Square Enix on why the Secret of Mana remake isn't planned for Switch - Nintendo Everything

Submit a news tip



Square Enix on why the Secret of Mana remake isn’t planned for Switch

Posted on October 12, 2017 by (@NE_Brian) in News, Switch

Square Enix’s new Secret of Mana remake isn’t currently planned for Switch. That’s somewhat surprising given the company’s support of the console thus far. We also can’t forget that Seiken Densetsu Collection also came out in Japan earlier this year.

Redbull recently spoke with producer Masaru Oyamada, and managed to ask why the remake isn’t in the works for Switch. His answer was fairly sound, in which it was explained that development started before Switch was announced. Though Square Enix can’t immediately say that the game will be on Switch, the company would like “to continue listening to the various requests from our fans.”

Oyamada’s full words:

“Development for the title began before the Switch was announced, so it was definitely beyond our expectations to see the level of anticipation for the release on the platform grow this much. In terms of our current circumstance, we are unable to immediately state that this will become available on the Switch, but we hope to continue listening to the various requests from our fans.”

Source

Leave a Reply

  • Roto Prime

    I will take the collection if you don’t mind, hard copy and translated….please….

    • Luis Coro

      I don’t really care for that remake… I looks like a lazy job. Now… if it had the Dragon Quest character and level design!! I would beg for it LOL!!

  • Blanco8x8

    What a convenient excuse…

    • Exy

      All I want is for these companies to say this from the get-go. If we can’t have nice things, don’t wait to tell us. Just be honest and transparent.

    • PRIMUS

      It is truthful though. They didn’t see the Switch being this successful. Not even we the Nintendo fans or Nintendo themselves saw the Wii level of greatness.

      • Yuuki

        yet they risk announcing a new Dragon Quest game for it long before we even knew what the switch is…

        http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/08/22/dragon-quest-11-confirmed-for-nintendo-nx

        • GoldenTriforce

          Because Dragon Quest always sells on Nintendo consoles, and Nintendo likely only gave them access to a limited amount of dev kits early. Nintendo probably wanted Dragon Quest over other games, and also we still haven’t even seen XI’s port yet (though I am feeling good about a mid 2018 release for that).

    • GoldenTriforce

      This is how game development works though. Budgets are created at the start of development and it’s not easy to increase these later on. It can happen *eh em Rayman eh em* but it’s not common.

    • MagcargoMan

      It’s typical PR drivel. That last sentence sounded so fake.

  • Luiz Da Silva

    To be honest, I would feel better if they had said “We did not bring Secret of Mana remake to Switch because we did not want to”, it’s a pretty pathetic excuse when even the PS Vita will receive a version.

    • PRIMUS

      The Vita was out longer than the PS4. I dislike sony and xbox, but this time this makes sense.

    • Luis Coro

      Who is even in the market for the VITA??? not even the free games we get from being a plus member for PSN its a motivation to get one!!!

  • Tlink7

    Can’t have the big guns on the Switch, now can we? πŸ˜›

  • Marco Romano

    What are you guys talking about?

    It’s perfectly understandble, the biggest part of the games you are seeing right now has been in development for months or years, way before Switch was even announced

    • Roto Prime

      So do you Think Dragon Quest XI Switch had a shorter development cycle then this game?……

      • PRIMUS

        Dragon Quest has the Mario, Final fantasy power behind them, even mediocre games shall sell.

      • GoldenTriforce

        Nintendo limits dev kits way too much. Very good chance that the Mana team got their kits far later than the DQ team, and DQ team probably couldn’t share much due to NDAs…. plus we still haven’t even seen Switch DQ XI so…

        • Roto Prime

          This is logical <3

        • Didn’t they try to limit dev kits less this time? I also feel like I have a hard time believing Square couldn’t more dev kits besides what Enix got.

