• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Eidos has been bought by Square-Enix!

Spire

III
BRoomer
Joined
Apr 13, 2008
Messages
15,079
Location
Texas
Holy mackerel! I do not know what to make of this.

More and more, the smaller developers are dwindling as the masses no longer desire their games. The corporate giants are buying everyone. Egh.

EDIT: I'm not necessarily disappointed with Square's move, just with the general direction of the video game market.
 

GreenKirby

Smash Master
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,316
Location
The VOID!
NNID
NoName9999
All the market's are going bad. The gaming market sadly isn't an exception either.
 

VariableGear

Smash Rookie
Joined
Mar 25, 2008
Messages
10
Location
Omaha, NE
Holy mackerel! I do not know what to make of this.

More and more, the smaller developers are dwindling as the masses no longer desire their games. The corporate giants are buying everyone. Egh.

EDIT: I'm not necessarily disappointed with Square's move, just with the general direction of the video game market.
Smaller developers are still surviving, though. I agree that the major publishers are stagnating as they attempt to make games that appeal to the widest possible audience, but it's not as if there's nothing to celebrate in the medium. As long as we can play instant-classics like Spelunky, the medium will continue to be one of the most entertaining in existence.
 

pikamon

Smash Ace
Joined
Oct 15, 2001
Messages
680
Location
nintendodiscussion.com
It's all about pleasing the average gamer (casuals). Look at Nintendo. They have basically stopped making all of their main series games. Oh, sure they say they're working on a new zelda, a new mario, etc., which is no doubt true, but you aren't going to see the amount of classic games you used to. It's all about this new wii-motion control crap (I'm looking at you, Wii Sports and friends!). Square even said one of the reasons they changed Final Fantasy's battle system was to make it more fun for the average gamer (I personally hated it though, and I don't know many who liked it, but hey, whatever floats their boat).

You pretty much have to get a DS for any classic-style RPGs nowadays (FFIII, FFIV, DQ remakes and DQ9, and more) or if you want to play a nintendo game that isn't "run in place and win a medal!" or "punch the bag over and over!", since the Wii hasn't had a really interesting game in months. Honestly, when was the last time any of you picked it up? After playing Brawl for a month, I really haven't touched it except to run through Paper Mario and play around on the VC some (Mario RPG ftw). And now they are talking about making a Wii 2? No thanks.

Why is it that the main reason for a "gamer" to get a Wii is for its Virtual Console? Why can't the Wii stand on its own library? That is, of course, just my opinion. I could be wrong.

It really looks like all the good stuff is on the 360 nowadays (I don't have a PS3, but nothing in the library really appeals to me yet). All the RPGs are on the X-Box, along with all the action games and shooters, and even fighters and sports games, but since Nintendo is making so much money off of these party games, who knows how long it will be before it becomes a rarity to find a good game that isn't directed towards everybody? When my 360 turned on a few months ago and I suddenly had a "Mii" (360-style), I couldn't help but worry...

Lol, I guess I sort of went on a huge tangent there...woops!
 

The Halloween Captain

Smash Master
Joined
May 20, 2008
Messages
4,331
Location
The northeast
It's all about pleasing the average gamer (casuals). Look at Nintendo. They have basically stopped making all of their main series games. Oh, sure they say they're working on a new zelda, a new mario, etc., which is no doubt true, but you aren't going to see the amount of classic games you used to. It's all about this new wii-motion control crap (I'm looking at you, Wii Sports and friends!). Square even said one of the reasons they changed Final Fantasy's battle system was to make it more fun for the average gamer (I personally hated it though, and I don't know many who liked it, but hey, whatever floats their boat).

You pretty much have to get a DS for any classic-style RPGs nowadays (FFIII, FFIV, DQ remakes and DQ9, and more) or if you want to play a nintendo game that isn't "run in place and win a medal!" or "punch the bag over and over!", since the Wii hasn't had a really interesting game in months. Honestly, when was the last time any of you picked it up? After playing Brawl for a month, I really haven't touched it except to run through Paper Mario and play around on the VC some (Mario RPG ftw). And now they are talking about making a Wii 2? No thanks.

Why is it that the main reason for a "gamer" to get a Wii is for its Virtual Console? Why can't the Wii stand on its own library? That is, of course, just my opinion. I could be wrong.

It really looks like all the good stuff is on the 360 nowadays (I don't have a PS3, but nothing in the library really appeals to me yet). All the RPGs are on the X-Box, along with all the action games and shooters, and even fighters and sports games, but since Nintendo is making so much money off of these party games, who knows how long it will be before it becomes a rarity to find a good game that isn't directed towards everybody? When my 360 turned on a few months ago and I suddenly had a "Mii" (360-style), I couldn't help but worry...

