×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Square Enix Admits Final Fantasy XIV Damaged Brand

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the all-downhill-since-tellah-died dept.

Role Playing (Games) 234

_xeno_ writes "It's taken a year since Final Fantasy XIV launched to what can at best be called unfavorable reviews, but Square Enix CEO Yoichi Wada is finally willing to admit that the (still subscription-free) MMO 'greatly damaged' the entire Final Fantasy brand. Despite this damage, Wada said Square Enix will continue to work on 'reviving' the game, with an upcoming patch promising to finally introduce such series staples as chocobos and airships. Even so, there's still no word on the PS3 release, which was delayed until the game was 'fixed,' nor is there any sign that Square Enix feels the game will be worth a subscription fee any time soon."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

234 comments

Never considered the MMOs part of FF (4, Funny)

bipbop (1144919) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534634)

FF11 and FF14 never seemed like they were FF games in the first place, so they didn't tarnish my perception of the brand, at least as far as I'm aware. On the other hand, FFX, FFX-2, FF12, and FF13...

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37534694)

Amen. FF10, 10-2, 12, 13 were mediocre games sold on pretty graphics and Square's hype & momentum. Great way to not honour a brilliant series.

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (1)

BetterSense (1398915) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534702)

I've been waiting for the franchise to recover ever since it fell off after 7. Some people like 9, but I'm tired of being an old fogey and insisting 7 is the last good one.

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37534746)

Apparently I'm an even older fogey, because I insist that IV was the last good one.

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (1)

dicobalt (1536225) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534858)

Hey I played the original FF and I really liked FFIX which is based on the original FF take on classes. I would be happy to see a FFIX-2 actually.

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37535130)

Hey I played the original FF and I really liked FFIX which is based on the original FF take on classes. I would be happy to see a FFIX-2 actually.

Indeed. 9 was a work of art in the series. 10 took the story telling down a couple of leagues.

In response to the grand-parent, you apparently have not played the original Final Fantasy Tactics. I still remember a quote from a reviewers; "It has more twists than a line at Disney World."

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37534874)

Heh I'm an older fogey because FF7 is a different game form FF1-6 with FF6 being my Favorite not That FF7 is bad, it is one of my favorites, but it is a different style game.

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (1)

segin (883667) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535258)

FF6 and earlier were all in a fantasy setting, with FF6 being the closest to modern, and in a way it foretold FF7's "mostly modern" setting. Then there was FF8 which really detracted from what Final Fantasy is about, but it still maintained that it belonged in the series, although it was too... "modern". Like the opening of 10, with the city of Zanarkand.

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (1)

no1nose (993082) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535468)

FF3 on the SNES in the USA circa 1993 and FF7 on the Playstation in the USA were the best games of all time IMHO. The original Phantasy Star on the SMS was dang good too.

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37535596)

You're crazy. FF7 is FF6 with 3D player models. Even the battle systems are almost identical.

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (2)

vga_init (589198) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535198)

9 definitely had its redeeming qualities. Heck, even 8 was a pretty good game, but the problem is that neither of them even came close to reproducing the magic that went into 7. Now I'm just convinced that Square got lucky with 7 and that was just a fluke--a one-off occurrence that will never be repeated in the series. It's been more than 10 years so we should all just accept that fact and move on.

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (2)

radiumsoup (741987) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534726)

I played FFXI for over 5 years, only stopping after life changes made playing too costly from a time sink standpoint... I played the FFXIV Beta for all of 10 hours before uninstalling with a simple note to the devs: "This game is nowhere near ready for Beta." I'm quite surprised it was released at all... but FFXI was a very good game for the brand, even if it was quite obviously geared with a large bias toward the Japanese market with North America (and finally Europe) as an afterthought.

The Square-Enix merger was the end. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37534932)

I agree with all of the above, except that FFX was one of my favorite games in the series, rivaling VI as my favorite.

However, I generally haven't liked anything put out under the Final Fantasy brand after the Square-Enix merger (except for FFTA & FFTA2). While the DQ series of games has done well post-merger, and KH was surprisingly fun, FF has pretty much gone straight into the crapper, IMO. FF12 was pretty good up until the halfway point, at which the plot fell apart under the weight of tedious side-quests and poor pacing, and I don't even want to go into FF13. Plus, I've never liked MMOs at all, so FFXI & FF14 never appealed to me. And don't get me started on FFX-2, Dirge of Cerberus, Revenant Wings, and other half-hearted spin-offs.

Re:The Square-Enix merger was the end. (1)

drunkennewfiemidget (712572) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535002)

I loved I, IV, VI, VII, IX, and X. I'm still working on XIII, and haven't bothered with the MMO ones -- I have no interest in MMOs.

I've been saying for years: if someone came out with a game with a story as engaging as say, FF VI or FF VII or Earthbound, I wouldn't care if it were still in 16 bit graphics. I still break out the Earthbound and FF VI occasionally to re-play because they were great games with great story lines.

Graphics are nice and all, but I'll take gameplay and story line any day of the week over them.

Re:The Square-Enix merger was the end. (1)

TheEyes (1686556) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535124)

I loved I, IV, VI, VII, IX, and X. I'm still working on XIII, and haven't bothered with the MMO ones -- I have no interest in MMOs.

I've been saying for years: if someone came out with a game with a story as engaging as say, FF VI or FF VII or Earthbound, I wouldn't care if it were still in 16 bit graphics. I still break out the Earthbound and FF VI occasionally to re-play because they were great games with great story lines.

Graphics are nice and all, but I'll take gameplay and story line any day of the week over them.

I have high hopes for FF XIII-2, if only because they publicly labeled it as wanting to "fix" FFXIII's mistakes. They even named some of the worst offenders with the game: railroad plot, and too much focus on the story rather than the characters (they also talked about governance issues, but I can't speak to that). I just hope they also work on dialogue, too; I don't know if all that sounded better in Japanese, but the English translation was some of the corniest, cheesiest drivel I've ever heard. The characters were engaging and complex people... right up until they opened their mouths, and they all became annoying mental patients. Ugh.

