Not another remake thread...

[Wolf Kanno]

Okay this is a hypothetical question to see how people would react. What if SE did a remake of VII but it was in old-school 2D style? The pre-rendered cut scenes would remain but the rest down to combat was 2D. How ould this make you feel? :D


P.S. I am aware of a FFI hack game of FFVII but I'm looking at this title looking more like VI.

[Momiji]

I would be somewhat interested, mainly because of my pixels > polygons complex.

[scrumpleberry]

Confused, because squenix doesn't normally move backwards. And yes, in my opinion 2D is backwards. It can be brilliant, but there's nothing new to be gained from it :P

[Jessweeee♪]

I like 3D better.

[Saber]

FFIV -
released Jul 12, 1990
remade July 22, 2008

FFVII -
released Sep 3, 1997

I'm kinda guessing ff7 won't be remade until like 2015 but according to the aztk calander the worlds suppose to end somewhere at like december 2012. Right when a presdental election will be made in the usa.

jk it could be out whenever but it might be a long time from now

[unfinished fantasy]

... The pre-rendered cut scenes would remain ...frankly cut scenes were awful, why insist on keeping them unchanged? As for game itself - any examples of 2d in high definition similar in style to ff6?

[champagne supernova]

Okay this is a hypothetical question to see how people would react. What if SE did a remake of VII but it was in old-school 2D style? The pre-rendered cut scenes would remain but the rest down to combat was 2D. How ould this make you feel? :D


P.S. I am aware of a FFI hack game of FFVII but I'm looking at this title looking more like VI.

Unsurprisingly, it would make me feel like I was not going to buy it. I understand that nostalgia would want people want VI in 2D, but in VII, it would really be a step backwards. Nanaki would look plain silly. How would Cloud go into his crazy possessed state? A lot of the game is explained through body language, albeit simplistically. Put it into 2D, and that would all be lost.

[cloud21zidane16]

I wouldnt like it, 3D suits VII for me.
I also think 3D wouldnt suit some of the older Final Fantasys.

[Wolf Kanno]

Confused, because squenix doesn't normally move backwards. And yes, in my opinion 2D is backwards. It can be brilliant, but there's nothing new to be gained from it :P

How is 2D backwards? Also, would you say the same if it was being remade in 3D for the PS3? I feel updated graphics wouldn't bring anything new to the story or gameplay.


I like 3D better.

Fair enough. :p


frankly cut scenes were awful, why insist on keeping them unchanged? As for game itself - any examples of 2d in high definition similar in style to ff6?

Partly because I feel many fans would view the cutscenes as part of the whole VII mythos and charm but they don't have to exist I'm just saying that current technology could allow them to still be used even in a 2D remake.

As for the second question I hate to admit I don't quite understand what you are asking. You want to know what 2D would look like in HD? May I ask why?



Unsurprisingly, it would make me feel like I was not going to buy it. I understand that nostalgia would want people want VI in 2D, but in VII, it would really be a step backwards. Nanaki would look plain silly. How would Cloud go into his crazy possessed state? A lot of the game is explained through body language, albeit simplistically. Put it into 2D, and that would all be lost.

You would be amazed what 2D can actually do. Xenogears alone has shown that a few of the things you mentioned can be pulled off.;)

Also, VI and CT have shown that much body language can be expressed through simple sprites and considering VII doesn't have much in the way of overly complex movement, I can't think of a scene off the top of my head that would require serious Blocking that an FFVI sprite couldn't pull off.


I wouldnt like it, 3D suits VII for me.
I also think 3D wouldn't suit some of the older Final Fantasys.
This struck me as an interesting statement, care to elaborate? :)

So far some good responses, I'm curious to know how VII's level of 3D is so important to it when I personally feel the story can easily be told through 2D. Overall, I feel only battles would be dramatically affected.

[champagne supernova]

So far some good responses, I'm curious to know how VII's level of 3D is so important to it when I personally feel the story can easily be told through 2D. Overall, I feel only battles would be dramatically affected.

It is a point that VII's graphics are simplistic, and it is a fair enough argument that VII is a 2D game placed on a pre-rendered background.

But making it a pure 2D game with sprites would make the game lose a lot, and not just in the battles. Would Midgar be as moody or depressing in 2D? Would the image of hopelessness come across as clearly in Gongaga or Corel? I love Cosmo Canyon, but would it be the same in 2D. How would Sephiroth look?

And beyond that, I would not like to see VII remade with the same graphics. For anybody who disagrees that graphics make a game better, go play GTA4. All the subtleties that great graphics can do made the story rise from somethin simplistic to something amazing.

[ReloadPsi]

I would be somewhat interested, mainly because of my pixels > polygons complex.

