i have a great gaming idea for square-enix. how's this sound?

pukemon

pukemon

CAGiversary!
final fantasy: THE final fantasy: THE manly fantasy. i think it's time to move on square. ff is getting old already. basically same thing all the time, with different battle systems. i think the programmers are addicted to estrogen. the main characters get more girly with each installment.
 
the characters are NOT getting girly just there are more pretty girl characters now, the guy characters are still very man. FF is not getting old, and it is always as amazing as it is, it is the best RPG as always, in it's timesss since 16 years ago. any unfair comments of such to the great name of FF is ridiculous. if you don't understand what FF really is by just playing the new FF's and if you don't like it, then just don't play it, these are japanese games, and no one care if you like it or not~ don't yell and wait for any english translated japanese games then~ :twisted:
 
[quote name='pukemon']final fantasy: THE final fantasy: THE manly fantasy. i think it's time to move on square. ff is getting old already. basically same thing all the time, with different battle systems. i think the programmers are addicted to estrogen. the main characters get more girly with each installment.[/quote]

Yeah, I've noticed the influx of metrosexuals lately. It seems that XI is getting even worse, too.

Personally, I hate playing RPGs with girly men and when you play as a fuggin little kid. I don't know about you, but I hate having to play as a kid.

It would be really cool for Square to go back to the game's roots and do a game with old-school knights like the first few games. Also, it might be kinda cool to have a real-time combat system. Maybe something like KOTOR, which isn't totally real time.
 
The FF series is leaps and bounds above almost all the competition in terms of story telling, cinematics and character development. Other than that though, the games themselves continue a downward spiral into blah-land. And yes, the male characters are two-shakes off of a tran-sexual.

Btw, if you see the shots of the main character from FF12.. I really didn't know if it was male or female when I first saw it.

EDIT - I remember something about FF12 supposedly having a 'new, innovative battle system'.. that could be something to look forward to.
 
Square has been going down hill for a while now.

They seem to be dead set in their new wave, metrosexual fantasies so don't hold your breath for a change anytime soon. Maybe one day they will realize that fmv's and love stories don't make make a game.
 
[quote name='Scrubking']Maybe one day they will realize that fmv's and love stories don't make make a game.[/quote]

Well, unless you consider selling millions and millions of copies making the game.
 
i dont get what your problem is, square has had effeminate male characters for a long time now, i guess now since theres a hip new word for that, its time to whine about it?

Kefka3.jpg
 
[quote name='jmcc'][quote name='Scrubking']Maybe one day they will realize that fmv's and love stories don't make make a game.[/quote]

Well, unless you consider selling millions and millions of copies making the game.[/quote]

The cinematics and the stories don't sell the millions of copies of the game. The name Final Fantasy sells the game. They could make a game where you jump in dog doo for 24 hours straight, package it in a Final Fantasy 12 box and it would sell like hotcakes.
 
[quote name='Cornfedwb'][quote name='jmcc'][quote name='Scrubking']Maybe one day they will realize that fmv's and love stories don't make make a game.[/quote]

Well, unless you consider selling millions and millions of copies making the game.[/quote]

The cinematics and the stories don't sell the millions of copies of the game. The name Final Fantasy sells the game. They could make a game where you jump in dog doo for 24 hours straight, package it in a Final Fantasy 12 box and it would sell like hotcakes.[/quote]

They did, it was called Crystal Chronicles. It didn't sell like hotcakes.
 
[quote name='Cornfedwb'][quote name='jmcc'][quote name='Scrubking']Maybe one day they will realize that fmv's and love stories don't make make a game.[/quote]

Well, unless you consider selling millions and millions of copies making the game.[/quote]

The cinematics and the stories don't sell the millions of copies of the game. The name Final Fantasy sells the game. They could make a game where you jump in dog doo for 24 hours straight, package it in a Final Fantasy 12 box and it would sell like hotcakes.[/quote]

yes final fantasy is a popular series, but its also a damn good one, so i dont see you point here? why not take shots at castlevania games, or mario games? oh, what? because they arnt popular enough for you to attack to get some attention?
 
