"Innovative" Changes

[DocFrance]

To all the people complaining about these changes: why don't you just admit that you only want to play (and pay for!) the same exact game over and over again with a few minor graphics updates? 'Cause that's basically what you're saying.

[DJZen]

I'm not the biggest Mario fan, but I seem to remember the only major changes being the addition of new abilities, and creating new levels. I believe that the series could have done pretty well even without these changes.

Okay, in Donkey Kong (the ORIGINAL Mario game), you ran up scaffolding to save your girlfriend (Pauline) from a crazy gorilla. You ran along, jumping, climbing ladders, and hitting stuff with a hammer occasionally. Then came Donkey Kong Jr., in which Mario was the BAD GUY. You played as Donkey Kong's son trying to rescue your father from a plumber who became vengeful..... or something.....

Then we got Mario Bros., which wasn't like DK at all. You ran around trying to flip enemies from below and the point was basically just to destroy all enemies. It was also 2-player and was the debut of Luigi. Then is Super Mario Bros., it went back to the Donkey Kong style, only level were actually more than one screen. In fact, the levels were HUGE in comparison, and while you were still trying to save a damsel in distress, you actually had to defeat her captor this time! In DK you just had to reach him. In SMB, you had to fight Bowser. Then came SMB2, which was actually NOT a Mario game at all, but was given a slight face lift when ported to America. For one thing, the characters did not control the same way at all. There was this weird momentum system that prevented you from running at full bore right away. Also, you could take quite a few hits before dying because you had a life meter. You couldn't stomp on enemies to defeat them, you had to hit them with something. There were many things to hit them with, such as vegetables pulled out of the ground (!), bombs (also pulled out of the ground), blocks which the levels were constructed from, koopa shells, and even other enemies. There was also the door system..... The door system allowed access to a sort of inverted version of the level you were currently playing, which contained coins and cherries, and was also, in some cases, the only way to progress in the level at all. Instead of getting items out of question blocks, you pulled them from the ground, and the invincibility power-up (starman) actually FLOATED UP FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE SCREEN. There was an end level boss for pretty much every level, and after each stage you could play the slot machine to get extra lives (this is what the coins were for). A fairly radical departure. Then came SMB3, which was a lot more like SMB1, only much much much more expansive. There were all new enemies and abilities, completely different level types (quicksand and a genocidal sun in the desert, autoscrolling islands 3 blocks long and whole screens apart in the sky level, enemies 4 times the size of Mario in the giant world), and even an overworld map where you could prepare for levels with powerups and use the infamous warp whistle. Super Mario World didn't do a lot that was truely revolutionary (it gave you Yoshi and the spin jump, but took away almost all the SMB3 abilities and powerups), except that it was the first mario game where you could same your progress. This is a good thing because it was definitely a much bigger game than the previous titles. However, Super Mario World 2 was NOTHING like Super Mario World. For one thing, you controlled Yoshi instead of Mario. Mario was a baby riding on Yoshi's back in this game, and the object was to just get him to the end of the level using a relay system. You beat enemies by throwing eggs at them or eating them, and you couldn't actually die unless you fell off a cliff. The only way to lose other than that was to have Mario get knocked off your back and then captured by a bunch of.... umm..... propellor lizard things. In Super Mario RPG, well, it was an RPG, enough said. In Super Mario 64, once again things changed. The health system was brought back, and jumping on enemies didn't hurt them, STOMPING on them was how you beat them, and even then, that didn't always work. You also had to navigate by moving Mario around like a gymnast with all his crazy backflips and stuff. There was a much bigger emphasis on exploration, as you had to beat a level by going on various treasure hunts within it, instead of simply reaching one goal per level. Seriously, the Mario series is the best example of a series prolonging its life by completely changing from one game to the next.

[Cz]

Boy, did I pick a bad example. That's what comes from not doing your research. *dies*

To all the people complaining about these changes: why don't you just admit that you only want to play (and pay for!) the same exact game over and over again with a few minor graphics updates? 'Cause that's basically what you're saying.

No. Screw the graphical update, and alter the ability/levelling system. That's what makes an FF, not great visuals or quirky little gimmicks. Change the battle system, and you change the game.

[DocFrance]

Here's another thing that irks me. Square has yet to actually use the third dimension for something other than graphics. Sure, we have all these pretty 3D graphics, but do they serve any purpose other than eye candy? I'd wager that FFVII, VIII, IX, and maybe even X could be played on the SNES if you took out the flashy graphics. All the characters would just be sprites that move around a bit to convey different emotions - or do you need to see Yuna in a thousand different poses in order for it to be good? Blitzball was the worst offender! Supposedly, it's a game that's played within a 3D sphere of water. BUT when you actually play the game, you're confined to a 2D plane within the sphere! That's like calling soccer "3D" when it's really just played on a flat surface.

So really ask yourself - why 3D? Is there anything that the third dimension brings to the gameplay table for FF? We're referencing Super Mario Bros. a lot, and the 3D of Super Mario 64 was a huge factor in the gameplay! 3D adds nothing to the gameplay for FF - our characters still line up in perfect lines against the enemy, just like in the original! How's that for realism?

[DJZen]

It'd be interesting to see if they could do that and still use the same method of combat or if they'd have to completely change it. Would you still be able to select attacks from the menu or would you have to do something else?

[Dignified Pauper]

If anyone can say that the story-lines have gotten better as the series went on, i refuse to believe it.

Graphics what? who cares, they're nice, and they should represent the system, but they don't make the game.

Gameplay, this is starting to really irk me, i expect a certain criteria for FF series. World Map that I can walk on, turn-based battles with ATB gauge, experience and levels, no sphere grid, random battles.

As for the mario brothers stuff.. Please, the same basic thing has happened over and over. With the addition of the N64 3-D world, it only changed directions and interface. It wasn't different. As with Donkey Kong and DK jr, those had mario, but they aren't mario games.
Like i said, they made different names b/c they changed the game entirely. FF is starting to change their games and straying from the formula. Paper Mario wasn't so innovative anyways, Mario Sunshine, please, Luigi's Haunted mansion, another different name. Also, note, the Mario Bros only had 3 on the NES, and a few on GB. Super Mario World, Yoshi Island, Paper Mario, note the name change, it didn't stay constant, it denoted a change of formula.

[Cz]

So really ask yourself - why 3D?

Why indeed. Though perhaps a factor in it's success, FFVII's field graphics were a good example of 3D for the sake of 3D. High quality sprites would have been a better choice, in my opinion. As you say, it wouldn't have affected the gameplay on bit.

Blitzball was a wasted oppurtunity. The opening FMV was an excellent showcase for the mini-game, but the matches themselves were a huge disappointment. It could have been the defining mini-game in FF history, but instead it was a failure.

[Del Murder]

Different strokes for different folks. I don't think the changes in XI and XII are much different than the changes in the other games. Sure some of them aren't that good but I'll take the good with the bad any day.

I'm also sick of the 'God forbid Square change anything!' sarcasm. It's been done to death around here and I don't see any other purpose of it other than to belittle the person you are referring to. So please knock it off, everyone.