Lol, I guess I sort of went on a huge tangent there...woops!
To be honest, I like games that are "fun". The only drawback to the more casual crowd is someone keeps mixing up the word "fun" with the word "easy". However, I must admit that I didn enjoy playing my first Zelda where I actually found all the Heart Pieces and the first Mariuo where I was able to collect all the stars, neither with an FAQ. Personally, I feel the wii library is just large enough to keep gamers entertained as long as they are not picky about the genre, with titles like Metroid, Zelda, Mario Galaxy, World of Goo, Smash, Mario Kart, Paper Mario, and Okami. Unfortuantely, this does not compete with Xbox is quantity, where a First Person Shooter fan has double that list for a single genre.

There are multiple reasons why the wii's library is sub-par:

1. All the third parties mis-judged who the market leader would be, and require about two years to develop a game.

2. They try to capitalize on a "casual" market who they believe to have no knowledge of gaming, and thus can be easily appealed.

3. Publishers do not know what will sell on the Wii, but guessed that minigames were a good choice, and believe hardcore games won't sell.

4. Developers dislike the Wii. It's inferior graphical capabilities limit what the developer can do, while it's motion controls require creativity and innovation, while the Xbox can sell games that follow traditional formulas.

5. Nintendo went through all it's best frachises fairly quickly, and needs time to remake them. It has single-handedly dominated it's own sales chart entirely with first party games, which while impressive, means that they have exhausted their frachises somewhat, and need more time for developement.

6. Because of low developement costs and a high install base on the wii, games that flop can be marginally profitable.
 

The Halloween Captain

Smash Master
Joined
May 20, 2008
Messages
4,331
Location
The northeast
The gaming market was one of the first hit.

Excuse me while I remember my only enjoyable job ever.
Weird, I would have thought the gaming market would be one of the most durable in a serious economic crisis.

Things like that are normally forms of escapism, such as movies during the Great Depression. Gaming might be a little high-end to be classified with movies though.
 

pikamon

Smash Ace
Joined
Oct 15, 2001
Messages
680
Location
nintendodiscussion.com
To be honest, I like games that are "fun". The only drawback to the more casual crowd is someone keeps mixing up the word "fun" with the word "easy". However, I must admit that I didn enjoy playing my first Zelda where I actually found all the Heart Pieces and the first Mariuo where I was able to collect all the stars, neither with an FAQ. Personally, I feel the wii library is just large enough to keep gamers entertained as long as they are not picky about the genre, with titles like Metroid, Zelda, Mario Galaxy, World of Goo, Smash, Mario Kart, Paper Mario, and Okami. Unfortuantely, this does not compete with Xbox is quantity, where a First Person Shooter fan has double that list for a single genre.

There are multiple reasons why the wii's library is sub-par:

1. All the third parties mis-judged who the market leader would be, and require about two years to develop a game.

2. They try to capitalize on a "casual" market who they believe to have no knowledge of gaming, and thus can be easily appealed.

3. Publishers do not know what will sell on the Wii, but guessed that minigames were a good choice, and believe hardcore games won't sell.

4. Developers dislike the Wii. It's inferior graphical capabilities limit what the developer can do, while it's motion controls require creativity and innovation, while the Xbox can sell games that follow traditional formulas.

5. Nintendo went through all it's best frachises fairly quickly, and needs time to remake them. It has single-handedly dominated it's own sales chart entirely with first party games, which while impressive, means that they have exhausted their frachises somewhat, and need more time for developement.

6. Because of low developement costs and a high install base on the wii, games that flop can be marginally profitable.
That's actually a very good list. I really agree with #5. It feels like there has been a tremendous stretch of nothing over the past year or so, whereas before that, when I first got my Wii, there were plenty of games to choose from: Brawl, Mario Kart, Paper Mario, Mario Galaxy, Metroid, and a few others (I don't really count Zelda because it was basically just a port), but as time went on, the list stopped getting larger and eventually just stopped. What was the last real game that they made?

Of course, you could argue that Animal Crossing: Wild World was new, but I would disagree (same old stuff, hardly anything new about it). You've got these new remakes coming out too, like Pikmin and whatever else, but who cares? They're not original games---just rehashed games with new controls. Seems like Nintendo is barely trying, which sucks for their older fans, but it's great for the newer crowds.

Weird, I would have thought the gaming market would be one of the most durable in a serious economic crisis.

