Not anything new but here's an article where someone ponders the question. So I ask you Eyes on FF, have we reached a point where this might be the fresh break the FF series needs. or should we stick to the Japanese teams, cause you either don't agree that something is wrong, or feel that FF would lose something in the cultural exchange?
Have fun debate. :D
I think having a western team make 'an FF' wouldn't be that bad of an idea. I don't think there is any reason a western developer can't make a good JRPG, so long as they were not trying to re-invent th series as a WRPG.
And even if it sucks they can probably have a few cracks at it before SE would release a single title of their own.
There is nothing to debate here, it is all about your preference, whether you like WRPG or JRPG. For me I DISLIKE this idea, we in a drought for traditional/Adventure RPGs so i would rather to keep FF as it is. Also, I do see harm in making a western FF. It will be a good reason for this increasingly frustrated community to hail other JRPGs as gifts from heaven and declare SE as Activision of Japan, no matter how the other JRPGs are actually filled with many compromises :p.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
Another point, the major difference between JRPG and WRPG is that WRPG often combine three main components :
1- Morality system AKA role playing.
2- Quest/Mission structure AKA Non-linearity.
3- Avatar system
What i dislike, is that people often tend to romanticized some of these concepts beyond its actual value :eep:.
Just because it is made by a western company doesn't mean it has to be in typical western fashion. A more worldly gamer than myself could probably throw out some great examples of JRPGs made by western developers.
For me a JRPG is a style, not a physical place.
yes because apparently they can't properly make games anymore themselves (actually they never could ever since Square Soft became Square Enix, all their games have sucked since then). At least Western devs wouldn't bitch about 'HD towns' being too hard to make and we wouldn't have to deal with as much non-interactive cutscenes, which were originally used to make up for things that couldn't be done with gameplay mechanics and graphics but are now just an excuse to be lazy.
The only one I can think of off the top of my head right now is Secret of Evermore which was made by a NA team but borrowed many gameplay elements from Secret of Mana. I've never played it though so I don't know how good it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by VeloZer0
Anyway, in theory, I have no reason to believe that a western developer couldn't make a good FF title. In reality though, I'd be lying if I didn't say that I feel some of the better titles charming quirks have come from the cultural differences between Japan and the West (or from questionable translation choices), and even if a western developed an FF with a great story, great characters and awesome gameplay, I still think it would be missing something.
Of course, the fact that switching to a western developer has worked out so well for Silent Hill isn't making this seem like any better of an idea for me.
Septerra Core was a pretty good game made by an American studio in Japanese RPG style. It didn't have that great production values because it was made by a small studio, but it had voice acting for every line of dialogue in the game (including the guy who later on voiced Master Chief) and a much better story than FF8 which came out at around the same time.
I don't really know the difference between JRPG and WRPG, but I do think having a western influence in FF would not be a bad idea. Like hiring some actual writers to create a story for them.
Why can't they bring in some non-Japanese folks to collaborate with them? They don't need to turn the whole thing over to another team, but I definitely feel like they need to do something to change things up. An infusion of new talent is usually a good thing.
"Yes! FF has always been about trying new ideas and taking risks."
or in my own words
sure whynot
These days, WRPG means non-linear somewhat sandboxy world where you can solve lots of subquests in several different ways, and you've got statistics that are useful outside of battle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Del Murder
JRPG means more or less -edit- splerg derg slurp durp
I have no idea how to define jrpg :(
Front Mission Evolved ? the game itself was a mixture of Japanese and American ideas regarding storytelling, game design and art didn't lead to growth of the franchise or generates a positive momentum.Quote:
Originally Posted by Miriel
If BioWare or something like that would do it, I'd be fine.
