You're kidding, right? It was supposed to be done a year and a half ago, and the guy in charge of it isn't even sure whether it's gonna come out at all. And it's not like Square has ever cockblocked a game halfway through development, too, because they couldn't hold out for the final product (xenogears).
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Why didn't Square ever make a unique GBA Final Fantasy game?
- Thread starter tedtropy
- Start date
Kobun Heat
Member
LOLOCAUSTScott said:
TheJollyCorner
Member
Saying "d00d FFIV/V/VI, Chrono Triggaar, and Secrit of Mana on GBA would make billionz and millionz" is pretty ridiculous. All of those games, with the exception of Mana, were rereleased on the PSone, which had the majority of FF supporters at the time. As far as I know, none of the rereleases (FFAnthology and FFChronicles w/Chrono) even broke 1 million worldwide.
What makes anyone think portable releases for GBA would make more than PS1 releases at the height of it's lifespan? If they were 'enhanced' rereleases, we might get a little bit closer to breaking 1 million, but Square making money hand over fist on them? Nope.
Might as well just get a PSP when the price goes down, download an emulator, get the ROMs (with the assumption that you still own the original cartridges *wink wink*) and then you can have all the sons of bitches right there on PSP.
What makes anyone think portable releases for GBA would make more than PS1 releases at the height of it's lifespan? If they were 'enhanced' rereleases, we might get a little bit closer to breaking 1 million, but Square making money hand over fist on them? Nope.
Might as well just get a PSP when the price goes down, download an emulator, get the ROMs (with the assumption that you still own the original cartridges *wink wink*) and then you can have all the sons of bitches right there on PSP.
TheJollyCorner
Member
DavidDayton said:
give me a fucking break- it's a cell-phone game port. If this was some PS2 release of a mini-game that's 8 years old I could understand the negativitity towards it, but come on... some of you make it seem like Square just raped your sister, chopped your mother's legs off, kicked your dog, and hid your goddamn Highlander jean jacket with this simple little cell-phone game.
Square has been pretty hit-and-miss this gen, but for Kingdom Hearts (a guilty pleasure) and FFX (whining Tidus aside) and FFT:A (the best portable game ever) I must forgive them. Besides, they will soon pleasure me with DQVIII, KHII and FFXII.
Square just ain't that big on creating content for anyone but the top dog. They threw FF:CC at Nintendo like the stinky poo it was. XBox360 is going to see a port. Even the wildly popular Nintendo handhelds are just getting ports. I guess Namco isn't alone in their SC3 thinking.
Wow, I'm going to stop typing before I squeeze out another acronym or roman numeral.
Square just ain't that big on creating content for anyone but the top dog. They threw FF:CC at Nintendo like the stinky poo it was. XBox360 is going to see a port. Even the wildly popular Nintendo handhelds are just getting ports. I guess Namco isn't alone in their SC3 thinking.
Wow, I'm going to stop typing before I squeeze out another acronym or roman numeral.
Red Scarlet
Member
Don't Greatest Hits games = 1 million sales? Because either the FF5+6 thing and/or the FF4+CT thing on PS is a Greatest Hits.
TheJollyCorner
Member
Red Scarlet said:
Not necessarily.
Both Silent Hill 1 and 2 both hit the Greatest Hits level and neither of them broke 1 million.
TheJollyCorner said:
I think I wasn't clear enough in my point... I wasn't trying to say "SQUARE IS STUPID" -- rather, I was point out that
isn't really the most probable reason for the limited number of new GBA titles. That is, Square Enix doesn't have "minimum standards (for) sound quality and graphics" -- the proof being that they made a FF7 cell phone game.madara said:
Kobun Heat
Member
Indeed.Jonnyram said:
If FFXII wasn't delayed, then no game, in the history of the industry, has ever been delayed.
EGM mentioned it in the E3 issue, and said that the reason the guy in charge wasn't at E3 was because he was at some sacred temple praying for the game to be allowed to come out, "Seriously." Not long after I read that they've delayed it til 2006... the game was supposed to be out LAST YEAR. I dont mind waiting for a good game, especially when I've got shadow hearts to hold my RPG appetite for awhile, but to not be worried that they MIGHT think of axing it seems naive at this point.terrene said:
Bizarro Sun Yat-sen
Banned
jarrod's list is a little mixed up. FF1&2 GBA was produced by Tokita, and Kawazu had nothing to do with it (unless you count helping to design the originals). Wild Card was produced (and designed and directed) by Kawazu, and the only Matsuno connection was Akihiko Yoshida's illustrations and card designs. Hataraku Chocobo and Blue Wing Blitz were produced by Kawazu as well, though the BWB development team was comprised of Front Mission staff (not including Tsuchida who was working on FFX and FFXI at the time).