          But maybe this is the thing. We’re getting Enix’s big series, and we got Setsuna (and now Lost Sphear). Maybe Square doesn’t want to put their major/classic titles on the Switch. :/

          • GoldenTriforce

            I mean Square and Enix aren’t separate divisions, they are all internally under the same company, but yes, Nintendo limited less dev kits this time around. The issue is when they did that. Most dev kits shipped last year, and for most major (AA or AAA) games releasing this year or next, one or two years is not enough heads up to add to the development budget or to start porting. Bigger teams like DQ and Bravely were likely higher priorities for Nintendo, and smaller teams had short enough dev times and low enough budgets that Switch could be added on late. DQ Heroes and DQX likely got ports due to their low risks and low porting budgets. By next year, going into 2019, we will be seeing more multiplat titles from Japanese publishers. This is already starting to happen, see Phantasy Star Online 2, DQ Builders 2, and Attack on Titan 2 (a lot of sequels I guess).

          • It just seems weird that they could port Setsuna and get Lost Sphear on Switch, but not this.

        • Luis Coro

          Lets say they did get a dev kit later on… We have seen games that have been ported on the switch in a week or less (snake pass). On the other hand the reason why we haven’t seen DQXI on the Switch is because the unreal engine 4 version that was used for the PS4 was version 4.13 and the engine wasn’t optimized for the Switch until version 4.15

    • Vigilante_blade

      However, it s coming to Vita. It can be a very easy port.

    • Luis Coro

      Do you think development kits are handed on announcement for the console? those are made first with the overall specs of the console and then updated. Developers have to have one before announcement so they can showcase some demos or footage of some sort when announced.

  • Yolkghost

    Kind of a silly excuse considering dqxi was announced for switch forever ago,but I think it’s just the wording of it. They were worried about it not selling but since they already had plans for other jrpgs might as well do Mana.

    • Exy

      I want for this excuse to come up years into the Switch’s lifespan, maybe five years from now and a developer will say there’s no Switch version because one wasn’t planned when development started. Dumber things have been said in that regard before.

  • MagcargoMan

    Because they want you to buy the SNES Classic for the original.

    • Exy

      What for? They could make much more money with this remake and not have to pay Nintendo licensing fees.

    • this can’t explain why games like FFXII HD, collection of various KH HD games, FFX HD, WoFF, FF Type0 HD etc. avoid Nintendo platforms like plague

      • MagcargoMan

        Because ever since FF7 Square has avoided putting mainline FF games on Nintendo consoles.

      • GoldenTriforce

        I mean some of the more recent ones, maybe, but a lot of those were out around the time of Wii U, and while I wish they did try harder, I wouldn’t blame third parties for not supporting a console which sold worse than the Gamecube, especially with reports of how hard it was to port to. Stuff like EA backing out because people didn’t buy their poorly marketed mediocre ports was stupid, but that is unrelated.

        • Total sales of WiiU and Vita are comparable (worldwide, LTD) yet they avoided WiiU entirely. Switch is currently best selling platform with potential to surpass WiiU and Vita LTD within it’s 1st fiscal year, yet their support is extremely limited. This nearly complete lack of support for Switch even contradicts their own statements for example:

          Square Enix Vows to Fully Support The Nintendo Switch
          7 April 2017
          “In addition to developing
          new titles, we also want to port what we can do with existing game
          titles more and more,” Square-Enix COO Yosuke Matsuda.

          http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/170008-Square-Enix-Nintendo-Switch-Support

          On top of that WiiU isn’t isolated example but norm.

  • perhaps they should ask Epic how to port Secret of Mana to Switch.

  • Illustrathor

    Bull! Even if the Switch reason is plausible, releasing it for the Vita shows a different reason. The newest DQ on the 3DS outsold the PS4 version, and the 3DS was out long enough but they skipped it for the less sold system? Right… totally not Sony using their money once more to block the competition.

    • there is deep hatred between former Square part of SE and Nintendo

      • Reggie

        But it has been improving a lot over the years. You can’t deny that.

      • PRIMUS

        The beef has receded more now lol.

      • GoldenTriforce

        Which explains why Square Enix has announced almost as many Switch games as Nintendo.

        Companies hold grudges, but not for that long. Especially after Nintendo management has changed so much and SE has experienced so much success on Nintendo handhelds.

        This interview gives the most probable reason any dev can give for not porting games because it directly reflects how the industry actually works, not how the internet fantasizes it to work.

        • the only exception are games with relation to DQ and some low budget games, namely Octopath Travelers and some games from Tokyo RPG Factory nothing much else.

          • GoldenTriforce

            You were saying Square Enix had a grudge against Nintendo.