Do you have access to the sale numbers to back that statement or is just randomly off of the top of your head? I'd be willing to bet FF:CC (which is highly underrated) sold to a pretty good portion of the GCN installed base.
 
[quote name='punqsux'][quote name='Cornfedwb'][quote name='jmcc'][quote name='Scrubking']Maybe one day they will realize that fmv's and love stories don't make make a game.[/quote]

Well, unless you consider selling millions and millions of copies making the game.[/quote]

The cinematics and the stories don't sell the millions of copies of the game. The name Final Fantasy sells the game. They could make a game where you jump in dog doo for 24 hours straight, package it in a Final Fantasy 12 box and it would sell like hotcakes.[/quote]

yes final fantasy is a popular series, but its also a damn good one, so i dont see you point here? why not take shots at castlevania games, or mario games? oh, what? because they arnt popular enough for you to attack to get some attention?[/quote]

I wasn't taking a shot at the series, I was just pointing out the story and the cinematics really do not sell the game anymore. It's all the name.

I happily purchase and play every FF game that comes out (as well as most every Squaresoft game).. but really, I loved the story in FFX, but the gameplay was somewhat repetative and boring. And FF X-2 I think was just a poor showing.
 
FF series shouldn't stop. I love every one that I've played (except XI, god its boring, but I'm not into MMOs at all). I love the characters in each. Vaan in FFXII is bordering on downright homosexual, but I'll live with it. After all, that FFV (or is that VI) dude that punq posted is even worse. But it was a good game.

It might be noteworthy that I think those older characters, such as the one punq posted, are modelled after Amano Yoshitaka's art style:

FFVII Cloud/Aeris:

http://www.ffshrine.org/ff7/amanoart/ff7_1.jpg

and the ingame artwork by Tetsuya Nomura:

http://www.ffshrine.org/ff7/nomuraart/ff7_15.jpg
http://www.ffshrine.org/ff7/nomuraart/ff7_4.jpg

You'll notice that Yoshitaka still does the FF game logos... (look closely)

http://www.ffshrine.org/ffx2/logos/ffx-2_logo.jpg
 
i wasnt too big on x-2 either, but its just a side story.

crystal chronicles sold 200,000 units in japan in its first week. thats the only # i could find

i thought ffx had an amazing battle system, imo the best in the series. the switch to turn based really payed off. and the fact that you could call characters in mid battle was great, and that you actully controlled your summons!

im curious what you didnt like about the gameplay?
 
The battle system I got overly sick of after the first 10-15 hours, although I'll agree controlling the summons was bad-ass.
I think my biggest problem with the game was its Xenosaga-esque pacing, they just went overboard with the FMVs and it dragged on and on too many times, in too many places.
Overall, the game is a good, maybe great, game.. I'd recommend it to anyone.. but its just not what FFI, FFIII, FFV, FFVII or FFVIII was.
 
[quote name='Cornfedwb']The battle system I got overly sick of after the first 10-15 hours, although I'll agree controlling the summons was bad-ass.
I think my biggest problem with the game was its Xenosaga-esque pacing, they just went overboard with the FMVs and it dragged on and on too many times, in too many places.
Overall, the game is a good, maybe great, game.. I'd recommend it to anyone.. but its just not what FFI, FFIII, FFV, FFVII or FFVIII was.[/quote]

so you'd rather read 1 hour+ of text (calm town in ff7) than watch a few 2-4 min movies here and there? ill agree there were alot of movies but most were really short! xenosage felt like a chore, so much running all over the ship and talking to everyone over and over...i dont feel its comparable, but i never got more than 6 hours into it so i may not know
 
FFX isn't up there with FFIV, VI, or VIII (or even to some extent IX) in overally quality, but the battle system was superb. The turn based team aspect was fantastic; random battles didn't feel as much like a chore as previous RPG systems. It felt like they had infused a good amount of real strategy into the battle formula, which was a welcome addition.

