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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Final Fantasy VII Remake Review Thread - Current 88 Metacritic / 89 Opencritic

Pretty much what I expected. While the previews looked spectacular the original was a groundbreaking moment during the genre's golden era. The remake had an impossible task to live up to the original. Sakaguchi is also long gone and Square hasn't really approached their 90's greatness in the last two decades.



Around the Network
JWeinCom said:
DonFerrari said:

Seems like the two 60 scores that complain about the story being buffed in content to cover for the split of the original. Just like the preconceived complains we heard over the last couple years.

People anticipated there may be problems in turning what was the first 5-10 hours of a game into a full game.  Just because they anticipated this problem doesn't mean it's not legitimate.

This was one of my original fears for this remake. Nomura can't really tell a good a story (he thinks: Convoluted and Nonsensical= Good story), and Sakaguchi isn't there anymore to keep him in check. Crisis Core which is often loved by many screwed up the original Canon by introducing Genesis, and giving too much importance to Zack. I feared some of these issues would arise again, and apparently they did.



SammyGiireal said:
JWeinCom said:

People anticipated there may be problems in turning what was the first 5-10 hours of a game into a full game.  Just because they anticipated this problem doesn't mean it's not legitimate.

This was one of my original fears for this remake. Nomura can't really tell a good a story (he thinks: Convoluted and Nonsensical= Good story), and Sakaguchi isn't there anymore to keep him in check. Crisis Core which is often loved by many screwed up the original Canon by introducing Genesis, and giving too much importance to Zack. I feared some of these issues would arise again, and apparently they did.

Eh... the only Nomura games I've played are Kingdom Hearts and TWEWY and I actually liked the stories in both of those games... But to me they're good in an over the top fun bordering on campy kind of way which I don't know whether or not would be appropriate in the case of FFVII.



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 2020

Oh that's really good, but not awesome. I was expecting 90+, maybe my expectations were just too high



Around the Network
pikashoe said:
HoangNhatAnh said:

Copied from Neogaf for FF7R fans, spoiler:

Spoiler!

the events of VII and AC have already happened in another timeline

[*] the ghost things are Whispers of Fate that try to keep the characters in line with the original game
[*]Biggs and Wedge live. Jessie still dies.
[*]After the highway chase Cloud and co. fight the Whispers of Fate and beat them, making it so they're no longer bound by the original FFVII's storyline.
[*]During the battle the party is shown the clip of an old Nanaki with his cubs running towards a destroyed Midgar, Red XIII guesses it's a vision of the future that awaits them if they fail
[*]Sephiroth shows up after beating them. Fight is basically AC-tier, Sephiroth gets a black wing mid-fight.
[*]While this happens we flashback to Zack surviving his last stand in an alternate timeline
[*] After beating Sephiroth he teleports Cloud to the "edge of creation" and asks for his help in "defying destiny... together".
[*] He refuses and fight similar to their final omnislash duel ensues
[*]the party escapes Midgar.
[*]We continue Zack's scene with him walking to Midgar with a comatose Cloud holding on to him.
[*]Remake Aeris and Alt! Zack sense each other
[*]fade to black

 

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:
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.

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.



Your sword did not cut deep enough

SammyGiireal said:
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.

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:
deskpro2k3 said:

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.

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:
Hiku said:

Well a couple of things.

If you go into FF7R with the mindset that the new content is there in place of something more worthwhile, you may be annoyed and distracted in situations where maybe you wouldn't, if you consider a few things from the development side.

But what I mean by constructive is where do you think they should have ended each game? That's what I never hear from people.
Even though it's impossible for us to make any definitive assumptions about how far they could realistically go exactly, at least thinking about is still important imo, because it leads to a simple but important realization. That not every location from the original would work as an appropriate end to the first game.
I'd say few locations, even.

So where is the next best location? Is it 10 minutes before or after the budget runs out? Or 10 hours?
Then when you've decided on where to end it, how does it look for Part 2? Can it also end in an appropriate way while being a full game experience?

That includes the introduction of new characters and party members.
If you go too far in Part 1, it may leave Part 2 in an awkward spot where the most appropriate scene to end it on would make the game significantly shorter than Part 1, and not have as many interesting new characters and concepts introduced.

After all, the original game was not designed to be multiple games, so the pace was not dictated by this.
But that's something they have to consider here.

So moving the end of Part 1 further back to Midgar could solve a lot of problems (including not having to design the open world until next-gen hardware). And that's where the additional content comes in. But not only because of padding. (And they padded the original story as well). There are also things they wanted to do in the original but couldn't, or didn't have time to do, but can do now. For example, I believe we see Palmer in Honey Bee Inn in the Remake in a trailer.
In the original game, data minders have found scenes with Palmer in the Honey bee Inn that were cut from the final version of the game.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOcrmwca9l8

That whole lobby was cut, in fact.
But a cynical player, or reviewer, not considering many, or any of the things I just listed, may think of it in a negative light because they have the wrong idea of why it was implemented. Or why it's needed.
There are naturally also things the developers have thought of in the 20 years since the game released, that they wish they had thought of/could have done back then.

But if the player keeps thinking about how "I could have had Sephiroth skewering a snake instead", then it's going to be distracting. And perhaps not in a reasonable way if they don't consider how it should have realistically been done instead.

Based on the many comments I've read here over the years at least, no one aside from myself seems to have ever raised any of these issues.

I don't know yet how I'll like the game. But I do at least believe making it multiple games seemed necessary in order to include everything important, while presenting it in as beautiful a package as possible.

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.