I just don't want it to turn into too much into a Gears of War or Call of Duty in style. :cool:
I when I play a JRPG it's because I want to play a JRPG. If i wanted to play a WRPG i would do so, not some JRPG trying to appeal to western audience (which i feel is the reason i disliked FFXII). I feel trying to appeal to western audiences instead of just trying to be uniquely japanese is actualy what's causing the recent decline in FFs
Bioware is an EA partner.Quote:
Originally Posted by Laddy
It's funny, i found people complain about traditional parts of the franchise (e.g. Menu/command battles, lack of realtime battles, smashing X repeatedly, Linearity in general, Overworld, random battles). It seems to me that people don't want an FF game :eep:. What happened now is the result of losing some of it positive momentum.Quote:
when I play a JRPG it's because I want to play a JRPG. If i wanted to play a WRPG i would do so, not some JRPG trying to appeal to western audience (which i feel is the reason i disliked FFXII). I feel trying to appeal to western audiences instead of just trying to be uniquely japanese is actualy what's causing the recent decline in FFs
I love all those things and I want them back!Quote:
Originally Posted by ShinGundam
Too bad for ya ;(Quote:
Originally Posted by VeloZer0I love all those things and I want them back!Quote:
Originally Posted by ShinGundam
They just need a little tweaking. Simple things like learning the difference between drama and melodrama. Realizing that in-game graphics can handle the cinematic quite well these days. The world doesn't revolve around High School and appealing to 15 year olds. I think they could use some definite insight. I don't think that requires handing over the franchise to someone new. Though I don't think that's inherently a bad thing either. As others have pointed out, a JRPG is a style, not a country of origin. There's not a lot of high profile western-developed JRPGs because that's not what western audiences generally want, and its not what western developers generally want to develop. Its not to say they can't, or wouldn't. Its been done before. But I can only think of a handful of low budget games like Shadow Madness. But wasn't Sonic The Dark Brotherhood developed to be something like Mario RPG? I've never played it, but it was done by a western developer (BioWare). Bottom line, something needs to change. But it doesn't have to be supremely drastic. Square just needs to get a bit of a clue, that's all
JRPG isn't style, not in world where we have Final Fantasy, Nier, Parasite EVE, Demon's souls, Valkyria, TWEWY, YS, King's field, Xanadu next, Inazuma 11, Valkyrie Profile, Half-Minute Hero, Elemental Gearbolt and so on. JRPGs are so broad that it ends up encapsulating all kinds of games. Most of what Westerners think is "JRPG" is actually just specific genres, such as "Fantasy/adventure RPG" (e.g. Final Fantasy, Tales of, Skies of Arcadia). Much of the JRPG released here fits in that category but they are hardly the only genres produced. So why do we use this term ? In my opinion, the primary reason is to stereotype "Fantasy/adventure RPG" that differ from western made RPGs.Quote:
As others have pointed out, a JRPG is a style, not a country of origin.
Er, maybe I'm missing your point, but I'm not sure how any of those examples aren't a fantasy adventure rpg? (Admittedly I haven't played a few of them) Tales of Destiny, Enchanted Arms, Super Mario RPG, Shining Soul, Resonance of Fate, Disgaea all have completely different play and combat types, but they still have a similar feel, and the style in which the stories progress can be comparable. JRPG is just an easier to type and more widely known/understood umbrella term to place them under. But if you want to place them all in a category labeled "Fantasy/Adventure RPG" its all the same games, its still categorizing under an umbrella. I'm not sure what that changes. I'm not fond of mincing words and creating dozens of niche politically correct genre labels. Too many games blur the lines. That's why I'm categorizing them by their style of progression, influence, art style, not play-type. Personally, when I say JRPG, I mean all those games, despite their differences. At the end of the day they feel the same to me. That's not me stereotyping, its my personal experience and the feeling I walk away with. But there are distinct differences in outlooks and feel and story progression and art style and whatnot in WRPGs. So they're categorized separately. Its not meant to be derogatory. Only real problem is a lot of JRPGs get to be a little generic and don't put a lot of effort in, or at least in the right places
I'm working on a few hours of sleep, recoiling from dealing with family for a few days with little alcohol to make it an easier experience, and working retail during Black Friday Weekend. If I ramble and seem incoherent, I apologize to the three people on this forum who actually read my posts.
Generally the main difference between JRPG and WRPG is that WRPG are basically PnP style where you create an avatar and go through a series of choices and 90% of the content is choice. You could go avenge your father's death or you could join the thieves guild and plunder the castle of Lord Vermonin East Ordor.
JRPGs are more about story and characters, the content of the game is much more linear cause the goal of the game is to be a narrative not an open world. You are playing the role of Joe Fonsenburger from Illiard whose home was destroyed by the evil Widget Knight and now he's joined with his childhood friend and romantic love entrance to travel the globe to collect the Seven Mystical Rocks so he can become the new Darth Knight and avenge his hometown.