            That would be blatantly financially idiotic. I wasn’t saying they were supporting it more than PS4, I was saying that a company holding a grudge over a president kicking them out of a building and telling them to never come back over TWENTY years ago would be irrational, I have no idea how that is deluded.

            Dragon Quest (this one especially, considering the series is a whole lot bigger in Japan over Final Fantasy right now) and Tokyo RPG Factory titles are big, and while yes, everything else is not huge (like the Fear Effect games and RE: Legend), look at what they did for PS4 in its first year, only 2 games (Tomb Rader and FFXIV). The fact that 4 have already released on Switch so far is not bad. The fact is, unless every team in the studio got its dev kits 3 years ago, they aren’t going to have full support in the first year of the console’s life, that is very rare. Smaller games are very easy to port as they are cheaper (making them lower risks to add to the budget later on in development, which is what we are seeing right now), and Dragon Quest and the Bravely team likely got priority over the Mana team (and similar teams) due to their support of the 3DS. The only game which SHOULD have been on Switch year one and isn’t yet is FFXV, and that is Tabata’s fault, not Square Enix ‘s or Nintendo’s. Tabata was the wrong person to have in charge of a massive console RPG.

            Also, Square Enix only released one (two if you don’t count Garfield Cart, don’t know why they published that game) more game on Vita over 3DS, and the 3DS games on average sold much better. (VGchartz, which is not super trustworthy BUT is the closest I can get to global sales, says that Square Enix sold over 5 times as many games worldwide on 3DS over Vita, and according to accurate Japanese sales data, SE sold (about, give or take a few hundred thousand) 1.6 million Vita games in Japan, and (about, give or take a few hundred thousand) 9.6 million 3DS games in Japan, which to me says that not only did they support the 3DS just as much as the Vita but got a lot more out of the 3DS, especially in the country where Vita did best).

            We can debate about how good Square Enix’s support has been for the Switch, I’d argue its been great when looking at both prior Nintendo Consoles but also the first years of the Xbox One and PS4, plus they are looking into porting games, which they weren’t originally planning on porting, due to the Switch’s success, which means that support will likely increase in the future, but what I was trying to say was there is no way the company still has an irrational grudge (which was completely Nintendo’s fault at the time but that was 90s Nintendo, not 2017 Nintendo) over 20 years later.

          • GoldenTriforce

            I shouldn’t start writing essays for internet comments as a habit, seems like a bad idea :/

          • My English is extremely bad and I can only apologise for this

            1.DQ is special case managed mainly by Yuji Horii so it’s not even relevant.

            2.Tokyo RPG Factory is small production “Tokyo RPG Factory is a micro studio of ten dedicated staff. A further 20
            freelance staff make up the rest of the studio so it’s a small team
            like how games were created back in the day!” https://blog.us.playstation.com/2016/06/03/15-things-to-know-about-i-am-setsuna-out-july-19-on-ps4/

            3.support for Playstation platforms is basically granted so not even good comparison.

            4. your list is not even impressive, DQ, emulated ROMs and cheap production

            5. they can announce games years in advance DQXI for Switch is good example

            6.FFXV is total nonsense, high end production that barely run on far more powerful platforms, that they stick on this idiocy eg porting high end production on Switch is beyond laughable, and only prove that there is no real intention to support Switch.

            7.Vita was supported with ports of their most important games, 3DS was supported with trash, albeit exclusive trash.

            8. Their support for 3DS was cash grab, most sales was generated by DQ and therefore totally unrelated to my argument.

            9. As they say, seeing is believing
            10. Who exactly was responsible for the grudge between Square and Nintendo is hard to determine, since there are only statements from traitor himself and not from Nintendo read utter lack of relevant sources

          • GoldenTriforce

            1. Okay? Dragon Quest still sells really well especially on Nintendo. Who made the call to port it (SE, Hori, Nintendo) doesn’t matter, They are still big games that the Wii U didn’t have outside of X,

            2. In this case they are still quality games.

            3. And yet less games released in the first year on the hardware whose support was basically guaranteed over the risky Nintendo system. I am not saying that SE doesn’t see less inherent risk in PS platforms, but that only shows how well SE is supporting Switch, especially after recent Nintendo home consoles.

