270°

Square Enix doesn't mind killing kids

I was able to see a lot of features during my demo with Shadow of the Tomb Raider. I was able to see some of the gunplay, stealth combat, and Mexican culture within the game. And, I watched a kid die.

Read Full Story >>
gamingenthusiast.net
Gaming_1st2570d ago

It's obvious Square is considered left that's for sure....lol

FPS_D3TH2570d ago

Lmfao it’s obvious you’re a conservative religious nut then too. For someone so upset about “agendas” you sure have your own with these comments on every article I’ve opened today.

-Foxtrot2570d ago

This is a tough topic to put forward correctly without sounding like a sick psycho but I'm glad they had the balls to do that, it's a video game, if you can get away killing many adult characters then I don't understand why kids are off limits. It would add a lot more shocking, emotional moments within a story or dive deep into some hard morale choices in RPG games. For example if you accidentally killed a child in Elder Scrolls VI during a brawl with the city guards only to have the child's parents hunt for you in a random encounter or lure you to a location, trapping you in some twisted puzzle death maze.

I remember playing Fallout 3 and entering Little Lamplight with the Mayor McCreedy telling me he was going to "blow my f***** head off" and I needed to find a way in, I was going to just blow the kids head off during my evil run but realised the kids were off limits. My mind was boggled, you see peoples torsos strung up, arms dismembered and heads during VATS blow up but because someone was a few years younger character made up of the same polygons was a big no no. It's even the same when driving around Grand Theft Auto, Watch Dogs, Red Dead Redemption etc and not seeing a single child in site, it just seems odd. Just takes out the immersion aspect of the game sometimes.

mrshweenz2570d ago (Edited 2570d ago )

Square Enix: killing kids and E3 hype at the same time.

Pancit_Canton2570d ago (Edited 2570d ago )

The Last of Us did it

Spoilers

Sarah and Sam

Sciurus_vulgaris2570d ago

When playing The Last of Us you (the player) don’t kill either Sarah or Sam. Besides Sam, Sarah and Ellie,I don’t recall any other children being in the game.

MrSwankSinatra2570d ago

So? in this you don't kill a kid either he falls to his death hanging from a ledge.

2pacalypsenow2570d ago (Edited 2570d ago )

Not every culture treats kids like westerners do.

"Teenagers" only exist in the west.

Show all comments (24)
170°

It Shouldn't Take Expedition 33's Success to Remind Square Enix That Turn-Based Still Sells

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.

Read Full Story >>
thenerdstash.com
Relientk7723h ago

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.

thorstein19h ago(Edited 19h ago)

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.

Profchaos16h ago

I wouldn't be shocked if they switched ff to the vii remake combat system

PapaBop12h ago

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

barom4h ago

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).

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1h ago
DivineHand12522h ago

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.

Shane Kim21h ago

Remake and Rebirth have "turn based" if you set it in the settings.

Lexreborn219h ago

Dang wish I saw your post before I made mine because we definitely feel the same way lol

Profchaos16h ago(Edited 16h ago)

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

andy8522h ago

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

Tacoboto21h ago

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.

Redemption-6421h ago

I was just about to say the same thing.

anast20h ago

This comment should have a 100 upvotes, at least.

CrimsonWing6921h ago

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…

Show all comments (23)
50°

Rematch is "chasing credibility" but not realism like rival EA FC

Pocket Tactics sits down with Rematch’s creative director, Pierre Tarno, to discuss why Sloclap moved away from Sifu to chase something new.

Read Full Story >>
pockettactics.com
badboyz091d 16h ago

This where FIFA 2K comes in.

140°

Sony Faces Class Action in the Netherlands Over Allegedly Inflated PlayStation Store Prices

Mass Damage & Consumer Foundation in the Netherlands has filed a class action against Sony for inflating PlayStation Store prices.

dveio2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

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.

BeHunted2d ago

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

anast2d ago

The Dutch gov. wants a piece of the pie.

Eonjay2d ago

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.

BeHunted2d ago

"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.

djl34852d ago

Weird, I swore GoW, Stellar Blade, Horizon Zero Dawn, TLoU, etc. were on the steam store....uh.....

BeHunted2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

@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/...

Killer2020UK2d ago

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.

Show all comments (12)