The Weekly Download

Epic Games lays Off 1000 staff & Nintendo confirms new Switch 2 digital game pricing

• Big Games Machine • Season 1 • Episode 23

Share episode

Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.

0:00 | 49:32
SPEAKER_00

The weekly download, a podcast about interesting game industry news.

SPEAKER_02

Brought to you by Big Games Machine.

SPEAKER_00

Hello, hello. Welcome back to the weekly download. I feel honoured to be saying those words again, Alex. Great to have you back. I know it feels good to be bad. To be bad. To be back. Bad to the bottom. I think I'm quite good. I think I'm quite good at hosting podcasts. But yes, welcome back to the weekly download. I have returned after my absence. That is me, Tom. Today I am joined by my co-host, Alex, who stand a co-host. Well, I I like it. I like our uh I like our ability to take the biggest stories of the week and break them down. And it was not a complaint of conversation.

SPEAKER_01

Very clear.

SPEAKER_00

It was not implied. Well, here we are. We're back with uh another week. It's been, I feel like we always say this, another very busy week. Some really big stories, some good, some bad. We're gonna be taking a look at a few today, three big ones. So we're gonna be looking at the news that Nintendo have announced this week, that is, that they're doing a price drop of sorts for their digital games in the US, following on from having already done that in the EU, in Europe, and in Japan from when the Switch 2 came out last year. So now that's gonna be heading over to the US from May. We're also gonna be taking a little look at the news from Epic Games this week, who have laid off a thousand employees due to a decline in engagement with Fortnite, being the main reason that Tim Sweeney has cited for that. And then we'll also take a little look at the quite uplifting news, I think, if you're a fan of Square Enix. Square Enix was Metacritic's number one publisher for 2025, which is their first time ever taking that prestigious crown, I guess. I think it's uh Metacritic seems to be the aggregator for games and reviews, so feels like a worthy crown for Square Enix.

SPEAKER_01

It's an interesting one that I think we're definitely going to discuss when we get there in more depth. We will. When we get there, it's definitely an achievement.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, 100%. And and that's what we'll be looking at this week. So we'll take a small break, come right back, and we'll start with this news around Nintendo. And we are going to kick off this week's episode with the news that Nintendo is dropping the price of its digital games for the Switch 2 exclusively, so just Switch 2 games in the US and Canada starting from May this year. The first game to take advantage of this price split is going to be Yoshi and the Mysterious Book, which comes out in May, hence why it's happening in May. Uh, and and so there'll be a digital price of$59.99. The physical will be$60.99, so around that$10 difference. Nintendo has said that the main reason for this is to reflect the different costs that are associated with producing and distributing each format. I don't need to tell you, Alex, that digital games don't have cartridges, they don't need to be shipped, they don't have retail margins that Nintendo needs to worry about, so that's kind of the reason for those changes.

SPEAKER_01

They also don't have resale value. If you're buying digital products, that's it. That that's your money in Nintendo's pocket, no one else is getting that game.

SPEAKER_00

Very true, which which no doubt has motivated things. I think it's worth clarifying that Nintendo has come out after announcing this and reiterated that this isn't a price increase for physical games, this is a discount on digital purchases, and and that kind of is true, as we said in the the introduction to this episode. This is something which we're based in in the UK, Europe and Japan have seen this since the the Switch 2 came out. I think Mario Kart as an example, I think that digitally that retails, I think that's$66.99, and then the the price for the physical is is 75 pounds. Um so just one example that we have already seen that. So that's this isn't something brand new. This is just coming to the the the US, which is why it is a big story.

SPEAKER_01

Absolutely, and you know, you I I don't think anybody knows the price of Mario Kart. They buy it with the system and it it's just a sunk cost, isn't it? Like I was like, I've never even thought to look how much it was. But it I mean, it it was I know this is a I think I've been singing this since we first started doing the podcast in terms of what the deal was that essentially publishers made with their audience when they moved to digital. It's like it's gonna it's gonna mean they're not gonna have to ship things, physical stores are gonna be reduced. Like the shipping, the production costs, the paper elements with cartridges, even more so the cost of putting those together is all gonna be taken out of the equation, and therefore the cost can come down. And initially, I think there was because the same deal was made when you jump from cartridges to CDs, that the cost of production would be lower. And I think at that point they didn't realise that you know there were costs incurred that maybe are harder to see. Like it's when you put things on CD, there needs to be more information. When you put things when you move to digital, two things happen. One, there is no longer a cap in the same way, much like when you move from a magazine to a website, you can squeeze as much on as you like, and you can be, you know, have all kind of weird parts to that.