edit: I should add that Square wasn't using the division system at that time. The divisions were all dissolved in 2000 as part of their restructuring, only to be reinstated a couple years later as part of their re-restructuring. Square Enix may have changed their division structure again recently, too
As for the topic question, Square has rarely ever made FF spinoffs with standard RPG gameplay anyway, they usually save that for the numbered series. The only exceptions are Mystic Quest and FFX2, and the latter is a special case as it reused most of the programming and content from FFX. So it's not surprising that the GBA spinoff they did make was an SRPG and not a standard RPG.
edit: I should add that Square wasn't using the division system at that time. The divisions were all dissolved in 2000 as part of their restructuring, only to be reinstated a couple years later as part of their re-restructuring. Square Enix may have changed their division structure again recently, too
As for the topic question, Square has rarely ever made FF spinoffs with standard RPG gameplay anyway, they usually save that for the numbered series. The only exceptions are Mystic Quest and FFX2, and the latter is a special case as it reused most of the programming and content from FFX. So it's not surprising that the GBA spinoff they did make was an SRPG and not a standard RPG.
TheJollyCorner said:
I recall being able to, ya know, spell in my original post, but the PS1 and GBA are totally different creatures. The PS1 had FF7-9 fighting against any trips down nostalgia lane that Square decided to release on the system. Why would the average casual gamer play a 16-bit era game on a system when those alternatives are available? With the GBA, we have no such alternatives because Square decided to neglect the system. There's no doubt in my mind that a unique Square RPG or even a port would sell quite well. Hell, how well did Tactics do again?
Dragona Akehi
Retired
terrene said:
Jesus fuck. FFT is better than craptaculicious FFTA and even then Tactics Ogre (even Knight of Lodis on GBA) RAPES THEM BOTH.
Get Fire Emblem, WARS or TO.
*Shudder*
Also Square sucks. Enix merging with them brought the brand name's value down. Dammit.
terrene said:
How the hell can you call FFTA the best portable game of all time when the menu system was the WORST MENU SYSTEM I HAVE EVER SEEN IN A GAME?
Not to mention the fact that you complain about battle length in FFT and TO, yet it isn't like battles in FFTA are 5 minutes each, either.
Dragona Akehi
Retired
terrene said:
It's all about battle mechanics and balance for me. In that, FFT is a terribly broken game and FFTA is just terrible. Not Onimusha Tactics bad *Shudder* but bad enough that I won't torture myself to play the game.
Also: why haven't we gotten goddamn Dragon Quest GBA remakes yet? It's about fucking time already.
(In case you don't know the cycle for DQ titles:
**Original Console release
**Console Remake release
**Portable remake of the Console remake release).
Eh, to each his own. I might be a special case because I hadn't played a tactics game since Vandal Hearts for (the moetherfuckin') PSOne in 2001 or so. I was enthralled and in love and put in over 70 hours into FFTA -- what can I say, man, it did it for me. On the sheer love of FFTA alone I picked up Tactics Ogre, and was so frustrated with watching the enemy turn take 5 minutes each time that I gave up after 12 or so hours. Which is a pretty good run -- but eh. Also, the job system was too crazy. Male/Female, Young/Old, whatever. People don't have those attributes, really, they just have jobs. My ninja is now an old wizard. Whatever. In FFTA there just seemed to be more individuality in the characters you brought up -- maybe because they remembered old skills even after switching jobs, and they all belonged to species.Dragona Akehi said:
Dragona Akehi
Retired
terrene said:
Hey that's fine, I always did consider it rather stupid that I can have my Wizard turn into something else and suddenly he's 50 years younger.
However, the male/female unique class system is a good thing. TO:KOL is definately flawed in that the enemy takes FOREVER to make their turn. Just be glad you don't have TO:LUCT for PSX where to LOAD A BATTLE takes about 4 hours.
Still better than FFT though.
Dragona Akehi
Retired
GaimeGuy said:
That's an entirely different kind of SRPG. We're currently discussing isometric 3D turn based SRPGs as from the mould of Tactics Ogre.
The Ogre Battle series is an entirely different story. Ogre has it's merits but that's not what we're arguing about.
Similar threads
- Poll