Square Enix Best Video Game Company, FF

[Blood Angel]

I think that Square Enix is the best game company ever they created the best games ever the Final Fantasy's starocean kingdom hearts fullmetal alchemist and the broken angel...they just are the best
what would we do if final fantasy and square enix didnt exist:eek: :(

[Timothy]

I like square enix but i thaink that big blue box is the best B/C they made Fable wich is one of my fav video games. noce sig by the way

[Nineteenth]

Square did not make Star Ocean. Enix did.

Don't combine what each company did BEFORE the merger. The best companies are Namco and Konami, no other companies have been around as long as them and no other can match the games they have made.
I would be happy if Square Enix did'nt exist,only Enix should be around..

A Enix-Atlus merger could have been a better combination, heck.. Capcom-Namco, Capcom-Konami.. Capcom-Square ..

~Fin

[Lord Garma Zabi]

Good point there, let us clarify that Square and Enix are two totally seperate companies that for some crappy reason that I'll never understand, merged. Enix doesn't impress me too much, Square could have done fine on its own. All the FFs had endless popularity, yet they still mergred, for no good reason other than trying to gain more money. I do not think that Enix is the best company, or Square for that matter. I would have to go with either Rock Star or Koei, each revolutionizing things you can do on a game, and the amount of crap you can fit on one.

[SeijouOmni]

Good point there, let us clarify that Square and Enix are two totally seperate companies that for some crappy reason that I'll never understand, merged. Enix doesn't impress me too much, Square could have done fine on its own. All the FFs had endless popularity, yet they still mergred, for no good reason other than trying to gain more money. I do not think that Enix is the best company, or Square for that matter. I would have to go with either Rock Star or Koei, each revolutionizing things you can do on a game, and the amount of crap you can fit on one.
Wow. Just wow.
No matter what we want to think...Square simply bought Enix out. Call it a "Merger," or let them tell you that as much as they want, but Square simple knocked 'em out. Why? Because while Square does have the big-name titles that WAY too many people will buy no matter HOW bad it is(Kinda like how we're all gonna see Star Wars Episode III, even though the last two...HA), they lose a LOT of credibility amongst more...discerning gamers and critics who see that Sqaure's love of actual games is very low, and the they're only looking for the quickect way to make money, as opposed to creating anything good. This is evident when one sees how they let less-profitable but revolutionary and acclaimed titles like Xenogears and Vagrant Story get no more sequels, but Square keeps the rights away from the developers anyway with no real plans to do anything with them.

And to compare Koei and Rockstar with Namco and Konami...hurts my head. Namco publishes both of the top 3-D fighters...Soul Calibur and Tekken, in addition to waaaaaaaay back to the classic Pacman, and Konami puts out top-tier and innovative spectacles like Metal Gear Solid and Ace combat, and going alllllllllllll the way back to those old Ninja Turtles arcade games from Nintendo and Super Nintendo. And those are just 3 from each, there are dozens more titles from each that are ground breaking, award winning titles.

Koei THRIVES on Dynasty Warriors and other games centered around the SAME period in history, and they pipe them out non-stop with barely no changes at all (Anyone else reminded of Mario Party?). Rockstar is full of one-hit wonders (Manhunt, State of Emergency) save for Grand Theft Auto, which yes, continues to be amazing, and Midnight Club, which is an above-average game that succeeds by catering to the rice-burner-crap-car crowd, and the more recent one to the hip-hop "fancy wheels" crowd. Companies like Electonic Arts, Capcom, Konami, Namco, and even Sega and Atari not only have survived for ages, but also constantly make new, inventive, and fun games, despite a few misses. Companies like Koei, Rockstar, From Software, and to a lesser extent Square and even Nintendo, cling to the same stuff, and people still buy a lot of the same crap no matter how stale it becomes.

[Kai86]

yeah square enix is gr8 they make the best games xenogears, parasite eve 1&2, ff games. its a gr8 company:D

[Lord Garma Zabi]

Face it, Konami pretty much strives off of Metal Gear Solid games now, since all the other ones they make pretty much blow. I call it a merger cuz there is really no excuse to cooperate with them, seeing as they were more than able to carry on their own.

