Square-Enix sells all of its Western game studios and their games to Embracer

https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2018/lr24201.htm

https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2021-121

Penny stock frauds like that are more about ripping off retail.

"Netflix of Gaming" title has not aged well from years ago. Today's perception of Netflix is very negative and trend is negative as well. Tbh, negative perception of Netflix did not came from Netflix as tech company. It came from content production side. Game industry is a content heavy business and giving up IP and studios is net perceived loss. Its very strange when real value is replaced with buzzwords.

As engine programmer myself i cant pretend i understand content side of the business well. And as someone who finally cancelled Netflix subscription I am biased ofc.

FWIW I agree with the assessment, the terms are broad, generic and have no specific connotation for gamedev. It's not oriented at anyone in industry since you'd talk about specifics and not the "cloud", "ai", or "blockchain".

I did not find Nier Gestalt to be worse than any other JRPGs of its era in terms of gameplay, and it had some clever bits like switching between 2D and 3D perspectives as well as game styles. My main complaints were the tedious fetch quests (I completed about half of them before deciding it wasn't worth finishing them all), the fact that the fishing minigame was explained incorrectly, and (slight spoiler) a story that I found to be sad and depressing. Completing multiple endings can be somewhat tedious as well. But the creativity, the atmospheric graphics, and the soundtrack were exceptional.

I think Nier Gestalt and Replicant on the PS3 were underrated (if flawed) gems.

Plus the story of the original game took a looooooong time to get going combined with the ability to lock yourself out of the true ending without knowing or discovering it for like 75% of the game is definitely going to limit the audience.

Feels like the queen bitch valkyrie was the only encounter where they actually decided to push the combat. Imagine if Sekiro or Souls games only had a couple of bosses that felt like real bosses.

Overall a phenomenal game, though.

I think I quit right after the game had me murder a couple soldiers for bad reasons. I already have several GTA games I can play, which, thanks to tone and expectations, aren't frustrating when they ask me to do that kind of thing. My head-canon is that the soldiers instead shot everyone there and that was the good ending for the story.

When games don't have a penalty for dying, players will sometimes fall back on a trial-and-error approach, where each individual attempt stops being meaningful. Some experiences, like Celeste, are designed around this type of gameplay loop, but it usually doesn't work well in a cinematic experience.

The most common penalty for dying is lost progress, but this also doesn't work well for cinematic games, because the experience looses its magic once you know what is going to happen.

So Tomb Raider takes a different approach. Checkpoints are frequent, but the death animations make you really, really not want to die!

I'm very squeamish, so I always had to close my eyes when I died. But even the chance that I might see something was a good incentive!

I started the game, went to margit, found him too difficult, and then, with no particular alternatives, pretty much explored the entire map aimlessly, wishing for a clear direction on level appropriate content. It was hard to find the next thing to do. I didn’t want to skip through things with ashes or multiplayer. I didn’t want to farm.

By the time I actually found this content there was nothing left to do besides warp to bosses and murder them, or look up the obtuse quest lines and warp around to complete those. A huge floor on character progression is finding the flask upgrades. But since they’re just lying around you just go from having none of them to quickly finding more than you need for 80% of the game.

Like… dark souls would just be a worse game if every door and elevator was open from the beginning. It would just be confusing and frustrating if you started making “wrong” explorations.

I would greatly have preferred elden ring with pretty much the entire open world cut and instead just a tour of the legacy dungeons. The open world just compounded on some of dark soul’s weaknesses. Like finding even more cool weapons that you can’t practically try without farming a ton of upgrades and changing your build.

On the other hand discs allowed much larger games. There was a crazy amount of variety on the PS1, though as a result also a lot of crap to sort through. I was a Nintendo-first fanboy at the time, but when the PS1 dropped in price to about $100 I picked one up, trading in N64 games I no longer played to help fund the purchase. I think it was around the time FFVII came out because I remember reserving it for day-1 release.

Ahh simpler times, working manual labor while in school. Sometimes I'm nostalgic for those days of unskilled (relatively) non knowledge-based work. It was much less stressful, even if the pay was crap.

1. This was the first console controller with any analog stick at all.

2. Goldeneye, though it controls differently to modern shooters, was an excellent use of the single stick at the time. You could also use dual sticks by using two controllers at once - groundbreaking!

3. The Z-button was the first trigger-style button on console controllers.

4. The rumble pack was one of (if not) the first force feedback options for console controllers.

So obviously very many of the concepts in the N64 controller laid the groundwork for what became the standard controller design later, with dual triggers, dual sticks, and built-in force feedback.

Personally I think the N64 controller was less weird than:

1. Gamecube controller

2. Wiimote

3. Dual Screen handheld with touchscreen and stylus

4. Probably whatever the Wii-U had.

Here's an example of what it's like: https://youtu.be/AhXoYgB7rPU?t=2853

The sensory assault that is the audiovisual aesthetics are very intentionally crafted and fits with the world and the message.

I think they've recovered from that for at least 6 years now, minimum

>I have no idea how it's relevant that he was the monster designer on FF5 to what he's done to the company in a leadership role in the past 20 years.

well first of all, we're talking about Japan. Seniority trumps a lot of things over there, and Nomura being around for longer than 99% of the company would give him a lot of sway regardless of his named role.

But even leaving that aside, being the creative force behind a major franchise that bolstered the relationship with one of the most powerful companies on earth would get you some sway in any company. Even so, he's not necessarily the end all be all behind any grievances you may have with Square Enix. He's ultiamtely a director first and businessman 10th.