>>320529991
Enix > Square

>>320529991
Enix was just a publisher, Square was a developer.
And Square was definitely superior back in the day.

Enix never makes games. All they do is publish them. While Square most of the time makes their games. That being said Enix has a better track record for their publish games than Square has with games they personally made.

>>320530589
Quality > Quantity

Personally, I prefer the Soulblazer series (especialy Terranigma) over every Square game.

I like square more than enix for sure, but what's really worth mentioning is SNES and Genesis had fucking baller box arts , they need to bring that style back

>>320530813
I'm not saying Enix was bad, but their games definitely didn't compare to Square's, who had both classic style RPGs like Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy, plus experimental RPGs like SaGa and Vagrant Story. Their games just had a higher quality overall, even if there were some misguided efforts like FF8 and Chrono Cross.
And just so you know, I prefer Dragon Quest to Final Fantasy as a franchise.

>>320529991
>illusion of Gaia

Whats the consensus on that? I have it and played it but I've never seen it being discussed or even appearing in a thread. I've posted it in games only you played threads and got no reply

Only hipsters would say Enix.

Enix gets my vote for making my childhood favorite game, RAD

>>320531403
Nah, some people just prefer Dragon Quest, it's a pretty solid series that keeps things traditional

>>320531403
>He never played EVO or Brainlord

>>320531179
>who had both classic style RPGs like Chrono Trigger
Not him but CT was a game that was both Square and Enix working together. So I honestly wouldn't call it a pure Square game. But I do agree Enix was a company that wasn't as experimental as Square back in the days. But mostly because Enix was a much smaller company.