Quantcast
Square Enix Devotes Division To Developing Switch Games

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Square Enix Devotes Division To Developing Switch Games

Xxain said:
RolStoppable said:

Was the list that has been posted previously incomplete? Because you speak of great games that are already available.

That you use Ikaruga as an example for lack of support from Nintendo fans puts your entire argument on very thin ice. Ikaruga didn't sell well on any platform it has been released on and that's a very common result for games from the developer Treasure. If that's the best example you've got, then you really have nothing.

I would gladly make a list of great readily available games. Im not making a sales comparison. Ikaruga is niche IP in a unmainstream genre which greatly contributes to sales history. What doees it matter though? Why is that a barrier to YOU buying it. We as gamers, who follow the market, know Ikaruga's quality. If you are looking for great games, then there is one right there or is it about specific games.   

You are all over the place with your rant. This quickly moved from Square-Enix to all third parties.

Are you now asking me specifically why I haven't bought Ikaruga for Switch? I already own the game for GameCube.

And in case you missed it: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=6412088



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
RolStoppable said:

Not that strange when the quote should be differently interpreted than it is in the article.

“Growth in the number of platforms is basically a good thing, and we intend to further advance our multiplatform approach,”

That's the sole sentence the article is built around, but what it most likely really means is that Square-Enix recognizes Switch as a viable console (hence "growth in the number of platforms") and therefore games that were planned to be multiplatform will aim to have a Switch release as well.

And advance multiplatform approach certainly makes sense of making a division devoted to Switch right? Even more because games made for Switch can't be ported to others.

Regarding your question, advancing the multiplatform approach to include Switch and setting up a division specifically for Switch game development are not mutually exclusive. It's clear that Switch will be the market leading console that supplants the 3DS, so it getting both exclusive and multiplatform content is a logical course of action.

My interpretation of your second sentence is that you don't like it that Switch third party support is improving.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

RolStoppable said:
Xxain said:

I would gladly make a list of great readily available games. Im not making a sales comparison. Ikaruga is niche IP in a unmainstream genre which greatly contributes to sales history. What doees it matter though? Why is that a barrier to YOU buying it. We as gamers, who follow the market, know Ikaruga's quality. If you are looking for great games, then there is one right there or is it about specific games.   

You are all over the place with your rant. This quickly moved from Square-Enix to all third parties.

Are you now asking me specifically why I haven't bought Ikaruga for Switch? I already own the game for GameCube.

And in case you missed it: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=6412088

Lol no further questions your honor!!

close case.



24 years playing games.

nintendo network ID: Teriolforce ADD ME!!

currently playing Planetside 2

i7 4770k, RAM 32 Gb 1800 mhz, AMD 7990 Ghz Edition, gigabyte z87 deluxe.

Makes good sense for Square Enix with the Switch doing so well in Japan. Will have to see if any Western devs follow suit.



RolStoppable said:
DonFerrari said:

And advance multiplatform approach certainly makes sense of making a division devoted to Switch right? Even more because games made for Switch can't be ported to others.

Regarding your question, advancing the multiplatform approach to include Switch and setting up a division specifically for Switch game development are not mutually exclusive. It's clear that Switch will be the market leading console that supplants the 3DS, so it getting both exclusive and multiplatform content is a logical course of action.

My interpretation of your second sentence is that you don't like it that Switch third party support is improving.

Sorry but no. If they are approaching to have more multiplatform approach, creating divisions to create exclusives is the opposite movement.

I have no issue with Switch having more support (nor even if others are having less support because of it), but when putting only in Switch technical limitations aren't a reason. So'll see if Nintendo fans will complain about it, because when there are real limitations they complain, but when it is a market decision will they?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Around the Network
RolStoppable said:
Xxain said:

I would gladly make a list of great readily available games. Im not making a sales comparison. Ikaruga is niche IP in a unmainstream genre which greatly contributes to sales history. What doees it matter though? Why is that a barrier to YOU buying it. We as gamers, who follow the market, know Ikaruga's quality. If you are looking for great games, then there is one right there or is it about specific games.   

You are all over the place with your rant. This quickly moved from Square-Enix to all third parties.

Are you now asking me specifically why I haven't bought Ikaruga for Switch? I already own the game for GameCube.

