• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • Furukawa Speaks! We discuss the announcement of the Nintendo Switch Successor and our June Direct Predictions on the new episode of the Famiboards Discussion Club! Check it out here!

Fun Club What happens first? FF1-6 on Switch vs. Sony buys Square Enix

Which happens first?

  • Final Fantasy I - VI release on Switch

    Votes: 137 77.4%

  • Sony buys Square-Enix

    Votes: 40 22.6%
  • Total voters
    177
lmao if Sony bought Square Enix literally any stock transaction between when the rumours started popping up and when the acquisition is announced would be under intense investigation for insider trading

Anyway the FF1-6 Pixel Remasters are absolutely coming to console. They're the perfect Direct shadowdrop tbh. They'll probably sell two $60 carts with half of the games on each too.
 
sir_AnGer said:
I rather think Square Enix never quite understood what to do with Eidos. The Tomb Raider reboot back in 2013 was well-liked and also saw decent sales numbers but was considered a flop to the head honchos at SE. Deus Ex Mankind Divided was allegedly split in twain and then pumped-up with microtransactions, then the sequel appears to have been shelved. And Guardians of the Galaxy last year, while also seemingly enjoyable, didn't do well enough for the company heads.

Now, this is speculation on my part, but Square Enix seems to have bought Eidos as a result of the late 00's Japan-Is-Over panic that has led a lot of Japanese publishers to try and push for appeal towards Western markets without really understanding them. As a result, SE probably expected massive sale numbers but they overestimated the games' sales potential, at least in the short term. They also seem to have a problem with hopping on trends too late.

At some point, I guess probably the time GotG was announced to being a "poor seller", SE realized they had burdened themselves with something they didn't have the interest in to keep maintaining and decided to offload. Getting cash for some hare-brained tech schemes is probably just the cherry on top whoever drafted up the deal served to the out-of-touch old Japanese dudes in the C-suite.
Click to expand...
I agree with basically everything you're saying, even your speculation behind why they did the acquisition in the first place. My push back has always been this narrative that Embracer got CD/E "for a steal". You can only sell something for what someone is willing to pay you. We know that other possible interested parties (like Sony, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Tencent, etc) on paper could have easily outbid $300 million, but they didn't. You either have to jump through a lot of logic hoops to justify why SE would just rush sell on the first offer, or accept the reality this WAS the best offer on the table and the core gaming bubble has a massively inflated opinion on the value of CD/E and their ip was.
 
sir_AnGer said:
I rather think Square Enix never quite understood what to do with Eidos. The Tomb Raider reboot back in 2013 was well-liked and also saw decent sales numbers but was considered a flop to the head honchos at SE. Deus Ex Mankind Divided was allegedly split in twain and then pumped-up with microtransactions, then the sequel appears to have been shelved. And Guardians of the Galaxy last year, while also seemingly enjoyable, didn't do well enough for the company heads.

Now, this is speculation on my part, but Square Enix seems to have bought Eidos as a result of the late 00's Japan-Is-Over panic that has led a lot of Japanese publishers to try and push for appeal towards Western markets without really understanding them. As a result, SE probably expected massive sale numbers but they overestimated the games' sales potential, at least in the short term. They also seem to have a problem with hopping on trends too late.

At some point, I guess probably the time GotG was announced to being a "poor seller", SE realized they had burdened themselves with something they didn't have the interest in to keep maintaining and decided to offload. Getting cash for some hare-brained tech schemes is probably just the cherry on top whoever drafted up the deal served to the out-of-touch old Japanese dudes in the C-suite.
Click to expand...
something that's really weird to think about is how of all the big JP companies, the only one who had a really successful western division is Sega. Capcom's endeavors is very well noted, Bamco never really tried, and SE is very middling
 
ILikeFeet said:
something that's really weird to think about is how of all the big JP companies, the only one who had a really successful western division is Sega. Capcom's endeavors is very well noted, Bamco never really tried, and SE is very middling
Click to expand...
SE's western games were generally critically successful just not always commercially successful. Still a step above Capcom's or Konami's titles which were generally panned critically and commercially.
 
Derachi said:
Anyway the FF1-6 Pixel Remasters are absolutely coming to console. They're the perfect Direct shadowdrop tbh. They'll probably sell two $60 carts with half of the games on each too.
Click to expand...
SE has already announced that more FF projects are going to be released for the 35th anniversary, and a 2022 release for FFXVI is looking less and less likely (though I’m still not ruling it out entirely). I think there’s a very good chance that we’ll see some kind of Pixel Remaster collection.
 