The game itself, story, characters, etc was not very good. Passable, but nothing I'd consider excellent.

X-2 (I'm 40-something% into it at the moment) has another fun battle system, combining the jobs from V and the switching aspect of X, and throwing in a real Active Time battle system --- the ability to make an enemy pause mid-charge with a quick attack, possibly preventing damage with timing, is great. The mission based style of the game angers me though, and it loses a great deal of narrative strength because of it. FFTA lost points with me for the same reason.


I wouldn't give up on the FF series just yet. The director/producer of XII has not disappointed yet, with Ogre Battle, Vagrant Story, and FFT to his credit. I'm not sure if he was involved with FFTA, but that may be his only blemish on a great track record.
 
[quote name='"CarmenJubei"']"the characters are NOT getting girly just there are more pretty girl characters now, the guy characters are still very man. /quote]

Cause he's a meat and potatoes kinda guy.

finalfantasyxiips2_051104_045.jpg
 
Zidane was kind of male-ish, heh. I thought FF X got boring as well, I'd rather read than hear those crappy voice actors, that is for sure. Reading the text was part of the charm of RPGs for me, I don't have the attention span for books, but I can read if it's in a video game.
 
[quote name='dental_regurgitation']Zidane was kind of male-ish, heh. I thought FF X got boring as well, I'd rather read than hear those crappy voice actors, that is for sure. Reading the text was part of the charm of RPGs for me, I don't have the attention span for books, but I can read if it's in a video game.[/quote]

I know what you mean...I could read those old RPG's for days. Like FFT and FF VI...I loved reading through those games. You could take things in at your own pace and I always felt more like I was in the game when I was reading through everything (instead of watching movies). Also, I too thought FFX got a bit boring ( I haven't played the game, but have watched nearly the entire game played by others--some good naps there...)
 
I remeber everytime a "Final Fantasy" game came out, it was actually a big deal. Now I feel Square just trys to pump out as many FF titles they can a year just cause they know it'll sell.

Some are great, some just fall short of being great. Actually FF XII seems like it will be very good, but I'm still more excited to play other up coming RPGs like Tales of Symphonia, Star Ocean 3 and Suikoden 4 rather than another FF.
 
[quote name='Grave_Addiction'][quote name='pukemon']final fantasy: THE final fantasy: THE manly fantasy. i think it's time to move on square. ff is getting old already. basically same thing all the time, with different battle systems. i think the programmers are addicted to estrogen. the main characters get more girly with each installment.[/quote]

Yeah, I've noticed the influx of metrosexuals lately. It seems that XI is getting even worse, too.

Personally, I hate playing RPGs with girly men and when you play as a fuggin little kid. I don't know about you, but I hate having to play as a kid.

It would be really cool for Square to go back to the game's roots and do a game with old-school knights like the first few games. Also, it might be kinda cool to have a real-time combat system. Maybe something like KOTOR, which isn't totally real time.[/quote]

FF 12 is said to have a new combat system that mimicks KOTOR's (at least conventually)
 
[quote name='punqsux']

yes final fantasy is a popular series, but its also a damn good one, so i dont see you point here? why not take shots at castlevania games, or mario games? oh, what? because they arnt popular enough for you to attack to get some attention?[/quote]

You hit the nail right on the head.
 
[quote name='Rodimus Donut']I remeber everytime a "Final Fantasy" game came out, it was actually a big deal. Now I feel Square just trys to pump out as many FF titles they can a year just cause they know it'll sell.

Some are great, some just fall short of being great. Actually FF XII seems like it will be very good, but I'm still more excited to play other up coming RPGs like Tales of Symphonia, Star Ocean 3 and Suikoden 4 rather than another FF.[/quote]

I have to agree with Rodimus, in the past FF releases were EVENTS(mandatory caps) that people waited for, and once they got to the point where they were releasing them once a year it lost someof its mystique and specialness, the time period between the natural FF10 and FF12 (a lot of people are just passing FF11 over because it's an MMO and not just an RPG so it never should have been called 11) is so long that 12 feels different and newer now, especially with the new team working on it as opposed to the people who did the last 5 FF games (excluding 11). Hopfully this new feeling and a different additude will carry into the enevitable FF13.
 
