[encephalon]

The thing about the renaming about Agito was, despite losing the XIII, the story is clearly designed to be fundamentally the same as XIII, even beyond sharing the mythology. The way the story unfolded in a certain part of the game as well. The ending is very similar and Rem and Machina take a similar role to Fang and Vanille at the end of the game.

It's likely that Versus XIII will be a lot like XIII in terms of storyline to the point where calling it Versus XIII will make a lot of sense. The only reason we'll see Square rename Versus is if Square wants to start another Final Fantasy series to run alongside the main titles. The reason for the "Type" series is to put a consistent series on handhelds, which now overshadow consoles in Japan. On the other hand, having dual console games has proven to be a trial for Square.

[ZombiePlatypus]

The thing about the renaming about Agito was, despite losing the XIII, the story is clearly designed to be fundamentally the same as XIII, even beyond sharing the mythology. The way the story unfolded in a certain part of the game as well. The ending is very similar and Rem and Machina take a similar role to Fang and Vanille at the end of the game. It's likely that Versus XIII will be a lot like XIII in terms of storyline to the point where calling it Versus XIII will make a lot of sense. The only reason we'll see Square rename Versus is if Square wants to start another Final Fantasy series to run alongside the main titles. The reason for the "Type" series is to put a consistent series on handhelds, which now overshadow consoles in Japan. On the other hand, having dual console games has proven to be a trial for Square.

Well with the way things have panned out, maybe they should just stick with the Versus and Type games and forget about the "vanilla" (if such a thing still exists) Final Fantasies all together. SE has shown no restraint in terms of experimenting with the mainline entries, and they've been pretty loose with what is and isn't OK to have and do in a mainline, regular FF game. On top of it all, the recent-ish entries have been less than stellar to say the least, so why even bother?

Versus is stupid they should get rid of that name and 13. But DON'T replace it with something completely unintelligible and ridiculous. Final Fantasy Star Galolum Dissidissidentazer Miracle Master Chronicles of Norom Euroba. Don't.

That actually sounds kind of amazing. Toss in a fraction or a...square-root of something while you're at it and I'm game. Am I the only one that enjoys the batshit-stupid, overly-pretentious SE titles?

Also, regarding the Versus-renamed-to-FFXV talk, I think it's a really crappy move. As a fan, I'd for one feel kinda shafted. FFXV is suppose to be an entirely new, separate vision, concept and game. Billing an already older, existing project as a "brand new, previously un-revealed" game comes across like a seriously phoned-in move. I don't want SE to make a peep about FFXV or any other currently un-revealed game for that matter until Versus is out the door! (Excluding KHIII & FFVIIremake.)

[Grivenger]

These comments are why I strongly believe Versus will be renamed to XV

It's just Kitase who has been wanting to make an action FF game for some time, and he'll probably get that opportunity with his next FF title. That, or if FFXV's director happens to be Itou, he too has been moving into that direction (FFXII, even though it was not truly an action rpg game), so who knows if he won't go any further in the future.

We'll probably get something like:
FF15: Designed by Itou, evolution of FFXII's seamless, customisable AI-driven system (fixing its issues and making it current-gen worthy).
FF16: Designed by Kitase's team, evolution of FFXIII's/ FFXIII-2's "cinematic", fast-paced combat system, but with less menus and more button presses.

[Kagari]

These comments are why I strongly believe Versus will be renamed to XV

Don't believe Kitase's lies.

[ZombiePlatypus]

Whatever Kitase said there, comes across to me as "We wanna make FFXV like Zelda" (probably partly in an effort to avoid massive, sprawling HD towns & meatier story), as opposed "We are gonna rename Versus as FFXV."

[Meccanical]

Don't believe Kitase's lies.

I'M CAPTAIN BASCH

[charlequin]

That's the only criticism you listed that I find reasonable

The effect of the spinoffs is very well-documented, with a significant decline across the board for all FF-related "side" products (everything from the Z-list mobile spinoffs up to the "big" releases like main-series remakes) that kicked in several years ago and killed off quite a few previously successful spinoff brands (and from which SE has yet to demonstrably recover.) Similarly, the poor reception of XIII and XIII-2 by critics (and the significantly poorer reception of both by fans, reflected in responses to XIII and in both responses and sales for XIII-2) is a matter of record. It's technically possible that Versus will return the series to critical acclaim, but it is certainly not plausible.

