the saying "i'm not ging to lie" is more in lines with "lets be reluctantly honest". FF has been aiming for more realism, its true, and i wish it wasn't.
Did Final Fantasy die with Sakaguchi's departure or is there hope?
- Thread starter spoonyrogdrumps
- Start date
- Tagged users None
spoonyrogdrumps
Blue Mage
I understood what you meant. I agree with you. I wish it wasn't either at least for Final Fantasy. Some of this has to do with the XII hang ups but, there are somethings that the series could do which is making the world more interactive and it wouldn't change the core of the IP. FFXV is said to have destructive environments which is cool. Square did something really cool with FFVII, VIII and IX in that it blended sequences from FMV into gameplay which Square originally said they did to decrease load times and save space but it was still cool. Sheech wants more realism and that's where she differs from you, and I'm ok with realism but at the cost of what. Some people just don't like the tactical aspects or video game like combat. However as I've said here and at other posts that they can add realistic aspects to the old model. Combat can be seamless, you don't have to transport to another screen to battle, you can move in the environment all while being turn-based. You could make it even more difficult than FF of old but it's not necessary. I have a fear that XV will have simple tactics where HP is shown to be a health meter and MP your magic meter which already is as well as very little status effects and maybe even less character stats. They will still use a level system but it will be simple all in favor of being able to climb on top of a behemoth. Square wanted to appeal to a wider audience. I don't blame them in some ways. More market share more money. But, they end up making mechanics that aren't true to Final Fantasy's IP. realism or immersion in a video game is part of it's identity which is it's IP. Some people found the old games to hard. Realism is more than just combat mechanics though. It's the charm of things that aren't real made to seem real. That's the Fantasy. I suppose a fourth option could be in order. That Final Fantasy can re-boot as a different genre of RPG and still be a good game which it could. That's why they need to stop numbering it. XV as far as we know is returning to a traversal world map which is great finally. Fast travel I'm sure will still be available. I think they even said the environment will be more interactive. The only thing besides the combat/gameplay and leveling system is the narrative, it's pacing and the story, which doesn't make a Final Fantasy Final Fantasy it just makes for a good game. You hit the nail on the head with realism. Realism and real time real time real time lol is popular in a lot of ways. A lot of people want action. Sakaguchi said it best when Squaresoft almost went bankrupt and said I'm not very good at action games. I'm better at telling a story. What's funny is that Final Fantasy is becoming more action and less story in terms of impact. In someways an IP is much simpler than mechanics it's ideas. I personally didn't want to add that 4th option as I knew this is where some people would end up. With realism. That realism would destroy the IP of Final Fantasy. Just so were clear the realism were talking about is not the environment but the gameplay and combat to be more..real life fighting...whatever that means, non of it's real anyway, but you know what I mean. I didn't add that option because I don't want them to change the IP and add that realism. Thankfully I'm not alone. But, people still want it and don't care for Final Fantasy for what it was. I wish they would have never numbered it in the first place. Can you imagine Final Fantasy XXXVIII or higher. Since there is still only 3 options unless a Mod can change it to 4 people could just vote for number 3 as it's close enough. Final Fantasy might be better in their eyes as an action game.
i dont think that he said he wants more realistic games, i think he's saying games are inevitably getting more realistic, and it doesn't look right with a system that worked back when they were at their limits.
Yes this is what I meant (I'm a girl btw
). It's not that I want games to focus on being realistic, but it's something that is pretty inevitable for games these days if they want to stay ahead, and for Final Fantasy specifically, because it has always tried to look good. These days good tends to mean realistic. I love the way the battles used to be, but I can admit that with the way games are headed, with the realistic look and feel they try and do these days, those old battle styles would not work well. They can't stay in the past forever though, not if they want to keep make games that can be called great. It's not something I like or dislike, but it's something I can accept, because I do think change is good. For Final Fantasy, change has always been one of the defining features of the series. It's a shame because I loved the older battle systems, but I'm sure there are other battle systems I will love just as much. I don't think it needs to 'reboot' because it has never been defined as a tactical RPG series. Neither has every game been defined by the same gameplay. They used a certain style of battles before because those battle styles worked well for those games. They are changing that now because it would not work well for the new games. They are not changing their intellectual property because the Final Fantasy series as an intellectual property has never been defined by the battle system in each of them.
spoonyrogdrumps
Blue Mage
Yes this is what I meant (I'm a girl btw
I don't think it needs to 'reboot' because it has never been defined as a tactical RPG series. Neither has every game been defined by the same gameplay. They used a certain style of battles before because those battle styles worked well for those games. They are changing that now because it would not work well for the new games. They are not changing their intellectual property because the Final Fantasy series as an intellectual property has never been defined by the battle system in each of them.
