Collective nouns are tricky, since "they", plural, are not a person, singular, who can exist simultaneously outside the collective.
Like the king of one country can simultaneously be a baron in another, as well as a prince somewhere else. Identities are not mutually exclusive. Like a Hermaphrodite isn't it's own gender, it's simultaneously 2. But some people (read: mentally moronic) struggle with language, fetishize words, and turn nouns into adjectives.
A CEO can absolutely be an janitor at the same time. Job titles and wages don't form a hierarchy.
Sub sub sub sub contractors exist.
Collective nouns are tricky, since "they", plural, are not a person, singular, who can exist simultaneously outside the collective.
Like the king of one country can simultaneously be a baron in another, as well as a prince somewhere else. Identities are not mutually exclusive. Like a Hermaphrodite isn't it's own gender, it's simultaneously 2. But some people (read: mentally moronic) struggle with language, fetishize words, and turn nouns into adjectives.
A CEO can absolutely be an janitor at the same time. Job titles and wages don't form a hierarchy.
Sub sub sub sub contractors exist.
Perfect general thread for the NOT AN RPGgays.
Go ahead and name just one good RPG they've developed since the merger
Any SaGa game
Any DQ game
The Last Remnant
Front Mission 5
Lord of Vermilion
Triangle Strategy
Now I'll just wait for your butthurt reply where you say none of these are good because we all know that's what you're going to do.
no you homosexual, SE and even Square Soft never ever made any DQ game except for 11 which was the worst one in the series
2 years ago
Anonymous
Bad cope, Armor Project is part of Square Enix, whether you like it or not.
And what about all of those other games?
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Armor Project is part of Square Enix
Not that anon, but they're actually just business partners. SE publishes games developed by a developer (Chunsoft, ArtePiazza, TOSE, Level-5 etc.) chosen by Armor Project.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Not that anon, but they're actually just business partners.
Just looks the mobygames credit page of DQ11 and look how many square enix guys developed it.
Nobody would say that treasure hunter G isn't a square game , same with Parasite Eve, nobody would said is codeveloped.
They made FF7R. They originally weren't going to but like 2 years before release, they scrapped everything CC2 did for the game and started over themselves.
2 years ago
Anonymous
So other than that Square hasn't really made a game by themselves for awhile? That would mean OPs post was kinda of a trick question.
For FF7R I wonder if it was basically just a 1 to 1 remake with updated graphics.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>For FF7R I wonder if it was basically just a 1 to 1 remake with updated graphics.
No, it was still an action-ATB hybrid like the version of FF7-2 we got. Was still solely covering Midgar as well, if I recall correctly.
They became extremely risk averse after the whole Spirits Within debacle nearly bankrupt them and decided after the merger to only back extremely safe bets life FF and DQ pretty much killing any series less lucrative and anything that could potentially be a new series would always be slapped with the FF label to maximize profits.
Their current strategy seems to be doing a few big budget productions and converting their whole SNES library into "HD-2D" games. After that, I imagine they'll do the same for their PSX era 2.5D games like Xenogears.
My bet is after Live A Live they do Bahamut Lagoon and Treasure of the Rudras, as neither had an official english release.
The Final Fantasy side was always kind of a parasite on the genre. It cannibalized ideas other JRPGs championed, especially the ones behind Dragon Quest, but they usually did a good enough job making it their own and refining it, and it showed. They tried innovating back in the day, but literally all of their innovations made the games worse. Look at FF2, their most original game.
Final Fantasy 7 was a fluke giga success that made them kings of the genre (despite that, for most purposes, what people truly love was what FF7 copied from Chrono Trigger, and the up budgeted presentation), and so they outcompeted or bought their competition.
Unfortunately, this also meant they were out of ideas to borrow, since everyone who they'd copied to get that far was gone now. They also had the problems of the nouveau riche, as they had never really been a big successful company before, so splurged insane amounts of money on random shit like Final Fantasy the Spirits Within, unlimited Directorial Cocaine Boxes, and endless swarms of people dedicated to spending as much of their money doing nothing as possible.