[blackmage_nuke]

I think it can look completely amazing, particularly if it uses Chrono Trigger or Seiken Densetsu 3 level 2d. However using old school battle (enemies on the left party on the right) doesnt seem complete with only 3 characters in the party and i cant imagine FFVII with 4 character parties.

[Goldenboko]

FFIV -
released Jul 12, 1990
remade July 22, 2008


Thats pretty inaccurate. FFIV was remade for PS1 and GBA as well as DS.

[Yar]

Remade or rereleased, goBO?

[scrumpleberry]

How is 2D backwards?


It can be brilliant, but there's nothing new to be gained from it

I will not back down on this one. I haven't got a problem with 2D, many of my favourite games are. But game companies have exhausted pretty much everything you can do with 2D graphics. They've made the most incredibly beautiful games that you can make with it. 3D just offers so much more scope for doing new things because of, you know, the extra dimension. 2D simply isn't the way forward anymore. To my mind, there's absolutely no way that squenix would remake a 3D game in 2D. Aside from that, I think 2D would ruin the mood of FFVII and part of what it stands for: crappy polygons but one of the first successful forrays into the dark, scary jungle that is 3D graphics.


Also, would you say the same if it was being remade in 3D for the PS3?

No, because there are enough fans screaming for a remake now that it'd be worth the investment for them to do it properly, they'd make enough money, and it'd be worth it adding new dungeons and features and things because it'd be a project on such a large scale :razz:

[Goldenboko]

Remade or rereleased, goBO?

Well, GBA was a real remake, but PS1 had stat differences :P

[Bolivar]

A 2d version would be fun for novelty reasons, but as far as an official SE release, heeeelllll no.

The things that took place in FFVII simply can't be accomplished in 2d. Some of it probably could with Chrono Trigger graphics (that game is actually alot like the spiritual predecessor to VII), but that would be pushing it. Things like Tseng rising up on a Helicopter to your party on the pillar, working the computer, then taking off, just couldn't be done, or done as well. The seamless transition from cutscene to gameplay when you get off the train in the beginning is one of the main achievements of the game, and it simply couldn't happen.

Even for all of the FMV's to remain, you'd have to use such a large storage medium that it wouldn't make sense to make it in 2d. If you were to remove them, then you find yourself in the same dilemma of the events in FFVII simply not being able to be achieved in 2d, like the train circling the pillar. It could be done in a minimal way, but it would take out all the emotion and impact of Cloud's metaphor of social commentary just before it.

[Lawr]

Remade or rereleased, goBO?

Well, GBA was a real remake, but PS1 had stat differences :P

Actually, I think the remake would be the English "FF2" because the PSX one is the original, in Japan.

[Elly]

the English FFII was FFIV: Easy Type, dumbed down for americans that didn't have the patience to play an RPG, not a remake... the GBA and PSone versions were just re-releases with extras thrown in, the PSone version allowing you to choose from Easy Type (FFII SNES) & Hard Type (FFIV Super Famicom) versions... the only real remakes we got were FF I & II for PSP and FF III & IV for NDS...

as for the topic at hand i would not like to see VII in 2D a lot of what draws people into the game world besides a good story is good aesthetics, and i don't feel things like FFVII's steam punk dystopia of Midgar could be conveyed very well with 2D graphics, sure the story could carry most of the weight but, if you really wanna suck someone into the game world 3D is the way to go, as it is way more versitle than simple sprites and tile sets...

[Yar]

the English FFII was FFIV: Easy Type, dumbed down for americans that didn't have the patience to play an RPG, not a remake...

*facepalm*

[Bolivar]

the GBA and PSone versions were just re-releases with extras thrown in, the PSone version allowing you to choose from Easy Type (FFII SNES) & Hard Type (FFIV Super Famicom) versions... the only real remakes we got were FF I & II for PSP and FF III & IV for NDS...

Actually I think the GBA one had improved graphics, music and character portraits. I'm not sure if the PSX version had them first, though. Also, the FFI & II for wonderswan that Americans got with origins then dawn of souls were also remakes.

[Elly]

oh yes you're right there, they did have updated sprites and sound, so i guess the Wonderswan ports were the original remakes...i guess that makes the PSP ones re-remakes, lol...

[Bastian]

In my not-in-the-least-bit-humble opinion: FF7's graphics are WORSE than ff6's. So a remake in the style of FF4 DS would be completely accetable to me.

Honestly, i never finished playing FF7 BECAUSE I though that the graphics were inferior to VI. Those clunky polygons SUCKED. Plus i didn't care for the style overall. FF should have ended at VI. Further instalments should have gone under a new series title: final sci-fi. :P

[Goldenboko]

In my not-in-the-least-bit-humble opinion: FF7's graphics are WORSE than ff6's. So a remake in the style of FF4 DS would be completely accetable to me.

