| fatslob-:O said: It just makes sooo much more sense for Final Fantasy to be an ARPG when the battles are pretty upfront ... |
Why? I'm talking in the context of FF here, not ARPGs vs TRPGs here. I mean FF games, where turn based (even if some weren't great version of it) worked for this game since the 1980s. Why does it suddenly not work?
Taking your point, it also makes sense to me that Gears of War could be a Strategy RPG like X-com but they didn't make it like that and shock, it was still good. Yet, look at how well X-com Enemy Unknown did compare to X-com Declassified. That 'action' really did translate well, right?
| DerNebel said: I'm once again deeply impressed with the gaming community, the simple mentioning of gameplay changes to the remake of this 18 year old game makes people go and preemptively shit their pants so to speak. No wait and see approach here, no no, if it's not 100% like the game I played years ago on PS1 then it must be terrible. I loved it as a kid so it surely can't be improved with modern technology at all, no nostalgia goggles involved on my part here. |
Many of us want graphical improvements, being able to wander around an interactive Midgar or full 3d environments but in order for it to feel and be like FF7 it would have to have the same gameplay, else what is it? FF games are like FF games because of the gameplay, not the story. You could put that exact same story, characters and setting in any gameplay style but we didn't like it for that we liked it because it was FF. Would you play FF7 remake if it looked and played like Skyrim?
Hmm, pie.
