Members see less ads - sign up now for free and join the community!
You don't understand how, PRE BETA GAMEPLAY message or not, there's a big difference between showing something that looks like crud and allowing a journalist to discuss a glitch as if it was a feature?
Well, given that they're currently working on an off-road vehicle even though Chocobos already exist, it seems pretty silly to assume that Chocobos were intended as a replacement for an off-road vehicle rather than as a different option. Just because you think the two things are duplicative doesn't mean that the dev team saw them that way.
In any case, if they really cared about what one would realistically do with a luxury car, they wouldn't have given you the option to put a bunch of weird magical accessories on it to allow it to fly. Like off-roading, the Regalia Type-F is completely unnecessary in terms of the game's structure but designed to let people have fun with different vehicle types (while also expanding the capabilities of Luminous as an engine).
Well, given that they're currently working on an off-road vehicle even though Chocobos already exist, it seems pretty silly to assume that Chocobos were intended as a replacement for an off-road vehicle rather than as a different option. Just because you think the two things are duplicative doesn't mean that the dev team saw them that way.
In any case, if they really cared about what one would realistically do with a luxury car, they wouldn't have given you the option to put a bunch of weird magical accessories on it to allow it to fly. Like off-roading, the Regalia Type-F is completely unnecessary in terms of the game's structure but designed to let people have fun with different vehicle types (while also expanding the capabilities of Luminous as an engine).
It's all a matter of the intent behind its addition. If the off-road Regalia is something that Tabata originally wanted in the game, but couldn't fit it in that's fine. However, more signs point to its future inclusion as a reactive measure to the overblown negativity the team has likely witnessed online. I'm all for listening to feedback, but it must be parsed in order to address REAL issues over consumer ignorance.
Likes:
Jubileus
Even if it was something that was originally planned (which is still completely absurd that we're even talking about it) it still wouldn't make it a good decision to add to the game. It still isn't necessary. It still doesn't fit. And it still is a fairly large project.
There are two ways I can get behind it, though. If it's stage 1 of fixing the ability to fly anywhere without the auto corrections, or if it's part of one of the upcoming dlc scenarios but they're letting it happen in the main game. But, I would think they'd frame it that way if it's the former, and it'd make more sense to wait for that scenario to drop before implementing.
Now, looking at that video, it looks like the Regalia is using new off roading tires, so it looks like it could also be all that work just to unlock the feature in a post-game upgrade. It'll work that way, in that it will side step some of the issues with competing with chocobos, but it just makes it even less necessary.
I really don't have as much of a problem with it as I'm letting on, though. I do think it's a minor thing. It's just giving me some doubts.
There are two ways I can get behind it, though. If it's stage 1 of fixing the ability to fly anywhere without the auto corrections, or if it's part of one of the upcoming dlc scenarios but they're letting it happen in the main game. But, I would think they'd frame it that way if it's the former, and it'd make more sense to wait for that scenario to drop before implementing.
Now, looking at that video, it looks like the Regalia is using new off roading tires, so it looks like it could also be all that work just to unlock the feature in a post-game upgrade. It'll work that way, in that it will side step some of the issues with competing with chocobos, but it just makes it even less necessary.
I really don't have as much of a problem with it as I'm letting on, though. I do think it's a minor thing. It's just giving me some doubts.
I think this is a very good point to make.
Personally, I don't see the point of adding in a feature that allows the Regalia to go off road and I think it's unnecessary. If truth be told, a part of me feels that, as Jenova has stated, its inclusion is a "reactive measure to the overblown negativity the team has witnessed online".
It may have been available before the game was released as a test feature, and was experienced by GameInformer I think it was? But now that's it post release, it's not a necessity they need to add tbh.
I'd rather they use that time and resources to work on other, more important things (more dedicated time and resources on improving the story is never a bad thing) but the decision has been made, and thus we can only see how it goes from hereon out.
With that being said, if they're gonna add it, we might as well make good use of it once it goes live and have fun with it. It's pointless but I'm still gonna try and have fun with it by driving like a homicidal maniac, destroying flora and fauna left and right =P
Personally, I don't see the point of adding in a feature that allows the Regalia to go off road and I think it's unnecessary. If truth be told, a part of me feels that, as Jenova has stated, its inclusion is a "reactive measure to the overblown negativity the team has witnessed online".
