So the trolly criticisms are like:
OMAGAH, there is too many new things, and KH?
I've read only one legit criticism about FF7R, and it's about camera angles.
Still, 87 is very good.
Last edited by deskpro2k3 - on 06 April 2020So the trolly criticisms are like:
OMAGAH, there is too many new things, and KH?
I've read only one legit criticism about FF7R, and it's about camera angles.
Still, 87 is very good.
Last edited by deskpro2k3 - on 06 April 2020Oh that's really good, but not awesome. I was expecting 90+, maybe my expectations were just too high
pikashoe said:
Wow, that is on a whole other level of bad. Why would they do this. |
If those spoilers are true, then it is worst than anything I could have ever imagined in terms of ruining the cannon of the OG game.
deskpro2k3 said: So the trolly criticisms are like: Still, 87 is very good. |
The defensiveness
We were just saying that the story changes could be divisive among the fan base, not that they are inherently a bad thing.
SammyGiireal said:
If those spoilers are true, then it is worst than anything I could have ever imagined in terms of ruining the cannon of the OG game. |
It's definitely not a remaster. Good thing it says Remake on the box. I mean I'm ok with changes, it gives a fresh new experience, but to each their own I guess.
Link_Nines.XBC said:
The defensiveness We were just saying that the story changes could be divisive among the fan base, not that they are inherently a bad thing. |
The misunderstood.
I'm not talking about you. I'm talking about the reviews.
JWeinCom said:
A lot of this just seems besides the point. For the sake of argument, let's argue that this is the only way they could feasibly make FFVII on modern machines. So what? If the end result is that there's a lot of content that reviewers find uninteresting and/or a story that doesn't feel complete, then reviewers should score accordingly. If the end product is what the reviewer finds to be 8/10 in terms of quality, then that's what the score should be. Maybe 8/10 is as good as you could possibly do when trying to fit the source material into this era, but if so, then it is what it is. Reviewers are tasked with reviewing the game, not the developer's intentions. |
Hikku made a good point previously about a 1:1 scale full planet being nearly impossible to pull off with modern realistic visuals. It is something I have referenced on some of my JRPG reviews on this site. Back in the 90's square just followed the blueprint that 90 percent of the RPGs did in terms of designing its overworld. I also agree with the reviewers and Jwein that if they felt the game was incomplete or the story non sensical (and having read some spoilers I am even scared of playing the game now) because of Nomura's penchant for the non sensical then it deserves the low scores. I figured the game would rank in the 80's range for the same reason the abysmal FFXIII scored well; the incredible visuals. I thought they would screw the story telling up and it seems they did.
deskpro2k3 said:
It's definitely not a remaster. Good thing it says Remake on the box. I mean I'm ok with changes, it gives a fresh new experience, but to each their own I guess. |
The Original had one of the better plots ever told in the medium and genre. They didnt need to go Full Nomura on this one. The RE Remakes are perfect examples of remakes done right.
SammyGiireal said:
The Original had one of the better plots ever told in the medium and genre. They didnt need to go Full Nomura on this one. The RE Remakes are perfect examples of remakes done right. |
As I said, to each their own.
All I have to say is fuck this game. I just cancelled my preorder. How the hell SE thinks they can scam people by calling this a FF7 remake when it isn't is beyond me. Way to kill my years worth of hype SE.