• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • General system instability
    🚧 We apologise for the recent server issues. The site may be unavaliable while we investigate the problem. 🚧

The Future of Final Fantasy, discussion thread

Scrawnton said:
Do what Nintendo does and put all of their focus in gameplay loops and mechanics and then make suitable graphics and story lines that fit.
Click to expand...
Nah, I think the story, the setting and the characters are big parts of FF's appeal and are just as, if not more important than the gameplay. Slightly lower budgets would allow them to get more creative with those, however.
 
John Omaha said:
Nah, I think the story, the setting and the characters are big parts of FF's appeal. Slightly lower budgets would allow them to get more creative with those, though.
Click to expand...

We're probably in "needs to sell 7m to break even if Sony didn't fund these games" range right now, but I don't see how Final Fantasy cuts back from like 200m per game to 100m per game without seeing massive drops in fidelity and presentation that completely undermine what the series has defined itself on.
 
Scrawnton said:
Do what Nintendo does and put all of their focus in gameplay loops and mechanics and then make suitable graphics and story lines that fit.
Click to expand...

The series was very mildly popular until FF7 invented the AAA cinematic game genre. The identity is being AAA.

There's no Square IP that has any major fanbase mostly for its gameplay other than DQ which changes its gameplay less than any other franchise in gaming (And DQ is also doing quite badly in trying to grow and has failed to grow for several decades as well)
 
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
The series was very mildly popular until FF7 invented the AAA cinematic game genre. The identity is being AAA.

There's no Square IP that has any major fanbase mostly for its gameplay other than DQ which changes its gameplay less than any other franchise in gaming (And DQ is also doing quite badly in trying to grow and has failed to grow for several decades as well)
Click to expand...
Once you get past the 5mil mark in sales, "growth" shouldn't be seen as more important than maintaining the audience as the older players drop off. DQ maintains a consistent audience exceptionally well, probably the most consistent-selling franchise in history, all hits and no stinkers.

EDIT:
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
We're probably in "needs to sell 7m to break even if Sony didn't fund these games" range right now, but I don't see how Final Fantasy cuts back from like 200m per game to 100m per game without seeing massive drops in fidelity and presentation that completely undermine what the series has defined itself on.
Click to expand...
They aren't restricted to that definition, though. Again, so long as they've got audience buy-in (or can replace the audience with one of the same size or larger), they can redefine their own franchise however they see fit to.
 
Last edited:
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
We're probably in "needs to sell 7m to break even if Sony didn't fund these games" range right now, but I don't see how Final Fantasy cuts back from like 200m per game to 100m per game without seeing massive drops in fidelity and presentation that completely undermine what the series has defined itself on.
Click to expand...
That's not just pulling back the budget, that's cutting it in half. Bring it down to the 150-170 M range first (assuming these games even cost 200 M) by reducing some of the scope, reusing assets, etc. See if that has a negative impact on sales, then think about what else you could potentially cut in future games.

Either way, they'll have to think of something if FF starts getting outsold by other RPG series like Persona that are made on one-fifth of the budget.
 
Last edited:
Terrell said:
Once you get past the 5mil mark in sales, "growth" shouldn't be seen as more important than maintaining the audience as the older players drop off. DQ maintains a consistent audience exceptionally well, probably the most consistent-selling franchise in history, all hits and no stinkers.

EDIT:

They aren't restricted to that definition, though. Again, so long as they've got audience buy-in (or can replace the audience with one of the same size or larger), they can redefine their own franchise however they see fit to.
Click to expand...

Setting 5m as the bar where you should care less about growth just because that's the exact level Dragon Quest sells slightly above is funny, lol.

DQ11 being a really expensive production and hitting 6m doesn't seem super successful either. I imagine DQ13 will be a massive scaling back unless DQ12 does much better.
 
Last edited:
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
Setting 5m as the bar where you should care less about growth just because that's the exact level Dragon Quest sells slightly above is funny, lol.

