Are all games equal? Should they be?

[Fynn]

[FinalxxSin]

...

I don't believe I mentioned anything about you having to like FFXV. If that's what you're getting out of my recent posts, then there's not much I can do there. I am completely fine with you disliking FFXV, or any title in the mainline series. However, if you want to really push the "this isn't Final Fantasy" argument that I've seen so many times over the years, you're not going to get anywhere with me. From FFI to FFXV, they all share one thing in common. Every single game is an RPG of some type. I'm pretty sure SquareSoft/SquareEnix never put out some declaration creed deeming what Final Fantasy is and isn't. The more you try and mentally box FF, the more disappointed you'll end up being in the long term more than likely.


Buying things on name sake/nostalgia in this series isn't the best move given how you know how different the games are. With access to the internet, you are able to do your research and come to a logical conclusion on rather or not you should give your time to something. I don't know you, but it seems to me that the older you got, the more close minded you became. I'd bet gil that when you were a kid you just wanted to play a game and enjoy it. As you got older, having less time to play games on top of having to spend money on them, on top of having experience from your past shut you off from something you'd otherwise may possibly enjoy. I'm not saying to blindly put your chips on faith, because that's asking to get burned. Perhaps you should try and enjoy a game for it is instead of disliking it for what it is not. Food for thought.
P.S. That doesn't mean a game is free of criticism.

[Fox]

Buying things on name sake/nostalgia in this series isn't the best move given how you know how different the games are. With access to the internet, you are able to do your research and come to a logical conclusion on rather or not you should give your time to something. I don't know you, but it seems to me that the older you got, the more close minded you became. I'd bet gil that when you were a kid you just wanted to play a game and enjoy it. As you got older, having less time to play games on top of having to spend money on them, on top of having experience from your past shut you off from something you'd otherwise may possibly enjoy. I'm not saying to blindly put your chips on faith, because that's asking to get burned. Perhaps you should try and enjoy a game for it is instead of disliking it for what it is not. Food for thought.
P.S. That doesn't mean a game is free of criticism.

You know, I really don't think it's unreasonable to have certain expectations from a product because of the name given to it. If the next 'Star Wars' film is a zombie survival movie, they better have a damn good reason for making such a drastic change.

This argument that 'all the FF games are super different' appears a lot and you know what? Up until XII I don't see it at all. Up to IX they are all very similar structurally and mechanically, X streamlined things a bit and removed the ATB, and then XII (a game I love btw) they said "Hey, you know what's making trout-tons of cash? MMOs," and everything changed. So I think it is pretty fair to come out and say 'such and such isn't very Final Fantasy-like' because the changes in recent entries have been vastly more massive than what came before. Between the original Final Fantasy and Final Fantasy X, if you've enjoyed any game in the series I would have no hesitation recommending another one from that group. Because although they are very different experiences, they all still follow the basic formula. You know what you're getting into.

I'd never recommend XII though, even tough I loved it. Because it was an absolutely massive departure from the 'Final Fantasy' that had been established over 15 years. And then XIII was a massive departure from that. And then XV was a massive departure from that. You don't know what you're getting any more. What's the point of even having a brand if you're going to change it so completely every version that customers have no idea if they're going to like it?

[Fynn]

Except how much of a departure each entry is really depends on your point of view because FF has redefined itself for a long time, alienating a lot of fans along the way as well. Even VI with its vaguely steampunk setting was off-putting to a small group of people who wanted the series to remain set in this DQ-like high fantasy setting. Then VII came in which added a whole horse of new fans while further dividing the existing fan base. Then VIII was polarizing because it wasn't like VII, then IX was polarizing because it brought back the old which new fans didn't get, then X was relatively successful but still some fans thought voice acting had nothing to do with FF, then XI was an MMO, and the rest is history. Honestly, the older games seem pretty even only because they've gotten the time to settle in the eyes of fans. Give XIII and XV time and they'll be the same, and once XVII comes out, people will be saying those were the last games that really "felt like Final Fantasy". You can really see this going on with FFXII right now. It's just that the "problem" of it being different is way more pronounced now because the series itself as well as the fan base are larger than ever, and the gaming community in general has a much more prominent voice.

