Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Fallout 3, RE 5 in 2008, Final Fantasy 360 Never

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the zombies-and-radiation-are-so-cheery dept.

Games 136

In addition to the truly excellent trailer, yesterday Bethesda Softworks let slip the platforms on which Fallout 3 will be playable. CVG reports on an article in the upcoming issue of Game Informer magazine, which describes some of the gameplay and states the title will be on offer for the PC, 360, and PlayStation 3 sometime in Fall of 2008. Meanwhile, Eurogamer is reporting that Capcom won't be letting Resident Evil 5 out of the holding pen until at least April of next year. For now they're relying on the Wii port of the title and other offerings to see them through the year. Finally, if you were hoping to play Final Fantasy XIII on the Xbox 360, you'll be waiting a long time. IGN has word that there are no plans for any FF games on Microsoft's console.

cancel ×

136 comments

Fallout 3 Design Documents (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19411277)

If you're into Fallout 3, don't miss the original Fallout 3 Van Buren design documents [demonoid.com] . Cool stuff. Going to be interesting to see if anything survives from there.

Re:Fallout 3 Design Documents (4, Informative)

Anthony Boyd (242971) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412051)

I would note that in addition to the original design documents, the original Fallout 3 tech demo [nma-fallout.com] has been leaked. That's right, it's the playable game that the original team was working on 4 years ago. It doesn't have anything to do with the new game that Bethesda is trying to build. Bethesda only came into the picture when the original company folded.

Re:Fallout 3 Design Documents (1)

bckrispi (725257) | more than 7 years ago | (#19415601)

If you're into Fallout 3, don't miss the original Fallout 3 Van Buren design documents. Cool stuff. Going to be interesting to see if anything survives from there.
Gaah! Put up an NSFW tag next time!

interesting (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19411289)

assss!!!!!

Fallout 3 Gameplay? (1)

ShadowsHawk (916454) | more than 7 years ago | (#19411317)

I would really appreciate it if someone paste the article text since I'm suck behind a filter.

Re:Fallout 3 Gameplay? (1)

MonorailCat (1104823) | more than 7 years ago | (#19411361)

I believe its an article in an upcoming publication, not available online now (ever?)

Re:Fallout 3 Gameplay? (1)

ShadowsHawk (916454) | more than 7 years ago | (#19411399)

Ah. Thanks anyways.

Re:Fallout 3 Gameplay? (1)

Zencyde (850968) | more than 7 years ago | (#19411385)

June 5, 2007 - Looking for more Final Fantasy following the Xbox 360 port of Final Fantasy XI? Then you're going to have to look to a different next generation system. A Square Enix executive has disclosed to Japan's Nikkei BP that the company currently has no plans for Final Fantasy games on the 360.
Noting that the PS3 is getting Final Fantasy XIII, the website asked Square Enix's Shinji Hashimoto if the Wii or Xbox 360 will also be getting games in the series. "For the Wii, we have FF Crystal Chronicles in production," replied Hashimoto. "As for FF on the Xbox 360, it's currently a completely blank page."
Strong words from Hashimoto, although perhaps if everyone goes out and buys Last Remnant (that includes you!), Square Enix will have a change of heart.

Re:Fallout 3 Gameplay? (2, Interesting)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413485)

'Blank page' doesn't mean 'never', it just means 'no current plans'... That's about a minimum of a year, if they decide to do a port, or 3 years if they decide to innovate. Minimum, mind. Not average or mean.

Nintendo had been the sole Final Fantasy Console for years when Sony stepped in and took it. Now Nintendo has FF titles again (weak ones, but still...) so there's nothing stopping them from doing the 360. They are probably fishing for a big check from everyone's favorite monopoly first.

Re:Fallout 3 Gameplay? (1)

GrayCalx (597428) | more than 7 years ago | (#19411415)

Shadows

There really wasn't anything in the link. Just references to an upcoming Game Informer issue. I'll paste the article below, but theres really nothing there. :(

Fallout 3 is heading to PC, Xbox 360 and PS3, according to Game Informer magazine which has posted a scan of the cover of a forthcoming issue that features the sequel.

Bethesda's game is described as an open-ended RPG by the GI chaps, and as you'll know if you watched yesterday's teaser trailer it's due out in autumn 2008.

It's no great surprise that the developer is targeting those three platforms, but it's always nice to have it confirmed.

Expect a flood of Fallout 3 information to plaster itself all over the internet soon.

FF Quote Not Entirely True (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19411323)

See http://arstechnica.com/journals/thumbs.ars/2007/06 /06/busting-rumors-sonys-ps3-price-drop-and-square s-360-final-fantasy-plans [arstechnica.com]

They explain that Square said the 360 was a "blank page", which isn't the same thing as a flat out "Not gonna happen".

Nathan

Re:FF Quote Not Entirely True (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19414891)

It is if you're Japanese.

Remember, this is the culture where "Ahh, well..." in response to a question is a common way of shooting it down. Something even THIS concrete is basically laughing and stomping on the idea.

No FF on Xbox360 (2, Interesting)

Mortanius (225192) | more than 7 years ago | (#19411369)

Does it really surprise anyone though? FF is huge (perhaps as an understatement) in Japan where Microsoft has a pretty tiny share. Releasing exclusively would be suicide, and though there is a large market in the US, I would expect there's enough PS3 owners and enough would-be PS3 owners on the fence that would pick up a PS3 because of FF that it wouldn't necessarily be worth the added effort to port to xbox.

And please God, don't let them contract out to another company to do a half-assed port. :-P

Re:No FF on Xbox360 (2, Insightful)

Araxen (561411) | more than 7 years ago | (#19411565)

I agree, the 360 just doesn't have the foothold in Japan to warrant Square/Enix to develop for the 360. The PS3 has a larger player base in Japan than the 360 and eventually the price will come down enough that the Japanese and Americans will buy the system en mass. You can't say the same for the 360. America yes, but in Japan I doubt it.

But....I wouldn't be totally surprised to see Square/Enix to totally focus on the Nintendo systems. The Wii will have by far the larger player base of the 3 systems and the DS just has an enormous player base. We've seen the start of this focus with the next DragonQuest game coming on the DS and not on a next gen system(Wii/PS3/360). I think we are seeing Nintendo reclaiming the video game king throne.

Re:No FF on Xbox360 (2, Interesting)

badboy_tw2002 (524611) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413697)

I would. FF has always been about the glitz, and if anyone is going to push the limits of the PS3 and HD/BluRay it will be Square. It would be hard to call any FF a "casual" game, so they've got a solid core of hardcore fans on the PS3 waiting for the next installment. Look for the PS3 version as the lead platform, with a solid port to the Wii. (Using the Wiimote might actually liven up some of the battles, and would be an easy and great way to add something to the game without redesigning it from scratch.)

Re:No FF on Xbox360 (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412595)

Does it really surprise anyone though? FF is huge (perhaps as an understatement) in Japan where Microsoft has a pretty tiny share. Releasing exclusively would be suicide, and though there is a large market in the US, I would expect there's enough PS3 owners and enough would-be PS3 owners on the fence that would pick up a PS3 because of FF that it wouldn't necessarily be worth the added effort to port to xbox.

