Final Fantasy’s sales crisis is also an identity crisis | Opinion
Nice console games 
The
news
that
Square
Enix
considers
its
two
major
Final
Fantasy
titles
in
the
past
year
–
Final
Fantasy
16
and
Final
Fantasy
7
Rebirth
–
to
have
missed
their
sales
targets
won’t
be
a
surprise
to
many
people
in
the
industry.
On
the
contrary,
this
outcome
was
so
predictable
that
it’s
provoked
all
manner
of
exaggerated
eye-rolling.
Square
Enix
has
form
in
this
department,
after
all.
Its
most
famous
public
lament
for
the
under-performance
of
a
key
title
(despite
selling
many
millions
of
copies)
was
for
Tomb
Raider.
But
since
then,
this
tactic
has
become
a
fairly
standard
part
of
its
financial
communications,
leading
many
to
believe
that
the
company’s
internal
sales
estimates
are
insanely
out
of
touch
with
reality.
There’s
some
validity
to
that
claim
–
Square
Enix
doesn’t
generally
seem
to
be
very
good
at
setting
realistic
targets
for
its
games,
and
it’s
tempting
to
suggest
that
the
problem
is
one
of
motivated
reasoning.
This
is
a
company
that’s
struggled,
perhaps
more
than
most,
to
keep
development
budgets
and
timescales
under
control.
It’s
not
unfair
to
wonder
if
part
of
the
reason
for
major
titles
so
often
missing
their
sales
targets
is
because
those
target
figures
were
calculated,
somewhat
wishfully,
on
the
basis
of
how
many
sales
would
be
needed
to
cover
an
over-inflated
budget,
rather
than
a
realistic
assessment
of
the
market
conditions
for
that
title.
Although
this
kind
of
reasoning
is
not
usually
overt,
it’s
not
uncommon
across
the
industry
–
large
projects
often
become
juggernauts
that
nobody
wants
to
stand
in
front
of
and
risk
being
rolled
over,
so
numbers
and
projections
get
fudged
when
they
suggest
inconvenient
truths
about
commercial
viability.
In
this
specific
case,
however,
I
don’t
think
Square
Enix’s
tendency
to
over-inflate
its
projections
is
really
to
blame.
These
games
have
underperformed
quite
badly
by
a
much
more
simple
metric,
one
that
no
publisher
on
earth
would
be
happy
about
–
they
have
failed
to
match
or
exceed
the
sales
of
their
direct
predecessors.
By
restricting
the
addressable
market
for
the
games,
Square
Enix
made
it
almost
an
inevitability
that
their
sales
would
disappoint
FF7
Rebirth’s
sales
are
lagging
the
sales
of
FF7
Remake,
the
previous
instalment
in
this
remake-cum-sequel
saga,
while
FF16’s
sales
are
tracking
quite
a
long
way
behind
those
of
FF15,
the
previous
mainline
entry
in
the
series.
Other
internal
projections
or
development
cost
concerns
notwithstanding,
this
is
disappointing
performance
for
the
franchise
–
these
games
are
still
multi-million
sellers,
but
the
trend
line
is
not
healthy.Lots
of
people
have
been
quick
to
point
the
finger
of
blame
at
Square
Enix’s
decision
to
make
these
games
into
PS5
exclusives
at
launch,
with
the
PC
version
of
16
only
arriving
very
belatedly
(well
over
a
year
after
the
PS5
launch)
this
week.
The
argument
is
simple;
by
restricting
the
addressable
market
for
the
games,
Square
Enix
made
it
almost
an
inevitability
that
their
sales
would
disappoint.
Granted,
FF7
Remake
was
also
PlayStation-exclusive,
but
it
launched
on
the
PS4
at
a
point
when
it
had
a
much
larger
installed
base.
FF15,
on
the
other
hand,
was
cross-platform
on
PS4
and
Xbox
One
at
launch
(neither
game
launched
on
PC
until
over
a
year
later,
though).
There’s
some
logic
to
the
argument
that
platform
exclusivity
is
a
significant
restriction
on
sales
potential,
of
course
–
I’m
especially
sympathetic
to
the
argument
that
the
current
economic
climate
has
made
the
notion
of
people
buying
an
entire
console
to
play
a
game
into
a
very
a
tough
sell,
making
it
more
important
than
ever
to
meet
your
consumers
where
they
are.