The time periods between the numbered FF releases hasn't changed all that much. Each generation has seen three FF releases spread across the 5 year console lifecycle. 1-3 on NES. 4-6 on SNES. 7-9 on PSX. 10, 10-2/11 [both are more of an aside to the series, and thus can be counted as one], 12 on PS2.

The only reason that some of them could be considered an EVENT is the fact that in the early going, we didn't get all the FF's in the US. So there was a 3-4 year lull between each iteration of the series. FF2/4 made a big splash stateside, then there was the huge wait for FF3/6, bridged in Japan by 5.
 
Prehaps, but I can remember it being a lot more exciting when they'd slip out a character pic and MAYBE tell you it's name. After FF3(6) came out we waited awhile for news on 7 and then the switch from Nintendo to sony shocked people. They went the same route with the occasional snippet of information on 7 untill it finally came out.

And after that, every single year saw an FF release not even faltering in the move from PSone to PS2. This is why this small stutter makes it feel a little different. Plus by this point in the cycle we'd know every single detail about the characters and story and even now it's pretty secretive... it seems atleast.
 
I personally enjoy the FF series. I don't understand why people complain about companies making long series (ie Madden or FF). If you don't like it and don't want to buy a new one, then don't. Complaining isn't going to accomplish anything, since they're still gonna sell a ton of copies whether you like it or not. Just don't buy it and be happy with yourself that you aren't buying a "crappy" game.

[quote name='punqsux']i dont get what your problem is, square has had effeminate male characters for a long time now, i guess now since theres a hip new word for that, its time to whine about it?

Kefka3.jpg
[/quote]

That's a crazy pic. :shock:
 
punqsux wrote:


yes final fantasy is a popular series, but its also a damn good one, so i dont see you point here? why not take shots at castlevania games, or mario games? oh, what? because they arnt popular enough for you to attack to get some attention?


You hit the nail right on the head.

what's so good about it? vii' story was ok. the rest of the game was exceptional. viii had a better story, and the rest of the game exceptional. ix was a joke. the only thing going for 10 were the graphics and battle system and uh, that's it. x-2 was the lingerie bowl or something. 12 looks like it should be the the final estrogen fantasy. so after viii, imo, ff sucks. i still enjoy it. i just wish the creativity was used elsewhere. like a new mana or evermore game.

as for castlevania and mario. castlevania i don't have much of a comment to make as i'm not a big castlevania fan, but i did love sotn. but as for mario. mario not as popular? ummm, yeah. i bet you mario is more recognizable than the name final fantasy. and i'm willing to bet that all the platformers mario has starred in up until JUST mario 64 has sold more games than all ff games combined worldwide. i'm almost willing to bet all mario games before super mario world have more sales.

so why would you not see my point because you think ff is still great as do alot of other people, but alot of us think it has got stale? i think the ff series has lost much of it's appeal after viii and some will disagree with me and say vii, and even more will say after vi. if you're trying to say mario is the same thing over and over i could agree somewhat because of sunshine. but, mario has always and still is THE platformer by which most other platformers are judged. ff doesn't have that prestigious stigma anymore in the rpg realm. how come alot of ff fans are crying for something different? i could tell you because ff is just a mainstream pretty piece of trash now. or i could tell you square is milking this cow dry. but i won't.

i'm going to tell you playing ff is nowhere near as epic as it used to be. i like getting my ass handed to me sometimes, especially the final boss. viii was somewhat easy. marlboro was the hardest enemy in viii. but after viii, i have not looked forward to fighting the final boss. they were cheese. swiss cheese and me armed are with a red hot butcher knife. for crying out loud. you couldn't even lose to sin in ffx. it was more the for the not so sad story, than the epic fight. blah.

damn good series still my ass. i don't see your point. i'll take that nail and fight with it in ff xii and probably kick the final boss's ass from here to gaia. ff fanboys are like xbox fanboys. graphics baby.
 
