Squeenix: "We Take Too Long" to Make Games

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Squeenix: "We Take Too Long" to Make Games

image

Square-Enix boss Yoichi Wada has confessed that he thinks it takes too long for his company to make a game.

In an interview that GI.biz held with Eidos CEO Phil Rogers and Square-Enix CEO and President Yoichi Wada, Wada was asked about the public perception of Eidos prodcuts: Given that the reception of recent Eidos offerings has been lukewarm at best, was Wada concerned that attaching those games to the Square-Enix brand (known for releasing polished titles, if nothing else) would be damaging?

Wada answered that while he thought the financial support of Square-Enix would allow Eidos to spend more time and money on a game to hopefully restore gamers' faith in the brand, the parent side of the company had their own problem: "(I)t takes too long for us to produce a game..."

"In reality I think the issues we have are basically the same," continued Wada. "On one side you might say that because of the budgetary constraints they released the games without having the games polished to perfection, but on the other side we take too long to release the game."

This news should likely come as no surprise to gamers, as Final Fantasy XIII won't be coming to Western shores until 2010 - almost years after FF12.

On the other hand, while five years is a bit uncomfortably long to be working on a game, it could be worse. After taking five years to release Half-Life 2, Valve spent almost eight years in development of Team Fortress 2, announcing the game back in 1998 and releasing it in 2007. Development on StarCraft II started back in 2003 after the release of Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne, and Diablo III has been under development in one form or another since Lord of Destruction came out in 2001.

Of course, even notoriously-glacial Valve and Blizzard can't compare to 3D Realms' Duke Nukem Forever - 12 years in development, and counting. So cheer up, Square-Enix. As slow as you guys might be, you're in good company.

(VG247)

Permalink

I was about to say, they have nothing on valve. How many Final Fantasy games are there? As well all the ohter games Square make?

Only 5 years? If they could sync with Tool, it would be great as they release a masterpiece every 4-5 years as well.

Note: I wouldn't consider FF games as masterpieces as I have never actually played one.

It should be noted that other than Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest games, quite a lot of Squeenix games are not very polished. And also probably don't take nearly as long to make.

2011? I thought it was 2010!

Also, NO SHIT!

Goldeneye103X2:
2011? I thought it was 2010!

And me! No fair!!

At least you know if they spend 5 years on a game, it's gonna be good...

Goldeneye103X2:
2011? I thought it was 2010!

Also, NO SHIT!

Me too. I still think it is 2010 actually, unless the XBOX port takes over a year, in which case I won't buy the game anyway.

Goldeneye103X2:
2011? I thought it was 2010!

Also, NO SHIT!

Whoops. Typo. It's been fixed.

2011? God I might be able to afford a PS3 by that stage! Huzzah!

Sounds a bit like the positive answers you might give to a tricky question at a job interview.

"Whats your greatest weakness?"

"I'm a perfectionist, everything has to be just right before I allow anything I've spent time on out of my sight"

While the amount of time it takes for SE to release games is well known, I think this is just an answer he made to dodge adressing any major concerns there may be.

Perhaps if they cut out some of the extraneous content then it wouldn't take them so long.

Damn right they do...

And I LIKE Squeenix games...

CantFaketheFunk:

Goldeneye103X2:
2011? I thought it was 2010!

Also, NO SHIT!

Whoops. Typo. It's been fixed.

Too late! *pounces* Mmmmmmmm... Nothing is a tasty as typos...

But putting on my serious face for a moment, here's to hoping that DNF finally sees release, defies all logic by being a huge success, and has a deep and compelling story where you run around, kill everything, and have a woman with a reasonable outfit on.

Wait... maybe that wasn't entirely serious. I never can tell :D

As long as the game has good quality (like FF games), I don't care how much they take to develop it.

Elven_Star:
As long as the game has good quality (like FF games), I don't care how much they take to develop it.

This.

No one says anything when it takes 5 years to make a movie. If the longer time, higher costs, and better quality pays you back in the end then you should take as much time as you can.

Nah. They publish good ones on the side. The Square Enix name means quality 95% of the time.
They can take as long as they want to develop.

Internet Kraken:
Perhaps if they cut out some of the extraneous content then it wouldn't take them so long.

Then it probably wouldn't be as good.
I've never gotten into FF games but my wife has and I've always been impressed by the amount of content they pack in one game.
I can tell you (having already been disappointed by GTA4) that taking out too much content (while speeding up the process) can make the game less interesting at best and a mere shadow of the franchise at worst.

Personally, I don't care how long it takes, as long as the company uses that time to make a good gaming experience.

GonzoGamer:

Internet Kraken:
Perhaps if they cut out some of the extraneous content then it wouldn't take them so long.

Then it probably wouldn't be as good.
I've never gotten into FF games but my wife has and I've always been impressed by the amount of content they pack in one game.
I can tell you (having already been disappointed by GTA4) that taking out too much content (while speeding up the process) can make the game less interesting at best and a mere shadow of the franchise at worst.

In my experience a large majority of the content in these games is not needed. There are numerous occasions in which you simply have to go from point A to point B while you chase down the main villain. It just serves to link together numerous combat sequences that get repetitive quickly.

The only point of this content is so you can say your game as X amount of hours of playtime.

Damn right, they're taking their time. I haven't seen a Chrono game since forever. (joke).

