I think they got rid of MIDI for the 2013 port already, so we're good there.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Probably just a port of the Switch version. Expect very blurry backgrounds with extremely sharp 3D assets. Hopefully, no new models similar to FF8R, because that'd be more work.

Fun fact: the Switch version is - ultimately - a port of the notorious 1997 PC version, so expect no analog movement and 15fps menu framerate unless this isn't just a sloppy port of an existing sloppy port (of a sloppy 2013 PC port?) of a botched ancient Eidos port. Yum.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

FFVI HD-2D would totally sell like pixel hotcakes. Same goes for Chrono Trigger. In the case of FFVI they had the Pixel Remasters in the pipeline, so I get it, but Chrono Trigger had the still-despicable android port and, apparently, the somewhat less despicable after years of fixing PC version that still isn't great unless modded. Perhaps also the throughly abominable Chrono Cross re-release saturated the Chrono market in Square's view, so they're holding off for the time being.

As stupid as this sounds it does track for "game made less than theoretical ROI we would've maybe got if we just invested the money instead of making something, therefore we consider this venture a complete failure regardless of the market realities or indeed any kind of reality" Square.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: apocalyptech

Quoting: suchI disagree in that not paying for a few pieces of art isn't a proper saving, just one you report to particularly... challenged management to get them off your back. That goes triple if you're generating this much negative sentiment. That can have more of a sales impact than your sales banner.

Oh sure, I was honestly more referring to the other indications that they're going all-in on AI (such as that quote from the job posting that I'd pasted above). Having generative images as banners on the site is, I'm guessing, just the tip of the iceberg.

I'm trying not to think about GOG using genAI to fiddle with the games. It does sound like an idea they'd be entertaining. Then again, it wouldn't make for great marketing material a la their recent yt videos. "Oh, ya, we just prompted Copilot and then our lone programmer who works part time twice a year looked at the code for 5s, plz tip, the end."

View this comment - View article - View full comments

OK, sure. Here we go again with this GOG preservation rodeo. I really like the concept behind GOG, but they should do better.

Does the more widely (and going forward it's likely that: exclusively) available FF8R qualify as preserving Final Fantasy 8? I'd really like to see the rationale here.

I'd argue the regular PC FF8 qualifies for preservation before FF8R. The latter is a standard boneheaded Square "remaster" where new, ill-fitting in terms of art style and fidelity models clash with the blurry mess that are the new pre-rendered backgrounds in a perfect botched mess of an upscale job. There's a list of issues, but the main thing is that FF8R does not (sufficiently) accurately replicate the intended original experience. That also goes for FF8PC if we're comparing to PSX, but I'm assuming we're preserving the PC version with its original warts, instead of... adding more warts where there have been few before, but with built-in cheats, so who gives a toss, slap a sale on it.

Realistically, I'm amazed the original is still sold on Steam. Kind of looks like Square... forgot it exists? Or that someone at Square is aware they dropped the ball.

In any event, this is closer to re-writing history than it is to preservation. Par for the course, sadly.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: apocalyptech

Quoting: suchIt's GOG. What profits?

I mean honestly it's possible that's at the root of the issue here. I actually have no idea what GOG's financials are like, but if they have historically struggled to turn a profit, latching onto the "AI" bandwagon is an unsurprising move, at least. The suits tend to see modern generative systems as a shortcut to Increased Productivity™ and they might just be assuming that this is the magical tech that's gonna turn a struggling company into a thriving one.

Whether that's true or not in either the short or long term is another question entirely, but if that's the thought process over there, then it's at least an understandable pivot.

I disagree in that not paying for a few pieces of art isn't a proper saving, just one you report to particularly... challenged management to get them off your back. That goes triple if you're generating this much negative sentiment. That can have more of a sales impact than your sales banner.

Unless GOG are playing 5D chess and doing this as part of a coordinated effort to boost visibility. Who knows anymore. I'll take my tinfoil hat off now.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

It's GOG. What profits?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Yeah, this victory lap is fairly pointless.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: NezchanGiven his earlier statements, I wonder how much "AI" is going to be stuffed into this one.

Will it even be possible to tell what's AI and what isn't? Looking at prior 22cans output I have to conclude: no.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Caldathras

Quoting: suchValve is the funding/driving force behind mainstream Linux gaming, GOG can - at best - reach remora status to Valve's shark... ness here. Not that I'd mind solid, actual competition.

Why can't GOG work with Valve on this? Why do they need to compete? Perhaps I'm suggesting too radical a change in mentality for contemporary business thinking...

It's interesting, especially here.

I mean, let's assume that GOG and Valve put in an equal amount of work, resources etc. Looking at it from a traditional business point of view Valve has the larger share of the market, so it will benefit more while investing disproportionately less. Effectively, GOG would be paying for Valve to make more. Of course, as this Linux situation currently stands GOG is basically choosing not to benefit from development that Valve is essentially giving out for free. It's right there, they just need to make the effort to pick it up and run with it. Even from a capitalist point of view that market is a growing one, albeit still small and probably not with the potential to overtake Windows. Maybe. Even that cost didn't seem to make business sense to GOG... up to now.

Maybe that's why business people are cagey about Linux support. It's got those weird "not everything has to have a price tag" and "long term plans over short term profit" things going on.

View this comment - View article - View full comments