And in case you missed it: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=6412088


It was never about just SE. It was in general. I am only used SE because it was the topic of the post I quoted. No, I am not asking you specifically, being general. The general point is that Nintendo fan shave a shit ton barriers when comes to what is support/buying games. That is what I meant here:

One thing I noticed about the Nintendo community is only certain IP's matter. SE could have 30 games on Switch, but if they aren't recognizable, then they dont count. The worst of the 3 with that shit.

I'm not all over the place. SpokenTruth misinterpreted and you ran with that. We can not say that SE has shown a lack confidence in the switch when they have put that many games on the console .... unless you pretend anything not FF or KH does not count. That also relates to above.

 If there is anything that frustrates me it would be support begging, without actually supporting the great games that you already have available.

Everything l've said relates back to my original post.

 

 

 

 

 



DonFerrari said:
RolStoppable said:

Regarding your question, advancing the multiplatform approach to include Switch and setting up a division specifically for Switch game development are not mutually exclusive. It's clear that Switch will be the market leading console that supplants the 3DS, so it getting both exclusive and multiplatform content is a logical course of action.

My interpretation of your second sentence is that you don't like it that Switch third party support is improving.

Sorry but no. If they are approaching to have more multiplatform approach, creating divisions to create exclusives is the opposite movement.

I have no issue with Switch having more support (nor even if others are having less support because of it), but when putting only in Switch technical limitations aren't a reason. So'll see if Nintendo fans will complain about it, because when there are real limitations they complain, but when it is a market decision will they?

You are misinterpreting the Square-Enix quote. Their advance in multiplatform development refers to the move towards PC, PS, Xbox and Switch releases, as opposed to the previous approach of making multiplats for PC, PS and Xbox.

Of course technical limitations have nothing to do with what Square-Enix has said about their plans.

As for Nintendo fans, what they've been saying is that third parties should support a console that sells, so if Square-Enix really does support Switch better in the future because the console sells, there will logically not be complaints coming from Nintendo fans. If Square-Enix does what Nintendo fans demand for good reason, then Nintendo fans won't complain about Square-Enix. That shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.

I know that you have a habit of finding hypocrisy in what non-PlayStation fans say, but you take it to a level where you throw logical reasoning out of the window in order to have something on your hands. If you are objectively looking for hypocrisy in this specific case, you'll find it in yourself, because for the longest time you have defended virtually every anti-Nintendo decision by a third party as rational business while now that Square-Enix has decided to support a Nintendo console more due to its good sales, you do nothing but question their decision and portray it as something that doesn't make sense.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

DonFerrari said:
RolStoppable said:

Regarding your question, advancing the multiplatform approach to include Switch and setting up a division specifically for Switch game development are not mutually exclusive. It's clear that Switch will be the market leading console that supplants the 3DS, so it getting both exclusive and multiplatform content is a logical course of action.

My interpretation of your second sentence is that you don't like it that Switch third party support is improving.

Sorry but no. If they are approaching to have more multiplatform approach, creating divisions to create exclusives is the opposite movement.

 

You've misread what they're saying multiplatform approach just means supporting all platforms for example PS4/PC/X1 would get games like KH3 and FFXV while Switch would get games like Octopath, TWEWY and some shared releases like DQXI. This approach is still a multiplatform approach it doesn't mean every game would be multiplatform.



Xxain said:

It was never about just SE. It was in general. I am only used SE because it was the topic of the post I quoted. No, I am not asking you specifically, being general. The general point is that Nintendo fan shave a shit ton barriers when comes to what is support/buying games. That is what I meant here:

One thing I noticed about the Nintendo community is only certain IP's matter. SE could have 30 games on Switch, but if they aren't recognizable, then they dont count. The worst of the 3 with that shit.

I'm not all over the place. SpokenTruth misinterpreted and you ran with that. We can not say that SE has shown a lack confidence in the switch when they have put that many games on the console .... unless you pretend anything not FF or KH does not count. That also relates to above.

 If there is anything that frustrates me it would be support begging, without actually supporting the great games that you already have available.

Everything l've said relates back to my original post.

I take it, you didn't look at the links I provided.

The sole reason why you'd have the perception that Nintendo fans are the worst of the three fanbases when it comes to such matters is because Nintendo fans have to deal with bullshit from third parties about 20 times more often, and you interpret the frequency as a fault of Nintendo fans rather than the third parties who are actually responsible for the bullshit. Because as the thread I linked shows, the rage of PlayStation fans comfortably matches what can be seen from Nintendo fans in comparable situations. You are doing nothing more than making a baseless generalisation that you cannot back up.

