IcaroRibeiro said:
This discussion is stupid in both sides
Nobody will buy a JRPG with 10 hours campaign, not even in the 80s JRPGs were that small
Padding and filler stuff are cheap to produce, that's why they exist in first place. Removing it will not make cheaper games, only shorter games and Yes people will complain it's a 70 USD game for 10 hours of gameplay
FF remake would never run in an acceptable state on Switch
Releasing low quality ports is a great way to make platform holders don't buy a game. Hogwarts Legacy sold at best 10% of its total on Switch at cost of almost one extra year of downscaling and optimization
FF is dead in Japan because Japanese people stopped liking the IP. For some reason they don't like action games, and photorealistic open worlds are not appealing to them either. With a generation that never played a FF game in their lifes and never touched a Playstation it's hard to grown a new fandom, that's why the fandom kept declining in every release
FF remake will be released on Switch 2 and guess what, it will sell poorly, very poorly. This is not Monster Hunter, it doesn't have a long term relationship with Nintendo, this is not an IP long associated with handhelds either. It's a home console game tied to Playstation brand. If it can't sell well on their fanbase historically is (Playstation) it won't sell well elsewhere. Period.
|
Cut scenes and voice acting isn't cheap. Cutting fluff does save money. In 7 remake biggs, wedge and Jessie aren't that important and could have had many cut scenes cut.
And nobody said 10 hours, 10 to 20 hours. Remake could easily be 20 hours and would have been better for it. And even 30 hours for a jrpg is fine. This 50 to 100 hours is nonsense.
Anybody who thinks longer is better is being silly. FF16 was heavily criticized for long stretches of boredom. Quality will always trump quantity.
Last edited by Chrkeller - on 12 March 2024
Essay Pro