Dynasty Warriors changes alot from game to game. Differences from 2 to 3 was more characters, more areas to fight, better moves, better gameplay, and better graphics slightly. From 3 to 4 was character editing, body gaurd editing, new charge moves, more levels, more characters, and not to mention duels and cooler weapons and challenges in battles. Even challenge modes had more things added to it. New weapon system, more items, and cool side quests. I haven't played 5 yet so I can't compare that yet. But if I were I would play the games first before speaking cuz its people like you who always say DW games never change but don't look at Zelda games or even Halo and see that they change A LOT less than DW, yet still get better ratings. Koei is a company that started with games from that age, thats what they know and what they use,so you can't say nothing bad about that if the games are successful, like DW and Kessen. Rockstar had plenty of good games rather than the ones you named, like Red Dead Revolver, Smuggler's run, and they are making "The Warriors" game, which will rock. Again, get the info before speaking, it just saves time and saves me the time of going through this. No one gives a flying frick(trying to keep it clean) about the old Turtle games, which really weren't that good, and neither is Tekken or Soul Caliber. I will say Soul Caliber II was pretty good though. But as far as revolutionizing, you can't just look at Koei's recent titles, look at the old super nintendo classic Lord of Darkness:Nobunaga's Ambition to find out what I'm talking about.

Square sucks now mainly because the man who made all the previous titles until X left and the other schmucks at Square were lost and went one level lower in life and went from cashing in on a title, to cashing in off characters as well. X-2 was dissapointing to say the least, having Charlie's Angels out to save some dude I don't even remember. Square will soon burn if they don't hurry and do something.

[SeijouOmni]

I'll just go point by point...seems easier.

1) Konami has many more higly successful games than Metal Gear...Zone of the Enders changed mech combat, and spawned its own anime. Winning Eleven Soccer is hailed as the best soccer game of all time. Then there's the ENTIRE Castlevania series. Contra...remember that little game? And let's not forget the cerebral Survival horror series...Silent Hill. Oh...and that little RPG series...Suikoden. Oh, and they also publish some little game...not many people play it though, I forget the title...oh yeah...it's DANCE DANCE REVOULTION. Only the most popular arcade game of ALL TIME. I believe Konami also has the video game rights to Yu-Gi-Oh,which I hate, but sells like CRAZY. And they also made Boktai...a game that changes gameplay DRASTICALLY depending on the level of actual sunlight you're playing in. But no, you're right, I have no idea what I'm talking about. Metal Gear Solid is the only thing they have that ever sold. And they never innovated anything in ANY of those titles. Or maybe...you're just flat out WRONG on EVERY conceivable level.

2) Dynasty warriors changes are what I, and ANY review magazines or websites call SURFACE changes. We've seen Dynasty Warriors 2, 3, 3 Xtreme Legends, 4, 4 Xtreme Legends, 4 Empires, 5, Samurai Warriors, and soon to be released Samurai Warriors Extreme Legends. ALL of these games, despite a number of upgrades, still boil down to the same thing on virtually EVERY level...run around, kill all of the officers and gate guards, then kill the main guys...and all with the SAME combos that combine the SAME regular, power, and occasionally musou attacks that BARELY change from game to game. The items and weapons add to replay value, but between ALL of these sequels, the end result is that you can still play the SAME way you did in ANY of them and still beat the game...easily. It's repetative no matter how you wanna slice it, and say what you will, but ANY other person besides a rabid fanboy will say the same thing. And to compare them to Zelda and Halo...the last games of which changed EVERYthing from graphics engine to physics and gameplay DRAMATICALLY...Halo 2 even changed the physics engine AGAIN only about...2 weeks ago. While the game was still out, as a FREE UPGRADE. As where Koei puts out the same crap over and over with minor upgrades, and ask 40-50 bucks for what are, at best, EXPANSION packs. And I CAN say something about them sticking to the same era, even if the games are successful, because the POINT of that argument was that they don't have the creative force to successfully branch out into something new, so they stagnate in the same time period, with the same games built on the same engines wih minor upgrades. And talking about going back to SNES for Nobunaga Ambition? That only furthers my main argument about them...which is that they don't CHANGE enough in their recent games.