Not saying you have to enjoy XV though Everyone is entitled to have their own ideal FF in their head and hope it gets released one day. I just think that there's really no such thing as a "series standard" that involves anything other than constantly challenging the formula in various ways.

[FinalxxSin]

....

If the mainline FF series attempted to generate a title that wasn't an RPG, the flow of this conversation would certainly be different. I highly doubt that day is ever going to come. The changes back then were more subtle. However, the end results ended up being the same. For example, FFVII and FFVIII are still radically different from the first few installments despite sharing battle systems that have common ground with each other on some level. Just because a title is a far departure from other games doesn't mean you should avoid recommending it to somebody. You never know, the person might just be interested in an RPG like FFXII. That's why I tend to ask questions to see what type of themes, characters, settings, etc. a person is interested in. A lot of people always ask if they need to play the prior games to enjoy the current one. For the most part that answer has always been no. I can't answer the brand question, but I'll provide my viewpoint on it. What it basically boils down to is artistic vision being maintained. How each team of developers approach a game is going to be different. As Tabata mentioned in an interview months back, it's impossible to satisfy the wants and needs of every single person. What they try to focus on is what they feel is important. I can tell you right now, everybody is not going to share the same artistic vision. Not every person has the same vision of a fantasy. Even though the 15th number game has come out, there are still artistic visions that haven't been presented to us as the audience within the mainline series yet.


Hell, I could even see a mainline FF game taking advantage of VR if that ever did take off. Even then, I wouldn't look at it as something that isn't FF.

[Fox]

Except how much of a departure each entry is really depends on your point of view because FF has redefined itself for a long time, alienating a lot of fans along the way as well.

Certainly I will admit to the definition of a 'Final Fantasy' game or a 'Star Wars film' or a 'Harry Potter novel' is open to everyone's own interpretation. When the first game was released, that was what Final Fantasy was. Then FFII came out with a different narrative and slightly different mechanics. So fans of the original had to ask themselves: "Am I OK with these changes? Does this work as a Final Fantasy game?" And if the answer is yes, then their definition has expanded. Repeat that for 10 games and yeah, you do end up with a fairly broad definition. And, like you say, you do lose some people on the way.

Honestly, the older games seem pretty even only because they've gotten the time to settle in the eyes of fans.

I don't think time is the reason. I think it's because the recent changes have been so much bigger that things that used to be a big deal now seem trivial. It seems silly to remember a time when FFVIII's Junction system was controversial because we don't even take turns or control all our party members in combat anymore! I think that XVII will only 'normalise' XV if it literally becomes an FPS.

If the mainline FF series attempted to generate a title that wasn't an RPG, the flow of this conversation would certainly be different. I highly doubt that day is ever going to come.

I think that kinda demonstrates my point. You are doing the same thing that I am, you just have a much broader definition of what is acceptable. Tell me, do you think Mass Effect would be a good 'Final Fantasy' game if it had that brand name? What about Divinity: Original Sin or Baldurs Gate or Skyrim? All RPGs. Are they all reasonable styles to have 'Final Fantasy XVI' put on them next time out?

To me, this is like taking a big room and filling it with people. You have tall people, short people, old, young, men, women, people of different races. Some of them have medical conditions. Some of them are missing limbs. They speak different languages and have different professions. This to me is what FFI to FFX feels like; a diverse collection of fundamentally similar creatures.

Now imagine you put an elephant in the room. If you try and tell me that's a human I'm going to struggle to accept that. Certainly I don't think it really fits in with the rest of the humans. It's too radical a departure. That's XV for me. As I said above, it makes the differences between VI, VII, VIII (which were already highly controversial at the time) look trivial by comparison, which makes it all the harder to accept. In my eyes there does come a point where you've stretched the definition of your brand so much it becomes meaningless to even use the label.

[FinalxxSin]

....

To answer your first question, yes if the execution is done properly. As for the rest of it with the elephant thing, SE have already dedicated spin off title games for such instances. For example I am sure you know of Dissidia which is pretty much a fighting game more or less.

[Fox]

....

To answer your first question, yes if the execution is done properly. As for the rest of it with the elephant thing, SE have already dedicated spin off title games for such instances. For example I am sure you know of Dissidia which is pretty much a fighting game more or less.