SPEAKER_00

I love the idea of like getting to the end of a website, it's like last page. That's a bit harder to do on a website than it is to do in a magazine. Um not so I I'm not being facetious, but it's it's very true.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, and it and with games, you know, the the idea and it started to happen where you know games came out and they became live services or updates come later, or you could make fixes and things. And there's there's push and pulls to all of that in terms of the cost and what happens, but in most people's heads, I'm not having to go out and buy it. The convenience cost of being able to do it from my home does not outweigh the physical production and all the costs there. So why weren't we say seeing it cheaper from before across the board for everything?

SPEAKER_00

Well, I think in in it, I feel like till this point it's it's kind of been the opposite, where in a lot of cases, because uh Nintendo aside, I think Nintendo you don't really see sales in any regard. But if you look at PlayStation as a really easy example, the retail price of a digital PlayStation game will it'll go on sale, but it's kind of that hard$70 or or£70 in the UK. Whereas quite quickly after a game comes out, you could get the physical for much cheaper. Not the case with Nintendo, but it feels like this is one of the first times where we're seeing, as you've said, Alex, that that promise come to fruition in terms of well, I think we can recognise that one of the issues the Switch 2 cartridges have is that it's they're expensive to buy. Nintendo don't offer many sizes of cartridges, memory component, storage, that's all going up in price as well. So yeah, I I think something I think I'd I'd want to ask you is I know you in the past have been very you're more digital now than you were. Not yourself, but your collection of games. Do you, from your perspective, do you think this is kind of like a a tax on physical games? Do you think this will drive more people who play, you know, who do pick up physical games? Do you think this is enough of a a price change to make more people go digital?

SPEAKER_01

I don't think so. I think, you know, as you said, like all digital things are kind of have a locked and fixed-in price. If you go online, if you're buying a physical version online, they almost all start uh lower than RRP anyway. So I do wonder how much this is gonna filter. People will probably see the price go up, but they're probably gonna be closer to the digital price than Nintendo's declaring off the bat. That's as you've alluded to, likely gonna be different for Nintendo because they're one of the few companies that retain that kind of RRP or SRP, depending on where you are, uh, across digital and or or across the lifespan of their games. But I think anybody that's on physical is probably not doing it for convenience's sake. They're probably doing it either because, you know, they they want to collect. Like certainly that that's a fact for some of them. They want to resell it, which is going to remain in the same element. They might be sharing it between family members in kind of families like that, where they want to, you know, hand the cartridge around if that's the easiest way to do it. And I think they've got to accept that, you know, that having all of those those benefits probably do I don't see it as a tax, but they do come with a cost. I see it being like, should they pay more? Yes, there's there's physical elements that obviously physical elements, the elements of producing it physically drives the cost up.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah. Oh yeah, I I think that you do have to recognise that. I think it's similar to the the game key card controversy where there's reasons why there's reasons why some publishers are choosing to use those related to loading speeds and and asset uh being able to stream assets. I also think the other side of that is is that it is cheaper to use that as opposed to cartridges, and I think you do have to consider that. You know, if you want to I'm very PlayStation-wise, I'm kind of like 80% digital, 20% physical with the with Nintendo. I've always been very much, you know, I like I like the boxes, I like the cartridges. I don't mind paying that additional cost because as you've said, if I re if I get a new game and I don't like it, if I get it physically, I can very easily sell it on. So that's one of the factors where to me I think I don't mind paying a little bit more because it's an insurance that I don't get if I go and spend you know 60 pounds, which is the price of these games now, on a on a digital one. And if I don't like it, well I'm stuck with it. There is another factor.

SPEAKER_01

Name another product that you can buy physically and digitally where the digital version isn't multiple levels cheaper. Kindle, music, like they're all significantly cheaper because all of the cost in that is tied up in the production. Games have like, you know, the updates elements, the ongoing support, the size of the the bandwidth and server size required on the other end is obviously higher than those. But I can't think of another project that you can buy digitally and physically where the cost is still as comparable, actually. So I think we might be looking at this the wrong way around, which is like, why hasn't why wasn't that already happened being cheaper? Why wasn't it always the case?

SPEAKER_00

On that note, then do you think I mean the the question I wrote down was do you think we'll see more third parties do this on the Switch too? But I guess the bigger question is, do you think we'll see across the board more platform holders who were obviously not Steam, but if we look at PlayStation, again, not to bring them back up, but could we see Sony do something similar now that Nintendo have kind of green-lit this approach and and Sony could be like, okay, well we'll we'll do something similarly.