The difference here is that Joe can't choose to ignore his quest, its all he's got. In a WRPG you can choose to ignore it but it makes the story parts less meaningful cause often than not you do a few adventures with some NPCs and never see them again afterwards.
I don't believe either style is bad, it comes down to preference. The W and J are only added cause the specific styles are pretty much associated with a specific genre. People have already pointed out a few JRPG "narrative style games" done by western developers but frankly, there are not that many "choice based" WRPG games made by Japanese development teams. Metal Saga is the only one I can think of off the top of my head that fits the true stereotypes of a WRPG whereas most other efforts are more like weird half breeds or fall more into traditional JRPG design with better flexibility.
Also, Valkyrie Chronicles and Disgaea are not JRPGs, they are SRPGs because their battle systems are strategic battles utilizing "military" units on a map. They get a new name thanks to their battle systems. ;)
Now that this irrelevant issue of gaming psuedo-taxonomy is over, I would address that I feel the problem with the JRPG formula or "Japanese development style" comes from a few issues of developers not understanding how franchises are suppose to work, not understanding their audience, placing too much emphasis and prioritizing only parts of the game over others, listening to their fans (yes this is a problem and its not as counter-productive to this argument as you would think) and like Vyk pointed out, just some bad writing as of late.
For SE, part of the issue with many of their games is that a) their marketed poorly and b) quality is a mix bag. I agreed with what Bolivar mentioned in another thread about SE, which was that ten years ago, the developer was led by several artists, but nowadays it feels more corporate. While corporate means we get more games I feel the polish and quality are lacking.
I also feel that one of SE's biggest strengths is becoming a bit of their weakness, and that is innovation. It just feels like SE is trying too hard to "remake the wheel" with each game when tweaking the title would work. V-VIII were all applauded for their innovations in gameplay and battle systems but frankly, outside of differences of developing your character, the battle systems are still the same old ATB system of IV with minor tweaks to it to make it better. Hell, even the development systems of VI-VIII are nothing more than different ways of emulating V's Job Class system.
A lot of FF's innovations in the past was bringing more emphasis to story, graphics, and adding more gameplay tweaks and expanding the genre by showing its versatility while still remaining in the same framework of the genre. As long as you do it well, you can still hold onto a few things you did before. Most people I know would be ecstatic if FFXV was announced to have a job class system.
My point here is, there is nothing wrong with ATB and I don't see how turning FF into an Action RPG series is really better than sticking to a more traditional Turn Base system. The most amusing thing I remember seeing is how XII, and now XIII, are being trashed by FF fans for feeling different yet both are praised by critics for being innovative and different. Yet, Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey were torn apart by critics for using that "damn old clunky turn base system" and feeling too "old school" yet both games are highly praised by RPG fans and FF fans. Not to mention there must be at least a dozen people on this forum who said Lost Odyssey should have been FFXII. Its just amusing that the game that feels like it came from the late 90's is getting more praise and adoration by RPG fans than the titles that both developers and critics are hailing as "the future of the genre". Change is not bad but its not always good either.
I've noticed that FF has been losing more fans as it tries to break away from the standards of the older titles. Radically new battle systems removing the strengths of ATB, going back and forth on giving games mini-games or stripping them all away, experimenting with very linear and story driven map design, experimenting with adopting a more huge open world with less emphasis on trapping the player onto invisible rails. I feel the process has not only been alienating older fans, but even worse, thanks to the games long development times and hyper PR, I feel its starting to splinter the fan base. SE can't really listen to any of its fans anymore cause they all come from different gaming eras and what works for them may not appeal to other fans. I would love the franchise to go back to having long dungeons, heavier exploration with less hand holding in the story, as well as being moderately difficult that would require me to actually put some effort into grinding a few levels. Yet how would that factor into appeasing a new fan brought into the series by XIII, who is use to having the story unfold like a movie with better scenery in exchange for longer dungeons, and difficulty going in hand with more generous and less detrimental penalties for not living up to the games expectations. We can bitch and whine about how SE should just listen to its fans but I would ask which ones? It's a 20 year old franchise with enough variation in its history that it's fan bases are more correlated to the era of gaming they grew up in over which FF happened to be their fave. The fanbase is splintered and the most we can agree on is we like FF.
