Final Fantasy Thread

[Somnia]

i haven't played or really seen anything of 16, so i can't comment on the battle system. i probably should have excluded it and 15 since i have no real experience with that one other than watching a parody video of it. the last new ffi played was 13, where they seemingly went overboard with controlling everything the player did. then the sequels started ditching turn based combat and then 15 and 16 come out and seem to be more action based.
there's nothing wrong with experimenting and trying something new. paper mario 64 is one of my favorite mario games. full on rpg from the platforming master. they still make new turn based rpgs but final fantasy is still a bit more well known than the others.
it does come off as they don't like or want to make rpgs when the largest property that they have is more action based than turn based. especially when the ff7 remake looked like it was going down the same route. it is still turned based to an extent, so they may be making their way back or trying to find a middle ground between the two sides of combat.

Dragon Quest is still in the top 3 most popular JRPG franchises next to FF and Pokemon and until we see DQ12 to confirm or deny, that series is still turn based whilst reaching new heights both from a marketing and sales perspective globally.

We can just say we want Final Fantasy to be turn based again, we don't need to pathologize Square Enix as being afraid or embarassed of turn based when they consistently make both small, AA and occasionally AAA scale turn based games. It quite literally does not come off like them not wanting to make them when they make multiple every year.

Final Fantasy is not the totality of the company and the fact that so many treat it as such is why so many of their non-FF IP underperform even when they're great.

I wouldn't go that far. While they aren't "ashamed" of turn based games, they clearly don't view them as big money makers. So there's a cap on how much they are willing to invest into those types of games. I don't think we will see another latest gen turn based Final Fantasy. I would be ok with that choice if the action games were selling well, but they sell about the same as turn based Final Fantasy. The fans see that and question the logic of Square Enix's choices, especially when games like Baldur's Gate 3 have made it work in the turn based world.

The biggest issue with this analysis is how reductive it is. I am definitely someone who thinks a turn based AAAA JRPG could do well in the modern age, but the IP isn't exactly the juggernaut it once was. Its an IP that has varied wildly in sales from game to game for various reasons, so making any kind of "the action ones sell the same as the turn base d ones" just feels like it misses the point. FFXV is the only FF game since FFX to break 10 million in sales, but FFX, VII and XV are the only 3 games in the franchise to ever do that period.

The industry is also in a vastly different place. Turn based was the norm once upon a time and now it isn't. Games used to be far cheaper and quicker to make than they used to be. Neither of these things immediately disqualify turn based as a potential money making genre especially when you have examples like Atlus' global profile continues rapidly rising and the inevitable example of Baldurs Gate 3. BG3 is a total anomaly though both in that its part of the D&D IP which is ludicrously popular and also in that it is a totally open-ended CRPG style game that is extremely different in structure from FF. Of all the reasons BG3 succeeded I struggle to find many people who chalk it up to turn based combat. Anecdotally from the handful of roommates and friends I've had who have gotten into it over the past couple years, turn based combat usually ends up being one of the things they view as a sort of "necessary evil" rather than a thing they view as a part of the game they unabashedly love. I see similar sentiments online, though again its anecdotal.

As far as we know both FFXVI and Rebirth underperformed and its difficult to pin down why. Some will just say "cause they suck" or "cause action game" as shorthand but I reallt don't know. They were timed exclusives for an IP that just doesn't seem to have the same cultural relevance it once did. While FF used to constantly have new games of acclaim releasing year round, the amount of projects released has greatly diminished. FFXV also probably had the most expensive marketing campaign in all of video games to hit the sales numbers it did, though critical reception has been mixed from launch up until now. All of these things combine make the IP less of a guarantee, especially when its only on 1 of the 4 major platforms for a year or so after launch as opposed to 2-3 of them.

And it is a franchise with far greater budgets behind numbered entries than something like an Atlus game. Kind of wild we've hit that point regardless of the bevy of reasons I could give for Atlus' rise to mainstream prominence too.

All this word salad to just sort of say that while imo we could totally get a mainline FF game again, it isn't as simple a conversation as citing the franchise's historically inconsistent sales figures without context or saying "BG3 was successful". I mean shit, these are companies that routinely do focus tests both broadly and for specific titles to help decide on company direction. If there was ample data that said that turn based was just as if not more popular than action games globally (because FF has been a global franchise for decades now) we'd probably not be having this discussion.

Besides, we can also point to an IP like Dragon Quest as another big budget RPG franchise that is prolific and yet to abandon turn based in the mainline games. Maybe DQ12 comes out and changes that, I certainly hope it isn't true. 2DHD is also a far more costly and time consuming type of game to create than many give it credit for. People talk about Octopath and what not like they're these smaller scale games when that just isn't true. Its a spectrum and most of these 2DHD games tend to fall somewhere further on the pricier side than the cheaper one based on everything we know about the studios involved and timelines of releases.

I seriously do not think we need to say "Square Enix is *blank* of turn based" when we can just say what we really mean and say "I wish FF was still turn based". Any other way of phrasing it detracts from the actual point someone is trying to make because they're either flatout wrong or just beating around the bush. I don't understand why people are so stubborn that Square Enix has to be making SPECIFICALLY turn based Final Fantasy for them to act like SE doesn't hate it. If every other IP they have at every budget range is allowed to be turn based we are clearly just talking about Final Fantasy at that point.

Its especially frustrating when so many of their great turn based games underperform or remain niche. People who seem to care so much about Square Enix embracing turn based seem to really not care about Square Enix turn based unless its FF. So they should just say the thing they really mean and say "I wish FF was still turn based" and leave it there.

 

[starseeker300]

As far as we know both FFXVI and Rebirth underperformed and its difficult to pin down why.

its because they were initially released as ps5 exclusives, Squeenix lost out on XBOX and especially PC Sales.

Also personally I dont mind if Final Fantasy is an action rpg, as long as the rpg part is kept and it doesnt turn into just an action game with light rpg elements

 

[Klonoa7]

FF8 and 9 were my favorite games for the longest time when they were released. 7 was the third game that I played and really enjoyed the storyline compared to 8 and 9.

When FFX was released we were blown away by the graphics at the time. FFX-2 was dismissed by my friends as a “chick’s game”. No one really talks about FFX-2. Like ever.