SPEAKER_01

I I don't know how to answer that question simply because I don't know what the cuts taken by Nintendo or PlayStation are to have the branding, to have everything on the physical copy over the digital copy. It seems to be, you know, across the board it's like 30%, right? Of your whatever money comes in goes to the platform holder when you do things digitally. I don't know how that converts between the platforms when it comes to discs and the cartridges. And I think that's going to be what dictates whether that change is there.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah. Well, I guess it's something then we might we might see it start to happen. I wonder if it's something where Nintendo might encourage it. That would be to other maybe if I'm trying to think, I know there's the like like the the Dusk Bloods game. Is that I don't know if that's an Elden Ring thing. I don't think it is. I know it's from Soft. It's from Soft, but I don't know if it's but I wonder because that's going to be a switch to exclusive, if Nintendo will pressure from Soft to be like, hey, can you kind of embrace what we're doing here because we want to set this as a standard? They don't have that control over other third parties, but I do wonder if because it's going to be an exclusive, they might be able to say like win them around.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, no, I think in that case it's quite likely. But again, Nintendo have the power to sweeten the pot on that. They can take less of a cut. There's all sorts of things they can do on the back end. The question becomes like, is this something that makes financial sense for third party entirely third-party uh uh publishers to undertake it?

SPEAKER_00

It clearly does to Nintendo. It clearly makes sense to Nintendo. Yeah, I think we'll wrap here, but yeah, this isn't this isn't anything new for Nintendo. They have been doing this since the Switch 2 launched in other regions. So don't anyone reading this, uh anyone listening who's not in the US, don't expect those prices to change. It's not Mario Kart's not going to get any cheaper. If you didn't get the bundle, then you're uh you're out of you're out of luck. Um but yeah, I I this is this is interesting. Um lots of questions. I wonder if before the end of the year we will see other you know, other people kind of start taking part in this. I wonder what the reaction will be more broadly, because I do think this is a fairly consumer-friendly move. I think it offers people a cheaper way to get games. I know that there's been a lot of questions and and complaints about the pricing of Switch 2 games, but I look at that digital price for Yoshi and I think, well,$60 is what people were have paid for Switch games for nearly 10 years at this point. So that's kind of the de facto price, but the physical's a bit more. So there's some trade-off.

SPEAKER_01

My final thought with that in mind is if it's embraced by multiple people across multiple platforms, how long is it until the physical price goes up and the digital price comes up to what the physical price is now, and the argument becomes, well, you can still buy the game for$60, but you've got to get it digitally.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah. Yeah, well, I I think that that's it, isn't it? That it's a choice. To some people it might be a false choice. To me, it would be because I really do like there's no way I'm ever going to get a Zelda game digitally. I ain't doing that. Like that that does that won't happen. So I'm always gonna pay the premium.

SPEAKER_01

I'm on the full digital train, I travel enough, I don't want to be swapping cartridge.

SPEAKER_00

No, I know you're you're the you're embracing the future. I'm the the Luddite over here who's uh I'm saying that I've got lots of game key cards. I just love cartridges.

SPEAKER_01

It's just like I was like that and then embraced digital fully for mobile or portable, I should say. And then when I couldn't get a physical edition PS5, I became just like screw this. Sign it then.

SPEAKER_00

Fine. But yeah, we'll we'll wrap there, and when we come back, we'll we're going to take a look at this uh news around Epic. And our next story for today, we're going to be taking a look at the very big news from Epic Games this week. Of course, if you've if your head's been in the sand for 10 years, the creators of Fortnite. But they've announced that 1,000 employees are going to be laid off. That's around 20% of the total workforce. CEO Tim Sweeney released a statement and was very explicit about the fact that Epic is spending significantly more than we're making. Um the main reason that this is seemingly happening is because there's been a real decline in the engagement with Fortnite. And to go a bit mathematical, few data points for you. Um we've seen a big dip in monthly active players on the on Fortnite, on the Fortnite ecosystem. And total hours played across the Epic ecosystem fell by 14% year on year in 2025, which is substantial. You got to think we're playing with very big numbers here, so that 14% is going to be huge. Alongside the layoffs, Epic also confirmed that it's closing some of its experimental modes within Fortnite due to underperformance. So we're looking at rocket racing, Fortnite Ballistic, which was their CSGO style five shooter, as well as Festival Battlestage, which is the guitar hero style music mode. I think something, again, I'll I'll get through all this and then I'll open up things to you, Alex. Something that I think's really interesting is that Tim Sweeney explicitly spoke about the fact that Epic's not work, Epic's campaigning against Apple and Google has cost them a lot of money. And the fact that they've not been on those storefronts for years at this point has affected them. Like they've lost revenue through that as well. And then the final point before we'll open things up is one of the other things that Tim Sweeney said was that these layoffs are not related to AI. And we've seen companies like Amazon who have cited AI efficiency as being a big reason for cuts. And but Tim Sweeney, very clear from what he said, is that this is simply because their Epic are spending too much, and that they're you know, they've had these legal cases, they've had the big dip with Fortnite engagement, and they need to future-proof the company, and the way they're doing that is with these very drastic cuts. So that's the that's the context. Alex, I'll I'll happily hand you the talking stick. Any thoughts on all of that?