Final Fantasy is not a mainstream brand.

That is precisely the problem. We're looking at a series that was considered possibly the second-most relevant platform exclusive at the start of this generation, that as of 2006 was still a consistent and unchallenged 5+ million worldwide seller with every major entry, and we're looking at a situation where future games might bomb completely in the US and struggle to get over 2m worldwide. That is absolutely a collapse by any reasonable standard.

I don't know what "bad brand management" even means

Frankly, that suggests to me that you don't really know enough about the topic to discuss it with much authority.

I honestly dont see general audiences reacting that way. You make them seem very fickle about something as minor as a name change.

For a successful series, this sort of thing matters very little. The problem is that SE doesn't have a successful series; they have one that a majority of their worldwide base has grown extremely negative towards, with one of the foremost ideas people now have about the series being that SE are too incompetent to make it (see: any reference to "HD towns.") Setting up Versus as "XV" probably won't noticeably lower sales of that specific game much, but it won't sell extra copies either and it will set them up to make their current PR problems way, way worse when the game underachieves. That's a problem SE can't afford to be risking right now when the "Final Fantasy XV" branding potentially has so much value for them to start over fresh with next generation.

I think they might drop the XIII from the title, but no way they're going to rebrand an announced spinoff game to a mainline title.

Right. They could (probably will) keep "Versus XIII", they could go to just "Versus," they could come up with something totally new like they did with Type-0; they won't call it XV.

FF15: Designed by Itou, evolution of FFXII's seamless, customisable AI-driven system (fixing its issues and making it current-gen worthy).

Don't say things like that when they're not true. :(

[AuthenticM]

Square would benefit from firing Kitase. So would everyone.

[encephalon]

Well with the way things have panned out, maybe they should just stick with the Versus and Type games and forget about the "vanilla" (if such a thing still exists) Final Fantasies all together. SE has shown no restraint in terms of experimenting with the mainline entries, and they've been pretty loose with what is and isn't OK to have and do in a mainline, regular FF game. On top of it all, the recent-ish entries have been less than stellar to say the least, so why even bother? That actually sounds kind of amazing. Toss in a fraction or a...square-root of something while you're at it and I'm game. Am I the only one that enjoys the batshit-stupid, overly-pretentious SE titles? Also, regarding the Versus-renamed-to-FFXV talk, I think it's a really crappy move. As a fan, I'd for one feel kinda shafted. FFXV is suppose to be an entirely new, separate vision, concept and game. Billing an already older, existing project as a "brand new, previously un-revealed" game comes across like a seriously phoned-in move. I don't want SE to make a peep about FFXV or any other currently un-revealed game for that matter until Versus is out the door! (Excluding KHIII & FFVIIremake.)

The reason Versus exists is because Nomura wanted to do FFXIII differently, supposedly. If there's no "vanilla" FF, then what's the use for a Versus title? I don't want FF to completely lose command battles anyways.

[laika09]

Frankly, that suggests to me that you don't really know enough about the topic to discuss it with much authority.

I know what actual "brand management" is: the strategy a company uses to market its products, hopefully in a cohesive way that resonates with consumers and gives them buying cues and quality indicators. "Bad brand management" would be doing that poorly. Anyone who knows what "brand" and "management" are could figure that out.

What I didn't understand was the term as you used it, because you unceremoniously tossed it in the middle of your post, maybe to make a point, maybe to sound knowledgeable. I don't know. What you didn't do was suggest any rationalization for it, making it effectively meaningless. S-E is clearly making games that most people don't like. That much is obvious. But that has absolutely nothing to do with "brand management." Brand management is marketing.

So to recap, what you've done is make some accusations along the lines of "gosh, Final Fantasy('s sales) suck and Square Enix is bad bizness," misapplied an intimidating label to it, selectively quoted my post to hide the fact that you haven't provided a reasonable justification for it, and attempted to suppress a discussion by slyly asserting authority in a subject that you hadn't even broached.