0
BassForever said:
I agree with basically everything you're saying, even your speculation behind why they did the acquisition in the first place. My push back has always been this narrative that Embracer got CD/E "for a steal". You can only sell something for what someone is willing to pay you. We know that other possible interested parties (like Sony, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Tencent, etc) on paper could have easily outbid $300 million, but they didn't. You either have to jump through a lot of logic hoops to justify why SE would just rush sell on the first offer, or accept the reality this WAS the best offer on the table and the core gaming bubble has a massively inflated opinion on the value of CD/E and their ip was.
Click to expand...
Oh, I don't disagree at all. Eidos and its in-home brands aren't worth that much - Tomb Raider is mainly a nostalgia IP, Deus Ex was well-regarded but also feels kinda niche, Legacy of Kain is... both, sorta (?) and same probably also goes for Thief and it's worth keeping in mind that they also just let I.O. Interactive become independent while selling them their Hitman IP - so while the value has actually about doubled compared to what Square Enix bought them for in 2009 ($300 million compared to an initial investment of ~$165 million when accounting for inflation), it's still far below compared to what Sony paid for Bungie ($3.6 billion).

And I think that low value ties into how Square Enix never knew how to handle Eidos in the long run. Bungie was able to get the rights for Destiny 2 from ABK and that's an on-going money-maker for them, but SE never quite got there with Eidos. Yeah, apparently Avengers is "good now", but even that game despite the massive IP was just... fizzled out and is left to linger in the void, compared to SE's core IPs which have regained some traction in the last few years.

ILikeFeet said:
something that's really weird to think about is how of all the big JP companies, the only one who had a really successful western division is Sega. Capcom's endeavors is very well noted, Bamco never really tried, and SE is very middling
Click to expand...
I think what helped Sega is that they had a general hand in Western publishing for years and just let the studios do their thing as opposed to the others who were more about JPN only publishers wetting their pants over the success of GTA and others and as a result tried to rush into capitalizing on Western markets. Like, Capcom is more successful now that they've gone back to doing their thing instead of desperate appeals to non-Japanese sensibilities like RE6, Bionic Commando and DmC.
 
sir_AnGer said:
Oh, I don't disagree at all. Eidos and its in-home brands aren't worth that much - Tomb Raider is mainly a nostalgia IP, Deus Ex was well-regarded but also feels kinda niche, Legacy of Kain is... both, sorta (?) and same probably also goes for Thief and it's worth keeping in mind that they also just let I.O. Interactive become independent while selling them their Hitman IP - so while the value has actually about doubled compared to what Square Enix bought them for in 2009 ($300 million compared to an initial investment of ~$165 million when accounting for inflation), it's still far below compared to what Sony paid for Bungie ($3.6 billion).

And I think that low value ties into how Square Enix never knew how to handle Eidos in the long run. Bungie was able to get the rights for Destiny 2 from ABK and that's an on-going money-maker for them, but SE never quite got there with Eidos. Yeah, apparently Avengers is "good now", but even that game despite the massive IP was just... fizzled out and is left to linger in the void, compared to SE's core IPs which have regained some traction in the last few years.


I think what helped Sega is that they had a general hand in Western publishing for years and just let the studios do their thing as opposed to the others who were more about JPN only publishers wetting their pants over the success of GTA and others and as a result tried to rush into capitalizing on Western markets. Like, Capcom is more successful now that they've gone back to doing their thing instead of desperate appeals to non-Japanese sensibilities like RE6, Bionic Commando and DmC.
Click to expand...
Yeah if Bungie had lost the rights to Destiny 2 and it had stayed with Activision then Bungie doesn't sell for anywhere near as much as it does. Bungie didn't need to get acquiried, they just did so to secure their long term future since having all your eggs in a single GAAS basket is risky if that market dries up for whatever reason.

That is also probably why CD/E sold for less because even if Avengers had found a level of success to continue it's gaas plans for 5+ years, there's no guarantee in this agreement that Avengers can or will follow CD to Embracer, hence the comment about it being 2 years for CD/E to be profitable. Almost all of their revenue streams stayed behind with Square Enix while most of the expenses went to Embracer.
 