Not just that, but FF probably wouldn't sit too well on the 360 due to the limited storage capacity. FF games are known for ridiculous amounts of FMV which is exacerbated by needing HD content on the 360. I expect if FF did appear that it would have to span multiple discs.

Re:No FF on Xbox360 (1)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413531)

Yeah, because the Wii has -so- much more storage capacity than the 360.

While it's unlikely we'll see a true FF on the 360 (partially for your reason), it's possible we'll see spinoffs like the FFCC and the like, retro titles revamped, or new titles with 'hard core' gameplay without so many movies and more actual action. (I'm hoping for this, personally... Not holding my breath, though.)

Re:No FF on Xbox360 (2, Informative)

DrXym (126579) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413711)

Yeah, because the Wii has -so- much more storage capacity than the 360.

The Wii has the luxury of being standard definition. Which means FMV is likely to consume 1/3 the space on disk that it would need for 720p on the 360. The same goes for textures, models etc. which invariably would have to be far more detailed on the 360 to suit its higher resolution and more capable graphics & CPU. The situation would be even worse if the 360 dared hope to support 1080. Assuming any FF title could be crammed onto a single disk for Wii then it's likely that it would require 3 or 4 disks to take advantage of the 360.

I have no idea if this was one of the reasons that FF is not going to the 360 but it's clear that that multiple disks are the ONLY way FF XIII or later could happen on the 360.

Re:No FF on Xbox360 (1)

amuro98 (461673) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413709)

Storage won't be a problem. Blue Dragon is 4 DVDs. Multi-disc (J)RPGs are as old as optical media for consoles. The games are designed such that disc swaps only occur in one direction - IE. you won't be going back to disc1 after you've swapped it for disc2.

It won't even affect the manufacturing costs much either since DVD is so much cheaper than a single BD.

Even if FFXIII contains 2 hours of HD FMV (which is highly unlikely), that would only put the total game's size at about 4 DVDs - 5 at the most.

Re:No FF on Xbox360 (1)

skobar (890726) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412727)

But worldwide, there is more 360 then ps3 and the games does sell everywhere in the world.

There is also already a Final fantasy on the 360 even if it is a mmorpg.

I don't really care though as I have a ps3.

Re:No FF on Xbox360 (1)

amuro98 (461673) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413599)

While the 360 hasn't sold like mad in Japan, it's important to note that the two big J-RPGs for the console - Blue Dragon and Eternal Bell, sold very well - enough to make a small spike in 360 hardware and software sales. This proves that the Japanese are at least willing to buy a 360, if it has games they want.

We also know that Final Fantasy is a very big franchise in Japan.

Square's mentioned FFXIII won't be ready for release (in Japan?) until April 2008. What would happen if the PS3 is still struggling to even keep up with the monthly sales of the Wii and 360 worldwide? It would really be hard to justify releasing a game as expensive as FFXIII on a console that doesn't even have enough customers to guarantee a profit.

And yes, while FFXIII will certainly HELP convince people to buy a PS3, I don't think that it'll be a system seller by itself. Think about it. Would you spend nearly US$700 for just one game? Ok, so say Sony dropped the price of the PS3 to US$500. Would you spend nearly US$600 for just one game?

This is the problem that Square-Enix could be facing.

Their choices would be:
* Release exclusively on the PS3. (Note: they may not have a choice anyways if they already have a contract with Sony for FFXIII so the other options may be moot.)

* Announce a port to the 360. The 360 has the power, and certainly has the popularity overseas. Would FFXIII be enough to swing more Japanese to the 360 in Japan though?

* Announce a port to the Wii. At the rate things are going now, the Wii will be the undisputed leader in Japan by next year. However, the Wii lacks the graphical power of the PS3 and 360, and there could be issues with the controller (not enough buttons/sticks) If such a port was announced, would Square re-work the game to try to take advantage of the Wii's controller, or just force people to use the GameCube attachment? Also, what would this do to Wii sales worldwide? Would FFXIII do for the Wii what FFVII did for the PS1?

Finally, remember that SquareEnix has talked about turning FFXIII into a franchise containing many games on many different platforms. They've talked about future FFXIII spinoffs on the Wii and DS already, I believe. Just because they're saying "no FFXIII for the 360" doesn't mean that other FFXIII-related games may not show up there later, only that perhaps the central game will only be on the PS3.

Re:No FF on Xbox360 (1)

steveo777 (183629) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413887)

Think about it. Would you spend nearly US$700 for just one game?

It seems a few people are. I'm not sure how many PS3s are in the hands of consumers at this point, either in the US, Japan, or worldwide, but I'm willing to bet it's enough for Squeenix to bet FF on it. At least this time. It'll drive some more sales for a lot of the die-hards, but the game only needs to sell a million or so to turn a nice profit, and make enough money for the next. They're banking that the PS3 will sell steady for some years to come.

Re:No FF on Xbox360 (1)

DrEldarion (114072) | more than 7 years ago | (#19415121)

Would you spend nearly US$700 for just one game? Ok, so say Sony dropped the price of the PS3 to US$500. Would you spend nearly US$600 for just one game?
For a FF game? Probably. Maybe I'm a hopeless Square whore, but I know I'm not alone.

You also have to remember that, in Japan, there is only one game series with more selling power than FF (Dragon Quest), and from what I recall, it's a pretty close race. Final Fantasy is HUGE - it has its own drink in stores. A (current) exclusive on the main Final Fantasy XIII game will sell a boatload of systems. I'd be honestly surprised if we didn't see an extra million PS3s sold in Japan right after the FF release, just like I'd be honestly surprised if we didn't see a huge spike in 360 sales in America when Halo 3 gets released.

Re:No FF on Xbox360 (1)

Hotawa Hawk-eye (976755) | more than 7 years ago | (#19415943)

And yes, while FFXIII will certainly HELP convince people to buy a PS3, I don't think that it'll be a system seller by itself. Think about it. Would you spend nearly US$700 for just one game? Ok, so say Sony dropped the price of the PS3 to US$500. Would you spend nearly US$600 for just one game?
I've been considering getting a PS3, but there aren't enough games I think I would like to justify $600. The games that are out now are pieces of straw on the back of that $600 camel ... when the new Final Fantasy comes out, that's a whole bale full of straw, and it might very well shatter the back of the price camel.

Witness the case of a friend of mine. I've been trying to convince him to get a Nintendo DS for a while, trying to tempt him by telling him about some of the good games the system has available (Final Fantasy 3, which we both looked forward to; the Castlevania games; a few other titles.) Some of his other friends have been trying to convince him to buy one as well. He's always chosen not to buy, saying that while he's tempted, he probably wouldn't use it that much.

Two days after I sent him a link to the (warning: link may be hazardous to your free time) Puzzle Quest demo [infinite-interactive.com] and told him it was only for PSP and DS, he bought a DS Lite and a couple of games after spending a couple of hours driving around looking for Puzzle Quest and a good price on a DS Lite.

Re:No FF on Xbox360 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19416889)

Dude, Eternal Sonata (I assume that's what you're talking about) hasn't even shipped yet, and Blue Dragon "sold well" for a console that still hasn't sold half a million units yet in Japan.

The budget for a typical FF requires at least a million copies sold to break even, and while it does sell worldwide they typically sell the greatest number of copies in Japan.