FFXII was okay but we weren’t really thrilled by the whole license board thing in order to use weapons and armor. I was initially turned off by the mmorpg-like gameplay during battles but it slowly grew on me.

I actually played FFTA (GBA) before playing FFT (PS1) and enjoyed both. Still haven’t finished FFTA-2 though.

I first played the emulated fan translation of FFV and ended up purchasing it for iOS. Some highlights included the awesome music and jobs system. Plus reading the name “Bartz” was way easier on the eyes than reading “Butz”. I still have yet to beat FF3, 4, and 6.

FF13 - Beautiful game that took me a while to get into. It was the most difficult game at the time before I discovered Shin Megami Tensei games (those games can get way difficult). Still haven’t beaten FF13-2 or the third sequel.

FF Crisis Core - I love both the PSP and Switch versions

FF Dirge of Cerberus - Another great FF7 spinoff.

Dissidia 1 and 2 - Highly repetitive but somewhat entertaining

Never played FF15 or higher and don’t plan on it. Outside of the Switch the PS3 is as high as I go. My backlog is numerous and many new games are just ports and remakes anyway.

I haven’t forgotten about FF1 or 2 but maybe I’ll get around to playing those games someday.

 

[Strategist]

its because they were initially released as ps5 exclusives, Squeenix lost out on XBOX and especially PC Sales.

Also personally I dont mind if Final Fantasy is an action rpg, as long as the rpg part is kept and it doesnt turn into just an action game with light rpg elements

Single player FF games have never been huge sellers on PC. Final Fantasy games have been console exclusives forever and it hasn't been a barrier for sales. It is either the install base of the PS5 isn't high enough or the games are lacking in some way to the fans.

 

[Meekoos]

So I guess I'm better off with SO2R

 

[MasterEn]

Dragon Quest is still in the top 3 most popular JRPG franchises next to FF and Pokemon and until we see DQ12 to confirm or deny, that series is still turn based whilst reaching new heights both from a marketing and sales perspective globally.

We can just say we want Final Fantasy to be turn based again, we don't need to pathologize Square Enix as being afraid or embarassed of turn based when they consistently make both small, AA and occasionally AAA scale turn based games. It quite literally does not come off like them not wanting to make them when they make multiple every year.

Final Fantasy is not the totality of the company and the fact that so many treat it as such is why so many of their non-FF IP underperform even when they're great.

The biggest issue with this analysis is how reductive it is. I am definitely someone who thinks a turn based AAAA JRPG could do well in the modern age, but the IP isn't exactly the juggernaut it once was. Its an IP that has varied wildly in sales from game to game for various reasons, so making any kind of "the action ones sell the same as the turn base d ones" just feels like it misses the point. FFXV is the only FF game since FFX to break 10 million in sales, but FFX, VII and XV are the only 3 games in the franchise to ever do that period.

The industry is also in a vastly different place. Turn based was the norm once upon a time and now it isn't. Games used to be far cheaper and quicker to make than they used to be. Neither of these things immediately disqualify turn based as a potential money making genre especially when you have examples like Atlus' global profile continues rapidly rising and the inevitable example of Baldurs Gate 3. BG3 is a total anomaly though both in that its part of the D&D IP which is ludicrously popular and also in that it is a totally open-ended CRPG style game that is extremely different in structure from FF. Of all the reasons BG3 succeeded I struggle to find many people who chalk it up to turn based combat. Anecdotally from the handful of roommates and friends I've had who have gotten into it over the past couple years, turn based combat usually ends up being one of the things they view as a sort of "necessary evil" rather than a thing they view as a part of the game they unabashedly love. I see similar sentiments online, though again its anecdotal.

As far as we know both FFXVI and Rebirth underperformed and its difficult to pin down why. Some will just say "cause they suck" or "cause action game" as shorthand but I reallt don't know. They were timed exclusives for an IP that just doesn't seem to have the same cultural relevance it once did. While FF used to constantly have new games of acclaim releasing year round, the amount of projects released has greatly diminished. FFXV also probably had the most expensive marketing campaign in all of video games to hit the sales numbers it did, though critical reception has been mixed from launch up until now. All of these things combine make the IP less of a guarantee, especially when its only on 1 of the 4 major platforms for a year or so after launch as opposed to 2-3 of them.

And it is a franchise with far greater budgets behind numbered entries than something like an Atlus game. Kind of wild we've hit that point regardless of the bevy of reasons I could give for Atlus' rise to mainstream prominence too.

All this word salad to just sort of say that while imo we could totally get a mainline FF game again, it isn't as simple a conversation as citing the franchise's historically inconsistent sales figures without context or saying "BG3 was successful". I mean shit, these are companies that routinely do focus tests both broadly and for specific titles to help decide on company direction. If there was ample data that said that turn based was just as if not more popular than action games globally (because FF has been a global franchise for decades now) we'd probably not be having this discussion.

Besides, we can also point to an IP like Dragon Quest as another big budget RPG franchise that is prolific and yet to abandon turn based in the mainline games. Maybe DQ12 comes out and changes that, I certainly hope it isn't true. 2DHD is also a far more costly and time consuming type of game to create than many give it credit for. People talk about Octopath and what not like they're these smaller scale games when that just isn't true. Its a spectrum and most of these 2DHD games tend to fall somewhere further on the pricier side than the cheaper one based on everything we know about the studios involved and timelines of releases.

I seriously do not think we need to say "Square Enix is *blank* of turn based" when we can just say what we really mean and say "I wish FF was still turn based". Any other way of phrasing it detracts from the actual point someone is trying to make because they're either flatout wrong or just beating around the bush. I don't understand why people are so stubborn that Square Enix has to be making SPECIFICALLY turn based Final Fantasy for them to act like SE doesn't hate it. If every other IP they have at every budget range is allowed to be turn based we are clearly just talking about Final Fantasy at that point.

