The Official SQUARE ENIX Thread

Avatar image for marino
#1 Edited by Marino (7563 posts) -
No Caption Provided

Congrats to @kone for claiming victory here on the Square Enix banner this year.

kone also had second place with "Quiet Jan" and tolecover's Quiet Punching loop came in third.

The Official SQUARE ENIX Thread

How are they gonna top The Quiet Man?
How are they gonna top The Quiet Man?

E3 is the place for announcing never before seen games. It's exciting, fast-paced stuff and we're all enthusiastic to start talking about all the new toys. But, please keep in-depth discussions about specific games in their respective forums. For more information about how to help us keep things organized, go check out the GB vs E3 Official Player's Guide!

In an attempt to keep the E3 shenanigans organized, the mods institute these official discussion threads for each conference so that everybody has a go-to place to discuss them before, during, and after the show.

Despite the insanity of E3, keep in mind that the general site rules still apply. So, don't be a dick. If you need a refresher on to conduct yourself like an upstanding citizen of the Giant Bomb community, check out the FAQ.

Keep Discussions On Topic

This thread is exclusively for the general discussion of the Square Enix press conference. Discussion involving the other company's conferences should be taken to their respective threads (once they're posted).

Specific Announcements

What if they finally show that Avengers game and it's a Luis action adventure? You know, the best possibility.
What if they finally show that Avengers game and it's a Luis action adventure? You know, the best possibility.

To help you get where you need to go to talk about anything announced or shown during this press conference, we have created a list of them right here:

Where Can I Watch?

Monday, June 10 @ 6:00 PM PDT (Your Local Time)

Avatar image for whitegreyblack
#2 Posted by whitegreyblack (1981 posts) -

I was hoping that banner would win. Nice work @kone all your banners were hot fire!

SquareEnix MUST have some surprises this year, surely? I certainly can't name a lot of games I think they'll show...Ah hell, just release Quiet Man 2, you cowards. It'll surely sell the 18 million units the SquareEnix executives expect...

Avatar image for kone
#3 Posted by kone (55 posts) -

Thanks for featuring my banner! Thanks to the moderators who voted for my entries. I'm glad you enjoyed them. See you next year, or whenever another dumb idea of mine pops up.

Avatar image for zombiepie
#4 Posted by ZombiePie (7484 posts) -

I'm not joking, Square-Enix had the best E3 2019 conference. Their conference had something for everyone, and it was perfectly paced right up until its ending. I get people don't like how the Avengers game looks, but everything else was pitch perfect.

Avatar image for brackstone
#5 Edited by Brackstone (958 posts) -

Square's conference was great up until that Avenger's segment that said nothing about the actual game and made it seem like they thought nobody knew what the avengers were, as if they haven't been the biggest thing in pop culture for years. It was just bizarre.

Avatar image for nodima
#6 Posted by Nodima (2654 posts) -

I was into the new FFVII combat in a way I didn't expect to be. If they clean up the dialogue, even in just the minor, common sense ways they could like they seem to have with Tifa's character design, I might be there day one for that. I never finished FFVII due to some poor save management choices, and it took me years to get into it compared to VI, VIII and IX, but once I did I was hooked until I trapped myself in a no-win scenario. Especially after watching Tim Rogers' recent translation series on the game, I can see a more faithful translation and the more active combat really making this whole endeavor worth it.

The rest of the conference was hit or miss for me. I can't name another game that really stuck with me outside of games I know I don't have time for like Dragon Quest Builders 2, the words "Brave Exevius" and some incredible art direction out of the Final Fantasy XIV team. I liked the look of The Avengers, though the cutscenes still had that unpolished sort of look that was charming with a semi-schlocky property like Tomb Raider but would feel a little weird within the cultural gravity of The Avengers. Can't comment on the dialogue - what little we saw seemed boiler plate, and if this game is more Anthem than GTA V I can see that being a real let down considering the vocal talent - other than to say it seemed like they were telling me this was a narrative game and a live service game with free live services...and I have no idea what that means.