SPEAKER_01

There's a oh oh there's a whole lot there. I I read the thousand number, I did not realise it was 20% of their workforce. I'm I'm not sure if I thought that was big larger or smaller than I than I expected, but it is huge. Obviously, some of those jobs do cut into and while they cut into jobs that would have people would have been nervous of AI coming for, I think is what I'm trying to say. Like I feel like I am I am certain Tim Sweeney is correct in terms of was not AI was not the reason it is future-proofing the company, trying to make sure them they're making profits where they are. The idea that the drop of engagement is a bit like blaming the consumers, where in fact I think it's not no, it's it's it's expenditure elsewhere. But it does not be able to do that.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, it's a it is a valid point to raise, but it I kind of get where you're coming from. It is a bit like we've given you all these really cool crossovers, and why are we not why are we not buying the skins, folks?

SPEAKER_01

It kind of locks into this idea that you can go for you know ongoing infinite growth kind of thing, can be there. It's like, well, no, people will move on, people will drift and come back. You know, some obviously some skins and some cross collaborations bring people in, but other ones people just don't understand. And I don't know what the market I don't know what Fortnite looks like in terms of player counts up and down, like during uh an off-season that you know don't that doesn't resonate. Do you see that like dip right down and then kick the right cue?

SPEAKER_00

You look at trying to think Fortnite, the the Battle Royale stuff kicked off in I think 2018? 2018, 20, I think maybe late 17, early 2018 sounds about right. You look for how long it's been going, it's had a very it's had a very good run. I think the reality though is that, and it's one of the questions that I'd ask is are we seeing this live service recession of sorts? We've got so many live service games, we've seen I I I didn't think I was gonna bring up today. High guard, high guard's back in the conversation, but we've seen these examples, you know, of the high guards, of the Concords, so many more games that don't get spoken about. There's such an oversaturation in in live service. You've made the point about infinite growth, it it's it's not realistic, and I I think that it's very easy to paint Epic and Tim Sweeney as the bad guy in this situation, but I think you know I I we've spoken about the the Fortnite stuff before about how expensive it'll be to run, how expensive the licenses are. If the reality is that the downturn in Fortnite's fortunes to some degree have massively shifted what Epic's bringing in, they have to they do have to cost correct because if they don't, you could end up in a situation that's even worse in a year's time, and no one wants to see that. But I my my concern is that if Fortnite, which is one of the titans of the games industry still, if Epic Games and Fortnite are having issues What does that say for the rest of the industry? And I feel I I think people maybe came into this year thinking we were past a lot of the the bad.

SPEAKER_01

But unless it unless it means it's freeing those players up to play other things, as long as they're not Roblox, that could be a net positive for the industry. And I mean that just because that would be feeding into uh its own jug and what not.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah. Well you you imagine I don't know what every individual player's habits are, but I'd imagine that a lot of the people who are not playing Fortnite anymore are probably just playing other live service games. Not to put everyone within that community into the same basket, but you know, they might now be playing Marvel Rivals, they might be playing, you know, Marathon, or, you know, people are. I think live service games tend to, in my opinion, the audiences can be quite fickle if they see something new and shiny and everyone's playing it. They're not loyal to the that brand necessarily. They'll go and play whatever is trending, and it feels like maybe for the first time Fortnite is suffering because of that rather than winning because of it.

SPEAKER_01

There's a few other I mean, you know, you said before, obviously it's absolutely awful for these thousand people that are being let go. It looks like the severance package is pretty good at the end. It's very good.

SPEAKER_00

Is very good.

SPEAKER_01

Yes, yes, but at the same time.

SPEAKER_00

To give Epic some credit, because they do deserve credit for that, because I think if you're not gonna sit and talk about it, but if you go and look at the articles we're linking, the the severance stuff is is good.

SPEAKER_01

Which is they they're trying to make sure people are looked after. They're they're they're so like in that regard, but all the same, like you've got to wonder like obviously it's the people lower down that get cut, and it's the people at the top that make the decisions that end up resulting in them needing to be cut, which is always like the kind of like two sides of that, but absolutely feel for the people who have lost their jobs in this. But I do wonder, part of me wonders, like obviously not just over time, but also the people that came in. And and one of the reasons I remember Fortnite being kind of said it was really popular is because that it was a shooting game that kids could play. So like while their bigger brothers or whoever else were off playing Call of Duty, this thing was there, and then that brought people down, it became this place everybody could play. Thing is, then it was new, and you know, in the same way, kind of Facebook kind of was outgrown. I do wonder how many of the people that came in and were playing it and played it through COVID, played it through all these other things, played it through lockdown, have now like gone to university and doing other things, and maybe just that age group of people that were kind of all caught in that period of Fortnite have just kind of like have grown up moved into a place uh doing other things and maybe have more money to buy the games or doing these other things.

SPEAKER_00

And to add to your point, the the one the younger ones who in 2018-2019 were playing Fortnite because it was the in thing, because you know the the parents can turn around and be like, okay, inherently we are shooting things here, but it couldn't be less it couldn't be more careful if it tried. Well that that the next generation of those, you know, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven-year-olds, you've you've said the R-word, they're playing Roblox. Probably. It you know, it feels like Roblox have stolen Epic's Thunder here.