Re:No FF on Xbox360 (2, Interesting)

Conception (212279) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413627)

I think in general people forget something...

"Sony Invests in Square / Square Not Exclusive To Sony

Sony Corp it will invest 14.9 billion yen in capital to Square Co Ltd. The investment will give Sony an 18% stake in Square. Sony does not intend to prevent Square from contributing games to rival game makers such as Nintendo Co Ltd or Microsoft Corp, a SONY spokeswoman said. - Source Reuters.

"We are not exclusive to Sony, because of this deal." said Hisashi Suzuki, Square's president."

Sony owns a large part of Square. Sony needs to be doing -really- badly before Square starts helping out Sony's biggest game competitor.

Re:No FF on Xbox360 (1)

king-manic (409855) | more than 7 years ago | (#19415173)

Does it really surprise anyone though? FF is huge (perhaps as an understatement) in Japan where Microsoft has a pretty tiny share.

There is no doubt that FF is a juggaurnaut on both sides of the ocean. However it's more successful her ein NA then in JApan. In JApan Dragon Quest is the huge franchise and FF is #2/#3 in RPG's. Here in NA FF is the #1 and Dragon quest is down the line.

Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19411377)

After the last two Final Fantasy games, it's obvious that at the very least Square-Enix doesn't care about Final Fantasy any more. (The "last two" by my definition being XI, an uninspired EverQuest clone with moogles, and XII, an offline version of an uninspired EverQuest clone with moogles and bunny-women.)

Seriously, after playing XII and discovering that the game really does play itself to the point where you're only there to guide the characters through the map, I really don't see any reason to get any more Final Fantasy games. Ever.

Add in that the wonderful "storytelling" in FFXII sees a story wherein every character they've introduced through the start of the *tutorial* dies by the end of the tutorial, randomly jumping to some characters you've never met and really don't care about, and you've got a game with no gameplay and one of the worst stories I've ever read.

Yeah, I know, there are some twists concerning that last statement in the story, but the concept of the first several minutes of a story is to hook the audience. Introducing a whole slew of characters and then *killing every last one of them* (even if it later turns out they miraculously survived) does not create a compelling story. Especially when the main character they randomly dump on you turns out to be, hands down, the most annoying Final Fantasy character I can recall.

So let the PS3 keep their Final Fantasy. It won't help sales. Final Fantasy is dead, Square-Enix has decided to kill it.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

dhakbar (783117) | more than 7 years ago | (#19411665)

Damn straight.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (4, Insightful)

dannycim (442761) | more than 7 years ago | (#19411937)

Matter of opinion. Sure, FFXII's story was a bit light, but the combat system was the best ever seen of any jRPG. You could do everything manually or litterally program the AI of the party members with the gambit system.

I for one loved it, and most reviewers did too. SE's not about to "kill" FF any time soon, as you may think. It's their franchise, it's their cash-cow.

Damn Final Fantasy Hypocrites! (4, Insightful)

Prien715 (251944) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412127)

I agree.

What I don't understand is the GP's hypocrisy in saying "Square never innovates" and saying "I didn't like FFXII because it was too different" at the same time. Either you really do want another clone or you want originality. If you don't like something that's original (like the ability system in FF8), at least have respect for the developers for thinking out of the box rather than simply playing it safe. Whenever you innovate, you're going to come out with some things some people really like and some people really don't. I much prefer this to a game everyone thinks is mediocre.

Re:Damn Final Fantasy Hypocrites! (1)

Yusaku Godai (546058) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412469)

Well, I wouldn't exactly call it innovation. FFXII isn't the first RPG to have a battle system like FFXII's. Square is kinda like Blizzard--they take the niftiest things that everyone else is doing and refine the heck out of them. The Gambit system is definitely the smoothest implementation I've seen of that sort of combat system.

that word doesn't mean what you think it means (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412795)

What I don't understand is the GP's hypocrisy in saying "Square never innovates" and saying "I didn't like FFXII because it was too different" at the same time.

I have read the GPs post several times, and nowhere can I find him claiming that "Square never innovates". Or am I reading the wrong post?

Re:Damn Final Fantasy Hypocrites! (1)

Chainsaw Karate (869210) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413087)

What pissed me off was the fact that 90% of Final Fantasy XII takes place in a bunch of totally generic tombs, caves, mines, sewers, and tunnels. Seriously, every indoor environment is some stupid corridor dungeon with a whole bunch of rectangular hallways, all identically textured, strewn together with no rhyme or reason. Either the rooms are totally empty, or they have one treasure chest sitting in the corner.

I found myself yelling at the game "who the FUCK would build a fucking 80 floor tower with hundreds of rooms and then put nothing in it, except a treasure chest here and there with one potion or a knot of rust inside??" Also, you gotta love the randomized treasure chests. Not only do you get something useless 95% of the time, but you have no idea whether you're missing something good and should come back when it respawns. (After looking at the guide, I can tell you that you VERY RARELY find anything better than what you can get in shops.)

I miss the 32-bit FF games with pre-rendered dungeons. At least they made it feel like you were exploring a real place that served some purpose; that people would actually build and use. Unfortunately, from what I've seen of FF XIII, it looks like more crappy corridor dungeons. (see all the pics of those shiny futuristic hallways)

Wha... (1)

Ayanami Rei (621112) | more than 7 years ago | (#19416985)

Dude, you must be remembering some other 16-bit 2d RPGs. The pre-rendered dungeons in FF III and onward (up to VI) are just as aribtrary and devoid of stuff; big, empty tiled floors, a treasure chest at the end of a hidden hallway or whatever, walls that are all the same, save a few spot sprites.

Main reason battle areas were so sparse is to allow maximum manuverability when fighting enemies, and to keep the polycount down. 6 enemies, 3 party members, and two spell effects were at the limit of the PS2.

Outside areas had smaller draw distances and areas so they had more detail.
Contrast to non-fighting areas. Towns, the inside of shops, etc. These were heavily detailed and full of stuff.

It's all about what the PS2 can crank out.

Oh please (0)

Moraelin (679338) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413303)

Oh please. Noone said "square never innovates" or complained about innovation as such. So get off that high horse already.

You're basically committing the classic fallacy of creating a false dichotomy [wikipedia.org] : either you like FF8's uninspired ideas, or you're against innovation as a whole. Which is bogus even as bogus sophistry and fanboyism go.

Not only there's a lot of middle ground between the two, it deliberately ignores that innovation isn't even the only variable there. A game (or everything else) is judged on a whole more dimmensions than just innovation. Something can be highly innovative, yet be crap in a million other aspects: crap story, crap plot, crap delivery, crap mechanics, etc.

Or to turn that bogus dichotomy right back at you: hey, I'm building this house out of bundles of old newspapers, and painting it with human shit. It's so innovative, right? Hey, noone made one like that before. Do you want to live in it? No? Then you're against innovation, you horrible person.

_That_ is the whole point: just being original is _not_ mutually exclussive with being crap in every single other aspect.

The same applies to games. It's ok to innovate, but a game still has to have other qualities too to be worth playing. A crap system or a crap story still make a crap game, even if it's innovative. Crap is still crap even if it's brand-new original crap.

