I didn’t learn about gaming from video games. I learned gaming from my grandmother. She was a very poor widow who lived in a very old house in Central Texas. The house so old, it wasn’t integrated. Each room was built in a different decade. There was no air condition. Yes, you read that correct. Imagine a kid staying in an old house in Central Texas during the summer with no air conditioning.

The old house was very interesting because there is nothing like it today. You could literally run around the house in a circle because of how the rooms all attached to one another. The ceiling in the living room was VERY HIGH and the porch was massive. Of course, summer evenings would be sitting on the porch eating Blue Bell ice cream (i.e. real Texas ice cream).

My grandmother, however, was the biggest gamer to this day I have ever met. She taught me a thousand different games with a deck of cards alone. For her entertainment, she watched game shows. She didn’t really play Chess. She would tolerate the grandkid trying to play a board game with her, but she only played some. But she was a huge gamer. She played gaming both as solitary experiences and as social experiences.

Remember, this was all before the NES. It was before Atari.

So when I think of ‘gaming’, I think of her. I see gaming as more of a personality trait of people. Everyone, in the past, has played games with some more than others. Most of this gaming revolved around card games of some sort. Even Kings played these games.

It saddens me greatly that people do not know life on this Earth without the Internet. In the same way, it saddens me greatly that people do not know gaming without video games. Yes, gaming existed and thrived well before video games.

Based on this foundation, my approach to video games is going to be different than your typical gamer but more in common with the mainstream person.

Video games mean different things to who you ask it to be. To some, video games are like another movie or music to be consumed. To the industry, video games are means to obtain money. Some view video games as a social way to spend time with friends. Some in the tech sector see video games as where new bubbling technology trends become mainstream. The point is that everyone has a different relation with video games.

My relation with video games is that of revolution.

What does this mean? To me, video games are not a thing. They are a verb, a change. To some, PONG is just an abstract tennis game. To me, it is revolution. The fact that this was being generated locally is incredible. The revolutionary nature of PONG is why it attracted such mainstream attention. But over time, this ‘novelty’ died. Other games appeared to become the next flavor of ‘novelty’. And this is what began the march of generations.

I’ve spoken about how the Atari Era was. People treated video games very differently then. When someone picked up an Atari 2600, the entire neighborhood invited themselves to play it. The Atari 2600 was placed in the middle of the living room in a position of great prestige.

Do I remember people taking playing the Atari 2600 seriously? I will have to say no. There were serious arcade players trying to get high scores. But I never saw serious playing on the consoles then. Atari Era gaming was more whimsical. You couldn’t BEAT the games after all. You just played until you couldn’t. You couldn’t even pause the game. Most of the time, you were playing with other people or they were watching you. The games I remember most were River Raid, Yar’s Revenge, and Pitfall.

What attracted me to video games was the revolution of it. The idea that the computer was generating these ways to play was fascinating. However, this only applied to new ways. The way how arcades worked revolved around putting out new games in new ways. Sometimes these revolved around graphics.

In the early 1980s, the true revolutions were happening on brand new personal computers. I remember playing Ultima II and thinking this was a very mysterious strange game. I had a Commodore 64. Friends and I went through a gazillion of different games. One game my friends and I played all the time was Archon and Adept (Archon’s sequel).

When the NES appeared, I dismissed it. “It has nothing on my Commodore 64!” I was intrigued my its zapper. But that led me to eventually try out Super Mario Brothers. And, of course, Super Mario Brothers was a very revolutionary game.

I feel blessed to have been introduced to the NES during its black box era. The black box games are very arcade-like and most feature no scrolling on black backgrounds. It was like an Atari 2600 on sterioids. But Super Mario Brothers blew that all away. Most importantly, Super Mario Brothers triggered the imagination of a virtual world.

PC gaming was doing its revolutions as well. Ultima IV was revolutionary as was Paradroid.

Above: Released in 1985 with butter smooth scrolling on the Commodore 64. A programming marvel.

Above: Your Skyrim has nothing on this.

But while I was a fan of the NES, its continued revolutions made me a super-fan. From black box games came the silver box games such as Kid Icarus, Metroid, and Rad Racer. All three are fascinating games, but Metroid stands out the most. Legend of Zelda was extremely interesting game. I really, really liked its sequel more with Zelda II. But the games were just radically getting wilder. Super Mario Brothers only scrolled one way, but you go to Super Mario Brothers 2 and it scrolls both ways plus going up and down as well as a dark world! And you could choose different characters! While I really liked games like Gradius, games like Guardian Legend and Blaster Master just blew my mind. And some of these NES games were simply games like Tetris and Dr. Mario! Then you come to peak NES with Super Mario Brothers 3.

Add in the Gameboy revolution (and it was a revolution). I just couldn’t believe video games could be played on the go like this.

I even found Dragon Warrior and Final Fantasy to be revolutionary. They were like dumbed down Ultima games you could play on your TV!!! How cute!

So when the 16-bit era came around, I was on board. However, I felt very disappointed. While I very much enjoyed SNES sound and graphics, the games felt very samey to 8-bit games. To this day, people debate about which is better: Super Mario Brothers 3 or Super Mario World which points to how weak the 16-bit Mario game is. The rise of Sonic confirms Mario’s weakness. The 16-bit games I gravitated to were, of course, the revolutionary games of that time. These would be Super Mario Kart, Final Fantasy 4 (and some of the 16-bit JRPGs) as well as Street Fighter 2. The 16-bit Era of games were nowhere near as revolutionary as the 8-bit games were.

