Home Artists Posts Import Register

Content

Two years ago, The Jimquisition said Square Enix was planning to break its games into pieces. Here we are with a carved-up Final Fantasy VII remake and Hitman.

So today, I go back to my sources and find out even more. Why is Square Enix doing this? What was the great panic at the end of the last generation that led to more episodic content? And why are there so many remastered rereleases?


The Jimquisition has the answer.

Files

Why Square Enix Is Carving Its Games To Bits (The Jimquisition)

http://www.patreon.com/jimquisition http://www.thejimquisition.com http://sharkrobot.com/collections/jimquisition-merch Two years ago, The Jimquisition said Square Enix was planning to break its games into pieces. Here we are with a carved-up Final Fantasy VII remake and Hitman. So today, I go back to my sources and find out even more. Why is Square Enix doing this?

Comments

Anonymous

Fuck Square Enix?

Anonymous

I would love for you to go a bit deeper on the nature of episodic gaming, since I can certainly see some upsides to it. I have read several times that statistically, most gamers don't finish their games. I guess you can look at achievement percentages on PSN or Steam to prove that point. I think that most developers releasing full AAA games de-prioritize the ending in favor of a strong beginning. David Jaffe even admitted that the God of War intros were always saved for last by the development teams to take advantage of their comfort and experience with their game to make their epic early hooks. I can think of countless games where the end third just doesn't hold up as well, and I can't help but feel that episodic releases might help curb the issue of diminishing quality throughout a campaign. Had Konami released MGS V episodically, early support of the game could have helped the publisher balance its budget throughout development and perhaps given Kojima more time and flexibility to polish and finish each section of the game, rather than do it all at once and release it unfinished under the combined pressures of a faithless publisher and both a time and money crunch. I know that paying for unfinished content is a slippery slope, especially with the idea of purchasing a "season pass" ahead of time for all of the unreleased content at once, but it could also hold the publisher accountable for the promised amount of content as well! If Telltale ever planned 5 episodes and only delivered 4, I suspect they would legally and socially suffer for it. Developers can cut content and reduce the quality and length of a game so much more easily when nobody knows how meaty it's supposed to be. But attach an individual price tag on just a piece of content? You have to make sure that the price is justified by that piece alone. And of course, publishers would see more early adopters of a product when there's a lower price of entry. As it currently stands, most people unsure of a game will either rent or wait for a price drop. A cheap first episode solves those problems without any harm to the consumer, while avoiding the awfulness of the fee-to-play model. I'm just playing devil's advocate as food for thought. Thanks for the video Jim!

Anonymous

I don't hate the idea of episodic games in the abstract. It seems less offensive than free-to-play + microtransactions or a barebones base game + hordes of DLC. Plus, the developer has to make a decent product in order to get people buying the next episode. Better to get ripped off for $15 than for $60.

Anonymous

That is an interesting point you made about developing strong endings first.

Scott Miller

As a busy adult with a job and and all that, I find games are getting too lengthy. I stayed away from Alien Isolation, The Witcher 3, and The Talos Principle all because they were too long. Perhaps episodic games could be a solution to that.