A bad story is a bad story even if it's new. Or do you want to tell me you'd find a story about a booger which fell in the toilet and got flushed the apex of entertainment just because it's new?

So, again: noone criticizes innovation. And noone says simply "I don't like FF XII because it's different." I realize that it makes your fanboy rant easier to over-simplify it like that, but it also makes it so disconnected from reality it's not even funny.

Re:Damn Final Fantasy Hypocrites! (1)

Chainsaw Karate (869210) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413613)

I have nothing wrong with innovation, but Square-Enix, of all developers, should be able to recognize when the gameplay is fundamentally broken. For example:
* The license grid gives you absolutely no reason to specialize. Every character will eventually become some jack-of-all-trades battle mage.
* Offensive magic is basically useless, since MP-restoring items are hard to come by, it takes too long to cast, and you can do more damage with physical attacks in the same amount of time.
* Summons are also basically useless.
* Why the hell do they limit which gambits you have access to, and make you buy them all? It severely limits your tactical options until way later in the game for no good reason.

It's not like it takes some super genius to see how these "innovations" hurt the gameplay, and it certainly doesn't take a genius to conceive of ways to modify them so they work much more effectively.

Re:Damn Final Fantasy Hypocrites! (2, Insightful)

Prien715 (251944) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413833)

The license grid gives you absolutely no reason to specialize.

I beg to differ. While you could make everyone the same, it definitely paid to specialize. There were several "physical attack damage increased" grids near at far ends of the license board. For my fighters, I made it a priority to go after those, while for my mages, I cared more about getting the "magic damage+" and "mana cost reduction" gambits, which were also near one another. I had two offensive mages, one of whom specialized in status ailments and wielded a bow while the other was a straight attack mage. With headhunter, channeling, and putting her on last priority to case healing magic, she was able to do large amounts of damage and maintain most of her MP. Later in the game, I gave her shades of black, which allowed her to cast spells for no mp (but allowed her to regain mp via headhunter). Also, the item bonuses stack so it pays to create on character who uses items. With all the "ether++" and "remedy++" spaces on the board, I'd put my "item user" in the party whenever someone needed mp or had 10 status ailments.

If you decided (as you did), just to get all the low-level stuff with everyone, you really miss out on some of the higher level (farther away from the center) gambits which are insanely useful.

As a caveat, at the end of the game I ended up having a few hundred LP left over with everyone and could probably just learn the whole board with everyone. Square should have made a few 1000 LP squares to provide for even further specialization and more end-game content.

I agree that the game didn't make as good use of summons as it could've.

Why the hell do they limit which gambits you have access to, and make you buy them all?

So you can't cast Fire3 on the first boss? So you don't make everyone a mage since it's cheaper? Not the greatest decision, granted, but there's reasons.

Re:Damn Final Fantasy Hypocrites! (1)

Tyger (126248) | more than 7 years ago | (#19414833)

You're mixing up gambits and licenses. Gambits = simple AI for your allies. Licenses = purchased skills.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

badasscat (563442) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412429)

Sure, FFXII's story was a bit light, but the combat system was the best ever seen of any jRPG. You could do everything manually or litterally program the AI of the party members with the gambit system.

I for one loved it, and most reviewers did too.


When was the last time any big game got bad reviews? Game reviewers get caught up in hype just like everybody else, and maybe more importantly, they're often afraid to criticize games that they know have a lot of evangelists. They may not personally like a game, but they take the attitude of "well, if you like Japanese RPG's, then you'll love this game." In fact, you see statements just like that in game reviews all the time. It really is basically bullshit. A game's either fun or it isn't; there's no "if you like this kind of game, then you'll like the game." If that were a valid way of looking at things, then every game should get a perfect score.

So the fact that reviewers liked FFXII is meaningless. The fact that you liked it probably has more relevance; at least you're not trying to please your readers.

But I did not like FFXII, and I'm a pretty hardcore FF fan. I didn't think it was awful, but it never grabbed me - I never felt any emotional connection to it, and I never really felt like I wanted to play it. I'd come home at night and think "oh god, I'd better play some FFXII... I guess." Because of that, it ended up one of only two FF's since VII that I never finished. The story was probably the main problem, but I'm sorry, I did not like the battle system at all - it was like Grandia Lite. It had no real strategy; it was all action. It was clearly a case of "be careful what you wish for", because it was exactly the kind of battle system some FF fans have been clamoring for for a long time, but it was the perfect example of why real-time battle systems don't really work. It *felt* like a hack and slash.

FF's battle system has always been about strategy, and for that reason the battles themselves have always been somewhat abstracted. FFXII got rid of the abstraction and made the battles feel more "realistic", which as is often the case just ends up being more boring.

I don't agree with the parent poster that S-E needs to "kill" the series, but I do agree with him that the last two FF's have been subpar, especially after the gorgeous FFX, probably my second favorite FF ever. I'd even go further and say the last three numbered FF's have been subpar - FFXI, FFX-2 and FFXII.

Still, the series is still a system-seller in both the US and Japan, and it will help PS3 sales in a big way when FFXIII is released. Especially if, as has been S-E's modus operandi lately, the first numbered FF on a new system ends up really setting the standard. FFVII and FFX were both great, while the FF's in between were mediocre at best; hopefully FFXIII will continue the tradition of VII and X.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

Canthros (5769) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412859)

From personal experience, the FF combat system has often been less about strategy and more about power-leveling. It's been this way since FF1, and it's been true in the vast majority of the FF games. FF2, not to be confused with FF4, is probably the worst this way, but they've pretty much all been like this. Sure, strategy *helps*, but, when in doubt, you wander around and kill things to gain levels. As such, the combat's almost always been boring, and FFXII had a nice approach to alleviating that by not necessitating that you pay full attention to the combat to win a battle.

As to the story, I actually thought it was a breath of fresh air in the otherwise stale series, even if the setting (Ivalice) is actually recycled from earlier games. Personally, I really intend to skip FFXIII, since it promises to be more of the same that we got from the bulk of series.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

_xeno_ (155264) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413471)

Sure, strategy *helps*, but, when in doubt, you wander around and kill things to gain levels.

I'd argue that that's the "right" way to do it. By using smart strategies, you can defeat enemies more easily than by simply spamming "Attack." However, if you can't find a working strategy, you can always get through challenges by leveling to the point where the challenge becomes something you can handle.

It's kind of an automatic difficulty setting - if a challenge is too hard, you can make it easier by leveling. So the better you are at the game, the harder it is because the less leveling needs to be done.

That's not to say that Final Fantasy does that completely right. The turn-based Final Fantasy games (that's FF1-FF3, prior to the introduction of ATB in FF4) make strategy essentially impossible since you can't really determine the turn order and luck plays an overly large roll in deciding whether or not a given battle is successful. The best you can do is choose equipment and skills that the opponent is weak against.

Even post-FF4, dumb luck plays too large a roll in many of the Final Fantasy games. Either the opponent spams its "I Win" ability, or it randomly decides to ineffectively attack the character with the most defense/HP. So even with a good strategy, winning frequently comes down to whether or not the computer randomly chooses smart moves or randomly chooses dumb moves.