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (4, Insightful)

genner (694963) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535018)

FF11 and FF14 never seemed like they were FF games in the first place, so they didn't tarnish my perception of the brand, at least as far as I'm aware. On the other hand, FFX, FFX-2, FF12, and FF13...

Hey now FFX was a good game and I'm pretty sure the sequel was just some lame fan fiction that people mistook for a real release.

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (2, Funny)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535296)

How can you even call it fan fiction when there wasn't any nudity involved?

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37535346)

Well, it has a splashing incest scene (with all the main characters in bikinis), plus there's Yuna's cousin hitting on her all the time (more incest!). Sounds like fan fiction.

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37535828)

FF X was a good game? I have only one thing to say about that: AAAAA HA HA HA HA HA HA AAAAA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (2)

Toonol (1057698) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535872)

FFX-2 had some of the best mechanics in the entire series; the battle system/jobs system was great, and it had a non-linear mission based storyline. I think a lot of people hated it because (1) girls and (2) it had a very different feel and mood than X. That was deliberate, I'm very sure. The theme of FFX was death, almost oppressively so... but in the end you won, and so X-2 was about life and optimism, and the lighthearted-silliness was part of that.

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37535122)

Right on! FF13 is the cherry on top of the crap sundae...

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (1)

_KiTA_ (241027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535772)

FF11 and FF14 never seemed like they were FF games in the first place, so they didn't tarnish my perception of the brand, at least as far as I'm aware. On the other hand, FFX, FFX-2, FF12, and FF13...

FF10 was ok. FFX-2 was amazing. If you took the story tongue in cheek (like it was clearly meant to be), the battle engine and gameplay was just plain fun.

FF12 was a bit too politically heavy, but it was fun having what amounted to a FF Sandbox game.

FF13 was just shit, however. Interesting battle system, but the current executives at Square Enix must have a VERY low opinion of gamers to think that they had to dumb the rest of the game down to that level.

I'm worried that the same stupidity has their hands on Dragon Quest 10, which apparently is going to have online features similar to Demons's Souls / Monster Hunter / PSO. Not a MMO (but try telling that to the idiots in the gaming journalism industry) but just enough online capabilities to be interesting. Still, kinda worried. They are letting the idiot who did Nier have a crack at working with Yuji Hoori, and that's just a bad idea.

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (1)

Toonol (1057698) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535930)

FF13 would have been a great game if they had included more than just a battle system in the game. It felt crippled as it was... like a final fantasy spinoff fighter.

I appreciate how well done FF12 was, but they somehow made it as dull as sand. It felt like a particularly boring MMORPG with no other players. I appreciate how high the production values are on it, but somehow the fun got left out.

The online FF's, 11 and 14, don't even seem like they should be considered to be part of the same series. They're just vaguely related franchise items, like Kingdom Hearts is.

I think the series had a good run, though... FF3 through FFX-2 were all pretty fun. And I'm still interested enough to watch for future releases. I just have a fear that in a few more iterations, they'll be first person shooters.

Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF (1)

Firehed (942385) | more than 2 years ago | (#37536086)

Obviously it's all a matter of opinion, but they were all* IMO pretty decent strictly from a gameplay standpoint, and X held up relatively well in terms of story. I thought IX was crap and XII was mediocre at best, but XIII and (surprisingly) X-2 I found quite fun to play - in fact I'd quite recommend X-2 as a game with excellent mechanics, provided you ignore the fact that it somehow got Final Fantasy in its title.

*I haven't played either of the MMOs so can't opine on them

Stability and Performance Issues (4, Insightful)

ShakaUVM (157947) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534664)

It wasn't just "Stability and Performance Issues" that caused the game to suck so bad.

It was, well, everything.

A map that wouldn't show you where things you wanted to find were
A bizarre bazaar and shop system
No real story or major quest line (that I could find at least, in the week or so I spent playing it)
A UI that was designed for consoles - which is ironic since it never launched on the PS3.
Sloow animations on the menus. You have to hit menu (and wait for all the elements to slide in) then click on the submenu, and wait for all the elements to slide in and then click on "map" (instead of just being able to hit 'm' or whatever).
Class system didn't make any sense.

I dunno, there were other things I can remember really hating about the game, but it's been a year and I've tried to black out that part of my memory as best I can.

I just don't understand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37534740)

How could you spend so many millions on a game without springing for a competent game designer? I mean seriously....how can a relatively successful game producer make such a colossal flop? Sure...anyone can try something a bit experimental and have it not pan out, but this game failed in so many ways. Further, they were failures that should have been outright obvious from the get-go as failures to anyone who has spent any time at all in the industry.

Did they give the job to someone's son or something? With no oversight?

I am honestly baffled as to how they could have dropped the ball this badly
 

Re:I just don't understand (4, Interesting)

Z34107 (925136) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534924)

Rumor had it that they outsourced development to China. Chocobos were, for a while, horsebirds [sankakucomplex.com], but this was later corrected to "chocopo" [sankakucomplex.com]. (Ads on the linked site NSFW).

Better yet, the collector's edition included a tumbler [sankakucomplex.com] which could be "damaged" by "items including salt and solid materials, carbonated beverages, milk or other dairy beverages, fruit juices, etc." Not sure how that made it through QC.

Then again, Sankaku Complex just really doesn't like China, so it's possible Squeenix just dun goofed. Perhaps after (more than) 14 final fantasies, this [dropbox.com] was their game design. Anyone who knew for sure what happened met seppuku.

Re:Stability and Performance Issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37535036)

I assume that UI was made with Flash. I think most UIs are nowadays. (E.g. everything made with UDK or ID Tech 4+.)

And if you know those Flash "designer" types and the websites they usually make, you know where that "not made to be used, but made to fap to" comes from. ^^

Also, if FFXIV was anything like FFXI, it must have been a massive grind fest. Just one word: Shikigami (NM)!
Imagine a beast that's completely invisible, and is found in an area stuffed full of aggressive monsters. It spawns every 23 hours. And to claim it so you can fight it, you have to generate hate. Which basically means every monster in the area is going to come after you. But don't think that's all! Because in the area will be a few dozen other losers also camping to get it!
Which resuls in you going online every 23 hours, even at 3:30 AM in the middle of the night, watch someone else get "lucky" and then having to fight off the shitstorm you created.
Only to come back in another 23 hours.

