They probably would have used CDs encased in a caddy (this also would have prevented scratching of the disc too which would have been good for kids and teenagers). 

The Super NES CD drive had this design already (again the Nintendo one, not the Sony variant). 

It was a good design actually, most of the issues with CD were addressed right there. It even had basically a blank cartridge that could load data from the disc and once the data is on the cartridge you have basically cartridge like read speeds for your gameplay. 

You can see right there (circa 1992/1993) that the discs were encased in a caddy. This also would have made piracy much more difficult as you couldn't just insert a naked CD disc, you'd have to have some kind of black market plastic casing and given this was the 90s, most people wouldn't have bothered ordering some black market device via mail order or something. 

The caddy also contained a lock out chip for security and small amounts of storage for game saves so you wouldn't have needed a memory card. This design addressed virtually every problem that CDs had, they were stupid to ditch it. They could have used this design for the N64. 

Sounds like bullshit considering FF Tactics Advance came out in 2003 , 6 years AFTER Final Fantasy 7 came out on PS1.

Final Fantasy Dawn of Souls came out on GBA in 2004, IV Advance in 2005, V Advance in 2006, VI Advance in 2006 , III 3D Remake on DS and IV 3D remake in 2007.

All within 10 years of the supposed ban. 

For a company that was "banned", they had no issues releasing their games on the platforms of the company that banned them.

"Square spent an entire decade to crush Nintendo" by....releasing their games on Nintendo's platforms? lol

Are y'all from a alternate reality? 

Or just ignoring the fact that there's been several Square Enix games released on Nintendo platforms within the OP's so called 10 year ban? lol.

Damn, Basil spittin!

Can't forget about the exclusive Kingdom Hearts game and Sword of Mana that Nintendo Co-Published.

Just pointing out the symbolism of the game that caused their falling out now being back on a Nintendo system.

I think the "falling out" is just over dramatized by console war fans.

Especially since the OG FFVII has been on Switch 1 since 2019, a year before the original version of FFVII Remake was released on PS4 in 2020.

While that had symbolic impact as well, getting a port of a 22 year old game from three generations ago isn't quite as a big a deal as getting the modern remake.

Still a late port though.

1 generation and 6 years late.

Regardless going back to the topic, I think its just bullshit.

Much more current though than 3 generations and 22 years though. It also marks the start of the current gen ones coming as well, with Rebirth and part 3 confirmed to be on the way.

Not sure if I mentioned this before, but the only "square" in this equation is how squarely the blame falls on Yamauchi. It wasn't just Square he was poor at dealing with at the time, it was other companies, the customers, and the laws of the countries carrying his products. Some people will defend Yamauchi, but it's difficult to defend him against the charge that Nintendo's success in the 1980s and early 90s looks very much like it was in spite of Hiroshi Yamauchi rather than because of it.

Being a Nintendo fan hasn't blinded me to the consideration that Yamauchi was another entitled nepo-rich corporate bastard. At least, that's the view I've subscribe to for decades now.