Therefore, I fell back to PC Gaming which was becoming very revolutionary. The period of the early 1990s is the my favorite time for PC gaming. I was playing revolutionary games. What I mean by ‘revolutionary games’ is that these games re-defined how we saw playing games. These games include Civilization, Railroad Tycoon, Sim City, Ultima VI, Ultima VII, Ultima Underworld, Wing Commander, Master of Orion, Master of Magic, Star Control 1 and 2, and so on. Oh yeah, and games like DOOM.

PC Gaming had two huge revolutionary things going for it then: the mouse interface and the Internet. When combined, it was heavenly. I wasn’t as much of a Doom player, but I played Warcraft 2 to death (High Seas Combat is what the good gamers played on). I played games like Descent. I was on Kali all the time. And a game company used Kali as the inspiration for Battle Net. Hilariously, I bounced off hard from Diablo 1 because I thought it was an Ultima 8 clone! (haha). Starcraft, I gelled with. And yes, I did play with some famous players back in the day. Internet was smaller and more fun.

I became recoiled by game consoles during this time period. No one was doing anything new. The PlayStation was a dumbed down PC gaming computer playing games on the TV. I thought that then, and I think that now. The N64 was going down the dumb route of ‘must make every game 3d’ which pushed me away. 3d gaming wasn’t new to me as I was immersed with it in PC gaming. But I didn’t recognized Mario and Zelda anymore as they broke away from their 2d gameplay. The PS2/Gamecube Era just amplified this.

I’d say peak PC gaming was with World of Warcraft. Never could I imagine a game you could literally LIVE IN.

Above: Ultima Online, Everquest… sure. But World of Warcraft really blew the lid off. What an incredible game.

Then, something happened. A new Nintendo president appeared by the name of Iwata. When Iwata spoke, he was speaking of gaming in the terms I have described here: as revolution.

What was Iwata’s gaming revolution? Basically, it was to make gaming interesting again by updating the interface instead of just adding ‘more buttons’. The modern game controller was very scary to me (even then and today). There are too many damn buttons. Smelling the revolution, I bought a DS early on. Actually, I saw NSMB DS at E3 and bought a DS for the 2d Mario. That was my game.

The problem with younger people today is that confuse revolution with nostalgia. When I see 2d Mario, I do not see ‘old school gaming’. I see revolution. 2d Mario was always a revolutionary game. Super Mario Brothers was revolutionary, Super Mario Brothers 2 was wild, Super Mario Brothers 3 was revolutionary, and Super Mario World ushered in the 16-bit Era of SNES. When I see Metroid, I do not see the 1986 game. I see ‘revolution’. The reason why I poo poo Super Metroid was because it didn’t carry that torch any further outside of being a masterpiece of atmospheric audio visuals. Even though the games are old, I don’t have any interest in Dragon Warrior 2, 3, or 4 or Final Fantasy 2 or 3 (Japan). However, Dragon Warrior 1 and Final Fantasy 1 and especially Final Fantasy 4 (as well as 6) are interesting to me not because they are old but because they were revolutionary.

I like revolution games. That is MY preferred genre. Revolution games are the games that create genres and copycats. It is why I liked Mega Man 2 and even 3, but went meh with every Mega Man game after it. It is why I like Wii Sports but found Wii Sports Resort to be ‘meh’. I thought Super Mario Galaxy was interesting, but Super Mario Galaxy 2 is more ‘meh’.

With the Wii U and 3DS, as you can imagine, my response to all of that software was ‘meh’. What revolutionary games were introduced on those consoles? I can’t think of any. Maybe Splatoon? Bah.

There was Zelda: Breath of the Wild (which we associate more with Switch). BOTW was a revolutionary title. But it was a revolutionary title because it went back to the roots of original Zelda, it was a rebuke to N64 Era! Zelda has always been a game of ‘here is your sword, now go out into the world’ type of game. It was not about puzzles or stories. Zelda: Breath of the Wild is how Zelda OUGHT to have been done in 3d. Ocarina of Time was a mistake.

Nintendo games only appear to have good sequels when their slop factory begins breaking down. I see every new entry in their IPs as a decline. There is no revolution here. So it all becomes ‘meh’ to me.

So as a ‘revolution gamer’, I am ecstatic about the NES/Gameboy Era and the DS/Wii Era. I am neutral to Switch Era. I am hostile to N64/Gamecube/Gameboy Advance Era and hostile to Wii U/3DS Era.

The reason why I play old games is because I want to remember what a revolution felt like.

Is the Switch 2 a revolutionary console?

Is Mario Kart World a revolutionary game?

Is Donkey Kong Bonanca a revolutionary game?

“What games would be revolutionary?” snorts the reader.

Minecraft. I was one of the very early alpha testers of Minecraft, and I blogged about the game on this blog saying this was the new thing. What a revolutionary game!

What revolutionary games are out there today? I hear crickets. That said, I am actually going through my backlog and playing all these games. If I play a revolutionary game, I will know it.

