Topic: Final fantasy discussion thread

@BAMozzy the history of FF is interesting, it's called final Fantasy because it was Sakaguchis last stab at making a popular game as he wasn't making any money. The rest is history. Read up on it mate its really interesting.

@FullbringIchigo yeah as @kyleforrester87 said Bam was just answering the question. But it does signify that (maybe older) fans of the series want a more turn based tactical spin with time in the menus and to take the game at our pace. Where as the generally and wrong in my opinion consensus that real-time open world with western mechanics is the future of the main line series.

@themcnoisy i wouldn't mind if Final Fantasy started to use the Kingdom Hearts battle system my self, it has a mixture of real time and turn based mechanics and while not perfect, with improvement would suit the FF series well i think

@FullbringIchigo What's turn based about KH? It's completely real time no?

@kyleforrester87 not exactly, it is MAINLY Real Time that's true but it does have some turn based elements such as the wait times on magic and techniques

like i said if they could tweek it a bit i think it would be a perfect battle system for Final Fantasy

personally i want more infor on the system the FFVII Remake will use because that looks to be a good mix of Real and Turn Based and if it works could become the foundation of future FF games

@FullbringIchigo Ahh. For me I'd love the next FF to have combat like Nier (and other Platinum games i.e Bayonetta) where you're engaged in the moment to moment inputting specific button presses to pull off certain moves and combos. Nier lets you equip "chips" to your androids OS so this would essentially be similar to Materia (or whatever you want to call the abilities). And then of course you can outfit the other computer controlled players with whatever abilities you want.

So basically yes my preference is similar to Kingdom Hearts but with a bit more consideration to the buttons you're pressing to pull off the best moves and combos. I find you can get by mashing attack in KH (especially number 2).

@FullbringIchigo I was answering why I don't play FF and what it would take me to play FF. I know that it wouldn't change which is why I won't end up playing FF. Not that I want it to change because then the 'fans' of the franchise would be very unhappy. It would help if you actually read all the previous comments that lead up to mine first!! You are just stating the obvious!! I generally don't play JRPG's. The last ones I played with 'any' conviction were Zelda games and Mystical Ninja Goemon (N64).

And by the way, Nioh is on my wanted list... Just waiting for it to drop to a price that I am willing to pay... Nier though, another 'weird' and 'bizarre' Japanese game is not...

@themcnoisy I still think its 'funny' that the game has gone on to have multiple 'Final' fantasies regardless of where that title came from. It has to be one of the longest 'finals' in history and one hell of a fantasy

The reason I was drawn into this topic was the debate about the combat style. I do think that real time combat though is the natural evolution for the franchise and I believe they tried at least to keep some of the turn based combat element within the real time aspect - for example, Instead of using a menu interface, the player selects commands directly mapped to buttons on the controller, such as "Attack", "Defend", "Magic", and "Item". The change to the real time combat was, as I said, a natural evolution and probably an attempt to bring 'new' players into the world as well. I don't know whether they thought that the long term fans would be happy or not - maybe thought they would welcome the change as it seems like the natural progression now the hardware as evolved to the point of being able to deliver that along with the expansive open world and traditional Final Fantasy story, characters etc. Lets be honest, FFxiii was criticised leading to director Motomu Toriyama saying he felt that the lower-than-expected review scores for a main Final Fantasy series game came from reviewers who approached the game from a Western point of view. The two spin-offs received positive reviews in Japan but very mixed reviews in the rest of the world - All 3 of these were criticised over story, characters etc. Maybe the implementation of real time battles was a 'compromise' to attract more universal praise, to attract more westerners to jump aboard because the cost of development cannot be met by the Japanese and 'cult' following the franchise receives outside of Japan?

Like I initially said, Knowing that the previous games sold around 6-7m and received mixed reviews, and the fact this game had to sell around 10m to break even, they knew they had to attract new players in and therefore opted to go for real time combat in the hope that it would appeal to a wider audience and hoped the existing Fan base would embrace the evolution. It still retains a lot of the elements that FF are known for and its incredible looking world and soundtrack - inc the majority of the tracks from previous games which would appeal to long term fans. Its possible that the Demo may of put some of those new-comers off - that and the 'mixed' reviews and performance issues. It may not be the 'combat' that's the issue but the fact that they 'failed' to draw the newer gamers in. Again some of that may be down to the fact that this is numbered and new gamers could be worried that they don't know the history. Like jumping into a TV series at the 15th season. It may not tie in to the previous seasons/games directly but you still need to put that message across if you want to attract newcomers.

