By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Bitmap Frogs on 17 June 2009
Torillian said:

Anecdotal evidence is better than none.  What evidence do you have that FF's are evolving vertically instead of just changing without getting necessarily better as WoW said?

 

Exactly the same as he does: usual online forums, usual friends.

That's why anecdotal evidence is rubbish because it's biased by our own circumstances and our own biases on how we hear/read and interpret reality around us.

Anecdotal is as good as none. Even worse, since it may lead to false assumptions.





Current-gen game collection uploaded on the profile, full of win and good games; also most of my PC games. Lucasfilm Games/LucasArts 1982-2008 (Requiescat In Pace).

Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 17 June 2009

@Bitmap: Final Fantasy grew as a fan favorite because the storylines actually used to be good and the graphics were beyond comparison from the other JRPG competition.



Bitmap Frogs on 17 June 2009
S.T.A.G.E. said:
@Bitmap: Final Fantasy grew as a fan favorite because the storylines actually used to be good and the graphics were beyond comparison from the other JRPG competition.

 

Yeah, they are good games!

But we're talking about something different.





Current-gen game collection uploaded on the profile, full of win and good games; also most of my PC games. Lucasfilm Games/LucasArts 1982-2008 (Requiescat In Pace).

MaxwellGT2000 on 17 June 2009
S.T.A.G.E. said:
@Bitmap: Final Fantasy grew as a fan favorite because the storylines actually used to be good and the graphics were beyond comparison from the other JRPG competition.

Yes you can actually go back and play just about any classic FF RPG and not be offended by how it looks unlike most other RPGs of the same era and going back and playing them now.  The only exception to this rule is probably FF7 which they could have made it 2D sprites and it would have looked better, but then again the cenematics and battles look good for the PS1 and can somewhat make up for it.



MaxwellGT2000 - "Does the amount of times you beat it count towards how hardcore you are?"

Wii Friend Code - 5882 9717 7391 0918 (PM me if you add me), PSN - MaxwellGT2000, XBL - BlkKniteCecil, MaxwellGT2000

S.T.A.G.E. on 17 June 2009
Bitmap Frogs said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
@Bitmap: Final Fantasy grew as a fan favorite because the storylines actually used to be good and the graphics were beyond comparison from the other JRPG competition.

 

Yeah, they are good games!

But we're talking about something different.


I understand your point from your argument, but I would reserve my opinion on FF after the new one comes out and we see some of the sales. Most of your points are good though. :)



Around the Network
FaRmLaNd on 17 June 2009

@S.T.A.G.E. I'm well aware of the influence that early WRPG's had on JRPG's.

Anyway, judging a storyline purely by its references to other works is a simplistic way of judging something. Whilst its definetely fulfilling to allude to past works, since both sub-genre have done so makes it an irrelivancy. Since WRPG's generally feature more interactivity in their narratives they are arguably utilising the medium more effectively but again a more linear plot allows for a more focussed narrative so you could argue that linear storytelling has its own advantages.

At the end of the day most RPG's are crap and some are amazing. Both Sub-genre's have some truly masterful games in them so aruging whether insert genre is better is silly as it comes down to taste.



S.T.A.G.E. on 17 June 2009
FaRmLaNd said:
@S.T.A.G.E. I'm well aware of the influence that early WRPG's had on JRPG's.

Anyway, judging a storyline purely by its references to other works is a simplistic way of judging something. Whilst its definetely fulfilling to allude to past works, since both sub-genre have done so makes it an irrelivancy. Since WRPG's generally feature more interactivity in their narratives they are arguably utilising the medium more effectively but again a more linear plot allows for a more focussed narrative so you could argue that linear storytelling has its own advantages.

At the end of the day most RPG's are crap and some are amazing. Both Sub-genre's have some truly masterful games in them so aruging whether insert genre is better is silly as it comes down to taste.

JRPG's are beyond a sub genre of RPG's. It should be renamed the 'Japanese battle-system aventure'. Take UFC undisputed for example; it uses experience points and it isn't an RPG. You don't have to use experience points to be an RPG. RPG's have a concept which just aren't followed by JRPG's. JRPG's is an altnernate universe in terms of gaming. Yes, there are some great games...but they aren't traditional RPG's. You can say all you want that linear storytelling has its advantages, but that doesn't take away from the fact that JRPG's are still not RPG's. Unless you're playing a role....you're not role playing. One can watch JRPG movies of all the cut scenes of say...the FF series and figure out what the whole game is about. You can like the characters and think they are cool, but there is no way to be the character. You feel like you're watching the character, rather than making decisions. That is not an RPG.



Torillian on 17 June 2009
S.T.A.G.E. said:
FaRmLaNd said:
@S.T.A.G.E. I'm well aware of the influence that early WRPG's had on JRPG's.

Anyway, judging a storyline purely by its references to other works is a simplistic way of judging something. Whilst its definetely fulfilling to allude to past works, since both sub-genre have done so makes it an irrelivancy. Since WRPG's generally feature more interactivity in their narratives they are arguably utilising the medium more effectively but again a more linear plot allows for a more focussed narrative so you could argue that linear storytelling has its own advantages.

At the end of the day most RPG's are crap and some are amazing. Both Sub-genre's have some truly masterful games in them so aruging whether insert genre is better is silly as it comes down to taste.

JRPG's are beyond a sub genre of RPG's. It should be renamed the 'Japanese battle-system aventure'. Take UFC undisputed for example; it uses experience points and it isn't an RPG. You don't have to use experience points to be an RPG. RPG's have a concept which just aren't followed by JRPG's. JRPG's is an altnernate universe in terms of gaming. Yes, there are some great games...but they aren't traditional RPG's. You can say all you want that linear storytelling has its advantages, but that doesn't take away from the fact that JRPG's are still not RPG's. Unless you're playing a role....you're not role playing. One can watch JRPG movies of all the cut scenes of say...the FF series and figure out what the whole game is about. You can like the characters and think they are cool, but there is no way to be the character. You feel like you're watching the character, rather than making decisions. That is not an RPG.

So then any game where you play a role would be an RPG?  When I made a character in Rock Band, or GTA: SA, or hell when I create a character in skate 2.



...

Words Of Wisdom on 18 June 2009
Bitmap Frogs said:

If you have a well known brand and tastes change, what would you do? Using your brand name to push something more appealing to the market or risk raising a new IP from the ground? Giving up to the nostalgia of players no longer interested on your game and dropping a valuable asset is not the correct answer. 

So about Super Paper Mario, you do not know if the consumers at large were disappointed by the change in direction. Your casual evidence is meaningless. Again, it appears to wish corporations would decide according to your own tastes and needs not those of the larger pie.

They've been evolving vertically, you like it or not. The tweaks to the turn based system have been constant and other elements of the franchise have been tweaked several times but still without deviating from the original format. That's vertical progression and as it's happened the power of the franchise has dwindled as sales show. Of course I can't stablish a direct link between those two events (FF's vertical progression and its sales results). Again, you are talking about people praising the old super nintendo games, drawing from anecdotal evidence conclusions for the whole customer base. Again, anecdotal evidence is bad. 

And how many instances in the video game market can you think of where a company had a decaying brand name and were able to convert it with success?  About the only real example I can think of is Mortal Kombat (remember Mythologies and Special Forces?) which wasn't a success and, in fact, damaged the brand greatly.  Street Fighter which didn't resort to such things is in a much stronger position than its age old rival thanks, in part, to Mortal Kombat's own screw-ups.  Mortal Kombat was a great brand until they did exactly what you're suggesting and flushed it down the toilet.  Sadly it has never recovered.

Also, anecdotal evidence is not meaningless nor bad.  We know this thanks to the Ant Principle (I forget the real name of it but I've always called it the Ant Principle).  Essentially the nickname comes from the fact that you will never find just one ant or termite in your home.  If you find one termite in your home, you call pest control because there probably are more.  Essentially it's a theory based on the fact that the probability of finding the only instance of something is much lower than the probability of finding one instance among many when dealing with non-unique cases.  Anecdotal evidence is an indication of existence, not of scope.  If you find one termite in your home, then you may reason that you have termites in your home (via the Ant Principle) however you don't know how many.  It is not usable in a scientific study as a basis of generalization however it is useful in its own right for establishing existence.

As for Final Fantasy, reread what I posted above.  I say they haven't improved things, you point out tiny improvements, I say those are meaningless overall and not an indicator of improvement, you say I'm moving the goal posts, we argue about what defines "improvement," and we end up agreeing to disagree.  If it's all the same to you, I'd just rather skip to the end and agree to disagree.



S.T.A.G.E. on 18 June 2009
Torillian said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
FaRmLaNd said:
@S.T.A.G.E. I'm well aware of the influence that early WRPG's had on JRPG's.

Anyway, judging a storyline purely by its references to other works is a simplistic way of judging something. Whilst its definetely fulfilling to allude to past works, since both sub-genre have done so makes it an irrelivancy. Since WRPG's generally feature more interactivity in their narratives they are arguably utilising the medium more effectively but again a more linear plot allows for a more focussed narrative so you could argue that linear storytelling has its own advantages.

At the end of the day most RPG's are crap and some are amazing. Both Sub-genre's have some truly masterful games in them so aruging whether insert genre is better is silly as it comes down to taste.

JRPG's are beyond a sub genre of RPG's. It should be renamed the 'Japanese battle-system aventure'. Take UFC undisputed for example; it uses experience points and it isn't an RPG. You don't have to use experience points to be an RPG. RPG's have a concept which just aren't followed by JRPG's. JRPG's is an altnernate universe in terms of gaming. Yes, there are some great games...but they aren't traditional RPG's. You can say all you want that linear storytelling has its advantages, but that doesn't take away from the fact that JRPG's are still not RPG's. Unless you're playing a role....you're not role playing. One can watch JRPG movies of all the cut scenes of say...the FF series and figure out what the whole game is about. You can like the characters and think they are cool, but there is no way to be the character. You feel like you're watching the character, rather than making decisions. That is not an RPG.

So then any game where you play a role would be an RPG?  When I made a character in Rock Band, or GTA: SA, or hell when I create a character in skate 2.

Um...no. Rockband music sim that allows you to create a character. You don't determine anything, besides enjoying the fun of playing music and hoping to get 100%. Skate 2 isn't an RPG. GTA from time to time tends to show bits and pieces of RPG action. The last GTA let you choose who you would align yourself with or kill. Even with all that it wasn't an RPG, because you weren't playing a role and you couldn't relate with the character.