[quote name='pukemon']punqsux wrote:


yes final fantasy is a popular series, but its also a damn good one, so i dont see you point here? why not take shots at castlevania games, or mario games? oh, what? because they arnt popular enough for you to attack to get some attention?


You hit the nail right on the head.

what's so good about it? vii' story was ok. the rest of the game was exceptional. viii had a better story, and the rest of the game exceptional. ix was a joke. the only thing going for 10 were the graphics and battle system and uh, that's it. x-2 was the lingerie bowl or something. 12 looks like it should be the the final estrogen fantasy. so after viii, imo, ff sucks. i still enjoy it. i just wish the creativity was used elsewhere. like a new mana or evermore game.

as for castlevania and mario. castlevania i don't have much of a comment to make as i'm not a big castlevania fan, but i did love sotn. but as for mario. mario not as popular? ummm, yeah. i bet you mario is more recognizable than the name final fantasy. and i'm willing to bet that all the platformers mario has starred in up until JUST mario 64 has sold more games than all ff games combined worldwide. i'm almost willing to bet all mario games before super mario world have more sales.

so why would you not see my point because you think ff is still great as do alot of other people, but alot of us think it has got stale? i think the ff series has lost much of it's appeal after viii and some will disagree with me and say vii, and even more will say after vi. if you're trying to say mario is the same thing over and over i could agree somewhat because of sunshine. but, mario has always and still is THE platformer by which most other platformers are judged. ff doesn't have that prestigious stigma anymore in the rpg realm. how come alot of ff fans are crying for something different? i could tell you because ff is just a mainstream pretty piece of trash now. or i could tell you square is milking this cow dry. but i won't.

i'm going to tell you playing ff is nowhere near as epic as it used to be. i like getting my ass handed to me sometimes, especially the final boss. viii was somewhat easy. marlboro was the hardest enemy in viii. but after viii, i have not looked forward to fighting the final boss. they were cheese. swiss cheese and me armed are with a red hot butcher knife. for crying out loud. you couldn't even lose to sin in ffx. it was more the for the not so sad story, than the epic fight. blah.

damn good series still my ass. i don't see your point. i'll take that nail and fight with it in ff xii and probably kick the final boss's ass from here to gaia. ff fanboys are like xbox fanboys. graphics baby.[/quote]

1. learn to quote.
2. im no fanboy. i already stated i was less than impressed with x2, on top of which, i dont like fft, or ffta, i have no intrest in playing ff:cc(but will when i can get it for 10 bucks) and ff11 is just sad.
3. your argument about mario is invalid because of the simple fact that people love mario games, almost no one outright bashes them. and alot of people bash ff.
4.you say ff is not a good series, however you go on and on about how 1-8 were great games? there have only been 10 actual rpg installments, and because you disliked 2 of them its a bad series?ill admit 9 was the weakest ff in a long time, but i still enjoyed it alot more than many other rpgs of its time. and x was just great, the best battle system ever.
5.i noticed you said all x had was graphics and the battle system, now correct me if im wrong, but in an rpg is the battle system not the main gameplay aspect? if so, lets work out some logic here:
battle sys = gameplay
ffx battle sys = good
ffx = good gameplay
good gameplay = good game
ffx=good game

if you disagree with that id like to hear what you feel the main gameplay aspect in an rpg is, and if you say walking around and talking to random people, ill seriously laugh so hard
 
No, an RPG's battle system isn't it's main aspect. The story is, by definition of "role playing game."
 
[quote name='-Never4ever-'][quote name='punqsux']

yes final fantasy is a popular series, but its also a damn good one, so i dont see you point here? why not take shots at castlevania games, or mario games? oh, what? because they arnt popular enough for you to attack to get some attention?[/quote]

You hit the nail right on the head.[/quote]

Studies show that more children in the WORLD know Mario than they know Mickey Mouse now. I dont think popularity is something FF has over Mario...Maybe in the world of geeky fanboys. But the big diff here is Mario come out with a new game every 4 years and brings something completely new and fresh to the table while retaining the mario feel. Final Fantasy releases a new game every year with the same crap no one cares about. The only new and fresh Idea square comes out with these days gets a Final Fantasy tagline slapped to it anyways. I can wait till Square remakes they're first game "Rad Racer"....then it can be FINAL FANTASY : The Rad Racer.
 