It did it's own thing. It looked good because it was it's own thing. It is not inevitable nothing points to that. You don't know where games are going. Games head in many directions. Just because some statistic says there are young people that like mindless games doesn't mean everyone likes it. You are 2 women who are young giving opinions with a larger male fan-base who has played the series longer. I know a heck of a lot more than you and proved it. The only thing you two do is talk in circles. Yes it was defined as a tactical RPG. You've said the same thing before saying it's not defined as a tactical rpg. All RPG's during that time were mostly from the east and they were tactical in nature. Western and European influence brought to you the sandbox/action rpg. Just because it's different doesn't mean it's the future. What makes you the authority on what makes a game fun. You don't know what's fun until someone puts something in front of you. Your talking nonsense and most people disagree with you. Don't lie. You didn't even know how to define what an IP was until I told you and you still don't define it correctly. Turn-based combat has already evolved in other ways. The older games were harder for you, you thought they were boring as why isn't this battle going fast enough. Why do I keep dying. You don't have the patience for it or intelligence. Face it you don't want a tactical RPG. You want a large world sandbox type of game to play around in that tells a story. While I like those games that's not Final Fantasy and it's not even RPG. It's a sandbox game. Yes she does Razz she just likes trying to get my goat same as you. It can still work and more can be added too it it's just that you don't want it. You both contradict your statements. So it doesn't need a reboot......what were going to have Final Fantasy XXXVIII. The IP is defined by many things you just don't care what I say you just argue and make no sense. How would turn-based combat not work......how.....anything that you could come up with I can prove wrong. The truth is not that it doesn't work it's that this generation is obsessed with different genres and it doesn't want it to work. Again....I accept change. Naughty Dog is reintroducing Uncharted as a new IP. Watch and see what happens. If it does come out unless they scrap it and go with something else. Just because someone names something you believe in it.
Since the debate doesn't make any sense on your end and your goal now is to just talk in circles I think it's safe to say it's not going anywhere. Has you blatantly ignore fact
I was going to reply to you and give you logical reasons to refute your illogical points but then I saw this.
I don't see how my gender has anything to do with the matter. I happen to be studying in the games industry and will eventually be helping create these games you think you know so much more about. My being a female and you being a male does not mean you know a heck of a lot more than me.
You've proved nothing. Proof is evidence, so far you've given nothing but your own opinions, the same as most others on this site. You say it was defined as a tactical RPG, where's your source for that, you know, your so called proof? If you want to know what IP really means then check the dictionary. It's a legal term that really has nothing to do with the way you've been using it. Where's this proof you've apparently provided that turn based battle systems work well in new games where everything else is realistic? It doesn't take a genius to work out that standing and waiting for your turn when you're fighting a dangerous enemy is the exact opposite of realistic. Oh but I forgot, you're a man and I'm a woman so clearly I can't know what I'm talking about.
I think it's probably clear to most people reading whose arguments make sense and whose don't.
Everything changes. All media needs to evolve so that the audience remains interested. If we were to get the same, recycled plot lines and game mechanics, I doubt as many people would buy the game.Even the likes of sport genre games are involved with this: the progress which games such as FIFA make with each installment goes beyond updating stats and players on a team. Now, most people by these new games FOR the updated stats and the changes that always happen with their favourite team. It's one of those genres that will generally sell whether the item is a turd or a gemstone.
Obviously, a RPG series would need even more innovation and change to hold interest. A new plot line, character models, new villains. New gameplay mechanics, a "gimmick" that separates it from the pack. Huge changes compared to a sports game. A lot of the times, these changes will go against the traditional aspects of a series. This is normal. Why would anyone buy your product if there's nothing new to offer them in it? Why do you think this franchise is as successful as it is? The change between games opens it up to an audience that can pick 'n' mix their favourite games and characters.One of the main points of Final Fantasy is the fact that the series can change so drastically with each new installment.
Final Fantasy is one of the franchises most well known for their creativity and lack of hesitation to change the series. The impact of this on the "Intellectual property" of the series(Which primarily has to do with the likes of trademarks and copyright issues) would probably be little. The only aspect that would be affected by this is that it's a new installment under the franchise. I highly doubt that the patent for "Final Fantasy" has a requirement that it include certain aspects from the series.
Now, whether you consider these games Final Fantasy or not, under the eyes of copyright laws they ARE a part of the franchise. Square Enix could bring out a series of Shooters of the same ilk as Call Of Duty and give them the name "Final Fantasy", and I doubt there'd be much to stop them, other than the abysmal sales.
Of course there's hope. The employees of SE can still show innovation in their products. XIII's mechanic's- while a bit... shit- are still somewhat innovative and different. You can't deny they went for a newer system; it just didn't work out for them. Plot wise, they can't ALL be good eggs when it comes to characters and dramatic story arcs... They should simply learn from the experience and strive to improve the franchise as a whole. Now, if XV bottles it and ends up being cow manure, I think that the situation will need a revision. Anyway, that's just my opinion on the matter
@spoonyrogdrumps: The fact that you mention personal issues about the person you're debating against(In other threads, you refer to age. In this one, you talk about gender as well) is silly and illogical. There's no link between whether someone's opinion is viable or not depending on their gender. Their age might have an influence on certain aspects of life, but definitely not on video games. The fact someone gets angry or annoyed by a debate doesn't mean you're right, they're wrong or vice versa. I doubt either of these two people are trying to "get on your goat" and annoy you. They're expressing their opinions, they contrast to yours. I don't think mentioning either of those two aspects with change the validity of the points they make.
Obviously, a RPG series would need even more innovation and change to hold interest. A new plot line, character models, new villains. New gameplay mechanics, a "gimmick" that separates it from the pack. Huge changes compared to a sports game. A lot of the times, these changes will go against the traditional aspects of a series. This is normal. Why would anyone buy your product if there's nothing new to offer them in it? Why do you think this franchise is as successful as it is? The change between games opens it up to an audience that can pick 'n' mix their favourite games and characters.One of the main points of Final Fantasy is the fact that the series can change so drastically with each new installment.
Final Fantasy is one of the franchises most well known for their creativity and lack of hesitation to change the series. The impact of this on the "Intellectual property" of the series(Which primarily has to do with the likes of trademarks and copyright issues) would probably be little. The only aspect that would be affected by this is that it's a new installment under the franchise. I highly doubt that the patent for "Final Fantasy" has a requirement that it include certain aspects from the series.
Now, whether you consider these games Final Fantasy or not, under the eyes of copyright laws they ARE a part of the franchise. Square Enix could bring out a series of Shooters of the same ilk as Call Of Duty and give them the name "Final Fantasy", and I doubt there'd be much to stop them, other than the abysmal sales.
Of course there's hope. The employees of SE can still show innovation in their products. XIII's mechanic's- while a bit... shit- are still somewhat innovative and different. You can't deny they went for a newer system; it just didn't work out for them. Plot wise, they can't ALL be good eggs when it comes to characters and dramatic story arcs... They should simply learn from the experience and strive to improve the franchise as a whole. Now, if XV bottles it and ends up being cow manure, I think that the situation will need a revision. Anyway, that's just my opinion on the matter
@spoonyrogdrumps: The fact that you mention personal issues about the person you're debating against(In other threads, you refer to age. In this one, you talk about gender as well) is silly and illogical. There's no link between whether someone's opinion is viable or not depending on their gender. Their age might have an influence on certain aspects of life, but definitely not on video games. The fact someone gets angry or annoyed by a debate doesn't mean you're right, they're wrong or vice versa. I doubt either of these two people are trying to "get on your goat" and annoy you. They're expressing their opinions, they contrast to yours. I don't think mentioning either of those two aspects with change the validity of the points they make.
