Members see less ads - sign up now for free and join the community!
-
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.
I heard that, and a few other things about the game's production and how Konami behaved. It's just one of many things that's put me off Konami's products for life. From their handling of MGS, to their shameful treatment of Kojima and their general staff. As far as I'm concerned, Silent Hill, Metal Gear and all their other franchises are as dead as Fortress. Even Capcom pales in comparison.
SQEX seems to be pushing against that kind of attitude, with XV being its best example.
SQEX seems to be pushing against that kind of attitude, with XV being its best example.
Likes:
TheOneWhoIsTornApart
Are you kidding? Your examples to illustrate your assertion are Mario and Zelda? Those are two franchises that have barely evolved or "switched things up" in 30 years.
Yet they still make every other first party developers jealous because of how well they sell, console gen after console gen.
Yet they still make every other first party developers jealous because of how well they sell, console gen after console gen.
Likes:
Storm
OMG. I have always been very lucky with game bugs. Here's hoping my luck will last. Because, although hilarious when seen from someone else's experience, having this happen to you seems quite immersion breaking and annoying. xD
Side note: I know we can follow users here, but is there a friend list system? Because although I haven't been here long, I've already got to know the posting style of a few of you, and there are already some of you I would like to chat with throughout my experience with FF XV and beyond. Storm, you being one of those. ^_-
Side note: I know we can follow users here, but is there a friend list system? Because although I haven't been here long, I've already got to know the posting style of a few of you, and there are already some of you I would like to chat with throughout my experience with FF XV and beyond. Storm, you being one of those. ^_-
Likes:
Storm
i don't think there's a friend list here.
anyway, looking forward to discussing the game with you, i'll have a lot to talk since i'll be playing a lot.
edit:
unify the teams, this will lead to faster releases while maintaining the big scope of the main series, i dont know anything about management tho lol
anyway, looking forward to discussing the game with you, i'll have a lot to talk since i'll be playing a lot.
edit:
unify the teams, this will lead to faster releases while maintaining the big scope of the main series, i dont know anything about management tho lol
That's one thing I'm really enthused about the game. For once, the battle system will require input skill, contrary to the turn-based systems. Which means that the more you get into it, the more you practice, the better you will fight. A first in the series. This means that subsequent playthroughs will look and feel more awesome, making it even more fun to play it again and again. The fact that there's a new game plus system in place will help for that as well. Imagine the youtube monster runs that will tackle level 60 monster with level 10 characters? 2 hours long vids, anyone? Probably not going to be for me (who knows if I still have this kind of patience xD), but it will be cool to see how the no-life parents basement dwellers do it (no insults intended 
).
And you can all add me on skype, with a note that you're from here: hynad@hotmail.com.
Looking forward to sharing appreciations (and hype, if you add me before the game comes out) for the game with you (I'm not really into negativity and doom- trains, so if that's what you have to offer, please steer clear. =P ).
).And you can all add me on skype, with a note that you're from here: hynad@hotmail.com.
Looking forward to sharing appreciations (and hype, if you add me before the game comes out) for the game with you (I'm not really into negativity and doom- trains, so if that's what you have to offer, please steer clear. =P ).
Last edited:
Maybe im lucky but in my JD playthru i didn't met any bugs or glitches (ok, one time my water at Galdin Quay was weird and black like oil instead of clear blue, but i think it was due to my PS4 overheating), otherwise - zero bugs. Same as my Witcher 3 playthru, but i've seen alot of glitch compilation videos on youtube from this game.
Back then, they had 2 teams that would make one game one after the other. At least since FF VII. But they were all overseen by Sakaguchi-Sama... He is no more, and Kitase simply can't fill his shoes.
Right now, I think what Tabata achieved with the team he was managing is incredible. Japanese teams have never ever worked with a model similar to Naughty Dog's team model, where everyone has the same importance and weight, and every voice is heard. So that's a really good step in the right direction. I think Tabata might be the best thing to happen to Final Fantasy since Sakaguchi left. Kitase has only done one true wonder, and it was as his first directorial role with FF VI. The other titles, he had Ito greatly helping him. In fact, considering the best titles in the series (arguably) are VI, IX and XII, all have Hiroyuki Ito behind them as co-director, I think Kitase's importance for the series in overstated. He was mainly brought to direct FF VI because of his background as movie director. Not as a game developer. So his sensibilities are very limited for the medium compared to a veteran like Ito, who is responsible for the most influencial JRPG battle systems: ATB (most JRPG to this day, and the Gambit system (Xenoblade and Dragon Age, among some others. Even if you cannot always customize teammates AI, the underlying systems are still there).