0
sir_AnGer said:
I.O. Interactive become independent while selling them their Hitman IP
Click to expand...
SE still owns the Hitman IP, they gave IOI just the exclusive license for console games, SE selling the IP is a common misunderstanding caused by IOI president (iirc) saying SE had gave them the Hitman IP which is true they gave them the exclusivity to make the games and the ownership of the games but not the one from the IP. It hasn't been mentioned anywhere in the Embracer acquisition Hitman so SE almost for sure still owns it.
trademarks.justia.com

HITMAN Trademark of SQUARE ENIX LIMITED - Registration Number 2997558 - Serial Number 78428222 :: Justia Trademarks

computer game software; video game software; computer games and video games [ downloadable from a remote computer location] and recorded on CD-ROMs, compact discs [, and game cartridges; downloadable electronic publications in the nature of newsletters and magazines featuring action and...
trademarks.justia.com trademarks.justia.com
 
0
BassForever said:
SE's western games were generally critically successful just not always commercially successful. Still a step above Capcom's or Konami's titles which were generally panned critically and commercially.
Click to expand...
I mean middling in that they weren't complete busts, but didn't make a lot of money relative to expenses. CD and Eidos Montreal are in the black but just barely. from the way Capcom spoke of their western stuff, that was probably all in the red. and I don't even recall much of Konami's western efforts outside of Silent Hill, which was already on the backfoot because it's silent hill
sir_AnGer said:
I think what helped Sega is that they had a general hand in Western publishing for years and just let the studios do their thing as opposed to the others who were more about JPN only publishers wetting their pants over the success of GTA and others and as a result tried to rush into capitalizing on Western markets. Like, Capcom is more successful now that they've gone back to doing their thing instead of desperate appeals to non-Japanese sensibilities like RE6, Bionic Commando and DmC.
Click to expand...
what's sad is that you could almost say the same for Square Enix. possibly going super high budget is what did them in. of course, if you cut the budget down some, would the games been so affected that the sales wouldn't match?
 
Even in the case of Sony buying S-E, this stuff doesn't happen overnight. So unless they just never ever planned on releasing the Pixel Remasters on Switch, I think it would still happen before anything like a change in direction.
 
0
ILikeFeet said:
what's sad is that you could almost say the same for Square Enix. possibly going super high budget is what did them in. of course, if you cut the budget down some, would the games been so affected that the sales wouldn't match?
Click to expand...
tbh we're talking about a company that has been historically not that great with (game) budgets. Remember The Spirits Within?
 
0
Gay Bowser said:
I think even in the theoretical scenario where Sony buys Square Enix, they'd be most likely to operate them similar to how Microsoft is planning to operate Activision (or how they themselves are planning to operate Bungie), with continued multi-platform support.

You don't drop billions of dollars for Square Enix and then say "You can't put Dragon Quest on Switch"
Click to expand...
I don't think that's the way Sony operates. They would probably market even more as an exclusive.

Scrawnton said:
Assuming Square is selling and Sony is trying to buy. Does Nintendo stand by and silently let it
Click to expand...

Yes, Nintendo doesn't believe in this kind of acquisitions.
 
Scrawnton said:
Assuming Square is selling and Sony is trying to buy. Does Nintendo stand by and silently let it happen?
Click to expand...
This is what I’ve wondered about too. Nintendo doesn’t do acquisitions, but are they really going to just stand aside as the industry gets consolidated under every name but their own?

For my gaming habits, there’s literally no worse acquisition that could happen than Sony buying SE.
 
I think Sony buying SE has a less than 25% chance of happening and at least FF1 is going to come out on Switch this year.
 
0
Oh, and this might also be worth noting:



Yeah I don't think the corporate overlords will sign off on a purchase as massive as Square Enix would be if SIE keeps missing stated sales goals.
 
Gay Bowser said:
That's exactly how they're operating with Bungie.
Click to expand...

Yes, the company that released Destiny on the market. Where it is good to have a lot of players generating buzz and paying mtx.

Now Square? Who develops some of the most famous single-player jrpgs on the market?

Nah, that's not the way Sony operates. They will be important exclusives to Sony and PS brand.
 
Lmao Sony buying Square is pure cope by Sony fan boy console warriors in response to the Bethesda and Activision aquisitions.Neither are particularly likely but realistically I expect FF16 to come to nintendos next machine before Sony ever buys a company like Square.