Honestly, i never finished playing FF7 BECAUSE I though that the graphics were inferior to VI. Those clunky polygons SUCKED. Plus i didn't care for the style overall. FF should have ended at VI. Further instalments should have gone under a new series title: final sci-fi. :P

FFX, and FFIX weren't Sci-Fi-ish.

[Yar]

FFX, and FFIX weren't Sci-Fi-ish.

I don't know how to refer to X. It was clearly set in the future with futuristic things, but by incorporating Sin, they allowed it to keep a "past" feeling as well.

[Roto13]

I always thought VII didn't really make the transition into 3D very well, with it's ugly-ass backgrounds and characters. When I played it, I thought it would have been a lot better in 2D just because it wouldn't have been so ugly. Of course, a 3D remake wouldn't look ugly, either.

[Big D]

Some pirate firm in China actually made a NES version of FFVII, there was a thread about it sometime ago. They had to remove a lot of the extraneous content from disc two onwards, but the rest of the game's there. No idea why they did this, but that's not the point.

[Goldenboko]

FFX, and FFIX weren't Sci-Fi-ish.

I don't know how to refer to X. It was clearly set in the future with futuristic things, but by incorporating Sin, they allowed it to keep a "past" feeling as well.

FFX's timeline was backwards. Futuristic culture in the past, and a more primitive culture in the future. You played in the future, where most technology was caput. Comparing that to FFVII, and VIII it wasn't Sci-Fi-Ish at all xD

[Bastian]

An ammedment to my controversial post:

IX was definately the rightful heir to I through VI. Never played X though, but it looks fun.

[ReloadPsi]

Take a look at this stuff...

http://doncorneo0.tripod.com/rwal4.html

Found it about seven years ago; it's what inspired the sprite in my current avatar (which I've been using on and off for years)

[Bolivar]

FFX, and FFIX weren't Sci-Fi-ish.

I don't know how to refer to X. It was clearly set in the future with futuristic things, but by incorporating Sin, they allowed it to keep a "past" feeling as well.

FFX's timeline was backwards. Futuristic culture in the past, and a more primitive culture in the future. You played in the future, where most technology was caput. Comparing that to FFVII, and VIII it wasn't Sci-Fi-Ish at all xD

semi-off-topic: you can't classify FFX's timeline as "backwards" because there are plenty of examples in history where societies were less technologically "advanced" (advanced in quotes because it is a subjective and relative concept) than previous civilizations in the same region.

on topic: you can't classify VII or VIII either as sci fi because at the core it was pure fantasy, with added elements of contemporary society to add flavor. See: Shadow Run (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_Run).

[Wolf Kanno]

To be honest, 2D has come a long way and though I feel a IV-VI style FF would be quite interesting, I feel its just as plausible to do a more modern 2D style with VII.

I agree that 3D allows you to do more with 3D in a gameplay scenario but from a story standpoint, its just another medium to express things. Course, I feel the argument is kinda moot in this case cause very few RPGs utilize 3D into gameplay, especially the FF series. I would almost say XI and XII are the first true 3D FFs, while VII-X only used it from an artistic standpoint.

To further add to the topic since a few people seem to bring it up. Would a 2D FFVII truly hurt the characters and story? I only asked because I personally feel that outside of the Pre-rendered Cutscenes, VII hardly pulls off anything from a story standpoint that would lose its affect in 2D. The scenes Bolivar mention for instance are odd to me cause I see them less as impacts on the story and more like programming showboating with the new engine.

[cloud21zidane16]

I wouldnt like it, 3D suits VII for me.
I also think 3D wouldn't suit some of the older Final Fantasys.
This struck me as an interesting statement, care to elaborate? :)



I just think that if a game like VI was remade it would probably be a really good game, but i think it would make things like characters seem to different to what they was before, hard to explain lol :p

[Roto13]

If/When VI gets remade, it needs to be a PS3 game just because it deserves as much flair as it can get. :P

[champagne supernova]

If/When VI gets remade, it needs to be a PS3 game just because it deserves as much flair as it can get. :P

I agree with that.

[Bastian]

on topic: you can't classify VII or VIII either as sci fi because at the core it was pure fantasy, with added elements of contemporary society to add flavor. See: Shadow Run (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_Run).

Eh . . . Let's just say that I will classify anything with futuristic-looking technology as sci-fi, even if it turns out it all moves by fairy dust. I never got far in the game because right from the outset of the first hour or so of the game it was all so post-futuristic . . . completely UNlike the FF I've loved for the past six games prior.

[Wolf Kanno]

I just think that if a game like VI was remade it would probably be a really good game, but i think it would make things like characters seem to different to what they was before, hard to explain lol :p

I think I get what you mean. I must admit, seeing the IV remake on DS has changed my perspective of the game.


