Do you think Squenix has lost vision of the FF series?

Printable View

Show 200 post(s) from this thread on one page

01-15-2009, 04:51 PM
Bolivar

^ I understand that your taste may preclude you from optimism, but I still feel you're exaggerating, contradicting yourself, and being overly harsh. You say you feel they no longer have anyone who realizes how to make a game with excellent gameplay with an incredible story anymore - yet I think both of us would agree FFXII had both.

I don't understand how you can be unhappy with the direction Kitase and Nomura have taken the series when they were not involved with the last two main installments, and only one of the two before that. I guess you could say they've gone too far making the series about compilations, but again, I think we would agree that the Ivalice Alliance, which has been intended as a compilation since the term was coined, has produced various titles of quality material.

Have you played Dragon Quest VIII? Because that stands out most to me when I think of SE during the PS2 era, and (i know this may be a minority opinion), but I felt like it was the pinnacle of Japanese RPG's, being able to take a massive and colorful world of adventure and giving it full life, the Voice Acting in the NA version giving life to the regional dialects frequently used in the series, and the music was simply breathtaking.

I do have to give remakes credit(I never said ports), because although you have an original source material, you still have to build a game from the ground up, and that could go in any number of directions, but I feel SE not only gave them a new form, but really pulled it off with some really quality titles. (BTW, if Lucas were to release the un-edited Star War trilogy, I would say that Lucasfilms was heading in a better direction.) <- But even that's not a fair comparison to a remake of a game.

But yeah, SE is one of my favorite publishers and they've faithfully maintained that over the last few years. Also, I'm pretty sure going back we could definately find from the threads more than 3 titles you truly loved from the last 9 years, That seems like a crazy exaggeration., I can already think of FFXII and Tactics Advance, apparently you like The world ends with you and at least like TA2. I think you should give it up to the III and IV DS remakes as well, they're so far ahead of the original versions, they might as well be new games.
01-15-2009, 08:08 PM
hhr1dluv

At first, I found this thread to be somewhat depressing. I worried that Wolf would make me concerned that all future games put out by Square would be god awful and they'd no longer make me happy. :cry:

However, I've since decided that Wolf and I seem to have almost completely opposing opinions. X, VII, and X-2 are still my favorites in the series, and I've actually played a fair amount of all the main line titles (minus XI) at this point. With the exception of V, I find the early Final Fantasies, frankly, to be somewhat boring. So, if Square has moved away from that, then I'm glad.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't think that the older FFs are bad titles by any means. They are just, in my opinion, rather dry, arduous, and sometimes, unfortunately, lacking heart. Now, I feel that someone will pop in and say "heart = sappy and stupid melodrama is you're saying that the early FFs lack heart," which may be true. But still, it's how I feel.

Anyway, as for my other opinions about present-day Squeenix, I enjoyed XII, though still not as much as X, VII, X-2, or even VIII (from what I played). I haven't played a lot of the Ivalice Alliance yet, so I can't pass judgment there. However, I do agree with Wolf that the Compilation is mostly terrible. Dirge of Cerberus is the only FF-related game that Square has made that I did not enjoy at all. As for Crisis Core, I had a fair amount of fun playing it, though I agree with Wolf that the introduction of certain characters (like Genesis) is unnecessary and stupid. But then, FF VII sells, and in today's economy, I can understand why Squeenix is so shamelessly milking this franchise. It doesn't really bother me that much.

Overall, I still have faith in Square. I still have fun with their games, though I will admit that sometimes they rely far too much on cutscenes. But hey, I shouldn't complain about that, as I'm sure that I'm the type of gamer that they're catering to when they make games like that. :p

I've since come to this conclusion:
If Wolf likes a Square product -- I might like it.
If Wolf dislikes/abhors a Square product -- I might dislike it, or I might love the bejeezus out of it. :D
01-16-2009, 10:28 AM
Wolf Kanno

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bolivar

^ I understand that your taste may preclude you from optimism, but I still feel you're exaggerating, contradicting yourself, and being overly harsh. You say you feel they no longer have anyone who realizes how to make a game with excellent gameplay with an incredible story anymore - yet I think both of us would agree FFXII had both.

I would agree and it only took them 6 years to finally do it. I'm still just annoyed by the very long dry spell of products. Thinking upon it, I feel partly my "hypocrisy" comes from starting this thread before I got TA2 and World Ends With You.

Quote:

I don't understand how you can be unhappy with the direction Kitase and Nomura have taken the series when they were not involved with the last two main installments, and only one of the two before that. I guess you could say they've gone too far making the series about compilations, but again, I think we would agree that the Ivalice Alliance, which has been intended as a compilation since the term was coined, has produced various titles of quality material.