            4. A last gen MMO, a current gen port, a collection of retro games, and a smaller current gen port on Switch seems more impressive than the PS4’s last gen port and last gen MMO.

            5. Well A. we still haven’t seen Switch DQXI and B. Nintendo probably gave the DQ team higher priority for dev kits due to their 3DS support.

            6. Again Tabata is not a good director

            7. Kingdom Hearts 3D, Bravely Default, Bravely Second, DQ 7, DQ 8, DQ XI, and DQ Monsters are trash now? Okay…

            8. Whether it was a cash grab or not doesn’t change the fact that their games on 3DS sold far more, and not just the DQ ones. Bravely Default and KH both sold over 1 million units, which for none FF or DQ games is pretty good, and are also very good games (haven’t played any KH games, but have only heard good things about 3D). Whether they were “cash grabs” or not doesn’t change the fact that nothing on Vita sold close to anything on 3DS. If their good stuff was only on Vita, then they are probably very disappointed with how those titles sold, something which can’t be said for most of their 3DS releases.

            9. Yes

            10. Based on interviews from current or ex-Square Enix employees (the “traitor”), after switching over to PS because the silicon graphics processors were not as powerful as Nintendo expected and the system’s cartridges were way too small and expensive, Yamauch supposedly responded with anger telling them to never come back. While this may not have been corroborated by any other party, I am inclined to believe this because A. There is no rational reason to lie about this 20 years after the fact, and B. This lines up directly with how everyone, from Nintendo or not, has described Yamauchi. If you angered him you would feel the repercussions. Also this could be because of the language disparity, but why the use of “traitor”? It’s not like they were turncoats in a war, they are a company who decided that they couldn’t do what they wanted on N64, and especially with most third parties already having a strained and purely financial relationship with Nintendo because of their Famicom-era policies, switched over to Sony. Do I agree with that decision, no, but in no way does it make them traitors, given the circumstances it was pretty rational.

      • That died down a lot. And while the Wii U got nothing, the Wii, DS and 3DS were pretty supported by Square.

        This is weird behavior though. They’re throwing their scraps at the Switch and Enix is doing most of the support otherwise. (Even if the DQH ports were crap; not that it was Enix’s fault.)

        • Wii was supported with trash, DS was best-selling platform of all time in Japan and yet their support was mediocre at best.

          Vita was supported far more than 3DS.

          • Game_God

            I believe Square has this old fantasy of breaking Nintendo lockdown on portable gaming in Japan, they know that this where Nintendo true force is, they have tried it once with Bandai & the WonderSwan (burning failure!)… them supporting so avidly the walking-dead Vita was another try to dent Nintendo’s grip on the japanese handheld market.

            Square are sneaky & I won’t ever trust their goodwill towards Nintendo again, they keep on showing their fangirl bias towards sony again & again, despite being forced by the state of the market to make games for Nintendo platforms.

            Take the Vita & its lackluster performance, slap on it a Nintendo sticker & Square would have flown from it like it had the plague (or like what they did with the Wii U to be more clear…)!

          • there is certainly some bad blood between Nintendo and former high level Square employees, that’s for sure

          • Wow. Did you really just? Chocobo’s Dungeon was not trash. Far from it. Some of the smaller, e-shop titles weren’t special/AAA, but a few were solid. Besides, the HD stuff was just as “trash.”

            How was their support mediocre? We got remakes of III and IV, we got 4HoL, Revenant Wings, Tactics A2, Valkyrie Profile, TWEWY, Chrono Trigger, Heroes of Mana, two Crystal Chronicles games, Children of Mana, and a few things I didn’t list.

            That’s more support than they’ve given to any console from the seventh gen and onward. And that’s just the Square side, not even counting the Enix support.

            Lol. What games from SE did the Vita game? I can’t wait to see this list. I’ll give you Scarlet Grace and Chaos Rings, but after those, what isn’t a port or “trash?”

          • DS/Wii both among best selling platforms of all times, supported with such pathetic collection of trash
            Chocobo’s Dungeon Wii Metascore 76
            Final Fantasy: The 4 Heroes of Light Metascore 71
            Heroes of Mana Metascore 66
            Crystal Chronicles The Crystal Bearers Metacritic 66
            Heroes of Mana Metacritic 66
            Children of Mana Metacritic 65
            Chrono Trigger port,
            FFIII and FFIV remake of ancient games
            Revenant Wings, Tactics A2, Valkyrie Profile, TWEWY OK

          • Lol. Metascores, huh. Okay. x’D FFXIII got an 83. You think that’s accurate too? The fact that you’re even relying on a score is pretty silly, but have at.

