Things to hate about a company we love - January 13th, 2002 - Drew Cosner
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this column are those of the participants and the moderator, and do not neccessarily reflect those of the GIA. There is coarse language and potentially offensive material afoot. Money is cool. Don't say we didn't warn you.
I finally came to the conclusion that if I sat around waiting until I had something good to say up here, the column would never get started. So let's just get to the letters, starting with, hands-down, the most popular response.
| Proactive hatred |
|
Drew,
What does Square do that I hate?
FFXI
-Chad
|
You know, I feel a little guilty; I remember how haughtily I disregarded the fools who would judge Chrono Cross months before its release based entirely on screenshots and a few stray news articles. Yet here I am, completely unenthused by the prospect of FFXI. I even fully expect to dislike it despite not spending so much as a single second playing it. I sure suck.
I will attempt to defend myself, just because I like to give the impression that my opinions are infallible: I know what I like and don't like in RPGs. I like narrative-driven RPGs with well-defined characters and innovative battle engines. I don't like online RPGs, mainly because I don't want to deal with the type of people you encounter online. The idiots I have to deal with hosting this column are enough, thank you. So there.
| No more love |
|
Drew-muffins,
Everytime I read about how Jet Set Radio is hated/ignored in Japan a little part of my soul dies...
My problem with Square: I'm tempted to say that it's impossible to know what the sidequests are or how to complete them without consulting a guide of some sort (you can't tell me that you found out how to get Doomtrain in FFVIII through actual gameplay) but that's the easy answer. My main problem is the fact that in FFXI one of the main races is the Taru Taru and it could have easily been Moogles. A whole army of moogles running down a hill ala Braveheart would certainly be worth the purchase price of the game and modem combined.
-Figure Four
|
I also don't understand why Square can't just pay a little fan service where it would be just as easy to do so. In FFXI, instead of satisfying fans with a race of Moogles, Square gives us a bunch of Dragon Ball rejects. In FFVIII, they bothered their character designers to come up with the moombas instead of just making them moogles. In FFVII, rather than giving players a playable moogle with Cait Sith, we instead get a cat who rides atop a moogle, and a bizarre mini-game to appease us. What's the deal, Square? Where's the moogle love?
| Craving continuity |
|
Agent DC:
I missed the whole FFX Gaiden discussion a few days ago. I figure my views about that topic connect nicely with today's discussion. As we all know, each successive Final Fantasy game is a sequel in spirit only. The worlds, characters, and stories have virtually nothing to do with each other. Thematic connections (monsters, summons, airships, Cid, moogles, chocobos, etc.) bind the series together. That has always been, and I guess always will be, the hallmark of the FF series. I mean, nobody's done the reinvention "thing" better or longer than Square.
But this supposedly intrinsic, phoneix-rising quality of Square's uber-franchise is starting to grate on my nerves. I may be the only person in the whole world who feels this way, but I'm starting to really hanker for some narrative continuity in the franchise. Now, I'm not saying ALL the games in the series should be connected. And far be it for me to suggest a story spanning 10 or 12 games, each lasting well over 40 hours a pop, would be much better. (Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series, for example, is really pushing the whole sequel thing to uncharted territory) But how about a two parter in the series somewhere, or a trilogy within the greater flow of the series? I wasn't personally aware of this, but for instance I hear that the first 3 games in the DQ/DW series had a well connected narrative, whereas the later games did not. I don't see anybody complaining about how that ruined the "integrity" of that franchise.
Why wouldn't that be possible for FF? Sometimes, I just don't want to have to relearn all new systems and learn to love all new characters for new game in the series anymore. So please, for God's sake Square, put out one stinking actual sequel to an FF. It'll save you money, and it'll make at least one of your diehard fans really happy. Just keep Tetra Master the fuck away from any sequel.
-JC, wishing for another chance to admire Quistis from afar
|
You know, I actually wouldn't mind some narrative continuity in a Final Fantasy at this point. Sure, half the fun of a FF is being introduced to a new world, new characters, and a new world-threatening force of some nature, but a part of me feels that once I've fallen in love with a cast of characters, I'd like to see a bit more of them.
