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

Forums - Gaming - Final Fantasy: Officialy burnt out?

 

Final Fantasy: Officialy burnt out?

Yes 130 47.62%
 
No 94 34.43%
 
GIVE DEM A CHANCE! 40 14.65%
 
Not an FPS so I don't care :-) 9 3.30%
 
Total:273
Zkuq on 29 January 2011

The article has a point - there's too many games coming out at any given time. However, for the main series and maybe closest spin-offs/sequels, there is yet hope. Versus XIII seems genuinely interesting, especially given how it seems to be made by an actual person (well, people really) instead of under the top executives' influence. And XIII-2... Well, I think it's going to be pretty hard to go down or even stay at the same level - not going to happen with all the criticizing that's been going on since XIII was released. I think the direction's got to be up.

As for the spin-offs, I don't really care. I don't think they really make other games worse but they certainly do make them seem less meaningful, less important. They make the potentially good and interesting games seem 'just another FF'.

Anyway, I think they should be given a chance. Games in the main series haven't been that bad: X got very high praise, even though its linearity put off some of the old fans. Still, it was loved a lot. XII, while different, wasn't a bad game. And XIII definitely went into the wrong direction but it's impossible to say calling it bad is the truth, because it simply divided us, the gamers. Some liked it, some didn't. Personally I loved it but I can see why many didn't (in fact, I'm pretty surprised I liked it myself). So only the last two games can be called something that's not masterpiece, and even then, XII was pretty solid. I'd say there's definitely hope.



Around the Network
Boutros on 29 January 2011
Conegamer said:
Boutros said:

People have always had the wrong expectations for the franchise.

Final Fantasy is for Square-Enix what Mario is for Nintendo.

It's not because I've played (so-so) games like Mario Party 8, Super Paper Mario or Mario Strikers that I'm going to doom the franchise to die.

Final Fantasy is just a name. Just a tag to help sell the game.

Every new Final Fantasy is a new game, a new experience. They aren't related one another.

I like the way you're thinking here. However, due to posting twice in a row before, I shall wait before I post this comment. So here's a video of FF13-2 in case you haven't seen it:

So yeah. Looks pretty awesome. But your point about Final Fantasy to Mario is one I never really thought of before. However, there hasn't been a "mainline" Mario game which has disappointed me yet, but FF11, 13 and 9 did just that. I haven't played FF14 enough yet to make my opinion about it

I've sure seen it LOL

 

Super Mario Sunshine supposedly disappointed many (not me though as I loved that game). Next thing you know they come up with Galaxy which is rated the second best game of all time.

That's the thing with huge franchises. Developers allow themselves to take more risks as they know the franchise is well implanted and it would take more than a couple of fails to change its status.

That's why I'm not even worried a bit about Final Fantasy. I trust they know what they're doing and the future looks bright for the series so all's cool.



Conegamer on 29 January 2011
OneTwoThree said:

I read the article earlier today, and instantly agreed. But he asks one good question:

"Maybe it was always like that?"

I hardly ever played any SE games, my personal disgust with their style mostly emanated from seeing their cheesy trailers/artworks/game names/characters/cosplayers. Recently I decided to give them a chance, starting with a few classics - maybe their quality just came down over the years? So I bought Chrono Trigger and FFIV for the DS. While Chrono Trigger started out great, the dreadful turn based combat spoiled the fun for me, and after a few too many plot/location twists, it felt arbitrary.

With FFIV it was much worse. The story was the most obvious slice of cheese I'd ever read. Noone who dies is ever dead, friend or foe. Talking holy chrystals. Babyfaced characters are supposed to be kings and queens. The world map looks like it was taken straight from the Chrono Trigger construction set (or vice versa)! It's literally the same! And the turn based combat... really, I'll never understand what could be fun about that. It's basically: 

# enter cave

# random encounter 

# laser barrage laser barrage laser barrage bad breath bad breath bad breath BOO YOU'RE DEAD

# the party has fallen

# ok guess I wasn't supposed to come here just yet...

Nothing ever gets an explanation. Is "Laser Barrage" a magical attack, or a physical? "Object 199"? How am I supposed to know what to do? The healing staff "heals the target". OK. But when I hit my teammate over the head with it, he get's hurt - and kills me with a counterattack? Does "Reflect" block Eidolons? Is that kind of stuff common knowledge in Japan?