SPEAKER_01

Some of Epic Thunder. Like Epic Epic continue to feed that machine. I'm not saying that, but just it's percentages, right?

SPEAKER_00

But I think it is it is true. Yeah. And I think it's a it's a wider point, but I think the Roblox threat is part of the reason why they've invested so much into the the island creation tools. I mean, uh I can't quite remember the figure, but I think it's around three-quarters of a billion pounds last year they paid out to creators of islands and such within Fortnite. So, you know, stuff that normal people are making, which is that you know, that that's a lot of money, but I think that shows that the threat from Roblox must be real. And yeah, we're seeing this 14% dip in hours played. Well, you know, I'd imagine a a degree of that 14% is going to be people who are going and playing Roblox or other games with UGC elements.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah. Um to be very clear, we we've got the same numbers everybody else does. Like we're that's all it's all kind of a thought experiment in terms of could it be this? But yeah, don't don't listen to anything we're saying. It could all be wrong. I just just want to make very clear that I don't know if that kind of shifting demographic makes but you know, everything reaches a point where it's aged out. And Fortnite was fortunate in the sense that it hit a time that we kind of the technology hasn't shifted dramatically, like it still looks fantastic, it still plays really well, so it hasn't seen that kind of drop-off you see on some mobile games where it's like, well, this is starting to look really old. Or wow, where it's like, okay, like we've got to do incremental upgrades. But Fortnite.

SPEAKER_00

Alex trashing World of Warcraft right there, just a washed up.

SPEAKER_01

They they they've my understanding is I've never played World of Warcraft to any level. Um, but they've overhauled that and you know brushed it up as it incrementally. Fortnite hasn't need to go through the same level of overhaul as that in it it's kind of lifespan. Yeah. The cracks beneath the surface are not showing it in uh that sense of things, but it doesn't stop people from aging out of it.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, I I feel I think that you know, not let's not act as if Fortnite is gonna disappear anytime soon. I think uh the point, you know, the point we've made is that maybe there just needs to be a a re-evaluation, which is what this might be, of what the expectations are. If revenue's down, you know, you account for that, and you know, for whatever you think about Tim Sweeney, he's you know, he he he runs Epic Games, they're one of the biggest companies in in the industry, so he's clearly good at doing what he's doing, and I think this decision won't have been an easy one, but yeah, I I just repeat why that point I made before, which is that if they don't do this now, what might things look like in a year if it might be 14% drop in 2025? What if it this year it's it's 30% and all of a sudden they're in a panic mode because they're losing money?

SPEAKER_01

I'm sure in many ways it'd be much easier to let people go 50 at a time, right? But ultimately they need to reach whatever the end result of this is. That's the determination they've made. And as said, while it's gonna be incredibly hard for the people who are caught up in it, if if that keeps 80% of people going, then then that's the important thing there and and Fortnite and all the other parts tied up in that. Yeah, we've got to keep Fortnite going. But it's absolutely crushing.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, but we'll what we'll do was that's we've had a you know sad section here. Yeah, we'll be morose, didn't it? Yeah, we'll we'll speculation. We'll go away for a moment and then we'll come back and we'll look at this feel-good story about Square Enix because I really I do like this one. I I I do I've got a lot of love for Square Enix. So we'll we'll have a quick moment away. You'll see us in just a second, and when we come back, let's talk about Square Enix. Good news. Give me a good news story, Tom. I'll give you a good news story. Our final story, okay, patience.

SPEAKER_02

Young Power.

SPEAKER_00

Okay, our final story takes us to Metacritic and Square Enix. The the Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy publisher has been crowned as the aggregator's P1 number one publisher for 2025. The first time ever after 16 years. I'm sure that everyone in Square Enix HQ is delighted by this news.

SPEAKER_01

They've jumped Metacritic running, yes, not of Square Enix.

SPEAKER_00

Not of Square Enix. Imagine 16 years they pumped out of Final Fantasy every year. Uh and all 500 spin-offs they've done. But they've jumped from sixth place last year to the top spot. They had nine eligible games, which all received a 75 plus positive Metacritic score. The success came from a real mix of big AAA projects and smaller. I've put niche in quotations because I don't think this is a niche, but it is to some people. But we've got these high-quality games, the the Final Fantasy VII Rebirth release on PC. We've got the Final Fantasy Tactics remake. I'm not going to try and do the second part of that game's title. That's not happening. We've got the Dragon Quest 1 and 2 HD 2D remake, and then we've got the latest Octopath game, Octopath Traveler Zero. Just a few of the bigger ones for Square Enix. Interestingly, Sony Nintendo both absent from the top 10. 2025 was very much the year of the third parties, I guess, in in that way. And then Microsoft at fifth, which whatever Microsoft are.