Of course, considering how divided RPGers tend to be on which FFs are the "good ones," Square would find itself in the position of providing more of what a number of people may not like. I personally wouldn't have been too thrilled over the prospect of a FFIX Gaiden, as an example.
| Conspiracy theories
|
|
This isn't really a problem with Square, so much as an observance. They have released 3 Final Fantasy titles (not including rehashes or Gaidens, such as "Tactics" or "Mystic Quest") for each system they've been loyal to.
NES / Famicom
Final Fantasy
Final Fantasy II (JP)
Final Fantasy II (JP)
SNES / Super Famicom
Final Fantasy 2 (US) IV (JP)
Final Fantasy V (JP)
Final Fantasy 3 (US) VI (JP)
Sony PlayStation
Final Fantasy VII
Final Fantasy VIII
Final Fantasy IX
...
I'm just wondering if they are tacking the "XI" onto Final Fantasy Online so that they can release the seemingly obligatory three successive FF games onto the PS2 before the next system comes along.
It's a conspiracy, I tell you.
~arc
|
An interesting theory, although I will say this: Square still has plenty of time to crank out another FF after part XII. Especially when you consider the company's penchant for developing like mad in a console's later hours of viability.
| Square whores |
|
My complaints with Square would be about how they screwed up the Sieken Denetsu series. Instead of getting the wonderful SNES sequel to Sieken Denetsu 2 (Secret of Mana), Seiken Denetsu 3 (which yes I've played, thanks to ROM translations, and it is really that good), we get this American made piece of crap Secret of Evermore, one of the most god awful RPGs in existence. On top of that the PS1 Sieken Denetsu 4 (Legend of Mana) sucks!
Then there's the whole FFXI scheme. If they are really changing the FF series format to an online RPG format (I hope not) fine, but I have a feeling they are just calling FFXI a FF sequel just to rake in more sales on this risky online venture. They should have just done what they did with FF Tactics instead of trying to pretend it's direct sequel when it's not. That's kind of underhanded.
Plus there is the whole "remake" thing. Instead of making a quality remake like Enix likes to do with graphics updates, system tweaks, and tons of new extras, they just take of some of there classic games and port them to the PS1 with a few slapped on FMVs and a few small extras with inexcusable loading times. I don't know what they did with the Wonderswan remakes but the ones they've done so far for the PS1 are not worth my time. It was really great that they brought over FFV in the process but I had already played that thanks to more illegal ROMage. It was the only thing they did right by bringing over a FF game America had never seen before.
Otherwise I don't have too many complaints about Square. I was one of the few people who liked the FF movie and hoped it did well whether I liked it or not. Think about it, if this movie had done well, it would have opened to doors to more adult oriented animated features. Am I the only one who is sick of seeing the only animated features coming out America being G or PG rated kids movies? A lot of people wanted to see this movie fail but I don't think they saw the bigger picture.
And since you brought it up, yes you are right that many many people think that the GIA is a bunch of "Square whores" I don't mind the overabundance of Square coverage but when you go and ignore other games in the process like you have in the past than that really sucks. It's the only thing that prevents you people from being the best RPG game site hands down.
-Pendy the DQ/DW guy who wishes Square would make a Front Mission 4
|
I think the dichotomy between Enix's remakes and Square's just reflects the companys' differing philosophies: Square wants to crank out top-of-the-line products with tons of glitz to attract the gamers, whereas Enix tends to take more of an "art house" approach. In other words, once Square has put millions of dollars into a massive project, the company wants to move its development efforts on to something new. Remakes are just a way for the company to rake in a few more bucks after spending so much to make a game that stands head-and-shoulders above everything else on the market, at least in terms of aesthetics if nothing else. Conversely, Enix treats their games like absolute works of art, to be handled with reverence and care, even when remaking them.