Its especially frustrating when so many of their great turn based games underperform or remain niche. People who seem to care so much about Square Enix embracing turn based seem to really not care about Square Enix turn based unless its FF. So they should just say the thing they really mean and say "I wish FF was still turn based" and leave it there.

to be honest, i forget that square enix makes the dragon warrior games. it's easy to think of a company just making one game or just a handful of them.
ff7 remake underperforming is due to a couple of reasons. one, it's not a true remake. reimagining is probably a better and more accurate word. we are several years into the remake onslaught. devs and companies legit just porting a game over wholesale with usually a few bug fixes and a graphics update. everyone was probably just expecting that.
two, the ending of ff7 remake makes the game feel like a betrayal. you were told and sold on the game being a remake, the story that you know, existing on a new shiny console. not a new story entirely. the sequel brings up alternate timelines and jumping between them. zack is alive in this game where in the original he is dead before the game starts. the game was being sold on a lie. it's not the game that you played all those years ago on the station of play with those crispy, crunchy 3d models.
as starseeker300 and strategist mention, it being console exclusive hurts it as well. but not as much as THIS WAS A GAME THAT WAS 3 DISCS SOLD TOGEHTER AS ONE PRODUCT WHEN IT CAME OUT!!!!!!!!!!! the remake has such a massive budget for the graphics alone, which are barely better, if at all, than batman: arkham asylum. and the remake is disc one of the game. the sequel is disc two. the conclusion is disc three.
there is also the issue of costs for the consumer. 3 games: $60-70 per game, you need two consoles to play if you are a collector [ps4/ps5] or one if you just skip the ps4. a ps5 costs $350-1000 dollars depending on what model and where you get it. best case scenario: $180 [$60+$60+$60] + $350 is $530. half a grand to play the game in its entirety at the minimum. sales and discounts can help mitigate that, but that's still a hell of a lot of money to drop on a console that isn't really swimming in exclusives. nearly every game that i would want exists on the pc/xbox/or switch. pcs have mods, the switch has games that i want, and the xbox falls into the same category as the ps4/5.
yeah, i admit it, i want a turn based final fantasy. it doesn't have to be over the top with the graphics, story or anything. it can just be like the first one, a nice simple story with some good combat. ff7 is still liked for being nice and simple with the combat system. find materia, equip, and start casting spells. none of that crystal shit from ff13.
i think dragon quest underperforming might have to do with the systems they are released on, or with the timing of releases. there's about 35 games, so quantity isn't the issue. i'll have to do some research on that.

 

[Somnia]

to be honest, i forget that square enix makes the dragon warrior games. it's easy to think of a company just making one game or just a handful of them.
ff7 remake underperforming is due to a couple of reasons. one, it's not a true remake. reimagining is probably a better and more accurate word. we are several years into the remake onslaught. devs and companies legit just porting a game over wholesale with usually a few bug fixes and a graphics update. everyone was probably just expecting that.
two, the ending of ff7 remake makes the game feel like a betrayal. you were told and sold on the game being a remake, the story that you know, existing on a new shiny console. not a new story entirely. the sequel brings up alternate timelines and jumping between them. zack is alive in this game where in the original he is dead before the game starts. the game was being sold on a lie. it's not the game that you played all those years ago on the station of play with those crispy, crunchy 3d models.
as starseeker300 and strategist mention, it being console exclusive hurts it as well. but not as much as THIS WAS A GAME THAT WAS 3 DISCS SOLD TOGEHTER AS ONE PRODUCT WHEN IT CAME OUT!!!!!!!!!!! the remake has such a massive budget for the graphics alone, which are barely better, if at all, than batman: arkham asylum. and the remake is disc one of the game. the sequel is disc two. the conclusion is disc three.
there is also the issue of costs for the consumer. 3 games: $60-70 per game, you need two consoles to play if you are a collector [ps4/ps5] or one if you just skip the ps4. a ps5 costs $350-1000 dollars depending on what model and where you get it. best case scenario: $180 [$60+$60+$60] + $350 is $530. half a grand to play the game in its entirety at the minimum. sales and discounts can help mitigate that, but that's still a hell of a lot of money to drop on a console that isn't really swimming in exclusives. nearly every game that i would want exists on the pc/xbox/or switch. pcs have mods, the switch has games that i want, and the xbox falls into the same category as the ps4/5.
yeah, i admit it, i want a turn based final fantasy. it doesn't have to be over the top with the graphics, story or anything. it can just be like the first one, a nice simple story with some good combat. ff7 is still liked for being nice and simple with the combat system. find materia, equip, and start casting spells. none of that crystal shit from ff13.
i think dragon quest underperforming might have to do with the systems they are released on, or with the timing of releases. there's about 35 games, so quantity isn't the issue. i'll have to do some research on that.

Dragon Quest hasnt underperformed fwiw. Maybe DQ3's remake has, but afaik its sold fine thus far.

Idk how you could say the graphics for a game like FF7R are barely better than something like Arkham Asylum. Both games are gorgeous but that's such a wild comparison to me lol.

In US the PS1 adjusted for inflation w/ a copy of FF7 is about $600-650. Its really not all that different than a $500 for a PS5 and $130 for Remake and Rebirth. Only by the time the third game releases will we see a cost that rises above what people were more or less paying back in the day, at least in the US. There is more nuance to be had when it comes to pricing of course.

I think its more than Rebirth being an exclusive in a vacuum though like all of us have said it is certainly a reason. Worth noting is that Remake was also a timed exclusive but sold waaay better. Part of this could be seen as Remake failing in the eyes of fans but discourse surrounding it online has remained mostly positive so I struggle to see that as the reason.

What I find somewhat convincing is the fact that Remake was a PS4 exclusive in 2020 - 6.5 years into the PS4's life - and Rebirth was an exclusive 4 years into the PS5. By the time Rebirth released in February 2024, the PS5 had sold roughly 50-55million units while the PS4 had sold well over 100m units. Certainly a bigger installation base is partially to blame for why being an exclusive worked on PS4 but not on PS5. Then there's the matter of more and more people jumping to PC between generations to replace their console use. The PC port is selling super well by all accounts and is performing better than Remake did when it came to PC both in interest and reviews which is certainly a good sign.

In terms of sales rate the PS5 is definitely lagging behind the PS4 generally (71m PS5s by end of year 4 compared to 91m PS4s) and a lot of that can likely be chalked up to PC's meteoric rise during Covid and the PS4 still receiving ports of so many games that do come out even today.

I suppose all of that discussion is kinda moot though considering that Square Enix has seemingly sworn off exclusives going forward after both FFXVI and FF7Rebirth underperformed in launch windows. Clearly we're all on the same page and while I'm sure the Sony paycheck helped get such expensive games made, clearly there are better paths forward.