I actually don’t believe young people know what a revolutionary game is. This is the fault of youth. Since you’ve never played it, you think it is ‘new’ and ‘revolutionary’. People think Dark Souls difficulty is ‘new’ and ‘revolutionary’. This is a joke to those who played the NES. There are those who think Skyrim is ‘revolutionary’, but it is not with anyone who has played the Ultima games.

I am revolution gamer. This blog is dedicated to the gaming revolution. Point me to the revolutionary games, and I will go to them.

Fun fact: in 2005 Satoru Iwata, then President of Nintendo, revealed the Wii Remote during a keynote speech at the Tokyo Game Show to the surprise of everyone… including the show's organizers.

Iwata was not allowed to keynote at TGS ever again. pic.twitter.com/mu5baCaL0l

— Nintendeal (@Nintendeal) November 19, 2020

Will Nintendo ever be interested in revolution again?

Out of whimsey, I asked Grok why Sean Malstrom is interesting. I couldn’t stop laughing.

His critiques, such as those of Metroid: Other M or Super Mario 3D Land, spark debate because they challenge fan and industry orthodoxy.

But I haven’t played either game. I don’t need to play it to know it is not for me. And what the hell is ‘Industry Orthodoxy’? I need to start using that term. It sounds very dystopian!

Nostalgia and Hardcore Gamer Paradox: Despite positioning himself as a voice for casual gamers, Malstrom’s love for classic 8-bit Nintendo games and complex genres like RTS and RPGs suggests he’s a hardcore gamer at heart. This contradiction—criticizing “hardcore” gaming while displaying hardcore tendencies—intrigues readers, as it raises questions about authenticity and perspective in gaming culture.

RPGs and RTS games are ‘hardcore’ now? Since when? Games like Warcraft and Commander and Conquer were mainstream back in the day. World of Warcraft was mainstream. Maybe certain PC games such as Ultima games weren’t mainstream because PC gaming wasn’t mainstream then. But Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy weren’t mainstream? Get out of here! Stupid Grok.

Engaging, if Polarizing, Writing Style: His blog is known for its passionate, sometimes inflammatory tone. He’s been criticized for whining, conspiratorial tangents, or self-aggrandizement (e.g., boasting about wealth or appeal to women), but this raw, unfiltered style keeps readers hooked, whether they agree or not. Supporters find his consumer advocacy refreshing, while detractors see him as a “nostalgiatard” or hypocrite.

Hahahaha.

However, his relevance has waned for some, with critics noting a decline in writing quality post-Wii U and 3DS era, accusing him of becoming overly negative or out of touch. Still, his ability to stir debate and his knack for spotting market trends make him a compelling figure for those interested in gaming’s intersection with business and culture.

Wait! Why is it saying post-Wii U and post-3DS era instead of saying Switch Era? Switch Era was around 8 years, right? Also, during the Wii U and 3DS era… who didn’t want to die?

This was also the time when I started my own game project. It is my true muse.

Market surveys always exist. But this Japanese one is targeting game key cards. Where there is smoke, there is fire.

It can’t be! This is front page news.

This GIRL completed a video game that was released around the year she was born. And she LIKED IT.

Above: Listen at 2:57.

Her first thoughts after finishing Metroid are below at 2:47.

This is contrary to her audience who are baffled as to how she can like this old, obsolete game such as NES Metroid. She is told she needs to play Zero Mission since that is the ‘real’ original Metroid. She then disagrees as she had already played it. She felt Zero Mission was ‘completely different’ from Metroid and didn’t like the ending sequence with stealth gameplay of Samus running around the spaceship. “It was really weird!” which is girl speak for ‘really bad’. She also thinks Metroid Fusion is the worst Metroid she’s played.

“Will Sakamoto record any notes from this?”

He will not, reader. Sakamoto will only continue his errors over and over again.

Anyway, the reason why I am highlighting this is that if gamers actually PLAY the games on actual hardware (so there is no input lag), they will actually enjoy these games much more than the ‘newer’ versions. I agree with her in Metroid’s flaw of having to stand in front of a pipe shooting bugs for half and hour to refill your life. Certainly, that can be fixed. They can also put in the save system since Metroid NES had it in Japan due to the game being on disk. Other than that, Metroid is FINE as a game. Anyone saying anything other is not a real gamer (such as AVGN who might as well be a jester at this point).

People need to realize that Metroid is a CHALLENGING game… even to NES fans. Super Metroid is not a challenging game. Super Metroid might as well be an adventure game with how snore-ville the game is. Metroid II is a Gameboy game so it is hard to be critical of an epic Gameboy game. Zero Mission and Fusion are such jokes and a waste of 2d Metroid. I’ll have to replay Metroid Dread, but I wasn’t impressed by it either.

I think Sakamoto is the problem with Metroid. Sakamoto played an extremely minor role with the original Metroid, had no part in Metroid II, yet is seen as ‘IP holder of Metroid’. No wonder Metroid is in rough shape.

The way back for Metroid is to go back to the original game for its gameplay and tension. No bullshit ninja moves. No ‘melee’ attacks. No soap operas of Samus Aran. Metroid is about being alone in an alien world and killing the space jellyfish known as METROID. Samus Aran is NOT Metroid and will never be Metroid. Bring in a developer who knows what they are doing, please.