As for the topic question... No, I actually wouldn't want a Western developer to work on FF. Not because I feel they would ruin it, I wouldn't be surprised if it was well received and actually a fairly good game. I just feel like it wouldn't have the same magic as the older entries. Yet, on the other hand, I haven't felt that magic from the series since 2000 so it's not like handing the reins over to someone else would be any different from what's been going on for the last ten years or so. So really, it doesn't make much difference to me.
Well here's the thing. Giving a FF license to a western developer won't actually make the "real" FFs come out of japan any slower. You won't get one less japanese FF because we got one western FF, so in reality there is no loss for the people who refuse to touch a western FF, while those who do want one will get their dreams fulfilled.
It's ok Wolf, the census committee always reads your walls of text. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
This actually reminds me of an article I was reading on gamasutra about the state of game development and how to fix it. I'll link for anyone interested: Gamasutra - Features - Japanese Game Development: The Path ForwardQuote:
Now that this irrelevant issue of gaming psuedo-taxonomy is over, I would address that I feel the problem with the JRPG formula or "Japanese development style" comes from a few issues of developers not understanding how franchises are suppose to work, not understanding their audience, placing too much emphasis and prioritizing only parts of the game over others, listening to their fans (yes this is a problem and its not as counter-productive to this argument as you would think) and like Vyk pointed out, just some bad writing as of late.
For SE, part of the issue with many of their games is that a) their marketed poorly and b) quality is a mix bag. I agreed with what Bolivar mentioned in another thread about SE, which was that ten years ago, the developer was led by several artists, but nowadays it feels more corporate. While corporate means we get more games I feel the polish and quality are lacking.
It's a bit long but well worth the read for anyone interested in why Japanese developers have been struggling the last few years. Half of this stuff Square even admitted they got wrong with FFXIII, but I do agree that perhaps the biggest problem is the lack of people with creative drive to share and complete a game matching the vision in their head, and a structure to development that stifles creativity from team members rather than encouraging it. Frankly, I think if Square could sort out their development issues and find the Sakaguchi's and Kojima's within their company they'd not only be on the road to improvement but probably on the way to dominating the industry again.
I'm not so sure about this. Odds are as publisher Square would be paying the developer for the game development which would mean taking money away from another project. It might not take money away from a Japanese developed FF of course, but something else may get canned. Whether that turned out to be a good or bad thing though, who could say?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirage
A couple years ago I would give this a big no no. But now, after playing some Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, NwN, Fable, yadda yadda, I must say that would be interesting. I mean, both genres have things I like and I came to the conclusion that a game that could merge the best traits of the genres (so the sandbox-ness of WRPGs and character and story focus of JRPGS) would be thrilling. So far, the two games that came closest to this are Planescape: Torment and Final Fantasy XII, and those two are among my favorite games of all time. So, ultimately, I think it would be an intriguing experiment that might pay off.
You could probably get a major Western developer to make a FF title on spec. As far as the series as fallen releasing a numbered FF title still seems like a license to print money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivi22
At this point I'm not convinced numbered titles can come out any slower without putting the Duke Nukem team on them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirage
No more than usualQuote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
In 10 years are we going to have to call these JSRPGs and games like Civilization WSRPGs? :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
The general consensus made by 'them' 'out there' is that RPGs are to slow to sell to the western market. So, ergo they have to be faster. But the thing is, as much as they make them 'real time' they aren't getting any appreciably less turn based. In FF12 they just moved the ATB until after you selected you moved instead of before, and added a spell que. As dynamic as the characters in FF13 were, by and large I was just watching and waiting for my two action bar charges to complete so I could power shift into something else and get a free charge. (Kind of felt like Guitar Hero to me, watch the screen and hit the button at the right timing :D)Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
Yet refresh my memory, which FF title broke the series into the wastern market and still has the highest total sales of any of SE's titles? What battle system did it use?
