Square Enix Revises Earnings Forecasts For Major Loss

[Aizm]

Aye, but most of the response to my post was taken out of context. While XIII was a financial success, the formula was just bad juju, and as a standalone FF, it's best left as is. Until now, X was the ugly baby arguably, and VI before that. In retrospect, it's easy for many of us to enjoy VI or X in-spite of some of the things we disliked. I just think the attempts to refurbish and promote it are a good cause for the roughly 150mil USD ding in SquEnix's pocket (even moreso than XIV bombing). :P Ofcourse having an opinion means it is bound to get taken out of proportion on the interwebs.

What was out of context about the responses? This thread is discussing SE's financial report. You mentioned that is was XIII and XIV's fault. And a multitude of people made it quite clear it was not XIII's fault. You admit it was a financial success, and it is in fact one of the best selling FF games in franchise history. I'm going to go out on a wild guess and say that means a lot of FF fans liked it (hint: people who disliked it are way more vocal than the 'silent majority' that do like it) So what's wrong with expanding on the title?

What really intrigues me about your response though is that you think VI and X have bad reps? I can't say I've ever heard these games bashed. Quite frankly I think any die hard FF fan thinks VI to be one of the very best. Besides XIV (and you can argue XIII I guess), I think XII was the most recent game to get a fair bashing when it was released. Retrospectively though, I think most people have revised their opinion on XII.

[Augury]

What was out of context about the responses? This thread is discussing SE's financial report. You mentioned that is was XIII and XIV's fault. And a multitude of people made it quite clear it was not XIII's fault. You admit it was a financial success, and it is in fact one of the best selling FF games in franchise history. I'm going to go out on a wild guess and say that means a lot of FF fans liked it (hint: people who disliked it are way more vocal than the 'silent majority' that do like it) So what's wrong with expanding on the title?

What really intrigues me about your response though is that you think VI and X have bad reps? I can't say I've ever heard these games bashed. Quite frankly I think any die hard FF fan thinks VI to be one of the very best. Besides XIV (and you can argue XIII I guess), I think XII was the most recent game to get a fair bashing when it was released. Retrospectively though, I think most people have revised their opinion on XII.

I disagree, because XIII sold well only on the basis of having Final Fantasy in it's title, but most people I have discussed it with also found no redeeming quality, not the "loud minority". The hit to the company is probably a result of the numerous developments going on, but trying to promote an idea which didn't work. In this respect, my opinion WAS blown out of proportion by the concept that because XIII was horrible, IT was the cause of the dent. I'm saying that the dent is probably a result of trying to resell what was a pretty horrible game.

VI had a very awkward response when it came out because it was good, but very awkward in concept. It laid the framework for the Playstation age of FF games, and was without a doubt one of the best SNES games in the library. The awkward nature of the narrative was pretty deviant from the other even numbered sequels (which were all linear RPGs as opposed to job mix n' matching). X got heat for having some of the best (and worst) characters to date, as well as a narrative which tried to tackle mature issues in very immature ways. Most FF games get the ringer when they are released, but even the ugly babies are usually enjoyable (even if more to some, and less to others). XIII and XIV just seem to be the first games which are viewed as horrible by the MAJORITY. XIII can't be patched, and the lackluster characters cannot be ret-conned.

[SuzakuCMX]

I disagree, because XIII sold well only on the basis of having Final Fantasy in it's title, but most people I have discussed it with also found no redeeming quality, not the "loud minority". The hit to the company is probably a result of the numerous developments going on, but trying to promote an idea which didn't work. In this respect, my opinion WAS blown out of proportion by the concept that because XIII was horrible, IT was the cause of the dent. I'm saying that the dent is probably a result of trying to resell what was a pretty horrible game.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/plays...l-fantasy-xiii

No, you're wrong. Stop debating now, it's spamming the thread.

[Ostia]

http://www.metacritic.com/game/plays...l-fantasy-xiii

No, you're wrong. Stop debating now, it's spamming the thread.

The game was horrible, and i don't care what metacritic has to say, for in this forums is a card used when is convenient, when used to bash or argue that FFXIV is bad, the defense force comes out and say: Reviews are biased, they dint play more than X hours, yadayadayada. But when it is used to defend FFXIII: Its the word of jesus........ how dare you go againts it ?

[SuzakuCMX]

The game was horrible, and i don't care what metacritic has to say, for in this forums is a card used when is convenient, when used to bash or argue that FFXIV is bad, the defense force comes out and say: Reviews are biased, they dint play more than X hours, yadayadayada. But when it is used to defend FFXIII: Its the word of jesus........ how dare you go againts it ?

Let's see, how about "it's good" and "it's bad" are objective opinions, but "it was successful" and "most people hated it" are not? Metacritic gives a clear cut evidence that it was in fact a critical and financial success.

[Elexia]

Let's see, how about "it's good" and "it's bad" are objective opinions, but "it was successful" and "most people hated it" are not? Metacritic gives a clear cut evidence that it was in fact a critical and financial success.

Ostia is yet another troll, don't take him too seriously. He knows that everyone else knows XIII was a success, like it or hate it, it was successful and the American and European folks had 4 months to NOT buy the game as there were info and spoilers and whathaveyou everywhere between december 2009 and march 2010.

[Aizm]

I disagree, because XIII sold well only on the basis of having Final Fantasy in it's title, but most people I have discussed it with also found no redeeming quality, not the "loud minority". The hit to the company is probably a result of the numerous developments going on, but trying to promote an idea which didn't work. In this respect, my opinion WAS blown out of proportion by the concept that because XIII was horrible, IT was the cause of the dent. I'm saying that the dent is probably a result of trying to resell what was a pretty horrible game.

VI had a very awkward response when it came out because it was good, but very awkward in concept. It laid the framework for the Playstation age of FF games, and was without a doubt one of the best SNES games in the library. The awkward nature of the narrative was pretty deviant from the other even numbered sequels (which were all linear RPGs as opposed to job mix n' matching). X got heat for having some of the best (and worst) characters to date, as well as a narrative which tried to tackle mature issues in very immature ways. Most FF games get the ringer when they are released, but even the ugly babies are usually enjoyable (even if more to some, and less to others). XIII and XIV just seem to be the first games which are viewed as horrible by the MAJORITY. XIII can't be patched, and the lackluster characters cannot be ret-conned.

No, the majority of people do not find it to be horrible. The score board (sales) doesn't lie. You can presume on you opinion all you want that people don't like it, but that simply does not make it true.

If you care to refute, please give us some tangible evidence besides your usual rhetoric of "its horrible"...