In 1989, a movie came out that had the following:

It starts with a group of friends in the wilderness. An emergency occurs which forces their airship to pick them up. The emergency is about a failed peace land being conquered. The heroes get aboard the airhsip. They then go to the peace land and perform a successful takeover… yet fail despite being successful. The leader of the terrorists take over the airship.

PLOT TWIST: Leader of terrorists is a main character’s brother! (shock) It explains why a main character couldn’t kill the terrorist leader when he had the chance!

The movie goes along and shows this terrorist leader taking away people’s pain. This shows flashbacks of the main characters in the party.

Another airship, almost pirate like, is pursuing our heroes. The terrorist leader has taken control of the heroes’ airship and takes them into The Great Barrier where no one has ever gone. This is to be the Promised Land.

They get to the Promised Land ,and they meet God. Of course, God is not God but an EVIL MONSTER!!!! The original plan for the movie is to have the party fight gargoyles and rock monsters. The budget didn’t include it. The final party was of four people including our three main heroes and the brother terrorist leader with his own exotic powers. The four will face off against God.

Of course, the final battle against God is heroic but ultimately fails. The terrorist brother sacrifices himself to save the others. The pirate airship flips allegiances and aids in killing God. Victory is portrayed to be due to THE POWER OF FRIENDSHIP.

Movie ends with the main characters back camping basking in the power of friend ship. The End.

How do you like that movie, Reader?

“I do not remember that movie from the late eighties. You are telling me a party went out and fought God?”

Oh yes. This movie I am referring to is the exact plot of Star Trek V. I am doing a rewatch of Star Trek and this inevitably comes up. I was not looking forward to it. Looking at it recently, it is definitely a weak movie, but way better than any of the ‘new’ Star Trek. It’s definitely better than Star Trek’s worst episodes.

I’m just struck how parallel Star Trek V’s plot is with every other JRPG out there. It also informs me that JRPG plots are ‘truly terrible’.

I saw this Youtube comment which I will copy and paste here:

I’d love to see a new Final Fantasy game made similarly to FF6. I’m thinking the ability to have a large party, being able to bring characters you like (and leave annoying ones at the base), and having large battles with multiple parties. FF6 did a great job of making unique and memorable characters, customizable growth via Espers, and had a villain that you really wanted to take down at the end. I think FF lost it’s magic when they shrank party sizes and didn’t give us any control over who we brought along with us. They could make another game along the lines of Type-0 with a large classroom of characters to form into groups and take on missions. Most of all though, it’s been far too long since we had an airship to freely fly around a worldmap!

I am currently developing a game with the description above. Right now, it is clocking around 14 hours and about a third way completed. I suspect the following parts will get developed quicker as much of the base work has been done. We will see.

Speaking of Final Fantasy 6…

To me, the above picture was the peak of the game. This is the battle before you fall onto the Floating Continent. It is approximately at the halfway point. I like seeing the sci-fi style aircraft fly in the background, how you go through battle after battle, but you can also heal in the middle of it. You even fight a couple of bosses.

What if I told you I have not only duplicated that experience in my game but triumphantly surpassed it?

I still have many details to attend to, of course. I still need to work out some of the battle gameplay parts with particular enemies. I have learned the trick that Final Fantasy 6 did with their ‘super end boss’, the three gods before Kefka appears (where the battle screen just scrolls up and up and up) and beginning to feature some of that. I want to replicate peak 2d graphics if possible.

My game has you make a group of five parties out of twenty party members. Each party defends a part. Each one has a different experience. It is massive, extremely complex for the poor developer, and I believe the player will greatly enjoy it if it is executed properly. By group of five, I do not mean what FF6 where you sit on a field and wait for enemies to walk into you. I mean more like the battle for the Floating Continent. I even have full blown evil mecha coming in to lay waste to the heroes.

“People don’t want that type of game, Malstrom,” the reader sniffs. “They want a game about trans-gender issues, not heroic heroes defending against evil mecha. You need a game for the Modern Audience.”

Alas, I am undone, reader! I am not making a game for The Modern Audience. I am making a game for myself! This is a game I want to play. Why am I making it? Because no one is making a game I want to play.

To tell you a story of the development of my game, I wanted to surpass FF6’s big battle moments. Obviously, one way to do that is to have MORE CHARACTERS. That is exactly what I did. The character roster went up to 20 (it is actually much more than that). Now I can surpass FF6’s big battle moments! Hurray!

But, alas, the cost. The terrible, terrible cost. Making a couple dozen characters is NOT easy, let alone making them distinct, unique, with their own backstories. This, along with craft building, is the reason why my game has been so long in development. By adding more characters, I blew up the game.

Now that I have learned my lesson, I am immediately rectifying it. After this ‘big battle that is better than FF6’, I am going to get these characters off the stage! Too many characters! The most obvious thing to do is to start killing them off. Some will simply go ‘off stage’ and return later. I need a more easier-to-manage cast of characters so I can get done with the rest of the game. But because I have so many characters, certain things opened up for me and altered the development of the game. The most immediate is that the game will have a sadder tone because so many tragedies will happen. Another is that some characters will seem more alive as they have other things to do than be pawns for the player. They’ll simply go off stage and do their own thing! It also allowed me to create another game mode where you can choose any combination of characters and go on a dungeon crawl (no story in this mode, just gameplay mechanics). This ‘misstep’ has already made my game unique compared to its contemporaries. You might see a FF6-esque type game, but you don’t see any with 30+ characters in it!