The effect of the spinoffs is very well-documented, with a significant decline across the board for all FF-related "side" products (everything from the Z-list mobile spinoffs up to the "big" releases like main-series remakes) that kicked in several years ago and killed off quite a few previously successful spinoff brands (and from which SE has yet to demonstrably recover.) Similarly, the poor reception of XIII and XIII-2 by critics (and the significantly poorer reception of both by fans, reflected in responses to XIII and in both responses and sales for XIII-2) is a matter of record. It's technically possible that Versus will return the series to critical acclaim, but it is certainly not plausible.

I'm willing to believe that handheld spin-off sales aren't what they once were, but I don't know that it's at all meaningful in the discussion of the main series. The fact that they can still re-package and ship Final Fantasy IV for the 5th or 6th time and still manage to push like 300-400k copies doesn't immediately tell me anything about the strength of the brand. How many copies did Modern Warfare 3: Defiance sell? How many did Modern Warfare Mobilized sell? Do these numbers in any way reflect the trajectory of the series' popularity?

With respect to reception, I think we're reaching a point where consumers who still buy Final Fantasy games are insulated from the reviews they might read about them. Their tastes are completely disparate in this regard, and more in line with SE's target audience (Japanese 12-24 year olds). This isn't a license for them to release shitty games, but it is a license for them not to cater to 30 year old magazine writers who loved Final Fantasy VII because they didn't have to hear the cheesiness through voice acting and could just ignore the cutscene dialogue.

That is precisely the problem. We're looking at a series that was considered possibly the second-most relevant platform exclusive at the start of this generation, that as of 2006 was still a consistent and unchallenged 5+ million worldwide seller with every major entry, and we're looking at a situation where future games might bomb completely in the US and struggle to get over 2m worldwide. That is absolutely a collapse by any reasonable standard.

"Collapse" is Guitar Hero. This is not to say that these sales aren't a problem. But 1994-2001 was Square being in the right place at the right time, and Final Fantasy doesn't have to be that to be successful and make them lots of money, just like Sanrio doesn't need 50-year-old men buying Hello Kitty backpacks to make them lots of money.

Square would benefit from firing Kitase. So would everyone.

What did Kitase do? Have his name in the credits of some games you didn't like? Like being the director of Final Fantasy VI, VII and VIII?

[Skilletor]

The reason Versus exists is because Nomura wanted to do FFXIII differently, supposedly. If there's no "vanilla" FF, then what's the use for a Versus title? I don't want FF to completely lose command battles anyways.

It doesn't have to be FF13 differently. It's just FF differently. It would be quite easy not to make this a 13 title, just as it was easy to take the 13 away from Type-0.

[truly101]

Its still crazy to think that S-E's current strength is with the old Eidos brands, at least for consoles anyway. They could show off a new Thief or LOK game at E3 and a lot of people wouldn't even give a shit about Versus or FF in general, except for the PS2 games they're HD re-issuing.

[Kagari]

Its still crazy to think that S-E's current strength is with the old Eidos brands, at least for consoles anyway. They could show off a new Thief or LOK game at E3 and a lot of people wouldn't even give a shit about Versus or FF in general, except for the PS2 games they're HD re-issuing.

Eh... debatable. I don't think they're big enough to overshadow FF as of right now.

[DJIzana]

Eh... debatable. I don't think they're big enough to overshadow FF as of right now.

You sure on that?

Human Revolution sold like 2.18 million... last I heard of FFXIII sales figures, they only sold just over 1 million at the time.

[Kagari]

You sure on that? Human Revolution sold like 2.18 million... last I heard of FFXIII sales figures, they only sold just over 1 million at the time.

Thief and LOK is what I was referring to. FFXIII-2 was doomed from the start.

[DJIzana]

Thief and LOK is what I was referring to. FFXIII-2 was doomed from the start.

Ah, ok... yeah in that case I agree. I just meant the original XIII in my post too. Think we all knew XIII-2 was doomed from the start hahaha. ;)

[Mxrz]

FF15: Designed by Itou, evolution of FFXII's seamless, customisable AI-driven system (fixing its issues and making it current-gen worthy).

