-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
What made Squaresoft get so angry at Nintendo?
- Thread starter Alex_Mexico
- Start date
- Status
Dr. Feel Good
Banned
They hated Nintendo so much the supported the Wonderswan. The fucking Wonderswan.
Iwata wooed them back however by basically funding Crystal Chronicals and the GBA remakes.
Iwata wooed them back however by basically funding Crystal Chronicals and the GBA remakes.
Alex_Mexico
Member
As far as I know Square wasn't leaving Nintendo completely, at least not at first. They announced they were taking FFVII to the PS1. Maybe it was Nintendo's reaction to this that made Square never to throw a bone to any Nintendo console from 1997 to 2003.
I remember hearing that after Square's decision to make FF7 for the Playstation, Yamauchi was pissed and banned Square from releasing any games on Nintendo systems at least until he retired. I'm not sure if that's actually true though since I remember hearing that so long ago. But yes, that would seem to make a lot more sense than Square being offended by the use of cartridges.
Paper Mario is way better than SMRPG. Good riddance.
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
Because Yamauchi was a baller
Welfare
Member
Can companies even include refurbs in shipment data?
Also it's not a myth that Nintendo finished third in the 6th gen of home consoles. It got outsold by the Xbox by more than 2 million units.
Uncle Rupee
Banned
Except anyone who was around during that time knew that PS2s were breaking down quite a lot, and that Xboxs were also prone to failure while the Gamecube was practically indestructible. It's not just my own experience, but what was common knowledge.
Even if you threw the GBA out, which doesn't make a lick of sense imo as it's still the game industry, Nintendo's bottom line was more profitable than the Xbox division since Microsoft had it hooked up to a money-fueled life support system. If I was a company the size of Microsoft I could produce a Spruce Goose too, and could probably sell a few at great cost to myself, but that wouldn't make me a success now would it?
It's a myth that Nintendo finished third because the sales data doesn't actually tell you the profits. If losing 4 billion dollars doesn't put MS in last place when Nintendo was killing it, I think your precious podium is worthless.
Alex_Mexico
Member
lol yes
Square: "We want you to use discs. If not, we make FF for Playstation"
Yamauchi: "You're telling me what to do? faaaack u!"
Might have something to do with parts of Super Mario RPG belonging to Square. For instance, Superstar Saga, Geno: "Regardless of the above-mentioned, the copyright of Geno, reserved by Square Enix, Co. Ltd.".
Alex_Mexico
Member
You like to bring it up, right? Might as well do it here because I don't know what you're talking about.
Seriously, could anyone shed light on this?
Yamauchi gave zero fucks.
He started the "Fuck third parties, we can handle it on our own. They'll come to us." mentality that Nintendo still maintains to this very day.
Welfare
Member
My precious podium? Ha.
Fact - Nintendo sold 21.74m Gamecubes
Fact - Microsoft sold 24m Xbox's
In terms of home consoles, Nintendo failed to outsell Microsoft's first outing in the home console market.
Profits are a different matter, because the Xbox was a huge money sink because of it's specs. And Nintendo was killing it with the Gameboy, not the Gamecube.
If selling less than your competitors and hiding behind your handheld for profit doesn't put Nintendo in last place when MS was setting an establishment for the Xbox platform, I think your precious soap box is worthless.
Uncle Rupee
Banned
Here's a simple thought experiment to prove how stupid your stance is: let's imagine for a moment a company that has banked billions thanks to a near total monopoly on operating systems for decades. Now let's imagine that company makes a game console that it then sells for $1, losing hundreds of dollars per console. It quickly sells millions of consoles more than even its most successful competitors that make a small profit on every console sold. Our fictitious company can proudly state it is in "first place" for number of consoles sold, but is this a victory, or is it an illusory success that hides some rather embarrassing figures?
Nintendo has never been able to fully recover from Yamauchi tenure as far as 3rd party relations go. Nintendo still kind of operates under this Gung-ho samurai business where they are going to do their thing their way and not care what business trends are.
IIRC the Thomson DVD drives were very prone to failure in the original Xbox (I had one, I believe it was the consoles that came with JSRF and Sega GT), but I doubt that there was 2 million returns and that's assuming that MS included those refurbs as shipped consoles, which is doubtful.
I assume that Nintendo did make more money than MS off home consoles during that period, but there's no way they made more money from GC and GBA than Sony made with the PS2 and PS1.
Dr. Feel Good
Banned
Are you talking collectively? Or during the 2000 era? I could have sworn someone has shown data that backs up Nintendo operated with the most profits during that time, but I'm not positive. PS2 was a big money sink too I believe.
Edit... Now that I think about it, it's possible what I'm thinking of is thst all the profits of the Ps2 era were essentially whiped out by the PS3 era.
My understanding, and something that is often left out of this topic, is that Square had a hand in convincing other developers to leave Nintendo hardware. I believe Enix was the big one and likely what made Yamauchi so enraged and unwilling to work with Square afterwards.
It's been a long time since I read that and some simple searching shows that info still out there. Perhaps someone here has more detailed info on the subject?