Its easy not to like Kitase and Nomura cause I feel their style is visually based and geared for more of a mainstream audiance. I always feel that gameplay suffers and always feels very separate to everything else. Its like I'm switching off between a game and a movie and it just doesn't work for me. VI and VII showed the early warning signs but it wasn't til VIII and X it became obvious to me. I don't feel like they really wanted to make games then, they wanted to make movies.

My problem, is that I feel the direction they chose to go is not the way to make something truly magnificent. Games have the ability to tell a story through gameplay. You have played MGS3 and 4 so you may understand what I'm talking about. This was a direction I felt Square was moving towards with VI, VII, and IX. I feel VIII and X felt short and even backtracked unnecessarily, I'm willing to forgive VIII cause the game did so many other things but X repeated many of those mistakes and it was a later title so its much more difficult for me to forgive. Overall, I'm just disappointed that they moved away from the direction I thought they were going, especially when I play games like Ico, MGS3, and Persona 3 that show me what that direction would have looked like.

I do agree that the Ivalice team seems to be doing right, but I am still fairly early in TA2 so its hard for me to make a real judgment call on the title. I have yet to play RW so my only experience is with XII and Matsuno was a major factor in the project until a year before its release. To be honest, I don't have enough real information to make a valid opinion. For all I know, Matsuno leaving may have crippled the teams "vision of Ivalice" I really hope not; cause Ivalice was something I always wanted to be expanded on.

Quote:

Have you played Dragon Quest VIII? Because that stands out most to me when I think of SE during the PS2 era, and (i know this may be a minority opinion), but I felt like it was the pinnacle of Japanese RPG's, being able to take a massive and colorful world of adventure and giving it full life, the Voice Acting in the NA version giving life to the regional dialects frequently used in the series, and the music was simply breathtaking.

I have not played DQVIII except for a demo (and lets face it, Square/SE don't exactly have a good track record about demos) but I am well versed in the DQ series with I, III, and VII being top faves. I have not given the game a go but I am still burnt out on DQVII... I put 140+ hours into that thing and I am hardly close to absolute completion though I have finished the plot. Still, I have a love/hate relationship with the DQ series. Hence the reason for being lazy about playing VIII. :eep:

Quote:

I do have to give remakes credit(I never said ports), because although you have an original source material, you still have to build a game from the ground up, and that could go in any number of directions, but I feel SE not only gave them a new form, but really pulled it off with some really quality titles. (BTW, if Lucas were to release the un-edited Star War trilogy, I would say that Lucasfilms was heading in a better direction.) <- But even that's not a fair comparison to a remake of a game.

The Luca anology is more about the ports and that speaks more about how the ports have been the highligh of the SE lineup until recently. I never played FFIII before the DS so its hard for me to say how different it really is. I'm not a person who is really impressed with visuals and I feel had it been a more direct port, I still would have loved the hell out of it. Though III has that obnoxious Wi-fi :skull::skull::skull::skull::skull::skull::skull::skull:... I want Onion Knights damn it! :mad2:

I will admit that the IV remake was something to behold. Because I felt the changes to the game were much more significant than III's and even the tacked on Wyatt part offers the ability to finally have a real diversion. It truly was the incarnation of the title I imagined as I played it back in Middle School. SE did do a good job but I feel its hard to give them great kudos for "remaking the wheel" so to speak. Granted, I should be grateful they didn't screw it up. Yet, its not the same as what I am getting at. I guess the remake of IV is something I didn't want just yet and its why I'm less appreciative than I should be.

Quote:

But yeah, SE is one of my favorite publishers and they've faithfully maintained that over the last few years. Also, I'm pretty sure going back we could definately find from the threads more than 3 titles you truly loved from the last 9 years, That seems like a crazy exaggeration., I can already think of FFXII and Tactics Advance, apparently you like The world ends with you and at least like TA2. I think you should give it up to the III and IV DS remakes as well, they're so far ahead of the original versions, they might as well be new games.

As I said, I'm just starting on both titles and its hard to say how I will feel in the end. I can already tell I may not like The World Ends with You's story. The cast is pretty unlikable but its the concept and gameplay that fascinate me. TA2 is amusing cause its a combination of TA and XII. I have a harder time putting it down than The Wolrd Ends With You, but I'm hoping the story gets a bit darker. I've always enjoyed the dark and serious tone of Matsuno's earlier works and I am hoping the Ivalice Team can fulfill.