As for Square-Enix's Switch support specifically, it's perfectly fine to say that Square-Enix has shown a lack of confidence. Many of their games have been Japan-only and of those that have been coming to America and Europe, a bunch of them had to be published by Nintendo, otherwise they'd have most likely remained Japan-only as well. Dragon Quest XI released one year ago for other consoles, but Square-Enix has yet to show the Switch version, let alone announce a release date; a delay of such magnitude is directly caused by a lack of confidence.

When it comes to support begging, it should be obvious that people want to play good games. You can't claim with a straight face that I am Setsuna and Lost Sphear are great games, so quantity of releases alone does not constitute respect for the platform and that's what Switch gamers are asking for. The Wii received a high amount of third party games, but it shouldn't need to be explained that quantity alone doesn't mean anything. The response of Switch gamers to Octopath Traveler has been very positive in general which should tell you that it's not all moaning from the Nintendo fanbase, but rather that it is a matter of the effort that third parties put into their products and how those products turn ultimately out.

To get back to Ikaruga again... if you scold people for being too demanding and tell them to appreciate the great games from third parties that are already on Switch by pointing to a port of a title that is 15+ years old... doesn't that strike you as a sign that there is a serious problem as far as new content goes?



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

RolStoppable said:
DonFerrari said:

Sorry but no. If they are approaching to have more multiplatform approach, creating divisions to create exclusives is the opposite movement.

I have no issue with Switch having more support (nor even if others are having less support because of it), but when putting only in Switch technical limitations aren't a reason. So'll see if Nintendo fans will complain about it, because when there are real limitations they complain, but when it is a market decision will they?

You are misinterpreting the Square-Enix quote. Their advance in multiplatform development refers to the move towards PC, PS, Xbox and Switch releases, as opposed to the previous approach of making multiplats for PC, PS and Xbox.

Of course technical limitations have nothing to do with what Square-Enix has said about their plans.

As for Nintendo fans, what they've been saying is that third parties should support a console that sells, so if Square-Enix really does support Switch better in the future because the console sells, there will logically not be complaints coming from Nintendo fans. If Square-Enix does what Nintendo fans demand for good reason, then Nintendo fans won't complain about Square-Enix. That shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.

I know that you have a habit of finding hypocrisy in what non-PlayStation fans say, but you take it to a level where you throw logical reasoning out of the window in order to have something on your hands. If you are objectively looking for hypocrisy in this specific case, you'll find it in yourself, because for the longest time you have defended virtually every anti-Nintendo decision by a third party as rational business while now that Square-Enix has decided to support a Nintendo console more due to its good sales, you do nothing but question their decision and portray it as something that doesn't make sense.

Your crystal ball is great for translating what isn't even said... but it contradicts Wyrdness's.

Nintendo fans have been complaining about lack of 3rd part support since at least GameCube... and GC sold poorly, Wii wasn't able to sell MPs, WiiU sold poorly and so far Switch is selling good but for AAA games usually much lower than X1 and PS4... strange this request for Nintendo fans, does your qualification for it starts only at Switch? And PC/X1/PS4 are platforms that sells, so those games not getting there would also be against what these so called Nintendo fans are asking right?

If you want to put hypocrisy on my posts you'll have to work harder. Because as I said in the previous post I have no issue with Switch getting more support even if other platforms get less support because of it (as SE making a exclusive division) I first pointed out that both announcements from SE contradicted each other. And if SE gets more profit without porting exclusives to X1/PS4 I don't really care, but that certainly goes against what Nintendo fans here have been defending... even more when you look all rejoicing with this announcement, while pretty sure they would attack SE if it was a division exclusive to X1 or PS4, as some here even attack companies when they avoid to do ports of games that the port wouldn't look good on Switch to the point of accusing Sony of paying to skip only Switch for MHW or that there is a conspiracy of all big 3 parties to kill Nintendo.

Wyrdness said:
DonFerrari said:

Sorry but no. If they are approaching to have more multiplatform approach, creating divisions to create exclusives is the opposite movement.

You've misread what they're saying multiplatform approach just means supporting all platforms for example PS4/PC/X1 would get games like KH3 and FFXV while Switch would get games like Octopath, TWEWY and some shared releases like DQXI. This approach is still a multiplatform approach it doesn't mean every game would be multiplatform.

So you do have a crystal ball to interpret that more multiplaform approach means PS4/PC/X1 without Switch? Seems your crystal ball needs to talk to Rol's because his says MP means PS4/PC/X1/Switch plus exclusives for Switch.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994