This entry into the Final Fantasy universe is set in the worlds of Pulse and Cocoon. Players take control of multiple characters who are caught in a war between these worlds.
" @SuperSecretAgenda: The system is only trying to replicate the group dynamic from your typical MMO anyway, so I think crediting either of them for coming up with some groundbreaking gameplay mechanic is a bit of a stretch. TBH, I don't find programming the companion AI to be a particularly compelling mechanic anyway, so I'm glad they dropped it."
The first ten Final Fantasy games gave you full control of your party as it was needed due to the dynamics of the battles. Shit didn't start getting bad until Squaresoft merged with Enix. What fantastic games did Enix bring to the table? Sexed Up Girly Fantasy X-2, Ridiculous Online Fantasy XI (I was 75 RDM, SMN, BLK, and WHM FML -.-), Offline XI Fantasy XII, and Pussified Fantasy XIII. Since the merger, Final Fantasy games have been going downhill fast. Even storywise. Say what you want about Final Fantasy but FF4-FF10 had some of the most original plots in the industry. Shit, FFX was the ONLY JRPG in which the love story FAILS. Tidus doesn't get that hot summoner ass. "
The first time ever I agree with you. Did hell just freeze over?
@gakon5: Battles I mean. In FFX if you cast Hastaga and then Slowaga, and then do nothing but quick attacks...you pretty much have about 20 straight turns. I liked how it innovated the turn-based system and it was Square's first attempt at it, but man...you could break the system of that game so easily.
I don't get the complaining about FF12, it plays JUST like KOTOR if you put the ATB on wait and JUST like FFXI if you put it on active. It was win-win for both JRPG and WRPG nuts.
All the complaints I hear about FFXIII are inherent in most of the games in the series. In fact, the games after the Enix merger have at least tried to make the game less linear, in FFX-2 and FFXII, which many FF fans consider the worse links in the series (ironically). Everything before that was just as linear as XIII seems to be. Always a single story thread, blocked off sections of the map, inexplicable barriers that disappear after a story event... The game only 'opened up' when you got an airship, and even then all there was to do were generally unecessary sidequests.
Sound familiar? Maybe people are just over Final Fantasy?
" Bawwwwwwwww. All the complaints I hear about FFXIII are inherent in most of the games in the series. In fact, the games after the Enix merger have at least tried to make the game less linear, in FFX-2 and FFXII, which many FF fans consider the worse links in the series (ironically). Everything before that was just as linear as XIII seems to be. Always a single story thread, blocked off sections of the map, inexplicable barriers that disappear after a story event... The game only 'opened up' when you got an airship, and even then all there was to do were generally unecessary sidequests. Sound familiar? Maybe people are just over Final Fantasy? "
By your logic, Post-Enix games have become MORE Linear due to the fact that FF9 (Pre-Enix) was the last FF game to have an airship. Just admit that after Squaresoft's main crew got pissed at the merger and made Mistwalker Square Enix has been going downhill.
Compare the games of the 90s and compare them to now...Squaresoft was the forefront of gaming innovation and pushed the industry forward. They were the most prized company back then and all this shit now is due to that fucking shitty Dragon Quest game and the fucking idiots at Enix.
Square needs to buy Mistwalker and get shit back in order and fire the morons from Enix.
@KaosAngel said: While I agree with you that since the Squarenix "merger" things have been going down hill, the reason isn't because of the Enix guys coming over to Square. The reason is because ever since Square "merged" with Enix they have had no real competition in the Japanese market. They haven't put as much time and polish into their games as they did in the past, because they don't need to. Who else are you going to go to for your high brow JRPG fix? There isn't anyone. Back in the 90's Square was at the forefront of the industry because they had Enix for competition. It was Final Fantasy vs Dragon Quest and each was constantly trying to best the other while at the same time feeding off each other. Competition is good and today Square has none. Also, in the 90's there was still room for new ideas and not everything had been tried yet and done before, unlike today.
Also, I would like to add that as a long time Enix fan that the Enix franchises have all gone straight to shit since the "merger." They aren't the same. They have lost that unique Enix touch they used to have and become much more "square." It's not just the Square franchises that have been effected by it. Honestly though, I think the Square franchises have fared much better in the wake of the "merger."