Three might be an exagerration it might be more like five but I doubt you could name too many. The Mana series is all but dead and FM4 wasn't as good as I hoped; though I should give it another chance. KH was an amusing experiment but it doesn't rank in my top ten list of good Square franchises.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hhr1dluv

At first, I found this thread to be somewhat depressing. I worried that Wolf would make me concerned that all future games put out by Square would be god awful and they'd no longer make me happy. :cry:

Luv, I'm hardly that influential ad you should know by now to take my words and opinion with a grain of salt. ;)

Quote:

However, I've since decided that Wolf and I seem to have almost completely opposing opinions. X, VII, and X-2 are still my favorites in the series, and I've actually played a fair amount of all the main line titles (minus XI) at this point. With the exception of V, I find the early Final Fantasies, frankly, to be somewhat boring. So, if Square has moved away from that, then I'm glad.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't think that the older FFs are bad titles by any means. They are just, in my opinion, rather dry, arduous, and sometimes, unfortunately, lacking heart. Now, I feel that someone will pop in and say "heart = sappy and stupid melodrama is you're saying that the early FFs lack heart," which may be true. But still, it's how I feel.

We will just agree to disagree, your second paragraph brings up points concerning why I dislike the later titles stories as well as a few plot holes and WTF? moments but we each have our own taste and I am not saying that SE needs to go back to the "old ways" exactly. I don't think I would be happy if SE released a game like FFVI right now cause to me, it would seem counter progressive. Still, we have our own opinions and I would like to say again that my goal is not to convince you that the game you like suck.

Quote:

Anyway, as for my other opinions about present-day Squeenix, I enjoyed XII, though still not as much as X, VII, X-2, or even VIII (from what I played). I haven't played a lot of the Ivalice Alliance yet, so I can't pass judgment there. However, I do agree with Wolf that the Compilation is mostly terrible. Dirge of Cerberus is the only FF-related game that Square has made that I did not enjoy at all. As for Crisis Core, I had a fair amount of fun playing it, though I agree with Wolf that the introduction of certain characters (like Genesis) is unnecessary and stupid. But then, FF VII sells, and in today's economy, I can understand why Squeenix is so shamelessly milking this franchise. It doesn't really bother me that much.

It only bothers me cause the quality is horrible yet fans still eat it up like it was Filet Mignon. They retcon the plot for the sake of adding new elements, and the only thing the new elements bring to the table is the ability to make another sequel or spin-off. I always knew VII would be milked eventually. It was obvious back in day when it first came out when you consider Cloud makes an appearance in three other Square titles in the PS1 era. I just didn't think SE would blatantly destroy the source material when doing it. What bother me the most is the wasted potential. Crisis Core and Advent Children could have both been awesome but settled for flashy and cheap.

Quote:

Overall, I still have faith in Square. I still have fun with their games, though I will admit that sometimes they rely far too much on cutscenes. But hey, I shouldn't complain about that, as I'm sure that I'm the type of gamer that they're catering to when they make games like that. :p

I feel we all expect something different from FF. For me, I see some games have the ability to become art, and FF had a chance but settled for being a mainstram game series. My problem with SE is like the Compilation, I feel the potential is being wasted. :(

Quote:

I've since come to this conclusion:
If Wolf likes a Square product -- I might like it.
If Wolf dislikes/abhors a Square product -- I might dislike it, or I might love the bejeezus out of it. :D

I should send you a list of my likes and dislikes from the Square/Squenix library. ;)
01-18-2009, 05:47 AM
Markus. D

If anything they're experimenting more than ever with new gameplay schemes post-FFIX.

Embrace it :3
01-18-2009, 06:39 AM
Wolf Kanno

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tsukasa

If anything they're experimenting more than ever with new gameplay schemes post-FFIX.

Embrace it :3

That's true, I just wish they didn't use the FF moniker. Its a sound business idea cause it raises the chances of the title selling and broadening the players perspective but something about that just seems weak to me. Like they know they can't make anything good without FF or DQ being plastered onto it.

Oh, well, if it means more experimentation then I will accept the necessary evil... :(
01-19-2009, 08:01 PM
champagne supernova

X and X-2 were very different to what preceded them. But they were both very enjoyable.

I have also been playing my way through VI. I've also played V, as well as I. I have yet to finish any of them. Why? Because I was bored with the game, didn't have any particular feelings towards the characters, and wasn't enjoying the story. So what if Kefka had basically destroyed the entire world - I really couldn't care (although VI did have one or two good moments).

Now, I am not saying that they are bad games. They are great games, for their time. But I did not play them in their time, I played them recently, and I couldn't get into it. The fact that people are able to thoroughly enjoy the FFIV remake, from a generation that did not play NES or SNES shows you how well Squenix have done in their remake.