spoonyrogdrumps
Blue Mage
My source is it's game design. HP, MP, Strength, Stamina, Willpower, Intelligence, even the Luck stat. The fact that you have to time your attacks those are tactical maneuvers. Metal Gear Solid is Tactical espionage action. There are lots of games that are tactical. Tactical is a general term. Many articles have been written about the JRPG vs European and Western. The JRPG is trying to be like everyone else but it doesn't work...why because they are not supposed to be like everyone else. There's no individuality that way. Nothing to set it apart. Just because you are studying doesn't mean anything. Psychology, Literature, Writing, Business Management, Law. There's a lot to know. A lot of people want to do it but never end up being successful. You want to help create games then that people don't want to play. Good luck. Don't make any RPG's though. It's not surprising why you have that view about action. Europe feeds it to you because that's what is done there. Sandbox style action RPG's. By saying it's the future when people are against you doesn't make sense as everyone has their own taste. If there is anything that anyone doesn't like it's an arrogant programmer or someone studying to work in the game industry that thinks they know what people want. For shame. IP is a legal term in a sense yest but the Video Game Industry uses it as something else but it's a little similar. When I talk about IP I expound on more than just a clear cut definition because the video game industry isn't clear cut. What I expound on is the traits that popular IP's carry. When did I ever say that they had to stay still. I never said that. I'm sorry it got to heated. That is partly my fault. I've been in business a long time. Never assume that you know. School is just the beginning. You'll learn and I wish you luck.
spoonyrogdrumps
Blue Mage
For crying out loud I never said I was against change I'm just saying re-boot the franchise why is that so hard to grasp.
So nobody is right and we don't move anywhere.. got it
You also realize that they keep changing because people keep buying which is also visa verse. They may not be trying to get my goat. That might just be me because I have a cynical nature. You get that way sometimes when you run a business work a lot and are generally older. It's not that she's a girl for what she's studying. It's not illogical it's statistics. The only way for Square to successfully keep Final Fantasy around is by re-booting the franchise. People are not going to buy Final Fantasy XXXVIII. My nephew is 16 and agrees with me.
I never said anything about wanting recycled plot lines or mechanics. I-X isn't recycled. The change from I-X was fine. The change after that was crap. Japan operates differently then Europe and the West. Again I was expounding on traits of IP's The reason why they didn't change too much for so long is because it was selling and working for several...several generations of gamers. Not just one typical generation on one system. Take Devil May Cry. 4 games then a re-boot. They are using the name Final Fantasy to sell titles. If XIII wasn't called Final Fantasy an named a different IP I guarantee you I wouldn't have sold nearly as much as it did which isn't a lot.
I didn't say my studying meant anything. You made an assumption that because I'm a young girl I must know less about games than you, when you really know nothing about me other than that. On top of that you actually tried to tell me what I like and what I don't, when I think you'll find I know far better about my own preferences than you do. You called me a liar for saying I love the old turn based battle systems. I do love them, and I prefer them to many new battle styles. But the fact is that when it comes to realism, turn based is not going to work, because it's very concept - of taking turns in battle - is the opposite of realistic. People like seeing games that look real, that is the truth, and as long as that is important to gamers, it is important to game makers. What you describe as being 'tactical' fits pretty much every RPG ever made, including all the Final Fantasy games and other action RPGs. Kingdom Hearts for example, has all those 'tactical' traits you listed, but it is not a tactical RPG, it is an action RPG. There are different sub-genres of RPG, and tactical is one of them. Final Fantasy is not in that sub-genre, it is simply in the RPG genre. Final Fantasy Tactics is a tactical RPG, and it is not part of the main FF titles. That alone should tell you that the main series of Final Fantasy is not defined by being tactical RPGs.
spoonyrogdrumps
Blue Mage
I didn't say you were a liar for liking turn-based. I'm basically saying your not being truthful to either what you feel, or what you know based on your experiences, or what your taught. You talk in circles when you need to be more direct. You did say your education meant something. Just by telling me your studying you came off as if you somehow know, and I don't, which psychologically you do mean something subconsciously without even saying you do. You know less about Final Fantasy as a whole over the many systems it's on I never implied that you don't know anything even about games. Your good at talking in circles. You said what you liked I didn't say it for you. The game was not meant to be realistic in the sense your talking about. It can and my guess is they will attempt to milk it. If they want to make it realistic they should re-boot it. They don't though because they will make money by dragging out numbering it more because people will buy it. People won't buy it if it's not good. Let me put it this way. It might help you understand me. As a consumer I'm against what a game creator says or thinks that I want what they say or anyone says. As a business man I'm their best pal and I'm ruthless. What is realism in gaming and how do you define it. Good games are innovative, challenging, spark interest and challenge the mind. And as a business man good games are what I say they are as I'm speaking metaphorically. I run a business I say what is good for my company. Your in school. When you make it in the gaming industry you'll have some leverage but right now you don't. Yes they like to see games that look real but it's not as clear cut and dry as your saying. Kingdom Hearts is a good game series and Nomura did good with it. It has some tactical parts but it's more action. It's no where near the depth of Final Fantasy or other RPG's. It's also a kids game. Final Fantasy has a different target age group. Well it's tried to target many things. Who ever taught you what tactical in video games means let alone the English language was way off. Final Fantasy has been known for years as a JRPG more specifically a turn-based jrpg that is tactical in nature more so than Kingdom Hearts that is until XV comes out. I mean you already see the resemblance in the trailers and articles. They are making it so you only control one person at a time. I'm not saying it would be bad I'm just saying what they are doing.
I told you I was studying gaming because you made the false assumption that because I'm young and female I don't know anything about games or FF games. That assertion is totally baseless and in fact false. So is the accusation that I talk in circles. I have made my points completely clear. You have been going back and forth changing your statements whenever someone argues your point. When I first mentioned that FF was not a tactical RPG franchise you said I was right. Then you turn around and say I'm wrong and you have proof. That is going in circles, I haven't been doing that. My points have all been direct and they have all been consistent.
I specifically said that I loved the old turn based battles and you specifically replied saying I was lying about it. So don't say you didn't try to tell me what I like and what I don't, because it's written plainly for everyone to see a couple of posts before this one. If you really want me to quote you I will.
Realism is looking and feeling real. Standing by and waiting your turn when you're in battle with an enemy does not look or feel real. I don't know how many times I have to say this, and you keep ignoring this basic fact. At least give me a reason why you think I'm wrong.
I'm not the one making 'clear cut and dry' statements. You are the one saying that if something doesn't have A, B and C then it is not and cannot be a Final Fantasy game. Well the designers disagree with you, and it's their game. The past Final Fantasies disagree with you too, and they're the ones you are saying are 'true' Final Fantasies.
And the very definition of tactical RPG, RPG and action RPG disagrees with you as well. All RPG games have tactical elements in them, that does not mean they fall into the sub-genre of tactical RPG. As I told you with Kingdom Hearts, which is defined as an Action RPG, yet you tied to say a moment ago that it has to be a tactical RPG because it's got HP and MP and other stats. No, that does not make it a tactical RPG. Final Fantasy Tactics is a tactical RPG.
spoonyrogdrumps
Blue Mage
That false assumption is your opinion and yours alone. And who says that assertion is baseless. I am very educated. And what this comes down to is a you say I say. Haha I never said it wasn't tactical. Go back and read for yourself. I always said that I-X were tactical in nature in this thread as well as the other one. I'm still waiting for you to make a point that makes sense. I go back and forth to remind you because you can't keep up. I don't need to prove my-self I already have. I don't need to prove myself to thousands of others. They are on my side not yours about this topic. I didn't say you lied about not liking the turn-based system. I said you lied about your feelings and opinions. You withheld what you really want to say. When you graduate people will tell you what's real and you'll do your job. Period. You think to much of yourself. I'm not saying if it doesn't have A, B, or C then it can't be Final Fantasy. I'm saying that it shouldn't as it's stands on it's current IP. Now the business side of me says change is good let's milk it but a smart business man knows when to take. You never betray your customers outright ever. You don't win in the long run. I'm not saying Square can't get away with it for a while but their numbers are hurting and if they don't play their cards right they could bust. Your not hearing me I agree with the devs yet I disagree. I act and think like an owner it's in my blood can't help it sometimes.
I'll try to help with my reasoning. I'm sorry if I'm so cynical.