It may have been available before the game was released as a test feature, and was experienced by GameInformer I think it was? But now that's it post release, it's not a necessity they need to add tbh.
I'd rather they use that time and resources to work on other, more important things (more dedicated time and resources on improving the story is never a bad thing) but the decision has been made, and thus we can only see how it goes from hereon out.
With that being said, if they're gonna add it, we might as well make good use of it once it goes live and have fun with it. It's pointless but I'm still gonna try and have fun with it by driving like a homicidal maniac, destroying flora and fauna left and right =P
Likes:
DrBretto
I'm neutral honestly. Never liked how magnitized the Regalia's steering controls are on-road, especially when nearing other cars where you're forced to slow down in order to not collide against them. I get the intent of limiting it to roads and all, but the way its controlled could have been better imo.
On one hand i can understand people feeling worried they are taking the wrong route of feedback, on the other hand i can't really agree with it being a warning sign of the game potentially becoming a mess upon feedback updates based on this aspect. I much prefer doing the wait & see approach.
On one hand i can understand people feeling worried they are taking the wrong route of feedback, on the other hand i can't really agree with it being a warning sign of the game potentially becoming a mess upon feedback updates based on this aspect. I much prefer doing the wait & see approach.
Last edited:
That's great news. The game is far from perfect (both because of time-constraining problems and because of Tabata's team own decisions), but you can tell a lot of effort has been put into it and there was quite a lot at risk if this game underperformed (like, say, a big budget cut for XVI; which, tbh, might have been even good!).
Now, for God's sake, ditch the sequel approach for this series (sorry Hey Everyone :^)) and work hard on FF VII-R and XVI (and don't announce this one until it's close to done, as much as I want to see it).
The Regalia thing, however, is stupid. It's cute and all, but I really can't see who would want that, as boring as the on-rails controls for the Regalia could get.
Now, for God's sake, ditch the sequel approach for this series (sorry Hey Everyone :^)) and work hard on FF VII-R and XVI (and don't announce this one until it's close to done, as much as I want to see it).
The Regalia thing, however, is stupid. It's cute and all, but I really can't see who would want that, as boring as the on-rails controls for the Regalia could get.
"That's not to say games will ship out unfinished, but will definitely have more of their meatier parts left out for post-launch." This is what most people are afraid off, people don't want those parts left out post-launch, they want them at launch
there is nothing wrong with refinements, but they shouldn't make the game feel complete, they should feel like additions that enhance the experience, not fix holes, that shouldn't be there to begin with, this is probably why people demonize the AAA industry to begin with because of the shady practices(looks at Deus Ex WTF Pre-Order Bullshit), unfinished or buggy games(WTF Ubisoft, by god Assassin's Creed Unity was something else). Oh and Day One DLC.
I think the fear comes from the meatier stuff that should have been in the game to begin with being available post launch is that it can possible create an unsatisfying game, that's the problem, and worse it being sold to you as DLC. Gamers are afraid of games being ripped into parts and sold when they should have been in the main game, they are afraid of a game feeling incomplete which to a lot of people FFXV does feel incomplete, and it's understandable why for example the MT Prompto stuff that wasn't set up well, to a lot of people it came out of nowhere, and worst of all they are selling DLC that will probably flesh out that particular thing, and that is what people are afraid of. They are afraid of Final Fantasy a very story driven series going this direction. the FFXV backlash to the story doesn't come out of nowhere, it really is something that was a long time coming.
I just feel like FFXV gets a lot of it because of the hype it initially had, I mean people knew about this game for 10 years since it was Versus XIII, so it's understandable why they would be upset if certain plot points that are in the main game, that should be in the main game, are going to be held off for DLC, and they are going to be pretty upset, when certain characters that we are supposed to feel for, but can't because they get very little screen time(Luna), and some things being off-screen like Iedolas becoming a demon, so on and so forth where in previous games this wouldn't happen, there wouldn't be plot points that would be explained as DLC, they would be in the main game itself because they could only ship that copy.
Also Physical and Digital will probably always exist, hell that's the reason why the Xbox One got so much backlash, consumers don't just break rank, if they did MS would have kept it's stance, Sony would have done the same thing the only reason it doesn't on PC is because it has a very competitive market to get away with it, consoles do not, they don't have enough sales, they don't have enough freedom to get away with such things.
