By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Nintendo banned Square from their offices for 10 years after FFVII went to PlayStation. EDIT: japanese business model is akin to Yakuza

Tagged games:

 

What do you think

Nintendo is God they never make a mistake 7 26.92%
 
Square the ones who to be blame 8 30.77%
 
I dont why i just hate Sony 2 7.69%
 
I 9 34.62%
 
Total:26
Hynad on 17 April 2020
padib said:
Hynad said:

Yet here you are leaving Nintendo out as if their actions didn’t also push Square to move on to a publisher that’s not as draconic and greedy with third parties, as it is well known Nintendo was during that time.

The parties involved in the Squaresoft and Nintendo falloff doesn’t only include Sony and Squaresoft. It also includes Nintendo. And that’s a side that you more often than not leave out, because it doesn't match with your one-sided narrative.

Nintendo were asking more money from third parties than Sony. If placed with the choice to buy a car for 30k and then you see the same exact car for 20k, would you buy the one for 30k simply because you have a somewhat long history with the seller? No. You’d think the seller takes you for granted and tries to rip you off . This is basically what Nintendo did with third parties back then. The history is well known and documented. 

What sources do you have that Nintendo's greedy policies has any effect on Square? You must've forgotten that Nintendo essentially took all the risk of publishing ALL the final fantasies in the US. How greedy, really.

It's curious that you lecture me about seeing one side of the coin, yet here you are doing the same. It's curious how you lecture Rol about not providing sources, yet here you are doing the same. Perhaps it's time you stepped it down a peg, you're just as biased as everyone here.

How more predictable can you get?

Look it up yourself. It’s well established and well known that Nintendo asked for a bigger royalty cut than anyone else at the time. Even someone like you must already know that. And wouldn’t you know, Sony also published early Squaresoft games in the west.

Keep the wha wha wha coming.



Around the Network
DonFerrari on 17 April 2020
Hynad said:
padib said:

What sources do you have that Nintendo's greedy policies has any effect on Square? You must've forgotten that Nintendo essentially took all the risk of publishing ALL the final fantasies in the US. How greedy, really.

It's curious that you lecture me about seeing one side of the coin, yet here you are doing the same. It's curious how you lecture Rol about not providing sources, yet here you are doing the same. Perhaps it's time you stepped it down a peg, you're just as biased as everyone here.

How more predictable can you get?

Look it up yourself. It’s well established and well known that Nintendo asked for a bigger royalty cut than anyone else at the time. Even someone like you must already know that. And wouldn’t you know, Sony also published early Squaresoft games in the west.

Keep the wha wha wha coming.

When the "source" cited by Rol have it that the reason Square gone to Sony was that they were offering a much smaller royalty fee than Nintendo (not sure of the leap of logic to say that is moneyhat since that doesn't mean Sony gave money to Square, they just reduced their cut on future sales which aren't the same thing) it already show that Nintendo charged more, and considering basically all devs gone to playstation (when previously Nintendo demanded exclusivity or not allowed to release) with many being exclusive (probably without even a signed contract, just as several japanese devs don't release on Xbox and Sony doesn't need to pay a dime for it) show that for they it was financially much better (so yes the royalties play a big part on that) to be on Playstation than to stay with Nintendo and that kept being true for all console gens after.



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

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Hynad on 19 April 2020
RolStoppable said:
Hynad said:

Yet here you are leaving Nintendo out as if their actions didn’t also push Square to move on to a publisher that’s not as draconic and greedy with third parties, as it is well known Nintendo was during that time.

The parties involved in the Squaresoft and Nintendo falloff doesn’t only include Sony and Squaresoft. It also includes Nintendo. And that’s a side that you more often than not leave out, because it doesn't match with your one-sided narrative.

Nintendo were asking more money from third parties than Sony. If placed with the choice to buy a car for 30k and then you see the same exact car for 20k, would you buy the one for 30k simply because you have a somewhat long history with the seller? No. You’d think the seller takes you for granted and tries to rip you off . This is basically what Nintendo did with third parties back then. The history is well known and documented. 

The reason why I leave Nintendo out is the same reason why I wouldn't put any blame on Sony for Bandai-Namco choosing the Xbox 360 for Tales of Vesperia or Square-Enix choosing the Xbox 360 for Star Ocean 4. These third party publishers didn't choose Microsoft because Sony had ripped them off, they went with Xbox because Microsoft provided a moneyhat. If your line of thinking had to be applied, then we both would have to agree that Sony had messed up anytime Microsoft successfully moneyhatted a third party. But I reject that for the simple reason that it's stupid to blame one console manufacturer for losing out on a game when another console manufacturer threw money around.

Also, if you read the quote from Squaresoft's CEO, it's clear that it wasn't about a general royalty fee comparison between Sony and Nintendo, because what he said is that Squaresoft got a much better deal by Sony than any other third party publisher who developed for the PS1.

Logical fallacy. One prior event doesn’t result in all other events sharing the same parameters.



Leynos on 19 April 2020
RolStoppable said:
Hynad said:

Yet here you are leaving Nintendo out as if their actions didn’t also push Square to move on to a publisher that’s not as draconic and greedy with third parties, as it is well known Nintendo was during that time.

The parties involved in the Squaresoft and Nintendo falloff doesn’t only include Sony and Squaresoft. It also includes Nintendo. And that’s a side that you more often than not leave out, because it doesn't match with your one-sided narrative.

Nintendo were asking more money from third parties than Sony. If placed with the choice to buy a car for 30k and then you see the same exact car for 20k, would you buy the one for 30k simply because you have a somewhat long history with the seller? No. You’d think the seller takes you for granted and tries to rip you off . This is basically what Nintendo did with third parties back then. The history is well known and documented. 