So, essentially, they bought out the production of the things they usually relied on for good ideas, started throwing money at problems to solve them instead, and got surrounded by artistic conmen happy to spend 7, 10 years of very development time and ten gorillion dollars, and not have a fricking proof of concept, besides that it's going to be a musical, wait no film noire, wait no stage production, wait no musical, wait no open world western, wait no whatever it's out now, but now for my NEXT masterpiece...
It's full of chuuni morons in their 40-50s making mongoloid spreadsheet simulators with K-pop homosexualry and zippers. They can't even make a proper action-adventure game.
I mostly agree. Some Squeenix RPGs are okay but none are really good or great. Ironically despite hating it at launch I think FF12 was actually their most solid JRPG, just an awful Final Fantasy. The best DQ game they made was IMHO Heroes 2. Very solid musou gameplay. They should've made DQH3 instead of the builders trash.
S-E drove all of their old franchises into the ground and all their new mid range "indie" ones were garbage. Too much focus on demasters, ports, demakes that without exception SUCKED. >Squaresoft? great >Enix? great >Square-Enix? filth
It's more that their merger coincides with the end of the JRPG golden age. PS1 was the last point when devs had extensive freedom and still workable budgets to develop new ideas.
Is it possible that you just enjoyed rpgs more when you were younger?
Octopath Traveler and Triangle Strategy were really good. I know they have flaws, but the same could be said of pre-merger Square games as well.
A good majority of the pre-merger games were all turn-based. So maybe you just prefer that style over the action and hybrid rpgs that are coming out now.
While I still prefer turn-based, I am pretty sure that even without the merger Square would have transitioned away anyway from that formula.
Final Fantasy has always been an experimental series that I feel lost its way when they stopped using Atb or standard tb (1,2,3,X). That is not a fault of joining with Enix, a company known for DQ which still used turn-based up to XI.
Chrono Trigger
Secret of Mana
SMRPG
FF6/FF7
^All good games that have their flaws for sure, but I am pretty sure getting older and having hundreds of rpgs under your belt makes it so that barely anything seems fresh or original. And if it is fresh or original it is only because it deviates so far away from rpgs you are used to from the past that there is a disconnect.
Take your top 6 pre-merger rpgs from Square. If any one of them came out for the first time within the past couple of years, you would probably still consider it inferior to any of the other 5 simply because you are an adult now and also have rpg fatigue.
Ok what metric are you using to determine that no good games have been made since the merger? What determines good?
I am just trying to expand the discussion over a simple boring "yeah Square sux now" echo box. I tend to replay the 90s rpgs more than the post-merger ones. That could be because the games are actually better. Or it could be that most atb games (my preference) are from that time and they are shorter to playthrough and don't have a hundred different mechanics to learn.
Critical reception/ratings?
User ratings?
Sales numbers?
Can't be any of those 3 since post merger Square has made games that beat several pre-merger games on those metrics.
That leaves "Feelings". The worst subjective metric, because another person could easily say they feel the post-merger games are better and pre-merger are unplayable atb shit (I prefer atb btw).
And that begs to question why you "feel" the way you do versus why someone with an opposing opinion "feels" the way they do. Chances are you grew up with the former and the other person grew up with the latter rpgs. Nostalgia may be a possible factor in that or it may just be age.
Compared to Dragon Quest, FF changed up its battle systems almost every game.
Even though 4 to 9 all used ATB, jobs, materia, espers, junctions, equipment abilities were all different.
Going from FF7 to FF8 where enemies now level up with you, you have no mp, your stats only increase from junctioning magic, all made it feel like a totally different experience. If you subtract chocobos and spell names, you literally could have called each new entry in the series anything else besides Final Fantasy.
You're a gigantic fricking moron >Even though 4 to 9 all used ATB, jobs, materia, espers, junctions, equipment abilities were all different.