            Nice job listing those Vita games, by the way.

          • Metascore is entirely valid metrics for quality, certainly far better than your deluded statements.
            The entire relevancy of Vita in this debate is that SE can support inferior and even commercially failed platform with ports.

          • Metascore doesn’t mean much. XIII got a 83. Even though it’s a lot of corridors, cutscenes and a battle system most of the FF fanbase apparently didn’t like.

            I think it should come down to what the game actually delivers. We also should realize that main series entries on average will score better than any side and spin-off game, no matter which is actually “better.”

            You didn’t actually list any Vita games though. . . I even listed two for you. And while I did say Chaos Rings, it is also a port. A mobile one. (A very good one, but still a port.)

          • I don’t need to list any Vita games and i just explained why

          • Lol. Except, no. You’re saying that SE supported it more than the 3DS, but you don’t have any games to show for that support. Especially any games that aren’t ports/multi-plats, or “trash”; as you used to condemn and denounce the Wii, DS and 3DS support.

            You can’t even back your own points right now.

          • Ports are support too, especially in current multiplat oriented industry, the only question is whether exclusive trash is better than multi platform games.
            So my point is still valid

          • So when you said “Chrono Trigger port” earlier, was that supposed to be, “it’s a port so it doesn’t count,” or that it was included in the ok list?

          • another problem is what exactly one should expect from publishers on various platforms. A) commercially failed platforms B) platforms with moderate success C) best selling platforms.

          • You’re not answering your points though.

            I agree that Square’s Wii U and Switch support has been horribly lacking or inadequate but frnkly, that’s all of their console support. Their home console support has been horrible lately. (Delayed and/or broken or messy games.) Their portable support on the DS was great, but it got way reduced on the 3DS and then was mixed (Default was great, then they slashed Second’s budget and Explorers is kind of a cheap cash-in). They really did the very least for the Vita too.

            Really, all of their worthwhile support is basically mobile right now, and even that’s fractured. Some of it is shoved out for a quick, cheap buck, but games like Record Keeper, Opera Omnia, Chaos Rings, etc are what’s been delivering.

            Square hasn’t had a grudge against Nintendo in an incredibly long time. Really, it was even one guy. Sakaguchi and the others actually present didn’t care except for one semi-irrelevant guy. And their Nintendo support improved over the years.

            That their support now sucks isn’t from a grudge. It’s just that Square sucks. Heck, even with Dissidia, I’m upset that the Switch isn’t getting, but the game is pretty dang cheap. It is from KT though, so it shouldn’t be a surprise.

            There is going to be less and less excuse for the Switch though. Some of the PC and Vita ports may as well be on it. Hopefully they’ll come.

          • bad apology nothing much else

  • Dascylus

    I’ll buy it on PS4 and double dip if it comes out on Switch.

  • SetzerGabbiani

    LOL. I said this very thing when it was announced, but it’s still upsetting. We won’t see the Switch catch up with these pre-planned releases until sometime in 2018. At that point, these kinds of excuses will not carry water.

    Essentially, the SD Collection was a preemptive strike against this very line of questioning.

    It didn’t work though.

    • Velen (Not WoW)

      Yo Setzer.

      Also yeah, I agree, mid-way through next year they won’t be able to make these excuses anymore.

      Though considering how long the dev cycles for a game can be, I find SE’s explanation of development being before the Switch was announced plausible…

      Problem is they didn’t give us a specific time frame for when development started before then. If it was far along into development before the Switch came along then their commitment to non-Switch versions before even thinking of porting to the Switch would make sense.

      -but not giving us a proper time frame hurts the claim’s cred.

    • PRIMUS

      That is okay. We save money that way. Let us act like Xenoblade 2 won’t take us 8 months to complete.

      • SetzerGabbiani

        You’re absolutely right. I still have yet to 100% XCX.

      • I haven’t even finished Xenoblade. . .

  • Aline Piroutek

    Don’t attack the Vita version guys, Vita has little investiment from big thirds like SE.
    We need to complain about KH3 on Switch.