DQ11 being a really expensive production and hitting 6m doesn't seem super successful either. I imagine DQ13 will be a massive scaling back unless DQ12 does much better.
Click to expand...
I picked it cuz it's the lowest multiple of 5, calm down. You can make a great and pretty game with an expected sales target of 5 million, there's plenty that already exist, beyond that you're just spending more hoping to make more. For example: only about 13 games have ever broken that 5 million mark in the entire history of Capcom, and only 5 have broken 10 million. It's a very reasonable bar to set, is what I'm saying.

And considering how consistent the DQ franchise is sales-wise, I'd feel pretty confident that the games have been budgeted with that in mind, but either way, saying it's a really expensive production without knowing the production cost is... a choice.
 
Terrell said:
I picked it cuz it's the lowest multiple of 5, calm down. You can make a great and pretty game with an expected sales target of 5 million, there's plenty that already exist, beyond that you're just spending more hoping to make more. For example: only about 13 games have ever broken that 5 million mark in the entire history of Capcom, and only 5 have broken 10 million. It's a very reasonable bar to set, is what I'm saying.

And considering how consistent the DQ franchise is sales-wise, I'd feel pretty confident that the games have been budgeted with that in mind, but either way, saying it's a really expensive production without knowing the production cost is... a choice.
Click to expand...

There have only been 4 mainline DQ games released in the last 23 years and all four have very much tried to grow the series (unsuccessfully other than maybe 10 which I have no idea how successful it is) so this assumption seems kind of weird.

The game is a fairly graphically impressive and large scale AAA RPG that had an entirely separate game made for the 3DS. I would be surprised if this wasn't vastly more expensive than all previous games other than 10.
 
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
We're probably in "needs to sell 7m to break even if Sony didn't fund these games" range right now, but I don't see how Final Fantasy cuts back from like 200m per game to 100m per game without seeing massive drops in fidelity and presentation that completely undermine what the series has defined itself on.
Click to expand...
It's not like the series has always been defined this way. There are all of two big budget post-PS2 mainline games, a third if we include VII Remake. If that means bloating budgets to hit similar numbers as the PS1/PS2 days, how much is it worth treating XIII and XV as some sort of point-of-no-return?

EDIT: Lost this during self-editing, but when I said above two games I meant single-player.
 
Last edited:
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
There have only been 4 mainline DQ games released in the last 23 years and all four have very much tried to grow the series (unsuccessfully other than maybe 10 which I have no idea how successful it is) so this assumption seems kind of weird.
Click to expand...
Citation needed for these higher aspirations unmet.

And I’m sure DQXI was more money to make than past entries (if only because the dynamic at the time development began meant they didn’t yet have a single safe-bet platform for franchise exclusivity), I just don’t believe that the base minimum expectation for sales was set any higher, just a lesser return on investment at that sales level. And even then, DQXI is the best-selling game in the series when it crossed 6 million shipped worldwide in 2021… and it continues to sell, so the clock hasn’t stopped yet. An extra million over the average for the franchise (or an extra 500K over the prior bestseller) is nothing to sneeze at And I’m sure they’re happy about that, all things considered, but 6mil vs. 5mil probably isn’t the “growth” you‘re thinking they had in mind.

I just don’t see this impetus for growth you believe they’re chasing, or the dissatisfaction at the consistent 5mil audience the series always gets and the money that audience gets them, both through the games and every other avenue like merchandising. Especially when the biggest vector for DQ growth is selling outside of Japan and they are never going to sacrifice the Japanese audience to get there. That’s what FF seems to be for now, after all.
 
