Final Fantasy XIV

[Squeek]

Re: Final Fantasy XIV

I see well that's great thanks I appreciate all of your valuable information. Also you tend to misuse statistics because you also have to accept the fact that many people might not even like the RPG's that aren't doing so well. Have you ever thought that? I mean believe it or not I did not jump for joy when playing tales of the abyss. That game dragged on to an extent that I could not play anymore. Way too much filler for me I would of had to make myself sit through the boring cutscenes.

I think you (and several people in this thread) need to go re-visit what statistics are.

My argument: People who buy Final Fantasy tend to not buy other RPGs.

My data: Final Fantasy games sell over 5 million copies each, while other RPGs fail to break 500,000.

Your argument: FINAL FANTASY ROX AND UR DUM

Your data: EVERYONE I KNOW LOVES FINAL FANTASY

Now you're trying to tell me that you hated a different RPG. That's fine. That's still anecdotal evidence. The low sales have absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the game. EVERY RPG, aside from Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy, has low sales numbers. This means that there is an abundance of advertising revenue spent on Square's games, as well as a "loyal" fan base who buys every game they make. That does not magically say "Oh Square sold the most units their games must be the best hurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr". Halo sold more units than Half-Life, but we all know which one of those franchises is better.

Right under Final Fantasy in sales numbers is Spider-Man. Four and a half million units sold on the PS2. That must be a GREAT game. I'm almost positive everyone loved that game.

Popular does not mean right. Popular does not mean best. Popular means advertising was most effective.

[NFD]

Re: Final Fantasy XIV

fix'd

No, it was kicker.

[Bahamut-X]

Re: Final Fantasy XIV

Just wanted to comment on the character design in FFXIII. I am rather disappointed. The main character (Lightning as they call her) looks basically identical to say, cloud from advent children. The first time I saw a cutscene for the game I was blown back by the similarity in the facial features. I think there is even an image somewhere that someone made which compares the two really well with decreasing opacity and one image over the other. I was really hoping for a more unique character. Hopefully she will have an interesting personality to compensate for visual similarity. Also, her clothes are typical coats / belts/ buckles etc. More run of the mill.

Snow is just simply seifer + cloud. I am absolutely blown away by the lack of originality here. It's just atrocious.

Oerba seems to be there to play the token cute girl and provide sex appeal. Also, she seems to bear some resemblance to yuna from FFX2.

I don't really know much about the other character at this point. More coats and buckles and stuff though.

I know the only things I have commented on so far are the visual appearances of the characters. The only things I can hope for are interesting personalities and character development (Squeek would laugh at that).

[xObserveRx]

Re: Final Fantasy XIV

Alright, there are two things I need to mention here: (This is for Squeek btw).

1) You keep mentioning "The whole game" when you mention your play through of FFX. You do understand that you played merely 10% of the game, if that, correct? Stories, IMO, are meant to unfold and that's exactly what happens in FFX. The story is pretty "wtf?" at first, but it does end up making sense as you progress and other things happen as well as the "let's save the world" thing. I'm just saying that even though a story may be generic at first glance, it isn't always the main plot point that makes the story, it's the little things. FFX had character development, at least in the main two or three characters.

2) Did you play the Japanese version of FFVI? Like Mal said, the boss is explained by the two soldiers you're traveling with and the fight is a joke actually. I find it hilarious that you had any trouble on it at all. Secondly, I agree that FFVI's story was pretty generic, but you have to remember, at the time, stories in video games were not very complicated. Tales of Phantasia may have come out before FFVI; I'm not sure, but (and I'm assuming that game's story was relatively complicated) at that time, FFIV (2 in North America) was pretty much the most complicated thing we had. Stories were relatively simple then. What may seem like a generically "cheesy, inside-the-box" idea nowadays, was (possibly) still inside-the-box at that time, but it really hadn't been done in a video game sense.

On a side note, I urge you to try three other games, even if it's only for a bit, to see what you think. The first is Chrono Trigger. It's considered by many (as I'm sure you know) to be one of the greatest RPGs ever. (I agree that it's definitely up there). It's made by your not-so-favourite company, but I can assure you, it has a different feel from the final fantasy series. Please attempt to keep bias aside, at least for a while on that one.

The other is Final Fantasy Tactics. If you enjoyed Disgaea, you'll (hopefully) enjoy this game... or you'll hate it. It's the same premise, minus a lot of the more engaging side elements of Disgaea. It has an odd story, set in medieval times. It has well developed characters and a very confusing conclusion. (Something I both enjoy and despise). The only thing this game has in common with the other Final Fantasy games is Chocobos. It is an outstanding game, if I've ever seen one.

Also, I have a question. If you're talking about generic stories and characters in Final Fantasy series, are you implying that the Tales series as a whole (not just your beloved favourite) has none of these elements?