I've always felt this way. Listening to the fans is akin to listening to a small child's opinions on bedtime and how much candy they should be able to eat. You want to make the best choices for them, but listening to short sighted whining isn't the way to do it. Just look at how wildly SE has lurched back and forth between FF10,FF13 and FF13.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
I'm basically at the point where I have lost my faith in SE's abilities to make new titles, so I'm ready for them to try anything at this point. At least if they give it to a western developer and make a WRPG then I can finally give up on the series for good and stop worrying about it :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
Thanks for the clarification on terminology, Wolf. And you're quite right in your argument about their changes in development ideas. I never bought a new Final Fantasy (back when I liked them and still bought them) to see its new innovative battle system, or encounter style or how they handled towns or dungeons. That stuff wasn't broken. Maybe a little old, but every game from 4 - 10 tweaked the ATB just enough to make it interesting without being completely different. I wanted to check out the new story and characters. Which both 8 and 10 completely derailed me on. But at least I hated those games for what I was looking forward to?
I don't know if I entirely agree with this. Listening to fans, as in listening to the majority of people posting on message boards about what they like or don't like about a game is a bad idea, mostly because the majority of them either don't have a good idea of why it is they didn't like something, or are more than happy to offer up game breaking ideas for fixing them. Most fans are idiots who don't put any thought into why a game is the way it is let alone how to legitimately do it better.Quote:
Originally Posted by VeloZer0
But there is a way to listen to people's opinions and thought on a game and even catch things the player never even realizes they're doing or never gives a second thought, and that'd be play testing. It's something most successful western developers do a lot of, and which Valve probably excels at more than most. But even in play testing there's ways to do it right and there's ways to do it wrong. If all you do is give players a questionnare to fill out after playing the game for a couple of hours then you're doing it wrong. Sadly most japanese developers, including Square, tend to do too little if they do it at all. Feedback is important, but you need to get the right kind and get it often and implement what you learn from it to make a great game.
I tried to make the distinction between listening to fans and basing a game on what fans want, but I did it in a really half-assed way.
Your post is exactly what I wanted to convey.
That's cool. We all have off posts. I had the feeling you might be leaning that way actually, but wasn't entirely sure. Figured the distinction needed to be made either way.
I was thinking more along the lines of a company would be asked if they wanted to do a FF title, and then they'd get a share of the earnings the game brought in, while the game itself was mostly financed by the third party developer. Even if SE did put a bit of money into it, money isn't really what's slowing down game releases from them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivi22
Don't really see how this matters.Quote:
Originally Posted by VeloZer0
My point was that even if SE puts all their in house development on hold to finance a Western company making the next FF title it will still probably come out significantly faster than their current abysmal pace of making numbered FF titles.
They could probably have 2-3 tries to get it right in the time SE would put out one game of indeterminant quality.
Thinking that SE would put every in house development on hold while having a third party develop one single title is pretty... strange. How poor do you think SE is?
The trouble I have with this is that when it comes to funding a triple-A title on the level of an FF title, there aren't many developers who could afford to finance it themselves even with the promise of profit sharing. Not many developers have the money to develop for 2-3 years without receiving funding from publishers in the form of milestone payments or whatever else. At least not many who could develop independently and be big enough to pull it off. In fact, the only company I think would have the financial independence to do it might be Valve. All the other big names are reliant on their publishers as far as I know. And even with a bankable name like FF, getting funding from places other than a publisher would be difficult.Quote:
Originally Posted by MirageI was thinking more along the lines of a company would be asked if they wanted to do a FF title, and then they'd get a share of the earnings the game brought in, while the game itself was mostly financed by the third party developer. Even if SE did put a bit of money into it, money isn't really what's slowing down game releases from them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivi22
All that said though, I think a big publisher like Square would prefer to be funding the development anyway because then they can exercise more control over development for better or worse.
Maybe. However, I still think SE can afford to fund a game developed by a third party without having to cut down significantly on internal development teams.
I certainly think that Square Enix should be trying to do more with what resources they have available to them. I think that I would be willing to give a Western Final Fantasy a try. This type of thing has done before with, in my opinion, fairly decent results: Final Fantasy Mystic Quest and Secret of Evermore come to mind.
>>> Give FF to a western developer? No thanks, they just need a better writer..:luca:
One FF, not all of them.
>>> If is just one FF then its ok I guess, I loved Mystic Quest..:luca:
You guys know Mystic Quest was developed in Japan right?
