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 .
what triggers me negatively is their "Nintendo leaks":
- Hey, there is a Zelda game in development!
- Hey, a new Super Mario, mamma mia!
- Hey, super secret code name nobody will ever let you know about so I don't risk to be confirmed nor denied: SupaDupaDoohh! probably coming to Switch 2 sometimes in the next 5 years

wait, LOL?

all other rumorse (SEGA and S-E ones) can be easily identified and, consequently, confirmed or denied as soon as official plans will be unveiled, checking their "status" as reliable or not leakers
Obviously all leaks should be taken with a grain of salt and some are more obvious than others (who honestly thought Visions wouldn't get ported?) But Midori's track record is pretty good thus far. Until we start getting some concrete wrong statements, saying they are a troll is baseless.

Likewise I would say, revealing code names of games is info that doesn't even register as a leak. It's nothing info. I don't know why anyone interprets the Nintendo ones as anything other than "you might find this interesting".
 
To me the biggest failure of SE is the simple questionable premise the company is building their games around.

They stated that their primary goal with the console division is to introduce the console gamers to their ecosystem and transition them to their mobile business, to get them to become high spenders.

Then why is and was there such a huge discrepancy between both divisions in terms of gameplay? There was a clear shift in terms of gameplay direction with the console division towards action based gameplay. On the other hand the mobile division primarily provides turnbased/classic gameplay experiences.

There is no clear troughline in the company and it most likely comes down to the directors having to much say in that matter.

Not even to mention the hubris to think that just because you are SE that you can simply change a fundamentally part of your gameplay and expect it to be exceptional.

Creating Action is way more demanding than to develope turn-based games. It is more time consuming, it needs way more resources to make enemies, systems, testing and so on.

On top action needs more innovation than turn-based systems. With turn-based systems you can mash several mechanics and then have to make sure that the balancing and pacing is fine. The core gameplay is still a button press.
With action you can't simply have a button press be the same action all the time. If your system is not exceptional like for example From Software than your fanbase won't tolerate permanent reuse of systems and mechanics.

SE went from being basically masters of their craft to rookies and middle of the pack of action developers. And the sales numbers show that the consumers saw through their ploy with almost every of their attempt to shove action down their throat.
 
I do think it actually is.

Because FF15 didn't sell those 10m on the back of critically acclaimed gameplay. It sold it because of zeitgeist and many factors benefiting the release and a somewhat very positive outlook on the future people hoped for with the franchise and the company as a whole. The same is somewhat true for KH. Both games are also more or less the only two examples of a success in the gameplay shift (KH didn't shift) and also are the first two big releases since the shift was made.

Another big problem is that SE started to compete with itself and the whole wider industry. KH was the premier action franchise of SE. Nier was a new addition, especially automata on the pedigree of Platinum Games. Now most their games are action oriented and have to compete within the same company and are being dragged down be mediocre gaming experiences despite maybe being better.
 
what triggers me negatively is their "Nintendo leaks":
- Hey, there is a Zelda game in development!
- Hey, a new Super Mario, mamma mia!
- Hey, super secret code name nobody will ever let you know about so I don't risk to be confirmed nor denied: SupaDupaDoohh! probably coming to Switch 2 sometimes in the next 5 years

wait, LOL?

all other rumorse (SEGA and S-E ones) can be easily identified and, consequently, confirmed or denied as soon as official plans will be unveiled, checking their "status" as reliable or not leakers

While I do think it's strange that Midori suddenly got access to insider information about multiple developers, it may be possible in the future to verify her codename leaks. Dataminers frequently discover internal project code names while examining a game's code and assets. For example:


Often, a game's code still contains its internal project name, used by the developers before the release name is finalized. Below are some of the internal names of Mario games found in their data; note how Nintendo seems to use the keyword "Red" often to refer to Mario.
 