I'm keeping the faith that FF15 will be both awesome and released at some point in the foreseeable future. Having to ignore more and more things to keep that faith, but nevertheless.

[charlequin]

I know what actual "brand management" is: the strategy a company uses to market its products, hopefully in a cohesive way that resonates with consumers and gives them buying cues and quality indicators. "Bad brand management" would be doing that poorly.

And... that's exactly what I meant. Square-Enix has adopted increasingly baroque naming systems for its games, put out an increasing number of spinoffs whose quality and content is obscure to the audience until after their release, built up sub-brands (Crystal Chronicles, 4WoL, etc.) only to drop them or repurpose them to new and less desirable purposes, and otherwise created confusion and dissatisfaction around a label ("Final Fantasy") that at one time stood for quality and desirability. They have a brand; they used it suboptimally, in a way that ablated its utility in the process of achieving fairly meager gains; that brand is now tarnished. Bad brand management.

Again, I really don't think any my original assertions here should be controversial. The interwoven problems of poor marketing presentation, excessive spinoff quantity, and sliding product quality across the board have been discussed at length here on GAF for years; we were talking about this stuff back in 2007, when FFIV DS wildly underperformed its predecessor, and Sales-Age has watched as the effect has grown stronger and stronger, with a series of notable underperforming titles and finally XIII-2's unprecedented collapse. This stuff also all got hashed out in the last ten or so "why is FF such a disaster? can SE save it?" threads we had. The decline of the brand has been documented pretty extensively, such that the state it's in today can't really be a surprise to anyone who's been following it closely.

I'm willing to believe that handheld spin-off sales aren't what they once were, but I don't know that it's at all meaningful in the discussion of the main series.

It isn't necessarily, but it's a leading indicator. There was a time when the brand name "Final Fantasy" was so strong in all three territories that puting it on any game guaranteed immense sales, and even what in retrospect were rather trifling titles (Final Fantasy Tactics Advance, anyone?) drew fairly extensive buzz and reasonably impressive sales. When FF spinoffs became more plentiful, with more poor entries and misleadingly presented or poorly-thought-out titles, the sales on these spinoffs trended downward pretty significantly, to the point where FF-themed titles started actively underperforming expectations and sometimes outright bombing.

When this trend really kicked in (it was definitely happening in 2007, and got worse from there) there was quite a bit of speculation about how this sort of brand decline would affect the main series. My position at the time was a pretty strongly felt belief that as long as the quality of mainline entries remained high, it probably wouldn't.... but, well.

With respect to reception, I think we're reaching a point where consumers who still buy Final Fantasy games are insulated from the reviews they might read about them.

I think that's possible, but XIII-2's reception suggests that that audience is something like 300k people in the US these days -- a far cry from when X-2 did 1.5m in each territory.

Like, if FF has really shrank its US audience to the point where it's selling only to the niche of "JRPG fans" (rather than the semi-mainstream audience that previously buoyed these titles) that's an immense and probably unrecoverable loss.

"Collapse" is Guitar Hero.

If we assume XIII-2 has something to say about the overall brand strength (and given the way that X-2 sold at around 75% of a mainline entry, I very much think it does) we're looking at a franchise that could be facing a 50+% loss of sales from its current generational debut to whatever the next "main" title it can manage. I think that's well worthy of "collapse," myself.

This is not to say that these sales aren't a problem. But 1994-2001 was Square being in the right place at the right time, and Final Fantasy doesn't have to be that to be successful and make them lots of money, just like Sanrio doesn't need 50-year-old men buying Hello Kitty backpacks to make them lots of money.

I'm not really talking about the pretty much unavoidable decline of Final Fantasy from a 10m-ish worldwide seller in 1997 to a 5m-ish worldwide seller in 2006; what I'm interested in is the (IMO almost entirely avoidable) decline going on right now to what could wind up being a 1-2m worldwide seller.

[encephalon]

What did Kitase do? Have his name in the credits of some games you didn't like? Like being the director of Final Fantasy VI, VII and VIII?

It's amazing how many theories about the inner workings of Square-Enix are determined primarily by who was in the credits of _ game (or not).