" Bawwwwwwwww. All the complaints I hear about FFXIII are inherent in most of the games in the series. In fact, the games after the Enix merger have at least tried to make the game less linear, in FFX-2 and FFXII, which many FF fans consider the worse links in the series (ironically). Everything before that was just as linear as XIII seems to be. Always a single story thread, blocked off sections of the map, inexplicable barriers that disappear after a story event... The game only 'opened up' when you got an airship, and even then all there was to do were generally unecessary sidequests. Sound familiar? Maybe people are just over Final Fantasy? "
By your logic, Post-Enix games have become MORE Linear due to the fact that FF9 (Pre-Enix) was the last FF game to have an airship. Just admit that after Squaresoft's main crew got pissed at the merger and made Mistwalker Square Enix has been going downhill. Compare the games of the 90s and compare them to now...Squaresoft was the forefront of gaming innovation and pushed the industry forward. They were the most prized company back then and all this shit now is due to that fucking shitty Dragon Quest game and the fucking idiots at Enix. Square needs to buy Mistwalker and get shit back in order and fire the morons from Enix. "
I was simply pointing out that complaining about linearity and useless late-game sidequests in a Final Fantasy game is laughable since it's indicative of pretty much every title in the series, and the irony that Squeenix-era FFX-2 (which has an airship from the get-go, mind you) is the least linear Final Fantasy ever, and yet it tends to be lowly regarded by the people who cry about FFXIII's linearity.
As for the whole Square / Enix / Mistwalker thing, it's less that Enix are bad people and more that if you make the same game for 20 years, some people are going to get sick of it, and if you change what you've been doing for 20 years some people are going to complain about how your old stuff is better than your new stuff. The Dragon Quest games are still, overall, great examples of classic JRPGs, and are definitely at the very least on a par with Mistwalker's offerings (which are not bad games by any stretch), as are the numbered Final Fantasy games that have been released since then in their efforts to change up the pre-merger formula. The only undeniable thing about the merger is the amount of spin-offs and re-makes and experiments that Squeenix have peeled off have increased dramatically, with harshly varying quality. You can compare <x Squeenix era game> to <your favourite pre-merger FF> til the cows come home, but truth be told, nothing much has really changed except for the delivery, which is true of a lot of modern JRPG's in general and why the genre gets flack for not 'evolving' even though it still produces some quality games.
The bottom line is a distinct segment of JRPG fans continue to be whiny brats who don't know what they want.
" Bawwwwwwwww. All the complaints I hear about FFXIII are inherent in most of the games in the series. In fact, the games after the Enix merger have at least tried to make the game less linear, in FFX-2 and FFXII, which many FF fans consider the worse links in the series (ironically). Everything before that was just as linear as XIII seems to be. Always a single story thread, blocked off sections of the map, inexplicable barriers that disappear after a story event... The game only 'opened up' when you got an airship, and even then all there was to do were generally unecessary sidequests. Sound familiar? Maybe people are just over Final Fantasy? "
See that's the problem. These people don't know shit about shit and should be ignored. You can't try new things and satisfy grandpa weabo over there who loves the status quo so much.
Don't really have anything to reasonable to contribute, but CheapyD of cheapassgamer.com said on this week's podcast that he has some friends in Japan that were disappointed with the game. I'm hoping the game is great though...
"im still getting it. as long as its true that its 50 to 60 hours long then im fine no matter how linear it is. Im hoping that Versus XIII isn't going to be as linear though. "
Versus has The Backstreet Boys in it. What could possibly go wrong?
Huh, interesting. I haven't played a JRPG seriously since FFX (I dodged 200 lightning bolts!). I kinda sensed that they were starting to become a Waste of Time. I was starting to get mildly exited for FFXIII, too. I was even considering importing it, since I know a fair amount of the language.
The Final Fantasy franchise is a consistent disappointment to me, since Final Fantasy VI (aka FF III in the US) spoiled me with the perfect classic JRPG to date.
Ever since Final Fantasy became super-popular with FF VII and its glossy, androgynous look, the franchise just failed to impress me. The artstyle of FF IX came close, but overall it just didn't cut it.
"im still getting it. as long as its true that its 50 to 60 hours long then im fine no matter how linear it is. Im hoping that Versus XIII isn't going to be as linear though. "
Versus has The Backstreet Boys in it. What could possibly go wrong? "
" Half-Life 2 is completely linear yet it is one of the best games ever made. I don't understand this complaint at all. EDIT: If the battle system is anything like FF6 or Chrono Trigger I'll have no problem. "
Linear RPGs are a problem because a modern role playing game by genre classification should gave the freedom to explore the world you're in whereas an FPS may or may not, freedom isn't necessarily a given in the FPS genre.
"Is that the inside of the case!!! HOLY SHIT that is cool!!!!!!!!!! "
Dude, the best part about that case is the cover. It has a holo-graphic foil that shimmers in light and only the first edition prints of it will have it, like all the other Final Fantasy games in Japan. NA/EU do not get.
" The Final Fantasy franchise is a consistent disappointment to me, since Final Fantasy VI (aka FF III in the US) spoiled me with the perfect classic JRPG to date. Ever since Final Fantasy became super-popular with FF VII and its glossy, androgynous look, the franchise just failed to impress me. The artstyle of FF IX came close, but overall it just didn't cut it. Locke, Sabin, Terra, Kefka, Cyan, Edgar, Gau, Celes, Setzer, Mog, Shadow, Strago, Relm, Umaro and Gogo... ...these were the guys and that were the days when Final Fantasy was truely relevant. Final Fantasy VI was and will be the peak of classic JRPGs. The perfect storm. FF VII was just the result of it. Popularity by proximity. Square still thinks it's FF VII, which made the series popular. It's not. It was FF VI. That's why Square consistently fails to improve on Final Fantasy, since they build on the wrong game. "
" The Final Fantasy franchise is a consistent disappointment to me, since Final Fantasy VI (aka FF III in the US) spoiled me with the perfect classic JRPG to date. Ever since Final Fantasy became super-popular with FF VII and its glossy, androgynous look, the franchise just failed to impress me. The artstyle of FF IX came close, but overall it just didn't cut it. Locke, Sabin, Terra, Kefka, Cyan, Edgar, Gau, Celes, Setzer, Mog, Shadow, Strago, Relm, Umaro and Gogo... ...these were the guys and that were the days when Final Fantasy was truely relevant. Final Fantasy VI was and will be the peak of classic JRPGs. The perfect storm. FF VII was just the result of it. Popularity by proximity. Square still thinks it's FF VII, which made the series popular. It's not. It was FF VI. That's why Square consistently fails to improve on Final Fantasy, since they build on the wrong game. "
I have to disagree, I find the storyline (I assume you know Japanese as well if you have the game already) one of the better ones lately, EASILY better than Dragon's Age narrative. One is an interesting mix of sci-fi/fantasy premises, the other is basically Lord of the Rings redux. I'm getting pretty sick of the comparison honestly, there are reasons to like Dragon Age (none of which I fall into) but the narrative isn't one of them. It's like people who think it is innovative storywise have never read a book.
I enjoy the battle system too, but I can appreciate why somebody wouldn't they may not prefer a more action element to their RPGs. However, I play my RPGs mostly for the narratives, and I think FFXIII is one of the better ones at that in a long time. Best FF since FFX, possible since 8 for me.
Sure it is linear, but so what? Uncharted 2 was linear and people (myself included) loved that. I see the linearity as a plus rather than a negative.
" Half-Life 2 is completely linear yet it is one of the best games ever made. I don't understand this complaint at all. EDIT: If the battle system is anything like FF6 or Chrono Trigger I'll have no problem. "
Linear RPGs are a problem because a modern role playing game by genre classification should gave the freedom to explore the world you're in whereas an FPS may or may not, freedom isn't necessarily a given in the FPS genre. "
...says who? I've never ever considered an RPG that
" Half-Life 2 is completely linear yet it is one of the best games ever made. I don't understand this complaint at all. EDIT: If the battle system is anything like FF6 or Chrono Trigger I'll have no problem. "
Linear RPGs are a problem because a modern role playing game by genre classification should gave the freedom to explore the world you're in whereas an FPS may or may not, freedom isn't necessarily a given in the FPS genre."
You're talking about western role-playing games. Japanese role-playing games can be -- and often are -- completely linear.
" Half-Life 2 is completely linear yet it is one of the best games ever made. I don't understand this complaint at all. EDIT: If the battle system is anything like FF6 or Chrono Trigger I'll have no problem. "
Linear RPGs are a problem because a modern role playing game by genre classification should gave the freedom to explore the world you're in whereas an FPS may or may not, freedom isn't necessarily a given in the FPS genre. "
...says who? I've never ever considered an RPG that "
Yeah really. A linear path is essential to a tight narrative or at least a narrative that flows and paces well, that's always been the main thing that separated JRPGs for years because you couldn't find that stuff anywhere else. The idea that free roaming is modern at all, or that its essential to a modern game, is stupid and ignorant. PC RPGs had that element prettymuch from the very start, there's nothing new or modern about it and its certainly not essential to the experience especially if the main draw of the experience for you is the story.