Even FF6 realized they had too many characters. It is why the character roster gets reset after the 50% point with the world blowing up. Now your main character is Celes with Edgar, Setzer, and maybe Sabin. From there, you can choose to collect any or all the rest of the characters. FF6 brilliantly had a large roster of characters by not having a large roster of characters.

One of the biggest mysteries I have had is why did we get these quality games (say 8-bit and 16-bit games) and then watch how they are completely and utterly discontinued. They turn into something very different as they go into 3d. Then the games become more ‘cinematic’ and really lose everything about the older games. For example, Super Mario Brothers and Super Mario World are not that different from each other. But Mario 64 is a completely different game and experience. As someone who could never get into Final Fantasy 7, I think that game feels very different than the earlier Final Fantasy games. And while there have been attempts to continue such classic gameplay with games such as Bravely Default or Octopath Traveler, they are definitely missing something.

I have pleaded to the Gaming Gods that they resume work on these 2d classics. And NSMB series of games definitely sold. Octopath Traveler definitely sold. While there is definite demand for these games, there still feels something is off. One clear thing is that the company’s B or C tier teams are working on these games. So no matter what happens, it is going to feel like Tier B or Tier C type product. In the past, the top teams were working on these games.

Through backwards engineering, I can say confidently that these 8-bit and 16-bit games were not successful because they were first to market. This would also imply the reason why we replay them is because of nostalgia. No, there are serious craft reasons why the games are good. An example would be Dragon Warrior 1’s putting Charlock Castle in sight of the starting place. You can see the evil destination from the beginning of the game. The end goal is established since the beginning. And as simple as Dragon Warrior 1 is, the game is still fiendishly addictive despite its primitiveness. That takes skill to do. Final Fantasy 1, while janky, is still a fine work of craft.

“What are you saying, Malstrom?”

It has been said that if you get a ton of monkeys in a room and have them slap typewriters all day, you will eventually get the works of Shakespeare. Thanks to the Internet, we know this not to be true.

In that same line of thought, with all the ‘editors’ and ‘engines’ out there, the Unity, the Game Maker, the RPG Maker, the Godot, and so on, you see many ‘indie RPGs’, but you do not see games that feel like they belong to that same quality as the 8-bit and 16-bit classics. Now, why is that, dear reader?

“It is because they are missing the unique crafts that those developers brought.”

What!? You mean there isn’t a Game Industry process that can be copy and pasted into your new corporate universe? You’re saying the craft is tied to PEOPLE?

“It is.”

Oh, heavy indeed is this news, dear reader. It is like saying the author of a book is necessary for making the book’s sequels feel authentic! This is why I don’t like the word ‘developer’. It feels vague. It feels disconnected. It is like a builder of a house versus the architect of the house.

Perhaps the game designer should be called the game architect?

And those who make simple assets like rocks and grass should be called game brick layers?

“But Malstrom,” cries the reader, “that would mean not everyone could call themselves game developers! They would be seen as software peasant stock, as digital laborers.”

But it would be more accurate, yes? Oh AI gods, come and clear out the trash from the Game Industry. Get rid of their cushy jobs. One great thing about the older titles is that the ‘developers’ all wore multiple hats. No cushy tech job there.

The problem with these developers is not a matter of will… it is a matter of capability. Take for example Yoshi P. Yoshi P is Naoki Yoshida. His idea of gaming came directly from the Famicom. From his Wikipedia, we read:

Dragon Quest III made him want to become a writer due to how engrossed he became by its story, more so than those of books and films.^[8][9] His formative years were lived in Hakodate, where he balanced high school studies with a part-time job running the entire game corner of a toy store.

Dragon Quest III as an example of writing? Get out of here. If that is an example, it is the wrong example. And running the game corner of a toy store? That’s like running a Gamestop. Not saying retail work is easy, but it isn’t a real job. It is a job, not unlike McDonalds, that you give to kids.

Interestingly, Yoshi P studied at a school ran by Hudson and was put as a scenario writer for Far East of Eden series, a game on the PC Engine. Even more interesting was that Yoshida got put as a designer in the Bomberman series.

His first experiences playing online games such as Diablo and the Ultima Online beta test, left a huge impression and turned him into an avid fan.

Oh dear. It says he left the company because his superior thought his works were childish. Hahaha. He worked on what they say was an unpublished Windows online action RPG which was shelved because apparently the developers didn’t want to make a story mode. When at Square Enix, Yoshida did much with Dragon Quest X.

Yoshida’s claim to fame appears to be wrapped up in only one game: being declared the ‘savior’ of Final Fantasy 14. While the game definitely has been a money maker for Square Enix, Yoshida doesn’t appear to have much of a track record. I looked up his involvement in Bomberman series and could only find Bomberman 64 (lol). Being producer of Final Fantasy 16 is indication he may not know what he is doing.

Nothing about Yoshida’s experience shows that he has any knowledge about how to make a turn based RPG. None. Zilch. So, of course, he is NEVER going to go for it. It would be like a fish out of water. Yoshida would be more comfortable making a Diablo clone. Why? Because he has already made a Diablo clone.