3) As for Rockstar...Smugglers Runs is pretty good, yes, but that doesn't change the fact that most of their games don't do well at all, in fact, as of late, the majority of their games have tanked, their only two MAJOR hits in Sales being Midnight Club and Grand Theft Auto. Red Dead Revolver was repetitive and tanked in sales, and you can't say how much a game will rock before it comes out, almost ALL games look good in the preview stage, but most fail to make the cut on their promises when they come out, so why don't YOU look to get info before you speak, and that includes not putting out a rating on a game you've never played...that's called beign a fanboy, and invalidates most of your arguments.

4) YOU may not care about Tekken or Soul Calibur, but I think you've proven enough that your opinions are ill based, and sure, we could even say that mine are too. These games are, CONSISTANTLY, thei highest reviewed and selling 3-D fighters by LARGE margins. Period. There's no argument there. It's just fact. Oh, and Namco...they put out a few OTHER good and creative games as well, maybe You've heard of a few...Tales of Symphonia, Ridge Racer, It doesn't GET more creative than Katamari Damacy, And the first arcade shooter to feature the hide tactic..and still among the most popular and highest grossing...Time Crisis.

So yeah...yell and scream all you want, but both of our personal opinions aside, I can back up everything I've said with either opinions of professionals, or just plain, undeniable numbers in sales and distribution. Hell, you even said yourself that the games I've mentioned get better ratings than just about anythign Koei puts out. And for good reason if you actually READ reviews and play the games yourself with an OBJECTIVE eye, as opposed to that of a blind fan. So yeah, next time...get YOUR facts straight, youngin.' And come with it a little better than with stuff you're just pulling out of your...hn, yeah.

[Lord Garma Zabi]

Wow, Dance, Dance Revolution, thats a fun game.......NOT! Almost all those games you mentioned outside of Castlevania(which I didn't even know they did since they sucked so much) blew a lot of balls and should have never even reached the shelves. They were all so pointless and the gameplay of most weren't that great to play more than 10 minutes before realizing you had wasted all your money. Just because a game breaks barriers does not mean its any good, and I still say those games just paved ways for better games to take its place, it really didn't do much better than that.

All the changes that Dynasty Warrior games made were more than Metal Gear Solid games did, still having the same basic gameplay while not really changing a damn thing. Most games don't. If a game does good, they just don't totally kill the gameplay and risk it. But for the fact, all of the characters had a different charge move from 3 to 4, but half hearted fans like you wouldn't notice it. Doing what they have succeeded in is stupid to just change it because you and a few others don't like it. And there is a 1,000 year difference between Dynasty Warriors and Kessen, so don't talk about same time periods. Again, play the games, then speak.

Rockstar's games were awesome. They did a lot better than what you are saying, as you are saying they didn't sell pretty much a damn thing. The gameplay in those games annhilate EVERY game that Konami has ever made. And that isn't opinion, thats a fact.

I have done my research here, the fact is every game I critisize is for good reason. You can rave about Ridge Racer and your dance games all you want, the point is that the games I have mentioned were a lot more fun to play then the ones you named. Not to insult them, some are decent games. But I choose fun over barrier breaking, which Konami really didn't succeed at, as much as you would like to think it did. And to be honest, I have never even heard of any of those other games you mentioned for Konami, as they probably didn't do too good in sales themselves. So there you have it, as much as Konami did, it did not exceed Rockstar or Koei. Those guys are true barrier breakers and Konami is just a chump compared to them. Again, quit just naming all the games you have heard of and saying they are good, and just stick with the ones that you know are good.

[SeijouOmni]

Okay, once again, I'm putting PERSONAL opinions on what YOU or I like aside here. If you don't like DDR, fine, nor do I. It's still the number 1 arcade game worldwide. And for you to say that all of those games...well...did...something I won't repeat because it's immature and breaks rules, fine. That's your opinion too, don't present it as fact, or research. You saying that you've never heard of most of those game alone says you didn't do research, as well as a long rant in another thread about how much you love Dynasty Warriors and how awesome it is and how you know EVERYthing about it...that only tells me that you have quite a STRONG bias. And to claim Metal Gear Solid didn't change...when the very last one alone was a completely different game..in an outdoor setting, with a stamina meter, eating, hunting, self-surgery and wound repair, and a whole camo dynamic...doesn't even make sense. Each Metal Gear Solid game except for 2 and Twin Snakes COMPLETELY does away with the old gameplay engine in place of a new one. That argument is based on absolutely nothing. And either way, there isn't a new MGS twice a year, they take time and care to craft the games, unlike Koei.