Things like that are normally forms of escapism, such as movies during the Great Depression. Gaming might be a little high-end to be classified with movies though.
It is by far too high end. A game can be a risky investment for most people. You can go see a movie for 7 bucks, watch TV for free, surf the net, etc., but games cost a lot more. Your average new game costs roughly 60 bucks (a bit of a mark up from when I was a kid), sometimes 65. That's a lot considering most people in America are having financial problems, working for minimum wage (or a few dollars above it). I know I personally haven't purchased a game simply because I can't find a job right now so I'm stuck doing something that pays less, which means I can't afford to do anything else but play the games I have or at the most rent something (like Fallout 3, which was awesome).

Movies, on the other hand, will always do well, especially in times like this. It's like you said, the Great Depression boosted the film industry. Movies are so cheap (unless your theater jacks the price to 10 bucks, then you're off to Blockbuster!), so why not just do that? If you hate it, it's not a big deal. You're out 7 bucks. If you hate a game, sucks for you. You're out 60. Ouch!
 

The Halloween Captain

Smash Master
Joined
May 20, 2008
Messages
4,331
Location
The northeast
Actually, I agree. The gaming industry should be too high end. However, it is not. Nintendo and it's Wii are still breaking sales records and having trouble keeping in stock more than two years into it's lifespan, and almost six months after a global economic downturn. In fact, it sold 10 million consoles in America in 2008 alone, breaking all previous one-year console records (for America). That simply does not make sense if the video game industry (more specifically, Nintendo) is considered too high end.
 

pikamon

Smash Ace
Joined
Oct 15, 2001
Messages
680
Location
nintendodiscussion.com
Actually, I agree. The gaming industry should be too high end. However, it is not. Nintendo and it's Wii are still breaking sales records and having trouble keeping in stock more than two years into it's lifespan, and almost six months after a global economic downturn. In fact, it sold 10 million consoles in America in 2008 alone, breaking all previous one-year console records (for America). That simply does not make sense if the video game industry (more specifically, Nintendo) is considered too high end.
All I could say about that (or at least guess) is that Nintendo has been making cheap products. Their console has always been the least expensive. While the PS3 was 600 bucks, the Xbox was 400-500, the Wii started out at only 250 and it came with Wii Sports already packaged, which is a great deal for most people. 250 bucks for a party system that you can use over and over with a game that everyone can play. Its games were also much cheaper, most of them only going for about 40 dollars, sometimes less, so its no wonder why so many people might purchase the system.

They also did a clever marketing scheme by only shipping out a certain number of systems per week to their retailers (which clearly needed more than they received), which kept the market hungry. Three Wii's for Best Buy in a city of over 12,000? They're obviously going to run out within a few hours. When a person saw the Wii in stock, and they wanted it, they bought it because there was no guarantee that it would be there in a few months. Instinct took over and told them "I have to buy this now or I might miss my chance!", so they did. Most of the people I know who bought one around here had to use a credit card because they didn't have the money immediately available for it---they couldn't really save up for one, because who knew when they'd be able to find it? Remember how hard it was to get a Wii? Clever strategy.
 

The Halloween Captain

Smash Master
Joined
May 20, 2008
Messages
4,331
Location
The northeast
Sony made a slight tactical error though;

not only could consumers not save money for a PS3 because they would never know when it would be in stock, but the PS3's cost required consumers to save money by being cost-prohibitive. The inability to save money for a purchase that requires savings does not bode well for a console.

Actually, the main flaw with the PS3 is that it equals the combined cost of an Xbox 360 and a Wii. Thus, the Wii60 was born.
 

Gates

Banned via Warnings
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
9,316
Hopefully this doesn't mean that Square will deny advertising and coverage from review sites who give bad reviews to Dragon Quest IX.

But seriously, I know Square has been trying to expand its profile for a while now and that it's been looking to become, essentially, more western so that it can evolve as a game company. Eidos isn't the best company they could have bought, but it serves just fine and is definitely a solid choice.
 

KirbyWorshipper2465

Smash Legend
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
19,378
Location
The Western side of Pop Star.
Hopefully this doesn't mean that Square will deny advertising and coverage from review sites who give bad reviews to Dragon Quest IX.

But seriously, I know Square has been trying to expand its profile for a while now and that it's been looking to become, essentially, more western so that it can evolve as a game company. Eidos isn't the best company they could have bought, but it serves just fine and is definitely a solid choice.
Considering that Eidos is a company set in the UK, that's close enough.
 
Top Bottom