Those are character building gimmicks (all different flavours of slot system) that have nothing to do with the battle system, which is for all intents and purposes functionally identical.
Spending MPs or not for the same exact Fire 3 spell which is equally useless in both FFVII and VIII doesn't change a thing, filling your shitty wizardry derivative with gimmicks, surface level gimmicks at that, isn't experimentation, it's just fodder to reel in casuals, by the same absurd logic I can say that Dragon Quest was totally experimental because every game had different progression and narrative formats.
FF has never been experimental, it's a series that by the developers' own admission always played it safe because it's supposed to make a shitload of money, actually experimental games don't make a shitload of money because they're not meant for a wider audience.
We need OP to post Square's goods games outside of just Final Fantasy. So we have a general idea what types of games are considered good. That will allow us to find a modern comparison.
Perfect general thread for the NOT AN RPGgays.
Collective nouns are tricky, since "they", plural, are not a person, singular, who can exist simultaneously outside the collective.
Like the king of one country can simultaneously be a baron in another, as well as a prince somewhere else. Identities are not mutually exclusive. Like a Hermaphrodite isn't it's own gender, it's simultaneously 2. But some people (read: mentally moronic) struggle with language, fetishize words, and turn nouns into adjectives.
A CEO can absolutely be an janitor at the same time. Job titles and wages don't form a hierarchy.
Sub sub sub sub contractors exist.
>But some people (read: mentally moronic) struggle with language
>an janitor
lol
Why do I get the feeling that OP (A homosexual) is just another bitter disenfranchised Final Fantasy "fan" who doesn't care about videogames?
Go ahead and name just one good RPG they've developed since the merger
Any SaGa game
Any DQ game
The Last Remnant
Front Mission 5
Lord of Vermilion
Triangle Strategy
Now I'll just wait for your butthurt reply where you say none of these are good because we all know that's what you're going to do.
None of those are good though
Explain why they're not.
inb4 "SOUL"
Neither is your taste.
I've been saying it for years even if I kinda like FF12.
Shit taste confirmed.
You realize SE is not responsible for those games right
All of those games are made by SE though.
no you homosexual, SE and even Square Soft never ever made any DQ game except for 11 which was the worst one in the series
Bad cope, Armor Project is part of Square Enix, whether you like it or not.
And what about all of those other games?
>Armor Project is part of Square Enix
Not that anon, but they're actually just business partners. SE publishes games developed by a developer (Chunsoft, ArtePiazza, TOSE, Level-5 etc.) chosen by Armor Project.
>Not that anon, but they're actually just business partners.
Just looks the mobygames credit page of DQ11 and look how many square enix guys developed it.
Nobody would say that treasure hunter G isn't a square game , same with Parasite Eve, nobody would said is codeveloped.
specify who exactly "they" are.
The World Ends With You
SaGa Scarlet Grace
Dragon Quest VIII
Level-5 developed it
Dumb anon here. Does Square-Enix actually make games now? Or are they just an overseer for studios they contract to make games?
Like how Oracles and Minish Cap are from Capcom and DKC is from Rare.
They made FF7R. They originally weren't going to but like 2 years before release, they scrapped everything CC2 did for the game and started over themselves.
So other than that Square hasn't really made a game by themselves for awhile? That would mean OPs post was kinda of a trick question.
For FF7R I wonder if it was basically just a 1 to 1 remake with updated graphics.
>For FF7R I wonder if it was basically just a 1 to 1 remake with updated graphics.
No, it was still an action-ATB hybrid like the version of FF7-2 we got. Was still solely covering Midgar as well, if I recall correctly.
Trials of Mana. Even though it is a remake from SquareSoft time, the remake is practically a different game outside of story.
Duodecim. Sadly it was the last time Dissidia was good because the next time they tried it was a disaster.
I'm pretty sure Square was the developer for FM5.
Even before the merger they kept making games with decent ideas but so piss easy and incomplete they were functionally movie games.