Pictured Above: Yoshi P. “Is that a man?” That is a very good question, reader.

The narrative of Yoshi P being a ‘game god’ makes no sense since he is credited with only one hit game. And that credit is more of ‘fixing’ the game of FF14.

His ‘skills’ are more as a writer. So it sounds like he got to where he did through politics (what they call charisma). I am very, very suspicious of this guy. I wish I looked him up earlier.

My point is that anyone wanting Final Fantasy 17 to be turn based and thinking Yoshi P will be leading that charge is someone who will be very disappointed.

“Is there a point to this rambling blog post?” whines the reader.

Final Fantasy fans are making the same exact mistake I did. I desired more 2d Mario. I assumed 2d Mario wasn’t being made because the market analysis thought it wouldn’t sell. Therefore, I got very excited when I saw NSMB DS sell so strongly. And then NSMB Wii sold so strongly as well. And yet, the 2d Mario games felt very lacking especially NSMB 2 DS. NSMB DS was really Super Mario Advance 5 made by the guy in charge of porting the 2d Mario games who simply wanted to make his own 2d Mario game. Outside of NSMB Wii, you don’t see the A team members make 2d Mario. It is positioned as a budget title for consumers Nintendo doesn’t like (such as Malstrom).

The reason why Nintendo cannot carry on the legacy of 2d Mario is because the talent isn’t there. Much of the talent behind 2d Mario has either retired or gone into management. The craft of 2d gameplay is largely gone. The lucrative sales of 2d Mario caused Nintendo to make more, but it is clear the level of expertise and creativity are not present. Nintendo has a talent problem in that regard.

What no one wants to say, that I am about to say, is that turn based Final Fantasy will not and cannot happen because Square Enix doesn’t have the talent to make such a game. Final Fantasy fans ASSUME a big, RPG giant like Square Enix has tons of people who are experienced and lovers of turn based gameplay. This is why I point to Yoshi P. Nothing in his biography suggests he is a FAN of turn based RPGs, and he certainly has zero experience in developing them. In other words, Yoshi P has NO IDEA how to make a fun turn based RPG. It says Dragon Quest X is ATB based, so I suppose that is somewhat turn based? But it is ultimately a MMORPG.

What gamers need to realize is that these legacy game companies (Nintendo, Square Enix, etc.) no longer have the TALENT to make games of that prior caliber anymore. It is the equivalent of movies not using cgi to make their movies interesting. Today’s directors can’t do it. What!? Rely on actors and interesting dialogue? No explosions? They can’t do it.

I would love to be proven wrong, but 2d Mario has taught me that the talent and craft no longer exists. Looking back on it, I am just pained how all that talent and skill to make Super Mario Brothers 5 was thrown away to make Yoshi’s Island, Starfox, and Super Mario 64. Nintendo’s seeds of N64 market destruction began by the developers being so ridiculously selfish.

I do like how Clair Obscur has removed the gas lighting Square Enix does how the ‘modern market’ doesn’t want realistic turn based games. But Square Enix doesn’t believe what it says. Square Enix doesn’t want to make high production turn based games not for any market reason, but because of the selfishness of the developers. These developers wish to keep their positions.

Imagine if Square Enix greenlit a turn based Final Fantasy 17. Who would direct and product such a game? It would require someone with experience with shipping turn based RPGs. This would not be Yoshi P or current Square Enix producers.

The one who should propel a turn based Final Fantasy 17 would likely be Asano.

Above: Asano is on the right.

Asano has been producer and concept maker of many turn based games including FF 3 DS, FF4 DS, FF 4 Heroes of Light, Bravely Default, Bravely Second, Octopath Traveler 1 and 2, Triangle Strategy, Live a Live Remake, Dragon Quest 3 Remake, and Dragon Quest 1 and 2 Remake.

Do you think Mister Scenario Writer (that is his craft), Yoshi P, is going to step aside for new blood Asano to jump in and right the Final Fantasy ship with a turn based Final Fantasy 17? HELL NO. Yoshi P has already failed with FF 16, so I expect he will be allowed to fail again and again. This is the new modern way.

Now maybe there might be someone other than Asano to helm such a project, but there are going to be intense politics behind the scenes here. This is not about gamers getting what they want. This is about developers getting what they want. And they do not want turn based RPG because they don’t know how to do it. This is the reason for all the gas lighting.

This tweet sums it up a ton. Tired of hearing dogs barking and everyone running around with dogs everywhere. It’s gotten ridiculous.

Last Christmas at the TX Woodlands Mall, I saw a sign that read: “Bring your dog to get its picture taken with Santa.” Since when does Santa pose with dogs? WTF is going on with people?

I've always hated dogs, and among those I grew up around, this was an absolutely normal mentality. So the sudden shift in the collective conscious about these animals is totally baffling to me.

Those who walk on rural roads know it well: loose dogs are a blight. Chained-up… pic.twitter.com/Jso3wRDCd4

— 𝙷𝚒𝚌𝚔𝚖𝚊𝚗 (@shagbark_hick) July 19, 2025

Master Malstrom,

Did you know that your old pal Michael Pachter is on YouTube? He has a show called the Pachter Factor.