Allowing complicated strategies while still allowing simple power-leveling is a good thing. Requiring either one and preventing the other is a bad thing. Power-leveling allows players with more time than skill to complete the game.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19415471)

Sounds like the hype behind the Gamecube version of Tales of Symphonia. Everyone reviewed it as excellent RPG. I purchased it based on such. But, it was nothing more than a generic turd of an RPG, a waste of money if you will.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

OmegaBlac (752432) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412435)

Sure, FFXII's story was a bit light, but the combat system was the best ever seen of any jRPG.
Best ever? The combat system in FFXII was good and has alot of potential--hopefully Square-Enix can improve this in future titles--but IMO, it was not deep enough. For example, how can I get a character to continue to steal until they get certain item and then stop and switch to attacking? Or to steal only once from a certain monster for the whole battle, even if that monster has less then 100% health. The previous example was real annoying problem for me. For most of the game in order to have a character just steal once usually you would have a gambit like steal as long as monster health is 100%. What happens if another character or monster attacks the target first? Now you have to manually steal or move on to something else.

Vagrant Story's battle system was deep. IMO, that was probably the best combat system in a JRPG ever. One annoying problem with FFXII and the gambits was one would have to wait until 2/3rds through the game to get some the really fine-grained gambits that would have been beneficial earlier in the game. By the time you can acquire these late gambits, you most likely are already strong enough to not really need them or use a combination of other gambits to perform the same thing. The automatic nature of the gambits was a welcome change in JRPGs, but it felt limited to me.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

shimpei (3348) | more than 7 years ago | (#19416267)

For example, how can I get a character to continue to steal until they get certain item and then stop and switch to attacking? Or to steal only once from a certain monster for the whole battle, even if that monster has less then 100% health.
I can't dig up the source right now, but I remember the developers saying in a Japanese interview that this omission is deliberate. It'd have been trivial for them to add "Monster holding treasure" as a gambit target, but they chose not to make the game not too easy. Yes, you can program your characters to beat monsters in your sleep; no, you can't sleep your way through the game if you also want to optimize treasure collection. It's mean-spirited, yes, but don't assume they haven't thought through it.

By the way, if other characters are attacking monsters before your thief can target them, your gambit isn't precise enough. I'll leave the solution as an exercise for the reader.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (0)

brkello (642429) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412149)

After the last two Final Fantasy games, it's obvious that at the very least Square-Enix doesn't care about Final Fantasy any more.

After your first sentence I could tell you have no clue what you are talking about.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (2, Insightful)

blendo75.5 (1058006) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412159)

I enjoyed FF XII but I'm not going to spend what will likely be $660 to play XIII, especially since there will be versions released on every other console ever made (except the 360, apparently). I think Square lost sight of what makes FF a good game, for me it was never about the graphics. Final Fantasy XII will no doubt have beautiful graphics but the chances of it being a good FF experience are slim to none, probably due to too much energy being put into the graphics.

In the PS1 era I think people were shocked by how far graphics had come and Squaresoft used this intelligently at the time. Good graphics just arent that much of a shock anymore. I saw someone playing 360 the other day, a basketball game, and at first I thought he was WATCHING basketball on TV. Wow!! Then a minute later I saw the pixels, the seams, it wasnt as impressive as it had been at first glance. I got over the jump in graphics from the original xbox in less than 5 minutes. The improvement is there, definitely, but it's just not as big a deal as it used to be.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

Canthros (5769) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413029)

The FF series has always have usually pushed the graphics pretty hard, actually. I agree that I don't think it's as big a selling point as it used to be, but it's always been a big deal for the series.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

king-manic (409855) | more than 7 years ago | (#19415379)

I enjoyed FF XII but I'm not going to spend what will likely be $660 to play XIII, especially since there will be versions released on every other console ever made (except the 360, apparently). I think Square lost sight of what makes FF a good game, for me it was never about the graphics. Final Fantasy XII will no doubt have beautiful graphics but the chances of it being a good FF experience are slim to none, probably due to too much energy being put into the graphics.

In the PS1 era I think people were shocked by how far graphics had come and Squaresoft used this intelligently at the time. Good graphics just arent that much of a shock anymore. I saw someone playing 360 the other day, a basketball game, and at first I thought he was WATCHING basketball on TV. Wow!! Then a minute later I saw the pixels, the seams, it wasnt as impressive as it had been at first glance. I got over the jump in graphics from the original xbox in less than 5 minutes. The improvement is there, definitely, but it's just not as big a deal as it used to be.


I think thats nostalgia since I thought the PS1 era was a bit sloppy in FFVII and tight but with a stupdi story in FFVIII and just utterly bland in FFIX. FFX was a little sloppy and focused on design philosophy of "how can we frustrate the player". I felt FFVI and FFIV were all much tighter in story pacing and action. But that could be nostalgia too. I felt FFXII was tighly made and oozed quality although the story wasn't as epic as I would have liked I had more fun playign it then X IX VIII. It's int he top 3 for me.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412337)

Yeah I'm sure not nearly enough people here have read FFXII bashing every time the series is brought up. The game has sold a LOT of copies, so to say that FFXIII wouldn't help sales is absurd. Some consider FFXII to be the best of the series.

It sounds like you only played the game for about thirty minutes. The tutorial is a prologue; you're not playing with main characters there. And "jumping to some characters you've never met"???? HAHAHAH it's the beginning of the game! Where did you expect to meet them beforehand?

As for the combat system, it's like KOTOR (which a lot of people enjoyed) but with optional AI routines you can set for your party members to speed along the flow of battle. If you don't want the game to "play for you" then turn those routines off, simple as that.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19412983)

The tutorial is a prologue; you're not playing with main characters there. And "jumping to some characters you've never met"???? HAHAHAH it's the beginning of the game! Where did you expect to meet them beforehand?

This should probably be a car analogy, but... I'm going to go with a Star Wars analogy instead. Specifically, the Ep. 1: the Phantom Menace.

Let's say that instead of following Obiwan and Qui-gon, the movie instead suddenly killed both of them after they made it to the bridge of the Trade Federation ship. Suddenly we jump to Naboo and Jar-Jar, and the rest of the movie follows Jar-Jar's exploits. Eventually Obiwan and the rest of the group are reintroduced, but the start would still seem a just a bit disjointed.

The start of a story is supposed to grab the audience. It's supposed to make them interested in the rest of the story. It's supposed to introduce characters and create some form of attachment with the characters so that the audience wants to see what happens to them.

It's not supposed to introduce a group of characters, show how each of them dies, and then jump to an annoying character and suddenly start their story. A start like that makes the entire introduction of the previous characters completely pointless, since we're told that they're dead. Their story is over in under 10 minutes. We're not given enough to care about them.

FFXII should have started immediately with Vaan. Everything that happened during the actual opening should have been introduced after introducing us to Vaan and his friends, to allow us to learn of the connection with Vaan's story, since that's the story they ultimately have the game tell at the start. Otherwise the opening essentially means nothing until you're already a good, I dunno, let's say 5 hours into the game. Up until they start connecting the opening with the characters you're playing, the opening is pointless. It could have been summed up as "two years ago, the Empire invaded Dalmasca" and then you gain control of Vaan.

If you don't want the game to "play for you" then turn those routines off, simple as that.