Also, the improvement from VI to VII is unbelievable. And not just the leap from 2D to 3D (or pseudo-3D). The dialogue and the story was notched up immensely. The towns had histories, and the NPCs in those towns gave the impression of that town history. When you went through Gongaga and Corel, you were aware of how Shinra had destroyed these places. You didn't get that impression when you went through the towns in the Empire from VI.

Then one has to look at the improvement from VII to VIII. VII did have certain weak moments, especially with some of the translation, but VIII was basically flawless in its production. Yes, the story may not have been everyone's cup of tea, but the characters had a depth about them and the world had a massive background. Also the improvement in body language managed to convey the game's mood a lot better than VII's more simplified range of movements.

I still have to play IX, so I can't comment. But again, the movement from PSone to PS2 was very innovative. They were making fully 3D landscapes for the first time on a new system. They moved the game away from the swords-and-sorcery theme of IX to something you have said was completely new. The artistic nature within the game was new and interesting, and freshened up the game. And I don't care what you have to say about CTB - it actually bought a lot of thought into the bosses. Yes, it wasn't active, so it gave time to develop strategy. I also don't see what you have against the story. Tidus continued his quest to defeat Sin, knowing he would disappear. He kept it to himself, protecting Yuna from that emotion. Yuna, for most of the game, travelled with the thought that her achieving her quest would lead to her death. Her companions had to help her, knowing this. And Tidus hated his dad, because he was harsh towards him, but also because he disappeared. The scene at the end is touching in a strange way.

X-2 is a sequel, kind of like the compilation games. It wasn't aimed to be a true FF. It was designed to be fun. In my mind, it succeeded. I think the game also succeeded in illustrating how a world that had been oppressed for centuries would begin once that oppression ended. It was decent.

You yourself have highlighted the qualities of XII. I don't need to continue. And remember, Matsuno did leave roughly midway through it. The people who continued it are part of the Square team.

My point is that the Final Fantasy series has evolved through the years, and each evolution has improved it. Seriously, you yourself have admitted your dislike of X. Go play Final Fantasy I in it's original form, which Sakaguchi was heavily involved in (from what I've heard). Then go play X. Tell me which one is better.

Okay, that is a bit overboard. But do the same with VI and X. Or even VII and X. And it is not just technical limitations of the SNES that gives X the upper hand. The level of detail in the modern day Final Fantasies is exceptional.
01-20-2009, 05:34 AM
Wolf Kanno

Quote:

Originally Posted by champagne supernova

X and X-2 were very different to what preceded them. But they were both very enjoyable.

I have also been playing my way through VI. I've also played V, as well as I. I have yet to finish any of them. Why? Because I was bored with the game, didn't have any particular feelings towards the characters, and wasn't enjoying the story. So what if Kefka had basically destroyed the entire world - I really couldn't care (although VI did have one or two good moments).

Now, I am not saying that they are bad games. They are great games, for their time. But I did not play them in their time, I played them recently, and I couldn't get into it. The fact that people are able to thoroughly enjoy the FFIV remake, from a generation that did not play NES or SNES shows you how well Squenix have done in their remake.

We each have our own tastes and tolerance levels. I'm not going to say you are wrong for disliking the earlier titles. Despite my stance; I'm not actually crusading for the belief that "it was better in the old days" but I do feel the later titles have their fair share of flaws in terms of story and characters. I just find it funny that people are more forgiving when later games make the same mistakes because of technical achievements. Yet, it works the other way as well since I know too many people who forgive the earlier titles for unforgivable mistakes just because it was "old and they didn't have foresight then." You can hold onto your feelings concerning the earlier titles and yes, I do feel that playing them at the time helps but not all the time and we will get to that later...

Quote:

Also, the improvement from VI to VII is unbelievable. And not just the leap from 2D to 3D (or pseudo-3D). The dialogue and the story was notched up immensely. The towns had histories, and the NPCs in those towns gave the impression of that town history. When you went through Gongaga and Corel, you were aware of how Shinra had destroyed these places. You didn't get that impression when you went through the towns in the Empire from VI.

I actually disagree with most of what you said but I'm really not in the mood to degrade this thread into the VI vs. VII debate. Its been done to death and we should all accept the fact that nothing anyone is going to say is going to change our views about this.

Quote:

Then one has to look at the improvement from VII to VIII. VII did have certain weak moments, especially with some of the translation, but VIII was basically flawless in its production. Yes, the story may not have been everyone's cup of tea, but the characters had a depth about them and the world had a massive background. Also the improvement in body language managed to convey the game's mood a lot better than VII's more simplified range of movements.