This can go on for weeks.
And when you are finally done, you can't even distribute the skill points you got yourself! (Until you're above a certain level.)

There should be a national Shikigami watch, looking out for everyone trying this more than once, and putting him in a nice psychotherapy if he does. Because you can't tell me that this shit is massively masochistic and self-abusive. (With a dash of OCD. If by "dash" you mean being hit by a gamma ray burst from the same solar system! ;)

Re:Stability and Performance Issues (1)

_xeno_ (155264) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535656)

It wasn't just "Stability and Performance Issues" that caused the game to suck so bad.

Yeah, I'm not sure why they went with that in the article. It's why I included the link to the earlier Slashdot story. I mean, there were performance and stability issues (I guess) but they weren't what killed the game.

It was things like XP rewards (called SP) being awarded at random that did it. Every time you did an action (like attack a monster) there was something like a 10% chance you'd gain XP. This made leveling horrible. It turns out that a Skinner box has the opposite effect if you're more likely to get a shot to the nuts than an actual reward.

To be fair, this was fixed rather quickly: a good two months after release.

Also, this is the edited down version of the "things that were wrong at release." My first draft was waaay over the character limit. No need to go there, though. Suffice it to say that the list of things that have been fixed over the past year is absolutely massive - and despite that, the game is now mediocre at best. (And even that's pushing it.)

What the hell is a "chocobos"? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37534678)

What the hell is a "chocobos"?

Sure, I could waste my time and google it, but I'm not going to. The summary is supposed to provide critical information like that, for the convenience of the reader.

Re:What the hell is a "chocobos"? (1)

BKX (5066) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534782)

A chocobo is a giant chicken that you can ride.

Re:What the hell is a "chocobos"? (5, Informative)

dido (9125) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534830)

Chocobos are a species of giant, normally flightless bird sort of like ostriches or large chickens, that have basically appeared in one form or another in every Final Fantasy since Final Fantasy II (and now XIV should have them too). They are most often used as mounts, but some have magical abilities as well. One example of their appearance is in Final Fantasy VII, where the party has to capture a chocobo which they can ride across a swamp inhabited by a swift and deadly serpent monster. Crossing the swamp on foot without getting attacked by the serpent is all but impossible, and the serpent is too powerful to be defeated at the levels your characters are when they reach that point, but mounted on a chocobo your party can move fast enough to escape the serpent and reach the caves beyond.

Re:What the hell is a "chocobos"? (3, Funny)

ben_kelley (234423) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535146)

Oh great. It hardly seems worth even starting playing the series now that you have totally spoiled Final Fantasy VII for me!

Re:What the hell is a "chocobos"? (1)

Myria (562655) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535232)

Crossing the swamp on foot without getting attacked by the serpent is all but impossible

I've managed to get past the Midgarsormr in FF7 without a chocobo. It's just timing and a lot of luck.

Re:What the hell is a "chocobos"? (1)

Vitriol+Angst (458300) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535432)

and the serpent is too powerful to be defeated at the levels your characters are when they reach that point, but mounted on a chocobo your party can move fast enough to escape the serpent and reach the caves beyond.

.... OK, and THIS doesn't explain why FF XIV is a failure -- it only explains why I've never played the game in the first place.

Re:What the hell is a "chocobos"? (1)

anonymov (1768712) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535878)

Well, this article is about damage to the brand, so it's largely about the fanbase.

And for FF fans chocobos are a staple, even a bit of mascot, of all FF games since FFII. We've come to expect finding chocobos in every FF and now there are none.

It's like buying your favourite doughnuts just to find they left the sprinkles out :(

Re:What the hell is a "chocobos"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37534850)

If the summary had defined chocobos I think there would have been a bunch of comments asking "why the hell did you define chocobo? Isn't this slashdot?". I honestly think on this site it would be considered "common knowledge".

The problem is (5, Insightful)

chispito (1870390) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534704)

they are still JRPGs, and the industry (outside of Japan) has grown. Western RPGs keep growing and innovating. I feel like Western developers learned from Japan back in the 16 bit era, but Japanese developers are stuck in a time warp. There is more to life than turn based combat and angsty teenage heroes.

Re:The problem is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37534764)

Yes, now there's DLC that adds content into the plotline right after the game starts but isn't released until you've sunk 40 hours into a character that's at the one-way door at the end of the game.

Re:The problem is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37535356)

Yet WRPGs still manage to be full-length, complete games, without the padding you get in a JRPG. The DLC is just the cherry on top that doesn't quite fit the rest of the lasagna.

Re:The problem is (0)

Swarley (1795754) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534842)

No kidding. I heard so many people talk about how awesome FFIX was but I couldn't stand to play it for more than a couple hours. The main protagonist was just such a petty asshole that I just got annoyed and quit playing. The newer games have actually ruined the older games for me too since they showed me that those games were only good because technological limitations prevented Square for making the characters as douchey as they wanted them to be.

Re:The problem is (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37534920)

The newer games have actually ruined the older games for me too

I'm no Squenix apologist, although I have greatly enjoyed all the main single player numbered releases with the exception of FFXIII which I never bought. That said, I find the kind of opinion you express here to be nothing short of stupid. A good game is a good game. Whatever comes after it doesn't change that. The original SW trilogy hasn't been destroyed by the prequels - they're still great films. The Beatles haven't been destroyed by whatever dirge McCartney has released later in his career. Letting something from the present 'ruin' something from the past is patently moronic.

Re:The problem is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37535626)

The original Star Wars wasn't ruined by the prequels, it was ruined by Lucas.

Re:The problem is (-1, Flamebait)

blahplusplus (757119) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534892)

"Western RPGs keep growing and innovating."