I
don’t
think,
however,
that
the
numbers
add
up
particularly
neatly
for
the
platform
exclusivity
argument
–
and
while
it’s
not
possible
to
make
a
robust
defence
of
Square
Enix’s
platform
strategy
without
knowing
what
kind
of
benefits
it
negotiated
with
Sony
(which
could
well
have
made
it
into
absolutely
the
right
choice
commercially),
it’s
at
least
fair
to
say
that
it’s
not
obvious
that
this
was
a
strategic
error.
Square
Enix
would
benefit
at
least
somewhat
from
speeding
up
its
PC
release
schedule
For
Rebirth,
certainly,
the
PS5
installed
base
has
been
a
limiting
factor
–
Remake
launched
late
in
the
lifespan
of
PS4
and
could
address
an
immense
installed
base,
as
well
as
enjoying
another
sales
boost
when
the
PS5
version
came
out
down
the
line.
Rebirth
faces
a
tough
comparison
as
a
consequence
–
but
it’s
far
from
clear
that
launching
on
other
platforms
would
have
helped
very
much.
Xbox
Series
sales
are
tracking
a
long
way
behind
PS5
sales,
and
software
attach
rates
for
the
console
don’t
seem
to
be
very
healthy
(perhaps
unsurprisingly
given
the
focus
on
Game
Pass).
PC
is
probably
a
more
promising
platform,
and
I
do
think
Square
Enix
would
benefit
at
least
somewhat
from
speeding
up
its
PC
release
schedule
–
making
PC
gamers
wait
for
more
than
a
year
post-launch
is
undoubtedly
hurting
sales
–
but
it’s
very
unlikely
that
the
difference
would
have
made
up
millions
of
sales.
FF16
is
a
different
case,
since
the
installed
base
of
PS5
at
its
launch
was
actually
very
comparable
with
the
position
of
PS4
when
FF15
launched
in
2016.
Square
Enix’s
willingness
to
accept
an
exclusivity
deal
for
FF16
was
probably
informed
in
no
small
part
by
the
fairly
miserable
underperformance
of
the
Xbox
One
version
of
that
game.
The
argument
that
an
Xbox
Series
version
of
FF16
would
have
made
a
big
difference
to
its
sales
isn’t
supported
at
all
by
looking
at
how
things
panned
out
for
FF15.
Again,
an
earlier
or
even
simultaneous
launch
for
a
PC
version
could
have
made
a
more
impressive
dent,
but
it’s
not
clear
how
significant
it
would
have
been.
The
available
data,
then,
doesn’t
provide
easy
or
simple
support
for
the
hypothesis
that
platform
exclusivity
is
the
villain
of
this
piece.
That
could
be
part
of
the
answer,
but
more
broadly,
I’d
argue
that
for
a
real
understanding
of
what’s
happening
here
you
have
to
look
to
the
management
of
the
Final
Fantasy
brand
overall
in
recent
decades.
At
one
time,
this
was
the
premier
JRPG
brand;
for
much
of
the
world,
it
was
about
the
only
JRPG
brand
many
consumers
knew.
There
was
a
very
clear
sense
of
what
you’d
be
getting
if
you
bought
one
of
these
games
–
each
iteration
brought
significant
reinvention,
but
these
were
always
identifiably
similar
in
key
ways,
ranging
from
story
themes
and
structures
to
overarching
concepts
in
the
gameplay.
Now,
though,
I’m
honestly
not
sure
what
Final
Fantasy
means
as
a
brand
–
I
don’t
know
what
it’s
supposed
to
mean
to
me,
as
someone
who’s
played
these
games
for
nearly
30
years,
and
I
certainly
don’t
know
what
Square
Enix
thinks
the
Final
Fantasy
brand
represents
to
consumers
more
broadly.
The
available
data
doesn’t
provide
easy
support
that
platform
exclusivity
is
the
villain…
For
a
real
understanding
you
have
to
look
to
the
management
of
the
Final
Fantasy
brand
overall
in
recent
decades
The
appetite
for
reinvention
which
was
a
staple
of
the
series
from
the
outset
has
been
twisted
into
an
excuse
to
make
entirely
different
types
of
game,
not
as
experimental
side-projects
(which
has
always
been
a
part
of
the
brand,
and
has
resulted
in
both
some
classic
titles
and
some
absolute
dross
over
the
years),
but
as
mainline
entries
in
the
series.
