Square Enix tells us what to expect from now on.

[Enkidu]

Except it doesn't if you're not releasing something that's a guaranteed sell. Do you read about the game industry at all? You seem to do so at least casually, as you mentioned some specific numbers earlier, but you appear to be completely unfamiliar with the growing discomfort of heightening development costs. That, and you don't appear to recognize the stark difference in the profitability of an AAA console title versus a top-of-the-line smart device title.

I think you're either not reading my comments or you're reading them incorrectly. Rehashing stuff that's already been discussed.

"Some," yes, but not a number substantial enough to keep a videogame development studio going, especially if they follow up a hit with a sales (not necessarily critical) dud or two. Additionally, said development is rapidly reaching the point where the average consumer isn't going to notice the difference separating the previous generation's graphics from the current generation's.

Haven't I said high-risk/high-reward throughout my posts? Do you understand that? Of course companies should diversify, I don't think I ever claimed companies should solely focus on big budget games, did I? Why are you talking about graphics?...

That's completely incorrect. This isn't even a matter of opinion, it's just a matter of being wrong. They aren't "right back where they were" because consumers are fickle. They ruined a decades-long in-the-black streak by releasing confusing and unnecessary hardware iterations, like the 3DS and the Wii U. The Wii is still selling today, and better than the Wii U. Nintendo's problem isn't that the Wii was a mistake (it wasn't); it was perhaps the smartest thing that they created since the Super Nintendo, or the original Nintendo DS.

You can make up fairytales as long as you want. The facts are that Nintendo was struggling before the release of the 3DS or Wii U. They couldn't sell games, period. Maybe you should look at their financials. Revisionist history isn't so easy with publicly traded companies.

If you want to learn more about these things, there aren't just myriad stories specifying otherwise here on BG's gaming forum, but there are plenty of others that you can read on Wired, Bloomberg, Gamasutra, and so on. You can go through each company's own financials and related announcements, just like the slides in the beginning of this thread.

I'd suggest you read through the financials of companies like EA and ActivisionBlizzard. AAA games are the backbone of their companies. Again, you seem to be of the opinion that I think companies should focus only on AAA games. I've never said that... Things will change, that's for sure, but the big budget game is here to stay.

You know in the 50-60's there were people exactly like you predicting the fall of Hollywood. History is fun sometimes.

[Correction]

You're so concerned with 'winning' the conversation that you can't even see the huge overlap between what Kohan posts and what you probably already know. You're getting really hung up solely on your characterization of the overall health of the AAA game publishing industry and it's bizzarre. Nobody's said AAA publishing's days are numbered. We all seem to agree that AAA publishing is evolving purely out of necessity. In fact this is really why I started the topic, to get people's reads on their relationship with AAA games in general. Looks like SE's fans have either lost faith on the back on their Japanese output or they ignored the Fabula Nova Crystallis/XIV botchamania out of blind hope for some messiah down the line (KH 3! VERSUS! FFVII REMAKE!)

For what it's worth, Nintendo had an incredible run this generation with the Wii and the DS.
http://abload.de/img/capture2gckzu.png
Their recent struggles have everything to do with keeping the Wii around well past its welcome with gamers and botching the 3DS launch to the point where they dropped the baby completely with the WiiU. This has hurt their relationship with bigtime 3rd party publishers whose balls, surprise surprise, shriveled as soon as they looked at the margins they were getting on the new platforms. "Unprecedented partnership!"

[Kohan]

Haven't I said high-risk/high-reward throughout my posts? Do you understand that? Of course companies should diversify, I don't think I ever claimed companies should solely focus on big budget games, did I? Why are you talking about graphics?...

I resolved to talking about something simple, specifically graphics, because you didn't appear to have a grasp on the bigger picture and the complexities involved. I thought it would be a better point of association for you.

You seem to have a rudimentary understanding of how the game industry works, and what is profitable and what is not. As mentioned, it's misguided. You have some of the knowledge, but not all of it, and you're making statements that are partially informed and partially incorrect. You're also using blanket commentary (or were—you aren't as much now), which is lazy, and when you were called out on said laziness, you acted as if anyone discussing specifics was wrong to do so.

For example, there's the part about Nintendo. You originally said that the Wii was essentially a fad and a mistake. That's incorrect. You later went on to say that Nintendo's financials weren't all roses before the Wii U and 3DS. These two things are not entirely related. The Wii capitalized on the growing casual market that's still growing today. That doesn't mean it was a "fad and a mistake." It was very successful for Nintendo, and was a perfectly smart move for them to make back when they did it. However, a lack of future planning and market understanding led to mistakes like the Wii U and 3DS, which pissed away their opportunities. It harkened back to the stubbornness that led to their using the cartridge format on the Nintendo 64, for example.

You then mentioned their financials, but I had already talked about their long in-the-black streak, which they managed due to smart operations throughout the lifespan of the Nintendo 64 and the GameCube. As such, it should be obvious that I've already done my homework. I don't know if you have, or if you even knew that.

As mentioned, you have some of the knowledge, but not all of it, and you're applying it in a half-ass way. You're right on some things, and wrong on others.

You made a statement like this:

You know in the 50-60's there were people exactly like you predicting the fall of Hollywood. History is fun sometimes.

Yet earlier in the thread, I made a comment about how focusing on products for smart devices could give Square Enix the capital to do whatever they want.

I don't really even know what you're arguing about. If you agreed with Correction and I from the start (which you seem to be safe facing more and more toward), why did you open up with what was apparently trying to be a counter-argument?

[Enkidu]

I resolved to talking about something simple, specifically graphics, because you didn't appear to have a grasp on the bigger picture and the complexities involved. I thought it would be a better point of association for you.

Actually it was just kind of out of left field. It really had nothing to do with the topic at hand. Seemed more like filler, but I can see you're full of that.

You originally said that the Wii was essentially a fad and a mistake.

Again you're either not reading or not reading correctly. My comment was simple: "This reminds me of the whole 'the Wii is the future of gaming' bullshit from 5 years ago." And I stand by that comment. The Wii was a success in the casual market and a failure everywhere else. It certainly helped promote a new demographic, but it was not the future of gaming by any stretch. By now it's legacy is mostly forgotten.

Anyways the original topic was that plenty of AAA game companies are thriving - and they are. You can talk about financials all you want, but you don't seem to look at them because if you did you'd see nothing but talk about their AAA games. Skirting the topic at hand was your own doing, not mine. Honestly I think you just can't get over "plenty" and have a hard time noticing that it doesn't mean "all". That's the only explanation I can think of for your squabbling.

[-Zer0-]

Posted this in another thread somewhere back. Seems more relevant in this thread. Indulge, enjoy.

The State of AAA Games

[Sol-Blackguy]

Square-Enix, one Final Fantasy 7 remake away from going belly up...

[Brill Weave]

I don't even give them that long. I'm honestly looking at all of this as SE's death knell. If XIV isn't a success, even if just a moderate one, they're fucked.

[Enkidu]

Posted this in another thread somewhere back. Seems more relevant in this thread. Indulge, enjoy.

The State of AAA Games

That's just the thing, you can't paint a picture many different ways. Ubisoft actually saw a significant drop in casual game sales and a significant boost in AAA game sales... In this article they try to paint it an entirely different way. I'd suggest people read Ubisoft's financial statement and their predictions for the future. Hint: it's all about the AAA games, bro.

[Icarian]

I still can't grasp the concept of people saying smartphone games are the future for the handheld market, It is physically impossible to make any kind of meaningful gaming on the go with a smartphone/tablet, yes, you can play angry birds, doodle jump, cut the rope and games that you play for 5 minutes at a bus/train station (I'd rather read the web than play those games, but that's me) you're not going to play a Monster Hunter, Valkyria Chronicles, Street Fighter or even a Platformer on a smartphone, ever, at least not unless they are simplified into oblivion to the point that they're not even fun to play.

[Lucavi]

They're assuming that the same people that flooded nintendo's coffers with the Wii and summarily didn't buy Wii U out of boredom with Wii bowling and sports (finally) are always going to be gamers looking for the next best thing. They also assume the mothers, grandmothers and hipsters playing the latest popcap version of bejeweled and angry birds will again, always be there to dump copious amounts of money on products. As if these people are never going to get bored and move onto the next fad.

But hey, its cool; they've called for the death of PC and console gaming before; this won't be the last time.

[Sol-Blackguy]

I don't even give them that long. I'm honestly looking at all of this as SE's death knell. If XIV isn't a success, even if just a moderate one, they're fucked.

When Squaresoft and Enix first merged, I always thought it was a buyout.

[Correction]

I don't even give them that long. I'm honestly looking at all of this as SE's death knell. If XIV isn't a success, even if just a moderate one, they're fucked.

They have nearly a billion dollars in cash; they're not dying soon but they must return their margins to where their investors want or things start getting really bad for them as a company.

[Kelenae]

They have nearly a billion dollars in cash; they're not dying soon but they must return their margins to where their investors want or things start getting really bad for them as a company.

Ya there is plenty money in the coffers... its just that they need to get their act together or they'll have no money in the coffers

[Gwynplaine]

Square-Enix has never been a good gaming company for one thing, they excel at making art that has mediocre gameplay elements. Not saying that's bad a lot of fans like that just saying the gameplay was never their forte, it's the style.

[Elcura]

SE has never been amazing at gameplay, but for the most part they are capable of excellent games (not just stories) when the occasion calls for it. Kingdom Hearts and Dissidia are titles that show better gameplay, but even RPGs like XII and X-2 show great gameplay from a basic and generally static system (ATB).

During the PS1 era SE (or SS) made a lot of games with good gameplay. But generally there's a limit on how amazing you can make a traditional RPG.

[Charismatic]

During the PS1 era SE (or SS) made a lot of games with good gameplay.

Oh boy did they.
Vagrant Story, Threads of Fate, Brave Fucking Fencer Fucking Musashi, Parasite Eve and more... all of them were a bit on the easy side but the mechanics were fuckin' there.

Those were definitely their golden years. Made you really think they were gonna do it big.

[Odin'sLaw]

most games people are nostalgic for are Square Soft games I've said for 10 years (yes even at the age of 13) SE can't make amazing games like Square Soft could but by no means do they make terrible games (besides 14 or versus or....you know never mind)

[Mugmug]

Oh boy did they.
Vagrant Story, Threads of Fate, Brave Fucking Fencer Fucking Musashi, Parasite Eve and more... all of them were a bit on the easy side but the mechanics were fuckin' there.

Those were definitely their golden years. Made you really think they were gonna do it big.

Don't forget Einhander, Chocobo Racing (fuck the haters, this game ruled), Final Fantasy Tactics, etc.

Man I miss Squaresoft.

[tisiphone]

Man I miss Squaresoft.

^ This, so fucking much.

[Julian]

Oh man, Star Ocean 1 & 2, Dragon Quest (especially 7, and monsters!), Valkyrie Profile, I miss Enix.

edit: holy shit! Star Ocean 3 & 4 are a product of Square's intervention! SQUARE SOFT RUINED THE STAR OCEAN SERIES

</sarcasm>