As much as I enjoy excessively pounding the X button, going through the excessively nested menus and giving commands to characters besides the leader is just so unwieldy that it simply is not practical to turn off the AI.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413933)

In my view the prologue was fine as a tutorial, because it put you into the action straight away. It also was tied into the story rather well altogether. The Star Wars analogy you described... depending on how it were told it might even be fine. Many films take such a storytelling approach. The "disjointed" feeling would come if the approach was poorly executed, but I suppose that's far from an objective thing anyway.

The battle system... well, it's fine for some folks and not for others. It's a lot more elegant than many RPG (particulary JRPG) systems I've dealt with as of late so I was actually impressed. I found it better than KOTOR, better than NWN, far better than the Xenosagas. But I enjoy almost every sort of combat type that exists in gaming. For a good "middleground" setup in FFXII, you can always try turning Gambits ON for every besides the party leader. But, I personally just had them on for everyone all the time and switched leaders on occasion, as that's quickly done with the control pad.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

SparkyFlooner (1090661) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412449)

Final Fantasy XII was great. Especially when compared to X-2 (the only one I've never finished. When I saw the dance number in the intro I knew I was in trouble. And dancing to cast spel...I should stop there...) Anyway, I play Final Fantasy now because that's what I do. A Final Fantasy comes out, I play it. It's like the sun comes up and it goes down. It's a force of nature. The only way I WOULDN'T play a Final Fantasy is if, say, they made all the lead characters the guys from N'Sync or somthing. .....almost like X-2, where all the girls were from girl bands or something.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

BecomingLumberg (949374) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412873)

In my mind, X-2 will forever sit in the same realm as Mystic Quest... as a blasphemy to all that is FF. It should have been named "Yuna's Hot Pants Adventure!!!!" anyway.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

Wicko (977078) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413121)

LOL

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

Psmylie (169236) | more than 7 years ago | (#19416751)

X-2... There's an example of a game that might have been really, really good if it weren't for the tremendous amount of cheese we were expected to swallow. SE demonstrated how NOT to make a sequel. And trying to link FFX and FFVII... argh, that was like a punch to the gut.

FFX-2: Charlie's Angels in Spira.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (0)

Wicko (977078) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412777)

Yes, I'm sure that a blockbuster series like Final Fantasy, wouldn't get a boost from a console who's players have literally been begging for a Final Fantasy game for years. There are no loads of fanboys dreaming about a High Definition Final Fantasy on a console thats pretty much in the lead for next gen consoles. Square Enix, yeah, they really fucked up, topping the Japanese sales charts [gamespy.com] . It doesn't have to set any records to be a good game. Winning all those awards [wikipedia.org] probably doesn't help either. I couldn't find any North American sales figures but I'm sure they are just as shitty.

Just because you aren't a fan of the series, doesn't make it a dead series. Personally, I haven't played through 12 yet, but I've heard from close friends its a huge improvement over X and X-2. IMHO, X wasn't that bad, although I prefer the older FFs. Remember, these games are mostly slated to the Japanese culture, do you live in Japan? So stick to playing your WoW and whatever other american RPG's, clearly japanese RPGs aren't your style.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

skobar (890726) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412973)

I do, and a lot of other peeps do. You must be in the minority because almost everyone I talk to still loves the final fantasy series and it will probably make them buy a ps3 just because of it.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

Psmylie (169236) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413233)

By "Everquest Clone", do you just mean MMORPGs in general? Because, you know, certain similarities are unavoidable. I don't know, I think FFXI stands pretty well on its own. Hundreds of thousands of players would agree with me.

You didn't like FFXII? Fine and dandy. Sell your copy, if you haven't already. You're not required to like it, and FF fans in general (like myself, obviously) won't miss you. But saying that the franchise is dead? Millions of copies sold would seem to indicate that you are wrong.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (2, Interesting)

DrEldarion (114072) | more than 7 years ago | (#19414619)

... and MMORPGs are just MUDs with graphics, and MUDs are just RPGs that are text-only and online, and then we're back to the single-player RPG again. It's all a big loop, and everything is derivative of everything else. Saying a game sucks because it's too similar to other games is like saying a story sucks because it's similar to stories that have been written hundreds of years ago. Sure, you may not LIKE it, but you can't judge something solely on originality, because there really is very little of it in anything.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19413625)

This is precisely why I'll stick to 360, and buy Mistwalker's jRPGs. They have the FF creator, Nobou doing soundtracks, and members of TEAM CHRONO TRIGGER. Also it looks like their games won't play themselves like FF12 did.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19414233)

Cry those bitter Xbot Tears(tm) fanboy!

You pathetic fucks shouldn't have constantly posted those "OMG!!! FFXIII coming to the 360" posts/topics for the past year. You were dumb enough to buy a console with a shitty 7gig DVD drive and weak graphics hardware and now you are dealing with the consequences.

Red Rings of Death - 360 hardware defects
50 dollars a year online ripoff
No dedicated servers
Halo 3 looks like a crappy last gen game
Forza 2 is a graphical turd
No Final Fantasy games ever
No MGS games ever

Cry, Xbot, cry. The gaming world is laughing their asses off at you.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

BoberFett (127537) | more than 7 years ago | (#19415521)

Xbot? Are you 12 years old or do you just act that way?

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

skobar (890726) | more than 7 years ago | (#19415523)

You call people pathetic fucks? You should read yourself seriously.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

king-manic (409855) | more than 7 years ago | (#19415281)

Yeah, I know, there are some twists concerning that last statement in the story, but the concept of the first several minutes of a story is to hook the audience. Introducing a whole slew of characters and then *killing every last one of them* (even if it later turns out they miraculously survived) does not create a compelling story. Especially when the main character they randomly dump on you turns out to be, hands down, the most annoying Final Fantasy character I can recall.

Did you happen to skip FFX? Because Tidus and Wicca are the two most annoying characters in the entire series. Vaan can be accused of being bland but he's not outright whiny and over emoting like Tidus or as outright stupid as Wicca.

Re:Who cares about Final Fantasy anymore? (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 7 years ago | (#19416543)

Did you happen to skip FFX? Because Tidus and Wicca are the two most annoying characters in the entire series. Vaan can be accused of being bland but he's not outright whiny and over emoting like Tidus or as outright stupid as Wicca.
a) It's Wakka.

b) That, like any other statement you can make about FF games, is a matter of sheer opinion. I like Tidus, I think he starts off rather whiny but shapes up by the end of the game. I think Steiner, in FFIX, and Brother, in FFX/X-2, are by far the most annoying FF chars ever. *shudder*

Genre? (2)

aadvancedGIR (959466) | more than 7 years ago | (#19411567)

I really wish they just won't make a STALKER with hookers but rather a RPG with rich content. Seeing NextGens in the platform list is not IMHO good omen.

Console Fallout 3 == Bad UI? (2, Informative)

dontthink (1106407) | more than 7 years ago | (#19411571)

I hope they don't mangle the PC Fallout 3 UI to match what would look good on a console (like they did in Oblivion) - or at least make the UI moddable. Inventory/spell management was a giant pain in vanilla Oblivion (huge icons/font). Off topic, but I have the same worries about how Bioshock will feel on a PC as well...