0
MrBones said:
No button inputs in DMC or Bayonetta are remotely that complicated.

The combo strings that do exist are there mostly variations of "X,X,X", "X,X,pause,X,X", "X,pause,X,pause,X", etc. Some involve holding forward or back on the joystick, but it's all very intuitive (forward+attack is a lunge move, etc.). The depth comes from the breadth simple moves (from different weapons you can switch to), and chaining them together to form an ad-libbed combo. But none of it is as complicated as you make it out to be. And it's definitely not too complicated for anyone to balk at unless they hold preconceived misconceptions.
Click to expand...
I know I played them, I like them, they are still to complicated to be the norm.
 
Djehuty said:
I know I played them, I like them, they are still to complicated to be the norm.
Click to expand...
What about platformers like Super Mario Odyssey, a game that by all accounts and measures is incredibly accessible? The absolute fastest way to gain speed from zero is spin stick -> jump -> Ground Pound -> roll, ACTUALLY incredibly complex movements that also requires being insanely fast with them. Meanwhile, the more intended ways of building initial speed is either just long jump or rolling, and nothing requires you to go beyond that. And hell, even basic things like the backflip or triple jump or throwing Cappy and bouncing off him are not required moves.

Same deal for action games, especially on lower difficulties. I feel like when people describe action games like DMC or Bayonetta here, they make it out to be some insane skill floor that requires Enemy Step, pause combos, or dodge offsets when in reality, you can basically just spam Triangle and jump or dodge everything like any other action game like Ys or Zelda. The tools exist for advanced movement and gameplay, just like Super Mario Odyssey and etc, but you don't really need them to enjoy the game.

I don't think it matters to casuals if those complicated things exist honestly, especially if the core act of moving and doing things feel good on their own, which is what Mario, DMC, and FF16 all share.
 
Based on purely anecdotal experience, I'd argue that the biggest barrier to entry for casual players looking at CAGs are what the games look like in combat

My partner looks at me playing Bayonetta and has no idea what's going on at any given time; keeping track of all the different characters, the actions they're taking, the tells for enemy attacks, and reacting to all of those things, just completely overloads their nervous system

They could pick it up in time if they tried to, but they're never going to try to based on the sensory overload of just looking at the game as it is played
 
Ngl I expected way more enthusiasm for this demo. Only reason I know it launched is because I check the forums first thing in the morning. Like I’m a little shocked it’s not #1 on Twitch.
 
Mr_No_U said:
Ngl I expected way more enthusiasm for this demo. Only reason I know it launched is because I check the forums first thing in the morning. Like I’m a little shocked it’s not #1 on Twitch.
Click to expand...

I woke up at 3 am to download and play. I already have the deluxe edition purchased so I was super excited to get into the demo. I'm really enjoying it so far.
 
0
Jimmy Joe said:
They could pick it up in time if they tried to, but they're never going to try to based on the sensory overload of just looking at the game as it is played
Click to expand...
I enjoy character-action/action-rpg games, especially platinum, but looking at this (granted havent tried it yet) it does feel overwhelming to the senses. I don't know if its the color scheme or the hilarious amount of particles that I don't gel with.
 
0
Evil Lucario said:
What about platformers like Super Mario Odyssey, a game that by all accounts and measures is incredibly accessible?
Click to expand...
Until Odyssey, 3D Mario games sold substantially less than their 2D counterparts precisely because they were seen as more complicated to control and more difficult to get into by the casual audience. Like, Nintendo developers have gone on the record multiple times that the divide between 2D sales and 3D sales caused them to repeatedly try and make the 3D games more appealing to a wider audience (Galaxy, 3D Land, 3D World)

Odyssey is pretty much unprecedented in the way it's managed to sell comparably to a 2D Mario game. I'd argue one of the reasons this is likely the case is the the game is still heavily focused on 2D sections, and these 2D parts of the game received a comparatively large portion of the pre release marketing material. People were excited to play the game because you could jump into a wall and play 2D Mario.
 
saying that such a small portion of Odyssey is why the game sold so well is kinda odd tbh. I'd say the capture mechanic is a much more likely explanation
 
Jimmy Joe said:
In fairness, the Legend of Zelda was very much an "older fans know but no one else" kind of series in, say, 2016

There's nothing that suggests Final Fantasy can't be made more relevant to modern audiences. The problem is just that Square just doesn't seem to know how
Click to expand...
The turnaround of Zelda in Japan is insane, it wen't from a sub-500k LTD seller to a 2M FW seller in a single generation.