I disagree about the characters. Granted, I love VIII's cast infinitely more than VII's but I can't in good conscience say VIII's cast is well developed. Squall yes. Rinoa and Laguna to a certain extent but not close to Squall's level and the rest of the cast is pretty two dimensional in my book. I like them and I find them interesting but the game doesn't bother to go into anyone else so its difficult for me to appreciate them on the same level I did as Squall. The graphics were impressive but outside of the CGI Cutscenes, I never felt the upgrade did anything for the story or characters. I will be honest though, I am rarely impressed by graphics and I generally feel that they only help the less imaginative (I mean that generally and not as a slam to anyone)

Quote:

I still have to play IX, so I can't comment.

Do, its a great game and I feel you will understand me better when it comes to my dislike of X. XI really built upon the foundations of all the previous titles and I felt it worked really well.

Quote:

But again, the movement from PSone to PS2 was very innovative. They were making fully 3D landscapes for the first time on a new system. They moved the game away from the swords-and-sorcery theme of IX to something you have said was completely new. The artistic nature within the game was new and interesting, and freshened up the game.

The transfer wasn't as grand as most people had hoped. Despite being 3d the backgrounds are still for the most part treated as the pre-rendered kind from the PS1 days. Though it does have its moments.

Quote:

And I don't care what you have to say about CTB - it actually bought a lot of thought into the bosses. Yes, it wasn't active, so it gave time to develop strategy.

My beef with it has nothing to do with it being ATB on Wait mode, I just point it out cause its hard to grasp how people see it as an innovation. I do the same with XII cause ADB is still ATB but you get to move around but you still don't get the real benefits of being in a 3D environment.

I actually love the move to strategy, me beef was that nothing in the actual story part of the game is a major enough threat to warrant a greater strategy than, "hit it til its dead". It does get better by end game but I felt the lack of challenge diminished the gameplay side and when it finally did get good, I stopped caring. I do occasionally jump onto my end game file and battle end game and arena creatures to enjoy the battle system. I did like the concept, I just felt the execution was terrible. I only wish the fun part had been like that for most of the game. :(

Quote:

I also don't see what you have against the story. Tidus continued his quest to defeat Sin, knowing he would disappear. He kept it to himself, protecting Yuna from that emotion. Yuna, for most of the game, travelled with the thought that her achieving her quest would lead to her death. Her companions had to help her, knowing this. And Tidus hated his dad, because he was harsh towards him, but also because he disappeared. The scene at the end is touching in a strange way.

My main issue was that it was predictable and it was horribly over dramatic. The plot is a retelling of the Tale of the Yamato-no-Orochi with a bit of a Hollywood twist.

I got bored, cause once you understood the scenario (I am still trying to figure out how people missed the fact Yuna was going to sacrifice herself before the big reveal at Home) its easy to predict how everyone will react. Throw in the Rpg cliche cast of characters and it was just boring. I even had a point in the game where I started to ask myself if it was ever going to pick up. The ending is well executed but I felt the emotion was forced and thus it lost its impact for me.

I guess my main issue is that I felt X was kind of second rate and mediocre. Had it been made in the days of the 16-bit rpgs, I would probably agree with the majority that it was an excellent game but I feel RPGs have come a long way since then in terms of story and depth. When you turn around and play something like Ico and Suikoden III (two titles that were around at the same time) it really felt like X was backtracking with storytelling and characters choosing instead to rely on technology instead of innovation and good story fundamentals.

In terms of graphics and audio quality, X was a great improvement for Square and better looking than anything else on the market (except for MGS2). Yet, I felt they did a mediocre job on everything else. Especially when coming off the back seat of IX, which was a game that really defined what Square could do at the time.

Outside of the Ivalice team, I don't feel SE has been able to recapture the quality of storytelling and characters they had in the PS1 and earlier generations. I find they are constantly being outdone by other companies. Outside of XII and maybe even perhaps Kingdom Hearts: Chain of Memories,I feel SE has not been able to live up to the legacy they established in the PS1 generation. I'm still waiting for them to release games that surpass titles like, Xenogears, Final Fantasy Tactics, and Chrono Trigger. I feel XII is a step in the right direction but that is only how one part of the company envisions and feels the genre should go.

Quote:

X-2 is a sequel, kind of like the compilation games. It wasn't aimed to be a true FF. It was designed to be fun. In my mind, it succeeded. I think the game also succeeded in illustrating how a world that had been oppressed for centuries would begin once that oppression ended. It was decent.