Games
like
FF15
and
FF16
are
almost
entirely
divorced
from
the
legacy
of
the
series
and
the
expectations
of
existing
fans,
tied
to
the
franchise
only
by
a
shallow
application
of
window
dressing
in
the
form
of
a
few
visual
and
naming
elements.
This
is
not
just
a
‘they
don’t
make
them
how
they
used
to’
complaint
from
a
long-suffering
fan;
it’s
an
approach
that
has
genuinely
left
Final
Fantasy
in
a
very
uncomfortable
place
as
a
brand.
Despite
its
long
and
storied
legacy,
in
the
eyes
of
most
consumers
it’s
now
only
as
good
as
its
last
outing,
because
the
chasing
of
new
genres
and
the
peculiar
sense
that
the
company
is
actually
somewhat
ashamed
of
its
prize
IP
being
a
JRPG
has
left
the
series
without
a
firm
footing
in
its
own
past.
FF7
Remake,
of
course,
had
the
beloved
classic
status
of
the
original
FF7
to
build
upon,
and
much
of
its
sales
success
can
be
attributed
to
that
–
but
the
second
game
in
that
mini-series
was
always
going
to
have
to
live
or
die
by
consumers’
estimations
of
Remake,
not
of
the
original
game.
Remake
was
fondly
received,
but
acclaim
for
it
was
far
from
universal.
It
was
probably
inevitable
that
there
would
be
sales
attrition
for
the
sequel,
platform
issues
notwithstanding,
since
some
not-insignificant
percentage
of
people
were
put
off
by
decisions
in
the
first
game
–
things
like
introducing
fast-paced
action-game
combat,
or
making
the
game,
despite
its
“Remake”
title,
into
a
quasi-sequel
to
the
not-entirely-beloved
FF7
expanded
universe
media.
I
certainly
don’t
know
what
Square
Enix
thinks
the
Final
Fantasy
brand
represents
to
consumers
more
broadly
Rebirth
has
been
similarly
divisive
with
some
fraction
of
its
audience;
the
company
should
steel
itself
for
the
likelihood
of
further
diminishing
returns
as
it
hits
the
third
instalment
of
the
7
Remake
series.
Things
are
tougher
for
the
mainline
series.
The
last
outing
there
was
FF15
–
which
sold
very
well,
with
ten
million
unit
sales
making
it
into
one
of
the
best-selling
FF
games
of
all
time,
but
is
generally
remembered
quite
poorly.
In
hindsight,
many
players
were
nonplussed
by
the
consequences
of
Square
Enix’s
ambition
to
make
the
game
into
the
heart
of
a
cross-media
experience
–
slicing
out
large
parts
of
the
story
and
background
to
use
for
movies,
anime
shows,
and
DLC
chapters
left
much
of
the
actual
experience
of
the
game
feeling
hollow,
incomplete,
and
unfinished.
FF16
thus
faced
twin
challenges:
convincing
FF’s
long
standing
fans
that
things
were
back
on
track
after
the
commercially
successful
but
not
well
regarded
FF15,
while
also
trying
to
expand
the
appeal
of
the
franchise
by
convincing
Final
Fantasy
refuseniks
and
newcomers
that
this
was
a
new
kind
of
game,
something
they’d
be
interested
in.
It
doesn’t
seem
that
either
of
those
goals
was
accomplished
in
a
satisfactory
way.
Many
series
fans
seem
unhappy
that
FF16
was
essentially
a
pure
action
game,
with
all
pretense
of
actually
being
an
RPG
of
any
description
stripped
away.
For
outsiders
to
the
series,
however,
even
embracing
this
Devil
May
Cry
style
gameplay
didn’t
do
much
to
convince
them
that
this
is
anything
more
than
a
lot
of
melodramatic
highly-coiffed
twinks
yelling
at
each
other
about
crystals.