Ultimately though I doubt the remake trilogy's interesting attempt at being both a remake, a sequel and a reboot thanks to the timeline fuckery it keeps hinting at being a big reason for Rebirth underperforming. I'm sure some are mad that its not just the OG game fleshed out and I'm certainly someone who disliked Remake for many reasons and hasn't picked up Rebirth. When I look at general interest, discussion habits online and sales trends none of it really suggests that the people who were turned off by Remake's ending make up a super substantial portion of the people who haven't yet played Rebirth.

I also just generally wonder if the FF7R project has captured younger audiences who don't have much if any love for the OG or if the vast majority of people who have bought either of the games are older users. Wish there was a way to know.

Side note but idk why you dissed the extremely basic crystarium from FF13 of all things. People dog on the crystarium because its just linear progression, basically just a hyper-dumbed down sphere grid from FFX (which people love and praise). XII' more complex license board system also gets tons of praise from fans and Zodiac Age fleshed it out even more. Of all the progression systems to cite as an alternative to FF7's simplicity I'm not sure why you'd choose the absolute more basic of basic systems as a crystarium. The reason people disliked it is because the stats gained from holding X on the crystarium (cause that's all you do) could have just been offloaded to automatic boosts when you level up. It was just weird tedium that barely justified stat differences between the 6 roles a character could have in battle.

I mean hell, FF13 is the game that is also infamous for having most non-boss encounters be entirely beatable by the auto-battle button. When it comes to simple that game did both progression and combat about as simply as it could. I've grown to appreciate its unique feel and complexities over the years and XIII-2 certainly fixed a lot of problems, but again of all the FF games to put in opposition to 7's simplicity, 13 feels like the worst candidate.

 

[Tonberry]

Dragon Quest hasnt underperformed fwiw. Maybe DQ3's remake has, but afaik its sold fine thus far.

It sold 2 million in three weeks, which is more than any other HD-2D game. I think it’s safe to say that it sold well.

 

[TamagatchiTamaHiro24]

It is undeniable: FF changed post 7. Love or hate it, the series changed. It became huge It was at its cultural peak in the mid 2000's. The issue ended up being that it was tied to Playstation, which was bad during Seventh Gen because people HATED the PS3 during the generation itself. Now, I think the games are good, but Square is lost on where to put them.

I prefer consoles, but they should be aiming for PC and Switch 2. That's where most of their audience (RPG heads) are gaming. The only reason for them to stay with Sony is to flex the power of PS5, which... it isn't needed. PS5's selling point are its sensory experiences, not graphical perfection. So, I think they'd sell more games if they optimized them for the systems people are actually playing on, then porting them over to PS5 with awesome sensory experiences (rumble, haptic triggers, 3D Audio, etc.) for the same price.


In short, they need to meet their consumers not only on the systems where their audience is playing, but they need to extend a branch of goodwill. People don't have a high opinion of Squeenix. This could easily be fixed by doing some goodwill initiatives.

Post automatically merged: Monday at 6:17 PM

It is undeniable: FF changed post 7. Love or hate it, the series changed. It became huge It was at its cultural peak in the mid 2000's. The issue ended up being that it was tied to Playstation, which was bad during Seventh Gen because people HATED the PS3 during the generation itself. Now, I think the games are good, but Square is lost on where to put them.

I prefer consoles, but they should be aiming for PC and Switch 2. That's where most of their audience (RPG heads) are gaming. The only reason for them to stay with Sony is to flex the power of PS5, which... it isn't needed. PS5's selling point are its sensory experiences, not graphical perfection. So, I think they'd sell more games if they optimized them for the systems people are actually playing on, then porting them over to PS5 with awesome sensory experiences (rumble, haptic triggers, 3D Audio, etc.) for the same price.


In short, they need to meet their consumers not only on the systems where their audience is playing, but they need to extend a branch of goodwill. People don't have a high opinion of Squeenix. This could easily be fixed by doing some goodwill initiatives.

BTW, I love IX. Not a hot take, everybody loves that game now, but its my third favorite game of all time.

 

[Tonberry]

I prefer consoles, but they should be aiming for PC and Switch 2. That's where most of their audience (RPG heads) are gaming.

I think they should put them on everything. Console exclusives is a fading format, and it's especially redundant when it comes to non-1st party companies, imo.

 

[Strategist]

Idk how you could say the graphics for a game like FF7R are barely better than something like Arkham Asylum. Both games are gorgeous but that's such a wild comparison to me lol.

I don't think it is that wild of a comparison to make. We have hit an era of diminishing returns in graphics. Especially because most major AAA studios are afraid to build their own engines. So every UE5 game has a similar look to them. Back in the PS1 era, Squaresoft was at the forefront of graphics and presentation but they don't have that advantage anymore. They are followers and part of the crowd now.

On top of that, they aren't particularly skilled at optimizing unreal engine graphics yet, from what I hear. A lot of complaints about blurry graphics and frame rate stuttering in Rebirth.

In US the PS1 adjusted for inflation w/ a copy of FF7 is about $600-650. Its really not all that different than a $500 for a PS5 and $130 for Remake and Rebirth. Only by the time the third game releases will we see a cost that rises above what people were more or less paying back in the day, at least in the US. There is more nuance to be had when it comes to pricing of course.

The inflation argument would make more sense if salaries had adjusted to match inflation over time. On average, they haven't.

I think its more than Rebirth being an exclusive in a vacuum though like all of us have said it is certainly a reason. Worth noting is that Remake was also a timed exclusive but sold waaay better. Part of this could be seen as Remake failing in the eyes of fans but discourse surrounding it online has remained mostly positive so I struggle to see that as the reason.

The online discourse is really a small percentage of the gaming customer base. Plenty of gamers just play whatever looks cool to them and don't care to spend time talking about it online. Also it is a self selection issue as the most passionate advocates are the ones with the motivation to post the online forums.

What I find somewhat convincing is the fact that Remake was a PS4 exclusive in 2020 - 6.5 years into the PS4's life - and Rebirth was an exclusive 4 years into the PS5. By the time Rebirth released in February 2024, the PS5 had sold roughly 50-55million units while the PS4 had sold well over 100m units. Certainly a bigger installation base is partially to blame for why being an exclusive worked on PS4 but not on PS5. Then there's the matter of more and more people jumping to PC between generations to replace their console use. The PC port is selling super well by all accounts and is performing better than Remake did when it came to PC both in interest and reviews which is certainly a good sign.

