It seems the feud between G2A and TinyBuild Games is far from over. A recent press releases from TinyBuild talks about G2A’s ‘aggressive’ press release. The press releases has prompted TinyBuild to issue a 3 day ultimatum.
TNS: Expedition 33 was the wake-up call Square Enix needed, telling it turn-based RPGs are still popular, but that shouldn't have been the case.
True, but if it does get it through their thick skulls, then that works.
Although, the Dragon Quest 1 + 2 HD remakes will be turn-based and (the worst kept secret) Final Fantasy IX remake should be turn-based I would imagine. Let's see if any newer games go turn-based too.
DQIII HD Remake was turned based and very successful. Then there was a really obscure turn based game came Balder's Gate 3. I heard it might have done well.
It won't get through to them though, despite E33's success, they still won't risk going fully turn based for their big budget projects simply because they are still in the mindset that it needs to be action combat to appeal to the mainstream audience. I hope I'm wrong but don't underestimate just how stubborn Japanese execs can be
Ya'll are hyping up Expedition 33 too much. Reminder that FF XVI sold 3 million in a week and it took Expedition 33 approximately a month to get to that (33 days to reach 3.3 million).
While it is true that Sqaure Enix has moved away from turn based games compared to how they were in the past, there is a good reason for it.
Older gamers will know this but during the ps2 era, we were flooded with turned based games from Japanese studios and this created a form of fatigue back then going into the next generation.
When Square released FF13, they received heavy criticism for making the game turned based like every other FF game and not doing enough to innovate. This is why they made FF15, FF7 Remake and FF16 have real time combat. It gave the series a fresh spin and has brought in new fans to the series.
I personally would be happy with either turned based FF or the real-time combat version we see today.
Dang wish I saw your post before I made mine because we definitely feel the same way lol
Yeah hit the nail on the head but its like ww2 games we get hundreds of them then a decade of nothing and people start missing them i think we're going to start seeing them return
Claire, dragon quest even yakuza have seen turn based return
Only need to look at their own game DQ 11 approaching 10 million to show there's a market. And that's not as big of a name as FF
Another article about Expedition 33 and Square Enix and turn-based games? This is starting to sound like propaganda.
The game didn't sell because it's a turn-based game; it sold and is enjoyed because it's a really freaking good game that released completed at a good price without gamer drama attached to it. No Mtx, no wait-until-it's-patched, minimal bloat, a self-contained story, no multiplatform BS. Just a solid original game that absolutely nails what it intended to do.
Maybe try actually listening to the fans who have supported the series for decades. This habit of ignoring your core audience just to chase people who were never interested in Final Fantasy in the first place makes no sense. And when that approach fails, doubling down on it is beyond baffling.
The battle system has never been the main reason non-FF or non-JRPG players stayed away. Gutting the series’ identity to chase a broader market doesn’t attract new players. It just alienates the loyal ones.
Keep going down this road and we’ll end up with Final Fantasy Fortnite abomination or a F2P Battle Royale game.. Oh wait…
Pocket Tactics sits down with Rematch’s creative director, Pierre Tarno, to discuss why Sloclap moved away from Sifu to chase something new.
Mass Damage & Consumer Foundation in the Netherlands has filed a class action against Sony for inflating PlayStation Store prices.
My personal opinion:
Manufacturers and publishers have indeed inflated the industry.
From $700 million development costs for games like Call of Duty, to digital (store) prices for games and DLCs, online multiplayer fees on consoles (why can you play Helldivers 2 online for free on PC but not consoles?) or still preventing sell/lend digitally purchased games.
Sometime in the future, this bubble will collapse.
They should know better, but they just can't help themselves and suck even the last penny out of our wallets.
Because Sony knows people will be forced to pay those prices for single player and multiplayer games, not everyone prefers PC gaming. Sony also has a monopoly on PlayStation digital games. In 2019, they stopped allowing retailers and game key sellers to sell PlayStation digital games, making them available only through the official PlayStation Store
They should be suing the individual publishers increasing the prices to $80 instead of suing the store. There are plenty of publishers still selling game for like $50 with much success (like E33). But this proves that the publishers are the ones setting the prices.... so again nothing changes because they aren't even going after the main offender. How is suing Sony going to make Microsoft not charge $80 for the next COD? Sony being the number one store in the market doesn't mean that publisher have to charge us an arm and a leg. Again the industry is laughing at us because consumers never get real representation. Just these fake platitudes that are meaningless.
"How is suing Sony going to make Microsoft not charge $80 for the next COD"
Because Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly, I can purchase Call of Duty at a huge discount from CDKeys or other gaming retailers. The only way to purchase digital PlayStation games is through the PlayStation Store.
Weird, I swore GoW, Stellar Blade, Horizon Zero Dawn, TLoU, etc. were on the steam store....uh.....
@djI3485
I'm talking about PlayStation games that you can only purchase on PlayStation. I can purchase Steam and Epic games from 3rd party retailers and key stores.
"Sony to stop selling full-game download codes at retailers"
https://www.videogamer.com/...
About time. There is zero fair reason why digitally distributed products that you cannot recoup any value when you want to dispose of them, should be priced higher than that of physical copies that entail all of the costs and the benefits of owning.
I was criticized for supporting G2A and called out by the staff on this site. But I stick by what I said. That TinyBuild wants to double bill.
"2. Set a minimum cut for all 3'rd party sales of said keys."
Basically they want to sell keys then charge people when they resell them. AKA. double bill.
"1. Allow publishers to set a minimum price for the distributed products."
At that point it's not even a free market. Imagine if companies were allowed to tell Amazon anyone who sells a game can't sell it for less than $60. Or any type of product for that matter.
What TinyBuild is proposing is ludicrous.
Now the charge back issue was not fair to TinyBuild that I admit. But instead of going after G2A what they should have done is disabled the keys via Steam services or on their own download services. When people who bought the keys had the games disabled or the keys failed the people selling the keys would have gotten there accounts flagged and been removed from G2A.
Its 1 thing if people are using stolen credit card information to buy keys but if people are buying keys legitimately and selling them below retail price then what is the issue?? Its no different than buying a disc then trading it in or selling it on ebay.
It's the whole selling used games from 3 years ago all over again, somebody's key is their property, no difference here... also, how come they wont go after Ebay who pretty much do the same thing? Am I missing something here?