|THE CRAVE GAMING CHANNEL|
∑ TGS 2013
∑ Indie Submissions
∑ Release Dates
∑ Message Forums
∑ Staff Bios
∑ Jobs Listing
∑ Fan Art
∑ Indie Corner
∑ Sound Test
∑ Saving Throw
∑ RPG Backtrack
∑ Active Topical Banter
∑ Dialog Trees
∑ RPG Elements
I am pretty darn sick of everything going on about Nintendo and Square. I will admit faster than anyone else that I‚m not a loyalist, but I do enjoy games from either company. Final Fantasy Tactics was the very first game I ever bought without renting it first to "check it out" and Final Fantasy 8 was my first ever pre-order, while Super Mario 64 was the first game I ever kept playing until I beat it completely, because it was, well, fun, and Zelda:OoT kept me playing for hours, even after I beat it (for some odd reason).
However, I do agree with Mr. Tomm Hulett that not many people are looking at the arguments from all sides concerning this Nintendo and Square debate. People are kinda upset over Nintendo‚s reluctance to "let bygones-be-bygones" and allow Square to develop for Nintendo‚s new hardware, but they seem to be missing the reasoning behind the decision Nintendo made (or rather, that Yamauchi made). I can see at least two arguments in favor of Square‚s development and two reasons why Nintendo won‚t let Square develop:
Argument 1: Square will make games for the systems and make Nintendo a LOT of money in the process.
Reasoning 1: Take a look at the argument. "Square will make games for Nintendo‚s systems, and Nintendo will make a lot of money off of those games."
I‚m going to say this as simply as I can. Nintendo...does...not...need...money. They‚re sitting on the biggest franchise since Zelda and Mario, they‚ve almost got money coming out of their ears. However, if you think about it, that‚s all the games will be for. There won‚t be any NEW games. Nothing fresh, nothing special about them. Most of the games that will come out of this deal will be games that are already out for other systems. They will be ports, and therefore only used to make money. How do I know this? How can I make this judgment when I have no idea on Square‚s deal? Well, I don‚t have any inside sources or anything like that, but if you look at all that Square is doing right now, you might get a better idea. They‚ve got a few games coming out for PS2, namely Final Fantasy X, and after that, Final Fantasy XI, which will take a good portion of their resources to bring a fully online service up. They‚ve got The Bouncer coming out, which reeks of the company‚s seemingly new standpoint of "graphics over game play". They‚ve got the first three Final Fantasy games coming out for the Wonderswan, with graphics updates and such. They‚re even remaking Final Fantasy VII-IX for the PS2, with new graphics to "take advantage of the new system‚s power". Do I even have to mention that God-knows-how-many-million dollar CG movie they‚re making over in Hawaii? How could they possibly fit in a new game for Nintendo‚s systems when they‚re doing all this. Nintendo knows this, and they know that Square won‚t try very hard to make a new game, opting to port over some older, already-made games to help them make a profit. For those not fully knowledgeable of Yamauchi‚s view on ports (the same game on different systems with little to no changes other than graphics-wise), check here at http://www.video-senki.com/feat/yama23.html.
Argument 2: Why is Nintendo still fuming about Square leaving them for the much-better Playstation? Nintendo was still on cartridges while Playstation was using the much-better CDs!
Reasoning 2: First off, something needs to be straightened out, and I thank Tomm Hulett for mentioning this as well. Square (Squaresoft back then) didn‚t go over to Sony, they flat out MOVED. They picked up all their stuff, turned their back on Nintendo‚s system and went to Sony for an exclusive development with them. Most people attribute this to the cartridge format Nintendo was adamant on using. Come on, guys∑you can‚t possibly tell me there wasn‚t a single game Square has come out with on the Playstation that could have possibly fit on the cartridge. Even Capcom managed to take a two CD game and put it on one cartridge (thanks to Angel Studios), with voice acting and everything! Square completely left Nintendo, not even bothering to think about developing on them since they had a platform that they could make tons of money on with less cost than they had for Nintendo. Square was happy with that.
In closing, I‚ve heard several people going on and on about Nintendo and Square‚s statements and promises, even hearing one fan remark about Square‚s "potential" for Nintendo with, and I quote, "If they'll make you money, let them do it, dummy." In the business world, the almighty dollar is very tempting∑especially if you don‚t have much money in the first place. However, this theory doesn‚t apply here. Nintendo has plenty of money for their work, they don‚t "need" Square any more than the former President Clinton needs popularity right now. The promise of more money from sales of games doesn‚t sway Nintendo‚s interest...especially when you remember Nintendo‚s motto, "Quality over Quantity". If you look back at Square‚s, and ONLY Square‚s, games on the Playstation, even the Final Fantasy games, how many quality games can you see? Graphics aside, the magic systems are pretty much the only innovation in the Final Fantasy games (Final Fantasy VII/VIII didn‚t invent the mini-game, just in case you were about to mention that). Final Fantasy Tactics is a good one, but that one was a joint venture between Square and another company. There have been a few games that stand up to Nintendo‚s level of quality, I will admit to that, but there hasn‚t been that many. Nintendo is a strong company, and Squaresoft wouldn‚t be adding anything to their strength by being signed on. In the words of Dennis Miller, "Of course that‚s just my opinion, I could be wrong."
|© 1998-2013 RPGamer All Rights Reserved|