The best selling RE title right now is RE2R, which could be considered a regression to prior RE formula.
RE2R came after the highly successful (both critically and commercially) RE7, so the franchise had an upward trend at that point. Also, just because RE2R was third person and RE7 was first person it doesn't mean that it is considered a regression. Just the gameplay system is different. The game is also different compared to 4-5-6 because it's scope is smaller, it introduces a stalker enemy that audience loved, better use of third point camera and in general a mix of horror and action (more horror) that now is considered the best RE game by many.

It ticked all the boxes correctly just like RER4, RE7, RE8 plus it was multi-platform, so that's why these games sold so well. RE3R didn't so that's why it sold worse than the previous games mentioned.
This is not an argument against series playing with their formulas, bending their genres, etc. But let’s be real, no series has seen such drastic evolution and re-imagining as FF has in the past decade or so, and yet that clearly hasn’t done the franchise any favours, so bringing that up actively works against your point.
Changing the formulas doesn't do anything if it doesn't resonates with the audience. Which is what happened with FFXV and to an extent with FFXVI. FFXV in general doesn't have a good reception from the fans because of the world structure, gameplay and story. That's why they released tons of patches making significant changes both to gameplay and the pace. It reached 10m but let's not forget that the game was discounted after 3 months in the market. It also had tons of cut content which they later repurposed as DLC (Ardyn episode, movie, anime, multiplayer expansion) on top of the already announced DLCs before release so it received more support than FFXVI and FF7 Remake or Rebirth. Despite all that it just scratched the 10m ceiling, something that also some of the previous entries managed to do.

You think that Square is happy with 10m being the limit of a mainline FF, especially when it's multi-platform?

If multiplatform is not the main solution, then one should conclude that neither is anything you brought into the frame.
Sorry, but imo saying that multi-platform is the main solution it's just short sighted. What I brought to the frame are elements that have proved can actually help a game sell better when it's done correctly. If you think you can disregard all that and simply making a game multi-platform will guarantee enormous success then I guess we just have a different opinion.
 
People buy the games. That's all to it. Online discourse and feelings are not relevant. If companies find port worth it - they will port it. Just because Capcom ports REV on Switch 2, it won't mean that people won't buy the next RE on Switch 2 because "eye for an eye" (what are you talking about here?)
Do they do that? Yes. Do they do it sufficiently? You can see it in the numerous economically flopped projects from Square Enix or sudden layoffs from other companies. Reputation should not be underestimated, otherwise even good games cannot save a ruined reputation (see Ubisoft).

Anyone who thinks that regular customers are oblivious to the policies of the respective company and won't jump ship if there are too many disappointments is mistaken.
 
Do they do that? Yes. Do they do it sufficiently? You can see it in the numerous economically flopped projects from Square Enix or sudden layoffs from other companies. Reputation should not be underestimated, otherwise even good games cannot save a ruined reputation (see Ubisoft).
Square Enix projects flop for several reasons and one of the most important ones is that they don't cultivate the audience anywhere outside Playstation or launch 10 games close to each other. Square Enix releases tons of small games on Switch but they have to compete with indies and small companies like Falcom for exactly same market. It does not help that a lot of their games - above indie levels - are mediocre (Babylon's Fall, Foamstars etc0. Then we go to bigger IPs like Dragon Quest, Final Fantasy and Kingdom Hearts.

Reputation should not be underestimated, otherwise even good games cannot save a ruined reputation (see Ubisoft).
Ubisoft games sell just fine with or without Ubisoft's reputation. Online discourse is irrelevant in that matter as those are actually buy games cannot even tell who is the CEO of Ubisoft. The issue with Ubisoft is that it suffers from the same issues as other big publishers - only their big IPs sell. AC, FC etc. And Ubisoft at one point went to extreme to oversaturate the market with AC and FC games. Reputation is not an issue per se - but your IP has to be recognized by players as we don't really have a lack of games to play. Like people lament that Prince of Persia did not sell, but let's be honest - I can probably find an indie games that would be cheaper and plays better or similarly. There are many games like that. And Ubisoft had to compete with that.