If/When VI gets remade, it needs to be a PS3 game just because it deserves as much flair as it can get. :P

Damn straight. :cool:




Eh . . . Let's just say that I will classify anything with futuristic-looking technology as sci-fi, even if it turns out it all moves by fairy dust. I never got far in the game because right from the outset of the first hour or so of the game it was all so post-futuristic . . . completely UNlike the FF I've loved for the past six games prior.

I wasn't really going to get into this cause I feel its a bit off topic but though I would agree that VII and X have a 50/50 mix of sci-fi to fantasy thus negating the "Final Sci-Fi" namesake. I do feel VIII is more on the sci-fi/modern setting than the fantasy. The main storyline revolves around time travel and most of the "fantasy" elements are poorly explained and half the time seem to just be their for namesake. Its hard to claim the villains being "traditional" sorceress when their is so very little info concerning them within the game and even the damn Ultimania.

[Bastian]

Well, again, I never played VII or VIII or X BECAUSE from the box art and such I could tell that they weren't true FF games (in my own definition) due to their sci-fi look.

[ReloadPsi]

Well, again, I never played VII or VIII or X BECAUSE from the box art and such I could tell that they weren't true FF games (in my own definition) due to their sci-fi look.

Fantasy means "not real", not "in the past". That's history.

Ass.

[Bastian]

haha. well, we can debate about what exactly Sakaguchi ment by fantasy when he said he was making his "final" "fantasy" . . . which spawned the series, but one can assuredly assume he ment the "fantasy" genre, which does not mean "past" (agreed) but DOES involve a usually fictional and anacronistic European middle ages setting with magic and magical creatures. Not post-modern technology. Fantasy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fantasy)

Ass. :)

[Rostum]

haha. well, we can debate about what exactly Sakaguchi ment by fantasy when he said he was making his "final" "fantasy" . . . which spawned the series, but one can assuredly assume he ment the "fantasy" genre, which does not mean "past" (agreed) but DOES involve a usually fictional and anacronistic European middle ages setting with magic and magical creatures. Not post-modern technology. Fantasy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fantasy)

Ass. :)

The Dictionary > Wikipedia.
Never go to Wikipedia to try and state sources or references, it's not an authoritive material. It's made up mumbo-jumbo.


fan·ta·sy Audio Help /ˈfæntəsi, -zi/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[fan-tuh-see, -zee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, plural -sies, verb, -sied, -sy·ing.
–noun
1. imagination, esp. when extravagant and unrestrained.
2. the forming of mental images, esp. wondrous or strange fancies; imaginative conceptualizing.
3. a mental image, esp. when unreal or fantastic; vision: a nightmare fantasy.
4. Psychology. an imagined or conjured up sequence fulfilling a psychological need; daydream.
5. a hallucination.
6. a supposition based on no solid foundation; visionary idea; illusion: dreams of Utopias and similar fantasies.
7. caprice; whim.
8. an ingenious or fanciful thought, design, or invention.
9. Also, fantasia. Literature. an imaginative or fanciful work, esp. one dealing with supernatural or unnatural events or characters: The stories of Poe are fantasies of horror.
10. Music. fantasia (def. 1).
–verb (used with object), verb (used without object)
11. to form mental images; imagine; fantasize.
12. Rare. to write or play fantasias.
-The Dictionary (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fantasy&x=0&y=0)

Basically, you are wrong. Fantasy has so many sub-genres that it can not be wholey designed under one theme (i.e The medieval theme you are trying to force on it).

[Wolf Kanno]

To be fair, there is a difference between technical definition and layman definition. I would argue that the common layman definition of "fantasy" would be LotR or King Arthur. Whereas the definition the dictionary provides, practically describes "fiction" being the only requirement to be considered a fantasy.

Can we all just stop being OCD and get back on topic? Jesus...:eep:

[ReloadPsi]

FFI had robots and a giant floating castle in it. In fact in the NES version the graphical technology sucked so bad that it was in space!

I learned a few interesting things about European history in school and there was no mention of robots or floating castles that, if the graphical technology didn't accomodate it, appeared to be in space.

FFII was the first "true" FF in that case, which would also open a whole can of worms as to why the hell it was called FFII and not something else.

[Roto13]

The first thing you do in Final Fantasy VI is run rampage in a giant robot tank. :P

[Wolf Kanno]

Can we please get back on topic?

I only said something cause the definition Omecle gave seemed very vague and I partly understood what Bastion meant when he gave his comment (though I don't agree). I know damn well that sci-fi has existed in the series since the beginning and its partly why I enjoy the series cause I hate Tolkein-style fantasy.

Once again... May we please get back on topic?

[Roto13]

No.

Robots and time travel and electricity and machines and science fiction. Thoughts?

[Levian]

Now FFXIII that's a sci-fi game. From what I've seen of it it looks like it was made by the creators of The Matrix.

what's the topic again? :confused:

[Wolf Kanno]

No.

Robots and time travel and electricity and machines and science fiction. Thoughts?

