Can't get enough Final Fantasy?

[Wolf Kanno]

Well apparently SE does and so they have announced they are going to try and cut back development time so they can release FF either annually like Madden or Assassin's Creed or bi-annual.

News: Square targets new Final Fantasy game every 1-2 years - ComputerAndVideoGames.com (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/326844/square-targets-new-final-fantasy-game-every-1-2-years/?attr=CVG-General-RSS&cid=OTC-RSS)

Thoughts? I'm not sure if they can pull this off really well. Many of those games they mentioned they are trying to follow don't have drastic changes from each other from year to year.

[Levian]

FFVII, FFVIII, FFIX and FFX were released in Japan in 1997, 1999, 2000 and 2001, respectively.

Four of the best received entries released in five years.

[Wolf Kanno]

Yeah, but that was back when FF and Squaresoft meant something.

[Del Murder]

I think that timetable is fine with the right people working on it, which I no longer think they have.

[Slothy]

What Del said, though I don't think that kind of schedule really works anymore. Bi-annual maybe, but I dislike series with annual releases. Not to even mention that at the rate they make games now they'd have to have about 5 development teams working simultaneously, or release sequel every other year.

Sure, they may have released four games in five years once before like Levian said, but that's not realistic these days for a series that's known for drastic changes from one entry to the next.

[Quindiana Jones]

The Square Enix bloke himself said that they're never going to make games like the old school goldies again. Well, he kind of said it. What he actually said was in reference to a VII remake, and that it would take as much as ten times the cost of production and work hours to do the graphical revamp. While I may be wrong, I carried this over into the assumption that big, story filled, well developed worlds cannot be done anymore because doing the sexy graphics for them would cost a ridiculous amount (if only SE had more money *snark snark*). Now, whilst most non-sociopathic, emotionally and intellectually brain dead people wouldn't give a toss about graphics quality if they could just get a good game that's actually worth the fucking money, the majority of gamers are moronic tosspots who I wouldn't trust with even the bluntest of knives or the most resilient of Ming vases.

[ShinGundam]

Looks like i won't play Versus XIII because of this policy.

[Bolivar]

If they had two development teams doing them bi-annually, like Call of Duty, they could definitely pull it off. They'd need to be console spin-offs though or else FF will start having Super Bowl-esque numbers on the end and that ain't good.

Of course there's an issue of making a game of this scale with today's development costs. You really need about 3-4 years for games like this. But there's no reason why you can't have three teams doing it - give one to Kitase, one to Ito, and one to Minagawa. At least 2 out of 3 will be solid games :)

[Slothy]

If this arrangement meant more games directed by Ito I'd probably get behind it actually. Not so sure on Minagawa simply because he only has one directing credit to his name, and I have no idea how much of FFXII to attribute to any of them (Minagawa, Ito or Matsuno).

[Loony BoB]

If they don't spend time making a new engine for every new numbered FF release, I think they can achieve that without too big an impact. They are currently using the Crystal Tools engine and that new fancy engine (I forget the name) and have also noted their intent to use the Unreal engine again very recently. So... who knows where that will end up.

Maybe if they rush out the games then at least a couple of them will be received a bit better, although to be honest I think the fans often have too high (and too specific, perhaps) an expectation when it comes to Final Fantasy games. They're still better than any other "high-end" JRPGs out there, to my knowledge.

[Del Murder]

What other 'high-end' JRPGs are there available to the English market? It's a dying breed. Square was once the king of this genre (and that's why expectations are high) and they seem to be moving more and more away from it. They're (arguably) still better than the other options simply because there are so few of them.

[Loony BoB]

While true, I still think FF is a quality brand. FFXIV was a failure at launch and that is obviously a bad thing, but they have obviously learned enough to turn things around and they are heading in the correct direction on that end. For single player games, are FFXII and FFXIII really that horrible? For me, no, not at all - I played them through to completion, which is more than I can say for Lost Oddyssey (although I do intend on finishing that someday!).