It's not so much as you be wrong as your not right. While you make points that Final Fantasy can do this, and can do that... it can... and part of me as a consumer and a business man goes against every everything a company does as they are there to make money. Some people found a talent for it and got into the business early. I have a bachelors in business admin, a masters in history and a doctoral in psyc. Numbered series have trends in books, movies, and even video games. mass market acceptance is in three's unless something is really good like Final Fantasy for instance. You have trilogy books, movies, etc. A lot of it is statistics in the US and foreign markets. In short Final Fantasy will change. For the better that's mostly unknown. I look at statistically with Square Enix has done with the franchise and while they use the Final Fantasy name to create these hit or misses it's taking advantage of the consumer because they way their odds on who will by something on name alone. As a business man I say good thinking. As a consumer is say things shouldn't be said on here. It is there company they can do whatever they want. Your opinions will change. If I had the consumers best interest in mind I would build a model or demo of the franchise under a new IP with the same mechanics while building upon them and do the same with a more action oriented model. I'd test market them privately and realease the one that favored. That very well may be your future, but if they don't do away with numbering them with the idea that they will have a XXXVIII someday isn't smart. It might make sense in Asian cultures but here it doesn't. It isn't grammatically or numerically correct or proper to do that in Literature, Novels, Movies. as a series. Not only that but it's a video game and it's not an exception to the rule. Regardless they will change it and mine as well as many others final fantasy while disappear
I'll try to help with my reasoning. I'm sorry if I'm so cynical.
It's not so much as you be wrong as your not right. While you make points that Final Fantasy can do this, and can do that... it can... and part of me as a consumer and a business man goes against every everything a company does as they are there to make money. Some people found a talent for it and got into the business early. I have a bachelors in business admin, a masters in history and a doctoral in psyc. Numbered series have trends in books, movies, and even video games. mass market acceptance is in three's unless something is really good like Final Fantasy for instance. You have trilogy books, movies, etc. A lot of it is statistics in the US and foreign markets. In short Final Fantasy will change. For the better that's mostly unknown. I look at statistically with Square Enix has done with the franchise and while they use the Final Fantasy name to create these hit or misses it's taking advantage of the consumer because they way their odds on who will by something on name alone. As a business man I say good thinking. As a consumer is say things shouldn't be said on here. It is there company they can do whatever they want. Your opinions will change. If I had the consumers best interest in mind I would build a model or demo of the franchise under a new IP with the same mechanics while building upon them and do the same with a more action oriented model. I'd test market them privately and realease the one that favored. That very well may be your future, but if they don't do away with numbering them with the idea that they will have a XXXVIII someday isn't smart. It might make sense in Asian cultures but here it doesn't. It isn't grammatically or numerically correct or proper to do that in Literature, Novels, Movies. as a series. Not only that but it's a video game and it's not an exception to the rule. Regardless they will change it and mine as well as many others final fantasy while disappear
It's baseless because the only thing you know about me and the only thing you used to form that opinion was my age and gender. Those are not factors in whether or not someone knows about games. Hence – baseless assumptions. It does not come down to you say, I say because you are the only one of us making claims that you have superior knowledge about something when you have no idea about me. You can't tell me what my feelings and opinions are, you don't know me better than I know myself and to try and tell me how I feel or what I like is just silly. How do I think too much of myself? I am not the one making any claims here about my knowledge or anything, you are. I am merely disagreeing with your claims about me. You don't know anything about me.
I don't see anybody else here on your side Spoony I'm sorry to say. I had no problem debating with you until you started getting all high and mighty because of your age and gender, neither of which are at all relevant to the topic in any way.
As for your last paragraph, now you seem to be complaining that Final Fantasy was ever made a series in the first place because it's constantly changing. Well that's your opinion, but your opinion is not fact, you can't say you are right and I am wrong when we are having a discussion about our opinions. I think it was very clever of them to make a series that is constantly changing and evolving, and that it was good for fans as well as the company. Opinions are not right or wrong, they are just different. I would have loved to continue this discussion with you if you hadn't headed down the route of personal jabs and baseless insults because of my age and gender. That has nothing to do with the topic and really only showed that you can't discuss this in a reasonable way. I brought up arguments against your points over and over and again and your way of dealing with that was to try and say that I don't know my own feelings and that I don't know what I'm talking about because I'm a young girl. There is no way to have a rational discussion with you when that's your way of thinking.
spoonyrogdrumps
So let me see if I got what you are saying correctly...
You want them to "reboot" the series, kinda start a fresh slate on it, because you feel like the series has almost died? (Like they did with Tomb Raider recently?)
My question is what is the point? When a series like Tomb Raider gets a reboot, it usually means changing the main character, the plots, and sometimes the world. Final Fantasy has never really been the same, so it is almost like every number is a reboot in a way. A whole new story, a whole new timeline, a whole new world. Why would you start all over with one when really none of the main games relate at all?
