• @Stovetop
    link
    English
    107 months ago

    According to the article at least, that is essentially what they did. But their model was based on earlier years when there was higher projected growth, so the budgets were set too high as a result.

    Personally, as long as the final installment in the FF7 Remake trilogy is made with the same budget as the first two and ends on a satisfying note, I’ll be happy. A good ending gives the trilogy as a whole have more lifetime sales than it would if part 3 makes the first two less good in retrospect, i.e. the Mass Effect 3 effect.

    • @NocturnalMorning
      link
      English
      6
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      They really messed up with ff7 remake part 1. Don’t think I’ll be buying any of the others unless it’s used.

      Also, said this before, but splitting it into three titles was an obvious cash grab.

      • @Stovetop
        link
        English
        97 months ago

        I will just agree to disagree on that front. Playing casually, I clocked over 100 hours on the 2nd game, which is more time than it took me to complete the original full game on PS1. I enjoyed basically every minute of time played (save for one particular mini-game that I didn’t care for), so I’d say I got a good value out of it for the cost. It is also hard to say that it is a cash grab when it provides a much fuller experience than most AAA games these days seem to have.

        Basically, I don’t hate it any more than I hate the fact that The Lord of the Rings is three separate movies; it’s not like The Hobbit.

        • @NocturnalMorning
          link
          English
          17 months ago

          I’m sure the second game is enjoyable. I’ve heard a lot of good things about it. It’s still a money grab to split the game into three separate titles.