@Animal-Mother: Infinity Ward isn't a part of SE, Eidos Montreal is.
But the logic they're pushing is publishers develop the game.
Square Published MW:4 in EU and JP I think.... At least japan. Does this mean they developed the game? Maybe localized it. But certainly didn't develop it.
It's a heavy semantics argument.
Also at that point Eidos becomes a subsidiary studio wholly owned. And again while square may fund and manage the development costs of the game. Eidos still develops it.
And with this post I think i've finally lost my mind.
@Animal-Mother: Infinity Ward isn't a part of SE, Eidos Montreal is.
But the logic they're pushing is publishers develop the game.
Square Published MW:4 in EU and JP I think.... At least japan. Does this mean they developed the game? Maybe localized it. But certainly didn't develop it.
It's a heavy semantics argument.
Also at that point Eidos becomes a subsidiary studio wholly owned. And again while square may fund and manage the development costs of the game. Eidos still develops it.
And with this post I think i've finally lost my mind.
Eidos is a part of SE though so technically SE did develop the game. Thats like saying Xbox isn't a MS product. Its still part of the company, just its own division. There are multiple development teams within SE, Eidos Montreal is one of them.
final fantasy 12 and kingdom hearts 2 and birth by sleep are the only one I like from them. Other than that, they only made garbage. Every single game that I played that they made or publish ( that wasn't eidos) was garbage. Even games other people like so much like the world ends with you or crisis core were horrible to me.
@Animal-Mother: Infinity Ward isn't a part of SE, Eidos Montreal is.
But the logic they're pushing is publishers develop the game.
Square Published MW:4 in EU and JP I think.... At least japan. Does this mean they developed the game? Maybe localized it. But certainly didn't develop it.
It's a heavy semantics argument.
Also at that point Eidos becomes a subsidiary studio wholly owned. And again while square may fund and manage the development costs of the game. Eidos still develops it.
And with this post I think i've finally lost my mind.
Eidos is a part of SE though so technically SE did develop the game. Thats like saying Xbox isn't a MS product. Its still part of the company, just its own division. There are multiple development teams within SE, Eidos Montreal is one of them.
As I said it's a heavy semantics argument. You say tomatoe I say tomatoe.
And i'm not saying these games aren't square products. I'm saying that square doesn't develop the actual games.
@Animal-Mother: Infinity Ward isn't a part of SE, Eidos Montreal is.
But the logic they're pushing is publishers develop the game.
Square Published MW:4 in EU and JP I think.... At least japan. Does this mean they developed the game? Maybe localized it. But certainly didn't develop it.
It's a heavy semantics argument.
Also at that point Eidos becomes a subsidiary studio wholly owned. And again while square may fund and manage the development costs of the game. Eidos still develops it.
And with this post I think i've finally lost my mind.
Eidos is a part of SE though so technically SE did develop the game. Thats like saying Xbox isn't a MS product. Its still part of the company, just its own division. There are multiple development teams within SE, Eidos Montreal is one of them.
As I said it's a heavy semantics argument. You say tomatoe I say tomatoe.
And i'm not saying these games aren't square products. I'm saying that square doesn't develop the actual games.
@Animal-Mother: Infinity Ward isn't a part of SE, Eidos Montreal is.
But the logic they're pushing is publishers develop the game.
Square Published MW:4 in EU and JP I think.... At least japan. Does this mean they developed the game? Maybe localized it. But certainly didn't develop it.
It's a heavy semantics argument.
Also at that point Eidos becomes a subsidiary studio wholly owned. And again while square may fund and manage the development costs of the game. Eidos still develops it.
And with this post I think i've finally lost my mind.
Eidos is a part of SE though so technically SE did develop the game. Thats like saying Xbox isn't a MS product. Its still part of the company, just its own division. There are multiple development teams within SE, Eidos Montreal is one of them.
As I said it's a heavy semantics argument. You say tomatoe I say tomatoe.
And i'm not saying these games aren't square products. I'm saying that square doesn't develop the actual games.