Robots are generally only interesting when Asimov does them, Time travel is generally a terrible story element (except in the Chrono series) and I wish it could be banned, the nature of electricity was discovered by Ben Franklin during a kite flying experiment, and what type of machines? Building equipment? Roto, do you secretly want SE to make you a Bob the Builder RPG? ;)



what's the topic again? :confused:

Whether VII's story is good enough to stand a change into a different art medium. Would VII fans think it less of a game had it been 2D. The answer so far seems to be a resounding yes. :p

[Roto13]

No.

Robots and time travel and electricity and machines and science fiction. Thoughts?

Robots are generally only interesting when Asimov does them, Time travel is generally a terrible story element (except in the Chrono series) and I wish it could be banned, the nature of electricity was discovered by Ben Franklin during a kite flying experiment, and what type of machines? Building equipment? Roto, do you secretly want SE to make you a Bob the Builder RPG? ;)

OH MY GOD YES!




what's the topic again? :confused:

Whether VII's story is good enough to stand a change into a different art medium. Would VII fans think it less of a game had it been 2D. The answer so far seems to be a resounding yes. :p


OH MY GOD YES!

[Bastian]

What I was aiming at was the overall vibe of the game. Every single game from I to VI has a very similar vibe (although, even VI gets slightly too SF for me with those mecha things). Pure fantasy. Swords, sorcery, castles, goblins, princesses, dragons, etc. It seems like everything post VI (save IX) went in a completely different direction . . . one with MORE technology and LESS of the stuff that makes for fantasy. For me.

[Bolivar]

What I was aiming at was the overall vibe of the game. Every single game from I to VI has a very similar vibe (although, even VI gets slightly too SF for me with those mecha things). Pure fantasy. Swords, sorcery, castles, goblins, princesses, dragons, etc. It seems like everything post VI (save IX) went in a completely different direction . . . one with MORE technology and LESS of the stuff that makes for fantasy. For me.

I apologize for getting us so off topic, I just want to say again - fantasy does NOT mean one set thing - it is a very large category with several major and popular subgenres. It's ok to use your own meanings of words, but none of the FF's are sci fi in anyway. Calling something sci-fi because "technology" is present in it is a dumbed-down, trivializing way of categorizing things.

Back on topic:


Whether VII's story is good enough to stand a change into a different art medium. Would VII fans think it less of a game had it been 2D. The answer so far seems to be a resounding yes.

Juxtaposing these first 2 sentences seems to me to be a very sneaky way of connecting unrelated ideas.

1) How the story would hold up is irrelevant to art medium. VII clearly is longer, more complex, employs more layers of plot, uses more literary techniques, and has much more developed/thought-out dialogue than nearly every previous mainstream JRPG.

2) VII would be less of a game in 2d, not because it would no longer have its graphics to support it, but because STORY IS NOT EVERYTHING IN A GAME!. So many factors of the direction Squaresoft took are why it had such an earth-shattering impact in multiple continents in 1997. No 2 field screens looked alike; hell, no 2 battles really looked alike; The artwork was so detailed in so many areas, there were so many refreshing things it brought to gaming which contributed to its success. And because alot of these things simply cannot be achieved in 2d, yes it would be less of a game.

[Rostum]

Edit: Bolivar said it better than I.


STORY IS NOT EVERYTHING IN A GAME!

Want to emphasize this, as it is absolutely true.

[Elly]

that is so true, the story isn't everything, there is also graphics (setting/effects) & music as well... i always find it annoying when a jaded old school purist comes into a later FF forum and starts spouting off that VII and up are lesser games because they have blatant signs of technology in their settings and better graphics, they tend to equate better graphics with lack of story and that just is not true... there are many factors that make up a great game not just one factor alone... sure you can have a good story but having a vivid lush environment makes it that much more enjoyable, and having that environment with really great music makes for a truly entertaining experience... i love all the FFs and can say from my perspective they have only gotten better with time, of course the exception being that giant leap backwards FFIX, but even it had great graphics and beautiful music...

[Goldenboko]

STORY IS NOT EVERYTHING IN A GAME!
Just one of the few things that counts in an RPG. :greenie:

[Jessweeee♪]

Edit: Bolivar said it better than I.


STORY IS NOT EVERYTHING IN A GAME!

Want to emphasize this, as it is absolutely true.

Depends on the gamer, really. The three most important things for me in an RPG is the Story, the Music, and the Gameplay, in that order :</>D!



ANYWAY.


If FFVII had come out in 2D and not 3D, then I probably would have gotten around to playing it, and would have liked it. Some things wouldn't translate over well.

...but if it were to be released in 2D I wouldn't pay for it because I already have the game and I do not need two copies. Plus I do usually like 3D better when given the option.