And that brings us to a situation with Square Enix. The saving grace of FF is that nobody does cinematic JRPGs like FF - otherwise FF brand would be dead long time ago. However when every other publisher decided to expand their IPs reach, Square Enix went with the exactly opposite route. Western publishers have never had issues with releasing their games everywhere - where they can - and most of the time it is PS/Xbox/PC. With Japan, certain publishers recognized multiplatform - Capcom stopped making their exclusive games for specific platforms long time ago, Sega stopped doing that in the late Xbox One gen, Bamco too (Tekken for example). For example when Capcom had money trouble in SF5 era, they did not cling to PS exclusivity but ensured that they would not abandon PC.

But SE went with the exact opposite route. And FF7R aside, them having FF14 on PS and PC and FF16 developed by Yoshi-P - who is actually responsible for FF14 - while not releasing the game on PC Day 1 (where you would think people would at least try the game due to Yoshi-P and FF14 association) is an insane move.
 
Steam pricing (EUR) for Kingdom Hearts is slightly different compared the Cloud release on Switch.

Steam prices:
KINGDOM HEARTS -HD 1.5+2.5 ReMIX- (49,99€)
KINGDOM HEARTS HD 2.8 Final Chapter Prologue (59.99€)
KINGDOM HEARTS III + Re Mind (DLC) (59.99€)
KINGDOM HEARTS INTEGRUM MASTERPIECE (99.99€)

Everything has a -31% launch discount.

For comparison, SE's delulu with the Cloud release:
KINGDOM HEARTS -HD 1.5+2.5 ReMIX- Cloud version (39.99€)
KINGDOM HEARTS HD 2.8 Final Chapter Prologue Cloud version (49.99€)
KINGDOM HEARTS III + Re Mind (DLC) Cloud version (59.99€)
KINGDOM HEARTS INTEGRUM MASTERPIECE Cloud version (99.99€)

The first 2 games are €10 more expensive, 3rd game and collection are same price.
 
Last edited:
I love Final Fantasy Tactics but was it a successful game? With the state of FF right now I don't see it making big waves despite being great news.

Other than the MIA Dragon Quest games, it is the best selling SE game form before the merger to NOT have a current version, as far as I know.

There was no doubt it is happening, so this is just more confirmation.

Next up would be the Parasite Eve games. There's rights issues in there though. Both sold over 1M but not as much as FFT as far as I could tell.

The DQ games are probably going to trickle out over years, as 4-9 need either wildly substantial remasters or full remakes.

FFT will do well, just like the inevitable update of Chrono Trigger. They've been on a bunch of platforms over the years but it has been long enough since the last proper updated release that there's latent interest.
 
Last edited:
I love Final Fantasy Tactics but was it a successful game? With the state of FF right now I don't see it making big waves despite being great news.
If I remember right, it remains the best-selling FF spinoff title of all time and one of the most-critically acclaimed games in the entire franchise. So... yeah?

I'd personally prefer a remake to a remaster, nothing AAA necessary of course, but something more than what we typically get in a remaster.
 
Last edited:
I love Final Fantasy Tactics but was it a successful game? With the state of FF right now I don't see it making big waves despite being great news.
The original and War of the Lions sold a combined 2.5-3 million units, and I think was the best-selling TRPG all-time until Fire Emblem: Three Houses surpassed it a few years ago. They definitely considered it a success, especially since they went ahead and released an updated PSP version instead of just dumping the original PS1 version onto the PS1 Classics service during the PS3/PSP era.
 
Hopefully the long time is taking this remaster to appear is because its more of a remake than a remaster...

My guess is a faithful rebuild/remake in Unity or Unreal, like the Pixel Remasters. Their PSX codebase is kind of a mess and the difficulty of porting and maintaining those types of ports is most of the reaso why FFT has been missing so long.
 
My guess is a faithful rebuild/remake in Unity or Unreal, like the Pixel Remasters. Their PSX codebase is kind of a mess and the difficulty of porting and maintaining those types of ports is most of the reaso why FFT has been missing so long.