I can't really say which is the better approach, since it's wholly subjective. On one hand, Square consistently provides gamers with titles that push the envelope, development costs be damned. On the other hand, Enix's games are labors of love, and it shows in the final product, even should that product be in development so long it's instantly out-of-date the minute it hits shelves. Which you prefer, I leave to you to decide.
And on a final note, I don't know how you can claim a site that fawns over oft-neglected titles like Rez, Gitaroo Man, and Jet Set Radio "ignores other games in the process," but okay. It's like this: 99.9999% of our readers desperately seek the latest Square news and previews. We try to give neglected titles equal attention, but come on; spending the majority of our limited time exhaustively covering games only a minority of readers even care about is akin to the New York Times running "Jackie Anderson of Mansfield, OH Wins Lottery" as a frontpage story. You dig?
| This truly sucks |
|
Hi Drew,
First off, I'd like to say that I think Square are one of the best games
companies in the world, and that I understand the business reasons
behind some of their export decisions. But that's not going to stop me
complaining about them.
Chrono Trigger. Chrono Chross. Final Fantasies one through six. Final
Fantasy Legends one through three. Legend of Mana. Final Fantasy
Tactics. Xenogears. Super Mario RPG. All good games, by most
accounts. And all fated never to see release in my country. Still, I
suppose it's my fault for being born in the third largest gaming market
on the planet.
The UK is continually ignored when it comes RPGs. Despite the massive
success of FF7 and its sequels, we're still looked upon as a nation of
football, driving and fighting game players. Many games, already
translated for the US and already proven to be huge sellers in the West,
fail to appear over here at all, and the games we do get are delayed by
months. For many classic games, our options are either expensive
imports or dubiously legal emulators.
Don't get me wrong, I understand that translation for Europe is made
difficult by the fact that the continent is about the same size as the
US but speaks twenty different languages. I understand that the US is a
more important market. And I understand that Square are not the only
ones guilty of this, and that things are slowly improving here.
But consider that the only non-action RPG Square released for the SNES
was Final Fantasy Mystic Quest, and you'll understand why I felt the
need to get that off my chest.
-Greg A. Lamb
|
Just taking a moment to reflect on how bad it sucks to live in Europe if you're a gamer. My condolences to all you poor schmucks.
| Art house |
|
I've been waiting for a topic like this....Thanks Drew!
I do love Squaresoft, I'll say that first right out. Most of the games I
own are Squaresoft products, just because to me they put out the most high
quality games. I certainly can't say I've really been disappointed, meaning
I haven't traded or sold any of their games that I've bought. I do have one
major grievance with the company, however. I wish that just for once, just
ONCE, they would put as much money, advertisement power, and effort into a
project that was non-Final Fantasy.
I understand why Square puts so much money into the series; it's their
flagship and all. But I'd like to see something different (no, and I don't
mean Kingdom Hearts). Most of the games that I really love Square for have
been titles other than Final Fantasy sequels, like Xenogears, Vagrant Story,
Threads of Fate, the Mana series, the Parasite Eve games (yes, I liked PE2.
You can laugh at me), etc. Some of the titles, though, I sometimes wondered
how they would had been like if given the royal treatment that the Final
Fantasy games are given.
What gets more disheartening is when I hear about how some of my beloved
Square games that had their budgets cut at the last minute, were rushed in
the end in order to make deadline, or had entire portions of the game
deleted to avoid having to make another disk for the game, and such. Then
of course, there are the hidden gems that get almost no advertisement, at
least compared to FF games. Though it doesn't necessarily make me cry
myself to sleep at night, I still can't help but think "what if?"
ocassionally.
Now, I realize that Square can't put that much money into every little thing
that they do. They're simply choosing to work with what made they are
today. I think it's great they haven't forgotten that and still nurture
Final Fantasy. Just look at the most recent installment. I can't expressed
how impressed and delighted I was with FFX, just on the basis that despite
how hyped up the title was, it reminded me more of the "art house" titles
they did in the previous years, most notably Xenogears and Vagrant Story.
What would really impress me is if they took what they learned from that and
used it in a different series or an entirely new title. They have such a
large fanbase, I'm sure that they would receive the support that they need
without question.
