| archer9234 said: I wouldn't count it as a real remake than. It's only a remake, on the story end. I'd call it reimagining. |
A "Remake" is to take something old and rebuild with today's technology and sensibilities.
The Fury said:
But we have a remaster on the PC and now PS4 (remaster is the same game, graphics and all, just pimped out a bit). It's strange that for some reason people don't understand we don't want a different game, we want the same game we remember but that looks f***ing amazing. Imagine FF13 graphics but with FF7 gameplay, you wander around towns, interact with people yet it still goes into battle arena with turn based combat. Or should i just point at Crash Trilogy and say SquEnix should take note? |
Crash Trilogy is a remaster, you ppl aren't getting it rigth at all, a remake, as the name implies, means to make the thing again. It is the same with movies, someone remakes something ppl go "they changed, this, they changed that" ye thats a remake for you, it rebuilds everyhting from the ground up. They could've kept the combat system if they wanted to but since they are building the game again from scratch as per what you do in a remake they decided to change it. Even the story could, and possibly will be, different. The original work is merelly a guideline on a remake.
I get it ppl wanted a hughe remaster with newly crafted character models and graphic design, not the simple HD one we got in the past, we are not getting it, were getting a remake. So to save yourself any future frustrations, when you read something is being remade, expect changes, a lot of them.
DakonBlackblade said:
Crash Trilogy is a remaster, you ppl aren't getting it rigth at all a remake, as the name implies, means to make the thing again. Its the same with movies, someone remakes something ppl go "they changed, this, they changed that" ye thats a remake for you, it rebuilds everyhting from the ground up. They couldve kept the combat system if they wanted to but since they ar ebuilding the game again from scratch as per what you do in a remake they decided to change it. Even the story could, and possibly will be, different. The original works is merelly a guideline on a remake. I get it ppl wanted a remaster, we ar enot getting it, were getting a remake. |
Very good.
For all you ppl who dont get it - Expect everything to changed. The fact that there are 5 more games in the FF7 world that the main game really doesnt connect too, you better believe the FF7R script will be rewritten to acknowledge that those games exist.
You wanted a remake, were getting one.
| archer9234 said: I wouldn't count it as a real remake than. It's only a remake, on the story end. I'd call it reimagining. |
That's what a remake is.
I disagree that FVII stood out for it's combat. If anything, personally, it was its most average thing. The characters, the story, the world, everything else made it stand out, not to mention being the first 3D FF.
I'm all for action-based combat. In this day and age, it just makes more sense. Just polish it up from FFXV (it will benefit from having less characters on screen too) and it'll be perfect. They tried Turn-based for modern FF games and we got the FFXIII trilogy (granted, the combat wasn't bad but felt very stiff to me)
"Trick shot? The trick is NOT to get shot." - Lucian
Hiku said:
I think turn based can feel stiff and unnatural, depending on the amount of emphasis placed on action and fidelity. |
If you want natural, go outside and play. I see what you're saying, but if every battle system were made the same way, what's the point? Both battle systems can be utilized effectively. It just seems that the newer FFs are more FF in brand than in spirit.
Nothing wrong with that. They want a more fluid game. Just make sure its a polished gameplay, unlike FFXV.
| Areym said: I disagree that FVII stood out for it's combat. If anything, personally, it was its most average thing. The characters, the story, the world, everything else made it stand out, not to mention being the first 3D FF. |
It's not so much that the combat system stood out. It's the fact that the combat system working with the other element you pointed out made it the RPG of its time. Otherwise, it would become a game of another genre which could have still been a good game. Just not an RPG we all remembered it as.
| DakonBlackblade said: We always knew this, but it seens to me its something similar to what we have in FFXIV maybe where you kinda have a turn its just that your turn comes up very often. The menus on the left of all screen shots do sugest that, since there are commands to choose there and an ATB gauge. Id rather it be command base, this notion that command base games aren't mainstream is stupid, the best selling FFs are command base and one of the most sucessfull titles to come out of Square in years has been Bravely Default, exactly because it does what the company is good at, the quality of Squares games declined once they decided they were too cool for turnbased.
You are getting things mixed up, remakes include changes, they basicaly use the original as a guideline and rework it from the ground up. What you wanted was a remaster if you did not want anything to change at all. |
RE1 on Gamecube was a remake. And that is the defination of what I expect from a remake. Any major changes, is a reimagining, or reboot. And not the proper use of the term. If RE1 removed the tank controls, or locked angles. I wouldn't count it as a remake.
Wasnt FF always mainstream? I thought Final Fantasy was very mainstream. At least with FF 7 it became mainstream. And FF7R is still a remake. No matter how much some people dislike the new gameplay mechanics.
And wasnt there a thread about the same subject started earlier?
Hunting Season is done...
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