In terms of sales rate the PS5 is definitely lagging behind the PS4 generally (71m PS5s by end of year 4 compared to 91m PS4s) and a lot of that can likely be chalked up to PC's meteoric rise during Covid and the PS4 still receiving ports of so many games that do come out even today.

The lack of sales of the PS5 is really harming Square Enix, but it also could be said that none of the exclusives have done a good enough job of convincing the audience to upgrade to the PS5. A chicken or egg scenario in my opinion.

Ultimately though I doubt the remake trilogy's interesting attempt at being both a remake, a sequel and a reboot thanks to the timeline fuckery it keeps hinting at being a big reason for Rebirth underperforming. I'm sure some are mad that its not just the OG game fleshed out and I'm certainly someone who disliked Remake for many reasons and hasn't picked up Rebirth. When I look at general interest, discussion habits online and sales trends none of it really suggests that the people who were turned off by Remake's ending make up a super substantial portion of the people who haven't yet played Rebirth.

The only thing that annoys me about the remake/sequel/timeline fuckery is that they were playing coy about it in the marketing. But, realistically that would only bother players who are really attached to the story of the original game. The bigger issue with the series has been the dumb idea of splitting the content of one game into three 60 hr ones. It forces them to fill the game with filler, minigames and nonsense.

I also just generally wonder if the FF7R project has captured younger audiences who don't have much if any love for the OG or if the vast majority of people who have bought either of the games are older users. Wish there was a way to know.

There are some older folks who enjoy the remake project, but the vast majority I've interacted with online don't seem to have much connection to the series other than maybe playing FF7.

Post automatically merged: Monday at 6:24 PM

I think they should put them on everything. Console exclusives is a fading format, and it's especially redundant when it comes to non-1st party companies, imo.

Switch 2 won't be able to play PS5 pro or PS6 level games.

 

[Tonberry]

The only thing that annoys me about the remake/sequel/timeline fuckery is that they were playing coy about it in the marketing.

Yeah, this is what burned me personally. I would've been completely fine with it if they had advertised the game with it, but it didn't and that made it feel to me like they were too afraid to show it off, or just being way too confident.

I've warmed up on them more nowadays though, and I try to not be as judgmental to new experiences anymore. I'll definitely play them some day. Probably not until all three are out though!

 

[MasterEn]

Dragon Quest hasnt underperformed fwiw. Maybe DQ3's remake has, but afaik its sold fine thus far.

Idk how you could say the graphics for a game like FF7R are barely better than something like Arkham Asylum. Both games are gorgeous but that's such a wild comparison to me lol.

In US the PS1 adjusted for inflation w/ a copy of FF7 is about $600-650. Its really not all that different than a $500 for a PS5 and $130 for Remake and Rebirth. Only by the time the third game releases will we see a cost that rises above what people were more or less paying back in the day, at least in the US. There is more nuance to be had when it comes to pricing of course.

I think its more than Rebirth being an exclusive in a vacuum though like all of us have said it is certainly a reason. Worth noting is that Remake was also a timed exclusive but sold waaay better. Part of this could be seen as Remake failing in the eyes of fans but discourse surrounding it online has remained mostly positive so I struggle to see that as the reason.

What I find somewhat convincing is the fact that Remake was a PS4 exclusive in 2020 - 6.5 years into the PS4's life - and Rebirth was an exclusive 4 years into the PS5. By the time Rebirth released in February 2024, the PS5 had sold roughly 50-55million units while the PS4 had sold well over 100m units. Certainly a bigger installation base is partially to blame for why being an exclusive worked on PS4 but not on PS5. Then there's the matter of more and more people jumping to PC between generations to replace their console use. The PC port is selling super well by all accounts and is performing better than Remake did when it came to PC both in interest and reviews which is certainly a good sign.

In terms of sales rate the PS5 is definitely lagging behind the PS4 generally (71m PS5s by end of year 4 compared to 91m PS4s) and a lot of that can likely be chalked up to PC's meteoric rise during Covid and the PS4 still receiving ports of so many games that do come out even today.

I suppose all of that discussion is kinda moot though considering that Square Enix has seemingly sworn off exclusives going forward after both FFXVI and FF7Rebirth underperformed in launch windows. Clearly we're all on the same page and while I'm sure the Sony paycheck helped get such expensive games made, clearly there are better paths forward.

Ultimately though I doubt the remake trilogy's interesting attempt at being both a remake, a sequel and a reboot thanks to the timeline fuckery it keeps hinting at being a big reason for Rebirth underperforming. I'm sure some are mad that its not just the OG game fleshed out and I'm certainly someone who disliked Remake for many reasons and hasn't picked up Rebirth. When I look at general interest, discussion habits online and sales trends none of it really suggests that the people who were turned off by Remake's ending make up a super substantial portion of the people who haven't yet played Rebirth.

I also just generally wonder if the FF7R project has captured younger audiences who don't have much if any love for the OG or if the vast majority of people who have bought either of the games are older users. Wish there was a way to know.

Side note but idk why you dissed the extremely basic crystarium from FF13 of all things. People dog on the crystarium because its just linear progression, basically just a hyper-dumbed down sphere grid from FFX (which people love and praise). XII' more complex license board system also gets tons of praise from fans and Zodiac Age fleshed it out even more. Of all the progression systems to cite as an alternative to FF7's simplicity I'm not sure why you'd choose the absolute more basic of basic systems as a crystarium. The reason people disliked it is because the stats gained from holding X on the crystarium (cause that's all you do) could have just been offloaded to automatic boosts when you level up. It was just weird tedium that barely justified stat differences between the 6 roles a character could have in battle.