Dragon Quest 8 is good
Ah the usual turn based homosexual thats crying over objectively better games
They became extremely risk averse after the whole Spirits Within debacle nearly bankrupt them and decided after the merger to only back extremely safe bets life FF and DQ pretty much killing any series less lucrative and anything that could potentially be a new series would always be slapped with the FF label to maximize profits.
this, they are just too risk averse to make anything appealing to play.
I like some of their games, but they have been falling behind with every release.
Bump.
And pls stop talking about this disgusting company, their policies limit vidya develoment, all their games are mid and will always be
Their current strategy seems to be doing a few big budget productions and converting their whole SNES library into "HD-2D" games. After that, I imagine they'll do the same for their PSX era 2.5D games like Xenogears.
My bet is after Live A Live they do Bahamut Lagoon and Treasure of the Rudras, as neither had an official english release.
Bahamut Lagoon I can see getting one but Rudra is really minor as far as Square releases go, it might get a rerelease like Trials of Mana did though
I forget which half was which, but.
The Final Fantasy side was always kind of a parasite on the genre. It cannibalized ideas other JRPGs championed, especially the ones behind Dragon Quest, but they usually did a good enough job making it their own and refining it, and it showed. They tried innovating back in the day, but literally all of their innovations made the games worse. Look at FF2, their most original game.
Final Fantasy 7 was a fluke giga success that made them kings of the genre (despite that, for most purposes, what people truly love was what FF7 copied from Chrono Trigger, and the up budgeted presentation), and so they outcompeted or bought their competition.
Unfortunately, this also meant they were out of ideas to borrow, since everyone who they'd copied to get that far was gone now. They also had the problems of the nouveau riche, as they had never really been a big successful company before, so splurged insane amounts of money on random shit like Final Fantasy the Spirits Within, unlimited Directorial Cocaine Boxes, and endless swarms of people dedicated to spending as much of their money doing nothing as possible.
So, essentially, they bought out the production of the things they usually relied on for good ideas, started throwing money at problems to solve them instead, and got surrounded by artistic conmen happy to spend 7, 10 years of very development time and ten gorillion dollars, and not have a fricking proof of concept, besides that it's going to be a musical, wait no film noire, wait no stage production, wait no musical, wait no open world western, wait no whatever it's out now, but now for my NEXT masterpiece...
Everything you said is wrong. GJ.
>I don't really know shit about anything but read this wall of text opinion I pulled from my butthole
It's full of chuuni morons in their 40-50s making mongoloid spreadsheet simulators with K-pop homosexualry and zippers. They can't even make a proper action-adventure game.
All their games belong to >>>Ganker and
.
I mostly agree. Some Squeenix RPGs are okay but none are really good or great. Ironically despite hating it at launch I think FF12 was actually their most solid JRPG, just an awful Final Fantasy. The best DQ game they made was IMHO Heroes 2. Very solid musou gameplay. They should've made DQH3 instead of the builders trash.
S-E drove all of their old franchises into the ground and all their new mid range "indie" ones were garbage. Too much focus on demasters, ports, demakes that without exception SUCKED.
>Squaresoft? great
>Enix? great
>Square-Enix? filth
Why do you pretend you play anything more than FF garbage and maybe the occasional DQ spinoff, it's really embarassing.
It's more that their merger coincides with the end of the JRPG golden age. PS1 was the last point when devs had extensive freedom and still workable budgets to develop new ideas.
Is it possible that you just enjoyed rpgs more when you were younger?
Octopath Traveler and Triangle Strategy were really good. I know they have flaws, but the same could be said of pre-merger Square games as well.
A good majority of the pre-merger games were all turn-based. So maybe you just prefer that style over the action and hybrid rpgs that are coming out now.
While I still prefer turn-based, I am pretty sure that even without the merger Square would have transitioned away anyway from that formula.