It's been a long time since I read that and some simple searching shows that info still out there. Perhaps someone here has more detailed info on the subject?
Tidus_Great
Banned
I've played the ps1 version and i;ve heard the psp version has a superior translation but the gameplay has some slowdown. I'd like to give it a try because the story was probably the most interesting part of FF tactics for me.
Corran Horn
May the Schwartz be with you
Square owns parts of the game, characters they created like Geno etc. Could be legal issues with rights of the name that Nintendo just didnt want to go through legal processes and decided to make a new name.
D
Deleted member 471617
Unconfirmed Member
It all started when Nintendo dumped Sony and they turned the SNES CD-Rom attachment into the original PlayStation. Sony's success with PlayStation and it crushing Nintendo 64 led to Microsoft jumping into the gaming console war with Xbox. Have to wonder how console gaming would be now if Nintendo never dumped Sony to begin with.
On a related note, while it would take another generation or two, am I the only one that finds it funny that Square, Capcom, Konami and im sure a few others are nowhere near what they were during the SNES/GEN era?
Majority of my SNES games back then were from those three companies and of course, Nintendo but now, not even close whatsoever. Oh well.
On a related note, while it would take another generation or two, am I the only one that finds it funny that Square, Capcom, Konami and im sure a few others are nowhere near what they were during the SNES/GEN era?
Majority of my SNES games back then were from those three companies and of course, Nintendo but now, not even close whatsoever. Oh well.
Doesn't matter. In the eyes of the consumer the Xbox was more desirable, even if not by much. A first time entrant managed to make something more appealing than a seasoned player.
Depends what your going for. If market penetration is your aim you have succeeded, that was the bloody goal with the og Xbox.
For example MS spent over a billion dollars on the live infastructure during the original Xbox. Which at the time was the biggest outlay in telecommunications for a non Telco or governemt entity.
They knew that the og xbox wouldn't net them a profit, it gave them a toe in the market and set them up for the 360. Too bad they squandered their position this gen.
also why is it that Nintendo acolytes hate console numbers when talking about the GC but love console numbers when talking about the Wii? And no-one ever mentions attach rate during either gen.
last point? All those gaming PC's running windows circa 2001, do they have any bearing on "games"? If you include GBA seems only fair.
And that's why Nintendo didn't receive terrific 3rd party support since the N64 (semi-terrific for Gamecube).
Its something i've always known about the Nintendo/SNES/N64 era vaguely but didn't fully grasp why. Now i understand. The President of the company was a fucking asshole who didn't give a fuck. It was a rule with an iron fist, and the only reason they got so far in those days was because they had a stranglehold on the market due to being the only major competitor for a long time.
Once Sony entered the scene seriously and didn't fuck up multiple times like Sega, it was an end to Nintendo's dominion.
Unfortunately so. That's what Iwata said in 2001, and that's what he was saying last year as well during their quarterly reports. With that in mind, its no wonder why Nintendo are dead last. Their Japanese branch can make damn good games though, i'll give em that.
nkarafo
Member
He is wrong. I know because i'm depressed and play slow games in a dark room but i don't like Jrpgs at all : /
It's a long story, and Nintendo had many faults, it was not only because of the cartridges: http://www.unseen64.net/2008/09/06/square-vs-nintendo-eng/
Dreamwriter
Member
As I understand it, it was all about the SNES disc drive and how Nintendo treated them. When Nintendo announced the Sony device, Squaresoft jumped onboard wholeheartedly. They were excited, Secret of Mana was going to be a huge game with CD audio, and they were well into development when Nintendo surprised them with the switch to Philips, giving no warning at all. Squaresoft had to go back and redo a lot of the work, because of how different the Philips device was, and then Nintendo did it again, canceling the Philips deal without telling Square. At this point, Square wanted to just cancel the game, but Nintendo enforced a contract Square had signed for a certain number of games on the SNES in a certain time period, so Square had to completely redo the music and then cram the rest of the game onto an expensive cartridge. In the process of making the game Square had caught the bug for larger, more detailed games, so many of the games they made for SNES after that were on expensive cartridges, with a retail price of $75(US), which affected sales.
After that experience, Square hated Nintendo, and when they found out Sony was making a real CD-based system, they were happy to jump ship, since they could make huge games that only cost $1 to manufacture. In the process they convinced other developers that Sony was the way to go, and that made Nintendo hate them back. After that there was a little war between the two companies, they had little respect for each other, and Nintendo even brought some of that into the public.
After that experience, Square hated Nintendo, and when they found out Sony was making a real CD-based system, they were happy to jump ship, since they could make huge games that only cost $1 to manufacture. In the process they convinced other developers that Sony was the way to go, and that made Nintendo hate them back. After that there was a little war between the two companies, they had little respect for each other, and Nintendo even brought some of that into the public.
Pennywise83
Banned
Well, it's kind of complicated.