Sony has been deemphasizing the Japanese market since the late ps3 era which culminated in PlayStation moving its base to California.What little appeal a Square acquisition had to Sony vanished when Square sold off its western ips.
However,even if a Square acquisition was appealing to Sony and Square was willing to sell,Sony doesn't have the kind of money to buy a company as big as Square Enix.
 
karmitt said:
This is what I’ve wondered about too. Nintendo doesn’t do acquisitions, but are they really going to just stand aside as the industry gets consolidated under every name but their own?

For my gaming habits, there’s literally no worse acquisition that could happen than Sony buying SE.
Click to expand...
I doubt Nintendo will sit quietly by if any of the other two attempts to grab a major Japanese third party. Many people love to point out that Nintendo is doing nothing now, but that's mainly because all the acquisitions have been western studios and while I'm sure the higher-ups at Nintendo would love to have CoD and Bethesda on the Switch they are probably not too worried if those studios are bought out because they don't have as big a reputation for those games like their competitors.

It's different with Japanese developers since there is a large fanbase for these games on Nintendo systems, especially JRPGs. If Sony ever tries to purchase SE I have no doubt Nintendo will either counter them or poach the developers who will most likely be tossed aside from such an acquisition (Team Asano, Team SaGa, Team Mana, etc.).
 
Meriadock said:
Yes, the company that released Destiny on the market. Where it is good to have a lot of players generating buzz and paying mtx.

Now Square? Who develops some of the most famous single-player jrpgs on the market?
Click to expand...
It’s a little bit reductionist to describe Square Enix’s games as single-player JRPGs and ignore that their most profitable product by a significant margin is FFXIV, one of the most successful GaaS titles around, where it is also “good to have a lot of players generating buzz and paying”
 
0
12cheeper said:
Lmao Sony buying Square is pure cope by Sony fan boy console warriors in response to the Bethesda and Activision aquisitions.Neither are particularly likely but realistically I expect FF16 to come to nintendos next machine before Sony ever buys a company like Square.

Sony has been deemphasizing the Japanese market since the late ps3 era which culminated in PlayStation moving its base to California.What little appeal a Square acquisition had to Sony vanished when Square sold off its western ips.
However,even if a Square acquisition was appealing to Sony and Square was willing to sell,Sony doesn't have the kind of money to buy a company as big as Square Enix.
Click to expand...
If Square wants to sell and Sony is interested in purchasing they can absolutely acquire Square, they can afford it. I doubt Nintendo would really do all that much about it either, certainly nothing aggressive like outbidding or whatever.

That said this just isn't very likely to happen at all. Sony gains very little from buying Square and the opposite is true too, Square is sitting in a pretty cozy position being buddy buddy with multiple platforms holders and taking bags for console exclusive deals etc. I doubt they're in a hurry to sell or if it's really on their mind at all.

We've been on this wild ride ever since Microsoft bought Bethesda where people can just make any outlandish acquisition prediction because none of them really have 0% chance anymore, the industry is potentially going to end up being much more consolidated but it's not going to be quite as fast as some think and they need to slow down some.
 
0
Japanese publishers would probably be likelier to merge before they would be acquired by any first party.

Square Enix and Sega merge into Squega.
Konami and Capcom merge into Koncom.
Koei Tecmo and Bandai Namco merge into Kondai Tecco.

Déjà-vu, I feel like I made this shitpost already at some point in the past.
 
sir_AnGer said:
Oh, and this might also be worth noting:



Yeah I don't think the corporate overlords will sign off on a purchase as massive as Square Enix would be if SIE keeps missing stated sales goals.
Click to expand...



Context - They revised the target last Q and hit what they wanted. These are short term things with no bearing on Square Acq.
If they want square and square are ready, they will get them.

Does Square deal make sense for PlayStation? Not really, they can invest more and get a better fish if needed.

FF, KH and Nier IP are valuable to PlayStation but most of them they get as exclusive on consoles
 
Deep_rot said:
FF, KH and Nier IP are valuable to PlayStation but most of them they get as exclusive on consoles
Click to expand...
They have outsourced the latest Nier game to Platinum anyway. The dev teams Square houses are not the kinds Sony would want. Aside from Division 1 they don't prioritize graphics and aim for lower budget projects.

Legacy IP also isn't important for a company like Sony, they invest in new IP's more than anyone else in the market. Outside of FF, KH and DQ, Square IP's are pretty niche, like Star Ocean, SaGa or Mana (they own Mario RPG too which would most likely be gone for good in case of an acquisition).

Edit: Sony wouldn't own KH franchise if Square is acquired. It's co-owned by Square and Disney and Disney owns the name and rights to Sora. Games might disappear from digital fronts if Sony doesn't strike a deal with Disney.
 