It would almost certainly be based on the more recent War of the Lions releases that were on PSP/Mobile. Wouldn't rule out a move to Unity or something though.
 
My guess is a faithful rebuild/remake in Unity or Unreal, like the Pixel Remasters. Their PSX codebase is kind of a mess and the difficulty of porting and maintaining those types of ports is most of the reaso why FFT has been missing so long.
They have the mobile version though, which already has touched up HD assets and QOL improvements. I think it uses unity too?
 
The mobile version is over a decade old at this point and barely works, as far as I can tell. It encounters most of the same issues that specifically motivated the Pixel Remasters and abandonment of the previous direct ports of their handheld remakes, and also has problems with consistently throwing away player progress.

War of the Lions is generally a modified port (extensive code reuse) of the PSX version that also managed to break various things. I can easily see them using the updated sprites from the mobile Retina update, but the game is going to feel extremely dated if they do a simple "straight" port. The UI is slow and clunky by modern standards, and people expect better resolution and framerste support than the ports of PSX/PSP code can offer.

Square Enix wants evergreen multiplatform releases, and that is really hard to do with pure ports of the OG code.
 
The mobile version is over a decade old at this point and barely works, as far as I can tell. It encounters most of the same issues that specifically motivated the Pixel Remasters and abandonment of the previous direct ports of their handheld remakes, and also has problems with consistently throwing away player progress.

War of the Lions is generally a modified port (extensive code reuse) of the PSX version that also managed to break various things. I can easily see them using the updated sprites from the mobile Retina update, but the game is going to feel extremely dated if they do a simple "straight" port. The UI is slow and clunky by modern standards, and people expect better resolution and framerste support than the ports of PSX/PSP code can offer.

Square Enix wants evergreen multiplatform releases, and that is really hard to do with pure ports of the OG code.
I don't know what else they could do with the game besides a mix of the mobile and the PSP version.

I guess a remake isn't happening for this kind of game, so I am really curious why this is taking so long.
 
I don't know what else they could do with the game besides a mix of the mobile and the PSP version.

I guess a remake isn't happening for this kind of game, so I am really curious why this is taking so long.

This is where we get into the weird "what is a remake?" territory. PSX, PSP, and Mobile are all using parts of the same game code as far as I know, and SE has demonstrably hated and mostly stopped doing that type of awful ports of ports of ports. Their statement about the old FF games "being at the limits of what they could maintain" or whatever it was speaks volumes about their view towards future versions of their main IPs. We're soon going to be up to about 15 mainline FF/DQ games that have been totally built in Unity or Unreal, and that number is only going to grow.

The Pixel Remasters are full Remakes. Just totally new code in a new engine, which is how they support arbitrary framerates and resolutions on 5+ platforms and multiple specs. That type of rebuild but with the Retina assets is I think within budget scope of the best selling FF spinoff.

I'll be in tears of pain if it is really a straight port of the old code like Chrono Cross or FF8 or the old versions of the FF games were.
 
Last edited:
While I do think it's strange that Midori suddenly got access to insider information about multiple developers, it may be possible in the future to verify her codename leaks. Dataminers frequently discover internal project code names while examining a game's code and assets. For example:


Looks at Super Mario Run codename. I never played the game myself, but if there no level in the game where Mario has wings I am going to be very disapointed with the Dev team.
 
This is where we get into the weird "what is a remake?" territory. PSX, PSP, and Mobile are all using parts of the same game code as far as I know, and SE has demonstrably hated and mostly stopped doing that type of awful ports of ports of ports. Their statement about the old FF games "being at the limits of what they could maintain" or whatever it was speaks volumes about their view towards future versions of their main IPs. We're soon going to be up to about 15 mainline FF/DQ games that have been totally built in Unity or Unreal, and that number is only going to grow.

The Pixel Remasters are full Remakes. Just totally new code in a new engine, which is how they support arbitrary framerates and resolutions on 5+ platforms and multiple specs. That type of rebuild but with the Retina assets is I think within budget scope of the best selling FF spinoff.