I'd rather they save FFXVI for the PlayStation 5 launch, I think they should work on spin-offs and better yet remakes, before they get a mainline out, as well as sequels, I'd rather have a Type-Next before a FFXVI at this point.
I think for the eighth generation Square should do the following
The FF7 Remake(Trilogy?)
FF Dissidia Reboot(It's a reboot)
Final Fantasy X-3
Final Fantasy Type-Next
Final Dissidia Reboot Sequel
Final Fantasy VIII Remake
Final Fantasy Versus XV
Save Final Fantasy XVI as a launch title for the PlayStation 5, Xbox Two, Super Nintendo Switch, and Steam.
I think for the eighth generation Square should do the following
The FF7 Remake(Trilogy?)
FF Dissidia Reboot(It's a reboot)
Final Fantasy X-3
Final Fantasy Type-Next
Final Dissidia Reboot Sequel
Final Fantasy VIII Remake
Final Fantasy Versus XV
Save Final Fantasy XVI as a launch title for the PlayStation 5, Xbox Two, Super Nintendo Switch, and Steam.
Last edited:
Likes:
llazy77
I don't know and I'm sorry if I come off as a bit agressive, but in that list I see everything that has been wrong with the series for the last decade and a half: we don't need half-assed unwanted sequels, nor middling spin-offs (Type-0 is alright, but definitely shouldn't take the spotlight), nor remakes or anything like that.
Revisiting old FFs is boring as fuck. I can't wrap my head around people actually wanting that: wouldn't people prefer NEW things, rather than clinging to the same characters and worlds? And why is that? That's because there's only so much you can extract from these characters and worlds, especially when said characters and worlds have been exploited that much and when they themselves aren't able to produce anything worthy of the original title. I've had my fair share of seeing Noctis, for example, and I don't want to see him anymore other than in the occasional Dissidia or stuff like that.
Had they taken this approach during the Squaresoft days, we would still be in FF X with a myriad of shitty sequels, instead of getting actually exciting things. I don't want to wait 10 years just to see new stuff (the mere thought is depressing as hell); a generation full of XIII sequels and little more was enough.
I feel that this is the biggest aspect where S-E misses the mark in regards to the series, like they don't understand what made FF be what it was.
Revisiting old FFs is boring as fuck. I can't wrap my head around people actually wanting that: wouldn't people prefer NEW things, rather than clinging to the same characters and worlds? And why is that? That's because there's only so much you can extract from these characters and worlds, especially when said characters and worlds have been exploited that much and when they themselves aren't able to produce anything worthy of the original title. I've had my fair share of seeing Noctis, for example, and I don't want to see him anymore other than in the occasional Dissidia or stuff like that.
Had they taken this approach during the Squaresoft days, we would still be in FF X with a myriad of shitty sequels, instead of getting actually exciting things. I don't want to wait 10 years just to see new stuff (the mere thought is depressing as hell); a generation full of XIII sequels and little more was enough.
I feel that this is the biggest aspect where S-E misses the mark in regards to the series, like they don't understand what made FF be what it was.
Last edited:
Likes:
Jenova and Nova
I still think the off-road Regalia has less to do with anything reactive and more to do with adding features to Luminous for future projects. Based on my years of development, I'm also reasonably positive that it's a small team -- maybe 5 people -- working on it. It's an iteration on some feature branch using existing assets and codebase. The fact that it may be released as DLC is just bonus.
I'd rather we get a quality FFXVI then something that's just there to be new and "exciting", I'm fine with new, I'm fine with it really, but i'd rather a FFXVI turn out to be the next FFVIII or IX in terms of quality than to be a XV or worse XIII level of disappointment. This isn't the PS1 era anymore, they want to make big games, incredibly ambitious titles, so I want them to deliver on that, so if it means we have to wait till the PS5 for FFXVI fine, just don't make it terrible, don't make it feel like a waste of time. I care about quality, I'm not going to be excited just by seeing a trailer of FFXVI for the PS4 and the game comes out, and it's the same quality as FFXIII, with the storytelling of FFXV. If Square can do everything on this list, and have them be quality titles, then you know what I wouldn't really care if they are off the same worlds, because hey I'm getting quality games, and FFXVI can come out at any time no need to rush it. Hell I doubt the Squaresoft days can really be compared today, games are just harder to develop now than ever before due to the changes in hardware people expect more.