I played Tales of Destiny all the way through and enjoyed the game. I, however, have to disagree with you (assuming you're saying that the tales series had neither of the things mentioned above) about a lot of things. For one, the graphics in the game were far from superb. For a playstation game, it had horrible 2D sprites, even compared to something like FFIV, FFV or Chrono Trigger. It also had a horrible mode-7 scrolling world that had been done a million times better by at least a few SNES games. Putting graphics aside (as although I've ripped on this games graphics, I really feel that graphics do not make a game), I have to say that ToD had a generic story as well. Talking swords that are embodiments of the the four elements? As I recall, this was a simple save the world story as well. The dialogue in the game was pretty good I remember; with quite a few humourous scenarios and good character development. But these are the things that turn a run-of-the-mill "save the world" idea into something much more engrossing and enjoyable.

I'm curious what you think about ToD and how you compare(d) it to other games of that time. Comparing games nowadays to things of the past is a null argument as far as I'm concerned. I like to believe that developers learn from great concepts and works of the past and build on them. Not compare themselves to someone's previously awesome work.

TL;DR: If you're not Squeek, it doesn't matter. If you are, I'm disappointed that you wouldn't read a few paragraphs.

[Squeek]

Re: Final Fantasy XIV

1) I don't recall mentioning 'the whole game'. However, my point is that even though I only played 10 hours (which I doubt is 10% of the game), the story never really went anywhere. I know there's more story I haven't seen, but can I get something? Anything? The idea is to engage players from the beginning, not make them slog through mindless encounters toward a goal you don't even understand.

2) No I did not. The two soldiers said not to do something while it was in a shell. However, having fought two or three battles before the turtle and having no experience whatsoever with ATB, I had no idea how to do battle.

I tried Chrono Trigger. I kinda liked the combat system and kinda didn't. It was a much better pacing compared to other Square games and there was actually story. I got several hours in before it froze on me and I realized then that I hadn't saved at all so I lost interest.

I've also tried Chrono Cross. Surprised you didn't mention that one, since it was actually good. I didn't play a lot of it and the combat system was confusing as hell but it was pretty solid. Watched my friend play almost the entire game.

I played Tactics but didn't really enjoy it.

Where's #3...?

I'm not implying that Tales stories are less generic. In fact, I know Tales stories are generic as hell. The draw to Tales stories is how the characters react to the current events and not so much the events themselves. Tales of Vesperia, for example, had a horrible plot (and horrible translation work but that's aside from the point), but the character development was so solid that I didn't notice until I thought back on the plot once I finished.

I didn't play any early Tales games. I tried Phantasia but didn't really get into it too much. Was interesting for a while since it's the "sequel" to Tales of Symphonia, but the random encounters and random BOSS encounters were really a turn-off. Did not try Destiny, Eternia, Destiny 2, any DS games, etc. Like many others, I got into it from Symphonia. Then I played Abyss and Phantasia, then bought a 360 for Vesperia. I tried Tales of Innocence but it wasn't in English and it bothered me faster than I thought it would. Also I think 3D games on the DS look horrible and just cannot play them.

[xObserveRx]

Re: Final Fantasy XIV

Thanks for the informative answers, at least now I can safely say "To each, his own."

[ShAiOnEi]

Re: Final Fantasy XIV

Popular does not mean right. Popular does not mean best. Popular means advertising was most effective.

So what are you so worked up about then? Either way what you think is the most superior RPG and what isn't you can't change someone elses opinion about that. So what if the mass majority doesn't play what you play. As long as you enjoyed that should be enough right? Games make it out there because people are buying them. If you still are getting the games you like then the developers surely are getting enough profit to produce. No matter if they advertise or not. Quit bitchin' and do what you enjoy and try not to bash something you obviously don't.

[Squeek]

Re: Final Fantasy XIV

I'm worked up because people don't read my posts.

I wonder how many times I've written that I'm annoyed because Final Fantasy's customers tend to not buy any other RPGs and they're missing out on some amazing games. I'm concerned because it's possible that there are amazing games coming out that nobody buys, and the company decides it's not worth it to keep making them so they discontinue production of future titles.

That's what I'm worked up about.

Edit: After watching some Tales videos to reminisce while my friend still has my Vesperia disc, I remembered another thing I love about the Tales games: in-battle dialogue. All boss battles have dialogue sequences during the fight (not a cutscene--actual in-battle dialogue while they're smashing away at each other). In addition, when you do something for your friend or your friend does something for you, there's dialogue. When one of the characters does something stupid in battle, they tell you. When one of the characters finds the enemy's weak point, they tell you. If your casters are getting interrupted, they'll tell you (and sometimes your guy will apologize). If they're low on health or took a big hit or doing really well or pretty much EVERYTHING they'll tell you. However, it doesn't happen every time to the point where you're sick of it. In fact I never got sick of hearing even the most annoying voice in combat.

It really adds another level of greatness to the already-awesome combat system.

Definitely a lot better than having all your party members be mute during battle other than to yell out move names.