I'll admit I didn't realize two Avengers games were in the works, though, so overall I was just pleasantly surprised that some AAA looking thing is coming out of that property and not just the mobile phone looking beat 'em up.

Avatar image for panfoot
#7 Posted by Panfoot (338 posts) -

That was a real slog after the FF7 gameplay demo, it just felt like endless overly long trailers of remasters/re-releases or known quantities(FF14 expansion, which I think they just did a giant info dump about like, a couple weeks ago already?), with the exception being that CG trailer for the new People Can Fly game, which showed...pretty much nothing except a pretty generic art style. What little they showed of Avengers looked like it should have came in the lead up to the original 2012 movie, back when people weren't way into those specific characters yet. The character designs were all pretttty bad too, all looking like bland off brand movie versions, which if you can't get the likeness rights...just make it more comic book-y???

It's amazing that Disney owns two of the biggest entertainment franchises in the world between Marvel and Star Wars and can't for the life of them figure out video games...

Avatar image for radiation2
#8 Edited by Radiation2 (5 posts) -

Square's conference was great up until that Avenger's segment that said nothing about the actual game and made it seem like they thought nobody knew what the avengers were, as if they haven't been the biggest thing in pop culture for years. It was just bizarre.

I agree. The way they presented the Avengers game was odd. For instance, at the end of the voice actor interview, Nolan North turned to the camera and said something like, 'Can't wait for you to play the game, but right now, you don't have to wait for some exclusive content!", and then we cut to... A 20 second cutscene of Tony talking to Bruce...? And I believe we'd previously seen part of that same cutscene just moments ago. And then they end it on a short Hank Pym cameo.

I guess we'll have to wait until footage from the demo booth is made public to see some gameplay. Other than that, it was a solid conference.

Avatar image for barrock
#9 Posted by Barrock (4167 posts) -

So, what was with the thing Jeff said about the lead game designer for Avengers not playing games?

Avatar image for liquiddragon
#10 Edited by liquiddragon (3552 posts) -

It was the best conference. I can forgive Avengers cause it was a reveal. Very little BS besides that. Also, Square fans are decent folk. Bethesda fans were unbearable.

Avatar image for relkin
#11 Posted by Relkin (1222 posts) -

Ending aside, it was pretty firmly the best conference we've seen so far. There were a lot of good surprises, but the thing that shocked me the most was how much more...confident I am in the FF7 Remake. I still have my concerns, sure; an entire game in just Midgar? What is that, even?

But the combat looks good. The attack strings look pretty rad (and hopefully feels similarly rad), and the slow down mechanic seems perfect for sorting through the huge list of spells/summons/items that you eventually get in that game. I'm really looking forward to seeing more about that game.

As an aside, the number of people in chat who were frustrated by Square releasing a bunch of JRPGs was strange.

I's Square.

Avatar image for onemanarmyy
#12 Posted by Onemanarmyy (4580 posts) -

A strong showing of FF7 remake + letting more people play FF8 already makes for a decent presentation. That race game could be neat & deceptively indepth. The RPG's are hard to judge so far. Avengers & Outriders need footage. Not too shabby

Avatar image for nodima
#13 Posted by Nodima (2654 posts) -

@barrock: The guy has a long history of working in traditional TV and film animation before getting into video games, so I'm guessing whoever made that comment assumed he was some outsider here to ruin Avengers for everyone. But even if he doesn't play video games as a hobby (and since nobody on staff or in the chat could prove that, I agree it was weird of Jeff to pull it from chat without attempting any follow up) he was still the creative director and writer on Uncharted: Lost Legacy, so as far as I'm concerned he's more than capable of adapting established IP. He was also a lead animator on The Last of Us and co-directed 50 Cent: Blood in the Sand.