Last edited:
9-Volt said:
They have outsourced the latest Nier game to Platinum anyway. The dev teams Square houses are not the kinds Sony would want. Aside from Division 1 they don't prioritize graphics and aim for lower budget projects.

Legacy IP also isn't important for a company like Sony, they invest in new IP's more than anyone else in the market. Outside of FF, KH and DQ, Square IP's are pretty niche, like Star Ocean, SaGa or Mana (they own Mario RPG too which would most likely be gone for good in case of an acquisition).
Click to expand...
Your correct.

Capcom are developers PlayStation like. They should buy them.
 
Deep_rot said:
Your correct.

Capcom are developers PlayStation like. They should buy them.
Click to expand...
In any case of Sony acquiring a publisher, they'd be laying off the management/publishing divisions as they don't need them.

They should go after individual studios, like their latest acquisition, Bungie. Bungie is perfect in every way for Sony.
 
0
Deep_rot said:
Your correct.

Capcom are developers PlayStation like. They should buy them.
Click to expand...
Capcom is family owned still in large part, they fought being forced to sell a lot in the early 10s when things weren’t going well for Capcom. They are not going to sell now that thing are going better than ever
 
0
Derachi said:
lmao if Sony bought Square Enix literally any stock transaction between when the rumours started popping up and when the acquisition is announced would be under intense investigation for insider trading

Anyway the FF1-6 Pixel Remasters are absolutely coming to console. They're the perfect Direct shadowdrop tbh. They'll probably sell two $60 carts with half of the games on each too.
Click to expand...
You think they’d shadowdrop those? How would that work out with a physical release?
 
GamedadJP said:
You think they’d shadowdrop those? How would that work out with a physical release?
Click to expand...
Probably like the Collection of Mana which was shadowdropped digitally during a Direct with the retail release following about three months later.
 
I think they’ll eventually hit the Switch, but in the same format as PC and iOS: digital only, can buy individual entries or a bundle for a small amount off. I feel like the price of the Pixel Remasters — over $100 CDN for them all — will prevent a retail release.
 
0
And then there's something like Final Fantasy XII, which came to PS4 after Switch was released in 2017, got a late Steam version in 2018, and finally came to Switch in 2019. Or World of Final Fantasy, which came out for PS4/Vita in 2016, got a late Steam release in late 2017, and finally hit Switch in late 2018. It can be a crapshoot whether anything shows up on a platform at all, but they can be years late--and the FF games are less likely to be left behind than the rest.
 
0
It was revealed today that an Eidos developer heard Sony wanted to buy the Japanese portion of Square Enix, which is why SE most likely dumped their Western studios.

Still curious to see which one happens first.
 
Huh I already voted for FF1-6 on Switch here

Tbh I’ll say neither at this point, when has Square ever ported one of their mobile games to console

They have better chances of appearing on NSO at this point

As for the other option it’s just not happening. Best you can get is Sony moneyhatting a couple of their games like it’s 1997 but nothing more
 
Scrawnton said:
It was revealed today that an Eidos developer heard Sony wanted to buy the Japanese portion of Square Enix, which is why SE most likely dumped their Western studios.

Still curious to see which one happens first.
Click to expand...
the dude left Eidos Montreal in 2013. since SE is a public company, he's not in a position to know about any details of Sony buying SE. sounds like he's just repeating what's going around on the internet
 
ILikeFeet said:
the dude left Eidos Montreal in 2013. since SE is a public company, he's not in a position to know about any details of Sony buying SE. sounds like he's just repeating what's going around on the internet
Click to expand...
Yea, that's pretty clear from the interview that kicked off the new round. Like, yes, Sony would probably be very keen on buying at least the Tokyo office of SE. But so would probably any other large company in the gaming space. I can't imagine that Sony hasn't floated the idea to SE's board at various times similar to how Nintendo's execs have talked about how they're always thinking of M&A options.

We're still very much in echo chamber territory here.

www.gamesindustry.biz

Square Enix's Western studios were a "train wreck in slow motion"

On May 2, 2022, Stephane D'Astous began receiving emails and phone calls from former employees. The shared tone was a r…
www.gamesindustry.biz www.gamesindustry.biz

It's also worth reading because it all but confirms that Eidos was poorly managing things and Embracer was the only buyer who was willing to pick them up for significantly less than their Gearbox acquisition which is a good indication of the rude health the division was in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom