Discussion in 'Video Games' started by AwesomeCool, Apr 14, 2016.
*cough* Chrono Break *cough*
Cross was meh, but it had it's points.
Would love to see a third game especially considering the first was a smashing success, but is square competent enough to handle such a project without messing it up?...
Seeing as it's one of the best-selling games in the series, they should probably keep thinking that way.
That's what saddens me, it's the worst in the series...
And that's what saddens me: the degree of resentment people have towards a game that isn't a game they like being extremely popular and successful.
Bad analogy. Best selling =/= good game or best game. Best selling just means it is the game most people picked up, and we don't know why they picked it up. Maybe all those players think it is garbage? We will never know.
To give you an example where your example is false. Most people regard Windows as not the best OS out there. However, it is (last time I checked) the best selling. There are various reasons for this, and I'm not going into this here. Another example: Ipods. I regard them (and I know others who do) as inferior to other portable music players out there, but good luck finding anything but an ipod out there. In this case, ipod didn't have the best product out there, but due to good marketing and availability they are the most popular. But that doesn't make them the best.
So we should never think that just because a game sells many copies it is a good game. Sometimes people buy it for other reasons. Sometimes it is just because it is marketed better, so more people know of it instead of a lesser known game that is really a better game (I'm sure you and others have found hidden gems before when it comes to games). And sometimes the game that sold many copies ends up being bad, turns off the customer base, and they don't buy the next game (which we won't know if that is the case). After all, we can't return games nowadays just because the game is bad (unless it is on steam and you meet certain conditions), so if we buy a game, we are stuck with the game, even if the game is bad. And that is not reflected at all in sales figures.
Not only am I certain this isn't true, but I suspect only a quite small minority of people are even familiar with more than one operating system to the degree that they can give a judgement on which is best.
You're right that most can't give a judgment on that. So...do we assume Windows is the best just because it is the best selling? We can't because there are other reasons it is best selling (some of that being it is preinstalled on many machines, so people just live with it).
What this is, is an example of what those of us who study stats call a confound...an outside variable that throws off the results. Since we don't know honestly why so many people bought ffxiii, it is false to assume that because it is best selling it is the best. Maybe the label of Final Fantasy affected the sales? We will never know unless Square could somehow rename the game to some other title, release it in a vacuum to another planet with the same number of people and see how many copies it sells now.
Back on topic: Did anyone see the steam page for ff9, where they are saying ff9 sold 5 million copies worldwide? For those who are curious where to look, its on the main page in the description written by the company. I somehow thought the number was lower, but then again I come from the time when a game could sell 400,000 copies and be considered a huge success (and that was back in the early 90's in the PC game market).
Are people not allowed to "dislike" FF13?
it's pretty clear that you really, really, really like it @lilyWhite, but please accept that some people may voice their opinion has disliking it.
I played it, enjoyed my time while doing it, there were some good stuff, but overall,it is still my least favorite.
as per VGChartz it's only the 4th best-selling
So yes it sold well, but a lot of the hype around the release of a new FF helped the sales. As well as the fact that the park of Xbox360 and PS3 was quite huge at the time of release.
to be honest I really enjoyed the paradigm battle system, but I was a bit disappointed by the direction. Art was gorgeous, but that was kind of expected on a new gen console.
I guess the issue with FF13 is that many just voice their disliking without really explaining why, so it may feel like people are dissing the game just to join on the"Let's diss FF13" train.
No. You recognize that, because everyone has different expectations, desires, and requirements of an operating system, there is absolutely no way you can state one operating system as an objective "best".
Which of course, should be pointed out that it's a comparison of "FFXIII sales in four years" vs. "FFVIII sales in fourteen years", thus failing to prove any point.
Exactly. Hence why we can't prove that FFXIII is the best, as people have different expectations, desires and requirements for video games too.
Talking numbers compared to sales lifetime??
I actually found more recent numbers
the PS1 came out indeed in 1994 and we can safely assume it reached its end by 2004, well after release of the PS2. In the meantime it sold roughly 100 Millions units.
FF7 came out in 1999 so if the PS1 honestly died by 2004 the timeframe for sales on PS1 is roughly 5 years, and it sold 10 Millions on PS1.
FF13 came out in 2009 and sales numbers are roughly 7 Millions on XBOX360 and PS3 combined. by 2015 the Park of these two consoles was around 160 Millions units.
so in a relatively equal time frame, FF7 sold way much more, on a way smaller park of consoles.
I don't know for you, but around where I'm from, it has been a while that FF7 on PS1 isn't for sale everywhere anymore, so no, it's not really about a sales comparison between 4 and 14 years.
My point: It sold quite well because it has qualities, but also because when it came out there hadn't been an FF released in a while, for many new gamers it became their entry point in the FF series (as FFXV will be for a new gen of gamers), and the park of consoles were the game is available is big enough to warrant good sales.
That you think this was ever said truly affirms how I regret saying anything.
Final Fantasy has been dead to me since after FFX. Even though I liked 8-10 it felt like they were just using cookie cutter formula and not really bringing anything new to the table (since 7) and after 10 it just started getting old since they hadn't done anything groundbreaking. I've played all the core games since the beginning (for me it was 1989 with FF1 on the NES).
FF1 had perhaps the best replay factor of any of the series since you could start the game with a custom party of 4 from a pool of 6 classes. They never did bring this game mechanic back and I think it was a mistake. FF6 sort of had this element by having such a large cast of characters so this made FF6 very replayable since you could focus on a different set of characters each replay.
FF7 was the most popular of all. It had everything that a perfect game would have, driving storyline, cutting edge graphics (at the time), great gameplay, rich item/magic system. It started out linear (which is great, far too many games start open world and it's so easy to get lost in, overwhelmed and give up), but the world opens up slowly over time giving plenty of options for exploration. Perhaps the most important factor here was great storyline. I feel like this hasn't been replicated since.
FF8 was too much of a copy of FF7 but more complicated as someone else already mentioned and this isn't always good. I enjoyed it but I like complicated things (not always though). FF9 was good too but still too much like previous games. FFX was my last favorite (not least favorite), it brought a few new things that took getting use to. At first I hated blitzball but then it got addicting later on. Still not sure it was the best gimmick to add to this game.
I played FF12 way after the fact but couldn't really get into it (maybe because it was too old by the time I tried it). FF13 bored the crap out of me. I liked the characters but the game was very repetitive and brought nothing new to the table. The battle system was largely the same as always and I found it very grindy. I've replayed FF1, 6, and 7 more than a dozen times each but even now it's getting old. It's probably true that this series is past its prime. If they keep revisiting this title I doubt they will be able to come up with anything really new and original. But then again, maybe all they need is just a really really good storyline to bring it back to life. I think storyline > gameplay > graphics but these days it seems the focus is graphics > storyline > gameplay and that for me is not a winning formula.
I think the decline of the franchise started with Hironobu Sakaguchi leaving Square after FFX and Squaresoft merging with Enix. I've noticed that a lot of people say that FFX was the last "good" FF (I'm aware he had SOME inclusion with FFXII but left early into development). So that magic or spark sort of went when he left. Plus I believe the reason why FF7 hasn't (and may not) be surpassed is due to the fact that is was the first to do so many things that is almost standard in RPGs today. For example, in a really basic and simple explanation, the Materia system is just augmenting weapons and armour that grant skills and passives. We have plenty of games that use that. In terms of story, if the setting was changed, but essentially the same story told again, it still wouldn't be popular.
I agree wholeheartedly with this. Storyline to get us hooked, gameplay to keep us playing and graphics to keep our eyes happy (though this can be subjective).
So which is it? The newer games are too different, or too similar?
Not a fan of newer FF games either (for theme reasons), but this kind of reception is probably extremely confusing and overly nuanced to do anything useful with as a company.
I'm happy with graphics such as from the borderlands series. Doesn't need to be ultra realistic 3d for me. I feel like really good artistic styled games can go a long ways, and tends to be way nicer to my poor graphics card. Maybe a new artistic style would help reinvigorate the series, plus it would probably reduce the amount of effort needing to apply to that area of game development so they can focus on making better storyline and gameplay.
Maybe it's just me but I can understand why some people feel the new games are different is probably because they are looking for the 'nostalgia' factor but you can't get it from a new game. It's the old games that tugs at our heartstrings because of the memories associated from playing it as a kid. I think the new games still have the old style but it's missing the nostalgia. I think a FF7 remake (as long is it is an actual remake and not a crappy port) could do well. I've been pining for a remake since graphics first got better than FF7. I'm only hoping that it's not too late (I really wont know til I play the remake whether it was worth it or not) as I'm getting old and jaded.
The reason I can go back and play FF1-7 countless times over is because they are nostalgic. It took me ages to realize it but I finally clued in when I couldn't play for the first time similar older classics in the same style (if the games too old and has no nostalgic value it might be hard to get into).
So I think it's because of nostalgia that people can feel that the new games are both similar and different at the same time even though it is hard to make sense of that statement.
I think it's for similar reasons also why a lot of people who never played the series prior to FF7 have a tough time getting into the older games too.
Maybe we should discuss what the classics did right?
FF1 - Could pick your party, this was really fun and allowed for all manner of challenge factors from super easy to impossibly hard. Yes, I beat the game as all fighters and another time as all white mages.
FF4 - Another epic classic. This one had a really awesome world, I mean you had all of the overworld, the underworld AND the moon to explore. Wasn't there 3 airships too? I think the magic in this game was the best for its simplicity and variation. There were some really cool spells in the game too. This is a classic tale of good vs evil and it was really well done.
FF5 - Jobs, need I say more. This was a great gameplay element and added a lot of replayability because of the variations, I think a lot of newer games lack this level of variation as you're too locked in to very specific characters and skillsets. Be wary though, too much variation can be a bad thing (I feel like Skyrim failed in this aspect, it didn't appeal to me at least, I got overwhelmed and never did finish the game even after 1000 hours gameplay). I should add, the job system helped reduce grind fatigue because you had a whole new job to explore. Grinding is a part of these style games admittedly but grinding can also be very boring.
FF6 - Storyline, variety, 2 worlds, airships, espers (precursor to materia). This was one of my favorite games of all time ever, mostly due to nostalgia I'm sure.
FF7 - I could write a book about how this game stands out. Midgar was such a great start, it got me hyped and excited from the first instant, it was easy to play from start until just leaving Midgar in one session because of that initial impact. The music, the city, the danger, the thrill, the badass team of rebels you got to play as. The train, the panic, the worry. The tragedy of the undercity plate crashing down. Climbing Shrinra tower to beat up those baddies that hurt your friends. This one section of the game could have been a game all of its own. It didn't matter how the game played out after this part because it was so captivating. The rest of the game was great too though. How the story of Cloud's past is slowly revealed, and how we slowly learned what made Sephiroth go off the rails. How we slowly learn the details of Cloud's newfound friends throughout the rest of the game. Yuffie was a favorite. The golden saucer was a real highlight too. I could go on but I'll stop here...
FF8 - I still enjoyed this one but this is where the series started going downhill. Too much the same as FF7 but made much more complicated. It took a long time to get acquainted with the new system, without the hype still being had from FF7 it would have been very hard to get into this game if it were all on its own because the learning curve was too steep. The graphics were awkward, it was trying to get ahead of the capabilities of the time. The characters were presented as too sophisticated for what the graphics could convey. It would be like putting formula one racing tires on a model T...
FF9 - This was a gem. They went back to the older style graphics and this was a good thing. Vivi brought back memories of FF1 (good old black mage sprite). Well balanced, not a lot of grinding, lots of story to keep the momentum going.
FFX - It's been a long time since I played this one so my memories might be a bit off. The characters had good development. I quite liked the cast. The story was unique for the series I felt, it had a fresh feel to it at the time. The overly bubbly and cheerful protagonist was a fresh change. Blitzball was fun only after getting use to it, but highly addictive after that point. The CTB battle system was a new thing at this point. It helped keep this style of battle system alive a bit longer (I feel like it's hard to continue with this style unless something really innovative happens). The sphere grid for learning new skills was a lot of fun to explore and another new idea at the time. The Al Bhed group added mystery and intrigue to the game, I think they might have been responsible for the steampunk.
In the end, if Square Enix wants to ignore the popularity of recent games in the series simply because they aren't another FFVII, they're just being stupid. It's like when they considered the Tomb Raider reboot a sales failure, despite being the fasting-selling installment of the series (and, at this point, the best-selling installment). And they've already set a target of ten million for themselves with FFXV, so they're going to beat themselves up more even if they do phenomenonally well anyway.
Perhaps the stupidest part of it is because they're trying to appease a vocal minority that complains about the recent games, but are so dead-set in viewing FFVII as the greatest game ever that there simply isn't any possibility that they will ever not complain about new games for not being FFVII.
So if they feel they need to compare everything with FFVII, then they're just stupid, but in the end it doesn't matter. Whatever direction they take, the end result will be the same: they'll make hugely popular and successful games that some people on the internet will devote themselves to complaining about because it's not [insert their favourite FF game here] and therefore terrible and the series is ruined and whatnot. If Squenix genuinely thinks FFXV is going to be any different in that regard (because there's already people complaining about how it's not Final Fantasy enough for them), they're flat-out delusional.
And when FFXV comes out, it will be one of my rare first-day purchases, I am certain that I will enjoy the game, and I will hopefully be wise enough to never take part in discussions of it online.
FF needs to return to its roots like the previous 3-6 and tries to rejuvenate the series with new fans. The old battle system was simple enough for any type of gamers to try the series during the old days and this is probably missing with the newer ones; FF lost its identity after the 9 in my opinion. They should definitely start from the beginning and make a game that's fun and easy to play instead of adding complicated mechanics and extravagant gameplay to the game.
@Danpixel: I second that. I think part of Square's problem is they have forgotten the KISS principle when it comes to games. Just look at the later games and how overly complicated they have tried to make the plots. And I say tried as sometimes the result looks like someone took the script and put it in a blender and hit blend (FF8 anyone? After disk 2 that story went cookoo in my opinion. Almost feels like a new writer took over right there at the disk change).
Another thing I do wish they would stop doing is shoehorning things in, just to have them in the game. You can usually see this when a boss fight tries too hard to be epic, and it seems Square thinks epic == many, many rounds in a battle, with all of them being big HP sponges. If it takes me longer to watch a movie than to win your boss fight, you did it wrong. A classic example of this is the ff13-2 final fight. Round 4 didn't need to exist, and in my opinion it added nothing to the fight except to drag it out another 10 - 20 minutes. It felt like someone looked at the game, and said "This is the final fight. It must have 4 rounds. Add them. Make it work."
Interestingly enough, what I find funny about this whole debate though is if we did some of the things Square did in their games in ours, we would be ripped to shreds on the internet. So why do we give Square a free pass? One that has always irked me is when they slip a guide-dang-in into their game. Classic example. Yunalesca from FFX. Can anyone honestly say they beat Yunlesca without a guide, unless it was by dumb luck? The game never trained you to let a status aliment stay for it might have a positive benefit, then suddenly the game throws a boss that has 100% chance to inflict death on all party members, and you're expected to now suddenly ignore a status aliment 50+ hours into the game when all game it has been cure them as fast as you can? And yet, if we did that in our game, we'd be ripped with negative reviews faster than we can blink. Yet, somehow, for a square game it is acceptable practice to do this and then say "Go buy the strategy guide to learn this trick.", when the game should be properly training you about it.
Separate names with a comma.