Bullshit. Western RPG's are just as bad in their own ways, most modern western RPG's can hardly even be called RPG's anymore. Mass effect 1 and 2? Really? Cover based shooting with a few skills on the side is far from traditional video game RPG's as you can get. Most modern "RPGs" have been turned into first person shooters because the developers are so incompetent at "RPG's" part so and they see all that Call of duty money out there. The only good RPG's coming out lately are from out of left field like Torchlight and Magicka and a few others I can't name at the moment. Skyrim and oblivion can hardly be called RPG's in considering their dumbed down forms of older more RPG'esque games.

Lets face facts, the modern gamer is so simple minded he can't deal with the more complex RPG's of the past so developers have turned them into first person shooters or cinematic computer rendered movies because too many gamers out there don't really like videogames anymore for the game part, but only for the story/cinematics and hollywood effects.

Re:The problem is (2)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535008)

Perhaps it can be traced back further, but I've always had the impression that Western fantasy RPG character sets can be traced back to J. R. R. Tolkien's work. Talk about being stuck in a time warp.

Re:The problem is (2)

PwnzerDragoon (2014464) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535086)

You can blame Dungeons and Dragons for that. I imagine if it never existed, today's WRPGs would be far different than they are.

Re:The problem is (1)

Keill (920526) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535110)

It depends on how you define the term RPG in relation to computers and computer games, (rather than P&P etc. - (since, no, they're not used the same way to represent the same thing)).

The problem we have is that a lot of what people perceive as having to do with the label 'Role-playing game' has actually very little to do with what such a label describes - because of people's inconsistent, subjective perceptions of what the word game itself represents in the first place. This is then affecting how such games are designed and made, usually at the expense of the game itself, which is why most games now are merely the basic types of game - FPS/RT(TB)S/Action-adventure/Driving/Beat'em'up etc. dressed up.

The REAL problem, which we can solve, is understanding how to MANAGE complexity properly - or rather, how to give the player the tools to do so themselves. Some games can do this in a limited manner or to a limited degree - (driving games with options going from 'simulation' to 'arcade' etc.) - but the scope for using such mechanisms for all types of games, and especially the one, main element we should REALLY be looking at here - (user-defined) gameplay DEVELOPMENT - is MASSIVE.

Re:The problem is (0)

blahplusplus (757119) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535326)

"The REAL problem, which we can solve, is understanding how to MANAGE complexity properly"

The problem is developers usually cut major corners or just take the easy route like they do in MMO's and automating their combat systems. Combat systems are critical for an RPG and most modern combat systems have removed and significantly dumbed down the participation part. Final fantasy 12 is a case in point - hold forward, set your bot to win. All you do in the game is navigate you don't have to make or participate in any meaningful way.

The major problem is cinematics and story is crowding out the game aspects to a significant degree. Game developers realized they could expand their market by getting rid of the participatory elements of gameplay because most people just don't really like video games at all - ones where you have to participate. Most modern games are little more then glorified movies which you can move around in and your hand is held all the way through.

This wouldn't be so bad if the game also was designed properly for experienced players so that a newbie and an expert player different experiences. Since casual gamers tend to not like the gaming (the activity and participation) aspects of games.

Better design would be great but developers and publishers don't seem to want to put in the time or money to make the best games they can, they seem to want to cut corners to maximize profits because their are too many stupid consumers out there.

Re:The problem is (1)

Swarley (1795754) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535448)

I think that FF games have always had a dumbed down combat system for the most part. They dress it up with occasional differences, but certain common threads of "fake strategy" seem to show up in all of them, and usually in just enough quantity to ruin what might have been an otherwise fun game. Mainly I'm talking about things like the idiotic legacy of featuring 20 different status debuff spells that all do roughly the same thing (prevent your party from getting hurt or attacked for a few turns) and for which almost every boss in the game is vulnerable to exactly one of them. So the "strategy" becomes trying each debuff in order until you figure out which is "the one" and then the fight becomes easy. Factor in irritatingly placed save points that require you to die and replay the same 20 minutes of game over a few times while you figure this out and presto: "fake strategy" that's convincing enough to fool players into thinking that they are "getting better at the game" or that they had to "think of a better strategy" to beat the boss. The difference between the good and bad FF games usually boils down to where and how ham handedly they force these sorts of mechanics in and also, as I mentioned in a previous post, how douchey their characters are (in some cases astonishingly douchey). Completely obtuse item combination systems that feature complex recipes with absolutely no way to learn these combinations or even hints about them in game don't help either, not to mention the infamous Zodiac Spear treasure chest bullshit from FFXII. This is definitely a trend that's gotten worse since the older games, which is odd because the internet is so ubiquitous now that "making games to sell strategy guides" doesn't work anymore.

Re:The problem is (1)

Keill (920526) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535482)

As I said - it all comes back to the same, underlying problem - the (collective) lack of recognition and understanding of games - what it is the word game itself represents, based on its use (in general) - BOTH in isolation, and in relation to the rest of the language.

This is therefore a matter, (and failure), of LINGUISTICS, that then causes a problem of semantics.

I have a blog on gamasutra to talk about this problem - but since it's merely symptom of a deeper problem within the language, dealing with how the basics of the language is recognised and understood (ultimately because of how it is taught, which is why it's a matter of linguistics)), is the real underlying problem. (Which is why I have to wade through quite a few things to describe the problem itself for how it is related to the language in general).

In short, the problems with the word game exist because people are not applying the basic rules of English grammar consistently when describing what other words in the language represent based on how they are used - specifically the TYPES of concept/information they are used to represent, further represented by the words NOUN, VERB & ADJECTIVE. (It appears that there's a bit of a problem with adverbs too, but I haven't really looked at them yet).

The problems with the word game, are mainly a symptom of not describing nouns and verbs consistently in RELATION to each other.

Blog: http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/DarrenTomlyn/3291/ [gamasutra.com]

Re:The problem is (2)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535208)

Mass effect is barely even in the category of "RPG." Although the quest system is pretty good, the equipment and skills were lacking. No, what OP (I suspect) is talking about is games more like The Witcher (1&2, especially 1), KOTOR (going back a ways), Oblivion (kinda), even Dragon Age or the soon to be released Diablo III. None of those games can be played by sitting something on the controller and walking away which is what can be done with some of the new ones (I think this [vgcats.com] sums it up nicely).

The Last Remnant, which I did play and while fun, was a terrible RPG (worse than Mass Effect. Seriously) 3rd person cover shooters are more innovative RPGs than this (in fact, they actually did involve innovation at the time.) Walking down a single pathr, absolutely no choice of skills to update (you can choose which ones a character focuses on... that is all), 2-3 choices (which you don't entirely control) for combat, group-based fighting. Honestly, it's fun for a while especially since it is more or less the only JRPG I ever played, but I cannot see how people could ever spend massive amounts of time playing games like that. I tried one of the recent FF (13 I think) games for about 30 mins once. It... didn't even feel like an RPG, it felt like walking down a narrow corridor holding down a button.

Also, neither Magicka nor Torchlight were very good RPGs, no idea why you chose those as examples. They were a lot of fun, but deep RPG action they were not. OP is right: Western RPGs have, if not grown deeper, at least expanded and experimented in the genre. JRPGs seem to have devolved.

Re:The problem is (1)

blahplusplus (757119) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535390)

"Also, neither Magicka nor Torchlight were very good RPGs, no idea why you chose those as examples"

Yes they are good games because
1) They focus on the fun
2) They get that RPG's require a good combat and/or loot system
3) Story and cinematics aren't relied upon for critical acclaim (which most western RPG's do rely on).

The great thing about diablo 1 + 2 was the challenging monsters and the phat loot. All western RPG's have done is bring hollywood to games. Mass effect minus the audio/video and story - the actual game elements (where you participate and have to shoot, not just watch in game cutscenes) is not innovative or creative at all.

So when you say "they have innovated" you're confusing everyone lauds critical acclaim on them for their CINEMATICS not their actual gameplay, they are reviewing the game as a movie - not a game. Huge difference.

Re:The problem is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37535890)

Last Remnant and FFXIII are the only JRPGs you have played. Your opinion is worthless.

Re:The problem is (0)

Windwraith (932426) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534954)

Ah, the ubiquitous JRPG hate.

The only thing is that we changed a series of Japanese clichés for a series of American-European clichés, that we will get bored of in a few years, and then we'll say "western rpgs are all the same".

Re:The problem is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37536060)

Ah, the ubiquitous JRPG hate.

The only thing is that we changed a series of Japanese clichés for a series of American-European clichés, that we will get bored of in a few years, and then we'll say "western rpgs are all the same".

Different cultures. Once we get bored with them in a few years, we'll make new ones, rather than appease the hardcores who want to resist change at all costs.

Re:The problem is (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534964)

I disagree, FF 1 thru 7 and still classics, it is when they changed and "innovated" that they went downhill.

Re:The problem is (1)

surferx0 (1206364) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535568)

They are classics because they were amazing and innovative games for the time period they were released in. However they would not hold up to games today if they were released in this console generation with appropriate graphics/sound.

Developers have to continue to innovate and adapt to using new technologies and the changing marketplace. Granted, Square-Enix very good at it and created the mess that was FF13, but it is still something that has to be done. They just need to do it right, like they used to.

Re:The problem is (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535660)

I disagree, they are classics and therefore still amazing to this day, and continue to show up on best games of all time lists.
You don't need nostalgia to play them today and enjoy them more then most new games.

Re:The problem is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37535434)

The main problem with FFXIV in my opinion was the combat system. People enjoy the Final Fantasy series not only for the story but the strategic combat. The combat in FFXIV is as basic as can possibly be. There was no thought put into it, even EverQuest had a better combat system than FFXIV.
Games that are based on action and adventure need to have those two things in the game. XIV had extremely limited travel areas, pretty much like dungeon crawling through a forest, and the action didn't change from the first level to the last. The crafting system in the game was fine, it was a typical grind but required ridiculous materials.
  I personally never had many stability issues and I thought the game looked decent enough. The one aspect of games that keep me entertained is the actual gameplay. Up until Dungeon Siege 3 released this past year I had never played a game that I could compare in equal to the terrible combat in FFXIV. My group of friends I played with all ended up crafting for hours on end rather than adventuring and that's when we realized the game cannot be fixed and it wasn't worth the time investment for the dismal future that FFXIV has.

Re:The problem is (1)

HawaiianToast (618430) | more than 2 years ago | (#37536068)

This is it. Also, if FFXI did well in the west, it was because it showed up before WoW. I remember ditching FFXI a few months after WoW was released and had been somewhat ironed out because it was just a vastly better experience. The FFXI style of game play just seems cruel and masochistic to me now. Not that I have the patience for any of them anymore...

Yeah I'm sure it wasn't 13+ sequels. (3, Insightful)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534710)

No such thing as brand dilution. No sir. At no point did they stretch the brand thin.

Re:Yeah I'm sure it wasn't 13+ sequels. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37534752)

Don't forget the other FF branded games that don't contain numbers. Crystal Chronicles and Tactics, and probably some others I can't think of.

Re:Yeah I'm sure it wasn't 13+ sequels. (2)

artor3 (1344997) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534906)

Just from memory, you've got the 14 numbered games, X-2 and XIII-2, three Tactics titles (Tactics, Advanced, and A2), Crystal Chronicles, Mystic Quest, the three game Legends series for the Gameboy, the three VII spin-offs, the Dissidia fighters (2 of them) + another fighter with a different name that I forget.

That's 30 right there. I'm sure there are more. That's more games than there are in the Madden series!

Ehrgeiz (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535170)

FF Legend is a rebadged SaGa, and FF Mystic Quest is a spinoff from FF Legend. The other fighter might have been Ehrgeiz (rhymes with "air kites"), which had some FFVII characters. Fast fact: Square's PS1 fighting games developed by Dream Factory (Ehrgeiz and Tobal No. 1) were among the few PS1 games to run at 60 fps and 480i; most games for that system ran at 30 fps or less and 240p.

Re:Yeah I'm sure it wasn't 13+ sequels. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37535360)

I knew I saved that list of Final Fantasy games for a reason. The following is a list of 73 titles that are either main games or spin-off games. It does not include re-releases on other platforms, but does include re-releases that added content. It's also incomplete.