I suspect your ideas are not going to get much respect at Square-Enix until they've shipped a main line FF title that doesn't move over a million units in its first month and ultimately peaks at 5-7 million units worldwide.

Would you go to a movie studio and expect them to take your advice on a franchise that has always been highly profitable?

If you believe there is a big market for the sort of game you describe why not take the idea to those other developers who need a hit. They might be more open to outside advice.
 
[quote name='jmcc']No, an RPG's battle system isn't it's main aspect. The story is, by definition of "role playing game."[/quote]

story cannot be a gameplay aspect because the story is written, and in final fantasy games you have no input about the outcome of it.
 
[quote name='punqsux'][quote name='jmcc']No, an RPG's battle system isn't it's main aspect. The story is, by definition of "role playing game."[/quote]

story cannot be a gameplay aspect because the story is written, and in final fantasy games you have no input about the outcome of it.[/quote]

But what about the games where you DO have input in the outcome? Look at games like KOTOR and Deus Ex - you actually get to decide how the story ends. Even two or three different scripted choices are better than one that you can't influence at all.

I've never understood why the FF games are so popular, mainly because they're boring as all hell. Too many movies and not nearly enough replay. That's just my $0.02, though.

And it's worth noting that the only reason that I could tell that the pic that Mookyjooky posted was of a guy was because of the exposed chest. It's that close to a woman. :shock:
 
[quote name='Gothic_Walrus']
But what about the games where you DO have input in the outcome? Look at games like KOTOR and Deus Ex - you actually get to decide how the story ends[/quote]

i agree with you totally, however in ff, youre given no such choices to altert he story, and therefore the story is not part of the gameplay
 
[quote name='pukemon']basically same thing all the time, with different battle systems.[/quote]

So.... each game has a different setting, a different battle system, different characters, and an all new storyline.... but they're "all the same."

Uhhh, right.

[quote name='Scrubking']Maybe one day they will realize that fmv's and love stories don't make make a game.[/quote]

No, what makes a good game is having the best of everything. That includes good graphics, good music, interesting characters/setting/storyline, AND good gameplay. As far as I'm concerned if it doesn't have ALL those things, it's not worth my $50.00

I grow tired of your comments about gameplay being all that matters when it is, in fact, only one aspect of the game (especially a more complex genre like the RPG). If you can't appreciate those complexities, than stick to simpler games where the "gameplay" IS actually all that matters, like PONG.

[quote name='Gothic_Walrus'][quote name='punqsux'][quote name='jmcc']No, an RPG's battle system isn't it's main aspect. The story is, by definition of "role playing game."[/quote]

story cannot be a gameplay aspect because the story is written, and in final fantasy games you have no input about the outcome of it.[/quote]

But what about the games where you DO have input in the outcome? Look at games like KOTOR and Deus Ex - you actually get to decide how the story ends. Even two or three different scripted choices are better than one that you can't influence at all.

I've never understood why the FF games are so popular, mainly because they're boring as all hell. Too many movies and not nearly enough replay. That's just my $0.02, though.[/quote]

As Punqsux indicated, the japanese version of the "role playing game" has been horribly mislabeled, because they're not actually role playing games, there's no role playing going on. Role playing requires you to make decisions about your character and decisions that determine the outcome of the story. So Japanese "rpgs" arent actually role playing games, but that doesn't mean they're not excellent games.

It's a question of immersion, depth and complexity of storyline vs customability, options, and ability for the player to take control of and actually be a part of the storyline. The former, the japanese way of going about it (Final Fantasy, Suikoden, etc) is like reading a good book. The latter, or the more european/american approach (Neverwinter Nights, KotOR, etc) takes a Dungeons & Dragons approach to it by giving you as much control as possible in a videogame.