" Half-Life 2 is completely linear yet it is one of the best games ever made. I don't understand this complaint at all. EDIT: If the battle system is anything like FF6 or Chrono Trigger I'll have no problem. "
Linear RPGs are a problem because a modern role playing game by genre classification should gave the freedom to explore the world you're in whereas an FPS may or may not, freedom isn't necessarily a given in the FPS genre. "
...says who? I've never ever considered an RPG that "
OK. Well then how do you define an RPG then? Dice rolls? Crafting Items? Wearing hair in emo fashion across the eyes? Having one wing?
My definition is pretty much in line with what the market wants and buys in large numbers, from single player experience to MMOs.
@Addfwyn said:
" I have to disagree, I find the storyline (I assume you know Japanese as well if you have the game already) one of the better ones lately, EASILY better than Dragon's Age narrative. One is an interesting mix of sci-fi/fantasy premises, the other is basically Lord of the Rings redux. I'm getting pretty sick of the comparison honestly, there are reasons to like Dragon Age (none of which I fall into) but the narrative isn't one of them. It's like people who think it is innovative storywise have never read a book. "
LOL. You're taking pot shots at Dragon Age : Origins saying it's LOTR redux while the Final Fantasy series are some edifice to originality.
Every single FF game since 7 has been Magic meets Industry redux. Sometimes they're steampunk styled, sometimes they're water themed, sometimes they;re set in highschool and sometimes it's just the same as FF7. Mate, I love Square's designs and I LOVE LOVE LOVE Mario RPG and Chrono Trigger but even I can admit to myself that the Final Fantasy games are just Final Fantasy redux with minor variations in style and almost no variation in content. I read a lot of books too, probably more than you as I often read two or three at a time (not at the exact same time obviously). I ve;been exposed to lot of fiction in my 37 years and I can say without any cheek that Final Fantasy's fiction is some of the most derivative trash pulp stuff I've had the unfortunate luck to experience. Yes I know Aeris dying was heartbreaking. tear. Still it's not good fiction. even if you understand Japanese.
Good Japanese fiction is stuff like Cowboy Bebop or Ghost in the Shell or Akira or even Macross Frontier if you like fanservice tributes to the original Macross. Final Fantasy is not good fiction.
Indeed it is true that Dragon Age : Origins is a classic and classicly retreaded 'dark fantasy' tale. It';s neither particularly original nor does it deal in matters which are particularly shocking, but there's a reason for this. It was designed to be the spiritual successor to the AD&D licensed Baldur's Gate games, which Bioware originally did, so it needed to stay within the fantasy realm. That said even though it is derivative of classic fantasy the Dragon Age fiction writers bothered to fully flesh out the origin stories for each race and actually give the player different endings based on how the acted in the world, how they treated others and what choices they made at pivotal plot points.
Final Fantasy never does that from narrative or experience perspectives. It's just battles along a linear path (or random across landscape/sea) until you reach the fixed endgame.
Linear RPGs are a problem because a modern role playing game by genre classification should gave the freedom to explore the world you're in whereas an FPS may or may not, freedom isn't necessarily a given in the FPS genre. "
...says who? I've never ever considered an RPG that "
OK. Well then how do you define an RPG then? Dice rolls? Crafting Items? Wearing hair in emo fashion across the eyes? Having one wing? My definition is pretty much in line with what the market wants and buys in large numbers, from single player experience to MMOs. "
A game, typically of higher than average length, where you play the role of a specific character (or in some cases, multiple characters) in a large narrative-driven adventure in a fictional setting. Typically, though not always, there is a party of controllable characters that progress through the overall arcing narrative with a series of increasingly important quests. Different from adventure (or action-adventure) games by having a stronger focus on the narrative as opposed to the action, and typically (though not always) spanning a much longer period of time. Combat, inventories, XP and levels are all systems that are very commonly seen in the genre but not required. Yeah, it's a complicated definition but it's a very vague category.