When you consider the blunder that the XIII series was, people really have legitimacy to question his importance for the series. Although, to be fair, Toriyama has a lot to do with them, and I hope he never gets a chance to touch the series ever again. He is responsible for the 2 major titles that toned down the series the most, compared to what came before: FF X, and XIII. While Ito is responsible for bringing back a LOT of what made FF, well, FF, when he directed XII after Matsuno left, because of "health" problem (truly, it was because of differences with higher-ups over artistic and directorial liberties. Wada's days were filled with choices made from listening to "what people will like more based on current trends" rather than the artists visions, and that's when things started to fall apart for the series. Good riddance, Wada. May I never hear of you ever again. Thanks!). xD (Sorry).
Right now, I think what Tabata achieved with the team he was managing is incredible. Japanese teams have never ever worked with a model similar to Naughty Dog's team model, where everyone has the same importance and weight, and every voice is heard. So that's a really good step in the right direction. I think Tabata might be the best thing to happen to Final Fantasy since Sakaguchi left. Kitase has only done one true wonder, and it was as his first directorial role with FF VI. The other titles, he had Ito greatly helping him. In fact, considering the best titles in the series (arguably) are VI, IX and XII, all have Hiroyuki Ito behind them as co-director, I think Kitase's importance for the series in overstated. He was mainly brought to direct FF VI because of his background as movie director. Not as a game developer. So his sensibilities are very limited for the medium compared to a veteran like Ito, who is responsible for the most influencial JRPG battle systems: ATB (most JRPG to this day, and the Gambit system (Xenoblade and Dragon Age, among some others. Even if you cannot always customize teammates AI, the underlying systems are still there).
When you consider the blunder that the XIII series was, people really have legitimacy to question his importance for the series. Although, to be fair, Toriyama has a lot to do with them, and I hope he never gets a chance to touch the series ever again. He is responsible for the 2 major titles that toned down the series the most, compared to what came before: FF X, and XIII. While Ito is responsible for bringing back a LOT of what made FF, well, FF, when he directed XII after Matsuno left, because of "health" problem (truly, it was because of differences with higher-ups over artistic and directorial liberties. Wada's days were filled with choices made from listening to "what people will like more based on current trends" rather than the artists visions, and that's when things started to fall apart for the series. Good riddance, Wada. May I never hear of you ever again. Thanks!). xD (Sorry).
Last edited:
Expanding on from my post the other day about the supposed "lack of story".
http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=225392696
(Zero spoilers of course)
"There is a lot of story but a lot of it happens during exploration"
No going straight from point A to point B unless you're doing a speed run for some reason.
How much story you experience is dependent on your play style.
Take your time and savour the sweet taste this game has to offer ladies and gentleman.
You wouldn't want to miss out on anything would you?
http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=225392696
(Zero spoilers of course)
"There is a lot of story but a lot of it happens during exploration"
No going straight from point A to point B unless you're doing a speed run for some reason.
How much story you experience is dependent on your play style.
Take your time and savour the sweet taste this game has to offer ladies and gentleman.
You wouldn't want to miss out on anything would you?
Last edited:
Haha... They almost look drunk. 
Those violent swings of the axe aimed at Noctis and Ignis while he is in the Regalia is so hilarious.
Last edited:
Likes:
Rogue-Tomato
For anyone who plans on playing the game on the PS4 Pro I found some comparison screenshots of the game.
Takes place at the very beginning of chapter 1 but will still put the link in the spoiler tag.
Looking very nice if I may say so. HDR is enabled btw. I can see quite the difference personally.
Takes place at the very beginning of chapter 1 but will still put the link in the spoiler tag.
Looking very nice if I may say so. HDR is enabled btw. I can see quite the difference personally.
Likes:
Hynad
Nintendo makes a lot of iterative Mario and Zelda games in their secondary lines, but their mainline games consistently changed things up a lot (sometimes angering fans in the process).
I wouldn't call any of that "barely evolving." The changes Nintendo has made in its mainline games seem to be at least comparable to the changes Square/Squenix have made in their own mainline games. *shrugs* (For the record, I've heard that the reason why Nintendo abandoned the F-Zero franchise was because they couldn't think of anything meaningfully new that they could do with it.)
Mario Bros was a single-screen arcade game where you jump over turtles. This is so weird to players nowadays that remakes have to turn the turtles into spineys because people don't know how to play otherwise.
Super Mario Bros abandoned this model completely and, in the process, made side-scrollers a thing. It's inarguably a complete genre change.
There are actually two different versions of Super Mario Bros 2. In Japan, it's a massive troll of a game that intentionally subverts expectations. (Poison mushrooms! Warp pipes that send you back levels!) In the US, it's a completely unrelated platformer branded with the Mario name, with four PCs with distinct playstyles and the ability to pick up and throw enemies.
Super Mario Bros 3 reverted back to SMB1's playstyle in a lot of ways, but added a world map and gave choices about which levels to play when.
Super Mario World, to be fair, seems pretty iterative to me.