Why am I writing this? Because I realized: I don't hate what Square has become, I would have always hated their games. I hate RPGs. It's a cheap way of game design to me, to the point that I wonder what could be so hard about churning them out. They copy all the assets, rearrange them, make up a ludicrous story and invent some new BOO YOU'RE DEAD attacks to piss you off. 

To each their own. I know now that I shouldn't comment on Square's supposed downfall, because I would have hated their games in 1991 already. Oh and don't be to hard on me, at least I spent 80 hours trying. 

FFIV, Object 199 is a 1-hit KO at any level

However, that's a good point, but surely any game can be catergorised the same way? Let's take Mario, for example:

  • Start
  • Run from left to right (or, if you're lucky, up!)
  • Restart about 70 times
  • YOU'RE WINNER!
So maybe it's personal taste. Some people dislike Final Fantasy, some people dislike Mario, some dislike racers, shooters, action, adventure, puzzle...
Everyone has a different opinion, and that's a good thing. It's alright you hate RPG's, but at least you tried. Most people wouldn't do that...


 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

Conegamer on 29 January 2011
Boutros said:
Conegamer said:
Boutros said:

People have always had the wrong expectations for the franchise.

Final Fantasy is for Square-Enix what Mario is for Nintendo.

It's not because I've played (so-so) games like Mario Party 8, Super Paper Mario or Mario Strikers that I'm going to doom the franchise to die.

Final Fantasy is just a name. Just a tag to help sell the game.

Every new Final Fantasy is a new game, a new experience. They aren't related one another.

I like the way you're thinking here. However, due to posting twice in a row before, I shall wait before I post this comment. So here's a video of FF13-2 in case you haven't seen it:

So yeah. Looks pretty awesome. But your point about Final Fantasy to Mario is one I never really thought of before. However, there hasn't been a "mainline" Mario game which has disappointed me yet, but FF11, 13 and 9 did just that. I haven't played FF14 enough yet to make my opinion about it

I've sure seen it LOL

 

Super Mario Sunshine supposedly disappointed many (not me though as I loved that game). Next thing you know they come up with Galaxy which is rated the second best game of all time.

That's the thing with huge franchises. Developers allow themselves to take more risks as they know the franchise is well implanted and it would take more than a couple of fails to change its status.

That's why I'm not even worried a bit about Final Fantasy. I trust they know what they're doing and the future looks bright for the series so all's cool.

The video never appeared anyway

Also, I was waiting for you or someone to say sunshine. It was a great game. But not as good as Galaxy, as you say

Companies can bounce back. And I'm sure FF will. But they can't do it resting on what they've been doing for 10 or so years. Galaxy re-invented the platforming genre when it had pretty much died. For many, RPG's are dying. So Squeenix need to do a Galaxy and make sure that FF15 is the best game of all time. I know they can do it. I'm just waiting for it to happen...



 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

Pristine20 on 29 January 2011

FF dead? Then all JRPGs are dead. No way. When a main series FF sells less than 5 mil LTD, I will read and accept the article. Right now, it seems like a ploy for hits.



"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler

Around the Network
LordTheNightKnight on 29 January 2011
Conegamer said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
Conegamer said:
LordTheNightKnight said:


Um, the Wii shovelware doesn't sell well for the most part, neither did Ninjabread Man.

And it's the fact that the sales are frontloaded that is the proof most gamers dind't enjoy FFXIII (same with Other M and Heavy Rain), while gamers like games like Red Dead Redemption, Just Dance (it's not shovelware just because some people don't like it), and even Epic Mickey.

What about Carnival games? That's a million-seller no?

Also, I think the issue with FFXIII is there was sooooooooo much hype about it pre-launch, and when I sat down to play it, and there were no cities or NPC's or witty characters...well, that hurt me. Bearing in mind that I'd just come off re-playing FF12 in anticipation. It's an alright game. But it's not Final Fantasy.

 

@Wagram. I'm one of those people. FFVII is a good game, but nowhere near as good as many people want you to believe. I thought VIII, XII and III (maybe even X and IV) were better!


Carnival Games had legs. That means it has lasting appeal. Call of Duty games have legs even after their massive openings, which means they have appeal. Even some games that had small openings, like Madworld, The Conduit, and Chinatown Wars, kept selling after that and sold several times their openings. That meant they had some appeal beyong the hype (which was more to get a good opening, not to get sustained sales).

All 3 of those games needed better sales

Also, I suppose I see your point. But has there ever been a game which has just...not sold after its first month? I know Tales of Graces didn't, but that was a different matter...