So then if they don't develop any games what are you arguing? Like, I dont understand how you're differentiating what games they develop since they have a bunch of developers that develop different games. FF14 is just as much a SE game as Deus Ex HR
So then if they don't develop any games what are you arguing? Like, I dont understand how you're differentiating what games they develop since they have a bunch of developers that develop different games. FF14 is just as much a SE game as Deus Ex HR
I'm arguing that they don't actually sit down and actually develop the games. Hence these developers being called by their studio names and being considered subsidiaries.
So what i'm saying is
Studio such as IO comes up with new hitman>>>>>>>>>> Pitches idea to square>>>>>>>>>>Square green lights>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Square funds project within company creating new hitman game>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IO actually develops the game>>>>>>>>>>>> Square markets so on and so forth and publishes game and puts it out at stores the internet and so on.
In the most rudimentary fashion. Square may own them but is still considered the publisher square may oversee the project and fund it but does not actually develop the game. I/O does as a studio that is considered a subsidiary owned by square but isn't called square nor by the media outlets and gaming journalists is said it's developed by square.
If you listen to the giant bombcast they talk about games like call of duty and who they're developed by. They are top notch professionals and have never once said a call of duty game is developed by activision but the studios under activision. I mean bobby kotick isn't there with the Infinity ward or Treyarch teams rollin up his sleeves.
Square is still a fairly profitable company so someone must think they're doing a good job
they only became profitable recently thanks to Eidos. But they been in some serious deep shit ever since the Spirit Within. In fact, they still exist today because of Sony.
So then if they don't develop any games what are you arguing? Like, I dont understand how you're differentiating what games they develop since they have a bunch of developers that develop different games. FF14 is just as much a SE game as Deus Ex HR
I'm arguing that they don't actually sit down and actually develop the games. Hence these developers being called by their studio names and being considered subsidiaries.
So what i'm saying is
Studio such as IO comes up with new hitman>>>>>>>>>> Pitches idea to square>>>>>>>>>>Square green lights>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Square funds project within company creating new hitman game>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IO actually develops the game>>>>>>>>>>>> Square markets so on and so forth and publishes game and puts it out at stores the internet and so on.
In the most rudimentary fashion. Square may own them but is still considered the publisher square may oversee the project and fund it but does not actually develop the game. I/O does as a studio that is considered a subsidiary owned by square but isn't called square nor by the media outlets and gaming journalists is said it's developed by square.
If you listen to the giant bombcast they talk about games like call of duty and who they're developed by. They are top notch professionals and have never once said a call of duty game is developed by activision but the studios under activision. I mean bobby kotick isn't there with the Infinity ward or Treyarch teams rollin up his sleeves.
so with this argument, sony doesnt develop uncharted games, naughty dog does????
animal mother, you are kind of making it more complicated for yourself...once a company is owned by a publisher, doesnt it become an internal studio? its all apart of the company now.
why complicate it more? so whats a square enix studio and not a square enix studio? does it have to have the name square enix studio? are you only counting a studio and not the pubs? lol
So then if they don't develop any games what are you arguing? Like, I dont understand how you're differentiating what games they develop since they have a bunch of developers that develop different games. FF14 is just as much a SE game as Deus Ex HR
I'm arguing that they don't actually sit down and actually develop the games. Hence these developers being called by their studio names and being considered subsidiaries.
So what i'm saying is
Studio such as IO comes up with new hitman>>>>>>>>>> Pitches idea to square>>>>>>>>>>Square green lights>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Square funds project within company creating new hitman game>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IO actually develops the game>>>>>>>>>>>> Square markets so on and so forth and publishes game and puts it out at stores the internet and so on.
In the most rudimentary fashion. Square may own them but is still considered the publisher square may oversee the project and fund it but does not actually develop the game. I/O does as a studio that is considered a subsidiary owned by square but isn't called square nor by the media outlets and gaming journalists is said it's developed by square.