Avatar image for archer88
#14 Posted by archer88 (417 posts) -

I really didn't care for most of what was shown in this presentation, but I don't think that's SE fault really. My JRPG tastes are pretty...selective, and a lot of what was on show here didn't really do much for me. FF7 Remake looks really good with some interesting combat, but I have no nostalgia for the series, so the hype for this seems a little intense to me. To each their own. Once that part of the presentation was over I didn't see much to get excited over, but that's probably because I don't have any experience or reverence for classic SE properties, and they didn't show enough of the other IPs like Outriders or Dying Light 2. As for Avengers, seemed like a bit of a rough announcement but it's probably too early to pass judgement. Also, there have been some "rowdy" audiences before, but this group was fucking annoying.

I'm not trying to flame here, honestly. I don't know what I expected from this presentation, but it highlighted to me that they are well suited to developing/publishing/promoting JRPGs and ill-suited for any other developments. I'm a big Deus Ex fan and it was frustrating to see an otherwise great game (Mankind Divided) mangled by SEs poor management. They never seemed like the right fit for IO interactive, to the point where dumping them was actually a blessing. When it comes to Tomb Raider I get the impression that profits are all that mattered to them and the quality of the games were an afterthought. I know they are a company trying to make money, but there seems to be so much care and passion put towards products like Final Fantasy or Dragon Quest that just isn't there when it comes to games that aren't traditional SE fare. I love video games and want to see every player in this industry thrive, I just get the feeling that some games or studios would be improved if they had no ties to SE.

Avatar image for liquiddragon
#15 Edited by liquiddragon (3552 posts) -

@archer88: That seems like a really one-sided way to look at it. Square poured a ton of money into TR and great games came out of the Eidos acquisition (TR1, DX:HR, Hitman S1.) They gave 3 flagging series the AAA treatment. If anything you should be grateful. Eidos Montreal put out MD and SoTR yet none of the blame goes to them, only Square management?

Avatar image for casepb
#16 Posted by Casepb (775 posts) -

I loved it. Even the Avengers game looks interesting to me. I know a lot of people were unimpressed. I will agree that the characters look off.

Avatar image for deathstriker
#17 Edited by Deathstriker (1177 posts) -

Avengers felt weird... the cinematic graphics and voice talent were good, but if the game is less than a year away and playable at E3 why not show gameplay? Seems like they might be hiding something. Also, the roster seems very small, so small that having Black Widow on the team seems like a mistake. If they felt the need to have at least one woman on the team then Wasp or Captain Marvel would've been better choices, playing as BW or Hawkeye feels like drawing the short stick. I thought the characters looked good, but Cap's costume was lame.

Also, going with the original MCU Avengers and their looks makes the game feel like it's 10 years too late. I know they said they'd add more characters, but I would've had Doctor Strange, Panther, Namor, and others mixed into the main cast so it feels more like its own universe.

Avatar image for archer88
#18 Edited by archer88 (417 posts) -

@liquiddragon: You're right, SE put up the money to make those games and the development studios executed. Amazing, well received games were the result. Lets look at your examples though.

TR1 sold over 3 million copies within weeks of being launched and is the best selling game in the franchise but SE still announced their disappointment with it's sales numbers. This resulted in Crystal Dynamics releasing a statement where they defended their work and the performance of the game.

DX:HR sold over 2 million copies at launch and was well received. SE then green-lit a sequel but in an effort to maximize revenue, made some questionable decisions during it's development. They had the planned game cut down in scope with the intention of it being split into two games, they ran a pre-order campaign that unlocked more bonuses the more total pre-orders they received, the forced micro-transactions into the game late in it's development, and they pulled resources from the main campaign to develop "Breach" which is largely designed to encourage micro-transactions. The game was well reviewed but did not sell as well as it's predecessor. Hard to find good numbers, but somewhere around 1 to 1.5mil it seems. The largest complaints were a campaign that felt short with an incomplete ending and micro-transactions in a single player game. The franchise is now on hold.