I see this. You know it's funny, I've been thinking about morality systems in games recently, surprisingly while I was playing Konquest mode in MK. While killing the five innocent monks who were only minding their own business (I wanted the Koins), the thought occurred to me that if I had done the same thing in Fable, people would hate me. Personally, I know that my girlfriend wouldn't have done it despite it not having any affect in-game. That's just the type of obsessive-compulsive saint idealism she's cursed with. "NPCs have feelings too."Quote:
Originally Posted by ShinGundam
But I really like games where actions have consequences beyond being able to acquire this item or missing that summon or viewing that extra hidden scene.
I really think that FF could do well by making OPTIONAL sidequests SEEM more relevant to the story too. Like when you decide to do it, you learn more about the world, or a character, or a system unique to the installment.
The avatar should change too. I can't help but ask myself why these characters go around in the same outfit everywhere. Don't they shower? Don't people question their style? Aren't they affected physically by anything that occurs in-game? I think characters should change their outfits now and then, change their hair, hell, maybe their hair gets messed up because of a battle. Scars, stress marks, grey hair, wrinkles... these things shouldn't be trivial accessories that belie a character's history, they should be trophies proclaiming your accomplishments over the course of your journey. Who's really going to hold onto "that bird's feathers" or "that rock from that time" or especially an actual trophy from a tournament when you've got a world to save?
SE has the capabilities to implement all this stuff in their games. Now it's just up to them to do something fresh and new instead of sticking to the old worn-out formulas.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercen-XI see this. You know it's funny, I've been thinking about morality systems in games recently, surprisingly while I was playing Konquest mode in MK. While killing the five innocent monks who were only minding their own business (I wanted the Koins), the thought occurred to me that if I had done the same thing in Fable, people would hate me. Personally, I know that my girlfriend wouldn't have done it despite it not having any affect in-game. That's just the type of obsessive-compulsive saint idealism she's cursed with. "NPCs have feelings too."Quote:
Originally Posted by ShinGundam
But I really like games where actions have consequences beyond being able to acquire this item or missing that summon or viewing that extra hidden scene.
I really think that FF could do well by making OPTIONAL sidequests SEEM more relevant to the story too. Like when you decide to do it, you learn more about the world, or a character, or a system unique to the installment.
The avatar should change too. I can't help but ask myself why these characters go around in the same outfit everywhere. Don't they shower? Don't people question their style? Aren't they affected physically by anything that occurs in-game? I think characters should change their outfits now and then, change their hair, hell, maybe their hair gets messed up because of a battle. Scars, stress marks, grey hair, wrinkles... these things shouldn't be trivial accessories that belie a character's history, they should be trophies proclaiming your accomplishments over the course of your journey. Who's really going to hold onto "that bird's feathers" or "that rock from that time" or especially an actual trophy from a tournament when you've got a world to save?
Now that you mention it, I don't see the whole "changing avatar" thing as a WRPG-specific element. Its just an element that WRPGs use more than JRPGs. But there are JRPGs who use it, and it doesn't make them feel more western. Its just a nice change of pace. The characters in Resonance of Fate don't purposely change their outfits throughout the game. But you can buy and collect hundreds of items to customize their look with. Clothes, hair color, accessories, even eye-color. It was nice. And its always nice in a FF when characters get different weapons, you get to see how they look in battle. It wouldn't be too hard to do the same thing with their clothes. But that would require having actual armor instead of just an armband or whatever. But now that I think about it, Legend of Legaia changed the characters with their armor and that game's pretty ancient. So the idea isn't foreign to Japan. They just choose to ignore that idea for some reason
Showers, toilet breaks and other personal hygiene things are rarely seen done in any work of fiction, though. Why should FF suddenly start with it? t's not really exciting, unless something really out of the ordinary happens while they do it,
are you saying you have a problem with steamy shower scenes?
YesQuote:
Originally Posted by kotora
Hygiene doesn't have the be the only excuse for changing their clothes. Its just a fun mechanic that's rarely implemented properly. Lots of JRPGs have armor, why shouldn't that armor change your look? :}
And any game with a shower/bath scene generally gets edited to high hell before being localized..
If it gets through the PG13 rating, it's not hot and steamy enough for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by kotora
>>> Uh?, if its really from japan then my love for mystic quest is decaying a 70%..:luca:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivi22
I think a western developer would totally try to create a Final Fantasy that matched the originals. Why wouldn't they? They would try to get the feel the same.Would help if the development team were FF fans too.