[Kenshin IV]

what's the topic again? :confused:

Whether VII's story is good enough to stand a change into a different art medium. Would VII fans think it less of a game had it been 2D. The answer so far seems to be a resounding yes. :p


OH MY GOD YES!

You people need to lay off the hateraid. That much of it isn't good for your health.

The whole 2D vs 3D argument is completely meaningless for an RPG, especially for one that primitive in the 3D-era, and you're all just making yourselves look dumb. If Seven looked like Six it'd be exactly the same game minus a few FMVs. People wondering if the Seven fans would love the game as much should ask themselves if they would've liked it better had it been exactly the same with sprites. Because "the answer so far seems to be a resounding yes." And that close-minded, shallow look on gaming amuses me.

[Wolf Kanno]

Juxtaposing these first 2 sentences seems to me to be a very sneaky way of connecting unrelated ideas.

Actually, I only said something cause many people were alluding to 2D damaging the games story so I brought it into focus. Beside, nothing gets the fans more riled up than alluding to this game not being super special awesome :p Just seemed like the fastest way to get the thread back on track.


1) How the story would hold up is irrelevant to art medium. VII clearly is longer...

I'm only quoting you that far because after the longer part, I completely disagree. VII is not really complex, its just told in a convulated way. I still argue that your belief in VII's mature social commentary is as relevant as me or any VI fan saying VI has it for teen pregnancy and unfair class systems. Its generally mentioned once and hardly touched upon... Yet this is not the place to get into that. :p

Actually the art medium does matter in certain cases. If used correctly, you can enhance story elements that otherwise would feel dry or uninteresting. On the other hand, poor use of the medium can damage strong story sequences. Personally, I feel VII's story would hold up rather well in 2D. Even if it was VI style 2D I feel the plot and characters would hold up as well to me as they did in 3D.



2) VII would be less of a game in 2d, not because it would no longer have its graphics to support it, but because STORY IS NOT EVERYTHING IN A GAME!. So many factors of the direction Squaresoft took are why it had such an earth-shattering impact in multiple continents in 1997. No 2 field screens looked alike; hell, no 2 battles really looked alike; The artwork was so detailed in so many areas, there were so many refreshing things it brought to gaming which contributed to its success. And because alot of these things simply cannot be achieved in 2d, yes it would be less of a game.

I agree to a point. The battle screen is a gross exaggeration though :p The background is the same and though the camera changes the angle, the camera only has a certain number of angles it utilizes. Boss fights, I've noticed, are always fought in a specif angle. As for detail, I agree that 3D made it possible to achieve VII's level of detail easier and faster but its possible to achieve great levels of detail in 2D. Look at SNK games or Guilty Gear and its astonishing what 2D itself can actually do.

The problem with gameplay though, is that with the exception of the camera angle in combat and the pre-rendered CGI cutscenes, VII does not really utilize 3D in any way that takes advantage of its third dimension that could not have been done in 2D.

The backgrounds are far more detailed, but you still interact with them as though they were a 2D plane. The combat system has a cool camera system that pans around but the characters are still lined up as well as the monsters and ATB works like it did in earlier installments.

Even the mini-games that utilize the 3D never do anything elaborate enough that couldn't have been done in 2D using Mode 7. Actually, the modern summon system was a result of the 3D engine but like many of the visual wonders in VII or any game for that matter, you stop paying attention after the 100th time its used.

The character models themselves have very few actual animations (in normal play, not combat) that it could be handled with sprites. I only said VI style to rile people up but perhaps they could utilize more modern 2D techniques.

I'm not really attacking the game so much as just pointing out that VII's use of 3D would allow it to be translated rather well into 2D if SE felt like screwing with people. Of anything, it would get the fanboys who douse the game for only being special cause it was in 3D off your back cause the game (I feel) would hold up rather well. Personally, I've always felt VII was just a 2D RPG done in 3D, and I'm not really saying that to diss the game. The fact of the matter is that 2D is just another art medium and this is something I feel modern generations of gamers cannot perceive. Very few RPGs utilize 3D for gameplay, rather they keep it for the art form and immersion factor.


that is so true, the story isn't everything, there is also graphics (setting/effects) & music as well... i always find it annoying when a jaded old school purist comes into a later FF forum and starts spouting off that VII and up are lesser games because they have blatant signs of technology in their settings and better graphics, they tend to equate better graphics with lack of story and that just is not true... there are many factors that make up a great game not just one factor alone... sure you can have a good story but having a vivid lush environment makes it that much more enjoyable, and having that environment with really great music makes for a truly entertaining experience... i love all the FFs and can say from my perspective they have only gotten better with time, of course the exception being that giant leap backwards FFIX, but even it had great graphics and beautiful music...