As for JRPGs being a dying breed, that depends on how you look at it. Do you mean quality, or just whether fans will actually want to play the games at all regardless of how good they might be? I think the quality is about as good as it's ever been for single player games. I do think VII is the best ever, but I don't think that means all the other games are a pile of crap. I think they're really good. Will they ever match VII's quality? Personally, I'm not sure. The gameplay shown in VII wouldn't be complimented well by HD - the cartoony look fits the less serious moments far more than high quality graphics would. I actually think FFX would have been a better game if it didn't have voice acting and had less quality graphics when dealing with the characters. I guess that makes me weird, but oh well. As for the actual gameplay, I think the games are doing alright. XII had so much gameplay on it it was overwhelming and - for me, at least - affected my appreciation of what story they had.

But then, as much as FF has always been "about the story" for some people, I've always felt the storywriting for the games wasn't the major point of them. The characters and gameplay have dictated my enjoyment. The script - not in it's whole, but in it's moments - has always been strong, too. But the story? Well, most of the stories were either incredibly basic in the earlier games, then they went for some fairly cliché bits in the mid-series and then later it got to the point that everything had to be overly complicated (particularly from VII onwards). Have the stories ever been incredible? No, not for me. Not even VII. Moments, scenes? Definitely. Overall story? Hell no. XIII is absolutely fine for it's moments, for me, just as much as any of the previous series. The characters just as good. The gameplay and replayability are lacking, and perhaps map design could have been improved. But I really enjoyed it.

Perhaps people are just more vocal when they really dislike things these days and it makes the games come across a little worse for it. When you pick up so many fans over so many years for so many different games with different characters... how can you please everyone in the end? For every person who said FFXIII was rubbish, metacritics and the rule of averages show that there were at least as many who thought it was fantastic, because it rates around 80-something there.

What other JPRGs sell well here? Pokémon, I guess, if you think of it that way. But they just rehash the same thing over and over and over, so it's hardly a case of them losing their skill for making a game so much as it's them being lazy ever since they made that first one. Mario RPG does well, I understand, and is well received, right? What else... well, the other ones aren't really mainstream and for the most part I put that down to a complete lack of advertising. I don't know about what it's like there, but over here these are the only JRPGs that are advertised outside of gaming magazines. Every major selling £40 game in the past few years has surely had high advertising in order to get that success. I can't think of the last #1 game that didn't advertise at least on television. Everything from Football Manager to Uncharted to Skyrim to World of Warcraft to Starcraft, even Deus Ex and Portal 2. Hell, even Final Fantasy XIII. They all were advertised. And that's just talking television, not billboards and the sides of buses or whatever. If the other JPRGs don't advertise, they will not be a big selling game. It's a fairly simple thing, really. The exception to this rule is, of course, cheap games. But we're not talking about them, I'm talking £40 games!

[Jessweeee♪]

I'm more concerned with the end product. I don't really care about the time table P:

I agree about the whole advertising thing. IMO the Shin Megami Tensei series is on par with Final Fantasy as far as quality goes (at least the entries I've played), and recently they've been getting a lot more awesome, but aside from gaming magazines and word of mouth, there's no real advertising. Leading up to the release of Catherine Atlus had a huge PR campaign (though I don't know if it involved television because I did not have cable) and it's their best selling game yet even though it's the kind of game that typically appeals to a small niche.

[Del Murder]

I've never played the Shin Megami Tensei series. I agree it is hurt by bad PR. What's the most recent game for current gen consoles? I'll give it a look (if it exists, I can only find Persona 4 for PS2).