If you listen to the giant bombcast they talk about games like call of duty and who they're developed by. They are top notch professionals and have never once said a call of duty game is developed by activision but the studios under activision. I mean bobby kotick isn't there with the Infinity ward or Treyarch teams rollin up his sleeves.
Since SE "owns" Eidos, Deus Ex:HR is made by an SE studio which technically makes it an SE game. SE doesn't own Infinity Ward so they're just publishers of CoD in other countries. It's that simple. Your subsequent babble just makes you look desperate for your argument.
So then if they don't develop any games what are you arguing? Like, I dont understand how you're differentiating what games they develop since they have a bunch of developers that develop different games. FF14 is just as much a SE game as Deus Ex HR
I'm arguing that they don't actually sit down and actually develop the games. Hence these developers being called by their studio names and being considered subsidiaries.
So what i'm saying is
Studio such as IO comes up with new hitman>>>>>>>>>> Pitches idea to square>>>>>>>>>>Square green lights>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Square funds project within company creating new hitman game>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IO actually develops the game>>>>>>>>>>>> Square markets so on and so forth and publishes game and puts it out at stores the internet and so on.
In the most rudimentary fashion. Square may own them but is still considered the publisher square may oversee the project and fund it but does not actually develop the game. I/O does as a studio that is considered a subsidiary owned by square but isn't called square nor by the media outlets and gaming journalists is said it's developed by square.
If you listen to the giant bombcast they talk about games like call of duty and who they're developed by. They are top notch professionals and have never once said a call of duty game is developed by activision but the studios under activision. I mean bobby kotick isn't there with the Infinity ward or Treyarch teams rollin up his sleeves.
Since SE "owns" Eidos, Deus Ex:HR is made by an SE studio which technically makes it an SE game. SE doesn't own Infinity Ward so they're just publishers of CoD in other countries. It's that simple. Your subsequent babble just makes you look desperate for your argument.
I don't want to get into raving lunatic mode again.
But I will just leave this right here.
Just tell me who it says it's developed by that's all.
So then if they don't develop any games what are you arguing? Like, I dont understand how you're differentiating what games they develop since they have a bunch of developers that develop different games. FF14 is just as much a SE game as Deus Ex HR
I'm arguing that they don't actually sit down and actually develop the games. Hence these developers being called by their studio names and being considered subsidiaries.
So what i'm saying is
Studio such as IO comes up with new hitman>>>>>>>>>> Pitches idea to square>>>>>>>>>>Square green lights>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Square funds project within company creating new hitman game>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IO actually develops the game>>>>>>>>>>>> Square markets so on and so forth and publishes game and puts it out at stores the internet and so on.
In the most rudimentary fashion. Square may own them but is still considered the publisher square may oversee the project and fund it but does not actually develop the game. I/O does as a studio that is considered a subsidiary owned by square but isn't called square nor by the media outlets and gaming journalists is said it's developed by square.
If you listen to the giant bombcast they talk about games like call of duty and who they're developed by. They are top notch professionals and have never once said a call of duty game is developed by activision but the studios under activision. I mean bobby kotick isn't there with the Infinity ward or Treyarch teams rollin up his sleeves.
Since SE "owns" Eidos, Deus Ex:HR is made by an SE studio which technically makes it an SE game. SE doesn't own Infinity Ward so they're just publishers of CoD in other countries. It's that simple. Your subsequent babble just makes you look desperate for your argument.
I don't want to get into raving lunatic mode again.
But I will just leave this right here.
Just tell me who it says it's developed by that's all.
Lol you still don't get it, do you? Diablo I&II is a Blizzard game because the studio that made those games which is a different studio, was bought by Blizzard. Condor was renamed to Blizzard North but it remained a different studio. Xenoblade is a game developed by Nintendo because Monolithsoft is a part of Nintendo. Eidos is now a part of SE, so when Eidos develops Deus Ex it also means SE develops Deus Ex. Honestly, the reason why you're probably arguing about this is because SE is Japanese and they have the image of JRPGs not games like Deus Ex and it seems hard to put into your mind how a Japanese company could have technically developed such a game. Your picture doesn't really prove anything. It is the same with Retro Studios' Donkey Kong. Are you saying DKCR isn't a Nintendo game because it's developed by an American company like Retro Studios?