Final Fantasy has always been an experimental series that I feel lost its way when they stopped using Atb or standard tb (1,2,3,X). That is not a fault of joining with Enix, a company known for DQ which still used turn-based up to XI.
Chrono Trigger
Secret of Mana
SMRPG
FF6/FF7
^All good games that have their flaws for sure, but I am pretty sure getting older and having hundreds of rpgs under your belt makes it so that barely anything seems fresh or original. And if it is fresh or original it is only because it deviates so far away from rpgs you are used to from the past that there is a disconnect.
Take your top 6 pre-merger rpgs from Square. If any one of them came out for the first time within the past couple of years, you would probably still consider it inferior to any of the other 5 simply because you are an adult now and also have rpg fatigue.
>hurr it's all nostalgia
Except it's not. You really should stop assuming people had the same childhood you did
Ok what metric are you using to determine that no good games have been made since the merger? What determines good?
I am just trying to expand the discussion over a simple boring "yeah Square sux now" echo box. I tend to replay the 90s rpgs more than the post-merger ones. That could be because the games are actually better. Or it could be that most atb games (my preference) are from that time and they are shorter to playthrough and don't have a hundred different mechanics to learn.
Critical reception/ratings?
User ratings?
Sales numbers?
Can't be any of those 3 since post merger Square has made games that beat several pre-merger games on those metrics.
That leaves "Feelings". The worst subjective metric, because another person could easily say they feel the post-merger games are better and pre-merger are unplayable atb shit (I prefer atb btw).
And that begs to question why you "feel" the way you do versus why someone with an opposing opinion "feels" the way they do. Chances are you grew up with the former and the other person grew up with the latter rpgs. Nostalgia may be a possible factor in that or it may just be age.
But you're wrong because I didn't grow up with it. Also stop writing this much if you're going to say this little
Fine how about a discussion more on your level.
New Square games bad
Old Square games good
Merger cause game company to make shit games.
>Final Fantasy has always been an experimental series
lmao
Compared to Dragon Quest, FF changed up its battle systems almost every game.
Even though 4 to 9 all used ATB, jobs, materia, espers, junctions, equipment abilities were all different.
Going from FF7 to FF8 where enemies now level up with you, you have no mp, your stats only increase from junctioning magic, all made it feel like a totally different experience. If you subtract chocobos and spell names, you literally could have called each new entry in the series anything else besides Final Fantasy.
You're a gigantic fricking moron
>Even though 4 to 9 all used ATB, jobs, materia, espers, junctions, equipment abilities were all different.
Those are character building gimmicks (all different flavours of slot system) that have nothing to do with the battle system, which is for all intents and purposes functionally identical.
Spending MPs or not for the same exact Fire 3 spell which is equally useless in both FFVII and VIII doesn't change a thing, filling your shitty wizardry derivative with gimmicks, surface level gimmicks at that, isn't experimentation, it's just fodder to reel in casuals, by the same absurd logic I can say that Dragon Quest was totally experimental because every game had different progression and narrative formats.
FF has never been experimental, it's a series that by the developers' own admission always played it safe because it's supposed to make a shitload of money, actually experimental games don't make a shitload of money because they're not meant for a wider audience.
Action games can't be RPGs since player skill supercedes the skills the character the player controls.
The Seiken Densetsu series is an rpg and classified as an action rpg. You can get I to semantics of whether it actually is an Arpg or whatever.
Just finished Ys8 and that felt like an rpg to me.
Just because people classify it as such doesn't mean it is so. Action elements and RPG elements run contrary to one another.
We need OP to post Square's goods games outside of just Final Fantasy. So we have a general idea what types of games are considered good. That will allow us to find a modern comparison.
Competition breeds innovation.There is no reason to make a better game than the other guy if there is no other guy.
Yeah, Enix really did itself no favors.
So much for ever seeing another Valkyrie Profile or (decent) Star Ocean... 🙁
Another day , another thread made by a seething Sakaguchigay.
Cope, seethe and dilate