The
real
bright
spot
for
the
franchise
in
recent
years,
the
success
of
FF7
Remake
aside,
has
been
the
MMORPG
FF14,
which
has
generally
been
incredibly
well
received
and
is
often
described
by
fans
as
the
best
mainline
FF
game
in
decades.
Putting
FF14
director
Naoki
Yoshida
in
charge
of
FF16
was
clearly
meant
to
harness
some
of
that
success.
It
didn’t
work
–
though
the
MMORPG
background
of
the
designers
certainly
shone
through
in
the
interminable
boss
battles
which
all
had
a
litany
of
health
bar
after
health
bar
to
chip
away
at
–
but
it
should,
in
theory,
have
driven
sales
among
the
FF14
fans
who
have
been
hanging
off
every
word
from
‘Yoshi-P’
about
game
updates
for
years.
This
brings
us
back
to
the
platform
issue
though,
and
is
part
of
the
reason
why
I
think
Square
Enix’s
slow
PC
releases,
not
its
ignoring
of
the
largely
irrelevant
(for
this
franchise)
Xbox,
is
a
genuine
part
of
the
problem.
Ironically,
even
as
FF
seems
to
struggle
with
both
an
identity
crisis
and
a
sales
slump,
JRPGs
more
generally
are
actually
in
pretty
good
health
FF14
is
a
success
on
PlayStation,
of
course,
but
like
most
MMOs,
it’s
primarily
a
PC
title
and
its
most
hardcore
fans
–
the
ones
most
likely
to
run
out
and
preorder
a
new
game
from
the
same
director
–
are
playing
on
PC.
Instead
of
being
able
to
pre-order,
that
audience
had
a
year-long
wait
coloured
by
largely
negative
word
of
mouth
–
nobody
should
be
surprised
that
the
PC
launch
is
a
damp
squib.
The
problem,
then,
is
nothing
quite
so
simple
as
a
mistake
in
platform
targeting
–
which
might
easily
be
rectified
by
moving
future
releases
to
a
multi-platform
strategy.
Square
Enix
certainly
needs
to
improve
its
approach
on
PC,
but
even
that
will
only
be
fiddling
in
the
margins
of
the
problems
Final
Fantasy
has
as
a
brand
right
now.
Those
problems
all
arguably
trace
back
to
Square
Enix’s
own
deeply
held
belief
that
this
game
is
its
mainstream
pillar
franchise
–
which
means
that
a
major
Final
Fantasy
game
has
to
be
everything
to
everyone,
a
gigantic
mainstream
hit
on
the
level
of
a
Call
of
Duty
or
even
a
GTA.
But
that
ignores
the
reality
of
what
Final
Fantasy
has
been
throughout
its
history.
It
was
at
the
vanguard
of
JRPGs,
yes,
but
the
moments
when
that
genre
(and
Final
Fantasy
itself)
brushed
up
against
mainstream
success
and
acceptance
were
the
exception,
not
the
rule.
It’s
a
niche
genre,
one
which
benefits
from
having
an
insanely
devoted
fanbase
(and
thus
lots
of
merchandise
sales
and
opportunities
for
ancillary
revenue)
–
but
overtly
chasing
mainstream
success
requires
taking
major
steps
away
from
what
makes
that
genre
appealing
to
its
core
fans
in
the
first
place.
Ironically,
even
as
Final
Fantasy
seems
to
struggle
with
both
an
identity
crisis
and
a
sales
slump,
JRPGs
more
generally
are
actually
in
pretty
good
health.
Flagship
genre
titles
like
Persona
and
Like
A
Dragon
are
very
different
to
what
Final
Fantasy
has
become
–
likely
having
only
a
fraction
of
the
development
budget,
for
a
start,
but
embracing
their
genre
roots
in
ways
that
have
delighted
fans
while
also
helping
to
control
development
costs
to
some
degree.
I
don’t
know
if
that’s
a
model
Final
Fantasy
could
ever
return
to
–
perhaps
after
years
of
pushing
in
the
opposite
direction,
expectations
are
simply
set
too
differently
for
that
to
ever
work
–
but
at
the
very
least,
those
are
the
types
of
games
Square
Enix
should
be
looking
at
carefully
as
it
makes
strategic
decisions
about
what
kind
of
development
scale
and
budget
is
actually
justifiable
for
Final
Fantasy
given
the
audience
and
market
it
has