Horror of minigames (1)

ichigo 2.0 (900288) | more than 7 years ago | (#19415959)

Another thing I'm worried about is minigames. The lockpicking minigame in Oblivion was pure torture on the PC, and even finding the mouse pointer so that you could click auto attempt was annoying! The persuasion minigame didn't at least penalize mouse users, but it was pretty pointless and broke immersion. So hopefully Bethesda learned their lesson, and does not have any minigames in FO3.

Re:Horror of minigames (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 7 years ago | (#19416627)

Why do you say the lockpicking minigame was torture? I loved it.

Hoping they don't make Fallout into Oblivion (1)

bulled (956533) | more than 7 years ago | (#19411921)

Not that I didn't like Oblivion, just that it wasn't so much an RPG with such a linear story. Fallout was great because there were so many different ways to complete the game, or even many of the quests. Oblivion was more FPS than RPG because the decisions you make have little to no impact on the outcome of the game. So please Bethesda, don't ruin such a great game franchise!

truly excellent? (0, Flamebait)

brkello (642429) | more than 7 years ago | (#19411987)

How in the world was the Fallout trailer excellent? It was a camera panning out to show a devestated city. It could have been a trailer for any generic post-apocalyptic game. Really, I understand being a huge fan of a game but that probably ranks as one of the most boring trailers ever created.

Re:truly excellent? (1)

eddy (18759) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412197)

It was excellent if you were worried that they wouldn't understand the franchise AT ALL The trailer was basically a homage to the series.

p Now, it remains to be seen that they can actually implement it. I'm afraid they know very well that the game won't live up to the ideals, and they just wanted something out there to placate the masses (how ironic!). That it's being targeted at consoles isn't encouraging at all. Remember, this is a game where you expect to be able to -- if you so please -- murder children and fuck {wo}men. If it ain't gritty, it ain't fallout. It remains to be seen how you can get the grit in there for platforms which are basically aimed at children.

Re:truly excellent? (2, Informative)

Nephilium (684559) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412517)

Don't forget, you could also become a porn star, get married, and sell your spouse into slavery...

Something tells me if this goes to consoles, we'll have a brand new franchise for people to say how horrible it is, and how it corrupts 'teh children!'...

Nephilium

Breaking news : Jack Thompson sues Bethesda; (1)

BlackCobra43 (596714) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413013)

claims they are producing a "Post-aocalyptic murderous rampage simulator" that is teaching our our children how to brutally slaughter innocent supermutants, hideous aliens and horrible genetically enginereed kiling machines.

Cue Bethesda's respons : "Yeah, what of it?"

BOC (1)

eddy (18759) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413831)

I'll postulate that the game can't be a good Fallout and NOT draw his vexatious attention.

Re:truly excellent? (1)

DrEldarion (114072) | more than 7 years ago | (#19415463)

You honestly think that the PS3 and 360 are aimed at children? Considering that the best sellers on both these consoles' predecessors weren't exactly child-friendly (like GTA (killing random passerbys for the hell of it, having sex with prostitutes) and Halo) and the current hits (like Resistance and Gears of War (where you can chainsaw your opponent while he's on the ground and have blood splatter all over the screen)) are also quite gory, I wouldn't say so.

So they'll give it an "M" rating and be done with it. Just because it's on a console doesn't mean they'll tone it down.

Re:truly excellent? (3, Insightful)

Bigboote66 (166717) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412579)

The trailer's exciting to Fallout fans because it is in line with the intro movies from the first two Fallout games ( http://youtube.com/watch?v=WkBNKa2KXZE [youtube.com] , http://youtube.com/watch?v=e3PXiV95kwA [youtube.com] ). There's a lot of fear in the fan community that Bethesda will "ruin" the franchise; this trailer is Bethesda's way of saying that they're on the same page as the fans. Whether or not they follow through on the promise is another matter.

Also, the trailer is just plain good from a production/drama standpoint. It's a teaser trailer, which, pretty much by definition, is not meant to show you an MTV-style montage of game footage (those trailers are the most boring to me), but just let you know, "The game exists, we're working on it, here's something to let you know how excited we are about the movie." Compare this to teaser trailers from movies like "Strange Days" that featured nothing but an extreme closeup of Ralph Fiennes talking for 2 minutes.

-BbT

Re:truly excellent? (4, Insightful)

Eideewt (603267) | more than 7 years ago | (#19415709)

As a Fallout fan, I found it more worrying than exciting. The constant thing in the intro movies for Fallout, Fallout 2 and even Fallout Tactics was the human element, and this trailer here was the total opposite. The Fallout intro had the soldiers shooting the guy and laughing, followed by a soldier in front of the flag, commercials (buy war bonds!) and an account of the war. Fallout 2 had a film about leaving the vault, with short-sighted advice ("line up in an orderly fashion", "wear dark glasses") and, of course, vault dwellers going out to meet the rest of humanity and getting gunned down as they wave. Fallout Tactics had some BoS guys zooming across the desert in their truck, listening to music and stopping for a magazine. You saw this view of human nature throughout the games as well (Fallout Tactics less than the other two, but it was a different kind of game).

The Fallout 3 trailer was completely missing that human element. It had the old-timey music and the bombed out city, followed by scary music and a robotic guy in armor. Without the "this is what we are, and we'll be the same no matter what world we live in" attitude, I am not at all reassured that Fallout 3 will live up to its predecessors. I don't expect a game intro level of quality from a teaser trailer, but I did expect to see the above. If the armor suited guy had been doing something human (polishing his helmet or pissing, perhaps), and they had delayed the scary music and view of the city until after he had shown up, I would feel a lot better.

Re:truly excellent? (1)

Tofystedeth (1076755) | more than 7 years ago | (#19416313)

That is the best reason I've ever heard for not liking the teaser. No one I've ever seen has been so articulate or so damn reasonable. Congratulations.

Re:truly excellent? (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 7 years ago | (#19414133)

It was a camera panning out to show a devestated city. It could have been a trailer for any generic post-apocalyptic game.

The teaser echoes the unforgettable intro to Fallout One.

It is precisely what every fan of the original has been praying for.

Fallout is one of a handful of RPGs that exist outside the fantasy framework of D&D and Star Wars. There are no generic post-apocalyptic games.

Re:truly excellent? (2, Insightful)

Eideewt (603267) | more than 7 years ago | (#19415779)

Not at all it doesn't. Look at the armored guys in the Fallout intro, then look at the guy in this teaser again. I'm afraid they've got all the incidentals right, but totally missed the soul.

Sony owns 8.5% of Square Enix Duh. (3, Informative)

kabocox (199019) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412015)

Follow this link http://www.square-enix.com/jp/ir/e/stock/stockhold er/ [square-enix.com] and look at entry number four. Sony owns 8.5% of Square Enix. I thought Nintendo had owned a part of Square at one point in time, but I don't recongize any of the others as being either Nintendo or MS related. If MS or Nintendo want to tell/force Square Enix to develop for their consoles, then they might want to buy a large share of that company.

Re:Sony owns 8.5% of Square Enix Duh. (1)

Chris_Jefferson (581445) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413395)

But they do make games for nintendo consoles. Perhaps the simpler answer is:

A) Square-enix sell most of their games in Japan
B) In Japan, all Microsoft consoles flop horribly.

No secret plot, just business sense.