I mean hell, FF13 is the game that is also infamous for having most non-boss encounters be entirely beatable by the auto-battle button. When it comes to simple that game did both progression and combat about as simply as it could. I've grown to appreciate its unique feel and complexities over the years and XIII-2 certainly fixed a lot of problems, but again of all the FF games to put in opposition to 7's simplicity, 13 feels like the worst candidate.

i would say dragon quest just needs more exposure. hopefully it gets that soon.
graphics have a limit. you can only go so far, no matter if you go realistic or cartoony. i've kept an eye on how the graphics look with each new console generation. it is starting to look the same to me. there's little jumps here and there, but do you need to see 30k strands of hair on lightning or cloud's head? every object added into a 3d environment requires rendering and processing by the console/pc. the more that exists, the longer the load times are. that the main complaint people usually have about games. i don't have a problem with load times if i'm heading into a big ass area filled to the brim with stuff. but too many things to keep up with causes slowdown and stuttering. i've seen this a few times on the ps2, which is very rare to see. and the switch sees that stuff happening too, but that seems to be centered around handheld and tv mode.
i started gaming in the mid 90's around the age of 5. after a while, graphics aren't that impressive; the game being eye catching and having good designs becomes more important.
the argument for prince inflation falls a bit flat since game prices have remained relatively the same throughout time. mario 64 was about $60 at release. i think it sold on the wii shop for about 5-10 dollars. lots of things have rose in price, but that one remains near the same. hopefully someone could find a list of prices for systems and consoles through out the year and more analysis can be done in more depth.
ff7 was ultimately released on the psx, and pc a year later. i didn't know that ff games were released on the pc until a few years ago when i saw a pc copy of ff8 at a thrift store. most people do associate this game in particular to the psx. a lot of people praised the game and told their friends about it; which would help drive up sales. i'm certain that most of the people singing ff7 remake's praises either haven't played the game in decades, or just replayed the first disc to satisfy their nostalgia itch and called it a day. ff7remake is disc one of the original. this is probably where some of the dissonance comes from. new players have nothing clouding their judgement. the game is wholesale new and if they did play the original, they probably weren't impressed by what they experienced. or they are very glad for quality of life improvements that have been made since 98'.
the graphics are possibly the reason for the long development time. i was reminded earlier
in this thread that a lot of effort goes into making a game presentable, let alone a from the ground up remake. lighting, shadows, model rendering adjustments, costumes and animation. those take quite a while to work out and fine tune. add in voice acting, mouth movements need to be synced up too. that would explain the nearly 7 year gap for the game coming out for the ps4. and usually consoles have different internal set ups and the programs used for each can't really communicate with each other. that's why ports take so long to make. you basically have to translate the game from one coding language to another to get it to function.
i'll have to make another post to comment on the sales and reception of the ps4/5. slowly running out of room in this one.
yep. the game was marketed and named "Final Fantasy VII: Remake". we expected the same base game with some easter eggs and references to the other installments in 7, and maybe a few to some of the other games. 9 does this through every aspect of it. we are also in the middle or a remaster/remake storm. some people probably just shrugged and had no interest in revisiting an old story. others may have been excited to see if anything was going to change.
old players were probably interested in checking the game out; younger player's would have probably been motivated by fan art of aerith and tifa. the only thing that kept me going through my first playthrough of the original was putting tifa in the third party slot so the victory camera would swing in close to her at the end of battles. i was about 14, so that the explanation to that decision.
is the crystarium linear? yes. [also, thank you for naming it. i was drawing a complete blank on the name. i just remember crystals being everywhere in the menu] is the sphere grid linear? you bet your sweet bippy it is. why hate on one over the other? the sphere grid doesn't stop you from exploring and moving around on it as long as you have the levels to do so. you can start jumping paths as soon as the calm lands. the crystarium is limited on story progression. if you fight every battle during a chapter, there's very little grinding. you'll be as strong as the story says that you need to be. you need to beat the game to unlock the final part of it.
why would that be a problem? some people like to do all of the quests first before beating the game. i've certainly been in this mind set for the past several years. i think ffx was the start of that. along with dot hack, both which i played back in the 2000's. you could do lots of stuff before beating the game and taking a break.
i'll continue this in a second post, barely 350 characters left.

Post automatically merged: Monday at 8:04 PM

i'm encountering some weird error, so i copied my second post into a text file. hopefully this goes through.

 

[Somnia]

The only thing that annoys me about the remake/sequel/timeline fuckery is that they were playing coy about it in the marketing. But, realistically that would only bother players who are really attached to the story of the original game. The bigger issue with the series has been the dumb idea of splitting the content of one game into three 60 hr ones. It forces them to fill the game with filler, minigames and nonsense.

Honestly that's why it works. We already knew the game was gonna have to take vast liberties and make absurdly large additions to the source material to take a single 40 hour game and spread it across 3, 40 hour games. Of course now we have a better idea as to what all that means, but I'm kind of glad that in an age of media marketing the totality of themselves to audiences before release at least 1 massive budget project managed to play with expectations even if I personally didn't care for it all too much.

The filler argument is interesting to me as someone who hasn't played Rebirth. I'm sure it does feel like a lot, but almost every minigame I've seen in Rebirth was present in the OG or is just new side content. Kinda want to play it just to see if I can understand why people don't mind OG's consistent minigame shakeups but lament Rebirth as far as a main playthrough goes.



__________________________________________________________________________________________

Side note, I'm starting a Final Fantasy 1 playthrough! Will be my first time on a pixel remaster release and I'm excited to shoot for the platinum! Anyone want a party member named after them? Gimme a name and what class ya want if so

 

[Meekoos]

In full honesty I always pass on Dragon Quest due to me never liking Toriyama's art style, Chrono Trigger my one exception.

What makes a Final Fantasy game is probably the best question to ask now since that's where the discussion is heading. For me it's the immersion to go everywhere in a breathing world of each Ivalice title and FFXV failed me in that and if that same level of depth is present in FFXVI then honestly I'm being told to look elsewhere, either new titles, indies, or old titles getting remastered as was the case for Romancing SaGa and Star Ocean.

 

[Strategist]

In full honesty I always pass on Dragon Quest due to me never liking Toriyama's art style, Chrono Trigger my one exception.

Weird. It is the opposite for me. I like the artstyle but I don't like the vibes or the story. Usually its the basic JRPG country bumpkin that goes on an adventure storyline we've all seen a thousand times. Final Fantasy, for all its faults, tries to be more "adult" (for lack of a better word) and varied in its themes and settings.

 

[Somnia]

Weird. It is the opposite for me. I like the artstyle but I don't like the vibes or the story. Usually its the basic JRPG country bumpkin that goes on an adventure storyline we've all seen a thousand times. Final Fantasy, for all its faults, tries to be more "adult" (for lack of a better word) and varied in its themes and settings.

