Square Enix CEO says 360, PS3 too complex

[The RPG Critic]

An interesting read; below is a direct copy of this article:

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6172359.html

Square Enix dropped the bombshell in December that the latest in its Dragon Quest role-playing game series, Dragon Quest IX: Guard of the Starry Night (working title), would be coming exclusively to the DS. As the last installments of the game--which is very, very big in Japan--were on Sony's PlayStation 2 and original PlayStation, the news was a head-scratcher for many.

Square Enix's president and CEO, Yoichi Wada, has now explained the decision, which he says was made so that the "widest array of people" could play the latest installment in the RPG series, reports the Financial Times. He believes bringing the series to the DS means the game could find fans outside of its current audience.

Wada appears not to be a fan of complex next-gen consoles like the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3, which he calls "over-engineered." He told the newspaper, "There are too many specs--and you also need a high-definition TV, a broadband connection, and a deep knowledge of gaming--these consoles are mismatched to today's environment. In a year or two years, they will fare better."

The Square Enix executive believes that the ground has shifted in the gaming industry. "[Whereas] in the old days,we could just focus on the PlayStation or the Game Boy," he said, "the environment has changed completely." A new breed of gamer has also emerged on the back of the release of Nintendo's marketing push to embrace nontraditional gamers--including women and older people--and this means, Wada says, "we have to make games for all kinds of people."

What say you to that??

[feilong801]

Being at work still, I don't want to go too long into post, but I'll say for now that I largely agree with what he's saying. Seems like a pretty balanced take to me.

-Rob

[Superjay]

Sounds like Square is lazy to me. Most American developers suck it up and try to utilized the hardware to make a good game. I think Square has another real reason they are not talking about.

[JasonhasRSI1]

[QUOTE=Superjay]Sounds like Square is lazy to me. Most American developers suck it up and try to utilized the hardware to make a good game. I think Square has another real reason they are not talking about.
[/QUOTE]

Perhaps, though there is something to be said for ease of programming for a console (see the Sega Dreamcast  as compared to the Sega Saturn).

That said, 360/PS3 fans shouldn't fret. Regardless of SE's take, there are plenty of great third party developers who have made/or are making fantastic games for both systems (editorial: deeper and more rewarding games than will ever come out for the Wii).

[feilong801]

[QUOTE=JasonhasRSI][QUOTE=Superjay]Sounds like Square is lazy to me. Most American developers suck it up and try to utilized the hardware to make a good game. I think Square has another real reason they are not talking about.
[/QUOTE]

Perhaps, though there is something to be said for ease of programming for a console (see the Sega Dreamcast  as compared to the Sega Saturn).

That said, 360/PS3 fans shouldn't fret. Regardless of SE's take, there are plenty of great third party developers who have made/or are making fantastic games for both systems (editorial: deeper and more rewarding games than will ever come out for the Wii).
[/QUOTE]

I disagree with your opinion. You assume that the sort of "deep" and "rewarding" gameplay experience for you is the same for me. I'm not sure why a game has to be an 80 hour long FPS/RPG to be a rich gameplay experience. Yet, using the criteria that I assume you are using, Twilight Princess easily beats the pants off of most of what was released for any system last year (for me, it destroyed everything, but the overall view by everyone else is that it was one of the finest games of 2006).

-Rob

[JasonhasRSI1]

[QUOTE=feilong80]

[QUOTE=JasonhasRSI][QUOTE=Superjay]Sounds like Square is lazy to me. Most American developers suck it up and try to utilized the hardware to make a good game. I think Square has another real reason they are not talking about.
[/QUOTE]

Perhaps, though there is something to be said for ease of programming for a console (see the Sega Dreamcast  as compared to the Sega Saturn).

That said, 360/PS3 fans shouldn't fret. Regardless of SE's take, there are plenty of great third party developers who have made/or are making fantastic games for both systems (editorial: deeper and more rewarding games than will ever come out for the Wii).
[/QUOTE]

I disagree with your opinion. You assume that the sort of "deep" and "rewarding" gameplay experience for you is the same for me. I'm not sure why a game has to be an 80 hour long FPS/RPG to be a rich gameplay experience. Yet, using the criteria that I assume you are using, Twilight Princess easily beats the pants off of most of what was released for any system last year (for me, it destroyed everything, but the overall view by everyone else is that it was one of the finest games of 2006).

-Rob
[/QUOTE]

I'll concede the operational definition of "rewarding"  is  arguable, not so much for "deep" though.