I'll be in tears of pain if it is really a straight port of the old code like Chrono Cross or FF8 or the old versions of the FF games were.

Wasn't Tactics Orge just the PSP version with some tweaks or I am thinking of a different game? When FF Tactics got leaked I thought it would get the same treatment with Tactics Orge but if this was the case it should have been released by now, unless SE is sitting on it for some reason.
 
Wasn't Tactics Orge just the PSP version with some tweaks or I am thinking of a different game? When FF Tactics got leaked I thought it would get the same treatment with Tactics Orge but if this was the case it should have been released by now, unless SE is sitting on it for some reason.

Tactics Ogre Reborn was a massive overhaul of the PSP code as far as i know, and was along the same lines as the Nier and Crisis Core Remaksters. Nearly all of the assets were new, and the entire organization of the UI was new, and the gameplay itself was basically 90% redesigned. However, the PSP Tactics Ogre was itself an entirely new game to PSP and not a port of PSX code like WotL was. The core codebase for TO was thus about 12 years newer than the FFT code.

I take SE at their word with the old ports of ports of ports being beyond what they could maintain and improve. FF and DQ games have been getting actual remakes in new engines for the last few years and I really hope FFT isn't a backslide to their old ways of awful ports. I can't imagine them pulling off an effort as extensive as Nier/TO/CC or even the PRs if they're trying to do it all on top of code from the mid 1990s.
 
Last edited:
Tactics Ogre Reborn was a massive overhaul of the PSP code as far as i know, and was along the same lines as the Nier and Crisis Core Remaksters. Nearly all of the assets were new, and the entire organization of the UI was new, and the gameplay itself was basically 90% redesigned. However, the PSP Tactics Ogre was itself an entirely new game to PSP and not a port of PSX code like WotL was. The core codebase for TO was thus about 12 years newer than the FFT code.
Oh wow, didn't know that. I am more positive about FFT now.
 
Oh wow, didn't know that. I am more positive about FFT now.

Really, Reborn was a super impressive update. It's a new game wearing the skin and script of the PSP remake. The PSP remake also had totally redesigned game compared to the SF version.

The jump from their old style remasters to the Pixel Remasters, DQ Remakes, and PSP/PS3 Remaksters has been gargantuan. There was a real turning point from 2017 to 2021 or so, so when something like Chrono Cross Remaster now comes out it feels like a giant dissapointment.
 
I was thinking about FF9 remake and a possible future FF8 remake, is a future possible FF8 remake totally dependant on how well the likely FF9 remake will sell? I do think a FF8 remake needs a bigger overhaul due to how broken some of the mechanics in the game was.
 
I was thinking about FF9 remake and a possible future FF8 remake, is a future possible FF8 remake totally dependant on how well the likely FF9 remake will sell? I do think a FF8 remake needs a bigger overhaul due to how broken some of the mechanics in the game was.

It would be hilarious and probably deserved if FF8 is the only FF game out of the first 10 to not get a remake.

I think it is inevitable though. FF9 will just determine when. My count is that about... 13 FF/DQ/Mana games have outright multiple remakes so far, and that will grow.
 
Last edited:
It would be hilarious and probably deserved if FF8 is the only FF game out of the first 10 to not get a remake.

I think it is inevitable though. FF9 will just determine when. My count is that about... 13 FF/DQ/Mana games have outright multiple remakes so far, and that will grow.
In my eyes VIII deserves a remake the most.
It's like RedLetterMedia says, you should remake the things that for some reason or another failed to live up to their full potential, rather than the ones that are already widely beloved.
 
VIII getting a fuller remaster versus VII and IX might've been what put it on the shelf for a remake. Same with X/2 and XII tbh, I really feel like next up should be a XIII (trilogy) remaster.
 
VIII getting a fuller remaster versus VII and IX might've been what put it on the shelf for a remake. Same with X/2 and XII tbh, I really feel like next up should be a XIII (trilogy) remaster.
Which is sad, because VIII and X would be the perfect candidates for a remake, especially VIII which could be split in 2 or 3 parts.
 
VIII getting a fuller remaster versus VII and IX might've been what put it on the shelf for a remake. Same with X/2 and XII tbh, I really feel like next up should be a XIII (trilogy) remaster.
The VIII remaster never struck as particularly higher effort than IX's Unity version
 
EVXISuAX0AMmISs


How times have changed since those days, now Square is one the companies that can be expected to support Switch 2 to a large degree.
 
The VIII remaster never struck as particularly higher effort than IX's Unity version
I'd say more went into revising the assets for VIII. It has entirely new models throughout while IX was really just touching up the main characters. Both do have sloppy aliased CGI/backgrounds and updated textures throughout but when you put them up against their originals, you definitely see a bigger visual difference on VIII imo.

VIII had other improvements too like redrawn portraits/cards and a new UI (IX only updated fonts iirc).
 
The last thing Final Fantasy needs at the moment is another remake split up into multiple unnecessary parts.
I agree but FFVIII is the only game that if it gets remake it will be split into parts, unless they reboot/change the story.

All the other mainline FF games can be done in one.
 
God willing and praise be to Him, future Final Fantasy remakes will focus on being faithful recreations instead of sequels that are meant to be their own series. 8, 9, and 10 should all be their own single releases
 
God willing and praise be to Him, future Final Fantasy remakes will focus on being faithful recreations instead of sequels that are meant to be their own series. 8, 9, and 10 should all be their own single releases

We have over 40 Square Enix remakes to compare to, including at least 6 FF remakes since 7 Remake came out. There is no reason whatsoever to think that multiple games is the norm, ever or going forward. Most are broadly faithful remakes.

The ones that I don't consider faithful are a very small list. FF7, Lufia DS, Final Fantasy Origin, and Sword of Mana, and arguably Tactics Ogre PSP. But most are like the waves of remakes we've seen for the first 6 FFs and first 8 DQs.
 
Last edited:
We have over 40 Square Enix remakes to compare to, including at least 6 FF remakes since 7 Remake came out. There is no reason whatsoever to think that multiple games is the norm, ever or going forward. Most are broadly faithful remakes.

The ones that I don't consider faithful are a very small list. FF7, Lufia DS, Final Fantasy Origin, and Sword of Mana, and arguably Tactics Ogre PSP. But most are like the waves of remakes we've seen for the first 6 FFs and first 8 DQs.
I know

But a lot of people feel that FF7 has set a new standard for "remakes," despite the fact that it is a sequel; my hope is that they are wrong, and that remakes in future will be treated reasonably

Who knows, one day maybe they'll remake Final Fantasy 7
 
I know

But a lot of people feel that FF7 has set a new standard for "remakes," despite the fact that it is a sequel; my hope is that they are wrong, and that remakes in future will be treated reasonably

Who knows, one day maybe they'll remake Final Fantasy 7
good news, I think we have enough lack-of-news to say that SE might not be too happy about FF7R2's pace and that this whole initiative might have fell on its face
 
good news, I think we have enough lack-of-news to say that SE might not be too happy about FF7R2's pace and that this whole initiative might have fell on its face

I don't think that the whole thing is done at this point, but that said... Square might as well finish the plan and move on. The remake project might have been a step too far for the company to be taken as a model to follow with any new project. So it's more than likely that they just complete this trilogy and then shove this as deep into a memory hole as possible.
 
I just need that FF9 remake announcement from Square themselves. Gotta be one of the worst kept secrets in the industry.
 
EVXISuAX0AMmISs


How times have changed since those days, now Square is one the companies that can be expected to support Switch 2 to a large degree.
In 2024, this plan has completely backfired from them as I bet it still carried over to the Switch.

At this point there's very few major markets or important secondary markets where Playstation ''wins'' over Nintendo.
 
Back
Top Bottom