In this video, Pachter predicts that tariffs are going to drive up the price of Switch 2. Despite this, he still thinks it will sell 18 million units by next March. I think that’s wishful thinking. He also mentions that Switch 2 is more readily available on store shelves in Europe right now than it is in the United States. He also says that stores like Best Buy and Target want people to come to the store to buy Switch 2 (probably so they will be more likely to buy extra games and accessories) and so their websites will show that the handheld isn’t in stock even if it is. But he believes Nintendo rushed the Switch 2 launch and that the launch was slightly weaker than he expected.

Emailer, why are you inflicting on all of us this homeless looking guy spouting off things that are backed up by no data? And why is he showing an image of himself twenty years ago? This is what fat chicks do.

Pachter is the quintessential video game analyst example of being wrong about everything.

It is important we realize that there is GAMING and there is the GAME INDUSTRY which are two very different things. Gamers see Pachter as this clown who appears in their news feeds. Game Industry sees the Wedbush Report. Analysts like Pachter are knowledgeable about the GAME INDUSTRY but not about GAMING.

People still don’t know what I mean by GAME INDUSTRY. Let us use the example of streamers. A streamer is someone sitting in front of camera and saying things… about something… and uploading it to the Internet. The Streamer became popular because there was an authenticity to the streamer. The streamer was not much different than the viewer. Aside from having a good camera, the streamer would like to talk and may be have a good voice, be handsome/pretty, etc. Industrializing streaming looks like the below:

In China, the industrialization of streamers is why you see rows and rows of these people ‘making content’.

It is the difference between the non-conformist oddball ‘game developer’ versus the massive hoard of specialists in ‘the game industry’. This is what people mean by indie vs game industry. What it is becoming is little game industry vs big game industry.

The pattern of gamers is that they do not hate organic made games or consoles. They do not hate on the Virtual Boy, for example. They do coalesce hatred around industrialization though. Microsoft, who is nothing but industrialization, keeps flopping about because of that. Sony has its issues.

The reasons why you love Nintendo are the reason why Nintendo hates Nintendo. Nintendo doesn’t want to be seen as the ‘scrappy company’ who uses ‘older technology’. Nintendo wants to be EA. Nintendo desires industrialization. You don’t see innovation come from their games. You see their IPs rolled out like a factory assembly line with no soul generation after generation.

The decline of Nintendo from their NES highs was their embrace of industrialization, their focus on getting the ‘best hardware’ and ‘best competition’. Iwata comes along, gives his ‘Heart of the Gamer Speech’, and puts an end to that competitiveness. But it was not an end to the industrialization. So when Nintendo makes a hit like the Wii, Nintendo tries to ‘industrialize’ it with the Wii U and is shocked to see the market reject it.

Whenever Nintendo faced serious trouble, they keep going back to their ‘golden years past’. NES Classics for GBA. NES and SNES Classic Minis after the Wii U. Wii-mote designed from NES remote. Zelda’s fall had next Zelda game prototype be designed in NES Zelda (which became BOTW). I do not believe the appeal is nostalgia but a desire of non-industrialization… which many of these old titles represent. Modern hit games from Minecraft to Baldur’s Gate 3 to Expedition 33 are representative of a non-industrialization desired in gaming.

I am not surprised at all that Nintendo went their anti-consumer approach with Switch 2. They’ve been wanting to do it which is why they did it. What I am surprised about is that they are ignoring data that shows this will be very bad for them. The reason why software sold so well on the Switch, especially third party software, was because of the carts. People would opt to buy the Switch version of the game because there was a physical version. Now, does this represent all of the software? No. But it represents much of the ‘fringes’ such as the indie releases. It doesn’t represent the mega hits.

Imagine if Switch 2 software had the same relationship as Switch 1: the entire game on a cart. People would buy a Switch 2 and then buy ALL the third party software. Gamers are hoarders. Launch excitement also causes them to go giddy and do things like this. We have data that shows launch buyers are NOT doing this. This is very, very ominous for third parties going into the future for Switch 2.

The third party software for Switch 1 is an interesting history. For the first couple of years, Switch 1 had to rely on indie software. Once the Game Industry saw that software consistently selling, they opened up their floodgates to Switch 1. I saw this happening in real time. I made posts saying, “Don’t worry about any lack of third party games now. In a year or two, Switch will be swamped with them.” And so it happened.

Nintendo is best when they go against the Game Industry (see NES, Gameboy, DS, Wii, Switch). After Iwata freed Nintendo from ‘competition’, Nintendo’s hot and cold product reception with the market is due to this desire for industrialization… this corporatization. They industrialize a console, watch it die, then go, “Let us re-assess our assumptions and design a game console for gamers.” It becomes a hit. “Let us industrialize this console.” It then dies. This is the cycle.

These analysts don’t even know how to think like gamers. What they think of as ‘gamers’ is really just ‘consumers’. There is a difference between consumer and gamer. Here is an example.

Gamers do not really need or want another ‘game console’. We have gone through at least 9 generations of game consoles throughout the decades. How many new ‘game consoles’ do we need? Why don’t we just play the game consoles we have? This is the question the Game Industry has to wrestle with.

“Better graphics and power, Malstrom,” replies the Game Industry. And that did make a huge difference with changing computer technology. While there was appeal to ‘high definition graphics’, the Game Industry didn’t realize how much impact that would have on their software pipeline. Games kept getting more and more expensive. Iwata coming on stage saying this push for constantly better graphics and power needed to stop is like walking on a railroad track telling a train it needs to stop.