Put your childish fanboyness aside and actually go READ something. Just because YOU didn't like it doesn't change that reviews on Konami games are almost ALWAYS higher than Rockstar or Koei...ESPECIALLY Koei. You don't believe me, go to gamespot.com OR IGN.com and check for reviews. Don't believe me in sales? Go pick up ANY videogame magazine with insider sales from EB/Gamespot. And when I say the same "era" I do mean just that...ERA. A whole segment of time. Regardless of the exact year, the game still plays off the Bows/arrows/sword/pole asian feudal ERA. Same basic setting. And no, Most Rockstar games DON'T sell that well, again, check numbers. Manhunt, State of Emergency, the last Smugglers' Run, and Red Dead Revolver all had mediocre sales and reviews after the first few months, after MOST people realized Rockstar doesn't automatically equal good. And saying that the gameplay in the games is better as a "fact"...that doesn't even make sense. There's no scientific measure for overall gameplay...especially for comparing games across multiple genres. That IS an opinion under ANY circumstance...and that only proves how illogical your overall argument is with a single sentence. Do you even KNOW how many aspects of a game that "Gameplay" encompasses? It includes, but is not limited to, response time, button layout, button customizability, AI, camera angles, collision detection, character balance, and SO much more. Unless you can somehow MEASURE every last ONE of these things, and average them out across ALL Rockstar and Konami games, you MIGHT have an argument.

Because YOU don't enjoy games doesn't make them better, and I'll say it again, put your personal, subjective, obviously biased, fanboy opinions away, and make a VALID argument. Look at the over meta-ratings for the games, then go look up the sales. and tell me what you find, don't just make things up based on the two seconds you claim to have spent with the few games you've even heard of. Don't break rules and use crude language to make a point, it only makes you seem less intelligent than you already prove yourself to be with every sentence. Don't claim to do research after making an entire rant based solely on opinion. Hell, outside of sales, most of my argument is opinion, but it's opinion supported by professional reviewers all around, and I've played essentially ALL of the games I've mentioned, as where you yourself admitted not even hearing about most of them, meaning your opinion is only backed up by minimal experience. State your opinion intelligently and respectfully, not as fact, and not in any crude manner that might get you booted were I to bother being THAT petty and immature.

[red storm]

Wow... and I read every word of it too.

Anyway, Square Enix might be one of the the best game companies out there, but as SeijouOmni said, it's like episode III. Just because it has a label of a good game placed on it, many people will buy it. I too have a copy final fantasy X2, mainly because it said final fantasy. You simply can't know if a game is good or not by standards, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. My sisters both like X2, so if its a bad game, how come they do? I bought games that reviews said were greatly disapointing, yet I still enjoyed them.

Wether a game is good or not is a matter of opinons, wheter a game company is good or not depends on sale charts.

[SeijouOmni]

Wow... and I read every word of it too.

Anyway, Square Enix might be one of the the best game companies out there, but as SeijouOmni said, it's like episode III. Just because it has a label of a good game placed on it, many people will buy it. I too have a copy final fantasy X2, mainly because it said final fantasy. You simply can't know if a game is good or not by standards, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. My sisters both like X2, so if its a bad game, how come they do? I bought games that reviews said were greatly disapointing, yet I still enjoyed them.

Wether a game is good or not is a matter of opinons, wheter a game company is good or not depends on sale charts.

X-2 had a ridiculous story, and tons of perverted fan service that wouldn't allow you to take the game seriously. It seemed designed for J-pop loving fangirls, but then paraded around half-naked girls the entire game...paradoxal. But for all of that crap, there was a pretty interesting game underneath...WAY underneath. The battle system was actually unique, and fun because of it. Maybe if they had made it a true sequel to FFX, and not just a giant fanservice, it would actually get more respect.

[Nineteenth]

Wow... and I read every word of it too.