Mistwalker is the real Final Fantasy (3, Informative)

grapeape (137008) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412359)

The heart and soul of Final Fantasy Hironobu Sakaguchi (The Co-Founder of square as well as the creator and executive producer of Final Fantasy 1-12) and Kensuke Tanaka (developer of Squares's online service and producer on many FF titles) are both gone and are with Mistwalker developing games exclusively for the 360. So dont worry 360 fans will get all the RPG goodness they can stand. Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey are all on the way, it will be interesting to see if Final Fantasy is more Sakaguchi or more Square-Enix. IMHO Final Fantasy without Sakaguchi is like Guitar Hero without Harmonix.

Re:Mistwalker is the real Final Fantasy (1)

skobar (890726) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412943)

What if guitar hero 3 turns out to be great or even better than guitar hero 2?

Re:Mistwalker is the real Final Fantasy (1)

grapeape (137008) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413045)

Then we find that a developer has been able to trump Harmonix at its own game, who knows we find the same with FFXIII. On the other hand if Rock Band is better than GHIII then we know just how insrumental (no pun intended) Harmonix was to the GH franchise.

RE5 on Wii? (1)

rnmartinez (968929) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412379)

Did I read the summary wrong, or is there actually going to be RE 5 on Wii? I really hope so! Especially since Konami decided that even though it was technically possible, it didn't make sense to put Silent Hill 5 on Wii (booo Konami!)

Re:RE5 on Wii? (1)

BlackSnake112 (912158) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412545)

I saw RE 5 on Wii and read it as: RHEL 5 on Wii and was like?? They are porting RHEL 5 to the Wii with the cordless controllers?

that is it I am going home now.

Re:RE5 on Wii? (1)

mharms1 (884992) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412637)

I think that the summary is a bit misleading. It looks like they're porting Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles and Resident Evil 4 to Wii. Umbrella Chronicles looks like a fun, House of the Dead style lightgun shooter, set in the Resident Evil universe.

Re:RE5 on Wii? (1)

amuro98 (461673) | more than 7 years ago | (#19414811)

Light gun? Awww. I wanna be able to swing my Wiimote around like a maniac and club those zombies into submission! And be able to do it with my friends. Yes, 4 people swinging like mad, in a small room. I don't know who'd be worse off - the zombies, or the human players.

Looks great but (2, Insightful)

sckeener (137243) | more than 7 years ago | (#19412515)

Fallout came out in 1997 and Fallout 2 came out in 1998. Looks like fallout 3 is coming out for the 10th anniversary of Fallout 2. Who is the target market? 20 somethings that still have time to do solo gaming?

Looks great and I would love to play it.

I just do not have the time for solo games any more. The only time I have for myself is reading in the bathroom or on the bus. Maybe I could play it if it was on a handheld like a psp. Also, bonding with other would also help me justify the time, so co-op or multiplayer would be good too. My fiance and I love playing shades of gray type games...what better than Fallout!
   

No FFXIII on 360 Is A Sales Disaster (2, Insightful)

ddelella (1088977) | more than 7 years ago | (#19413179)

Someone for Square Enix is definately going to be fired over this mistake of not releasing FFXIII for the 360. XBOX 360 is the current next gen console who has sold the most and continues to gain speed. Don't believe it...check out the lovely sales statistics from Austrailia (1 million games sold in 14 months, a new record for any console). Sure FF has been mostly PS exclusivebut with FFXI and the new FF on 360 plus many releases for other portable consoles recently it makes it only the next best move to add it to the last untapped platform. And why not follow the other games and their reasoning, like Resident Evil, Devil May Cry, Ace Combat, etc. All have made convincing cases for reasons to expand to XBOX 360. There are also conflicting reports from Square Enix President and the developers of FFXIII who claim that they would choose the 360 platform of Sony because of the ease of development and cost.

So when they release FFXIII and its numbers suck they can only blame themselves. I know that the millions of 360 user would love to enjoy FFXIII...and perhaps a re-release of FFI on the XBOX Live Arcade...hint hint!

Re:No FFXIII on 360 Is A Sales Disaster (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19413733)

Actually they should keep the next few FFs on the PS2. The PS2 still outsells the PS3 and the XBOX360 and there is already a enormous amount of consoles outthere.
If not PS2 then of course the Wii because it just sells like fucking hotcakes and will most likely be the best selling "next-gen" console by the end of the year.
The PS3 doesn't sell anywhere and the XBOX360 has no market outside the US (especially not in JP) so either of those platforms would a bad choice.

Re:No FFXIII on 360 Is A Sales Disaster (1)

DrEldarion (114072) | more than 7 years ago | (#19415527)

Just like they should have kept FF on the PSx rather than bringing it to the PS2? You have to make the transition sometime.

A huge part of FF games is the visuals, so that rules out the Wii. The 360 has no Japanese market, so that rules it out. What's left? PS3.

Re:No FFXIII on 360 Is A Sales Disaster (2, Informative)

k_187 (61692) | more than 7 years ago | (#19414467)

two things

1. the PS3 is beating the pants off the 360 in Japan. 2. There are a large number of people who will buy a PS3 for a new final fantasy.

Re:No FFXIII on 360 Is A Sales Disaster (2, Insightful)

Yosho (135835) | more than 7 years ago | (#19416699)

Here's some statistics for you: http://www.the-magicbox.com/topten.htm [the-magicbox.com]

This year alone, the Wii has sold over three times as many units as the PS3 in Japan. It's sold over fifteen times as many units as the Xbox 360. Why would Square-Enix, a Japanese company, want to release the next entry in their largest franchise for the weakest system? You should keep in mind that the rest of the world is a secondary concern for them.

Re:No FFXIII on 360 Is A Sales Disaster (1)

PixelScuba (686633) | more than 7 years ago | (#19416981)

Because Japan, for all intents and purposes, is still just a fraction of the larger video game market. The 360 will likely be a major shareholder in the home console market in much of the market outside of Japan. If you like money, and what company doesn't, you need to get your product out to that huge user-base. Not producing a 360 version would alienate a large market of potential sales. Also, don't forget, Final Fantasy isn't even the most popular jrpg in Japan, Dragon Quest is. In North America, Final Fantasy is the popular franchise... precisely where the 360 is the most dominant... ridiculously more so than the PS3.

Re:No FFXIII on 360 Is A Sales Disaster (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19416969)

Translation

I bought a XBOX, I want FF, I want it now, but they are not going to do it so I am mad.

In a few years you will be able to get a ps3 for a 100 bucks. Just wait it out.

I like the 360 hw and the ps3 hw. The wii is a GC+1 so I will snag one when I can find one. But I want to see a game that really flexes the PS3 muscle. On paper (and from some of the tech stuff I am seeing) it *looks* like a hell of a system. The 360 is also a fairly decent system but it is about 1 year behind tech wise with the ps3. I own both.

Duh...(FFXIII) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19415907)

Playstation 3 is Japan's most popular system (or alongside the Wii...I don't know) but it's CERTAINLY more popular than the Xbox 360. For Square-Enix to put a franchise where about 90-95% of it's profits come from on the least played console in that region of the world is suicide for SE.

Besides, the PS3's hardware is far superior, this gives the developers much more creativity in development without having to compensate for hardware.
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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...