I'm old school but it doesn't mean I hate modern gaming.;) To be honest, my top favorite RPGs actually hail from the post-VII era (Xenogears, Persona 3, FFT etc...). My problem with newer FFs is not so much because of jealousy of technology but rather I feel they are poorly written and a few of them hide their flaws in the technology. To me, VII doesn't really do this, though I feel the fans use the technology factor as a shield to cover the games flaws instead of accepting the fact it has a few logical problems. :p

I agree that immersion factor is incredibly beneficial for a game, but where I disagree is how its been utilized. The only FF game to utilize 3D well in the form of immersion is XII. Why? Cause its actually 3D and you can interact and move around in it. VII-X utilize Pre-rendered backgrounds that for the most part (though there are minor exceptions) are still interacted by the player as though you were playing a 2D title. I can appreciate X's backgrounds for their beauty but I do not find them immersive cause it becomes obvious that they are non-interactive due to being pre-rendered.

To be honest, I didn't mind this fact until I played XII and experienced what true immersion in FF could be. Now its hard for me to appreciate the old ways. They are pretty, and I do admire the detail but saying they allowed deep immersion in a way that 2D can't is just silly. 2D is a different art form and though the gaming community has mostly forsaken it, playing through the few that have survived is a breathtaking experience.

I didn't start this thread as a means to bash VII but rather as a means to set people straight on the subject of 2D vs. 3D. To make this more interesting, if VII could be redone in more modern 2D would you still feel the game would fall short of its original greatness?

[Kenshin IV]

The line between complex and convoluted is paper thin. I look at convoluted as being something that is not fully explained. Or twisting something to make it seem like something it's not. Which is not at all the case with Final Fantasy VII. Everything in the story is fully explained. There aren't any "Guardian Forces made us forget stuff"-sized plot holes, and the only thing convoluted would be the poor translation. And that is certainly not the story's fault. Of course, that's only how I look at defining it.

And part of why the story lines of games like Final Fantasy VI and Final Fantasy VII are so revered and have withstood the test of time is because they touch upon mature, deep, and complicated situations. That they touch upon them is fact, whether or not you can relate, or find any entertainment value in them, is your own personal opinion.

[Roto13]

[...]with the exception of the camera angle in combat and the pre-rendered CGI cutscenes, VII does not really utilize 3D in any way that takes advantage of its third dimension that could not have been done in 2D.

This is something that's completely true, but nobody ever bothers to mention, and this is EXACTLY why I always thought it would have been better in 2D. The 3D aspect of the game pretty much just trades in sprites and grids for little lego models. The quality of the sprites in Final Fantasy VI and Chrono Trigger was higher than the quality of the character models in VII. Plus, the backgrounds were basically just JPEGs.

[Wolf Kanno]

The line between complex and convoluted is paper thin. I look at convoluted as being something that is not fully explained. Or twisting something to make it seem like something it's not. Which is not at all the case with Final Fantasy VII. Everything in the story is fully explained. There aren't any "Guardian Forces made us forget stuff"-sized plot holes, and the only thing convoluted would be the poor translation. And that is certainly not the story's fault. Of course, that's only how I look at defining it.

And part of why the story lines of games like Final Fantasy VI and Final Fantasy VII are so revered and have withstood the test of time is because they touch upon mature, deep, and complicated situations. That they touch upon them is fact, whether or not you can relate, or find any entertainment value in them, is your own personal opinion.


I actually agree with you about the endearing quality of VI and VII as well as most of the FFs but I do feel VII is convulated.

Warning! I am only going to make this comment once and any further deviation from the thread topic shall be ignored cause this is not a place for plot analysis. If you want to discuss these plot elements, make another thread please. :)

As for my reasoning...

The Reunion is never given a proper explanation and acts more like a red herring than an actual plot element. The Ultimania, I feel explains the situation much better. Tifa keeping the truth from Cloud is also never really touched upon in a satisfactory manner nor does the games explanation leave enough logical reasoning for the player to come to a satisfactory conclusion. My only reasoning I can find is that its never explained so the whole plot twist about Cloud would be more exciting and surprising. These are about the only two that really bother me and everything else is more of personal taste than faulty writing.

Back on topic...

I understand that some people were fully impressed with the change to 3D back 97. I was not one of them. Virtua Fighter was impressive cause it brought a major new gameplay element, even Mario 64 utilized 3D in a way to bring a radical change to the genre. Its not so much that VII didn't utilize 3D well as much as its the problem that turn-based JRPGs do not gain much for jumping to the 3D world. It gained a graphical boost and for some that might have been enough. Yet, I cannot say the jump to 3D was really significant for the turn-based RPG genre.

Graphically? Yes. gameplay-wise? Not so much though there are glaring exceptions. This is not to say 3D is inferior to 2D or even that RPGs would have been better off staying 2D cause the benefits are slight. Rather that only until this past generation have we seen JRPGs utilize 3D effectively. One is not superior to another, rather they are different styles that have different strengths and weaknesses. Yes, there are certain genres that benefit more from one style to another. I think most would agree that 2D is a lousy art form to use to make an FPS yet at the same time, 3D cannot do Metroidvania style games to save their life.