Focus for me is the narrative-driven part. WRPGs tend to sacrifice there to give more an open-ended quality to the game (Allowing for usually more character customization), whereas JRPGs sacrifice on that open-ended 'do as you will' quality to tighten the narrative and character development. Since I prefer the narrative, it's obvious which I prefer.
Interestingly, none of the things you listed I consider an integral part of the RPG genre. Also, basing any of your definitions on what the majority thinks is a poor decision, as just because many people believe something does not make it remotely true.
@Addfwyn: Role Playing games have their roots in Play By Mail and Play on Paper games. Neither of those are centered entirely on combat, nor are dice rolls the solitary deciding factor of the fate of the players. Dice rolls add the elusive luck quotient but in the roots of role playing games, it is the human GM or DM (game/dungeon master) who fleshes out the story with their own imagination. Narrative is king, but not the story of high fantasy as much as the journey of the characters. Final Fantasy games are more akin to Zelda meets Peter Jackson's Choose Your Own Adventure books by almost entirely ignoring the dm/gm role or at the very least fixing it down a single path thereby forcing you ingest the narrative which they choose for you. You can't be a prick in Final Fantasy games, at least not in anything else but a meta sense by not healing party members and always giving them the shittiest gear which will ultimately lead to the party becoming less useful and could block you from advancing at all.
Which leads me to another point. If the way you act has so little bearing on the nature of FF narrative, why bother with a party at all? You know you'll pick person a up at some point and lose person b at another, so why bother having a party mechanic at all? Are they just there so you won't get lonely or bored? Are they just pack mules? If you can't relate to them then I think they serve little purpose in RPG terms. You're not really role playing at all in that sense are you? You're just making a delineation between the protagonist character and the other party members because the game has told you you're the protagonist. At least in Bioware RPGs you can actually see a clear distinction between the protagonist and the other party NPCs and you can get very different states of play depending on how you relate to and how you treat them individually. Moreover the way they relate to each other may either aid or burden you depending on their 'personalities' and individual needs. That is far more in line with what a true Role Playing Game is. You're more than just a set of dice rolls and loot being pushed on rails to an fixed endpoint.
WPRGs vary in quality as much as JRPGs do. While it's true that Bethesda games of recent times Oblivion and Fallout3 did indeed sacrifice some narrative direction to enable the player more supposed freedom they were not the only WRPGs ever made.
Games like Deus Ex, Dragon Age : Origins, Mass Effect, Elder Scolls : Morrowind, The Never Winter Nights series, KOTOR and the Baldur's Gate series did indeed have a broad, sweeping narrative with different classes, specialisations and variable character relationships and story flow. There are other examples too that go much further back but I can't remember them by name at the moment.
The point I'm making is that the success of the Final Fantasy series has been it's RPG lite context. That makes it far more accessible to a broader audience and it's a common style of game that Japanese studios have been creating go back to the days Y's and Zeliard, yet I feel the audience is beginning to see through the smoke and mirrors and are quite correctly identifying the underlying similarities to almost all Japanese RPGs which in turn is making them hunger for deeper stories with a greater sense of context and consequence to their in game actions. I see it much like the evolution of FPS games, where we started not even being able to look up or down and now we can see and move through environments with 360 degrees of freedom. People tire of being forced down linear paths and that's what the Final Fantasy games will need to change to stay current and attractive on shelves where many competitors are fighting for the same dollars to be spent.
@ryanwho said:
" @Addfwyn said:
" @SeriouslyNow said:
" @Dan_CiTi said:
" Half-Life 2 is completely linear yet it is one of the best games ever made. I don't understand this complaint at all. EDIT: If the battle system is anything like FF6 or Chrono Trigger I'll have no problem. "
Linear RPGs are a problem because a modern role playing game by genre classification should gave the freedom to explore the world you're in whereas an FPS may or may not, freedom isn't necessarily a given in the FPS genre. "
...says who? I've never ever considered an RPG that "
Yeah really. A linear path is essential to a tight narrative or at least a narrative that flows and paces well, that's always been the main thing that separated JRPGs for years because you couldn't find that stuff anywhere else. The idea that free roaming is modern at all, or that its essential to a modern game, is stupid and ignorant. PC RPGs had that element prettymuch from the very start, there's nothing new or modern about it and its certainly not essential to the experience especially if the main draw of the experience for you is the story. "
Bullshit. You want to know what's essential for tight narrative? GOOD WRITING. For a game this is also means properly connecting the dots and not leaving glaring plot holes. All of that including believable characterisation comes directly from good writing. Japanese RPGs are based around pulp writing for the most part and it saddens me that we see great writing so rarely in Japanese games and the majority in action games like Ghost in the Shell on PS2 or the Legend of Zelda games.
