But it is part of the main series. -.-
FFX-2 8/10
Fun Game great Combat, decent story.
FFXI - 7/19
Very fun, but I thought it was far to group dependent.
FF X-2 : A way to further be in the closet with your "Dress-up Doll" game obsession.
GETTIN' CHRONOCRUNK
IvorEvilen said:
Chocobo Racing is awesome... good memories... With Final Fantasy X-2, the game played out like a true Final Fantasy game, and was deserving of the "X-2", while the FFVII prequel and sequel are clearly spin-offs (have few similarities to the gameplay of the main series) and not really main entry titles... at least that is how I see it. Edit: Sorry about the two posts in a row :P... |
I'm still waiting for your answer IvorEvilen.
What is your definition of a true final fantasy game?
---
If anything, FF X-2 is a spin-off or even an add on. despite being the twelfth game released in sequence and being labeled "X-2", the game is not considered Final Fantasy XII, as it is a spin-off of a previous game, it have all the same zones. Squaresoft originally planned to make two spin off titles to Final Fantasy X. One was to be focused on Yuna, and the other on Rikku. However, that idea was scrapped, and both characters play a central role in this game.
Summon arent really summons, characters can... transform.
deskpro2k3 said:
I'm still waiting for your answer IvorEvilen. What is your definition of a true final fantasy game? --- If anything, FF X-2 is a spin-off or even an add on. despite being the twelfth game released in sequence and being labeled "X-2", the game is not considered Final Fantasy XII, as it is a spin-off of a previous game, it have all the same zones. Squaresoft originally planned to make two spin off titles to Final Fantasy X. One was to be focused on Yuna, and the other on Rikku. However, that idea was scrapped, and both characters play a central role in this game.
Summon arent really summons, characters can... transform like in ff13. |
Well, there are several factors in whether or not I would consider any game a true member of a series of games. First of all, for any game, there must be key gameplay similarities between, and in FF's case, things that each member of the series have in common.
There must be multiple person parties, each one fully and equally customizable by the player (otherwise they are just side characters), and potentially controllable (FFXIII still allows each character to be controlled). The game must be a single player adventure, but I'm not opposed to multiplayer features as a side. The games must have battle sequences (FFXII really pushes this... but I guess it can't be totally limited as it is Square's series). The game must also be an evolution of some sort of the game that came before it, and finally the game must primarily be an rpg, not an action rpg, adventure, or a shooter...
There must also be key things to connect each game, like characters, monsters, and names, examples being Biggs and Wedge, Cactuar, and Fire, respectively. Music has also been carried over, which adds to the unity.
There are other things that contribute too, but I am too tired right now to really go into detail. Spin-offs and FFXI take some, but not all of the elements, therefore they aren't really members of the main series, just spinoffs, and if Square wants to sell a game as something that it isn't, then it is only lying to the consumer, tricking them for their money, regardless of whether or not the consumer ends up liking the game. Sure, Square can dictate what FF is, it's their game, but what a game really is in comparison to the other games around it and what the company markets it as are two totally different things.
IvorEvilen said:
Well, there are several factors in whether or not I would consider any game a true member of a series of games. First of all, for any game, there must be key gameplay similarities between, and in FF's case, things that each member of the series have in common. There must be multiple person parties, each one fully and equally customizable by the player (otherwise they are just side characters), and potentially controllable (FFXIII still allows each character to be controlled). The game must be a single player adventure, but I'm not opposed to multiplayer features as a side. The games must have battle sequences (FFXII really pushes this... but I guess it can't be totally limited as it is Square's series). The game must also be an evolution of some sort of the game that came before it, and finally the game must primarily be an rpg, not an action rpg, adventure, or a shooter... There must also be key things to connect each game, like characters, monsters, and names, examples being Biggs and Wedge, Cactuar, and Fire, respectively. Music has also been carried over, which adds to the unity. There are other things that contribute too, but I am too tired right now to really go into detail. Spin-offs and FFXI take some, but not all of the elements, therefore they aren't really members of the main series, just spinoffs, and if Square wants to sell a game as something that it isn't, then it is only lying to the consumer, tricking them for their money, regardless of whether or not the consumer ends up liking the game. Sure, Square can dictate what FF is, it's their game, but what a game really is in comparison to the other games around it and what the company markets it as are two totally different things. |
Your definition holds some truth. But, most of it is your opinion sadly.