I think it is important to note that Zelda changed in a way that resonated more with modern audiences. Not just by making the game open world, increasing greatly the scope, adding amazing physics-based gameplay, or by choosing a good artstyle, but also by releasing it on a hit platform for the region (the switch). It kinda feels like a reinvention of the old 3D zelda formula, while at the same time going back to the roots of the series (Zelda 1 for NES) and bringing that sense of exploration to modern hardware.

All of those are vastly opposite to the decisions taken regarding FFXVI, not only in platform choice but on the changes they did to the formula. The new changes don't feel revolutionary, they feel like "short term trend-chasing". And instead of going back to its roots, it felt alienating for the core audience. So instead of having our cake and eating it like BOTW, they refused to get any cake nor eat it.
 
JazzPotatoes said:
Until Odyssey, 3D Mario games sold substantially less than their 2D counterparts precisely because they were seen as more complicated to control and more difficult to get into by the casual audience. Like, Nintendo developers have gone on the record multiple times that the divide between 2D sales and 3D sales caused them to repeatedly try and make the 3D games more appealing to a wider audience (Galaxy, 3D Land, 3D World)

Odyssey is pretty much unprecedented in the way it's managed to sell comparably to a 2D Mario game. I'd argue one of the reasons this is likely the case is the the game is still heavily focused on 2D sections, and these 2D parts of the game received a comparatively large portion of the pre release marketing material. People were excited to play the game because you could jump into a wall and play 2D Mario.
Click to expand...
Considering Galaxy 2 has much more 2D sections than any previous 3D Mario, I'm not buying that explanation for Odyssey doing so well. It's multiple different things that adds up, but either way my overall point was about how "complicated inputs" have existed in what's simultaneously one of the biggest, widest appeal type of games in the world at the same time. Enthusiasts in this forum or elsewhere getting scared off by action games like that while simultaneously loving something like 3D Mario has always been interesting to me if "complicated inputs" are the subject. Not every game would appeal to others but the parallels are quite noticeable to me.

Action games also scale down to Easy modes and auto-combos really well, and it doesn't take away from more depth you can get out of games.
 
Mr_No_U said:
Ngl I expected way more enthusiasm for this demo. Only reason I know it launched is because I check the forums first thing in the morning. Like I’m a little shocked it’s not #1 on Twitch.
Click to expand...
Shame because it’s pretty good I’m now sold on this game and I initially wasn’t too hyped for it
 
0
JazzPotatoes said:
Until Odyssey, 3D Mario games sold substantially less than their 2D counterparts precisely because they were seen as more complicated to control and more difficult to get into by the casual audience. Like, Nintendo developers have gone on the record multiple times that the divide between 2D sales and 3D sales caused them to repeatedly try and make the 3D games more appealing to a wider audience (Galaxy, 3D Land, 3D World)

Odyssey is pretty much unprecedented in the way it's managed to sell comparably to a 2D Mario game. I'd argue one of the reasons this is likely the case is the the game is still heavily focused on 2D sections, and these 2D parts of the game received a comparatively large portion of the pre release marketing material. People were excited to play the game because you could jump into a wall and play 2D Mario.
Click to expand...
the audience is also skewing in favor of 3D games these days. Fortnite probably helped kids come to grips with 3D controls quickly.

That and I think people see 2D games as lesser these days (which I of course disagree with). Since the whole $60 debacle happened with Metroid,
 
Watching some demo gameplay, and to my eyes the performance mode is a complete mess. Looks a bit nasty and doesn't even run well (=consistent, primarily).
The solid stability of quality mode certainly is to my liking. Then again, I don't think the motion blur does the visual presentation any good.
So far the tech side of things certainly makes me feel pretty good about waiting for the PC version.