Hitman 2016 was well received, but under performed. Hard to get a number for sales because it's episodic but by the end of 2017 it seems they had reached 7 million unique players and 13 million by mid 2018. By the time the final episode was released, but before it was released as a full package on a disc, SE started looking for potential buyers. It really just seems like these two weren't a great match for each other from day one. An unfortunate pairing after the Eidos purchase.

As for Eidos Montreal specifically, I can't personally speak to SotTR because I didn't play it. A quick lookup says it sold over 4 million copies and was generally well received. Some praise for the puzzle design of tombs and some complaints about the writing and it feeling a lot like the previous two games. That...doesn't seem so bad, I guess. I think Mankind Divided is an amazing game that needed more of a conclusion. The main story feels short, but I don't agree that the game was light on content. There are some amazing side-missions in that game that really flesh out the world and shouldn't be missed. It's at least 40 hrs of content. There's also a ton of detail to the world and they really nailed giving players a lot of choice in how the accomplish objectives. I played through the entirety of Breach and it was fun to work through but could be frustrating when progress was restricted in ways that were clearly intended to promote micro-transactions. When I look at what went wrong with MD, like marketing, post-launch revenue streams, and micro-transactions, it all seems like publisher driven issues. As the developer Eidos Montreal could have done something differently to better wrap up the story or to make Breach less of a grind but it's hard to know how much freedom they had to do so. The founder of the studio resigned during development due to issues with SE and the art director left shortly after MDs release. Employee turnover is reportedly high for that studio, which usually points to an issue with some aspect of management, though not necessarily with SE.

You know what I will blame Eidos Montreal for? Thief 4.

Avatar image for liquiddragon
#19 Edited by liquiddragon (3552 posts) -

@archer88: I like how when the games turn out well, it's the studio's execution and when it doesn't, it's cause Square didn't give them enough freedom. Does SE have a say or not? Sounds like you're saying they do so why aren't you giving them credit with all the good they did. You only seem to want to blame them for their mistakes. The fact is, we got a bunch of great games we would've never gotten if it wasn't for SE so why don't you be thankful. I don't understand what you want. SE poured hundreds of millions into developing and marketing these games. They took a huge gamble that didn't pay off for them. What more do you want. It's weird the way you're coming at them and not once do you express gratitude.

Avatar image for archer88
#20 Posted by archer88 (417 posts) -

@liquiddragon: I think you're reading my posts as more hostile than they actually are. I never said across the board that success is due to the developer and failure is due to SE. Re-read what I wrote. The first thing I say is SE funded, the developers executed and the results were great games. That's a joint effort. My point isn't that SE is a shitty company, it's that the seem out of their element when dealing with IPs, and the studios that develop those IPs, that are outside of their normal fare.

- TR1 was successful by any standard; the problem with SE in that case is that their statements after launch expressed disappointment with the game which bothered the developer enough that they felt compelled to publicly defend the quality of they had made. Tomb Raider being a quality product was due to both parties.

- DX:HR was successful and loved by fans an critics. It being a quality product was due to both parties. I didn't get into this above because we weren't really talking about the quality of DX:HR, but if there was anything to criticize it was the boss battles and the push a button ending, which were design decisions and EMs fault.

- Hitman was maybe successful, but just not right away. Hard to tell who pushed for the episodic release but it seems like it was IO driven based upon statements about developing the levels better. It's also hard to tell if it was a good idea. The episodic release kept Giant Bomb coming back to it throughout the year. The same sort of coverage didn't happen with Hitman 2 despite it being a more polished package that was released as a whole. Anyway, I highlighted the timing of SE looking for buyers to illustrate that they probably never really saw how IO fit under the SE umbrella. Even then, I'm not blaming SE, I said they weren't a good pairing. That's on IO as well.