SPEAKER_01

I think whoever that encompasses.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, whoever that is at this point. But what I found quite funny, and it's not related to this, but Ubisoft came 11th and Nintendo came 12th. So as much as everyone uh can can dunk on Ubisoft, it seems that Welcome Tour and Drag Dragon Drive brought Nintendo below Ubisoft, but the story here is square in it.

SPEAKER_01

Nintendo's got a really wild ride because I I've been checking it while you've been going over this, and they are the only company to have more than one great game, and they've got three.

SPEAKER_00

Well then that that's I think it's Tears of the Kingdom, Breath of the Wild. It's a one of them. Donkey Kong, isn't it?

SPEAKER_01

Oh, yeah, okay, yeah, it's Zelda twice. So Nintendo have kind of cheesed it a bit.

SPEAKER_00

But to raise the question, Square Enix's success is kind of similar. You know, we're we're seeing the the release of Rebirth on PC. That was their highest ranking game last year. Obviously, that's the deviation away from the PlayStation exclusive strategy, which we've known they've not been successful with for quite a while. But you know, Octopath Traveler 2, 0 even, sorry, that's in the HD 2D engine. We've got the remake of Final Fantasy Tactics, Dragon Quest 1 and 2, both remakes in the HDD engine. My question, Alex, is this success very much dependent on nostalgia? Because it feels like a lot, and it's clever, but it feels like a lot of Square Enix's success in the last few years is looking back at the past, bringing those experiences to new audiences and doing a really good job of it.

SPEAKER_01

I mean yes, clearly it is.

SPEAKER_00

Correct answer. There we go. Next question.

SPEAKER_01

Whether that's people who played them originally and want to go back to them, and whether it is introducing it to a new audience is obviously a huge part of that. But also they're really cornering a market in where they sit. I mean, these are all games that really sit in a a single place to like the numbers on it are 19 products across nine titles. And I think is the only game there that's new the Final Fantasy. I don't want to say remakes, because that's not what they are, not even reimagining. I'm not sure what's going on. Remakes, aren't they? I'm not even sure by what I've heard of them. I mean, I've got to be.

SPEAKER_00

I mean, they're they're basically as someone who never played the originals. I finished remake on the Switch. I've currently started playing Rebirth on PS5. I understand that they're essentially Final Fantasy VII in name and nothing else.

SPEAKER_01

Characters.

SPEAKER_00

So definitely dependent on the the name recognition and the character recognition, but very much a new start for Final Fantasy VII. But yeah, I it I I I applaud Square Enix because I think what they're doing, and I don't know all the facts and the figures and stuff, but it feels like what they're doing is having a lot of success from games with I imagine quite small budgets in comparison to a lot of other games. They're recognizing that we're good at what we're good at. We can re-polish up these games, we make really good JRPGs. We've got a load of great RPGs in the past. We can put some new ones in there, we can you know Octopath Traveler Zero is a reimagining of a mobile game with loads of new elements. So pretty much pretty much everything they released last year has already come out at some point in the past.

SPEAKER_01

It does throw up a few questions though, doesn't it, in terms of why they've never appeared at number one in the past. Because they've and they're actually games that reviewed well, so I don't know why how they would have played into it. But you know, they had the Tomb Raider games, they had the DSX games, they had the Hitman games all under their umbrella for a long time there. At the racing thing that I think had like massive charging, very bad reviews, a lot of charges in and I think they were trying to embrace NFTs for a while. Squares had a dotted history, so it shows that they've worked out a formula that works for them. Well, I think what they've done the return as well.

SPEAKER_00

The point you've made, I think the answer to that is if you go and look at what they released last year, there's no filler. They and if you look even two or three years ago, the reason why they're getting dragged down in these rankings is because yeah, you've released Final Fantasy VII remake. You know, I think that's a brilliant game. Some people might not, but you've released this brilliant game, but you've also released two absolute stinkers to use a very uh you know industry term. But that's what's dragged them down is is those weaker releases. Whereas last year felt very yeah, we're just to yeah, because to be fair to them, I look at this lease and that look at this list and I think that's that's great game after great game. I don't care if they're brand new or they're remakes or they're this or they're that. I just look and I think brilliant game after brilliant game and and that success that they've earned critically is deserved, and they've stopped releasing bad games. It's that easy, guys. Just only release good games games.

SPEAKER_01

No more talking about it.

SPEAKER_00

Only release good games, and you too can be Metacritic's number one publisher.

SPEAKER_01

But I think the other thing that you've hit on there that is another reason that so I imagine Square obviously always everybody always wants to be the number one publisher in terms of reviews. Like it, I'm sure it has amazing knock-on effects down the line. But I think the other thing is that, and you pointed this out, these are probably quite targeted, they're making efficient use of their engine, and they've got a very probably a very clear pipeline, as opposed to the Western games that they were putting out, that they were never happy with the returns on those. So I think the this could be a it was no doubt a very good year for Square. And if if this is the if this is the path they're going down and they're gonna double down on this.