Personally I enjoy both types of game, I think they both have their merits. As far as Final Fantasy goes, I think it has taken a turn for the worse in recent years (FF9, FFX-2.... I'm looking at you -_-), but I have hope for the future. Square Enix is starting to get back on target with games like Drakengard and Front Mission 4. Hopefully FF12 will turn out really good. :D
 
Regardless of whether you think the story is a gameplay element or not, the battle system is not the main aspect of an RPG. If it was, it would be a fighting game, not an RPG.
 
Final Fantasy never really had any stories that stood out strong for me, except VII. They're all save the world in a Fantasy or Sci-Fi setting. You can always expect that. But then when you think about it, all RPG's are pretty much like that.

And I agree that story is the most important, but I've played RPG's just cause I loved the fighting system. (ex: Tales of Destiny 2, and Star Ocean.) About half the time spent in an RPG is fighting, so and RPG has to have a strong fighting system.
 
hey guys. some of you are taking me way too seriously. yes i was kinda serious about square having a FINAL fantasy, but i also meant maybe taking the series in a new direction and stop living off the name. but the MANLY fantasy was serious sarcasm. i think alot of people are starting to get turned off by the feminine male characters. and i wasn't picking on you punq. just your comments i disagreed with and the guy that totally agreed with you. anyways, i do believe the story is part of an rpg. it's definitely secondary but still important. if there were no story in an rpg, it would basically make it a lameass fighting game. and we'd definitely like a good story better than a bad one. and it'd be real nice for something VERY original for once. as for the battle systems, i think it's high time square came out with something more interactive and strategic rather than inputting a command over and over. i have grown tired of the same basic story and basic battles. yes, i enjoyed being able to switch characters in battle in ff x, but i definitely see more depth in there if square took the time. i enjoy being able to customize my characters with unique ways almost every game but it just doesn't cut it. the meat and potatoes of ff tactics were jobs and weapons/armor customization. yeah it was cool but it would've been much better and made the game much better if the game was harder. tactics was way too easy for all that crap. square should take some of that artistic talent and allocate to the technical aspects or final fantasy. fmv's are cool, but not worth 50 bucks. that why i think ff fanboys are like xbox fanboys. it's all about the graphics to them and not the gameplay. i have a few friends who have xbox's and only one does not care about graphics. he has always been able to give me info on gameplay and other aspects of games. if not for him, i prolly would've never given xbox as much of a chance as i have. and he probably wouldn't play his gamecube as much if not for me. and we've never played videogames together as he is only a good acquaintance and we haven't had time to hook up and play.
 
[quote name='pukemon']anyways, i do believe the story is part of an rpg. it's definitely secondary but still important. if there were no story in an rpg, it would basically make it a lameass fighting game.[/quote]

So without the story it's a lame fighting game, but the story is still "secondary"?

That makes absolutely no sense.


[quote name='pukemon']fmv's are cool, but not worth 50 bucks. that why i think ff fanboys are like xbox fanboys. it's all about the graphics to them and not the gameplay.[/quote]

This is the most tired, nonsensical argument that has pervaded ever since Final Fantasy became popular.

First of all, anyone who picks up FF7 or FF10 out of the blue because the graphics look cool obviously isn't a "fanboy". The very definition of the word fanboy suggests that you are a FAN and if you are picking up a FF game because the cover looks shiny or because you saw some pretty screenshots or footage, that person obviously isn't a FAN of the series yet.

Second, the people who DO look into the series because of its graphics and DON'T see any of the depth the games offer typically have a very low retention rate. I know tons of people who bought FF7 when it was new because suddenly final fantasy was mainstream, the game looked great... it was the game to own. How many of them bought a final fantasy after that? How many of them even finished the game? Not many. RPGs by their nature (because they're so long and require a lot of reading) don't end up appealing to people who just want to see pretty graphics.