Highly recommend trying games like DQ5, DQ7 and DQ11 out. I think it also applies to entries like DQ8 but those first 3 I mentioned do a fantastic job of adding important wrinkles to the very familiar story and setting that the franchise tends to cling to, especially DQ5 and DQ7. I don't think a single game has captured the specific sense of adventure that DQ7 gives me and I wish I could bottle that shit up and drink it lol

 

[MasterEn]

Weird. It is the opposite for me. I like the artstyle but I don't like the vibes or the story. Usually its the basic JRPG country bumpkin that goes on an adventure storyline we've all seen a thousand times. Final Fantasy, for all its faults, tries to be more "adult" (for lack of a better word) and varied in its themes and settings.

In full honesty I always pass on Dragon Quest due to me never liking Toriyama's art style, Chrono Trigger my one exception.

What makes a Final Fantasy game is probably the best question to ask now since that's where the discussion is heading. For me it's the immersion of each Ivalice title and FFXV failed me in that and if that same level of depth is present in FFXVI then honestly I'm being told to look elsewhere, either new titles, indies, or old titles getting remastered as was the case for Romancing SaGa and Star Ocean.

final fantasy is rooted in dungeons & dragons. that's why the story feels more "adult", it is supposed to be taking itself seriously. dragon quest has more of a relaxed feel to it. that could be due to Toriyama's involvement. he liked being more chilled and comedic with his stuff.
another thing that should be noted, is that the people involved with the games have changed over time. it's more unusual for someone to leave a company in japan from what i've heard, but it does happen. this would cause a usually subtle shift with anything new coming out of a company. the people who worked on the first final fantasy games may no longer be at the company.

 

[Strategist]

final fantasy is rooted in dungeons & dragons. that's why the story feels more "adult", it is supposed to be taking itself seriously. dragon quest has more of a relaxed feel to it. that could be due to Toriyama's involvement. he liked being more chilled and comedic with his stuff.
another thing that should be noted, is that the people involved with the games have changed over time. it's more unusual for someone to leave a company in japan from what i've heard, but it does happen. this would cause a usually subtle shift with anything new coming out of a company. the people who worked on the first final fantasy games may no longer be at the company.

I could see Nomura trying to turn Final Fantasy into something more like Kingdom Hearts, but Yoshi P is a big fan of the older Final Fantasies. Problem is, he doesn't like turnbased and is Devil May Cry pilled.

Post automatically merged: Yesterday at 12:06 AM

New Squaresoft medley by an amazing cover band.

 

[starseeker300]

Side note, I'm starting a Final Fantasy 1 playthrough! Will be my first time on a pixel remaster release and I'm excited to shoot for the platinum! Anyone want a party member named after them? Gimme a name and what class ya want if so

I call red mage slot

 

[Meekoos]

Side note, I'm starting a Final Fantasy 1 playthrough! Will be my first time on a pixel remaster release and I'm excited to shoot for the platinum! Anyone want a party member named after them? Gimme a name and what class ya want if so

White Mage - Anri the true MVP

 

[Pandaprewmaster325]

Its a damn shame they keep remastering them in 2d format without improving the story , ff1 is like barebones in terms of story you don't even get to say anything as the heroes all you do is act surprised lol , garland is nonexistent as a villain.

The game is pretty difficult basing my judgment on the origins copy I would say the 2d games seem more difficult than the 3d ones (I only played 7 and 8 from the 3d games) its way less forgiving in ff1 the pacing is also slow as heck I beaten the game at level 35 or 36 to think this is final fantasy started so simple and how far it came...


Same goes for ff2 it got a pretty good intro showcasing the emperor and the heroes one thing I found outrageous was maria being the slowest in the game she starts with highest agility and somehow lacked behind in the intro....In terms of gameplay ff2 is unique by having no level system instead you get this "the more you use the better you become" sort of system now its not bad but quite flawed I didn't use any exploits of hitting the team members to gain health I see it as pretty lame tbh , the fact that you need to mass use spells to get them going is genuinely annoying and spells like esuna can come in handy late game but because I found myself not getting hit by negative spells that much it remained lvl 1...

So you get the sort of gameplay that if you decide to change your weapon or any of the members weapons at a certain point in the game their performance would go down unless its maria who I see as a spellcaster for the most part this system forces you to stick to few spells and weapons that you have leveled up pretty well during the game.

And the story? As I said the intro gives off promising vibes into this being an amazing adventure to stop evil well the game starts off in you getting chased by imperial soldiers and supposedly killed in the process that's quite a way to start the beginning of the game sounded pretty promising but as time went on the story just slowly disintegrated there is no major character development for any of the members save for gordon who was like the only interesting character in this whole mess and gareth the original Dragoon in my case the bunching bag of the team as foes just targeted him the most his death was the only meaningful one too each other character death felt rushed (Joseph literally dies one dungeon later after getting to know him LOL)

Speaking of dungeons the design is torture I can only imagine square at the time making dungeons and deciding that it would be good to add trap doors that punish the player for exploring you know this clip of tom from & jerry where tom is creating some sort of chemical and has an evil grin the whole time? That's how it looked like when square were making the dungeons for ff2 its a game that has a pretty grim setting for a world and the potential to be top tier in terms of story but goes underused and just falls flat I mean the emperor is supposed to be this very strong being well he dies pretty easily both times he doesn't get enough screen time either.

Square shouldn't keep remastering these 2 games and keeping the core story untouched they seriously should remake ff2 and make the story good

I heard that at some rerelease of ff2 (there is so many that it feels like square just sits in the meeting room one guy says "we are releasing ff2 for the billionth time" and the room goes wild) the level up of items system is more dynamic and allows for pretty fast leveling of weapons and spells early on but become slower as time goes on.

 

[MasterEn]

Its a damn shame they keep remastering them in 2d format without improving the story , ff1 is like barebones in terms of story you don't even get to say anything as the heroes all you do is act surprised lol , garland is nonexistent as a villain.

The game is pretty difficult basing my judgment on the origins copy I would say the 2d games seem more difficult than the 3d ones (I only played 7 and 8 from the 3d games) its way less forgiving in ff1 the pacing is also slow as heck I beaten the game at level 35 or 36 to think this is final fantasy started so simple and how far it came...