SPEAKER_00

Which I imagine they are.

SPEAKER_01

I mean, we've already centric, I guess, is the thing.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, and you think you've I'm keen to wrap so we can get into the rundown, but I I think my last point would be that will they continue doing this? It seems that they will. You look at this year, we've already had remake on the Switch 2, which is doing fantastically. Right now, 40% off. So I'd really recommend it if anyone's not played it, digital. Maybe it's more expensive, physical, uh following Nintendo's lead. But yeah, we've had the rebirth is coming to Xbox and Switch 2, or it might already be out on Xbox, but it's coming to Switch 2 later this year. You had the remake of Dragon Quest VII with that lovely visual style, which I think we'll see popping up in more remakes, I imagine. So yeah, it it does feel like they've recognised a a hopefully sustainable way of publishing and developing games, and and that decision has been rewarded with you know being recognized as having a really strong ear, and I'm all for it. One of the points we'll talk about in the rundown is counterintuitive to this idea of budgeting well and and other such stuff. So I think Square Enix is very much uh an example for other companies perhaps to look at and try and embrace the way that they're going about things.

SPEAKER_01

It probably is worse step because obviously you've got Capcom at three, which did very well, and it was a port that kind of helped bring them down. I I don't want to we do have to jump into the final bit, but one thing that I do want to shout out is that an ex-client of ours, camera, are on there. Uh number two, which is a Chinese publisher that, you know, they they put out a lot of titles. They only released five games last year, but they were all well reviewed, like really putting them in at two, which is Yeah, one one of two publishers to receive nothing but green Metacritic scars.

SPEAKER_00

Green Metacritics, yeah. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01

And I mean green. They've only put things out on PC, I imagine, looking at the fact they've only got five products because five titles, five products, whereas it was nineteen products, nine titles for Square, because they're they're they're across multiple platforms. But absolutely worth shouting out that you know that they're obviously really picking their games well, they're publishing, choosing to publish, and great to see newer blood being injected into that list. Because if you look at the previous top tens, it's all it's all the kind of Yeah.

SPEAKER_00

I mean, if you look elsewhere as well, we we will move on. But we've got Thunderfull at number four, uh a bit further down, emu at number nine, uh Fury, number ten. Trying to see if we've got any more of the Devolver, number 14, Don't Nod. I know Don't Nod are a tiny um company, but Atari, number 20, they're above Sony. Atari guys, Atari are better than Sony.

SPEAKER_01

You end up really looking, you end up going around in circles. But yes, yeah, I just I just thought it was worth shouting out uh, you know, somebody that uh a a a publisher that might be less well known is is right up there.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, but fantastic. So we'll we'll head away now. We had that nice feel-good story. Well done, Square Enix. I've played pretty much I've played pretty much all of these games, so I'm part of the reason. Yeah, I've I've literally I look into these four, I've bought every single one, apart from the um remake of Dragon Quest I and Two. But yeah, well done Square. Here we are, we're back. Rapid rundown time, and this one is gonna be very rapid because Alex has just reminded me with uh a lot of anger in his eyes. He's like, I need to be out of here very soon. So we're gonna we're gonna go through these really quickly. First story of the rundown, marathon launched a few weeks ago, and despite being a first-party title, some of the sales data we're seeing for this indicates that Steam sales are around 70% of its sales, with PS5 being just 19%. I I think we've seen Sony by all accounts are pulling away from PC, aside from their multiplayer games. I was about to say, I bet they're glad they haven't done that already. Well, apart from the multiplayer games, and I think this is why, because Steam is the place to go for shooters, and you know, and I think we're seeing that with the data here. Yeah, it's it's very much doing well on Steam. PS5, not so much. So I think it it shows that Sony's kind of doing the right thing.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, I think any game that requires an a larger active player base to make the game good for the native, whatever you want, however you want to look at it, platform needs that broader reach.

SPEAKER_00

So yeah, I'm yeah, because I I think it has cross I imagine it has cross-play. So it it yeah, it makes total sense. If you're releasing something multiplayer, don't just release it on console, is is the message there. Another message from Jason Schreyer is stop stop spending so much on games, on making games. Jason Schreyer, very much Bloomberg journalist and brilliant author, too, very much one of the most in-the-know sources of in the industry, has this week spoken about the fact that he is aware of budgets for games that are up to three uh triple A games that are up to$300 million or even more in some cases. I know you said before, Alex, well that's GTA's the more. Um but yeah, the I I kind of did some um like back of the coaster maths on this or whatever the term is. I I if a game had a$300 million budget, it retails for$70, you take away the the platform's 30%, every game that has that budget has to sell six million to break even.

SPEAKER_01

At full price.