The reason why I leave Nintendo out is the same reason why I wouldn't put any blame on Sony for Bandai-Namco choosing the Xbox 360 for Tales of Vesperia or Square-Enix choosing the Xbox 360 for Star Ocean 4. These third party publishers didn't choose Microsoft because Sony had ripped them off, they went with Xbox because Microsoft provided a moneyhat. If your line of thinking had to be applied, then we both would have to agree that Sony had messed up anytime Microsoft successfully moneyhatted a third party. But I reject that for the simple reason that it's stupid to blame one console manufacturer for losing out on a game when another console manufacturer threw money around.

Also, if you read the quote from Squaresoft's CEO, it's clear that it wasn't about a general royalty fee comparison between Sony and Nintendo, because what he said is that Squaresoft got a much better deal by Sony than any other third party publisher who developed for the PS1.

Tales of Vesperia came to 360 because 360 was popular in the west. That was the era Japan was desperate to appeal to the west more. Namco felt ToV had a better chance in the west on 360. They were just one of the few that didn't make it overly gritty to do so like Bomberman Act Zero, DmC, Bionic Commando, Castlevania and the like.



Bite my shiny metal cockpit!

ThePunisher on 19 April 2020

Nintendo haters are so pathetic even when the 3rd parties themselves admit their unprofessionalism. It might have been time for nintendo to change some policies but it was clear that they lost support mostly due to moneyhatting from competitors. And it takes a special kind of retarded to say that was the most lucrative decision for 3rd parties when the better choice would have been to just go multiplatform. They would have profitted a lot more with their games being on the N64 and future systems. Also, many of them wouldn't have gone bankrupt.



Around the Network
Azzanation on 20 April 2020
HollyGamer said:

So in your logic  it's Sony fault by inviting them (Square ) to Playstation ??? Also is Sony fault by making CD on Playstation also Nintendo is have a great decision by using cartridge??? Or is Square fault by trying to become innovative with their new FF series???   

I mean...

So if your husband or wife walk out on you for someone else thats okay because they had a better offer? Cool, its not there fault someone offered them more money. 



HollyGamer on 20 April 2020
Azzanation said:
HollyGamer said:

So in your logic  it's Sony fault by inviting them (Square ) to Playstation ??? Also is Sony fault by making CD on Playstation also Nintendo is have a great decision by using cartridge??? Or is Square fault by trying to become innovative with their new FF series???   

I mean...

So if your husband or wife walk out on you for someone else thats okay because they had a better offer? Cool, its not there fault someone offered them more money. 

LOL

What kind argument is this, Square were not second party developer nor first party developer to Nintendo. Did Sony get mad when FF13 when to Xbox 360??? No ( only a couple hardcore fans that mad) but it's just business like usual.  Did Sony get mad when Insomniac made Sunset Overdrive to Microsoft ??? No

  



Azzanation on 20 April 2020
HollyGamer said:
Azzanation said:

I mean...

So if your husband or wife walk out on you for someone else thats okay because they had a better offer? Cool, its not there fault someone offered them more money. 

LOL

What kind argument is this, Square were not second party developer nor first party developer to Nintendo. Did Sony get mad when FF13 when to Xbox 360??? No ( only a couple hardcore fans that mad) but it's just business like usual.  Did Sony get mad when Insomniac made Sunset Overdrive to Microsoft ??? No

  

I know its over exaggerated, I just thought its a funny comparison. 

Keep in mind that it was the Nintendo platform that Square saved themselves from folding in the old days. Final Fantasy was Squares last resort of saving themselves and because of the success of it on the Nintendo platform they were able to stay afloat and continue to make amazing FF games plus Secrets of Mana and Chrono Trigger etc. Square leaving Nintendo was like a broken marriage because they were a great duo together.

And like a marriage, if your partner leaves, you wouldn't want them hanging around your house especially if they left for money.



Hynad on 20 April 2020
Azzanation said:
HollyGamer said:

LOL

What kind argument is this, Square were not second party developer nor first party developer to Nintendo. Did Sony get mad when FF13 when to Xbox 360??? No ( only a couple hardcore fans that mad) but it's just business like usual.  Did Sony get mad when Insomniac made Sunset Overdrive to Microsoft ??? No

  

I know its over exaggerated, I just thought its a funny comparison. 

Keep in mind that it was the Nintendo platform that Square saved themselves from folding in the old days. Final Fantasy was Squares last resort of saving themselves and because of the success of it on the Nintendo platform they were able to stay afloat and continue to make amazing FF games plus Secrets of Mana and Chrono Trigger etc. Square leaving Nintendo was like a broken marriage because they were a great duo together.

And like a marriage, if your partner leaves, you wouldn't want them hanging around your house especially if they left for money.

But unlike with business where money is the main factor, if you married for money, you married for the wrong reason. Your analogy is stupid.



DonFerrari on 20 April 2020
Hynad said:
Azzanation said:

I know its over exaggerated, I just thought its a funny comparison. 

Keep in mind that it was the Nintendo platform that Square saved themselves from folding in the old days. Final Fantasy was Squares last resort of saving themselves and because of the success of it on the Nintendo platform they were able to stay afloat and continue to make amazing FF games plus Secrets of Mana and Chrono Trigger etc. Square leaving Nintendo was like a broken marriage because they were a great duo together.

And like a marriage, if your partner leaves, you wouldn't want them hanging around your house especially if they left for money.

But unlike with business, if you married for money, you married for the wrong reason. Your analogy is stupid.

And also marriage is a contract, that if any of the parties don't want to be part of anymore they can divorce, so not sure what is the problem he is seeing. Meanwhile he and some others ignored that Nintendo broke contract on the CD development with Sony and instead of moaning we got playstation, talk about being revengefull =p



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

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."