BoB: I'm not counting FFXII. FFXII was a brilliant game. It was not my type of game, but I don't deny it was a well-made and smart game. But that was previous gen. The only current gen JRPG Square has released for consoles is FFXIII. I would not consider that a great game. It was so bad that they had to make a sequel to correct for a bunch of stuff that they should have thought of in the first place. It was certainly good enough to play all the way through, since I did that. But I didn't find it good enough to play through the one 'side quest' or ever have the desire to pick up again (even FFX and FFVIII which are on the bottom of my FF favorite list I've played through at least twice). Still, even with its flaws FFXIII is the best JRPG I've played for PS3, mostly for lack of other options. And that makes me sad. When I say JRPGs in the English console market are a dying breed I mean there's not enough of them out there, or at least ones worth playing.

I'm currently playing Radiant Historia for DS right now and it has so far blown anything Square has done for the DS out of the water (excluding remakes). Square used to make games like this (as evidenced by all the remakes and PSN releases!). Why can't they do that any more?

[Jessweeee♪]

Catherine isn't part of the SMT series or even an RPG (it's a puzzle game), but it was made by the Persona team and it shows. It's something fun to play and I highly recommend it! Other than that, I think Persona 4 was indeed the last console RPG, so uh, keep an eye out for Persona 5?

[Bolivar]

If you mean "high end" as in AAA quality and budget, I agree with Loony BoB. But if you look just outside that market there's a lot out there that's considerably better than FFXIII at the least (and I think it's fair to compare them to just that game since it's the only single player FF they've made in 5 years.

White Knight Chronicles can't compete with the production values, or even the story, but I had a lot more fun playing it. Going to shops, talking to townsfolk, exploring the wilderness, customizing my characters all really tickled that RPG pleasure center in my brain. I mean FFXIII made you wait 40 hours in to open up and even then it's still fairly linear. After the intro to White Knight Chronicles, you step out of the castle walls into a huge open field with the grass swaying, bugs flying about, and cute little baddies waiting to bashed and it was an absolutely GLORIOUS feeling. Maybe the best I had this generation, and that's coming form a hardcore MGS4 fanboy. It's not in the pantheon of classic RPGs. But it was an RPG for RPGers and I loved it.

Valkyria Chronicles is better than Final Fantasy now. It's more important of a game, and it's absolutely the definition of a modern classic. The second entry came out last year and it was a much better game than FFXIII.

Demon's Souls... I've played a lot of it, beaten a lot of levels and bosses but I still feel like I have penetrated deep enough into everything it offers... But even then, it's a game I respect as probably an overall better experience than FF.

From what I've heard from a lot of 360 fans, I'm sure they'd put Lost Odyssey up here as well. And I've seen a good chunk of Radiant Historia to know it's up there as well, as Del said. So is Golden Sun from what I've heard. I play a lot of remakes on my handhelds, so I wouldn't add them here, but the fact is there's a lot of new (not necessarily original) RPGs coming out, some even from Square, that show that FF really needs to find its soul before it becomes a certified has-been that I no longer buy. I hate to think about it, but at this point I really can see a future where I don't buy Final Fantasy anymore...

[Del Murder]

I've been aware of WKC, Valkyria, and Demon's Souls but when I looked into them they didn't really appeal to me for one reason or another. You're saying they're better than FFXIII, but that's no hard feat. Would you say they are on par with the PS1 and SNES era of RPGs?

[Slothy]

I can't speak to WKC, and Wolf would disagree with me about Valkyria, but I'd say Valkyria and Demon's Souls are definitely as good as a lot of the best PSX and SNES era RPG's. I'd go so far as to say they're better in many cases.

[Wolf Kanno]

Yeah... I don't feel WKC is that great of a game. Its story is kind of ho-hum and its battle system is actually pretty boring beyond the combo system. Even the White Knight is actually kind of boring to play as. It also borrows much more heavily into more annoying aspects of MMOs. I don't care for Valkyria Chronicles as a story, and I definetly don't believe its had much of an impact on RPGs as Bolivar seems to believe. The game play is good but it's story borrows too heavily from other anti-war anime like Gundam, to not feel irritating after awhile. Which is a shame because it has potential.

Demon's Souls is an awesome game, I just refuse to say its an RPG because it isn't. Its an action game with RPG elements, but progress is less about levels and even equipment to some degree, and more about pure skill. The fact leveling gets harder as you go through New Game+ pretty much just drives home the point that the RPG elements are not the major contributing factor to success and are simply a minor buffer to reward skill. If you suck at this game, its because you the player suck, and no amount of stat boosts or special equipment is going to change that. It really has more in common with an action game than an RPG. Hell, DMC and GoW have leveling systems but they're still considered action games. The game also has no real story, just a loose but incredibly engrossing narrative. It's fantastic and easily one of the best new games this console generation.

I'm with Del, there is a drought of good console JRPGs this generation. Even Squenix has admitted XIII wasn't everyone's cup of tea and even promised to let the team take a break so they can "re-learn" how to make them like they use to, and they've flat out apologized for FFXIV. They don't have a great track record in-house for the console market. Also, they're too recent "short development time" titles are both sequels to established products (FFXIII-2 and Dissidia Duodecim) and many of the game they mentioned as doing this model tend to have the benefit of having the core game elements and engine established. AC: Brotherhood is not exactly a great departure from AC2 both visually or gameplay-wise. As Del said, XIII-2 is practically an "apology" game that is trying to address all the grievances from the first game.

I'm curious to see what this development model would do for the final product because the games that utilize it now, basically work on the principle of fine tuning the game each year, but there is no drastic change between each installment. I'm curious to know what Squenix would use as the gameplay basis or if they would simply stick to come up with new systems but make them more simple and development friendly.

[Bolivar]

I think I fully admit in my post that WKC is not a great game, only that I had a lot more fun playing it, exploring the contours of every map, bashing baddies and customizing my characters.

And I don't think I've ever said Valkyria Chronicles has had an impact (yet), but it absolutely is the biggest innovation to the SRPG formula we've seen in quite some time. Every fan of the genre should play it.

I have to say I do think Demon's Souls is an RPG because it has character creation, and a degree of randomization to its numbers systems. You loot items and customize equipment. Unlike action games where every action you take is immediate or near-instantaneous, every action has a charge time to it that can be shortened or lengthened by the equipment you're using, the stats you have, and combat effects like being encumbered. It would be hard to imagine what game could legitimately be called an "Action RPG" if Demon's Souls isn't one.

But I wasn't just talking about console games here. The issue was: whether Final Fantasy XIII is better than the new RPGs of today? If you limit that to big budget, AAA titles, then yeah, it's probably better than The Last Remnant. But if you look at the titles that have come out on handheld and console, a lot of awesome stuff is still being made that shows you shouldn't have to lower your expectations. As Del said, Radiant Historia is the kind of game Square used to make and it's a shame that they don't seem to know how to do it anymore.

[Fynn]

I think I fully admit in my post that WKC is not a great game, only that I had a lot more fun playing it, exploring the contours of every map, bashing baddies and customizing my characters.

And I don't think I've ever said Valkyria Chronicles has had an impact (yet), but it absolutely is the biggest innovation to the SRPG formula we've seen in quite some time. Every fan of the genre should play it.

I have to say I do think Demon's Souls is an RPG because it has character creation, and a degree of randomization to its numbers systems. You loot items and customize equipment. Unlike action games where every action you take is immediate or near-instantaneous, every action has a charge time to it that can be shortened or lengthened by the equipment you're using, the stats you have, and combat effects like being encumbered. It would be hard to imagine what game could legitimately be called an "Action RPG" if Demon's Souls isn't one.

But I wasn't just talking about console games here. The issue was: whether Final Fantasy XIII is better than the new RPGs of today? If you limit that to big budget, AAA titles, then yeah, it's probably better than The Last Remnant. But if you look at the titles that have come out on handheld and console, a lot of awesome stuff is still being made that shows you shouldn't have to lower your expectations. As Del said, Radiant Historia is the kind of game Square used to make and it's a shame that they don't seem to know how to do it anymore.

Don't forget Xenoblade Chronicles! :tongue: (I know you hate me)

[Bolivar]

Don't forget Xenoblade Chronicles! :tongue: (I know you hate me)

:pissed:

[TrollHunter]

Not looking forward to this new route they're taking with FF.
Annual releases? Squeenix... Please no. :cry:

[VeloZer0]

I think it is a good move forward. I don't really they think they have been putting out games of high enough quality to justify the development times they are taking. Getting back to more ambitious development cycles could help them get back into their groove.

I don't support hard deadline annual releases, but having that as a goal isn't so bad.

[Wolf Kanno]

I think I fully admit in my post that WKC is not a great game, only that I had a lot more fun playing it, exploring the contours of every map, bashing baddies and customizing my characters.

I understand, I actually agree that when I first started playing, having no other real JRPG goodness to delve into besides XIII, I was also just eating everything up, but the game kind of grew tedious for me. After awhile, once I kind of filled my thirst for RPG goodness and came back to the game, I started to see its faults. I consider the game better than FFXIII personally but I feel it's only a good JRPG because it has no real competition.


And I don't think I've ever said Valkyria Chronicles has had an impact (yet), but it absolutely is the biggest innovation to the SRPG formula we've seen in quite some time. Every fan of the genre should play it.

I can agree on it being innovated, but whether it has an impact hasn't been seen yet, but I honestly feel it will be a niche series within the larger SRPG genre much like Disgaea. I don't actually see it having a huge impact on the sub-genre to be honest, simply because it's innovations may not transfer over as well to something like the Tactics Ogre franchise, or Nippon Ichi's games.


I have to say I do think Demon's Souls is an RPG because it has character creation, and a degree of randomization to its numbers systems. You loot items and customize equipment. Unlike action games where every action you take is immediate or near-instantaneous, every action has a charge time to it that can be shortened or lengthened by the equipment you're using, the stats you have, and combat effects like being encumbered. It would be hard to imagine what game could legitimately be called an "Action RPG" if Demon's Souls isn't one.


I think my issue stems from the fact another From Software series, Armored Core, has most of those features as well, but no one would call Armored Core an Action RPG. Assassin's Creed also has charge times based on what weapon you use as well, and you purchase items and equipment from shops that can affect your characters "stats", so I feel Demon's Souls "RPG" elements are weak. It's still a fantastic game, but I kind of feel like it's in the same category as Vagrant Story, which is called an "Action RPG" despite most of its core elements leading one to believe the game defies any true genre, but we can't just say ??? when the genre entry comes up. ;)


But I wasn't just talking about console games here. The issue was: whether Final Fantasy XIII is better than the new RPGs of today? If you limit that to big budget, AAA titles, then yeah, it's probably better than The Last Remnant. But if you look at the titles that have come out on handheld and console, a lot of awesome stuff is still being made that shows you shouldn't have to lower your expectations. As Del said, Radiant Historia is the kind of game Square used to make and it's a shame that they don't seem to know how to do it anymore.

Agreed, in fact I find that Squenix's handheld titles are more true to form of the old days, granted most of them are remakes which is why, but games like KH: Birth By Sleep, Dragon Quest IX, and even FFIV:The After Years, are all well made, and perfectly palpable for more traditional minded fans. I am actually really impressed with the Agito/Type 0 game after playing the demo for awhile, and can honestly say I'm really looking forward to it. Hell, it has some elements in its design that I feel you would appreciate, like blending gameplay and storytelling with in-game cinematics. That Scorpion Tank encounter in the early part of the demo made my jaw drop actually, as well as the atmosphere leading up to the first boss encounter. I'm honestly still in disbelief this game was made by the same guy who did the sub-par Crisis Core. The game has blossomed into something truly more ambitious than its console big brother.

