Why Square Enix May Want Smaller, Sharper RPGs

A different kind of RPG ambition

The current conversation around role-playing games is no longer only about bigger maps, longer campaigns, or more elaborate systems. In recent years, players have shown growing interest in games that still feel ambitious but are built around a more deliberate sense of focus. That shift matters, because it suggests that scale alone is not what makes an RPG memorable. Instead, thoughtful pacing, a distinctive identity, and a clear creative vision can be just as powerful as a huge budget.

That idea has become even more visible thanks to the success of Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, a game that has drawn attention for feeling artistically ambitious while keeping its scope relatively contained. For large publishers and long-running RPG series, that example raises an interesting question: could there be room for more compact premium projects that still aim high, but concentrate on one world, one region, or one tightly designed premise?

Recent comments from the director of Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth point in that direction. Rather than arguing that all future RPGs should shrink, the message is more nuanced: there may be space in the industry for games that are smaller than blockbuster tentpoles, yet still larger in craft and polish than typical low-budget releases.

Why focused projects are getting attention now

For years, the games industry has treated size as a marker of value. Open worlds grew wider, quest logs became denser, and production teams expanded to keep pace with player expectations. But the market has changed. Audiences are increasingly willing to embrace games that make strong choices about where to spend their energy.

That does not necessarily mean players want shorter games across the board. Rather, they seem to appreciate experiences that avoid wasted motion. A focused RPG can still offer deep combat, memorable characters, and striking art direction without spreading itself across too many regions or systems. The result can feel more cohesive, which often helps the story and mechanics reinforce each other instead of competing for attention.

• Clearer pacing: Less time is lost on filler content or repetitive traversal.
• Stronger identity: A game can commit to a single tone, setting, or design language.
• More efficient production: Smaller scope can reduce the need for endless content creation.
• Higher polish per moment: Developers can refine the parts players will actually spend time with.

When a game succeeds by being precise rather than massive, it can reshape expectations for what an “important” release looks like. That is part of why discussion around Expedition 33 matters beyond one specific title.

What a mid-sized Square Enix RPG could look like

Square Enix is one of the companies best positioned to experiment with this kind of design. Its catalog includes enormous, prestige-scale role-playing games, but it also has a long history of more compact projects, experimental spin-offs, and regional stories that do not require a world-saving plot across multiple continents.

A hypothetical AA project from the company would not need to abandon the qualities that define the brand. It could still feature stylish presentation, tactical combat, and the emotional storytelling associated with the studio’s best-known series. The difference would lie in how those elements are delivered. Instead of building an adventure around a dozen continents and sprawling side systems, the game could center on a narrower setting with a much more deliberate structure.

That might mean a single city under strain, a remote kingdom, a haunted expedition route, or a self-contained conflict that unfolds over a manageable number of chapters. In other words, the appeal of a smaller-scale game is not lack of ambition. It is the chance to pour ambition into a more concentrated shape.

The business case for making less feel like more

From a publisher’s perspective, a smaller RPG can be attractive for practical reasons as well as creative ones. Big-budget production is expensive, and when a project stretches across many years, the risk increases. A tighter scope may reduce uncertainty while still allowing for premium pricing, especially if the game earns strong reviews and word-of-mouth support.

There is also a branding advantage. A company that is known for large-scale epics can sometimes benefit from showing that it can also create elegant, contained adventures. That kind of variety can help a publisher reach players who love modern production values but do not always have the time or patience for 80-hour campaigns.

That balance is increasingly relevant in a market where players judge value by quality of experience, not only by hours logged.

How a smaller game can still feel epic

One of the biggest misconceptions about AA development is that it automatically means modest ambition. In practice, some of the most memorable games in any genre are built around a few strong ideas executed with confidence. A compact RPG can still feel grand if it uses art direction, music, animation, and mechanical cohesion to create emotional weight.

For example, a smaller game may choose to invest in highly expressive character animation rather than dozens of explorable regions. It may favor richly written dialogue over sprawling optional content. It may build its world around symbolic spaces that feel meaningful, even if they are not physically enormous. Those choices can create a stronger impression than raw volume alone.

This is also where a well-defined combat system matters. When a game has fewer environments to support, it can spend more time making sure the battles, progression, and boss encounters are tuned carefully. Players often forgive a narrower map if the moment-to-moment experience feels smart, stylish, and satisfying.

The influence of recent breakout hits

Breakout successes often do more than sell copies; they change what other developers think is possible. When a comparatively modest project becomes widely discussed, it sends a signal that strong design and artistic clarity can compete with better-funded blockbusters. That is especially important in the RPG space, where the dominant assumption has long been that bigger automatically means better.

Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 has been a useful proof point because it demonstrates how a game can feel emotionally and visually ambitious without trying to outspend every competitor. It creates a template that other studios may study: be selective, be distinctive, and make sure every major system serves the same creative goal.

That lesson is relevant not only to independent teams, but also to major publishers seeking a sustainable future. If more companies embrace the idea that a project can be premium without being oversized, the RPG landscape could become more varied and more resilient.

What this means for Final Fantasy fans

For fans of Final Fantasy, the idea of a smaller-scale spinoff or side project may be especially interesting. The series is famous for reinvention, and part of its appeal has always been its willingness to explore different tones and structures. A focused AA title would not replace the giant flagship entries. Instead, it could complement them by exploring ideas that would be harder to sustain in a tentpole release.

That could include a more intimate cast, a contained political conflict, or a localized fantasy setting with a strong artistic hook. It might even allow the team to take risks that would be difficult to justify in a mainline installment. Because the project would be smaller, it could move faster, test new mechanical ideas, and tell a sharper story without having to support every expectation attached to the series’ biggest releases.

For players, that creates a compelling possibility: more Final Fantasy experiences that feel hand-crafted rather than industrially expansive.

Why the industry should pay attention

The larger conversation here is not simply about one publisher or one director’s preferences. It is about the evolution of game development itself. As budgets rise and production cycles lengthen, creators are under pressure to justify every addition to a project. At some point, however, diminishing returns set in. More content does not always create a better game.

A healthy industry needs room for both huge adventures and concentrated ones. The first can deliver spectacle and breadth, while the second can deliver focus and refinement. When developers have the freedom to choose the right scope for the idea they want to make, players benefit from greater variety.

The message behind the recent discussion is simple: a game does not need to be enormous to matter. If it knows what it is trying to do and commits fully to that goal, it can leave a lasting impression.

Key takeaways for players and studios

• Scope should serve the idea: The best size for a game depends on what it is trying to express.
• Focused design can improve quality: Tighter projects often leave less room for filler.
• AA does not mean lesser: Mid-sized games can still deliver premium experiences.
• Big publishers can benefit from experimentation: Smaller projects may create new creative and financial opportunities.

Frequently asked questions

Does a smaller RPG mean fewer ideas?

Not necessarily. A smaller RPG can still contain complex systems, meaningful story arcs, and memorable bosses. The difference is that its ideas are usually arranged more efficiently, with less content that exists only to inflate playtime.

Why are developers talking more about AA games now?

Because the industry has reached a point where blockbuster development is costly and risky. AA projects offer a middle path: enough budget to look polished and ambitious, but a scope that is easier to control.

Could Square Enix really make a focused side project?

Yes. The company already has the creative talent and brand recognition to support a more contained premium RPG. The real question is not capability, but whether the market and internal strategy line up.

What makes Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 relevant here?

It shows that a tightly designed RPG can generate major attention without chasing giant scale. That makes it an important reference point for studios thinking about scope, efficiency, and player appetite.