Edit: woops, wrong FF XVI thread.
 
0
Nakapol said:
This is what Japanese made for shit posting sometime ago. says that FF aren't really cultivated a new fans in Japan.

NijDua2.png
Click to expand...

Oh freak I’m a grandpa I guess
 
Mr_No_U said:
Ngl I expected way more enthusiasm for this demo. Only reason I know it launched is because I check the forums first thing in the morning. Like I’m a little shocked it’s not #1 on Twitch.
Click to expand...
You were expecting a Final Fantasy demo to hit #1 on Twitch?
 
Leica said:
You were expecting a Final Fantasy demo to hit #1 on Twitch?
Click to expand...
#1 or at the very least close enough, yes. It's the next mainline entry in the legendary FF franchise, by the same team that develops the highly successful FF MMO.

And it's getting pushed HARD in terms of advertising--PS showcase, influencer push, ads, you name it. Yeah, I expected more.

Edit: to be fair looks like viewership is going up. It's nearing the top 10 at least.
 
Mr_No_U said:
#1 or at the very least close enough, yes. It's the next mainline entry in the legendary FF franchise, by the same team that develops the highly successful FF MMO.

And it's getting pushed HARD in terms of advertising--PS showcase, influencer push, ads, you name it. Yeah, I expected more.

Edit: to be fair looks like viewership is going up. It's nearing the top 10 at least.
Click to expand...
The MMO on pc.

Not launching on pc is indefensibly stupid.

That’s where the audience that plays your game is. PlayStation should be the number 2 priority behind PC.
 
I feel like Square has kind of lost the plot with the Final Fantasy series. There's nothing that makes a final fantasy game a final fantasy game anymore. Nowadays they're all just completely different sci-fi/fantasy games with few distinct gameplay elements or mechanics linking them together.

This could be remedied if the new worlds and characters were appealing, but they just haven't made anything with a distinct level of iconography since the early 2000s. There's a reason they keep going back to the world of FFVII all the time with spin-offs and remakes.
 
0
Mr_No_U said:
#1 or at the very least close enough, yes. It's the next mainline entry in the legendary FF franchise, by the same team that develops the highly successful FF MMO.

And it's getting pushed HARD in terms of advertising--PS showcase, influencer push, ads, you name it. Yeah, I expected more.

Edit: to be fair looks like viewership is going up. It's nearing the top 10 at least.
Click to expand...
Getting #1 on Twitch basically just boils down to are the largest streamers on the platform streaming it yes or no, the only reason it went up (it has gone down again) is because Lirik streamed it at the time of your post. For it to be #1 it would need to have more viewers than Rust at 372k which TotK at it's peak on actual launch day didn't even manage and that is a much more streamable game than the demo of a game that's got a ton of cutscenes in it. Twitch figures are a pretty useless metric but your expectations here are pretty out of reality lol, I doubt the actual launch of the game comes close (unless again xQc or some large Spanish speaking streamer plays it, in which case it automatically will).
 
Leica said:
Getting #1 on Twitch basically just boils down to are the largest streamers on the platform streaming it yes or no, the only reason it went up (it has gone down again) is because Lirik streamed it at the time of your post. For it to be #1 it would need to have more viewers than Rust at 372k which TotK at it's peak on actual launch day didn't even manage and that is a much more streamable game than the demo of a game that's got a ton of cutscenes in it. Twitch figures are a pretty useless metric but your expectations here are pretty out of reality lol, I doubt the actual launch of the game comes close (unless again xQc or some large Spanish speaking streamer plays it, in which case it automatically will).
Click to expand...
I feel like you're focusing too much on the #1 thing. For a game of this caliber, not to mention the advertising muscle behind it, expecting it to be near the top isn't an unrealistic expectation at all.
 