I felt there could have been more political strife and less poorly ripping off Macross but as you said, X-2 was designed to be fun, and I do feel the game succeeds. It was a decent game and had X borrowed more of X-2's gameplay side, I might have enjoyed its predecessor a bit more. Yet, I am strongly against the idea of making sequels for the numbered FFs as I feel it cheapens the epic impact the games held. I find it silly to believe a few weeks later the world is hit with another world shattering event that only our fearless heroes can prevent. I can't say I want FF to follow into the same trappings as comic books or movie sequels.

My main issue with X-2 is that it destroyed the few touching and interesting moments of X by retconning all of it. X really loses its impact when you know Tidus comes back in the sequel. Even if you don't get the ending yourself, just knowing that weakens the originals impact. I actually started to think less of X because of X-2's retconning.

Quote:

You yourself have highlighted the qualities of XII. I don't need to continue. And remember, Matsuno did leave roughly midway through it. The people who continued it are part of the Square team.

Hiroyuki Ito took over with the Ivalice Teams Art director to finish directing and overseeing the project. By then the main parts of the game were finished and I feel they're main focus and impact was telling the programmers to stop writing 3 extra pages of code so that one red jewel in the Dalmascan treasury would look a little shinier, you know, so they could release the game before the end of the decade. ;)

Quote:

My point is that the Final Fantasy series has evolved through the years, and each evolution has improved it.

I agree the series has always been about evolution and innovation but I feel lately, when I see many of their more big budget projects, the games are less innovated and just heavier on graphics and poorly convulated plot lines. I feel the series has been stagnating since X and though a few titles come and go that show there is still a bit of spirit left in SE something happens. Like when I read interviews with directors of upcoming games and listen to XIII's director Toriyama state this in Edge magazine when asked about whether the current generation of consoles should offer more than just a graphical update on their predecessors, he stated:

"The current generation might be percieved as merely visual leaps but the battle system now looks so realistic that any player will draw more of an emotional experience from their link with the characters: actions within the game are presented so realistically that the user feels completely in command." Edge Magazine, July 2007, page 78.

I feel this is more of the Kitase, Nomura, and Nojima route of "style over substance". His statement reflects my feelings about his last major FF title. Graphically it was nice but there was little else and I really felt it did not show the true potential of the PS2.

Quote:

Seriously, you yourself have admitted your dislike of X. Go play Final Fantasy I in it's original form, which Sakaguchi was heavily involved in (from what I've heard). Then go play X. Tell me which one is better.

Okay, that is a bit overboard. But do the same with VI and X. Or even VII and X. And it is not just technical limitations of the SNES that gives X the upper hand. The level of detail in the modern day Final Fantasies is exceptional.

I actually did... its really amusing you ask this. A few months ago, I had to play through X cause my Gf got stuck (she didn't know how to activate nodes and finally got stopped by the boss at Macalania Temple. That far with only starting stats and abilities ;)). At the time, I was playing through VII again cause it had been awhile and eventually I got her to start playing VI Advance cause I started a new file on FFVI and she watched me play. The backstory of the Figaro Bros, Cyan and the whole damn opera won her over.

I still prefer VI over both VII and X; and I still prefer VII over X. I only finished X cause my GF wanted to see the ending. Funny enough, despite being a huge X-2 fan, she found X to be boring and disappointing as well. In the end, I still feel X is the weakest title in the series. I have never considered it to be truly innovative on the same level as its predecessors and successors.

X to me is a game that proves that good technology cannot cover up poor storytelling and bad gameplay design. But this is my own personal feelings. I don't believe that true achievement can be achieved solely on technology without people who know how to utilize that technology to create a fun an engaging experience.

Ico for instance has one of the greatest stories of the PS2 generation in my opinion, it has 1/1000th of the dialogue X had and still was able to give a tearful ending and overwhelming sense of satisfaction and it did all of it with gameplay instead of heavy use of cutscenes or heavy handed melodrama. Even the MGS series, which is known for its heavy use of cutscenes, many fans would agree its strongest moments are the parts when story and gameplay intertwine.

This is why the older games still entertain and enthrall me, cause they have good fundamentals and I do find their stories and characters engaging. We probably do not agree with each other but I feel we both know through our past dialogues that we come from opposite perspectives on the subject. ;)
01-20-2009, 11:22 AM
champagne supernova

Okay, this is how I look at it. Videogames are similar to movies. They are told through a combination of dialogue, visuals and music. Now, dialogue is very important. But, just as a movie with great dialogue can fail because of poor acting, so can a game with great dialogue fail because of poor visuals. For a story to be told effectively, one has to see how the events affect the characters. As roughly 90% of our communication is done through body language, great graphics that allow the player to see these emotions increase the gaming experience.