Final Fantasy
Final Fantasy II
Final Fantasy Origins
Final Fantasy I-II
Final Fantasy Dawn of Souls
Final Fantasy III
Final Fantasy IV
Final Fantasy IV: The After Years
Final Fantasy IV: The Complete Collection
Final Fantasy V
Final Fantasy VI
Final Fantasy VII
Before Crisis: Final Fantasy VII
Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII
Dirge of Cerberus: Final Fantasy VII
Dirge of Cerberus: Lost Episode: Final Fantasy VII
Final Fantasy VIII
Final Fantasy IX
Final Fantasy X
Final Fantasy X-2
Final Fantasy XI
Final Fantasy XII
Final Fantasy XIII
Final Fantasy XIII-2
Final Fantasy Versus XIII
Final Fantasy Type-0
Final Fantasy XIV
Ehrgeiz
Final Fantasy Mystic Quest
Final Fantasy Dissidia
Final Fantasy Dissidia 012
Final Fantasy: The 4 Heroes of Light
Final Fantasy Legends
Chocobo's Mysterious Dungeon
Chocobo's Mysterious Dungeon 2
Chocobo World
Chocobo Stallion
Chocobo Racing
Dice de Chocobo
Working Chocobo
Chocobo Land: A Game of Dice
Choco-Mate
Chocobo de Mobile
Chocobo Panic
Chocobo's Crystal Tower
Chocobo Racing 3D
Final Fantasy Fables: Chocobo's Dungeon
Final Fantasy Fables: Cid and Chocobo's Dungeon DS+
Final Fantasy Fables: Chocobo Tales
Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles
Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: Ring of Fates
Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: My Life as a King
Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: Echoes of Time
Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: My Life as a Darklord
Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: The Crystal Bearers
Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: My Life as a King - Everyone's Kingdom
Dragon Quest & Final Fantasy in Itadaki Street Special
Dragon Quest & Final Fantasy in Itadaki Street Portable
Final Fantasy in Itadaki Street Mobile
Kingdom Hearts
Kingdom Hearts Chain of Memories
Kingdom Hearts re:Chain of Memories
Kingdom Hearts II
Kingdom Hearts coded
Kingdom Hearts re:coded
Kingdom Hearts 358/2 Days
Kingdom Hearts Birth by Sleep
Kingdom Hearts Dream Drop Distance
Kingdom Hearts III
Final Fantasy Adventure
Final Fantasy Legend
Final Fantasy Legend II
Final Fantasy Legend III

Note: Final Fantasy Legends is a cellphone game. Final Fantasy Legend is an entirely different GameBoy game. They're not one game listed twice.

Re:Yeah I'm sure it wasn't 13+ sequels. (1)

witherstaff (713820) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535092)

I've never played XIV. The dress up game of X2 made me stay away from FF.

Re:Yeah I'm sure it wasn't 13+ sequels. (1)

jargonburn (1950578) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535368)

That's a shame. You might reconsider. I stayed away from X-2 for a while after hearing similar things. I finally bought the game, and found that it was actually quite fun...Dress-Spheres, Garment Grids, Accessories and all!

Re:Yeah I'm sure it wasn't 13+ sequels. (1)

blahplusplus (757119) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535520)

"Yeah I'm sure it wasn't 13+ sequels."

It wasn't the sequels that did them in, it was that each game in the series progressively was getting worse because game development kept getting more expensive and difficult (shinier graphics = more time and money). So final fantasy went from being decent games developers could spend time to polish (last one being roughly FF7, but even FF7 you can notice declines in quality from earlier games) to stories wrapped in garbage gameplay.

Japanese developers have not dealt with the move to high definition games. Their teams were good and experienced at making 2D JRPG's they never made a good transition to 3D very well at all. This isn't something that is just about final fantasy, every single JRPG suffered as developers moved to 3D. Few games did it correctly and those that did do it correctly were lost in the shuffle - Rogue galaxy is one of those games that is actually one of the last best JRPG's I've played.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_Galaxy [wikipedia.org]

Re:Yeah I'm sure it wasn't 13+ sequels. (1)

Xacid (560407) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535616)

Something that irked me was lack of continuation. After so many sequels you'd kind of like to see some of the same faces instead of having to readjust to everyone all over again. Dirge of Cerberus was kind of a nice spinoff like that IMHO.

Something else that kills me with the FF series now is how friggin long it takes to play. I'm pretty sure I got up to roughly 200+ hours in FF12 and finally said "fuck this noise". FF8 I think may have been around 80 and that pushing it. There was actually a /. article on this recently and it was suggested that gamers were wanting longer and longer games. Really? Am I just a weird guy who'd like to beat a game in a handful of solid weekends instead of a whole damned year's worth?

Re:Yeah I'm sure it wasn't 13+ sequels. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37536148)

I beat FF8 in 52 hours my first time, and that was after spending a generous amount of time leveling up squall. More and more games nowadays are being developed as movies; you've got some kids that get games like black ops just to kill nazi zombies all day (and some never even play story mode), and then other gamers that get a game for the story and fall in love with it, and to play the game in its entirety. I don't think rpg games are made for the former at all. Personally, I'd prefer a game that keeps challenging me even after I finish it, and isn't one that i can beat in a single weekend.

Re:Yeah I'm sure it wasn't 13+ sequels. (1)

billcopc (196330) | more than 2 years ago | (#37536176)

I'm kinda with you. I don't have nearly as much time to play these stupid long games as I once did, and even back in my pre-career years, I still rarely finished any RPG because they were too damned long.

What I do like is the (recent?) trend of a game that you can beat once, and if you feel like it, you can play through it again with all your gear to reach an even higher level, collect doodads you may have missed, or explore alternate questlines. Borderlands comes to mind, as does Mass Effect. You can "beat" the game in a dozen hours or so, or you can continue for 100% completion if you wish to appease your OCD demons.

I've played many a game where I resorted to cheats and save editors, to buff my characters and speed through the rest of the storyline. FF7 was one of them, because for whatever reason, I never got through to the end until a few years ago. I would play to the halfway point, then life would get in the way, or my idiot nephews would overwrite my save file, or when the PC version came along I'd just plain forget to back it up upon formatting... So one day I pulled out the save editor, gave myself a bunch of maxed-out materias and stat points, edited the stupid Knights Of The Round animation down to two seconds, and killed those emo demons once and for all. Closure, at long last. That's what I want out of a game: satisfaction. I want some kind of reward for my effort, not just a longer list of things to grind. If I feel like grinding, fine, but the boring stuff should be optional. If it's not, I'll cheat to bypass it.

No Chocobos and Airstrips? OF COURSE! (2)

Jayfield (2317990) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534788)

I haven't even played this game but I'm quite positive that the lack of airships and chocobos (which I'm about as fond of as Cait Sith and Moglies) is not the problem here.

FFX killed it for me (1)

dicobalt (1536225) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534800)

I have played FF since the original on the NES, I really liked FFIX's take on the original character theme. FFX was so weird and boring though, I didn't like the story or the characters or the weird skill sphere thing. Then FFXI was a MMO and I'm not a fan of MMOs because I already have a job. Then I was too busy to even bother with FFXII, I still have a PS2 though, maybe I will give it a try as it looks like people like FFXII.

Re:FFX killed it for me (1)

AdamHaun (43173) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534928)

FFXII is basically a single-player MMO. The engine and game mechanics seem to be borrowed from XI, and the big side quests are all tedious monster hunting. I found the story to be substandard, partly because there wasn't much to it, and partly because every story event was separated by hours of grinding the aforementioned side quests.

Reviews can be very misleading. Metal Gear Solid 4 gets 4.5 stars on Amazon, but I have literally seen high school students write, direct, and act better than those cut scenes. It's that bad. I read somewhere that a lot of gamers don't even watch cut scenes. Maybe that explains it.

Re:FFX killed it for me (1)

manwargi (1361031) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535114)

If you didn't like FFX and you don't like MMOs I would recommend against XII, as it gets much worse. Between almost any given location you will have to traverse vast stretches of land swarming with enemies that your characters will mostly be fighting for you, due to the gambit system's deal of automating what characters do during an encounter. It's a long, tedious game that IMHO, involves a lot of suffering in between cut scenes.

Damage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37534828)

The damage to the FF brand really started with XIII. XIV only made it worse.

Re:Damage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37536038)

The damage started LONG before XIII...

It's a lot better now. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37534836)

It isn't perfect or anywhere near it. The economy is still nonexistant. There is basically infinitesimal endgame content. The UI still needs a lot of work. But it certainly doesn't deserve mouth breathers trolling about it day in and day out. My wife and I enjoy it. Things are improving a lot. The communication is absolutely lightyears beyond where things were a year ago. The fact that they're still running it without money a year later shows that they're dedicated to making it work for the PS3 release. Most botched MMOs don't live that long. Hell, even highly rated MMOs don't last that long. Are people still playing Aion? Rift? TERA?

Re:It's a lot better now. (1)

Tridus (79566) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534978)

Yes, yes, and yes?

Comparing Rift to the abortion that is FFXIV is laughably ridiculous. XIV is one of the worst games to come out in years, and has taken a year of work post-launch to get up to the level of "poor".

Re:It's a lot better now. (1)

jasonla (211640) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535118)

Uhh. Yes, RIFT is doing quite well and is preparing to release a new major patch.

How many would still play Asheron's Call 3? (3)

GoodNewsJimDotCom (2244874) | more than 2 years ago | (#37534922)

Asheron's Call 1 sometimes comes up as best MMORPG ever. I played both AC1 and WOW, and AC1 was far more exciting. AC1 let you dodge arrows and magic if you were agile enough. AC1 wasn't the perfect MMORPG, drain health1 broke the game by itself, but it seemed worlds more fun than WOW. AC1 had free updates and they happened every month. AC1 had a bigger explorable area when you're low level, not containing you to zones. If your stats were primed enough, your low level could take on things far outside your level, not using some artificial level comparison rule(if monster over 7 levels, you can't hit it).

However AC1 died when AC2 came out. AC2 was flawed in many major ways such as armor didn't work very well, and fighting in a group is much more profitable, especially with a tactician. People went from AC1 to AC2 and when AC2 flopped, people didn't flood back to AC1.
So AC2 hurt the franchise far worse than if it was never released at all. Still, I think people are not sour on Asheron Call series. I bet if they'd release an AC3 similar to AC1, but with several basic things fixed, they'd be set.

Sadly this probably will never be since they made LOTRO, and forgot what made AC1 awesome, and adopted WOW game design laziness.

Re:How many would still play Asheron's Call 3? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37535006)

Mod Up insightful. I've played many MMO's over the years, and even though I was really blown away by WOW in the beginning, the plain and simple elegance and rough shod feed to AC1 cannot be understated. I can remember the feeling of being in the middle of nowhere at next to no life running my ass away from some monster because the death penalties in that game were no joke. I can't say it was a very socialized game which may have detracted from some possible players, but probably the best MMO in its own time that I've played.

Re:How many would still play Asheron's Call 3? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535188)

Still, I think people are not sour on Asheron Call series. I bet if they'd release an AC3 similar to AC1, but with several basic things fixed, they'd be set.

Would people play AC3 if it felt like a mash-up of Asheron's Call, Assassin's Creed, Armored Core, and Animal Crossing?

If the first was named Final Fantasy... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37534948)

...how come this series never ended?!?!?

Arglebargle... FF6 better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37535028)

Ok, in a nutshell...
FF1-5 = Good pre-steampunk overkill. Nice balance of traditional JRPG, not terribly grindy.
FF6 = Awesome, for cripes sake if Square wants to remake a game and haven't got sick of the FF7 weeaboos, do FF6. FF6's principal win was that you could play ANY of the characters, not just "leader + 2 others", and you could train them to have EVERYTHING except the one unique skill.
FF7 = builds on where FF6 was good, but introduced certain elements too early (pre-rendered game backgrounds , yuck. Also yuck in FF8 and FF9) Although they were good, the pre-rendered worlds pretty much killed the exploration bit that made the previous 6 awesome.
FF8 = Was more character driven, but it was basically FF7 with some time travel related elements. This is when FF started to go down hill as it started introducing annoying minigames (With FFX taking the cake for annoyingly stupid minigames)

However there's been no PS3 Final Fantasy game. FF13, stepped away from the pre-rendered backgrounds of the previous games but didn't introduce any free world except for the one excessively large random-monster field. You couldn't go back and do anything.