Mr_No_U said:
I feel like you're focusing too much on the #1 thing. For a game of this caliber, not to mention the advertising muscle behind it, expecting it to be near the top isn't an unrealistic expectation at all.
Click to expand...
It doesn't change much, Twitch metrics are decided by the largest channels on the platform streaming something or not, a demo isn't that appealing to stream thus it doesn't do that well because not even 5000 smaller channels can make up the difference of 1 or 2 big ones. It's part of why the platform sucks and I just don't think it's a very relevant statistic to judge anything by. For what it's worth I feel the interest in the title is pretty muted and it getting good WoM or more social media presence will likely depend a lot on how it reviews.
 
Leica said:
It doesn't change much, Twitch metrics are decided by the largest channels on the platform streaming something or not, a demo isn't that appealing to stream thus it doesn't do that well because not even 5000 smaller channels can make up the difference of 1 or 2 big ones. It's part of why the platform sucks and I just don't think it's a very relevant statistic to judge anything by. For what it's worth I feel the interest in the title is pretty muted and it getting good WoM or more social media presence will likely depend a lot on how it reviews.
Click to expand...
7 remake was well received and it was everywhere online and it still seemed to have stalled out at 5-6 mil
 
What are expectations for this?

Could be wrong but I'm not feeling the buzz and TOTK is still sitting ahead of this game on Amazon everywhere.

Didn't expect that at launch.
 
Kreese said:
What are expectations for this?
Click to expand...
JP sales I expect are going to be the lowest ever for the series since XIII

Worldwide I have no clue. I think it'll be fine but given how S-E pivoted from "there's no PC version what are you talking about" to "yes, we're working on a PC version" over the span of like 4-5 months it's pretty clear they need the additional platforms beyond PS5 to make up for the exclusivity.
 
DecoReturns said:
I feel XVI has more going for it to reach that 8million prediction tho.

It’s just has more appeal if that makes sense. I mean we will see if that’s the case
Click to expand...
Does it? There was a ton of demand for a remake of Final Fantasy 7, Final Fantasy 16 is just the next Final Fantasy, it's also not open world and is going for a tone/vibe that's very different from what fans expect.

Mr Doggo said:
didn't ff15 despite being controversial hit 10 million? I imagine you meant 7 million this year
Click to expand...
FF15 was only controversial with the gamers (tm) who spend too much time complaining online. You don't leg out another 5 million copies after launch if people don't like the game. Also 15 was a true open world game, 16 advertises itself as a more linear character action game.
 
Mr Doggo said:
didn't ff15 despite being controversial hit 10 million? I imagine you meant 7 million this year
Click to expand...
I base it off a few factors:
  • FFXV hit 10 million, but probably burned a very significant chunk of people who may now be wary about buying the next numbered title - it certainly was struggling enough for SE to execute their DLC plans live on stream (I'd even argue that if XVI underperforms, the XIII - XV period of the franchise will have caused irreparable damage)
  • FF7R, a reimagining of one of the most important and popular games ever, has serious troubles with sales legs
  • The PlayStation brand, which FF has inextricably tied itself to, is nearing total death in Japan
  • Early reception seems divided so far
 
Mr Doggo said:
didn't ff15 despite being controversial hit 10 million?
Click to expand...
The only “controversy” about FINAL FANTSY XV is that it was rebranded as a mainline numbered title after being part of the Fabula Nova Crystalis (FNC) project. The only other controversy is that it had a two month delay (September to November) because the game HAD to be out by then due to contractual obligations. There’s also how the second half of the game was rushed/streamlined compared to the first half. You go from one open area, to another, and then a boat ride and everything goes cho cho train from there.

Following the subject of FFXV’s long legs/tail/whatever: it was the first FF game Square Enix tested the Game as a Service model (GaaS). It had continued support for two years. Plus it was getting released on almost everything and a smaller tier game was made: Pocket. For mobile and Switch.
 
0
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom