decided to be a cross-gen later in development. Looks like you didn't read it.
 
Of course they will mention no PS4 because it was a.....PS5 conference. Why would they. And therefore, games there, on PS5 conference
Your taking the context out of the entire situation. The reason people point to the "we believe in generations" quote is that the timeline of events was as follows

Xbox says they will continue crossgen games -> Jim's quote with GI that we've discussed -> PS5 showcase with no mention of crossgen and as others have said no clarification from PS or studios -> 3 months of online discourse/media/pre-orders -> crossgen announcements

If they had said the quote then announced the games as crossgen a month later none of the claims of misleading people would exist!

They deliberately chose to obfuscate their crossgen strategy. That's it
 
Last edited:
Your taking the context out of the entire situation. The reason people point to the "we believe in generations" quote is that the timeline of events was as follows

Xbox says they will continue crossgen games -> Jim's quote with GI that we've discussed -> PS5 showcase with no mention of crossgen and as others have said no clarification from PS or studios -> 3 months of online discourse/media/pre-orders -> crossgen announcements

If they had said the quote then announced the games as crossgen a month later none of the claims of misleading people would exist!

They deliberately chose to obfuscate their crossgen strategy. That's it

Didn't took anything out of context. No need to spin my opinion. Like i've said, people/media took "we believe in generation" out of context and weaponize it for console warrying after Xbox annocements, nothing more, nothing less. Literraly "we believe in generations" includes Dualsense, 3D Audio, SSD, games and other next-gen features from that interview, not just games for PS5 only as media tried to show it. Jim literally implied in the interview there will be a PS4 support in next few years. Don't ignore the fact if there was a PS5 showcase, of course there will be ONLY a games captured on PS5 and ONLY advertised for PS5. Saying there were no cross-gen games on PS5 conference blatantly is stupid.
 
Don't ignore the fact if there was a PS5 showcase, of course there will be ONLY a games captured on PS5 and ONLY advertised for PS5. Saying there were no cross-gen games on PS5 conference blatantly is stupid.
Hold on now that doesn't stop them from putting it as a crossgen game in a press release. For example many switch games announced at a direct which are cross-platform are clarified after the showcase in press releases. Nothing stopped Sony from clarifying sooner. They waited on purpose. That's a fact.

Additionally this whole rabbit hole starred because you took issue with my post using the quote as a shorthand for the above described timeline I mentioned. I've explained the context behind my original post many times now. If you still feel somehow it lacks context then that's on you
 
For example many switch games announced at a direct which are cross-platform are clarified after the showcase in press releases.
I've said in previous post :
Later it can be clarified will it come to PS4 or not through social media.
OK. They didn't said that immediately after the conference. But also, i've expected PS4 support in mext few years with 1st party games. I didn't fell on specific quote "we believe in generations" like many did

Additionally this whole rabbit hole starred because you took issue with my post using the quote as a shorthand for the above described timeline I mentioned. I've explained the context behind my original post many times now. If you still feel somehow it lacks context then that's on you

Ok. You explained it, fine, but also only for games, not for the rest of the stuff mentioned in that interview. So, your statement about "we believe in generations" was games specific
 
"PS4 support" in itself doesn't automatically mean that Sony's premier PS5 games (Gran Turismo 7, new Horizon and God of War) will be released on the older hardware as well. For some of us, "PS4 support" meant how the system will live next to new hardware with a continued stream of 3rd party titles and occasional 1st party releases - just like it happened with PS2 and PS3.

There was nothing that stopped Sony to be upfront in this matter. Instead, they decided to be obtuse for months concerning the exclusivity of earlier mentioned games and in certain interviews flat out refused to answer those questions. Ryan and others could have very easily made a short clarifying statement to clear the misconception that was spreading in the media. Yet they didn't and the reason is quite obvious. Again, business-wise it all makes sense, but I don't see the point of insinuating how people who criticize this as being console warriors. The old forum leaned very heavily on a certain console manufacturer at the time and there was plenty of uproar among the active members.
 
There is no point in defending Sony on this. It's not just Sony, pretty much every business intentionally misleads people by omitting important details in their marketing. Marketing is psychological manipulation after all. You can argue about semantics and context all day, but the reality is that they KNEW how people would interpret their words. They're also aware of the immediate feedback from their audience and they choose not to clarify on purpose. It gives them plausible deniability so that they can claim it was never about exclusives, which is what @Salesman you're arguing about now. Regardless of what they actually meant, I think what's important is how they chose to respond AFTERWARD. Either they were ignorant of the internet response (which doesn't seem likely) or they intentionally let people misinterpret the statements.
 
@Salesman is correct in that only GT7 was moved from being PS5 exclusive to PS4/PS5. If you look at the assets in GT7 its clear that much of it simply builds of GT Sport so I would imagine pivoting dev wasn't too difficult.

It does bring an interesting situation in how FF16 may be the first big PS5 exclusive (I'd place Forspoken on a similar level to Demons Souls/Ratchet and Clank in sales potential). Though the PS5 userbase is sufficient enough to support and as we have seen many PS5 exclusives have had great legs as PS5 stock gets replenished.
 
To recap two recent announcements: SaGa livestream on May 31:

Nomura says Final Fantasy VII 25th Anniversary news in June.

A non-zero chance that this is during the Xbox Showcase. I wouldn't be surprised if Final Fantasy VII Remake comes to Xbox Series. It would help push sales of that game even more. Of course this could also be a VII Remake Part 2 reveal that is PlayStation exclusive (and PS5 exclusive would signal a substantial decline in sales unless it's in 2024 or later)
 
Last edited:
To recap two recent announcements: SaGa livestream on May 31:

Nomura says Final Fantasy VII 25th Anniversary news in June.

A non-zero chance that this is during the Xbox Showcase. I wouldn't be surprised if Final Fantasy VII Remake comes to Xbox Series. It would help push sales of that game even more. Of course this could also be a VII Remake Part 2 reveal that is PlayStation exclusive (and PS5 exclusive would signal a substantial decline in sales unless it's in 2024 or later)

I highly doubt Nomura is talking about ports. The elephant in the room is part 2. I also highly doubt its coming 2022. Late 2023, more likely 2024 by which time PS5 will have more than sufficient install base.
 
I might be misremembering, but I heard rumors and leaks about FF7R Part 2 coming in 2023 and Square wanting quick turnarounds.
 
I'll repeat but based on what Kawazu's said before I expect a Romancing SaGa: Minstrel Song 2D Demake to make it slot in with the console/mobile RS2-3 remakes. It's really the best of both worlds and will probably appease most of the SaGa fanbase.

A SaGa Frontier 2 remaster is also probably an easy bet.


I highly doubt Nomura is talking about ports. The elephant in the room is part 2. I also highly doubt its coming 2022. Late 2023, more likely 2024 by which time PS5 will have more than sufficient install base.
Could be all of the above honestly, IIVR moving full multiplat and VIIR2's debut (exclusive or not). They also probably have to start moving on Ever Crisis info given that's due this year too.
 
Back
Top Bottom