@SeriouslyNow: While I agree that the WRPG genre is indeed founded in pen and paper RPGs, I don't really feel that JRPGs ever were. JRPGs were originally founded on games like the original Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy, which really don't have a lot in common with pen and paper RPGs, you can't really trace the ancestry the same way.
The way you act generally does have little bearing on an FF (or another JRPG, but we can just refer to FF if you'd like) narrative, that is true. However, the same can be said for books or movies (media I often compare a good JRPG to) where there is a large host of characters that can obviously not be influenced by the viewer. RPGs, even the most cinematic, are a more interactive (and thus immersive) experience than this, but it's a parallel that makes a lot of sense. When you have a static narrative, your director (or in this case, the game designer) is able to craft a much more intricate story. Again, your definition of what a 'true Role Playing Game' is based on pen and paper RPGs. Which is totally fine, they are of course, RPGs. However, JRPGs are an entirely different genre that developed from a different ancestry. To say that dungeons and dragons was a heavy influence in the original Final Fantasy game for instance would be a gross overstatement. That does not make it any less an RPG, it's just a very different kind of RPG.
I agree that a couple of those WRPGs did have good narratives, but a lot of them sacrificed as well. You won't be able to name a story that was as impactful to me as Xenogears was, a game I can honestly say changed the way I think about things in life (I played most of the WRPG you listed except KOTOR, and they just didn't have that impact). You can't tell me that a game like Dragon Age: Origins is an innovative narrative. It's a game with a very cool cast of characters (The best feature by far), but the underlying narrative is exceptionally generic and overdone (and given far more credit than it is due). The interesting to thing to me about DA was the fact that the best element of the game was the most static: the supporting cast of characters, that were controlled heavily by the game designer. It makes me wonder how great a game a very static linear DA would have been (For me, probably fantastic. For many others, maybe less so).
I disagree that JRPGs need to change in that way, because I think that'd be the death of the genre. I guarantee you, the one thing that would make me stop playing Final Fantasy games is if they become more like WRPGs, with really wide open non-linear branching stories. When I want that, I'll play a WRPG, not a JRPG trying to pretend to be a WRPG. I play the JRPGs for the book-like experience of watching a finely honed narrative unfold. WRPGs just can't deliver that, and I perfectly understand why and I don't expect them to. I don't go into a WRPG with an expectation that it will be a narrative experience rivaling a book, because the way the games are crafted it just can't be that. That is an experience I go into JRPGs with, and the masterpieces of JRPGs can deliver that. It is one of the key successes of many SE RPGs, as well as some of the Atlus ones (Like Persona 3 or 4). True, there are a host of 'lighter' JRPGs like some of the Gust ones that don't have that impact, they are like the romantic comedies of the JRPG world (light and fun, but not really impactful like the other heavier hitters). I think the increasing disinterest in JRPGs lately is actually just because there haven't been many for people to be interested in. There's only been a handful of JRPGs since the start of this generation on console platforms. Instead, they've become the domain of the portables (where they often have done quite well).
" @SeriouslyNow: While I agree that the WRPG genre is indeed founded in pen and paper RPGs, I don't really feel that JRPGs ever were. JRPGs were originally founded on games like the original Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy, which really don't have a lot in common with pen and paper RPGs, you can't really trace the ancestry the same way. The way you act generally does have little bearing on an FF (or another JRPG, but we can just refer to FF if you'd like) narrative, that is true. However, the same can be said for books or movies (media I often compare a good JRPG to) where there is a large host of characters that can obviously not be influenced by the viewer. RPGs, even the most cinematic, are a more interactive (and thus immersive) experience than this, but it's a parallel that makes a lot of sense. When you have a static narrative, your director (or in this case, the game designer) is able to craft a much more intricate story. Again, your definition of what a 'true Role Playing Game' is based on pen and paper RPGs. Which is totally fine, they are of course, RPGs. However, JRPGs are an entirely different genre that developed from a different ancestry. To say that dungeons and dragons was a heavy influence in the original Final Fantasy game for instance would be a gross overstatement. That does not make it any less an RPG, it's just a very different kind of RPG. I agree that a couple of those WRPGs did have good narratives, but a lot of them sacrificed as well. You won't be able to name a story that was as impactful to me as Xenogears was, a game I can honestly say changed the way I think about things in life (I played most of the WRPG you listed except KOTOR, and they just didn't have that impact). You can't tell me that a game like Dragon Age: Origins is an innovative narrative. It's a game with a very cool cast of characters (The best feature by far), but the underlying narrative is exceptionally generic and overdone (and given far more credit than it is due). The interesting to thing to me about DA was the fact that the best element of the game was the most static: the supporting cast of characters, that were controlled heavily by the game designer. It makes me wonder how great a game a very static linear DA would have been (For me, probably fantastic. For many others, maybe less so). I disagree that JRPGs need to change in that way, because I think that'd be the death of the genre. I guarantee you, the one thing that would make me stop playing Final Fantasy games is if they become more like WRPGs, with really wide open non-linear branching stories. When I want that, I'll play a WRPG, not a JRPG trying to pretend to be a WRPG. I play the JRPGs for the book-like experience of watching a finely honed narrative unfold. WRPGs just can't deliver that, and I perfectly understand why and I don't expect them to. I don't go into a WRPG with an expectation that it will be a narrative experience rivaling a book, because the way the games are crafted it just can't be that. That is an experience I go into JRPGs with, and the masterpieces of JRPGs can deliver that. It is one of the key successes of many SE RPGs, as well as some of the Atlus ones (Like Persona 3 or 4). True, there are a host of 'lighter' JRPGs like some of the Gust ones that don't have that impact, they are like the romantic comedies of the JRPG world (light and fun, but not really impactful like the other heavier hitters). I think the increasing disinterest in JRPGs lately is actually just because there haven't been many for people to be interested in. There's only been a handful of JRPGs since the start of this generation on console platforms. Instead, they've become the domain of the portables (where they often have done quite well). Wow, we wrote a lot. "
Is the main character likeable? this sounds stupid but i haven't liked a FF main character in years (unless you count Balthier as the leading man) but if Lightning is an interesting character that might just be enough to save the story for me (which so far looks like junk)
I read the Gameinformer review and they say that theres nothing bad about the gameplay.
@luce: Lightning moans and bitches a lot...it gets annoying as all hell. She constantly cries about saving her sister and what it means to fight. It gets annoying.
Mind you, the rest of this post is an opinion. My beliefs are flawed and most likely not similar to your beliefs. Chances are I got something wrong:
Seems like we should stop referring to WRPGs JRPGs as just RPGs. There are too many differences between the two at this point for them to be considered the same type of game.
WRPGs tend to be progressive while JRPGs tend to be conservative. When JRPGs try to do something a little different (White Knight Chronicles, FF12) people don't like it, and just want more of the same. Meanwhile, when a WRPG does something fresh, it is praised.
I don't think the FF games are really gaining fans anymore. No, I think SE is just trying to hold onto the fans they still have.
Final Fantasy isn't and has never been an RPG at all, there I said it. It's a story told from point A to point B. Fallout 3 and Dragon Age do the same, but you can choose which points you want to take to tell our own story within a given world. MMO's allow even better control over who your avatar is even more so.
You don't play roles in Final Fantasy, even now Final Fantasy can't even let you choose a name for you main character. It is no better a fantasy adventure game as compared to say, The Legend Of Zelda or better still to pick a western made game say Baulder's Gate or even Uncharted 2. You could probably pass UC2 as a Final Fantasy if it had dragons, magic, a turn based battle system, and guy called Cid.
The Penny dropped after I had played Final Fantasy 12 at the same time as playing Guild Wars. Final Fantasy 12 gave me no control over the character, but Guild Wars did, name, skill builds, the guild itself.
Ironically there is Final Fantasy XI, I've heard great things about game because it belongs to the MMO genre. If there is only one place for the "real" RPG, it's the MMO/multiple Story arc game genre. Final Fantasy can only sell based on it's name now, the way it has to implement a story to even consider itself to be an RPG however, HAS to change.
I had my best time with Final Fantasy when Final Fantasy 9 and 10 were released, and they were great stories. I guess now as I am much older it the change of the times for me.
This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:
Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along
with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely
increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.
Comment and Save
Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other
Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll
send you an email once approved.
Log in to comment