I would say this about any long term franchise, not just FF. You also have to convince those that were disappointed with the previous few games that 'lessons were learned' - the FF fanbase that became disenchanted. Judging by the 'mixed' reviews, it would appear that this game isn't the game that people hoped it would be. Maybe word of mouth amongst the FF community will help but lets be honest, this game also needed to pull in newcomers too - give them a reason to buy. They couldn't just rely on the 'fans' that bought the previous few game(s) as they would fall short in the necessary sales.

@BAMozzy yeah i know i was just trying to point out other games that might suit your tastes but it looks like you already played them

@FullbringIchigo Maybe I shouldn't have got involved in a FF thread as its not something I play - although I do think sometimes an 'outsider's' view (rather than a fan) can make some observations.

As I said, I got drawn into the conversation because of the combat style - the decision to go to a real time combat over Turn Based. It was initially more a discussion about the pros and cons and why I prefer a certain way compared to @kyleforrester87 who enjoys the other. It was an exchange of opinion so we could understand better each others perspective - at least I hope it was. I think I understand now why Kyle likes Turn Based even if its not for me.

That then lead to a discussion about this game in particular and why, even though the combat style should appeal more to me (which in essence it does), the game itself doesn't and what it would take for me to play - hypothetically. That then led to me making the statement about the Witcher 3. It was never meant to say that I expect the series to go in that direction and more a case of explaining why FF will unlikely ever be on my play-list. I also hope I showed that I can still respect elements of the Series - like the visuals and audio in subsequent posts but I am well aware that I am not the target audience for the franchise. I tried to explain why I thought the game had to evolve and why they may have had to try and appeal to a 'new' audience whilst also keeping the fans happy. By new audience, I am referring to the newer generation of gamers - those maybe not familiar with any/all of the previous games - not Old gits like myself who have a much clearer idea of what I like (Or a bit set in my ways ) Less inclined to 'experiment' LOL. I certainly wasn't criticising FF but merely saying why the game doesn't appeal and why I play other games - like the Witcher 3 for example

I still think a Japanese 'Witcher' RPG game set in an open world feudal Japan with the different Shoguns all vying for territory so you have a 'similar' political landscape but you are an 'impartial' Samurai and decisions can matter - like the Witcher - would be Fantastic. I love the old world Japanese architecture and that backdrop would be beautiful.

@BAMozzy your free to view and talk in whatever forums you wish even if your not a FF fan and your right sometimes an "outside" view as you put it on a series is good, it lets fans see just what the series looks like from a different point of view and can even help fans see ways in which the series can not only improve but also draw in new fans

main issue with that is at some point, your going to set off some raging fanbay because you attacked "Their Precious"

(REAL PHOTO OF A FANBOY)

as for a Witcher Style game set in Feudal Japan, i would LOVE a game like that and be all over it like a bad rash

also if what i said came off bad i apologise but i'm not very good at expressing myself in text when it comes to things like this

@FullbringIchigo Text is very difficult to read with the same intonation it was written with so I totally understand why sometimes people get the wrong interpretation.

I am well aware of the backlash you can receive from 'fanboys'. As someone who can 'defend' MS and criticise Sony on a Playstation based website, I am often in receipt of that 'backlash'. For example, criticising the PS4 Pro from a '4k' perspective and pointing out where its 'weak' in this area, where a PS5 could greatly improve and why the Xbox X is much more built for the 4k era. The amount of time I get accused of being a MS fanboy - despite the fact that I have owned EVERY Playstation and have a higher Trophy score than a lot of those accusing me of being a MS fanboy, still own 2 PS3's (inc a Day 1 60GB Phat), two PS4's (inc a Pro), I find it ridiculous.