Same goes for ff2 it got a pretty good intro showcasing the emperor and the heroes one thing I found outrageous was maria being the slowest in the game she starts with highest agility and somehow lacked behind in the intro....In terms of gameplay ff2 is unique by having no level system instead you get this "the more you use the better you become" sort of system now its not bad but quite flawed I didn't use any exploits of hitting the team members to gain health I see it as pretty lame tbh , the fact that you need to mass use spells to get them going is genuinely annoying and spells like esuna can come in handy late game but because I found myself not getting hit by negative spells that much it remained lvl 1...

So you get the sort of gameplay that if you decide to change your weapon or any of the members weapons at a certain point in the game their performance would go down unless its maria who I see as a spellcaster for the most part this system forces you to stick to few spells and weapons that you have leveled up pretty well during the game.

And the story? As I said the intro gives off promising vibes into this being an amazing adventure to stop evil well the game starts off in you getting chased by imperial soldiers and supposedly killed in the process that's quite a way to start the beginning of the game sounded pretty promising but as time went on the story just slowly disintegrated there is no major character development for any of the members save for gordon who was like the only interesting character in this whole mess and gareth the original Dragoon in my case the bunching bag of the team as foes just targeted him the most his death was the only meaningful one too each other character death felt rushed (Joseph literally dies one dungeon later after getting to know him LOL)

Speaking of dungeons the design is torture I can only imagine square at the time making dungeons and deciding that it would be good to add trap doors that punish the player for exploring you know this clip of tom from & jerry where tom is creating some sort of chemical and has an evil grin the whole time? That's how it looked like when square were making the dungeons for ff2 its a game that has a pretty grim setting for a world and the potential to be top tier in terms of story but goes underused and just falls flat I mean the emperor is supposed to be this very strong being well he dies pretty easily both times he doesn't get enough screen time either.

Square shouldn't keep remastering these 2 games and keeping the core story untouched they seriously should remake ff2 and make the story good

I heard that at some rerelease of ff2 (there is so many that it feels like square just sits in the meeting room one guy says "we are releasing ff2 for the billionth time" and the room goes wild) the level up of items system is more dynamic and allows for pretty fast leveling of weapons and spells early on but become slower as time goes on.

dissidia does a good subtle job of giving garland a backstory and some depth to the world of final fantasy 1.
ff1 [and to an extent the next 5 games] was based off of dungeons and dragons. so it being fairly hard should be expected. most people would only own 1 or 2 games in the late 80's and most games were $20 - $60 plus the system.
i'd argue that they get somewhat easier and difficult the later the rerelease is. the first two games don't have an auto-target system. if your character targets an enemy and they die before their turn, they will still attack the empty air. there are newer, tougher enemies from the gba ports and onwards.
i don't have enough room to go into the details of ff2's combat system, but fun fact: maria is supposed to be the black mage, and leon is the white mage of the group.
ff2 came out almost exactly year later than the first one. literally dropping a day before the one year anniversary of ff1. not a whole lot of time to write a good story.
fuck the dungeons. i hate them immensely.
the weapon, spell and stat growths primarily depend on the enemy's rank. higher rank, more boosts to the growths. speed is an exception. it just levels up whenever the fuck it wants to.

 

[Pandaprewmaster325]

dissidia does a good subtle job of giving garland a backstory and some depth to the world of final fantasy 1.
ff1 [and to an extent the next 5 games] was based off of dungeons and dragons. so it being fairly hard should be expected. most people would only own 1 or 2 games in the late 80's and most games were $20 - $60 plus the system.
i'd argue that they get somewhat easier and difficult the later the rerelease is. the first two games don't have an auto-target system. if your character targets an enemy and they die before their turn, they will still attack the empty air. there are newer, tougher enemies from the gba ports and onwards.
i don't have enough room to go into the details of ff2's combat system, but fun fact: maria is supposed to be the black mage, and leon is the white mage of the group.
ff2 came out almost exactly year later than the first one. literally dropping a day before the one year anniversary of ff1. not a whole lot of time to write a good story.
fuck the dungeons. i hate them immensely.
the weapon, spell and stat growths primarily depend on the enemy's rank. higher rank, more boosts to the growths. speed is an exception. it just levels up whenever the fuck it wants to.

Yeah Im interested in dissidia sounds like fun game to me

Im not into D&D but since it was a thing back in the 80s and 90s among nerds its safe to assume FF was inspired by it every game dev played it back then.

My problem with ff1 and 2 is they came out inis 87/88 a time when technology allowed for way less cool stuff ever since then technology grew and this allowed these games to become way more than their original release but square for some reason only changes gameplay and keeps the lackluster story as it is when they can add more....and make the cast of ff2 pretty memorable gus doesn't even say more than 3 lines I think and gareth lacks the ability to jump like he is the original Dragoon come on square give him something instead of being firion on steroids.

I don't have a problem with the difficulty I think that's one of the positives of final fantasy you never feel like enemies are weak you are always trying to gain the advantage always on edge my problem is ff1 lacks items at least on the ps1 the thief (carl I named him the bunching bag of the team) was supposed to the utility character but ended up underperforming cuz lack of items made things unnecessarily hard.

Also the pacing if only it was slightly faster something I like a lot about FF8 is the fast exp gain few battles and you are few levels up while I find ff8 to the easiest of what I played so far it still manages to be challenging I mean my hands were shaking when fighting ultimecia.

Yeah I just don't like the ff2 system all that much use weapon too much int goes down like by brute forcing my way I become dumb? Alright then lets use spe- ohhhh spell damage is pathetic what about ultima? Oh man what a cool animation I hope it does huge amounts of damage (spoiler it does crappy damage :|)

 

[Num]

I think its more than Rebirth being an exclusive in a vacuum though like all of us have said it is certainly a reason. Worth noting is that Remake was also a timed exclusive but sold waaay better. Part of this could be seen as Remake failing in the eyes of fans but discourse surrounding it online has remained mostly positive so I struggle to see that as the reason.

i honestly just believe the reason is because of the mystery and anticipation surrounding the remake. anytime news dropped about it it would take the internet by storm. all of this builds up for years upon years and i wouldnt even just say this is solely about placing high expectations, but more of just wondering what the hell such a high profile mass budgeted remake of a legendary game has in store. and once that curisosity was satiated the overwhelming interest just wasnt there for what came next