[masterhickle]

Re: Final Fantasy XIV

1) I don't recall mentioning 'the whole game'. However, my point is that even though I only played 10 hours (which I doubt is 10% of the game), the story never really went anywhere. I know there's more story I haven't seen, but can I get something? Anything? The idea is to engage players from the beginning, not make them slog through mindless encounters toward a goal you don't even understand.

Actually, for someone's first time through FFX, 10 hours is about right for 10% of the game. I've beaten it (up to Yu Yevon, not counting collecting all the hidden items) 3 or 4 times, my fastest time being around 35 hours.

The story gets really in depth and takes some interesting twists and turns. To defeat Sin, a summoner must sacrifice themselves at the end of their journey to become an Aeon which can kill Sin. Also, someone the summoner is traveling with sacrifices themselves to become the next Sin.

So the group ends up deciding that they want to go about things differently - They want to kill Sin without anyone being sacrificed to do anything and to put an end to Sin permanently. Going against their religious ways makes things quite interesting....

Play through FFX fully once, you'll probably like it by the time you get to the end.

[macgravel]

Re: Final Fantasy XIV

And why are they already planning XIV when XIII isn't out yet? They don't know how the sales will do!

Well, let's see... One is a single player game, and one is a multi-player game. That pretty much solves that.

Just remove the 20-hour boss fights and the grinding and people might enjoy it more.

20-hour boss fights are awesome. I was sad when they cut down on the long boss fights just because a couple wusses got sick. :\

And what MMO doesn't have grinding of some sort? If there's no grinding, then everybody will easily be at the level cap. Once at the level cap, you can easily whore a certain creature for a rare drop. Then everybody will have the rare weapon, and it won't be rare anymore. Then everybody will be pretty much the same, and then the game will be boring. I don't know about you, but personally, it would be a waste to play. And I don't want to play an MMO like that.

[Squeek]

Re: Final Fantasy XIV

And what MMO doesn't have grinding of some sort? If there's no grinding, then everybody will easily be at the level cap. Once at the level cap, you can easily whore a certain creature for a rare drop. Then everybody will have the rare weapon, and it won't be rare anymore. Then everybody will be pretty much the same, and then the game will be boring. I don't know about you, but personally, it would be a waste to play. And I don't want to play an MMO like that.

WoW.

There's only a grind if you want there to be a grind. You can hit 80 in a month with casual play and about two weeks if you really try hard, and a patch coming soon is going to make that even faster. The only grinding comes from purely optional things that some stupid people (like me!) do in their spare time like grinding reputation with various factions or achievements or things of that nature.

You can't just whore a creature for a rare drop. Yes, creatures have rare drops, but nobody in the game even bothers, especially since the drops are pretty bad. You have to do raids. So you have to get a group and hope the group is good enough to kill the boss and hope your item drops.

WoW would not be popular if there were 20-hour boss fights. In fact, I don't think anyone would be playing WoW if there were. They're not fun. 20 hour DUNGEONS are fun if you use WoW's formula for raids, even though most raids only take 3-6 hours to fully clear. See, in WoW, there are any number of bosses in a dungeon and they don't respawn when you kill them, so you just call it one night and pick up where you left off the next. The raid resets a week later and you start over again. Prevents grinding / farming and still lets you experience epic boss battles.

Not all games are like MapleStory, even though FFXI tries to be.

[MrRubix]

Re: Final Fantasy XIV

I feel like there's nothing new. Everything I've seen about it I've seen in other FF games already.

Probably won't be picking this one up.

[macgravel]

Re: Final Fantasy XIV

I don't think anyone would be playing WoW if there were. They're not fun.

Opinion.

epic boss battles.

Not epic if they aren't 20 hours long.

[MrRubix]

Re: Final Fantasy XIV

I don't play Wow, but are the 20-hour long boss battles actually epic or just long-grind-repeat-style.

[Tokzic]

Re: Final Fantasy XIV

FF1 - Amazing
FF2 - Amazing
FF3 - Amazing
FF4 - Amazing
FF5 - Amazing
FF6 - Amazing
FF7 - Revolutionary

I seriously do not understand why so many people give such high regard - or any regard at all - to the first seven games.

Every single one that I've played, or watched be played, is utter, utter garbage. The writing is completely nonsensical and feels like you're just getting rushed through to fight whichever boss happens to be next. The worlds are all typical, unimaginative, flavourless fantasy. Until 7, there were no novel gameplay elements (and the gameplay element was the one and only good point of 7). The combat is lackluster, and plays the exact same way game after game.

FF8 - TRASH.

Are you serious? The first one I've played that didn't completely suck was 8. At least 8 had some coherency with its character interaction and writing. I enjoyed 8.

Can someone tell me what, if anything, makes the first seven games somehow not shit, especially in comparison?

unless this is just a giant troll that i fell for

I don't play Wow, but are the 20-hour long boss battles actually epic or just long-grind-repeat-style.

The boss battles in WoW are very, very well designed. Almost every boss has a learning curve - pretty much every boss has a handful of unique elements - and after killing a boss for the first time, the feeling is very empowering.