I don't mean to suggest that Final Fantasy should implement obvious biological necessities into the course of gameplay (i.e. sleeping, bathing, eating, exercising, using the restroom), I merely suggest that characters should have at least one extra outfit they change into at some point during the course of the game or some other kind of noticeably physical change.
Tidus looked physically different between ingame cutscenes (where he was a white boy) and FMVs (where he was asian).
probably not the point but still
I think we should have a shape shifting main character who can change between black and white andpeegeeazn
Sadly that was one of the few things I was amused over with FF8, Squall got to play dress-up once in a while. Its too rare in JRPGs. But he would have looked better in Cloud's dress and wig [img]http://home.eyesonff.com/images/smilies/heart.gif[/img]
When did Squall play dress up?
I think he's talking about the Seed dress uniform, not an actual dress
Oh, yeah. That's what I meant. I guess that probably was confusing when mixed with my quip about Cloud's dress. Sorry
I am starting to believe that Final Fantasy fans hate FF. There is always a heart broken FF fan with every release. Final Fantasy XII and XIII have broken the most hearts.
Final Fantasy XII was a Western influenced and quite frankly, most of you whined about the removal of turn based battles. If you would (and some of you realize this, I know) use your powers of observation the games are STILL employing the ATB system but are modified for style and presentation.
To get back to my point, Final Fantasy XII was very Western influence and was a SUCCESSFUL game in execution. The fans didn't like it.
Final Fantasy is not going down hill. Final Fantasy does not need to out source development to a Western developer. If anything they should outsource the development to ANOTHER JAPANESE DEVELOPER. Squeenix is moving more towards publishing anyway.
Also, I don't believe FFXIII means the series is going downhill. JRPGs have not been received well on a whole (with the exception of Demon's Souls, which plays like a WRPG). I think FFXIII design decisions came from time constraints and the pressure of having the most beautiful game on the market. I am sure the next FF will come out sooner and be more "complete" of a game. HOWEVER, some FF fans will still hate it. FF fans are insatiable and any series that has a the legacy of FF will have a hard time satisfying the entire fanbase. It doesn't matter what the next FF is like. Every FF has haters. Let's just hope it doesn't have as many haters as XIII (a game that did some things brilliantly, but broken hearted fanboys don't care).
I think the current situation is an extension of the growing anti-Final Fantasy sentiment across the gaming landscape more than anything else to be honest. The arguments people are making about Square being on the verge of collapse and needing to make serious changes to their flagship series or they risk losing all their fans and going bankrupt etc. etc. etc. are the exact same arguments people have made about every FF game since FF7. These arguments are always to be like this " Look X don't have random encounter therefore i will overlook the flaws of X but bash FF or any other series".Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamia
lol some people have such a hard time accepting the criticism on FF13 they've made up these really valid point and i'm impressed by your thinking. arguments about "haters"
I'm not a rabid FFXIII defender. In fact I've picked apart its flaws quite severely. Constructive criticism is welcome and encouraged (e.g. Wolf, Vivi22) but what happen nowadays is either plainly being negative or whining :eep:.Quote:
Originally Posted by kotora
yeah the criticism phase usually only lasts for a few months after release, after that no one wants to bother having to explain everything all over again. Unless it's actually a good game in which case people can go on for years.
I wouldn't say SE is failing, hell they are probably doing better financially now then they did in the PSX days. They are not going to go bankrupt but I do feel they have lost some of their credibility. I don't think SE stands for the same things it did years ago, and while no one can say whether this is a good thing or a bad thing, I do feel its alienating parts of the fanbase.
It's true that nothing SE can do will make everyone happy but it feels like, with the FF series at least, that SE has seriously dropped the ball in the last few entries. I don't think a quick turn over of titles will make it better either, what they need to do now is decide what they want FF to be, not live up to some silly expectations from years past but really come up with a direction and work towards it. I feel that XII and XIII both represent a sorta crossroads for the main series, each encompassing what part of the fanbase wants. Personally, I feel the direction SE needs to find middle ground between these two extremes, and maybe some better writers. Who knows, maybe Agito and Versus will be the happy middle, people are looking for.