Still, I have no intention of changing or altering my opinion because I may 'upset' a fanboy but as for being a 'fanboy' of anything myself, I really don't think I am. Not even of Call of Duty despite buying all since CoD4 and all the DLC (mostly because I buy the edition that includes the season pass) as I will also buy other FPS games, season passes etc and play those in preference to. I do try and be objective and give 'praise' where its due as well as be critical if I have the relevant experience/knowledge of course. Just fanboys can't seem to look at things objectively - how dare I who owns multiple Playstations criticise Sony when that's all they ever own?? LOL

As for Final Fantasy, I am certainly not suggesting ways in which the developers could improve the game. I am not in a position to be able to make those suggestions. That should come from the fanbase that actually play the game. My points were trying to suggest a reason why they have changed the combat style from the traditional turn based system they are known for. In part I believe its the natural evolution - like Mario or Zelda going from 2D to 3D. Also they are trying to appeal to a wider audience, the modern/new gamers that may be put off by turn based combat. The director felt the mixed reviews from critics was because they were looking at the game from a western perspective but they are also trying to attract the western audience - Japan alone isn't going to buy enough copies to justify the development costs and they can't rely on the 'cult' following in the west. As it often gets pointed out, games like Persona, Nier etc appeal to a 'niche' audience - which is fine but if you have to sell 10m copies to break even, let alone become profitable, they needed to appeal to a wider audience. Entice 'newcomers' in as well as keep the old fans happy. They also needed to entice the old fans who were disenchanted with 13 and the follow ups, that this was a return to form. Also after 10yrs of development, they had to release a game that ran perfectly. I also don't think the Demo helped with selling the game to a new audience.

I really can't say where improvements should be made. To do that, I would have to go back and play them all through to understand what makes a 'perfect' Final Fantasy game and how that 'should' work in the modern era. As someone who openly admits that Japanese games - especially JRPG's are not really my thing (1 or 2 exceptions as there are with everything), I am certainly not the person to make those suggestions.

Anyway - enough of that - maybe we should petition Square Enix to make that 'Witcher' style game in feudal Japan

@BAMozzy yeah the reason for ff13 and the spinoffs recieving good to average ratings mostly was because they are good to average games. The reason he gave for coming at the game from a western viewpoint for the lower scores is a bit grating tbh. It's squeenix propaganda and we have to realise they have been using the media for the last 15 years to fill us with this nonsense. Famitsu 40/40 means nothing anymore.

@BAMozzy forget asking Square, lets just petition CD Projekt Red, if we want a Witcher style game set in Feudal Japan, might as well get the Witcher Developers to do it

@themcnoisy i don't take any notice of any score or any review anymore, most of them mean nothing now a days, especially when the mind set of people seems to be anything lower than a 7 is total trash

it's as if a game rated 5 or 6 can't be enjoyable, hell i have enjoyed games that have been rated a 2 or 3 by "professional" reviewers

@FullbringIchigo I want CD Projekt Red to be totally focused on Cyberpunk and I think a Japanese developer would create the best open world Historical Japan with the knowledge of historical politics, weapons, gear and 'monsters' to make it feel more 'authentic'. I would prefer it if they played through the Witcher 3 and understood the importance of meaningful side quests and how the world can change - even how those side quests can have an impact on the world - not necessarily always a major impact but even little things like the Godlings of Sara and Johnny and reappearance later in the game - inc dialogue differences depending on the outcomes of those decisions.

Anyway that's off topic...

As for reviews, I always think 7 is an 'average' score. However I never read/watch just one review but look at multiple reviews. I also watch numerous game-play video's to try and get an idea of what the game is about, what I expect to be doing etc. I also have a clear idea of what I enjoy doing in games.

Its a bit like reviews of movies and how some relatively mindless action movie can get a low score whilst a Shakespearean period drama can get a much higher score. However I prefer the action, CGI laden big explosion Summer Blockbuster to the long winded, slow and drawn out Shakespearean costume drama that inevitably sweeps up at the Oscars. Generally I watch movies to be entertained or to switch off at the end of a day so don't want that 'drama' that I feel I have to watch closely and pay attention to every word spoken. Games are the same. I much prefer the mindless all action shoot-em-ups that score a 6/7 to a puzzler or slow paced walking sim that may score 8-10 because I am looking for that experience from a Game.

Usually by the time a review comes out, I have a good indication of whether the game is for me or not but I read the reviews more for keywords - like performance issues, bugs/glitches etc and things like that you can't always get from 'developer' released video's as they are not going to show these problems. The reviews rarely ever makes me buy a game I hadn't already considered but can make me decide to wait until I hear of a patch or until the price drops to a point I feel its worth purchasing.

yeah a lot of people say that but on a 10 point scale 5 is considered average and a 7 is a good but this was my point, people see any thing below a 7 and assume it's a bad game because most don't actually read the reviews, they just go straight to the score but my thoughts are that a review is the personal opinions of the person writing them and while they can be used to get an idea of what to expect shouldn't be taken as gospel, which may people seem to do

@BAMozzy maybe I phrased that wrong, the ff13 trilogy was a good game. But not even close to the series best, far too many of the series staples were removed and it was too linear. I enjoyed it, only failing on a couple of titan trials which is way at the back of the end game circa 100+ hours. So the reasons squeenix gave for less than stellar impressions was spin. But it was a decent game.