But, no one will ever know until Square actually does that. If they do,
that is.
-Sheyla O'Massey
|
Well, I would point one thing out: Koei is a fairly popular company in Japan. Gitaroo Man sold around 4,000 copies in the country. So much for fans flocking to a company's more "indie" efforts out of a sense of loyalty.
And one final note: every game you will ever play is incomplete. At some point, the developers just have to close up shop; it's business, pure and simple. Sure, crap like the second disc of Xenogears can result. However, I'd assert that that little situation is as much the developers' fault for not appropriately limiting the scope of their game as it it the execs' for forcing it out the door before proper completion.
| I hate that! |
|
This isn't just about Square, though they do it enough and probably
started it for all I know, but I am goddamned sick of battles in rpgs
that you can't win, aren't supposed to win, and yet are still made to
fight like a regular battle so you waste a half hour and all your items
until you finally give up and die and then see a story scene and curse
for a good ten minutes. Seriously though, if it's part of the story
don't make it a BATTLE, make it a cut scene, or a fight you don't
control or something. Maybe it's only me but I've had this happen in a
ton of games and I hate it.
-achilleszero
|
Yeah, I hate that shit as well. There have been plenty of times where I assumed a difficult battle was not to be won, only to lose progress when I died as a result. It really burns me up. The most recent example I can think of is the required blitzball game in FFX: I assumed it couldn't be won and moved along. My bad, apparently.
| Things that suck |
|
Want to know what I dislike about Square the most? It's that once, back in
those 16-bit days of yore, they broke my already fragile heart by releasing
a steaming pile of turd named "Final Fantasy: Mystic Quest." I'll never
forgive the bastards.
-JZA
|
Yeah, that game sucked. I do find it amusing that every self-proclaimed RPG iconoclast who wants to separate himself from the slavering hordes who would waste their time with "crap" like FFX defends this game vehemently. It reminds me of the people who will insist that a band's less-than-stellar albums from when they were still developing their sound are the best ones.
And now, ladies and gentlemen, for the Super-Trite Letter of the Day.
| Did you think of that one yourself? |
|
Square is evil for trying to turn video games into a movie, and in the
process making other developers think that's the only way to make a game.
If I want to watch a movie, I'll go to a movie (note: I've never gone to a
movie myself in my life, so that should give you an idea of how much I want
to see a movie). If I want to play a game, I'll play a video game. And I
don't like those two trying to mix.
I would much rather play through a scene myself than sit there and watch the
characters do it themselves... I thought that was supposed to be the
advantage video games had over TV (which I don't watch much of either) and
movies, that you could control what is going on as opposed to watching other
people do it.
And it's not bad enough that they themselves choose this path, but they're
infecting other game companies with it as well, since they're getting the
idea that people aren't going to buy a game otherwise, which, unfortunately,
also seems to be relatively close to accurate now.
|
Do, like, all Square detractors have a shared handbook I don't know about? Hey, here's some more clever witticisms for you: It's Final Fantasy, not Final Sci-Fi! Or how about this one: all of these new Final Fantasy characters look like they fell out of a Gap commercial and/or Dawson's Creek! And what's with Tidus? He looks like Meg Ryan! And why is it called Final Fantasy when we're edging towards part XII already? Hahahaha, oh God, I'm killing myself. My sides, they're just going to split!
Retards.
Closing comments:
Take a look at this screen shot. Take a look to the left side of the image, actually. Yes, that is who you think it is. So here's your topic for tomorrow: what future do you think celebrity appearances will have in video games, if any future at all? And how will this affect the game industry as we know it?
Think about it: an excellent game comes out, with one of the characters not only bearing the voice of a star, but also the video game likeness to boot. Suddenly people who formerly couldn't care less about games are intruiged. It's an interesting scenario. A scenario that conveniently forgets the existence of crap titles like that one Spice Girls game, but I think you get the point by now. Let Erin know what you think, 'cause, you know, one love plus one love makes two.
-Drew Cosner
|
|
|
|