Super Mario 64, on the other hand, codified movement in three dimensions and defined the 3D platformer subgenre. It's so different from what came before, in fact, that Nintendo was eventually forced to create two separate lines of Mario games because of it.
Super Mario Sunshine changed up the SM64 style by making everything focus around a water cannon, which actually turned a lot of people off.
Super Mario Galaxy followed a similar path of basing itself on a unique play mechanic, creating a setting comprised of small planetoids with their own gravity and building everything around that.
Super Mario 3D Land, in contrast, tried to merge 2D Mario mechanics with a 3D world.
Nintendo hasn't changed things up with Mario as much recently, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if the Switch game they showed has some new core mechanic that determines everything you do.
Super Mario Bros abandoned this model completely and, in the process, made side-scrollers a thing. It's inarguably a complete genre change.
There are actually two different versions of Super Mario Bros 2. In Japan, it's a massive troll of a game that intentionally subverts expectations. (Poison mushrooms! Warp pipes that send you back levels!) In the US, it's a completely unrelated platformer branded with the Mario name, with four PCs with distinct playstyles and the ability to pick up and throw enemies.
Super Mario Bros 3 reverted back to SMB1's playstyle in a lot of ways, but added a world map and gave choices about which levels to play when.
Super Mario World, to be fair, seems pretty iterative to me.
Super Mario 64, on the other hand, codified movement in three dimensions and defined the 3D platformer subgenre. It's so different from what came before, in fact, that Nintendo was eventually forced to create two separate lines of Mario games because of it.
Super Mario Sunshine changed up the SM64 style by making everything focus around a water cannon, which actually turned a lot of people off.
Super Mario Galaxy followed a similar path of basing itself on a unique play mechanic, creating a setting comprised of small planetoids with their own gravity and building everything around that.
Super Mario 3D Land, in contrast, tried to merge 2D Mario mechanics with a 3D world.
Nintendo hasn't changed things up with Mario as much recently, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if the Switch game they showed has some new core mechanic that determines everything you do.
Legend of Zelda was a top-down adventure game that gave you a map, threw you into the world, and let you do as you will (even if that means skipping six dungeons between the first and the final one).
Zelda II genre-hopped and became a weird side-scrolling semi-RPG.
A Link to the Past reverted to being a top-down adventure game, but added an actual linear plot and characters with meaningful things to say.
Ocarina of Time, like SM64, was a 3D adventure game that codified much of the way players interact with 3D worlds while effectively becoming a separate sub-genre and splitting the series into two lines.
Majora's Mask used many of Ocarina of Time's play mechanics but changes the structure significantly. Everything in MM was driven by the core conceit that you have a limited amount of time to act, resulting in a balancing act between helping NPCs, collecting the necessary items to stop the moon from falling, and resetting the world when you run out of time.
Wind Waker infuriated "mature" fans everywhere by switching to a cel-shaded chibi style. It also turned the overworld into a massive ocean, creating even more controversy.
Twilight Princess is probably the most traditional of the bunch, but even still, it was a massive stylistic shift from Wind Waker.
Skyward Sword built combat entirely around the use of motion controls and made it a much more important part of the game in the process. It also changed the graphic style to something completely different yet again.
Breath of the Wild is looking to be the biggest structural shift since Ocarina of Time, building a giant procedural playground with crafting and universal breakability that everyone seems to be going wild for.
Zelda II genre-hopped and became a weird side-scrolling semi-RPG.
A Link to the Past reverted to being a top-down adventure game, but added an actual linear plot and characters with meaningful things to say.
Ocarina of Time, like SM64, was a 3D adventure game that codified much of the way players interact with 3D worlds while effectively becoming a separate sub-genre and splitting the series into two lines.
Majora's Mask used many of Ocarina of Time's play mechanics but changes the structure significantly. Everything in MM was driven by the core conceit that you have a limited amount of time to act, resulting in a balancing act between helping NPCs, collecting the necessary items to stop the moon from falling, and resetting the world when you run out of time.
Wind Waker infuriated "mature" fans everywhere by switching to a cel-shaded chibi style. It also turned the overworld into a massive ocean, creating even more controversy.
Twilight Princess is probably the most traditional of the bunch, but even still, it was a massive stylistic shift from Wind Waker.
Skyward Sword built combat entirely around the use of motion controls and made it a much more important part of the game in the process. It also changed the graphic style to something completely different yet again.
Breath of the Wild is looking to be the biggest structural shift since Ocarina of Time, building a giant procedural playground with crafting and universal breakability that everyone seems to be going wild for.
I wouldn't call any of that "barely evolving." The changes Nintendo has made in its mainline games seem to be at least comparable to the changes Square/Squenix have made in their own mainline games. *shrugs* (For the record, I've heard that the reason why Nintendo abandoned the F-Zero franchise was because they couldn't think of anything meaningfully new that they could do with it.)