Third, there are PLENTY of games with pretty graphics and FMV to look at. It seems highly unlikely that someone so obsessed with FMV is going to buy a game where it takes 5-10 hours of play to get to that next FMV when there are plenty of other pretty games to pick from that don't require you to "plod" through all that story.

Fourth, if you ARE a true FF fan, you already know the series has much more to offer than that.... the sweeping musical scores, the characters, the story, and just the overall scope. The graphics for FF have always been top-notch in comparison to the rest of the games from their generation, and the fmv's we have today, not all that different than the cutscenes/sequences you'd see take place in the older games when the characters are talking and you don't have control of them.


This argument about people becoming FF fans because of FMV and graphics being the downfall of rpgs has been debunked and promptly dismissed by rational console rpg fans everywhere. The graphics and FMV are simply a vehicle by which the story is told and the game unfolds. The ONLY people who find them to be the sole attraction are newbs, and most of those people will never actually become fans of the series.
 
"If you're going to be looking at an ass for dozens of hours it might as well be a nice looking ass."

It;s a quote that never stops being true. If you;re going to be in an RPG that requires you to play through 40-60 hours then it better look as good as it can. No the game play maynot be as great as it used to be thought some times it is but you cant hate a game just because it has pretty graphics and stuff.
 
"If you're going to be looking at an ass for dozens of hours it might as well be a nice looking ass."

It;s a quote that never stops being true. If you;re going to be in an RPG that requires you to play through 40-60 hours then it better look as good as it can. No the game play maynot be as great as it used to be thought some times it is but you cant hate a game just because it has pretty graphics and stuff.

most console rpg players don't need great graphics to play the game. most rpg players prefer old school graphics like snes and ps1. i don't think ffx will stand the test of time and become a classic. i don't hate a game because it has pretty graphics. i'm just saying some people judge a book by it's cover.
 
what I'm saying is with more sopphisticated systems you cant always have a bunch of little sprites. yeah every now and then you get something like Disgaea and it looks great but if you can create a beautiful game why should you skimp on it unless its part of your art direction to begin with.

Square has always sought to better their presentation, otherwise they wouldnt be useing all 32,000 SNES colors in FF3(6) and they wouldn't have choosen the PS over the N64 for FF7.
 
[quote name='pukemon']
"If you're going to be looking at an ass for dozens of hours it might as well be a nice looking ass."

It;s a quote that never stops being true. If you;re going to be in an RPG that requires you to play through 40-60 hours then it better look as good as it can. No the game play maynot be as great as it used to be thought some times it is but you cant hate a game just because it has pretty graphics and stuff.
Click to expand...
most console rpg players don't need great graphics to play the game. most rpg players prefer old school graphics like snes and ps1. i don't think ffx will stand the test of time and become a classic. i don't hate a game because it has pretty graphics. i'm just saying some people judge a book by it's cover.[/quote]

Of course a lot of people judge the book by its cover when video games are concerned. Its cover is on each page! Video games is a visual medium, like movies and TV. Would the LOTR movies be as expressive and immersive if WETA didn't do such a fantastic job with their special effects? Imagine a claymation [stop-motion animation] Gollum for instance. Or a guy in a cheap suit of Godzilla quality. The movie loses a level of believability, and the overall product suffers no matter the quality of the script.

It is not fair to judge FF games by their fans, or in this case a small subset of its fanbase. Be wary of saying things like "some people" when you're trying to support an argument. It usually means that you are using too small a group to justify talking about the whole of the group.

Moving back to the comment made about how formulaic the FF series has become from a story standpoint, I agree it is formulaic. It's supposed to be formulaic. That is the common thread that makes FF a series. Different worlds, different people, experiencing similar events from a different perspective. FFX wasn't very dynamic in the character or plot development areas, I agree, but wait for FFXII before you deem the series doomed to failure. It is the first new world for a numbered FF game (that has a story and is traditional) since FFX. X-2 was in the same world, and completely out-of-bounds in terms of story and presentation, and should be seen more as an "expansion" to FFX then its own entity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top