FF11, I didn't play, and FF14 I bought, but... good god what were they thinking. The game is a god damned chore to play, has nothing but ugly customization and even worse clothing. If it wasn't for the world being open (albeit repetitive copy-paste) I'd have quit playing during the open beta. After beta I bought it, but was deeply disappointed as the RMT bots took over quickly.

Completely Enix's fault (2)

jasonla (211640) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535038)

Ever since the merger, the company's games have been shit, and I completely blame the Enix side of the family. Square Co. produced some of the most memorable and genre defining games, such as FF, Chrono Trigger, Xenogears, Secret of Mana/Evermore. (full list here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Square_games [wikipedia.org]). WTF has Enix ever released that was as noteworthy or even approaches the quality of Square?

Re:Completely Enix's fault (1)

Marurun (1938210) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535246)

Dragon Warrior, Illusion of Gaia, Terranigma, E.V.O. Search For Eden, Star Ocean, Wonder Project J, and so forth. Enix didn't just stick to your common RPG where you had menus and went around finding enemies to level up, but instead took a more creative approach to change how you played the game. Many of their games were never seen outside of Japan, yet since being fan translated many are considered just as appealing. Since their merger though I've yet to see anything creative come out of the company. Even before the merger it still felt like Square was trying to milk all they could out of the already perfectly received gameplay and story basis used in the FF series. And then when they were being creative(like with The World Ends With You) it felt like FFVII all over again with different artwork and themes involved.

Re:Completely Enix's fault (2)

ThosLives (686517) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535278)

I think I have to agree with this. Although, I think XII was pretty decent; given its style, though, I think it was done by the teams involved with Tactics and Vagrant Story which were, if I recall correctly, before the merger.

XIII reminds me of Xenosaga II and III, which both destroyed the awesome Xenosaga (I) with its crazy linear gameplay and "narrative" loading screens.(Seriously - the story should come out during gameplay, not a loading screen!)

So, yes; while I purchased XIII, I think that's probably it for me. (Personally I fall into the camp that has VI as the favorite.)

Re:Completely Enix's fault (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37535632)

XII was in the same world as Vagrant Story & FF Tactics.

If I remember the timeline, Vagrant Story > War of the Lions (Tactics) > FF XII

FFXIII whole heartedly destroyed my faith in the Final Fantasy brand.... many hours of screaming at the retarded AI for not correctly prioritising heals. For those who didn't play you can only control the primary character if this lead character dies, game over (But it's just fine if the other two people die).

I still actively play FFXI, I tried the Beta for XIV and it I think using the word terrible to describe it tarnishes the good name of some other terrible games.

If you want to play a half decent but very complicated game try out Last Remnant you'll notice the menu system graphics are very similar to FFXIII because this game "was" suppose to be FFXIII before it was renamed due to it's complexities.

Re:Completely Enix's fault (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37535420)

Ever since the merger, the company's games have been shit, and I completely blame the Enix side of the family. Square Co. produced some of the most memorable and genre defining games, such as FF, Chrono Trigger, Xenogears, Secret of Mana/Evermore. (full list here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Square_games [wikipedia.org]). WTF has Enix ever released that was as noteworthy or even approaches the quality of Square?

Dragon Quest and ActRaiser to name a few. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Enix_games [wikipedia.org]
Also Star Ocean. (If anyone tries to pop in and say the game ran like shit and had tons of glitches I'll bop em, cause the worst of those problems only crop up in emulators.)

I'm not sure if Enix is wholly to blame, as Square was kind of questionable before they merged. (Final Fantasy X and XI, and X-2 though to be honest X-2 was right before they merged)

Re:Completely Enix's fault (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37535548)

Try looking up the list of games made by Enix, then the dev teams that worked on SE's terrible games. Do a little research before placing blame; you'll sound less like a pre-teen fangirl.

Re:Completely Enix's fault (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37536094)

Are you serious? At least in Japanese markets, Enix's Dragon Quest series is legendary. It never became as popular outside of Japan, but it still has a decent following and has definitely had a cultural impact -- you would recognize a DQ slime, yes? "Quality of Square" is also a pretty ironic statement, since FF6 and 7 were some of the buggiest games you'll ever see with their sales numbers.

That being said, the merge was the worst thing to happen to both companies. Square was great. Enix was great. Square Enix has been nothing but a disappointment.

At this point... (1)

Bieeanda (961632) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535082)

At this point it's hard to tell if they're earnestly trying to polish a turd, or if they simply don't know shit from Shinola.

No it didnt (1)

Tharsman (1364603) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535174)

Lets be honest: mostly no one ever accepted the MMOs as official Final Fantasy games despite them being numbered. Yes, the game is horrible, and likely many will never again touch a SquareEnix MMO ever again (I gave them too much credit expecting them to not be capable of doing worse than FFXI again.)

But the Final Fantasy brand HAS been damaged big time and it had little to do with XIV. It was the horrendous XIII that had those honors. I think to this day I have not met a single Final Fantasy fan (in person, online I have seen very very few) that has not hated that long corridor game.

Now, I am talking from a western perspective. Perhaps the japanese market took the online games seriously? Doubt it but who knows.

Not quite (1)

krizoitz (1856864) | more than 2 years ago | (#37535196)

You know what harmed the brand? Final Fantasy XI, XII, XIII AND XIV. Changing the basic formula of "you control a party and its actions in battles" and going with completely linear game play and odd online experiences killed Final Fantasy. X was the last game that embraced the Final Fantasy brand, since then its been throwing crap at the wall hoping it will stick. These games are Final Fantasy in name only, the magic, the SOUL is gone. Long gone.

Re:Not quite (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37535934)

In XII, you control a party as well (and their actions in battle) ... what are you talking about?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...