Anyway, Square Enix might be one of the the best game companies out there, but as SeijouOmni said, it's like episode III. Just because it has a label of a good game placed on it, many people will buy it. I too have a copy final fantasy X2, mainly because it said final fantasy. You simply can't know if a game is good or not by standards, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. My sisters both like X2, so if its a bad game, how come they do? I bought games that reviews said were greatly disapointing, yet I still enjoyed them.

Wether a game is good or not is a matter of opinons, wheter a game company is good or not depends on sale charts.

X2 was'nt bad it was unique, a change from the normal. In some cases it was venture towards something new and dramatic to see what their loyal slaves would do.
Still ,it was a pretty interesting game , personally. It was one of the better FF's.(Being the only one that really decided to close all the gaps and wonders and the only one I have'nt used as some sort of throwing device.)
It was'nt bad, and it was'nt the best. It also was one of the only Final Fantasy games to offer a real reason to play though it again, unlike the older ones. (The other FF game being Tactics Advance.)

Also, you can't live by reviews; From videogame books, online or anywhere.
Most availabe reviews are biased to the extreme, for example. Older issues of Game-MaG* (Named changed to protect the not so innocent.) No other place or source would give the amazingly one sided reviews they gave.
If everyone lived by reviews, there would'nt be a need for thinking.

I might give up, simply because once people are brainwashed into one way of thinking it won't change; Too many people will stand beside something that they assume is right. Sort of like a small country so many years ago.

[Lord Garma Zabi]

All that stuff you mentioned about Metal Gear Solid would be......how did you put it.......surface changes was it? The same game play is still there. You run, you hide, you shoot. All the things I mentioned seemed to fall around the samethings Metal Gear Solid does, for the fact a Stamina meter, hunger, and all the other bs you mentioned still don't change a thing when it comes to gameplay. When I said I did my research, I meant the games I criticized. The games I never heard of I left out, due to not being able to back any of it up. But they couldn't have been all that great if me and almost everyone I showed this thread to said they didn't hear it either. So when taking all that into consideration, it is a very damn strong opinion, as I'll now put it, that those games did very little to the gaming industry. But we are on Square topics, so lets talk about them. They have done some amazing things in the game industry, don't get me wrong. They manage to chance the story and characters in every game, and somehow manage to have it sell, which in most game's cases would never happen. ATB is getting a little boring, and no matter how they change the look of it, its still pretty much ATB. The story lines are dying, and rightfully so since the lead programnmer is now gone. They are in a whole and it will be hard to dig out due to the lack of innovation, creative, and all around knowledge, of the people that are working on the current and future titles for the company. We all have to face it, Square is going down, and going down fast. It will forever be scarred as I see noway it can repair itself.

I didn't want to get into a fight over anything about Konami or that other thing Souji-Omni said. I just feel that the companies that I named were just as important, if not more, than the ones he named and didn't desirve to just be tossed aside as just another company that has done jack for the industry of gaming, which is what it sounded like he was doing. If I misinterpreted I am sorry, for this is not the thread to be discussing this, and I really have nothing personal against the guy to argue with him this badly, outside the fact that he insulted Dynasty Warriors quite a bit, lol. I do think there are more changes in the game that most people do not see, but that will have to be lived with due to the games popularity level right now, which although it got a Greatest Hit, it is not sold everywhere. Again, I am sorry for any confusion, you can continue talking about Square, and I will be happy to put my two cents in about the topic, seeing as I feel very strongly about that as well. Maybe someday I will create a thread titled "Konami vs. Koei", but until then I will stay on topic, I'm not saying you won the argument though, lol.

[red storm]

All that stuff you mentioned about Metal Gear Solid would be......how did you put it.......surface changes was it? The same game play is still there. You run, you hide, you shoot. All the things I mentioned seemed to fall around the samethings Metal Gear Solid does, for the fact a Stamina meter, hunger, and all the other bs you mentioned still don't change a thing when it comes to gameplay.
I cannot help but give a small reaction to this, you say that the 'run, hide, shoot' principle means that gameplay remains the same, right? Well, its a stealth game, and the basics of a stealth game are running, hiding and shooting/stabbing (depending on the setting). You can't change the basics of a genre without pretty much changing the entire genre. For a game to be original in a certain genre, it's the surface changes that do the trick. Basics are basics, trying to re-invent the weel is useless and designing new genres is both tricky and very rare.