Well if you read the OP you can clearly see i'm talking solely about square japan.
But you never answered my question. Who does it say it's developed by? Also i'm not arguing who owns the property but who ACTUALLY develops it.
It seems you're just narrowing your definition of "developing." If that's your logic, only indie devs "develop" games which is really stupid by the way. Eidos didn't develop Deus Ex by themselves alone especially when a company owns a studio. You don't know squat how much SE provided support to Eidos anyway so you can go on speculate about how SE just gave them money and thus making it not an SE game. SE Japan huh? I don't think anybody is arguing about DKCR not being developed by Nintendo EAD which is basically Nintendo Japan, captain obvious.
Well if you read the OP you can clearly see i'm talking solely about square japan.
But you never answered my question. Who does it say it's developed by? Also i'm not arguing who owns the property but who ACTUALLY develops it.
It seems you're just narrowing your definition of "developing." If that's your logic, only indie devs "develop" games which is really stupid by the way. Eidos didn't develop Deus Ex by themselves alone especially when a company owns a studio. You don't know squat how much SE provided support to Eidos anyway so you can go on speculate about how SE just gave them money and thus making it not an SE game. SE Japan huh? I don't think anybody is arguing about DKCR not being developed by Nintendo EAD which is basically Nintendo Japan, captain obvious.
LOL. Ramble on my friend ramble on.
Don't answer the question with proof I provided. Good day sire
So then if they don't develop any games what are you arguing? Like, I dont understand how you're differentiating what games they develop since they have a bunch of developers that develop different games. FF14 is just as much a SE game as Deus Ex HR
I'm arguing that they don't actually sit down and actually develop the games. Hence these developers being called by their studio names and being considered subsidiaries.
So what i'm saying is
Studio such as IO comes up with new hitman>>>>>>>>>> Pitches idea to square>>>>>>>>>>Square green lights>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Square funds project within company creating new hitman game>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IO actually develops the game>>>>>>>>>>>> Square markets so on and so forth and publishes game and puts it out at stores the internet and so on.
In the most rudimentary fashion. Square may own them but is still considered the publisher square may oversee the project and fund it but does not actually develop the game. I/O does as a studio that is considered a subsidiary owned by square but isn't called square nor by the media outlets and gaming journalists is said it's developed by square.
If you listen to the giant bombcast they talk about games like call of duty and who they're developed by. They are top notch professionals and have never once said a call of duty game is developed by activision but the studios under activision. I mean bobby kotick isn't there with the Infinity ward or Treyarch teams rollin up his sleeves.
How is that any different from the FF games? The dudes greenlighting and funding those games aren't developing them either. What you're arguing makes no sense.
They recently opted to try and change their philosophy so we will see in a few years if they actually achieve that. Compared to other Japanese publishers I'd say they are doing pretty well for themselves. Outside of typical internet hyperbole they have been making decent stuff since the merger, just not as frequently.
Well if you read the OP you can clearly see i'm talking solely about square japan.
But you never answered my question. Who does it say it's developed by? Also i'm not arguing who owns the property but who ACTUALLY develops it.
It seems you're just narrowing your definition of "developing." If that's your logic, only indie devs "develop" games which is really stupid by the way. Eidos didn't develop Deus Ex by themselves alone especially when a company owns a studio. You don't know squat how much SE provided support to Eidos anyway so you can go on speculate about how SE just gave them money and thus making it not an SE game. SE Japan huh? I don't think anybody is arguing about DKCR not being developed by Nintendo EAD which is basically Nintendo Japan, captain obvious.
LOL. Ramble on my friend ramble on.
Don't answer the question with proof I provided. Good day sire
LOL Deus Ex is developed by SE just as Diablo is developed by Blizzard and DKCR is developed by Nintendo. Ramble on.
Log in to comment