Paraphrasing : those expectations are not too high, they’re the direct result of the games’ budget.
Yeah, okay, let’s admit that for a second. It’s not like they have no control over the scale and budget of their own games. Seems to me this still counts as unrealistic expectations…
They seem to have things backwards.
You don’t set expected sales based on the cost of development. You set the cost of development based on the expected sales.
The problem is that the first is easy, the later is hard, nigh impossible.
Software development is notoriously hard to predict. Specially features against time and cost of development. But video games are even harder to predict. It’s impossible to know how many copies a game will sell, you might as well hire a tarot reader. Specially if the game doesn’t exist yet.
This is not a justification of the AAA practices. Quite the contrary, things are this way because mid and high management refuse to do their job or plainly suck at it. I guess that the adage still rings true: I want smaller games, with worse graphics, made by well paid developers who work less hours. But this games have never sold billions of dollars or sparked billion dollar game as a service IPs. So executives think it can’t be done and keep expending more in a desperate chase of the golden eggs goose.
SQEX did have significant AA-sized development for a long while, although potentially less going forward until their flagship rights itself (or they develop a new one). It’s less risky, and the payoff can still end up highly successful like Life is Strange or Octopath Traveler.
I guess the silver lining for them here is that FF16 had much better management than 13 and 15. It would have been a real disaster if 16 went into the budget overruns those two games did. Being hitched to a low-market-share platform and being released in a crazy year for gaming was also bad luck. Granted, FF16 and Rebirth not being good enough to move PS5 units is its own problem.
Consoles shouldn’t tie their success to a single game. Nintendo, the creators of such model, ditched it almost immediately. After the Famicom. Volume of games + convenience is what move consoles, not a single game. Exclusives have diminishing returns and at the beginning of console sales cycle they’re more likely to hurt the game.
According to the article at least, that is essentially what they did. But their model was based on earlier years when there was higher projected growth, so the budgets were set too high as a result.
Personally, as long as the final installment in the FF7 Remake trilogy is made with the same budget as the first two and ends on a satisfying note, I’ll be happy. A good ending gives the trilogy as a whole have more lifetime sales than it would if part 3 makes the first two less good in retrospect, i.e. the Mass Effect 3 effect.
They really messed up with ff7 remake part 1. Don’t think I’ll be buying any of the others unless it’s used.
Also, said this before, but splitting it into three titles was an obvious cash grab.
I will just agree to disagree on that front. Playing casually, I clocked over 100 hours on the 2nd game, which is more time than it took me to complete the original full game on PS1. I enjoyed basically every minute of time played (save for one particular mini-game that I didn’t care for), so I’d say I got a good value out of it for the cost. It is also hard to say that it is a cash grab when it provides a much fuller experience than most AAA games these days seem to have.
Basically, I don’t hate it any more than I hate the fact that The Lord of the Rings is three separate movies; it’s not like The Hobbit.
I’m sure the second game is enjoyable. I’ve heard a lot of good things about it. It’s still a money grab to split the game into three separate titles.
They also at least highlighted the platform locking was not a good idea for them, which I suppose most people will agree with.
Seems like they’re not aware of how much (or little) desire there is for their IPs.
Foamstars was a new IP, so they didn’t count on brand name to carry this one.
Unless they thought “Square Enix” would be enough to hype it, and yeah, for a game that far away from their usual, that would be completely disconnected from reality.
Final Fantasy doesnt need to cost $100+ million to make; especially when your only big idea is just to make it look expensive. Execs like to blame their own hubris on market changes but like… treat your workers better and give them creative freedom and they could do great things. Instead its all on the backs of money-grubbing trend-chasers who get to keep their jobs when their inevitable failures lead to mass layoffs.
Ya’ll spent 50 mil on marketing? I barely even noticed ffxvi came out. How much did Dunkey spend on marketing Animal Well and that shit was inescapable for weeks.
We clearly run in different circles. To me, the drip-feed marketing for FF16 felt constant for the months running up to the game. Meanwhile, the very first time I heard of Animal Well was when the reviews started getting posted (and even then I only took notice because they were above average).
I literally saw Animal Well for the first time on the sale page on PSN just before it launched. I thought about buying it because it looked good.
Meanwhile, I saw a ridiculous amount of hype for XVI every time news or a trailer dropped for it. The demo convinced me to pick it up, and I’m so glad I did. It sucks because it’s the first mainline single player game since XII (or maybe X) that lives up to the brand.
I was excited for Persona 5, but not FFXVI. I think they’ve headed a bit too far down the road of Western imitation - going full medieval look, action combat (which I’m sorry, they’re not good at and it’s still confusing), etc.
The main thing I’ve expected from JRPGs is having a story and world that surprises me. There was something signature about the look of a guy with an oversized sword in a steampunk grungy city that pulled me into those games.
I know they poured a lot of budget into FFXVI, but it feels unplanned and vision-less. Like they could have been making the eikon fights in one team before writing the rest of the story, like how studios will film a car chase in one country and then work it into their action movie’s plot however they want.
I don’t feel that way about ffVVI at all. The story was fantastic. My only complaint was that some of the fights just felt like the eikons were damage sponges.
I’d love to play XVI, the story sounds amazing and the graphics are cutting-edge Square but two things keep turning me off:
- The fighting system is way too close to DMC which I absolutely hated, I want a JPRG not an action game
- it’s platform exclusive, talk to me when it’s on Steam
So really they’re doing it to themselves here. Their comment about “we’re modernizing the game to bring it to more people” just rings of BS, especially with their sales recently, and if they really cared about that they’d be fast tracking and announcing a date for XVI on the PC.
I thought the fighting was really fun in ff16. I’m not familiar with DMC though. All a matter of taste I suppose. Second point is fair, I happen to own a ps5, so I was able to play it right away, didn’t even realize it was an exclusive.
I’ve only ever played a demo for DMC and I hated it. But I loved XVI’s combat, which actually evolves quite a bit as you get more abilities.
These triple a stile developments are managed into the ground.
Maybe it’s because Final Fantasy peaked at VII-X and went downhill from there, fucking up their combat further and further with every installment?
I would agree, but XIV (the MMO) moved so far off the norm that I don’t really count it with the others. It managed to handle things pretty well, and was stomachable even if the combat mechanics aren’t often what draw people in.
Well, yeah, XIV as an MMO is a different thing. But that one also doesn’t have revenue issues afaik.