[Elskidor]

If they can pull off great games within that amount of time then I would say welcome back. Every FF title came out yearly or every other year since 1987, and things took a massive turn after FFX and the merge.

FF1-1987, FF2-1988, FF3-1990, FF4-1991, FF5-1992, FF6-1994, FF7-1997, FF8-1999, FF9-2000, FFX 2001................FFXII 5 years later........FFXIII 4 years later. Within the first 14 years we had 10 of the main Final Fantasy titles...in the 10 years between 2001 and 2011 we received 2. Of course they did waste a lot of that time on spin offs, online games and other such games, but I'm just counting the main titles while ignoring the MMOs altogether. I'd love it if they could get back on track and make games as they did between 1987 and 2001...before the blasted merge.

[DMKA]

I'm a little bothered by this. As much as I love the Assassin's Creed series, for example, I can't help but notice how little difference there's been in the core game mechanics and visuals since Assassin's Creed II, which is why they've been able to churn one out every year since. Don't get me wrong, they've all been worthy games in their own right and I've had tons of fun with them but...after a while, you really start to desire that fresh new feel, like a whole new game that's 100% new material...something that, up until FFX-2, the FF franchise has always given us.

I have no problem with them doing it to produce sequels (like they did with X-2 and XIII-2) but I would hate for them to start doing it with core entries.

[Rostum]

Uh, FFXII and FFXIII did give us something new. FFXI also gave us something new, despite what some fans want to think.

I'm all for stricter deadlines. I just hope the quality doesn't drop.

[Bolivar]

I don't actually see it having a huge impact on the sub-genre to be honest, simply because it's innovations may not transfer over as well to something like the Tactics Ogre franchise, or Nippon Ichi's games.

That's what you would think, but the second game has melee classes and when you actually use one and take your first swing at somebody, it just clicks in your brain like "oh... okay... this can work..."


think my issue stems from the fact another From Software series, Armored Core, has most of those features as well, but no one would call Armored Core an Action RPG. Assassin's Creed also has charge times based on what weapon you use as well, and you purchase items and equipment from shops that can affect your characters "stats", so I feel Demon's Souls "RPG" elements are weak. It's still a fantastic game, but I kind of feel like it's in the same category as Vagrant Story, which is called an "Action RPG" despite most of its core elements leading one to believe the game defies any true genre, but we can't just say ??? when the genre entry comes up. ;)

There's a reason you put quotes around stats! While certain factors may have an impact on damage and charge times, the problem is that after those changes, those items become fixed entities. They're impacted by set intervals, not progressively. And damage isn't impacted by progressively changing strength, comparative defense, or customization of the item itself. Whereas in RPGs, it's all about randomization and what you try to do about it. Randomization is the hallmark of RPGs, going back to its origin in pen and paper games.

It's like when we discuss why Zelda isn't an RPG in GGaming, and the layers separating Demon's Souls and Zelda are pretty numerous.


Hell, it has some elements in its design that I feel you would appreciate, like blending gameplay and storytelling with in-game cinematics. That Scorpion Tank encounter in the early part of the demo made my jaw drop actually, as well as the atmosphere leading up to the first boss encounter. I'm honestly still in disbelief this game was made by the same guy who did the sub-par Crisis Core. The game has blossomed into something truly more ambitious than its console big brother.

I've heard a lot of good things about Agito from you guys, but I honestly can't see myself playing it. Despite all I've said in Demon's Souls defense, I'm just not interested in that Action RPG style that Square Enix has been on with Kingdom Hearts and Dissidia. I know Dissidia's supposed to be a fighting game, but I'm talking about the style here and Dissidia's really only a fighter because they have you fight one opponent at a time. It's not like Demon's Souls which is very well planned out by a developer who has roots in the origin of this kind of thing, it's just a lame attempt to move away from the criticism of non-fans of the genre that turn-based is inherently, by definition, a bad game mechanic. Then again, Type-0 might not even be what I'm talking about here at all, but I guess for now I'll just say i'll get around to it, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, just don't complain if I come with a wall of text for a post in the sub-forum :cool:

[Del Murder]

After thinking about it more, I like the idea of more frequent FFs. Only two main console entries into the series in 10 years just doesn't cut it. I think SE tries too hard to reinvent the wheel each time they make a FF and leads us to wildly different products like FFXII and FFXIII. A shorter development cycle may provide the focus they need to put in all the essential elements without taking it too far.