So let me see if I got what you are saying correctly...
You want them to "reboot" the series, kinda start a fresh slate on it, because you feel like the series has almost died? (Like they did with Tomb Raider recently?)
My question is what is the point? When a series like Tomb Raider gets a reboot, it usually means changing the main character, the plots, and sometimes the world. Final Fantasy has never really been the same, so it is almost like every number is a reboot in a way. A whole new story, a whole new timeline, a whole new world. Why would you start all over with one when really none of the main games relate at all?
Last edited:
spoonyrogdrumps
Blue Mage
Almost die...it did die! Your getting closer. Just think outside the box a little more. I was in a conversation with someone and he said it best. Square uses the franchise, the name, as a testing for guinea pigs and as a cash cow. They will keep doing this until they can't make money off of it. I don't need people to back me up. If I needed backing up people might be more inclined to chime in. True in hindsight Final Fantasy was different in certain ways from game to game but the core mechanics, the game-play, and structure of the franchise were the same until X where things started changing, not just the franchise but the company as well, and that's when the traits of the IP changed so even though it's legally the same IP it's not. It's not about you Sheech, any more than it's about Razz, or me or anyone one person. Your being too close minded and too sensitive like it's a personal attack against your age and gender. I'm not saying I want them to re-boot it. Most people will say they should just stop or do a re-boot entirely and let the chips fall where they may.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 21, 2008
- Messages
- 768
- Age
- 35
- Location
- New Gridania
- Gil
- 0
- FFXIV
- Prenneaux Grauhemoix
- FFXIV Server
- Lamia
After X everything just went to shit for me. Everything just seemed to change and its not change that I'm a fan of. The stories don't draw me in, the characters I could really give 2 shits less about, and I dont like the battle system. I miss the "Classic" combat where you actually controlled more than 1 character and the strategy behind it. The gameplay has severely been lacking for along ass time and truthfully I'm just not excited to play FF games anymore. Unless they're the classics of course.
I'll take retro graphics with amazing gameplay and likeable characters over shit gameplay and OMG graphics any day of the week.
I'll take retro graphics with amazing gameplay and likeable characters over shit gameplay and OMG graphics any day of the week.
Again how would a reboot work? Each game is very unique in its own way. A reboot just never makes sense at all. If it was a series where it followed one character, then they wanted to do a whole new character, then a reboot would makes sense... but Final Fantasy each number is different.
Also Final Fantasy was always a test dummy for many things. Final Fantasy two, you had the system where you had to use weapons to level up certain weapons, or get attacked to level up your hp, use magic to level up your magic... etc.
First Final Fantasy was like FFXII in some ways. In order to use magic you actually had to purchase it. Go to a shop and purchase it.
Final Fantasy IV, was the first game where they actually had set classes, and introduced the ATB formula.
Final Fantasy V had you leveling up your "job" and your actual level.
Final Fantasy VI had the espers that gave you certain boosts at every level, and you got to learn magic through them.
Final Fantasy VII had you be able to change out your magic/abilities with the Materia.
Final Fantasy VIII had you level up with the GF system, and drawing magic instead of simply learning or buying it.
Final Fantasy IX had it so your weapons/armor gave you abilities and you could learn it if you kept the weapons/armor equipped long enough.
and FFX had the Sphere system and Turnbase, but with a twist of being able to attack faster depending on speed or abilities you used (haste or slow.)
So each Final Fantasy did something that no other Final Fantasy ever did before that. Which is why I have enjoyed the series so much, even today, and also why each Final Fantasy is a Final Fantasy, even if you don't like it.
spoonyrogdrumps
Blue Mage
I get what your saying, but the core IP is what I'm getting at, which I've mentioned here already and in your thread "true" "real"
You are listing surface IP's where the core IP's you haven't mentioned (again not the legality but traits and mechanics. What I am saying is much simpler than what your listing.)
There are Final Fantasys that I like more than others yes but that's everyone.
Final Fantasy is that anomaly franchise that breaks the rules. It creates mechanics within it's core mechanics.
You list a lot of mechanics. I'm saying look at the bigger picture of it's core mechanics which I've listed in your thread.
Without the definition of what 'IP' is, this post makes no sense to me. Would you please clarify?