I still play Skyrim off and on. Haven't touched the apparently final DLC. I guess I don't need to feel bad about not waiting for a GOTY edition.
I never mentioned 2nd and 3rd helpings....No, I meant Skyrim only ate up one month?
I thought some of the stuff for New Vegas was pretty damn good.Man, it's kind of disappointing.
Bethesda hasn't made amazing DLC for their games since Oblivion's Shivering Isles. They've made OK DLC, but nothing great.
Dear Square-Enix,What a slap in the face to FF7-8-9 fans:
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/391763/final-fantasy-x-vita-video-shows-hd-character-models/
and also confirmed
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/396770/final-fantasy-x-hd-to-include-ff-x-2-hd-on-ps3/
Again, New Vegas was made by Obsidian, not Bethesda.I thought some of the stuff for New Vegas was pretty damn good.
It's not about money, it's about pride. They've already stated more than once that the company sees remaking FF7 as the day they have lost all creativity, because it would be admitting they couldn't do any better than a 10+ year old game. It would also cost them a SHIT LOAD of money to do because they'd have to create all new 3d environments and basically redesign the game from the ground up. It would mean spending the same amount of time it takes to make an all new, original FF game on rebuilding an old one.Really. Square didn't see more moneymaking potential in the juggernaut that is FF7?
I completely forgot about that. My apologies.Again, New Vegas was made by Obsidian, not Bethesda.
While the graphics would be a pretty huge investment, hopefully other parts of the game like mechanics, story and other stuff wouldn't have to be retooled nearly as much, so would save some development cost...It would mean spending the same amount of time it takes to make an all new, original FF game on rebuilding an old one.
That's because Obsidian isn't Bethesda. They put together a series of separate stories that tied together with an overall narrative.I thought some of the stuff for New Vegas was pretty damn good.
Those things aren't really where the cost factor is in game-dev (at least for a single-player RPG). There's just not that many collective man-hours there compared to actually building the world.While the graphics would be a pretty huge investment, hopefully other parts of the game like mechanics, story and other stuff wouldn't have to be retooled nearly as much, so would save some development cost...
Did they say they're losing money on the game or just that expected sell-through won't meet last year's projections? Neither one is good, but one is actually bad while the other is just them giving stupid guidance to their investors.Square lost money selling 4 million copies of Tomb Raider. Can you imagine what kind of a financial burden 7 would be to remake? How many resources would have to go into it? There's a reason FF13 is all corridors.
They only make around $30/unit of that after platform royalties, retailer margin, cost of goods/distro, and buyback. So that's down to $120M.4 million units of Tomb Raider sold is $200,000,000 in revenue. How the fuck could they lose money on that?
I suspect, as specialko is saying, that it's not that they lost money on it, it's that they didn't make as much as they told their investors/submitted earnings projections for the amount that they would.4 million units of Tomb Raider sold is $200,000,000 in revenue. How the fuck could they lose money on that?
Square lost 70 million in 2012 and called their best games "loss leaders".Did they say they're losing money on the game or just that expected sell-through won't meet last year's projections? Neither one is good, but one is actually bad while the other is just them giving stupid guidance to their investors.
Yeah, they should have just pulled the plug on that. I think the other issue is people just losing faith in them. XIII was mediocre in its best parts, XIII-2 was called a better game but that's not saying a lot, and there's so many things US gamers want from them that SE won't deliver. Various localizations and ports, sequels to fairly successful and well-received IPs, and hell even XIII-Versus which has been talked about for at least 5 years now, I think.unmitigated disaster that is Final Fantasy 14.
There's not a lot of recurring characters in the FF series other than themese/spells/summons and a few background characters. What's to stop another company from simply making a good jRPG on their own? Is the name that important?It's kind of sad... I'm at the point where I -WANT- Square Enix to go bankrupt, if only so someone else will buy the properties, get a fucking clue, and start producing what people want.
It matters if you want to make huge wads of cash on re-made Final Fantasy 6-9. It also matters if you want to do stuff with pre-established worlds like Ivalice (which has something like 10+ games set in it's world right now).There's not a lot of recurring characters in the FF series other than themese/spells/summons and a few background characters. What's to stop another company from simply making a good jRPG on their own? Is the name that important?
There was Enix, but ... And of course, Atlus is doing fine, but they've yet to reach big fame like Final Fantasy has outside of Japan. People wouldn't have bought FFXIII if it wasn't called Final Fantasy.There's not a lot of recurring characters in the FF series other than themese/spells/summons and a few background characters. What's to stop another company from simply making a good jRPG on their own? Is the name that important?
Yeah, I agree. While the Persona series seems to have found an audience, stuff like Code of Princess is really for people who feel enlivened by seeing the Game Over screen, and much of the SMT series is pretty difficult compared to Final Fantasy.It's too bad, because Atlus is making a lot of bold moves in what it brings over, and they're generally solid games. The problem is they sometimes get a little too niche and don't see the success they should.