@Wesker did you grab ffx mate?

@themcnoisy Not yet, but I will just before going on holiday.

@themcnoisy I was just going off of wikipedia, Metacritic and memory of that time. I remember the story for 13 was poor - or at least not as 'good' as people were expecting from the franchise and I recall that the follow-ups were meant to address some of the issues and criticisms levelled at 13. Point I was making is that for at lot of the fanbase, 13 was a 'low' point and the follow-ups didn't seem to be much better. Whether it was PR spin or not, all those games sold less than 10m and the developers (as well as SE) knew they had to appeal to a bigger audience for 15. Selling 6-7m wouldn't break even for the cost.

As I said, I feel the real time combat of 15 was implemented for two reasons.
Firstly, its the natural progression - like we have seen the visual progression as hardware evolved, the next step, was logically the mechanics and in particular, that Combat to add to the immersion rather than the stop start whilst you take turns.

Secondly, to appeal to a wider and new audience, those that perhaps want that more immediate and continuous action.

I know that certain things may be 'classic' but I also believe that compromises had to be made for the 'hardware' limitations at that time. Certain things just couldn't be done. Is a bit like 2D Mario or the top down Zelda games. I bet if the current level of Hardware was around 30 years ago, they wouldn't have been this way. Its a bit like saying the 1983 Star Wars game was 'wire frame' and that is 'classic' Star Wars and so should be still in Star Wars X-Wing games or Wolfenstein should have stuck to being a 'Maze' game with shooting. Even Fallout (the original) and 2 for that matter, used Turn Based combat and visually was 2D Isometric in style - like Diablo Series, StarCraft and Baldurs Gate - Basically evolved from games like Q-Bert, Head over Heals (remember that?) and Knightlore (a Rare (or Ultima as they were) classic). Now though Fallout is 3D with real time combat but I don't recall fans wanting it to keep to the 2D Isometric style and turn based combat. It evolved along with the technology and to stay 'relevant' with games like Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion and Mass Effect.

Games like Final Fantasy are trying to compete against western RPGs in the western market space. As you know we seem to be quite 'flooded' with Open World games and a number of RPG's. They need to do 'more' than just look 'visually' impressive and certainly story and concept wise they are different but I do think that mechanically they needed to at least be similar. Maybe introduce something similar to the VATS system in Fallout to target specific parts of the enemy with an attack by each of your party members - see through each characters eyes and have a different attack point with each to perform a 'heavy' attack when you charge up a meter. For example the main character you are playing as has a 90% chance of hitting the Head, two of the team have a 90% chance of hitting the Left and Right Leg whilst the final character has a 90% chance of hitting the enemy in the back. During this you can also opt to pick say a 'defensive' option or 'special' ability instead of a 'weapon' based attack from any of the characters - for example if one character doesn't have a decent attack percentage or decent weapon/special you could opt for them to heal the team. That still has an 'element' of turn based combat but still has the 'real time' flow.

There has only been two titles to sell 10m+ - Final Fantasy 10 (if you add in X-2 as well) and unsurprisingly 7. 8 sold just over 8m and 9, regarded as one of the best, sold 5.5m with 200k of those coming from Steam. Point is, historically, its been a series that doesn't break 10m - something they needed to do with 15 so they really had to do 'something' to attract a larger audience and compete with games like the Witcher 3, Fallout 4 and all the other Open World games we have.

My local shop was unboxing a few Final Fantasy 12s so I snagged a copy.. I'm really glad coz there's no better way to spend Friday evening than enjoying a new FF game. Hopefully I take to it a little more this time round.

12 hours into FF12 and I'm really enjoying this one! I'm a good chunk past where I got upto last time, and obviously thinking a lot better of it this time round. Guess 10 years ago my head was elsewhere as I was gearing up to move away from home etc.

It also really makes FF15s problems with its story and characters more apparent.

So my birthday is coming up on the 16th and I decided to ask for FFXV. This will be my first FF game and I watched all 5 parts of the Brotherhood anime to prepare myself. I'm excited to finally play it!