My only fear is that we'll be stuck with the FFXIII battle system in this scenario. The ATB system didn't change all that much from FFIV to FFIX. Perhaps they think FFXIII's system is the new baseline and future games will build upon it. That certainly supports a shorter development cycle, which we have see in FFXIII-2. I hope they change it, but at the same time I hope the change isn't another radical reimagniation (like action RPG).

A question: if they want to put out a FF game every 1-2 years doesn't that mean FFXV should already be in development?

[Fynn]

My only fear is that we'll be stuck with the FFXIII battle system in this scenario. The ATB system didn't change all that much from FFIV to FFIX. Perhaps they think FFXIII's system is the new baseline and future games will build upon it.

What if they decided to use XII's ADB system instead? That would be awesome. They could keep expanding on it with each entry!

[Wolf Kanno]

That's what you would think, but the second game has melee classes and when you actually use one and take your first swing at somebody, it just clicks in your brain like "oh... okay... this can work..." Interesting, but I'll guess we'll have to see.


There's a reason you put quotes around stats! While certain factors may have an impact on damage and charge times, the problem is that after those changes, those items become fixed entities. They're impacted by set intervals, not progressively. And damage isn't impacted by progressively changing strength, comparative defense, or customization of the item itself. Whereas in RPGs, it's all about randomization and what you try to do about it. Randomization is the hallmark of RPGs, going back to its origin in pen and paper games.

It's like when we discuss why Zelda isn't an RPG in GGaming, and the layers separating Demon's Souls and Zelda are pretty numerous.

The problem here, is that since you can't really see the stats in progress in DS when you battle, partially because the random number generator difference is so miniscule, it might as well be seen as just an action game. Seriously, a few point differences are not that noticeable. Granted stuff like equipment/weapon/magic requirements heavily utilize the stats, but ultimately, I really don't feel the stats are as important as just the skill to attack an enemy by exploiting weaknesses, or proper counter timing.

For me, all Action RPGs fall into the problem of the old saying, "you can't serve two master's lest you love one and scorn the other" and that's the issue I've always had with this genre because it either goes towards the action side or RPG side. If it's action, levels and stats are arbitrary and success has more to do with skills, if its the RPG side, then skill won't help you as much as min/max stats. KH is more of an action game, while Crisis Core is more of an RPG. Demon's Souls is more like KH, while the stats certainly help and in DS' case expand your options, it still comes down to the skill of the player. Whereas in CC, you'll hit a brick wall eventually in the Missions if you don't have levels or materia that max out your stats. Its why the games Hard mode is impossible without getting near 100% completion in Normal mode.

As for Zelda not being an RPG, well... I'd try to tell that to Nintendo because the Zelda games are listed under RPGs in the Virtual Console ;)


I've heard a lot of good things about Agito from you guys, but I honestly can't see myself playing it. Despite all I've said in Demon's Souls defense, I'm just not interested in that Action RPG style that Square Enix has been on with Kingdom Hearts and Dissidia. I know Dissidia's supposed to be a fighting game, but I'm talking about the style here and Dissidia's really only a fighter because they have you fight one opponent at a time. It's not like Demon's Souls which is very well planned out by a developer who has roots in the origin of this kind of thing, it's just a lame attempt to move away from the criticism of non-fans of the genre that turn-based is inherently, by definition, a bad game mechanic. Then again, Type-0 might not even be what I'm talking about here at all, but I guess for now I'll just say i'll get around to it, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, just don't complain if I come with a wall of text for a post in the sub-forum :cool:

I don't count Dissidia as a true fighting game, course I don't think Smash Bros. is either (yeah I said it fanboys). I'm not sure I would count it as an action game either but Dissidia was always an odd duck. I'm not the biggest fan of action RPGs myself, I prefer my turn based battle systems as well, but I actually feel SE has come a long way with Action games since Final Fantasy Adventure, and while not all of their games are successful ( most of their action games are usually pathetically easy) I do feel they have finally made them an enjoyable experience none the less, it's the reason I'm not bemoaning Type-0 or Versus XIII for being action games, because games like Birth By Sleep and The World End With You are actually fun to play and have shown me they can pull it off.



My only fear is that we'll be stuck with the FFXIII battle system in this scenario. The ATB system didn't change all that much from FFIV to FFIX. Perhaps they think FFXIII's system is the new baseline and future games will build upon it. That certainly supports a shorter development cycle, which we have see in FFXIII-2. I hope they change it, but at the same time I hope the change isn't another radical reimagniation (like action RPG).

This is my greatest concern about them going for this business model because I don't care for XIII's combat system personally, and I feel it has the least room to expand and grow out of previous combat systems. I feel The White Wizard of Fynn has the better idea of what should be the norm personally.


A question: if they want to put out a FF game every 1-2 years doesn't that mean FFXV should already be in development? Hell, I've suspected its been in development since FFXII was released. Course I'm betting Versus XIII might just get renamed...

[Bolivar]

I'm actually kinda feelin the schedule as well. With XIII, they spent so long on the game that they took so long, they basically had to put it out in order to save face. Whereas with the faster release schedule of older games, they'll have to actually get the planning phase done, they'll be able to experiment with things and then decide whether to keep, ditch, or refine it for future titles and there'll be a lot more of them. Overall I think it will keep them more in tune with the fast pace of the gaming industry and possibly get them back to where they're the leaders of the pack. But we'll see.


For me, all Action RPGs fall into the problem of the old saying, "you can't serve two master's lest you love one and scorn the other" and that's the issue I've always had with this genre because it either goes towards the action side or RPG side.

As a law student, I kinda depend on that old saying being false! But I guess this comes down to opinion - when I look at Demon's Souls, I see how it's dependent on your skill as a player and the way the fights play out, but I also recognize that this is all within the confines of an RPG system, which I felt was beautifully implemented.

As far as SE's more actioney games, I guess they still have to convince me, but granted I haven't played a lot of the older ones and I refuse to play Kingdom Hearts, partly out of taste, but almost out of principle as well (ok, I'm an elitist when it comes to some things...)

[Del Murder]

My only fear is that we'll be stuck with the FFXIII battle system in this scenario. The ATB system didn't change all that much from FFIV to FFIX. Perhaps they think FFXIII's system is the new baseline and future games will build upon it.

What if they decided to use XII's ADB system instead? That would be awesome. They could keep expanding on it with each entry!
Wasn't really a big fan of that one either. I like a dedicated battle screen with turn-based combat over real time encounters controlled by pre-set AI macros. That works for MMOs, but in a single player game it got tiring. I will say it was beter than FFXIII, though, and I would be curious as to how they would improve it.

The classic ATB is really where it's at for me. SE has shown they can modernize it, as exemplified with the phenomenal implementation in FFX-2. I also really liked the turn-based systems of FFX and FFT (they are really similar, the difference being in FFX you can't move around the field). They are very simple systems that don't require a lot of finesse. With those in place you can focus your development time on other things.

[VeloZer0]

I always thought that the system FFX used (turn based & speed based) was a really great system. It is simple yet leaves a ton of options.

[Flying Arrow]

A really, really well thought out and deep version of FFX's combat (including universal experience, please) would be awesome. I don't think they'll ever go back to full-on turn based anymore though, sadly.