I'm not a big FPS or RPG fan,  though I  find an action game such as Devil  May Cry 3 to be a great example of both a deep (referring to the combat system) and rewarding (referring to the steep challenge) game that doesn't come close to an 80-hour epic (more like 7 or 8) that is greatly enjoyable in long sessions or short bursts. I just don't see those sorts of games coming out in spades for the Wii (TP is an exception, but the only one, as far as I can see.) Again, as you said, this is all subjective. I  appreciate your passion for your console, but understand that other's views carry equal  weight as yours (especially on  an internet forum, of all places).

[Paul Campbell]

[QUOTE=JasonhasRSI][QUOTE=feilong80]

[QUOTE=JasonhasRSI][QUOTE=Superjay]Sounds like Square is lazy to me. Most American developers suck it up and try to utilized the hardware to make a good game. I think Square has another real reason they are not talking about.
[/QUOTE]

Perhaps, though there is something to be said for ease of programming for a console (see the Sega Dreamcast  as compared to the Sega Saturn).

That said, 360/PS3 fans shouldn't fret. Regardless of SE's take, there are plenty of great third party developers who have made/or are making fantastic games for both systems (editorial: deeper and more rewarding games than will ever come out for the Wii).
[/QUOTE]

I disagree with your opinion. You assume that the sort of "deep" and "rewarding" gameplay experience for you is the same for me. I'm not sure why a game has to be an 80 hour long FPS/RPG to be a rich gameplay experience. Yet, using the criteria that I assume you are using, Twilight Princess easily beats the pants off of most of what was released for any system last year (for me, it destroyed everything, but the overall view by everyone else is that it was one of the finest games of 2006).

-Rob
[/QUOTE]

I'll concede the operational definition of "rewarding"  is  arguable, not so much for "deep" though.

I'm not a big FPS or RPG fan,  though I  find an action game such as Devil  May Cry 3 to be a great example of both a deep (referring to the combat system) and rewarding (referring to the steep challenge) game that doesn't come close to an 80-hour epic (more like 7 or 8) that is greatly enjoyable in long sessions or short bursts. I just don't see those sorts of games coming out in spades for the Wii (TP is an exception, but the only one, as far as I can see.) Again, as you said, this is all subjective. I  appreciate your passion for your console, but understand that other's views carry equal  weight as yours (especially on  an internet forum, of all places).
[/QUOTE]

...which is exactly why he expressed his views as an opinion, and carefully and kindly stated that he happened to disagree with your opinion.  I think you are adding your own slant on his post that isn't really there.  If what you said is true for him, you should apply what you just said to yourself for the first post you made, as it defies the views you just expressed the same way his post supposedly did.  Why are some people so offended by a friendly debate?  Do we always have to debate whether or not we should be debating?

[feilong801]

Yes, yes, quite right. I wasn't trying to imply that, all things being equal, my opinion is worth one ounce more than any other persons.

-Rob

[The RPG Critic]

[QUOTE=Paul Campbell]Do we always have to debate whether or not we should be debating?
[/QUOTE]

This reminds me of two things: Monty Python and Hitchhiker's Guide.

Monty Python:

Man: Is this the right room for an argument?
Other Manpause) I've told you once.
Man: No you haven't!
Other Man: Yes I have.
...
O: (breaking into the developing argument) Oh I'm sorry, is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour?
M: Ah! (taking out his wallet and paying) Just the five minutes.
O: Just the five minutes. Thank you. Anyway, I did.

Hitchhiker's:

(V)--And I demand that I am Vroomfondel.
(M)--You don't need to demand that.
(V)--All right. I am Vroomfondel and that is not a demand, that is a solid fact. What we demand is solid facts.
(M)--No, we don't. That is precisely what we don't demand.
(V)--We don't demand solid facts. What we demand is a total absence of solid facts. I demand that I may, or may not, be Vroomfondel.

[JasonhasRSI1]

[QUOTE=The RPG Critic][QUOTE=Paul Campbell]Do we always have to debate whether or not we should be debating?
[/QUOTE]

This reminds me of two things: Monty Python and Hitchhiker's Guide.

Monty Python:

Man: Is this the right room for an argument?
Other Manpause) I've told you once.
Man: No you haven't!
Other Man: Yes I have.
...
O: (breaking into the developing argument) Oh I'm sorry, is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour?
M: Ah! (taking out his wallet and paying) Just the five minutes.
O: Just the five minutes. Thank you. Anyway, I did.

Hitchhiker's:

(V)--And I demand that I am Vroomfondel.
(M)--You don't need to demand that.
(V)--All right. I am Vroomfondel and that is not a demand, that is a solid fact. What we demand is solid facts.
(M)--No, we don't. That is precisely what we don't demand.
(V)--We don't demand solid facts. What we demand is a total absence of solid facts. I demand that I may, or may not, be Vroomfondel.

[/QUOTE]

LOL. How I miss the whimsy of Dougie-A.