By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Why FFVII Remake Should Keep Turn-Based Battles

LivingMetal on 18 November 2015
animegaming said:
fatslob-:O said:

Then your not looking at the right place ... 

There's tons of turn based RPGs on the vita or 3DS and there's a good reason why they went out of style when it came to AAA console games and especially so with SE's luck with FFXIII ...


except i want one on my consoles and i wouldn't say they went outside while this is a turn base stragtey game i think it is a good example X-Com Enemy Unknow was a success and was consider to be one of the best games of 2012 and is getting a sequel all of which happened a couple years after the annoucement of a FPS X-Com game that got a backlash surrounding that it cause Enenmy Unknow to be greenlit but also put the FPS in development hell and when it finally released it was a weird hybird between a third person shooter and a stragtey game.

they only went out of style because publishers stopped making them like what happened AAA survival horror and 3D platforms and metroidvania cause publishers want to make massively overbudgeted games cause they wanted Call Of Duty numbers but those games couldn't justifed those stupidly and unncessary prices to make so they died off until kickstarter became a thing which shows that there still is a demanned.


For a guy who calls himself "animegaming" you haven't looked very hard have you?  Here's what you do...

1) Research all turn-based RPG on the VITA. See which of those games are PSTV compatible.

2) Research all turn-based RPG on the PSP.

3) Research all turn-based RPG on the PSOne.

4) Purchase a PSTV.  Play all researched games that appeal to you. (And there is plenty. No excuse) Enjoy.

There.  You'll have a console that plays turn-based RPGs as a console on your TV.  It's that simple.

Also, you can use the PSTV exploit that allow you to play all VITA games on the PSTV as long as you do not upgrade the firmware past 3.52.

It's not that hard at all.



Around the Network
Nem on 18 November 2015
vivster said:
Nem said:


That made no sense.

First, FF7 is not a new FF.

Second, are you saying RE remake isnt a remake because it didnt change the gameplay? I'm guessing you have a twisted concept of what a remake and a remaster are. Remake is the same game remade from scratch with new technology. Remaster is the same game with upresed textures and/or resolution and/or models with more poligons. In essence a remaster is a port, a remake isnt. Actually a remaster of FF7 is already coming to PS4 aswell. Its a port of the PC version.

The PC version of FFVII is a 1:1 port of the PSX version. And the one that's coming to PS4 is just a port of the port. All assets are unchanged. Nothing about it is even close to a remaster. 

A remaster would be replacing assets for more advanced ones but leaving the core gameplay untouched with maybe a few helpful additions. That would be your FFX remaster variety or for example the DQ remasters on mobile.

A remake is a completely new game that is based on an old game. So in that regard it is a new game. They will replace all assets. And in my mind there is no doubt that they will change up the gameplay, which might even go as far as revamping the materia system. That's what a remake is. They remake the game with current technology and acknowledging current trends like autosaves and a more action based combat system. They're absolutely free to do so.

Changing the combat will not suddenly make it something different than a remake.

The next step would be a reboot, which would be a complete reimagining of everything including the design and story.


I was sure they said they were increasing resolution. That would mean they would have to fill up parts of the screen not seen before, but well... if it isnt a remaster then its just a simple port.

You are right about a remake beeing completely new assets and complete new code based on the previous game. But in no way does it entail changing drastically what the original was. Because doing that would be making a re-imagining/reboot and not a remake. Like DmC for example. Its a re-imagining/reboot of Devil may Cry with new tech. Its definitly not a remake of the original game.

And theres also the fact that the most famous remake around is RE remake and that literally is the same gameplay with some optimisations and the same game with some added bits. Nothing was changed though. Its faithful to the original. Thats what FF7 needs to be and its what Square did with their remakes of FF3 and FF4 aswell.

If they change the gameplay, it wont be a remake at all.

I dont get how you sugest changing the materia system and the combat system to action and then say that isnt a new design.



calebjo on 18 November 2015

more than a decade waiting ffvii remake since the ps3 demo, so i will be happy just to see it before another decade past away



Imnus on 18 November 2015
LMU Uncle Alfred said:
Imnus said:
If it's Turn-Based it's gonna flop horribly, there's just no point anymore to have Turn-base on RPGs unless it's Tactical like Final Fantasy Tactics or XCOM.

Turn-based battle systems are incredible boring, repetitive and require no skill or intelligence to play. In theory you could create a turn-based RPG that's actually challenging, but they never do, they only challenge is mindless doing the same thing a thousand times over and over.

Now the real problem is that Square's ARPG (Kingdom Hearts) is also pretty awful, and in a world where Demon's Souls and Dragon's Dogma exist I'm not putting a 100 hours in a game with crappy battle mechanics, maybe I could put out with something as bad as The Witcher 3 if the rest of the game is great, but any worse than that and I'm out.

To be perfectly honest, the best FF games were not all that challenging (FF6-FF10), although really it's FF7-FF10 if you consider sales and critical acclaim, plus they were definitely easier than FF4-FF6 and FF12/FF13.  

Despite the crap FFXIII and FFXII get for instance, they're both pretty difficult games to beat.  Some people have an easier time than others, but they're definitely hard for FF games.

Not only are they not challenging, they're also not fun. Even the worst of button mashers is better than 95% of Turn-based RPGs, hell the Ys I or II which aren't even really button mashers, just run-mashers are more addictive and fun than most Turn-based RPG.

Turn-based RPGs aren't good because of their battle system, they're good in spite of it. Hell, the FF card side-games are more fun and require more thinking than pretty much any FF combat system, Blitzball was more engaging and challenging too, playing that first cup and the final against Luca Goers was way more fun than any battle in all FFX.

I think the only time Turn-based works is in Tactical RPGs, those are fun, engaging and challenging. Hell, I would give my left nut for an AAA RPG with XCOM mechanincs.

More importantly you just can't expect a Turn-based RPG to sell what's needed to cover the cost of AAA development today, so why beg for something that could kill a franchise or even a developer, Turn-based RPGs can ony successfully exist in games with much smaller budgets.

Now what I'm worried about is Square insistence of this half-assed battle systems they're trying to make, yes FFXIII (specially FFXIII-2) may be an improvement over their older pure Turn-based or ATB systems, still worse than virtually every decent action game. And they're not pleasing anyone with those, so why bother.

Hiku said:
Imnus said:
Turn-based battle systems are incredible boring, repetitive and require no skill or intelligence to play. In theory you could create a turn-based RPG that's actually challenging, but they never do, they only challenge is mindless doing the same thing a thousand times over and over.

Definitely a game that's challenging where you'll want to plan ahead. It's also very possible to ruin your end-game-build at the very start of the game.
Also, do you realise how many turn based rpgs there are that you've never played, or even heard of?

Thousands probably. Still I've played over a hundred easily and 90% of them have battle mechanics that are just awful, the rest are mostly decent with a few solid ones, not one I would say was actually good. And then the problem is that the decent ones are worse than any decent action game, also ARPGs have improved a lot this gen and the last, while Turn-based have probably gotten worse in comparision.



Insidb on 18 November 2015
Ultrashroomz said:
AbbathTheGrim said:
Cloudman said:
I wonder more how they will handle the death of Aerith. I wonder if there will be a point in using her if she is just going to die later o:

That spoiler man.

The game is more than a decade old.

Who doesn't know what happens at this point? xD

Tell it to the people who had "Titanic" ruined for them, you savage!



Around the Network
DakonBlackblade on 18 November 2015
Cloudman said:

I am kinda joking around, but I did legitly think about that. I have heard of some people being upset on using her, but then losing her and her exp or something. Or is it possible to transfer that exp to someone else? Grandia II did it x )


From a pratical point of view, woul you play her knowing you were just wasting effort ? Is one thing to do it when you dont know but if you do why would you waste your time on her ?



Cloudman on 18 November 2015
DakonBlackblade said:
Cloudman said:

I am kinda joking around, but I did legitly think about that. I have heard of some people being upset on using her, but then losing her and her exp or something. Or is it possible to transfer that exp to someone else? Grandia II did it x )


From a pratical point of view, woul you play her knowing you were just wasting effort ? Is one thing to do it when you dont know but if you do why would you waste your time on her ?

Honestly, I don't think I would. I would probably bench her for someone else.



 

              

Dance my pretties!

The Official Art Thread      -      The Official Manga Thread      -      The Official Starbound Thread

DakonBlackblade on 18 November 2015
Cloudman said:
DakonBlackblade said:

From a pratical point of view, woul you play her knowing you were just wasting effort ? Is one thing to do it when you dont know but if you do why would you waste your time on her ?

Honestly, I don't think I would. I would probably bench her for someone else.

As I said before I would only do it if there were some trophy associated to it, as I am a trophy hunter, not that I play games for the trophys only, but I have to get the platinum of every game I like, if I dont like the game I dont realy care but its hard for me not to liek a game, the ones I dislike the most i usualy think they are 7s and still have a lot of fun with them (Fallout 4 Im looking at you) and this is Final Fantasy, theres no way Ill think this is a 6 or lower.



MotherBound on 18 November 2015
Ultrashroomz said:
AbbathTheGrim said:
Cloudman said:
I wonder more how they will handle the death of Aerith. I wonder if there will be a point in using her if she is just going to die later o:

That spoiler man.

The game is more than a decade old.

Who doesn't know what happens at this point? xD


Came out in 97', so almost 20 years old actually!



Currently most hyped for: FFXV and Zelda U

DakonBlackblade on 18 November 2015
MotherBound said:
Ultrashroomz said:

The game is more than a decade old.

Who doesn't know what happens at this point? xD


Came out in 97', so almost 20 years old actually!


Holy crap man, I was 9 back them. The memorys...