And, again, dialogue cannot set the mood as effectively as visuals. Again, in FFVI, the only reason I knew the Empire was bad was because I was told so. Yes, what they did was bad, and as you played the game, you knew that they were bad. But, I never felt that they were bad. When I played VII, walking around through Midgar, I felt that Shinra was bad.

Again, I am not bashing VI. VII was able to achieve this because the technical limit had been raised heavily since VI. But my point is that the use of graphics elevated the game to a new level.

I feel that in a visually intensive medium such as video games, artistic style is needed to make the game more substantial. Look at Sin City. It is a great movie, and would probably have been great if they didn't make it in the style that they did. But, because they did, it was able to reinforce the game itself.

I don't watch that much anime to pick up the references you are making to X and so I cannot comment.

Now, I can guess that the reason you like IX is because it is a throwback to the earlier games, a signing off of sorts. But the thing is, Final Fantasy cannot be about swords and sorcery all the time. They needed to move in a new direction.

And, although I will admit that the opera scene in VI is awesome, what substance does it add to the story? Surely that is a prime example of style over substance...
01-21-2009, 05:54 AM
Wolf Kanno

Quote:

Originally Posted by champagne supernova

Okay, this is how I look at it. Videogames are similar to movies. They are told through a combination of dialogue, visuals and music. Now, dialogue is very important. But, just as a movie with great dialogue can fail because of poor acting, so can a game with great dialogue fail because of poor visuals. For a story to be told effectively, one has to see how the events affect the characters. As roughly 90% of our communication is done through body language, great graphics that allow the player to see these emotions increase the gaming experience.

I agree to a point but I don't really feel that until recently that games have come far enough to convey proper body language. I don't feel X really had it and what it did have always felt automated and or unrealistic. I blame this on Square forgetting the fundamentals of animation, something they should have learned from the Spirits Within.

A better way to understand the games is to view the 3D FFs as movies and the 2D ones as books. Its up to the player to put in the gaps that are missing due to body language. Most books don't give detail to all the body language but we can envision it when the author points out emotion and this is something the FF have done since the beginning. Even VII-IX with their limited technology still utilized this technique. The older games have the ability to be stunning but the player has to put the effort to believe in it and if one cannot because the visuals throw them off then I feel sorry that they are missing out and their ability to enjoy storytelling is a bit more limited. :(

Quote:

And, again, dialogue cannot set the mood as effectively as visuals. Again, in FFVI, the only reason I knew the Empire was bad was because I was told so. Yes, what they did was bad, and as you played the game, you knew that they were bad. But, I never felt that they were bad. When I played VII, walking around through Midgar, I felt that Shinra was bad.

I agree to apoint though music also helps which is something VI did have going for it as well as the earlier titles. Music, I find is much more important sometimes as its a medium that solely evokes human feeling. MGS is also an exception cause many of the groundbreaking moments in the titles are during codec scenes which have very limited visuals but excellent VA and musical work.

I also would like to point out it seems obvious to me the empire is evil in VI and it even shows it through visuals. The game starts with you invading a town and gunning down lightly armed resistance, you watch the soldiers and Kefka try to torch Figaro Castle, we see South Figaro under marshal law, the streets vacant with the exception of an overwhelming military force, these soldiers attack you when you confront them. We watch Celes get brutally beaten as a prisoner by the very people she once commanded (unless you're playing the GBA version). Just watching the soldiers capturing the espers and then seeing them in the Magitech laboratory under inhuman conditions. I think its very obvious they are not exactly a good group and its not just from listening to Locke and Banon drone on and on about them being bad. ;)

Quote:

Again, I am not bashing VI. VII was able to achieve this because the technical limit had been raised heavily since VI. But my point is that the use of graphics elevated the game to a new level.

I understand but again I disagree. Its hard for you to use VII as a comparison cause they are the cast I'm the least sympathetic for. Except for Cid, I never felt any feeling or connection with its cast. Sorry...

Quote:

I feel that in a visually intensive medium such as video games, artistic style is needed to make the game more substantial. Look at Sin City. It is a great movie, and would probably have been great if they didn't make it in the style that they did. But, because they did, it was able to reinforce the game itself.

Visuals are important but not at the cost of everything else. It doesn't matter how good the actors are if the script is bad and the characters are flat and boring. This was fundamentally my issue with later titles. It always felt like the visuals got better and the story and characters got worse as time went on. But games have the ability to transcend the norms of movies. I felt it was great they borrowed techniques from the movie industry but games are fundamentally an interactive medium and I feel SE has been neglecting this. As I said before, their games always have this distinct separation of gameplay and story, they are not exactly as connected to each other and at times I feel story takes greater precedence and gameplay becomes a means to an end.

