>>717538263
>Neither do their action games, evidently.
Uhh... Automata? Ever heard of it? Probably not, it's very niche and didn't sell well.
Jokes aside, I do agree with what you're saying. Ultimately though, that's not where Square Enix is at I guess. I think they're at a crossroads. They've got Dragon Quest as the "big budget" turn-based game, an old Enix IP. They've got Octopath and other Team Asano games (like the Remasters) as the "small budget" turn-based games. Where does "old school" Final Fantasy fit in this?
Back in the days when it was Squaresoft and Enix, this would just be healthy competition in the gaming space that the consumers benefit from, and it was. We got amazing games like Chrono Trigger, and we also got more experimental "cult classics" like 7th Saga (turn-based) or the Soul Blazer/Illusion of Gaia/Terranigma games (action). However, they are now both the same company, and Final Fantasy has nowhere to go in the turn-based space, so I think they're taking it the action route. Think about it - they've already got turn-based games, many of them in fact. Why would they need more? Final Fantasy could be the "big budget" action game instead, and maybe Nier could be the "small budget" action game, if they continue with that series. Now they've got turn-based and action fans instead of just turn-based fans.