    • MagcargoMan

      You need to complain about KH3 in general because they’re taking so damn long.

  • Seaphron

    Definitely a fair answer from them. Hope they do decide to bring this title over though. Probably won’t pick up on PS4, but I can see myself grinding this one out on my lunch hour (don’t have a Vita).

  • Djip Minderman

    “Development started before Switch was announced” Developement started in the later half of the psp’s life span from the looks of those graphics.

    • Lol, I was thinking the same.

  • KnightWonder

    So basically, they’ve got no answer.

  • Vigilante_blade

    Square enix. If a game comes out for Vita, then it is EASY to make for Switch. You have no excuse, whatsoever. It’s time you start giving REAL support to the Switch. Enough half measures.

  • jimmy

    Still looks like a cellphone game, dodged the bullet on this one i guess

    • PRIMUS

      lol!

    • I have a lot of respect for plenty of cell phone games, but yeahhh. This looks cheap, lol.

  • PRIMUS

    This is a great response and truthful. Not the nonsense that will come from Capcom.

  • If it means that there might still be hope down the line, then yeah, I’d like to see this on the Switch, please.

  • fox_whisper85

    Oh good, I hope they lose sales through piracy

  • Okay, this is funny. Because that was the case with a few games and I absolutely buy it (like the SAO game). However, unlike the SAO game. . . this looks like crap. I don’t even mean that rudely but like. . . the SAO game looks pretty. Very pretty. (Most of them do.) This remake. . . does not. It makes me think of when people say Switch games look like PS2 games.

    I don’t know if I believe them or not, but they’re doing something wrong if this has been worked on for so long enough that they couldn’t develop it for the Switch as well and it looks like this.

  • Busterblade

    So many developers caught with their pants down, and even Nintendo themselves at the Switch’ success. Guess it’ll take a while until the scrambling to catch up is finished.

    • MagcargoMan

      Your profile pic suits your comment.

      • Busterblade

        Thank you, I thought it an adequate picture when one considers some of the baffling things going on in gaming at the moment.

        • Addy

          That’s my reaction when I come across all the idiots arguing over the dumbest things related to their preferred corporation that doesn’t care about their customers, just their money.

  • Fandangle

    “We’re too lazy to port it.”

    As much as I hate port beggars excuses like these are just as annoying.

    • Addy

      Add “You already have this game on a compilation and on a plug-in-play, don’t be greedy. We have other JRPGs like Project Octopath Traveler, I am Setsuna, and Lost Sphear, and no, you’re not getting a mainline Final Fantasy, stop asking.”

  • Simtopia23

    I don’t blame them just because they have Octopath Traveler (which is one of my most anticipated release)

  • Locky Mavo

    It’s going to be available on Vita, so not only is a Switch version a no-brainer, it should be no problem as well. And if not, or even as a higher priority, they should release an english version of the Seiken Densetsu Collection in the west on the Switch.

  • Travis Touchdown

    Kek. Meanwhile Konami managed to put out Bomberman day one.

    Ignore their lies: this game can and should be on Switch. #MakeTheSwitch

  • Yuuki

    Of course SE couldnt have known before that fans want the remake of one of the best SNES games ever on nintendo newest Console. How could they have known this… They didnt even know that Bravely Default would sell here in the west despite fans yelling for it.

  • I call BS. Dragon Quest XI was the same situation yet it’s coming.

  • Zamion Dorkwood

    as long as they fix the terrible voice acting I don’t care that it doesn’t come out on switch.
    the voice acting is the real victim with this remake.

  • Jon Turner

    Fair enough, but I do think a LOT of fans would love to play this one on Switch.

    Although from the sounds of it they seem pretty open.

  • FutureFox

    Tried the demo and wasn’t enamored by it. But As I replay it on SNES classic it be nice to see how well they smooth over some of the glitches from the original.

  • Justin McQuillen

    All this explanation, and they never get to the cold fact that they aren’t putting it on Switch because they’re idiots that don’t like money.

  • Shadowknight1

    …So, what, this game was in development when the Wii U was still new? The Switch being announced isn’t a good excuse. The Switch was in development and developers had kits before it was announced. I think I’m gonna call bs on this excuse…