Quality is better than quantity. Somebody should send this message to Wada

Off note:If they're taking their sweet little time, might as well cast some good voice actors once in a while. Also, it would be great if they make their male-characters look like a male character someday...

yeah they take too long . i could understand game like oblivion that is 200 plus hours long.

I don't mind waiting for good games, as long as the time it took to make them reflects how good the game is. I highly doubt that's the case with the New Duke Nukem, I think that everyone will be so excited for it that their expectations will be too high, and everyone will be deeply disappointed. Lets not forget about what happened with Silcon Knights when they were making TooHuman. But I doubt FF will turn out like those games.

Wouldukindly:
Personally, I don't care how long it takes, as long as the company uses that time to make a good gaming experience.

Couldn't have said it better... who wants a zillion bad games anyway? I'd rather wait three years as long as the game is mindblowing.

Particularly the games that come from Squaresoft's side when they and Enix became one company suffered a trend towards mediocrity. Just compare Final Fantasy VI, VII, Parasite Eve 1, Vagrant Story, both Chrono games and the original Final Fantasy Tactics to the stuff they published since 2004.

I used to be a fanboy of them, but since Final Fantasy X-2 their star is sinking constantly. It's like a japanese LucasArts.

Internet Kraken:

GonzoGamer:

Internet Kraken:
Perhaps if they cut out some of the extraneous content then it wouldn't take them so long.

Then it probably wouldn't be as good.
I've never gotten into FF games but my wife has and I've always been impressed by the amount of content they pack in one game.
I can tell you (having already been disappointed by GTA4) that taking out too much content (while speeding up the process) can make the game less interesting at best and a mere shadow of the franchise at worst.

In my experience a large majority of the content in these games is not needed. There are numerous occasions in which you simply have to go from point A to point B while you chase down the main villain. It just serves to link together numerous combat sequences that get repetitive quickly.

The only point of this content is so you can say your game as X amount of hours of playtime.

While I can't vouch for FF (like I said, I'm not the one in the household with the experience) I can tell you that the difference between the content of GTA3 and GTA4 (I'm not even talking about Vise or San An which I wasn't expecting anything near those levels) is huge. Not just the activities (rampages), but the weapons (flamethrowers), and vehicles (tanks) too. Sure some of those things missing were repetitive (R3 missions) but they had cool rewards and some people actually enjoyed it. Just because it's repetitive doesn't mean it's not fun. Some of my favorite all time games are very repetitive like Katamari or Rez.

Donkey Kong is repetitive as hell but people still battle over the top score.

I think it's more of a question of value. Do you want more content on the rarely released disc or do you want to buy a much shorter disc more often. I go for the former to save money; IOW I think if they came out with games more often, we would be getting less game.

I wonder if this has to do with the increased workload from working with the current gen HD systems, they already said they'll need 10x the sales of a regular game.

Me, I'm less interested in the main series FF than the FFCC Crystal Bearers game though it's kinda worrying that S-E has announced rebranded QTEs as a new feature.

Well every game is about 80 hours long...
If a jobs worth doing, it's worth doing well!

Yes, Squeenix takes too long to release. But what's worse, is their subcontracted developers are just as slow. Matrix games, the ones who ported FF3 and FF4 to the DS, should be half-way through FF7-DS by now, the games are essentially done already, what's taking them so f'ing long? OK, some slack for FF3/4 because they went from 2D to 3D, but get FF5 and FF6 out ASAP, then port 7 and 9, and go back and re-do 1 and 2. I want a full Final Fantasy 1-7 on DS by Xmas or heads will roll!

Sounds like SE has a bad case of "VALVe Syndrome".

The only cure is to replace every person working at the company (including all executives) with less awesome people. Unfortunately, there is a very low survival rate following that procedure.

CantFaketheFunk:
This news should likely come as no surprise to gamers, as Final Fantasy XIII won't be coming to Western shores until 2010 - almost years after FF12.

Darn straight -- I remember back in the good old days when game developers needed nothing like almost years to get a title on the shelf.

Sorry, man. This typo had me laughing audibly for a good two minutes.

I dont mind as long as the games they take so painstaking long to make are fantastic, that makes up for the wait. I usually enjoy the games Square-Enix make being a huge final fantasy fan, as long as they are taking the time to make the best game they can.

I mean look at Duke Nukem Forever, that game has been in development for so long its sheer awesomeness should cause my eyeballs to explode.

Good to see some humility. SOMEONE cough*sony*cough could use some.

Who cares I mean cmon. Most games of the Final Fantasy range are amazing. I do not mind waiting a few extra years to get a quality game instead of having shit constantly pumped out every year that is not even worth playing once.
Keep doing what you're doing Square!
However... Blizzard... Starcraft 2 looks like shit. What the fuck have you guys been doing for all these years?
Btw Duke Nukem got its fame from snazzy one liners, over the top violence, profanity and titties. Lets face it. In today's market it's not going to be anything special. The only thing it can add is sex but does the company have the balls to include that knowing what its backlash will be?

Maybe it's just that fact that I have an inhuman level of patience when compared to other gamers, but I would much rather have a fantastic game in 5 years, than to have a mediocre game in a year or two.

However... Blizzard... Starcraft 2 looks like shit. What the fuck have you guys been doing for all these years?

You and I must not be following the same game then, because Starcraft 2 looks amazing.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here