My point exactly! If XV were a spin off I would have absolutely no problem with it whatsoever. Spin offs have always been extremely varied, experimental and coming from a bunch of different genres. So my expectations for those are far broader. XV is just as much a departure from FFVII as Crisis Core is, in fact it's arguably more so. It definitely would fit much better as a spin-off. Arguably XII as well.

[Fynn]

I don't think XII would work better as a spin-off since its battle system is a direct evolution of the ATB system and the game overall place much more closely to what previous FFs did than XIII. As for XV - from the very beginning, since it was announced as VS XIII, it was said that it would have an action battle system, so it made sense for it to retain that even after the change, especially since SE have been struggling with maintaining mainstream appeal after XIII. Which direction XVI will go is still up in the air, but I'm definitely way more open to varying battle systems in FF than before.

[FinalxxSin]

....

I don't get your point, unless you are trying to express you are only accepting of certain types of RPGs to get a number attached to them. If I was to look at myself and have that type of mentality, I would be a hypocrite.

[Fox]

....

I don't get your point, unless you are trying to express you are only accepting of certain types of RPGs to get a number attached to them. If I was to look at myself and have that type of mentality, I would be a hypocrite.

My point is that being a mainline entry carries certain expectations. Every time you go outside those expectations one of two things happens: 1) you don't consider it a good example of the series or 2) you accept it as part of the series and thus expand your definition.

My argument is that there comes a point where you've redefined your franchise so much there's no point having a franchise anymore.

"I liked Final Fantasy VIII. Will I like IX?" - Probably!
"I liked Final Fantasy VIII. Will I like XV?" - I have absolutely no idea!

Being part of a franchise creates expectations based on past form. That's not weird or unreasonable. Huge, sweeping, drastic changes to the formula are naturally going to disappoint people who have played the earlier games and have those expectations. Because if I like Final Fantasy games and Final Fantasy changes what it is so drastically, where can I go to play the kind of thing I want? I'm a big fan of Deus Ex as well, if the next game in that series comes out and it's just Cyberpunk DOOM then I'm going to be upset. There is a place in the world for a Cyberpunk DOOM but I'd like my Deus Ex to stay true to being Deus Ex thanks.

Spin-offs are great because you know going in, just by virtue of it being a spin off that it's going to break from what you're familiar with. That's the whole reason spin-offs exist - to allow you to create something in the same world/style of your main series without being restricted to its conventions.

[Sephiroth]

But FF is known for constantly evolving. I do agree with you - totally and there is no doubt for me - that while this is said all the time, when it comes to certain aspects, the evolution never was all that extreme. But if you ask me, trying to tackle even those aspects to evolve or let's just simply call it "try it from another perspective" just opens up more possibilities for something. I was very skeptical about the combat system, even after Duscae. Guess what - I love it now. Would I want Turn-Based Combat? Yes, especially as I get it in Atelier RPGs back every year and I just love it. But first, it does not mean we will never get it back again and second, other things might surprise you as well.

I mean, you should not have this mentality for drugs or murder but still.

[Fynn]

"I liked Final Fantasy VIII. Will I like IX?" - Probably!
"I liked Final Fantasy VIII. Will I like XV?" - I have absolutely no idea!

"I liked Final Fantasy III, will I like IV?" - Probably!
"I liked Final Fantasy III, will I like X?" - I have absolutely no idea!

[Sephiroth]

"I liked Final Fantasy VIII. Will I like IX?" - Probably!
"I liked Final Fantasy VIII. Will I like XV?" - I have absolutely no idea!

"I liked Final Fantasy III, will I like IV?" - Probably!
"I liked Final Fantasy III, will I like X?" - I have absolutely no idea!

For me it is:

I liked Final Fantasy I will I like XV? => Yes, Final Fantasy never disappoints me, was the reason I became what I am, learned Japanese and become a Game Designer.

[Fynn]

I mean, yeah, that's your personal answer, but that was more to illustrate that the leaps between the qualities of been games have been so significant even in the past that it's impossible to recommend any game in the series to anyone based on one game they like. Regardless of whether it's XV or X. Because I know a lot of people that like VIII and hate IX and vice versa.