The greatest story moments I've had in recent years was from the MGS series where you actively participate in the climatic moments that are usually just cutscenes in other games. I love the story and characters in Ico and Shadow of the Colossus, not because it was a bit of gameplay that separated high end movie quality story scenes with wonderful dialogue, it was mostly gameplay and in the course of the game itself, you began to build a bond with the characters. I probably care more for the Colossi and MGS bosses than I ever did for most RPG villains cause I built a relationship through an interactive medium. FF has only flirted with the concept of combining storytelling and gameplay yet sadly its been slowly removed from their games. Even XII, a game I liked, did little to bring this into fruition.

Quote:

I don't watch that much anime to pick up the references you are making to X and so I cannot comment.

Its okay, many of its older stuff, in fact things that were around when Nojima and Nomura were most likely impressionable teens. The Yamato-no-Orochi on the other hand is a famous Japanese folktale and its storyline is seen in many animes. Inu-Yasha has a few episodes based on the legend and Blue Seed was a series solely based around the legend. I'll jusat quote myself to explain it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

X is almost the tale of Orochi verbatim. Two earthly dieties (Spira) are terrorized constantly by the evil Orochi (Sin), the hero Susan-O (Tidus) appears before them while on his travels, he had been cast out of heaven (Zanarkand) and thrust into the strange world of mortals. He learns the Dieties sacrifice their daughters (summoners) in order to appease the beast only to have it return to wreak havoc later (Spiral of Death theme) Susano-O decides to kill the beast after meeting the last maiden to be sacrificed Kushi-inada-hime (Yuna), first he lulls it to sleep by feeding it sake (Hymn of the Fayeth) and finally kills the beast. Other versions of this story has the dieties replaced with a village and even focus on the misguided notions of the villages belief in sacrificing the maidens as the only way to save themselves. Thus you have your reference to the Yevon religion.

That's my major refernece.

Quote:

Now, I can guess that the reason you like IX is because it is a throwback to the earlier games, a signing off of sorts. But the thing is, Final Fantasy cannot be about swords and sorcery all the time. They needed to move in a new direction.

Not true, to be perfectly honest with you, I'm really not much of a fan of high fantasy. I like IX cause it had a good cast and story. It has its share of faults but I found them more acceptable than the two previous installments. In fact it brought back the interactive story telling that VII had been flirting with. Unfortunately, like VII, I felt the storylines of most of the cast was poorly tied up. I actually don't mind the sci-fi tones, I actually like VI's steam punk setting and VII's enviromental cyber punk settings. Even VIII's design was a nice change. I didn't feel X's was done well but its more about me not liking the direction they chose to go with it. I probably would have minimized the amount of machina that was seen in the game and probably would have made a stronger emphasis on the Shinto/Buddhist concepts. I actually like the idea of a sword made of water...

I actually don't care for many of the airship designs in XII cause I felt they borrowed too heavily from Star Wars. I also felt it partially conflicted with the rest of Ivalice's technology level. XIII only bothers me cause its basically pure sci-fi. Pulse looks like a prehistoric Spira but Cocoon looks like something straight out of Xenosaga. I geverally find the best designs in the series were ones where the sci-fi and fantasy elements balance each other out but I feel XIII and vXIII will fall into the same trappings as Spirits Within. A heavy sci-fi/modern story with one or two fantasy elements that can easily be explained in sci-fi terms. I don't care for high fantasy but I feel mysticism and magic is very important to a fantasy story and when its imbalanced (Like it seems to be in the two main XIII projects) it doesn't come off as well as it should.

Quote:

And, although I will admit that the opera scene in VI is awesome, what substance does it add to the story? Surely that is a prime example of style over substance...

It hints to the beginning of Celes and Locke liking each other, it expanded on the world of VI by establishing more of its Victorian steam punk setting, it showed another side of Celes who up until this point was a cold and tough general, now we could see a softer side of her. It was a comcial moment to ease the tension brought on by Zozo and leading to the Empire arch. It was an interactive moment that allowed the player to control the story and the characters in a cinematic experience which is something I was speaking about on how games can allow a greater level of interactivity when one can actually particiapte in the story scenes. Its because of that reason alone it is one of the famous and most highly regarded scenes in the FF series

It also brought us one of the greatest FF tracks which many feel influenced another fabulous and great track, Aerith's theme. :cool:

Show 200 post(s) from this thread on one page