1. They didn't have the appeal to sell better. Madworld is part of a genre that hasn't been big since the arcade days (and has an art style that is far too niche). I could say The Conduit suffered from poor word of mouth, but it had legs so the word of mouth wasn't that bad. Therefore its poor opening was likely due to some mixture of looking uninteresting and a lack of hit FPS on the Wii to begin with. Chinatown Wars had a stupid marketing campaign, where the forumla of just showing the gameplay and the mayhem was dropped in favor of ads that made it look like some visual novel spinoff.

2. Few games stop selling altogether after the first several weeks. It's whether the sales stay appreciably high after the opening week.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

OneTwoThree on 29 January 2011
Conegamer said:
OneTwoThree said:

I read the article earlier today, and instantly agreed. But he asks one good question:

"Maybe it was always like that?"

I hardly ever played any SE games, my personal disgust with their style mostly emanated from seeing their cheesy trailers/artworks/game names/characters/cosplayers. Recently I decided to give them a chance, starting with a few classics - maybe their quality just came down over the years? So I bought Chrono Trigger and FFIV for the DS. While Chrono Trigger started out great, the dreadful turn based combat spoiled the fun for me, and after a few too many plot/location twists, it felt arbitrary.

With FFIV it was much worse. The story was the most obvious slice of cheese I'd ever read. Noone who dies is ever dead, friend or foe. Talking holy chrystals. Babyfaced characters are supposed to be kings and queens. The world map looks like it was taken straight from the Chrono Trigger construction set (or vice versa)! It's literally the same! And the turn based combat... really, I'll never understand what could be fun about that. It's basically: 

# enter cave

# random encounter 

# laser barrage laser barrage laser barrage bad breath bad breath bad breath BOO YOU'RE DEAD

# the party has fallen

# ok guess I wasn't supposed to come here just yet...

Nothing ever gets an explanation. Is "Laser Barrage" a magical attack, or a physical? "Object 199"? How am I supposed to know what to do? The healing staff "heals the target". OK. But when I hit my teammate over the head with it, he get's hurt - and kills me with a counterattack? Does "Reflect" block Eidolons? Is that kind of stuff common knowledge in Japan?

Why am I writing this? Because I realized: I don't hate what Square has become, I would have always hated their games. I hate RPGs. It's a cheap way of game design to me, to the point that I wonder what could be so hard about churning them out. They copy all the assets, rearrange them, make up a ludicrous story and invent some new BOO YOU'RE DEAD attacks to piss you off. 

To each their own. I know now that I shouldn't comment on Square's supposed downfall, because I would have hated their games in 1991 already. Oh and don't be to hard on me, at least I spent 80 hours trying. 

FFIV, Object 199 is a 1-hit KO at any level

However, that's a good point, but surely any game can be catergorised the same way? Let's take Mario, for example:

 

  • Start
  • Run from left to right (or, if you're lucky, up!)
  • Restart about 70 times
  • YOU'RE WINNER!
So maybe it's personal taste. Some people dislike Final Fantasy, some people dislike Mario, some dislike racers, shooters, action, adventure, puzzle...
Everyone has a different opinion, and that's a good thing. It's alright you hate RPG's, but at least you tried. Most people wouldn't do that...

 

Yeah, I agree. I wouldn't blame JRPG fans for loving that stuff. I love Mario and Zelda. I just wanted to point out that you've always got 2 kinds of people commenting on stories like the Destructoid one: FF fans who are turned off by the recent games, and RPG haters (like me ;) ) who just jump at the chance of bashing a genre they dislike. 



Chibi.V.29 on 29 January 2011

me and 6 million others who got ff13 would beg to differ :D



Yeah i know my spelling sucks but im dysgraphic so live with it :3    

---------------------------------------------------Bets--------------------------------------------------

Conegamer - I say that the PS3 will beat the DS next week in Japan  (for hardware sales) Forfeit is control over others avatar for 1 week.

Wagram on 29 January 2011
Chibi.V.29 said:

me and 6 million others who got ff13 would beg to differ :D


^^ Can't wait for XIII-2!



Chibi.V.29 on 29 January 2011
Wagram said:
Chibi.V.29 said:

me and 6 million others who got ff13 would beg to differ :D


^^ Can't wait for XIII-2!


IKR!!!! :D



Yeah i know my spelling sucks but im dysgraphic so live with it :3    

---------------------------------------------------Bets--------------------------------------------------

Conegamer - I say that the PS3 will beat the DS next week in Japan  (for hardware sales) Forfeit is control over others avatar for 1 week.