- DX:MD. Ok this one I largely blame SE for, but its hard to argue against it given what the game was criticized for by fans and reviewers. Even then I think I was being fair when I made statements like

"As the developer Eidos Montreal could have done something differently to better wrap up the story or to make Breach less of a grind but it's hard to know how much freedom they had to do so. The founder of the studio resigned during development due to issues with SE and the art director left shortly after MDs release. Employee turnover is reportedly high for that studio, which usually points to an issue with some aspect of management, though not necessarily with SE."

EM could have done better with the restrictions SE placed on them and didn't, that is, if they had that level of control or the time to do so. The high turnover could be due to EM management or it could be due to SE management. Maybe it's neither. Maybe people don't like living in Montreal. Who knows.

- Thief 4. Underwhelming and I think it is entirely EMs fault.

Now, back to my original post and this press conference. Compare how they handled the FF7 Remake and the Avengers reveal. The former is paced well, executed well and showcases why you should be excited about what they are making. The later was muddled, disjointed and underwhelming. Promoting FF7 seems natural, but they seem to stumble while doing the same for Avengers. Just like the seemed to stumble with IO and Hitman or EM and Deus Ex Mankind Divided. Avengers was supposed to close the show for them and THAT was the result.

Maybe I'm wrong. I admitted I don't play a ton of JRPGs so has this happened with some of the JRPGs SE has published and I'm just not aware of it?

Am I thankful for the good games they have produced? Yeah of course. But that's not a reason to just shut up and be grateful when there are valid things to criticize.

Avatar image for liquiddragon
#21 Edited by liquiddragon (3552 posts) -

@archer88: They have an issue with presentation, messaging, delivery, and marketing, particularly with Western games but FFXV was a huge mess too. I think they are trying to figure that out but still have a long way to go. But ppl that fund games have a big say in the creative side of development, not just the business side. Under SE, Edios made TR games ppl actually cared about, revived Deus Ex for a moment, which no one thought possible, and delivered what a lot of ppl think is the best Hitman game ever with Season 1 so they did many things right with those IPs. It's just that these games are huge bets and if they don't hit just right, it's a bust and a massive loss. They know what they're doing to a degree. Just hard to get everything total right. I don't think it's fair to say profit was all that mattered to them. It's unfair, really harsh. They tried and they didn't half ass it. They swung big and missed. They put out quality products, it wasn't just a quick cash grab.

Avatar image for nasher27
#22 Posted by nasher27 (358 posts) -

Going off of GameInformer's write-up and Ben's impressions from Night 1's first segment, I'm a little concerned about that Avengers game. It's been in development for years and still seems this unfinished? Seems to hint at some development hell/reboots taking place, which rarely bodes well.

Not that they can't turn it around into something playable, but they're going up against the likes of Cyberpunk and Watch Dogs Legion next spring, to name a few heavy hitters off the top of my head (and I know there's a lot more).

Avatar image for hippie_genocide
#23 Posted by hippie_genocide (2463 posts) -

I liked everything I saw from FFVII. The only thing that gives me pause is that everything that's been shown is from the first hour of the original game. It makes me question what is actually going to ship with the first installment. What they did show looks amazing though. On the flip side I thought Avengers looked bad. Each character has this randomly generated up-rezzed mobile look to them. I know CD can pump out good looking games as evidenced by the recent Tomb Raider games, so I'm not sure what's going on here. Lastly I was way into the announcer for DQB2. The game looks great too so maybe I'll give it a shot since I missed the first one.

Avatar image for aerithlives
#24 Posted by aerithlives (37 posts) -

Square-Enix won this E3. Final Fantasy VII remake looks amazing, and Secret of Mana 3 remake?! A game nobody would have expected them to do this with? Fantastic stuff.

Avatar image for ieee_gb
#25 Posted by IEEE_GB (41 posts) -

FF VII better come out for PC otherwise not interested.

Avatar image for barrock
#26 Posted by Barrock (4167 posts) -

@nasher27: Feels like a delay might be coming. They can't be happy with the reaction it got.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.