Who says we need new games? There’s a gazillion in our back logs as well as others on these old consoles that are far more interesting than the slop coming out today. You don’t see games like Checkers or Chess being redesigned every generation, do you?

The primary reason for ‘new games’ or ‘new entertainment’ is that every generation wants something to call their own. A great example of this is Star Trek: The Next Generation being embraced by Gen X but rejected by many of the original TOS fans. The 8-bit Generation holds up Super Mario Brothers as their game, yet the older generation held up Pitfall. One generation holds up Final Fantasy 4, another holds up Final Fantasy 7, and then another holds up Final Fantasy 10 (and so on).

But people aren’t having children. So the pipeline of ‘new consumers’ demanding this ‘new entertainment’ is going down. Is it profitable to cater to the young generation anymore? Perhaps it is better to cater to the consumers already present. I’m looking at you, Final Fantasy 16.

I’m rambling here, but I think we are seeing a shift beyond the typical ‘next gen’ console cycle. Gamers are getting older, and the console gamers are getting even older. These old console gamers are going, “WTF am I paying all this money for this slop? I’ve got plenty of games in my closet to play.”

There is more than just gamer and non-gamer. There is the lapsed gamer. Lapsed gamers surge in numbers during console transitions. And by the same token, lapsed gamers are the easiest group to pluck with new customers. It is far easier to convert a lapsed gamer to an active gamer than a non-gamer to an active gamer.

The ‘Game Industry’ not only has to deal with the ‘aging gamer’ (e.g. gamers in the ancient age of forties), they have to deal with massive competition blossoming up from below. Just how Youtube allowing amateur streaming disrupted television, hobbyist games will be disrupting ‘industry’ gaming. I would rather play jank games from my friends on Discord than pay money for ‘the greatest game of the generation’ from some Game Industry slop company.

It’s too early to say anything about the Switch 2 either way. What we do know is that the price of the console is high and only going to get higher. And we know third party games aren’t selling on the Switch 2.

I thought the Mario Kart World bundles were a temporary thing, but it looks like Nintendo has made the bundle permanent when market data shows no one wants to pay for Switch 2’s high cost. They have to add value by giving away a game.

Master Malstrom,

Check out this video by the Critical Drinker:

One of his best points is how gamers enjoy being able to simply insert a physical game into a console and play it. I firmly believe that physical carts were one of the biggest reasons why Switch 1 was so popular. Does Nintendo not realize this? It would seem they don’t, given that Switch 2 is the anti-Switch in regard to physical games. But if this is true, it can only mean that Nintendo is completely disconnected from its audience.

I also wanted to talk about the upcoming Zelda movie. I think making it a live-action film is a huge mistake as I don’t think the characters of Link and Zelda will translate well in a live-action setting. I really believe it should be an animated film which would allow it to more closely resemble the look of the video games. What say you?

Finally, the reviews for Donkey Kong Bonanza are coming in, and of course they are all positive and glowing. To be fair, I think all the punching and smashing could provide some fun, but it just looks like one big time sink. I suspect it will get old fairly quickly. And even if the game is fun to play once, I don’t see much in terms of replay value. I can’t imagine ever wanting to play this game a second time. And if there is no replay value, that should seriously lower the game’s score. People who already own Switch 2 will buy this game (since there isn’t much else to play), but I don’t see anyone buying the hardware just to play it. If this happens, then the game will have to be considered a failure.

You will never see a Nintendo game reviewed poorly. Even the Switch 2 Tour Guide game got good reviews. Game Industry is not critical concerning Nintendo games but also because of the fanatical Nintendo super-consumers. Nintendo is a cult to some people.

We’ll have to see how the Zelda movie plays out. Live Action might be the better move than animation. Live Action will definitely interest an older audience than animation would. I think they should go all Lord of the Rings but the director really, really hates that idea.

As for Critical Drinker, he isn’t saying anything new in this. Much of his complaints are what has occurred with PC gaming. PC Gaming during the 1990s also had ‘patches’ and many ‘classic’ 1990 PC Games didn’t work well when they shipped. Ultima VII was literally broken. Ultima VIII WAS broken. Warcraft 2 needed patches. Starcraft wouldn’t be the game it was until it had the patches. And you don’t want to see what Warcraft 3 was at launch either.

I think there are far bigger problems on the Game Industry pipeline… both in how games are made and the mentality of the developers. Games are no longer shipped, they are ‘developed forever’.

I am trying to rectify these problems with making my own game. As you know, my own game, when it is released, will fix all these problems and usher in a new gaming Golden Age. Statues will be made of my likeness throughout the world, and women might even come to find me attractive. Yes, all things are possible.

Is there any better comparison?  If you buy the Switch version, you literally get to own a physical copy.  But if you buy the Switch 2 version, you get the stupid game key card.  Why bother?

If that upcoming Mortal Kombat Collection is on a game key card, then I’m buying the Switch 1 version, no question.  This is a very strange scenario.  It’s like buying the NES versions of puzzle games in the early 90s (such as Yoshi’s Cookie or Wario’s Woods) on NES instead of SNES, but because you don’t get to own an actual cartridge on SNES.

I like your comparison with the past. Let’s explore that more.