[Kenshin IV]

This is something that's completely true, but nobody ever bothers to mention, and this is EXACTLY why I always thought it would have been better in 2D. The 3D aspect of the game pretty much just trades in sprites and grids for little lego models. The quality of the sprites in Final Fantasy VI and Chrono Trigger was higher than the quality of the character models in VII. Plus, the backgrounds were basically just JPEGs.
Ugh, let me be the first to say I could care less about graphics in games. I also tend to be far more in support of 2D over 3D (and to clarify, I mean in terms of play, not graphics). But you are not seriously trying to suggest to me that Final Fantasy VI and Chrono Trigger, from a purely technical stand point, are actually graphically more impressive than Final Fantasy VII.

Like... Really now. If that's what you're suggesting, then that deserves this:

http://www.terminally-incoherent.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/facepalm.jpg

[Roto13]

But you are not seriously trying to suggest to me that Final Fantasy VI and Chrono Trigger, from a purely technical stand point, are actually graphically more impressive than Final Fantasy VII.

I most certainly am. I don't support either 2D or 3D over the other, but Final Fantasy VII's particular brand of 3D was pretty shameful. Chrono Trigger's 2D look, though, was beautiful.

I don't think just being in 3D at all is particularly impressive, even in 1997.

[Kenshin IV]

http://www.terminally-incoherent.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/facepalm.jpg

[Roto13]

Oh, grow up.

[Kenshin IV]

That all you have to say on it?

Can I use that too or is that your trademark? Please don't tattle on the teacher in the playground on me. Dunno if I can handle it emotionally.

Edit: To make it more meaningful to the topic: You're so blinded by fanboyism, and so blinded by hatred for this particular game for whatever reason, that these other games that are more cherished by you must be better in not just most ways, but EVERY way possible. Don't worry, you're most certainly not the only one. I understand, in your eyes Seven gets all this undeserved credit that isn't being given to the games you love (despite the fact that games like Final Fantasy VI and Chrono Trigger DO get immense amount of deserved respect) that it must fail in comparison in every single way possible.

[Roto13]

Or maybe Final Fantasy VII is just really ugly for a 3D game. Actually, that's a lot more likely.

[LunarWeaver]

Cloud's colossal blocky hands are the best thing to come out of the 90's. I refuse to let them be replaced.

[Kenshin IV]

Or maybe Final Fantasy VII is just really ugly for a 3D game. Actually, that's a lot more likely.
Ah, there we go. Something other than a childish retort. Well, it sort of is.

Anyway, I knew you had it in ya.


But yeah, of course it is NOW, but back then it certainly wasn't. There were few games better looking back when that was first released. You need to look past the blocky character renders to see all of the true polish that game had for it's time.

[Roto13]

Nope. The game was ugly, even in 1997. There were other 3D games that looked a lot better than FF VII. The "omg pretty!" reaction came mostly from the cutscenes.

It's not like VII had much of an excuse, anyway. The backgrounds were complete pre-rendered, so it's not like they took a lot graphical power to show. They could have made the characters look a lot better with what was left over, but it's pretty obvious they were just stumbling around with it.

[Kenshin IV]

Yes, and all the in battle character models and spells were hideous. Those pre-rendered "JPG" backgrounds sure were fugly. And let's not forget all the horrible load times that we had to suffer through while playing such a large and ugly game.

Oh, wait.

[Roto13]

The character models definitely got better in battle, though they still weren't anything spectacular. There were some nice spell and summon effects, but that was more because of the overall design than the graphic quality.

You're right, though, the backgrounds were pretty ugly.

[Kenshin IV]

Yeah, they were, good thing Final Fantasy on my NES made up for it in spades.

Game is like looking up at the Sistine Chapel in comparison, I tells yah wot.

[Roto13]

Final Fantasy I's backgrounds were ok for 1987 outside of battle. They were great in battle, though.

[Kenshin IV]

Yeah, if only they made Seven look like that. Actually... No, that would have been too beautiful for my lowly eyes to gaze upon.

[Roto13]

Nah, they should have made it look like Final Fantasy VI. Only better, since it was a PS1 game so it had a lot more potential.

[Kenshin IV]

Oh, well now you're just talking crazy talk. Such great beauty ought not be allowed.

Did I ever tell you the best looking game I've ever seen was Donkey Kong? Game captivated all my senses, not just sight.

[Roto13]

I think you're missing the point. I feel like I should pat you on the head or something.

[Kenshin IV]

Oh, I get your point. Do not fret.

Although, if you would like to pat me on the head anyway, I certainly won't object.

[Azure Chrysanthemum]

Yeah we're done.