SPEAKER_00

At full price, yeah. That's that's an even stronger point. Which a little bit concerning. And Well Done Square Enix, who are not doing that, unless you're telling me that Dragon Quest remakes cost$300 million to make.

SPEAKER_01

Well, that's what I was about to say. Like I I do think it does make does explain if this is the size of title that you know if that's how much they think they've got to spend to get that kind of sales, then of course you're gonna see fewer and fewer original games occupying those top spots.

SPEAKER_00

But you you wait for Final Fantasy VII remake. Remake in 2040. We're going back to Midgar, but this time we're only going to do the first chapter. Absolutely. Yep. Yeah, yeah. Bring it all around. Like it's uh it's a lot of money. It is a lot of money. But it you know, it it I think I I always think in Spider-Man 2, because I think that was one of the ones where the leaks showed that it costs about$2.20, and that includes the license, but there was a a mission in that where you could interact for 10 minutes. That was how long the mission was. You're in a full like theme pack, you can ride on a roller coaster, you can go and play some of the games, and and that's great. But then I think how much did this cost to make for what is 10 minutes of a 20-hour game?

SPEAKER_01

Spider-Man's different anyway. I mean that because it's locked onto PlayStation, or at least it was at the point of its release, it was also to help drive platform sales so it could afford to be a loss leader. That doesn't work for non-platform holders.

SPEAKER_00

So you know, I mean, it couldn't afford to be that much of a loss leader because Insomniac laid off a load of people. Guys, we we we were happy to take a loss, but not this big. God, come on. But yeah, our our final little story this week is Behaviour Interactive, known for Dead by Daylight, have acquired the fun pimps who are the developers of Seven Days to Die. And we're seeing more and more examples of bigger independent studios consolidating with smaller studios to form these bigger studios, a lot of studios that are really focused on genre niches, so horror in this case, and and we've seen a few examples, but I think this is one of the biggest that we've seen.

SPEAKER_01

I'm trying to did you say that the they yeah, Dead by Daylight, it brings Dead by Daylight and Seven Days to Die, kind of in under the same catalogue being because behaviour behaviour puts out other games, but I think what that screams to to me, uh and you kind of said this, Tom. Um I kind of expanded on it in my in my brain in the interim. Expand upon it for everyone else too, so they couldn't. Yeah, I was about to stand in your brain. Um I imagine the people at the fun pimps, was it? Yes, probably kind of like wondering what the next project is, but they're also sat on this cash cow, which if they keep it moving, keep it kind of keep the the content coming in and the new stuff, and that it is going to be a an ongoing community center, not community centre, centre for a community and and sales and revenue driver. And maybe they're just like, okay, one, we want to move on to building these deals and things is getting harder. Whereas behavior are like, no, we've got this absolutely in the back. Yeah, we know how to do it. Yeah, let's just let's just put this through the sausage machine and push push it out in both directions, kind of thing.

SPEAKER_00

It's a very it's very symbiotic, isn't it? I think both sides help each other here. And I think this is I don't love acquisitions, but I think this is a really good example of one. It makes total sense. I think for the as you said, for the the fun pimps, it gives them a bit of flexibility to they can they can stay doing what they're doing, but if they want to try something else, they can. And if it's within a similar genre, they've got an expert who knows, you know, from with the PR brain I'm I've got here, it's they know all the content creators, they know all the people to reach out to if they want to do events, they know everyone in the space, all the partnerships for giving new characters, new like cinematics. Makes perfect sense.

SPEAKER_01

And also, and like for the the fun pimps, that they're probably sat there going, like, okay, do we ride this right the way down until you know we start to see the the diminishing returns diminish to the point that we have to let people go? Or do we start something new now? Because it it's hard to uh if you're a small team, it's hard to run these two things concurrently, like building something new and maintaining where you are. So this could really like free them up to to do more, yeah. Which is exciting to see. Hopefully it'll be uh good for both of them.

SPEAKER_00

No, yeah, I agree. But yeah, that's and then there we are. Done. Here we are. That's it. See you later. No, that's that's it for another another rapid rundown. That is the end of today's downloads. As always, if you have enjoyed it, if you're new to the the download community, I guess be sure to subscribe wherever you get your podcast from, whether you're listening or you're watching on YouTube. Be sure to subscribe so you can stick around and catch future episodes. If you want to read more of these stories, we have our LinkedIn weekly download newsletter, which is available every Friday, summarizes all the biggest stories from the week in a very easy, easy-to-read fashion. We've also got the daily download, which is our Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday newsletter, five days a week, straight to your inbox. You can find a link to that in the description below as well. So you can click that, you get stories every day. We also have all the latest events and more fun things sprinkled in there, as and when we see them. But that's it. Alex, thank you very much for being here as always at a stallwart of the of the podcast. It's been a pleasure. Thank you very much to everyone for listening, and we will see you all next time. Goodbye.