You've got this all backwards.
PC is practically all-digital nowadays. The vast majority of PC purchases are made through online stores, and digital is so ubiquitous there that some publishers sell "physical copies" that are just a Steam key on a disc. The reason this works is because PC games have been limited-use for decades, they tend to crater in price so there's plenty of AAA games being sold for $5 for people to impulse-buy, and the countries for which downloading would be intolerable are those that probably just pirated everything anyway.
Consoles, in contrast, have an ecosystem based around discs being a physical thing that can be collected or resold, and their games retain more of their value for longer because of it. A non-transferable XO disc would have been significantly less valuable to the customer than a transferable PS4 disc, but Microsoft wasn't willing to decrease the price to compensate. It shouldn't be any wonder that Microsoft's DRM stance practically lost the generation for them.
Even if Microsoft succeeded, though, I doubt Sony would have followed suit, because they're a much more global company (as a console manufacturer) than Microsoft is. Microsoft makes almost all of its sales in the US and UK, so it (foolishly) assumed its customer base would have consistent access to the internet. Sony's customer base is far more spread out and includes countries that are unlikely to have the sort of infrastructure that the UK and (most of the) US have, so enforcing an online connection could have lost them entire markets.
TL;DR, PC is as digital as any market is likely to get. XO's DRM plot failed because Americans (and Britons) love FREEDOM, but Sony was never in any position to even attempt that sort of thing without forsaking significant parts of its customer base.
PC is practically all-digital nowadays. The vast majority of PC purchases are made through online stores, and digital is so ubiquitous there that some publishers sell "physical copies" that are just a Steam key on a disc. The reason this works is because PC games have been limited-use for decades, they tend to crater in price so there's plenty of AAA games being sold for $5 for people to impulse-buy, and the countries for which downloading would be intolerable are those that probably just pirated everything anyway.
Consoles, in contrast, have an ecosystem based around discs being a physical thing that can be collected or resold, and their games retain more of their value for longer because of it. A non-transferable XO disc would have been significantly less valuable to the customer than a transferable PS4 disc, but Microsoft wasn't willing to decrease the price to compensate. It shouldn't be any wonder that Microsoft's DRM stance practically lost the generation for them.
Even if Microsoft succeeded, though, I doubt Sony would have followed suit, because they're a much more global company (as a console manufacturer) than Microsoft is. Microsoft makes almost all of its sales in the US and UK, so it (foolishly) assumed its customer base would have consistent access to the internet. Sony's customer base is far more spread out and includes countries that are unlikely to have the sort of infrastructure that the UK and (most of the) US have, so enforcing an online connection could have lost them entire markets.
TL;DR, PC is as digital as any market is likely to get. XO's DRM plot failed because Americans (and Britons) love FREEDOM, but Sony was never in any position to even attempt that sort of thing without forsaking significant parts of its customer base.
My entire post was about why PC was all digital, and why I think digital and physical on consoles wouldn't be going away anytime soon, everything you say just adds to it, and it's the reason why PC gets away with it, why was because of market, on the PC there is much more market freedom than the consoles will ever have because their is tons of competition Steam isn't the only game in town. Where as on consoles, your market is tied to the console you get unless you have another 400-500 dollars lying around to buy another console, so the only meaningful freedom console gamers have are used sales.
Also the whole Sony doing the same thing comes from this
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/DRM-Xbox-One-PlayStation-4-Shuhei-Yoshida-Hiroshi-Kawano,23292.html Which heavily implies that Sony changed their potential DRM plans after looking at what happened to MS, it wasn't because of certain markets, it was because they would have had the same backlash, and considering their PlayStation division is the only successful division in their market, and they absolutely needed the PS4 to sell or else Sony would have sunk.
Also the whole Sony doing the same thing comes from this
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/DRM-Xbox-One-PlayStation-4-Shuhei-Yoshida-Hiroshi-Kawano,23292.html Which heavily implies that Sony changed their potential DRM plans after looking at what happened to MS, it wasn't because of certain markets, it was because they would have had the same backlash, and considering their PlayStation division is the only successful division in their market, and they absolutely needed the PS4 to sell or else Sony would have sunk.