Then, Sony entered the market and offered good contractual terms (lower royalties, agreement on distribution in Western markets, financing -Digicube was basically created with the help of Sony) and the CD support. In 1996, Squaresoft released quickly the last six SNES games (Super Mario RPG, Radical Dreamers, Bahamut Lagoon, a new Front Mission, Treasure of the Rudras and Treasure Hunter G), because the company was setting the stage for the big debut on PlayStaton: Final Fantasy VII was announced in early 1996, and was released in January, 1997. In between, the first Squaresoft game for PS1: Tobal.
- In 1991, Squaresoft asked Nintendo for bigger SNES cartridges in order to ship properly Romancing SaGa, which was going through some development hell. Nintendo refused for unknown reason (maybe because there wasn't much time). Some months after the release of Romancing SaGa (January 1992), Enix released Dragon Quest V using the same cartridge format Square asked to Nintendo. Of course Dragon Quest V was a much more important game, and probably Enix had much more bargaining power against Nintendo.
- Nintendo was working on a SNES CD add-on on which Squaresoft was developing Seiken Densetsu 2 (Secret of Mana in the West); the deal between Nintendo and Sony didn't go well, and the add-on developed into the PlayStation. Nonetheless, Squaresoft management felt that the game should have been on SNES, so the team had to work hard to make it fit on a cartridge... which meant to scrape up to 40% of what developed, including multiple routes, and large portions of the worldmap.
- Super Mario RPG is one of the best SNES games but the development was hard. Nintendo oversaw Squaresoft in everything, and that was difficult for a company having its on identity. Other than some communication problems and changes at the last minute, the Squaresoft logo disappeared from the NA boxart.
Then, Sony entered the market and offered good contractual terms (lower royalties, agreement on distribution in Western markets, financing -Digicube was basically created with the help of Sony) and the CD support. In 1996, Squaresoft released quickly the last six SNES games (Super Mario RPG, Radical Dreamers, Bahamut Lagoon, a new Front Mission, Treasure of the Rudras and Treasure Hunter G), because the company was setting the stage for the big debut on PlayStaton: Final Fantasy VII was announced in early 1996, and was released in January, 1997. In between, the first Squaresoft game for PS1: Tobal.
MrCunningham
Member
If Yamauchi was the end boss, then Howard Lincoln would've been the second to last boss before him.
thegirlleastlikelyto
Member
This is a bigger part of it than people realize. If you lived through it, it's not hard to remember that third-parties hated Nintendo. It was a much different world, and when Nintendo was the only game in town they effectively part dictated how the market worked. Plus Nintendo was living fat off those cart royalties third-parties had to pay as well which endeared them to no one. Nintendo promoted carts as easier for consumers, but really they didn't want much cheaper CDs to disrupt the industry (and how they made money in it).
I was going to disagree with this, but considering it more I think you're right. If you read Nintendo Magic,Yamauchi picked Iwata because he "got" Nintendo and its place in the industry in the same way. Iwata's much more of a software engineer and far less confrontational, but his understanding of what makes Nintendo "Nintendo" isn't too dissimilar from Yamauchi.
Secret Owl
Neo Member
N64 didn't adopt the CD format, which made manufacturing costs very high for publishers.
encephalon
Member
The quote wasn't about who profited the most, it was about who sold the most consoles. It's fine that you think the console wars are stupid because Nintendo made more money, but yamauchi still made a fool of himself by underestimating the competition.
I was there too. I even remember shares of both companies going up in the stock market after the announcement.
Old days...
Dreamwriter
Member
To be fair, Nintendo saw this as being something they had to do to bring back the game industry in the US, and protect the industry in Japan. Atari killed the industry because third party developers were releasing so much crap, and even Atari released a couple well-known stinkers, that any game bought was almost guaranteed to be shit. So people stopped buying games. Nintendo's solution was to lock the system down hard - at first they didn't want third parties at all, then they relented but controlled third parties with an iron fist. They controlled manufacturing, so only let each company release a few games each year, at a schedule set by Nintendo, designed to favor their own games and close partners (this was eventually ruled anticompetitive/monopolistic behavior in the US). They also had a VERY strict set of standards that developers had to adhere to with their games (marketed as the Seal of Quality).
Secret Owl
Neo Member
To be fair, he also rushed the Virtual Boy to market, inadvertently created Playstation, and was responsible for the N64 sticking with cartridges. He was a great business man, but his notoriously stubborn attitude lead Nintendo into some big problems that could have been avoided towards the end of his tenure.
That's not example of 'to be fair'. Maybe in the NES days when they were starting out that kind of behavior was tolerable, but as soon as they hit the SNES, they were just another corporation who wanted all the control. And they paid for it
Bigger than FFXIII xbox?
BumblebeeCody
Member
So if Xenoblade X is having issues with disc space, does that mean we could see them going to Blu-ray consoles? Confrmed!
this is what I knew:
2) Square didn't have Nintendo license so they were banned from releasing products for GBC/N64/GBA/GC until the reconciliation.
To note the reconciliation happened around the same time Square merged with Enix which was always a supporter for Nintendo platforms.
1) WonderSwan is great.
2) Square didn't have Nintendo license so they were banned from releasing products for GBC/N64/GBA/GC until the reconciliation.
To note the reconciliation happened around the same time Square merged with Enix which was always a supporter for Nintendo platforms.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked