• 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.
  • Do you have audio editing experience and want to help out with the Famiboards Discussion Club Podcast? If so, we're looking for help and would love to have you on the team! Just let us know in the Podcast Thread if you are interested!
  • General system instability
    šŸš§ We apologise for the recent server issues. The site may be unavaliable while we investigate the problem. šŸš§

The Future of Final Fantasy, discussion thread

Most people here I have seen either havenā€™t played it or like it

I just get annoyed at the whole ā€œThis game needs to be western shtickā€ because it reminds me of Inafuneā€™s nonsense
 
Sturmgeist said:
I really donā€™t understand the hate for Final Fantasy on this board. This thread is on its way to a thousand posts and itā€™s about a game that is not/probably will never be on a Nintendo system. Are people still pissed about Square choosing Sony back in the 90ā€™s? No other non-Nintendo game has ever produced as much vitriol as FFXVI on this board. I truly donā€™t get it.
Click to expand...
ā€˜Hateā€™ seems like hyperbole, much of the discussion has centred around FFā€™s gradual changes over the years, with some fans now lapsed, others happy to follow it wherever it goes, and others taking it on an entry by entry basis. Iā€™ve found the conversation fairly interesting, always happy to talk about FF, although Iā€™m not overly interested in making predictions based on sales. Seems like itā€™s done OK. Honestly I wish the series well, itā€™s not for me any more but thatā€™s OK, Square still make tons of rpgs that are exactly what I want.

Seeing as FF didnā€™t even release on SNES in Europe, I can honestly say itā€™s got nothing to do with 90s playground console wars for me. Iā€™ve only ever known it as a PS game. I also wouldnā€™t assume that Fami is full of bitter Nintendo fans angry about something that happened over 25 years ago rather than multiformat players, when the most common reasons listed in the thread why some members arenā€™t overly interested in FFXVI are there to see, and largely seem to be based around gameplay, representation and FFā€™s gradual drift throughout its history. Thatā€™s not exactly a console fanboy thing when the most popular Sony one from the 90s that everyone talks about was a turn-based one too. At that point, criticism seems likely to be from more lapsed FF fans whoā€™ve drifted away over the last couple decades than Nintendo fans holding a grudge for the better part of 30 years.

At this point I feel like the thread has drifted to be more of a general FF direction/sales thread rather than the outdated quote in the title. Maybe we should move it to being a general FF community discussion thread instead.
 
Last edited:
Im... whats happening here in this thread?

First it was overly negative, now the defense brigade is here to talk down the people as if there are no reasonable takes why people could be unsatisfied with the game or interested outside of "nintendo haters" or "cant move on".

Its a good game. Is it a masterpiece or does it move the genre forward?
Thats to be discussed, im not so sure if moving it to a different genre does move it forward, then again nobody ever questioned Kingdome Hearts, and this does not seem to far off (and that one is 2 decades ago)

Is it far removed from FF? For sure. If you always just looked at the old graphics and sprites as a "concession" because they could not do more, sure, then this is the same but realized more. The Eikons definitely fall in line with FF 8 / 9 in how they are represented (as those huge beasts to destroy worlds), but the characters and their interactions, the idiosyncratic&anachronistic presentation (futuristic elements but fighting with swords, steampunk, magitech) where strongly present for the longest part (6-10 at least), parties where also a big part, and i only recently learned that you have some form of travel party in this game, even if you only controll one character. Yeah, there are many changes that can lead to people either being more interested, or being dissapointed and feeling like its not "FF" anymore.

Does that mean one side is right or wrong? hell no.

I am really interested in the game (i like character action games),
i miss a more lighthearted tone and less "dark fantasy", more "all over the place" fantasy, i miss a party, i miss better female representation,
but i also feel like serious moments seem to hit hard from what i've seen, the music seem to be better then FF15 (maybe just cause the battle theme reminds me of FF8s), visuals are great, a lot of spectacle.
I don't have a PS5, and im not sure when i will get the chance to play the game, depending on what comes first: a switch 2 port, me having a capable PC and a PC port or me buying a PS5.

Sales seem fine. Definitely not the big break they where hoping for, but not a flop. Where exactly where we where after FF15 it seems, unsure if Square has a plan where to progress the Series.
 
Sturmgeist said:
I really donā€™t understand the hate for Final Fantasy on this board. This thread is on its way to a thousand posts and itā€™s about a game that is not/probably will never be on a Nintendo system. Are people still pissed about Square choosing Sony back in the 90ā€™s? No other non-Nintendo game has ever produced as much vitriol as FFXVI on this board. I truly donā€™t get it.
Click to expand...
I love Final Fantasy and many of my favorite FF games were released after Square decided to ditch Nintendo. However, I do not like the direction the mainline series has taken as it continues to try and align itself with a PlayStation brand that is becoming increasingly irrelevant in Japan, which is really exemplified in the choices made with FF16.
 
Last edited:
I don't think pointing out that the game being exclusive to one console may be hurting its sales equates hating it or arguing in bad faith. It seems pretty obvious to me that it would have benefited from a simultaneous, day 1 release on pc especially, unless Sony offered them a ridiculously good deal for the exclusivity. But even then it might be hurting general brand awareness, especially among younger gamers.

I don't really have a horse in this race. While I much prefer traditional turn-based party gameplay, I have made peace with the fact that FF may not ever go back to what originally drew me to it, and that's okay. Game looks fine, and I think the sales are going to be alright - not mindblowing, but not a complete disaster either. What remains to be seen is whether or not Square is okay with that.
 
Part of the issue here is that Square have a very public history of sky-high sales expectations, and then being unhappy when games don't meet those expectations. They're probably the publisher most famous for this, after things like the fallout from the Tomb Raider games.

If ever there is a publisher where "Sales look pretty good" will struggle up against "We wanted sales to be galactic" it's Square Enix. That's where part of the discussion is coming from: Not hating the FF series, but just being aware that Square is seldom all that happy with a game's sales unless it sells in ridiculous amounts.
 
What I don't get, they keep wildly grasping so many different styles all at once. When, if they actually want the west to be enthralled, and cater to Japanese gamers. It really is looking at them square in the face. Go back to the original final fantasy game, and build from there.

Imagine a game opens up, and you get to customize not just 1 character, but 4. And actively change their class between a few archetypes. Fighter, Red Mage, white mage, blue mage, monk, and thief. And you get to just completely make your party whatever you want, and name them.

Then the game opens up into a rad cutscene of these four warriors going to town on some goblins. The game cuts to gameplay. Now, this game could be action, or turn based, and something in between like FF7. That really doesnt matter.

Because when you get out of that tutorial.... You have no idea of an objective, but you see a castle shortly in the distance. You can choose to go to it, or not. But the story is in the hands of a player.

Does that sound familiar? That's basically Elden Ring, Tears of the Kingdom, Skyrim, ect. Basically the exact same of catalyst as those games, of going back to what used to make games so great. Discovery, improvisation, curiosity, intrigue. And it wouldn't be a complete ripoff, as long as it stuck to the series roots.

Final Fantasy, weirdly enough, always feels ashamed of its legacy, besides FF6 and FF7. If they went back to FF's roots, and did it well, they would have a smash hit.
 
Lozjam said:
What I don't get, they keep wildly grasping so many different styles all at once. When, if they actually want the west to be enthralled, and cater to Japanese gamers. It really is looking at them square in the face. Go back to the original final fantasy game, and build from there.

Imagine a game opens up, and you get to customize not just 1 character, but 4. And actively change their class between a few archetypes. Fighter, Red Mage, white mage, blue mage, monk, and thief. And you get to just completely make your party whatever you want, and name them.

Then the game opens up into a rad cutscene of these four warriors going to town on some goblins. The game cuts to gameplay. Now, this game could be action, or turn based, and something in between like FF7. That really doesnt matter.

Because when you get out of that tutorial.... You have no idea of an objective, but you see a castle shortly in the distance. You can choose to go to it, or not. But the story is in the hands of a player.

Does that sound familiar? That's basically Elden Ring, Tears of the Kingdom, Skyrim, ect. Basically the exact same of catalyst as those games, of going back to what used to make games so great. Discovery, improvisation, curiosity, intrigue. And it wouldn't be a complete ripoff, as long as it stuck to the series roots.

Final Fantasy, weirdly enough, always feels ashamed of its legacy, besides FF6 and FF7. If they went back to FF's roots, and did it well, they would have a smash hit.
Click to expand...
make it optional multiplayer and you have DQ9 or FF15 Comrades

that's a lot of birds dead with one stone
 
Lozjam said:
What I don't get, they keep wildly grasping so many different styles all at once. When, if they actually want the west to be enthralled, and cater to Japanese gamers. It really is looking at them square in the face. Go back to the original final fantasy game, and build from there.

Imagine a game opens up, and you get to customize not just 1 character, but 4. And actively change their class between a few archetypes. Fighter, Red Mage, white mage, blue mage, monk, and thief. And you get to just completely make your party whatever you want, and name them.

Then the game opens up into a rad cutscene of these four warriors going to town on some goblins. The game cuts to gameplay. Now, this game could be action, or turn based, and something in between like FF7. That really doesnt matter.

Because when you get out of that tutorial.... You have no idea of an objective, but you see a castle shortly in the distance. You can choose to go to it, or not. But the story is in the hands of a player.

Does that sound familiar? That's basically Elden Ring, Tears of the Kingdom, Skyrim, ect. Basically the exact same of catalyst as those games, of going back to what used to make games so great. Discovery, improvisation, curiosity, intrigue. And it wouldn't be a complete ripoff, as long as it stuck to the series roots.

Final Fantasy, weirdly enough, always feels ashamed of its legacy, besides FF6 and FF7. If they went back to FF's roots, and did it well, they would have a smash hit.
Click to expand...
that sounds great. FF1 is the most ff I've played, and the series already had such charecter then. i know ive said this 100 times now but romancing saga 3 is kinda this.

Anyway, thats why i don't see how this game gets very far in a world with totk, elden ring and such
 
0
Lozjam said:
What I don't get, they keep wildly grasping so many different styles all at once. When, if they actually want the west to be enthralled, and cater to Japanese gamers. It really is looking at them square in the face. Go back to the original final fantasy game, and build from there.

Imagine a game opens up, and you get to customize not just 1 character, but 4. And actively change their class between a few archetypes. Fighter, Red Mage, white mage, blue mage, monk, and thief. And you get to just completely make your party whatever you want, and name them.

Then the game opens up into a rad cutscene of these four warriors going to town on some goblins. The game cuts to gameplay. Now, this game could be action, or turn based, and something in between like FF7. That really doesnt matter.

Because when you get out of that tutorial.... You have no idea of an objective, but you see a castle shortly in the distance. You can choose to go to it, or not. But the story is in the hands of a player.

Does that sound familiar? That's basically Elden Ring, Tears of the Kingdom, Skyrim, ect. Basically the exact same of catalyst as those games, of going back to what used to make games so great. Discovery, improvisation, curiosity, intrigue. And it wouldn't be a complete ripoff, as long as it stuck to the series roots.

Final Fantasy, weirdly enough, always feels ashamed of its legacy, besides FF6 and FF7. If they went back to FF's roots, and did it well, they would have a smash hit.
Click to expand...
This is why I was so disappointed when Stranger of Paradise was announced. There were rumors beforehand that we were getting a Souls-like based on the original Final Fantasy, and that idea had such strong potential. An emphasis on setting and atmosphere over long-winded cutscenes, a highly customizable character/party, a vast world to discover, and on top of that if they had taken inspiration from Amano's original artwork for the visuals it could have been gorgeous and incredibly distinctive. Instead we got a ridiculous aesthetic that looks like a bunch of old men's idea of what modern teenagers think is cool, and absolutely wretched story and dialogue. I've heard some good things about the gameplay, but everything else about the game was so off-putting that I never had any interest. Still strikes me as enormous wasted potential.
 
0
All in all 3 million doesn't sound that bad. But it's Squeenix, who knows. Ofc I dont know anything about it but I'd be under the impression that YoshiP would have the budget under control, given how he turned around FF XIV
 
0
Acting like the "hate" this game is getting is due to this being a Nintendo board is hilarious when you look at the multiple locked threads and incessant trolling on Era. I guess they really are bigger Nintendo fans than we are.
 
I beat the game today.

The music, art style, experience are all top notch.

The story is kinda iffy, especially the edgy beginning. The combat is good but not great. Side quests are varying good to mediocre.

It's a perfectly fine 7/10 game. Easily in my top 5 of Devil May Cry/Bayonetta style action games, but not in my top 5 of Final Fantasy games.
 
0
Dardan Sandiego said:
Acting like the "hate" this game is getting is due to this being a Nintendo board is hilarious when you look at the multiple locked threads and incessant trolling on Era. I guess they really are bigger Nintendo fans than we are.
Click to expand...
Yup Final Fantasy brand not same anymore likes before. If Square Enix didn't put mainline FF in a Switch 2, FF brand will be downtrend further
 
Last edited:
JoshuaJSlone said:
FWIW, regarding being limited by one system that's had supply issues: PS5 is still well ahead of where PS1, PS2, and PS3 were when they got VII, X, and XIII respectively. XV did arrive when PS4 was around 50m, though.
Click to expand...
Current PS5 already around 40m, not to far from PS4 50m but FF16 sold quite drastically lower than FF15 when they launched respectively
 
Hajeman said:
Yup Final Fantasy brand not same anymore likes before. If Square Enix didn't put mainline FF in a Switch 2, FF brand will be downtrend further
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure it'll be fine honestly. It's selling really well in the west and will pick up steam once it drops on PC.

I don't think it'll reach FF15 heights, which was a decade of hype and development hell to finally release, but it should do alright. It's that good enough for S-E? Time will tell.
 
I don't have a dog in this fight, I'm a fair weather FF fan, I like some games in the series, some aren't my thing. I'd like to try 16 when it hits PC, it looks good. Definitely don't care if it hits Nintendo or not, even if I'm not willing to spring for a PS5 to play it. I don't know if Square is disappointed with these numbers, per se, but it doesn't feel like the brand has expanded in the way they probably hoped. Maybe the legs will surprise me, I hope so because I feel like if this game underperforms we're gonna get more weird experiments that will dilute the brand more.

Now, back to waiting for the FF Pixel Remasters to go on sale.
 
The downtrend of FF continues. Years ago every new FF game was a big thing, nowadays it's a blip, even in Japan. I never expected that in 2023 a Pikmin game will probably sell more in Japan and worldwide than a new mainline FF game.

Square-Enix must horrified by these sales, especially because they had other even bigger flops in recent time. Will be interesting to see which personal and strategic changes this will entail.
 
TomNookYankees said:
My guess at this point.....

Rest of 2023:
  • Gamescom (August) Nintendo privately shows off new dev kits
  • August/September: Expected leaks come out about Nintendo's next hardware
  • September Direct is a general direct and still focuses on Switch hardware; nearly all first party titles shown will be dated before H2 2024
  • October: Price drop announced (around 15-20% drop in price for all models)

2024:
  • February Direct another general direct, but only new software shown are download-only shadow drops and DLC the rest is more info on already announced games
  • May: NIntendo confirms they will be announcing new hardware soon
  • New Hardware is announced shortly before June Direct
  • June Direct a mix of final Switch announcements and New Hardware showcase
  • September Direct focuses entirely on software for the new hardware
  • November release
Click to expand...

Lozjam said:
What I don't get, they keep wildly grasping so many different styles all at once. When, if they actually want the west to be enthralled, and cater to Japanese gamers. It really is looking at them square in the face. Go back to the original final fantasy game, and build from there.

Imagine a game opens up, and you get to customize not just 1 character, but 4. And actively change their class between a few archetypes. Fighter, Red Mage, white mage, blue mage, monk, and thief. And you get to just completely make your party whatever you want, and name them.

Then the game opens up into a rad cutscene of these four warriors going to town on some goblins. The game cuts to gameplay. Now, this game could be action, or turn based, and something in between like FF7. That really doesnt matter.

Because when you get out of that tutorial.... You have no idea of an objective, but you see a castle shortly in the distance. You can choose to go to it, or not. But the story is in the hands of a player.

Does that sound familiar? That's basically Elden Ring, Tears of the Kingdom, Skyrim, ect. Basically the exact same of catalyst as those games, of going back to what used to make games so great. Discovery, improvisation, curiosity, intrigue. And it wouldn't be a complete ripoff, as long as it stuck to the series roots.

Final Fantasy, weirdly enough, always feels ashamed of its legacy, besides FF6 and FF7. If they went back to FF's roots, and did it well, they would have a smash hit.
Click to expand...
The difference: the series you mentioned where never beloved for their story. FF is. Not the first one, but say 4 onwards. And you just can't make a compelling story to the degree of a FF6 or 7 or 9 or 10 (I know I is controversial) with that approach.

The series definitely lost to much exploration and player agency, but going full on BotW would be to the detriment. If you give me bland custom made none characters, then there is 0 interest from me for that game. Like I don't care a single percent for TES. I love BotW. It's different series with different strengths, and making them all the same is not the goal
 
Mekanos said:
I don't have a dog in this fight, I'm a fair weather FF fan, I like some games in the series, some aren't my thing. I'd like to try 16 when it hits PC, it looks good. Definitely don't care if it hits Nintendo or not, even if I'm not willing to spring for a PS5 to play it. I don't know if Square is disappointed with these numbers, per se, but it doesn't feel like the brand has expanded in the way they probably hoped. Maybe the legs will surprise me, I hope so because I feel like if this game underperforms we're gonna get more weird experiments that will dilute the brand more.

Now, back to waiting for the FF Pixel Remasters to go on sale.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm far from a Final Fantasy purist so I'm actually pretty excited to play it myself once Sony puts out a smaller PS5 (or SE brings it to other platforms). All of my posts about the game itself have been pretty positive but that has no bearing on what I think about the game's commercial performance. We have numbers that we can compare to each other and people are simply going to react to that. We can still change our assessment of the game later down the line when we have a more complete picture of its reception.
 
Well, sure, for growth it would be better if the IP goes and stays multiplatform, but that doesn't mean it has to be on Switch / ReDraketed.

I think what's more important is to stop "reinventing" just for the sake of it.
Follow how it was prior to X / XII, a core gameplay loop where you add, change and reimagine on.

Stop this trend chasing. If they're getting inspiration from other media IPs, don't just take the "bad" parts to add into the game.
Simply, try to make a cohesive and focused game.

Also, diversity is your friend. It's 2023, i shouldn't have to say this.

They're welcome to keep the spectacle, but that musn't be the "full" focus of the game.

And ... yes ... try not to forget the RPG part. Feel free to keep it an action rpg, but keep the action and rpg parts balanced.
 
I donā€™t hate the state of FINAL FANTASY right now. I welcome the change to Action. I was convinced it was gonna streamline the franchise more. Iā€™m just worried that Square might stagnate the series now with only focusing on Remakes
 
Aether said:
The difference: the series you mentioned where never beloved for their story. FF is. Not the first one, but say 4 onwards. And you just can't make a compelling story to the degree of a FF6 or 7 or 9 or 10 (I know I is controversial) with that approach.
Click to expand...

This is kind of the problem.
In delivering story-focused, cinematic narratives even back on the SNES, they were actually way ahead of the curve. But the benchmark now is Witcher 3 or The Last of Us or Disco Elysium. Games have, in general, advanced in how they tell their stories. Look at the shift God of War took.
Final Fantasy simply has not kept pace (and neither has most of its peers - certainly this also applies to Xenoblade Chronicles). The presentation is at the level of a Saturday morning cartoon.
I'm aware that a lot of people kind of love that, and they really enjoy the sort of cheesiness of these games in general. But I feel like they're a minority, and that the more successful narrative games of this era (which is what Final Fantasy endeavours to be) don't rely on that factor. In fact they seem to want to avoid it.
It is an active detriment to your game to have a story that is front and centre that most players can't take seriously. Having long cut scenes that make players cringe is bad, actually.
So Final Fantasy 16 appears to have been an attempt to fix that, to be something modern audiences can take seriously. For me, it's a huge miss. The cringe factor is in full effect, except it's coupled with some really funny direct lifts from a popular fantasy series in another medium. Time will tell if that's just me or if the mass market also feels that the storytelling is at a significantly lesser level than the big Sony exclusives. We can be certain that the battle system is no longer a barrier to entry at least.

To circle back to the point though: If 16 is Square's absolutely best effort to make a cinematic game to compete against Sony's best, and if it fails to resonate on the same level as those games, then it makes sense for Square to try a less cutscene-heavy direction.
That doesn't mean full sandbox. Square's own Automata has an open(ish) world, short and infrequent cutscenes, and it's still a game that is heavily reliant on story. The difference is that the story is told while the player is still in control. Nier doesn't present its story in a more sophisticated manner than Final Fantasy, but it seems to treat its audience with more respect, allows them to make their own connections, and on at least one occasion, presents the player with a choice that forces them to really think about the game's themes. It does more with less. I think the humorous tone helps as well - you don't have to be self-serious to tell a bleak story or to play with heavy themes. And it makes less subtle or sophisticated elements seem less jarring.
That's just one example. Games like Disco Elysium are full choice and consequence - despite the main character being well defined rather than a blank slate. The Valve games have the story playing out around you but you're always in control of your character. Souls games impart a feel and emotion though their world and gameplay systems. And it's not right to downplay a game like Zelda where the adventure is experienced through playing it out, giving a thin narrative much more meat.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I dont think Game of Thrones Final Fantasy was a bad idea in and of itself. Right now, the IP lacks variety. There's no FF for young people, for instance. FF15 was the last time they attracted women. And that was by accident. Why should casuals jump into the brand?

FF16 isn't casting a wide net, so it falls on SE to make more types of nets to compensate, but they aren't
 
catonkatonk said:
This is kind of the problem.
In delivering story-focused, cinematic narratives even back on the SNES, they were actually way ahead of the curve. But the benchmark now is Witcher 3 or The Last of Us or Disco Elysium. Games have, in general, advanced in how they tell their stories. Look at the shift God of War took.
Final Fantasy simply has not kept pace (and neither has most of its peers - certainly this also applies to Xenoblade Chronicles). The presentation is at the level of a Saturday morning cartoon.
I'm aware that a lot of people kind of love that, and they really enjoy the sort of cheesiness of these games in general. But I feel like they're a minority, and that the more successful narrative games of this era (which is what Final Fantasy endeavours to be) don't rely on that factor. In fact they seem to want to avoid it.
It is an active detriment to your game to have a story that is front and centre that most players can't take seriously. Having long cut scenes that make players cringe is bad, actually.
So Final Fantasy 16 appears to have been an attempt to fix that, to be something modern audiences can take seriously. For me, it's a huge miss. The cringe factor is in full effect, except it's coupled with some really funny direct lifts from a popular fantasy series in another medium. Time will tell if that's just me or if the mass market also feels that the storytelling is at a significantly lesser level than the big Sony exclusives. We can be certain that the battle system is no longer a barrier to entry at least.

To circle back to the point though: If 16 is Square's absolutely best effort to make a cinematic game to compete against Sony's best, and if it fails to resonate on the same level as those games, then it makes sense for Square to try a less cutscene-heavy direction.
That doesn't mean full sandbox. Square's own Automata has an open(ish) world, short and infrequent cutscenes, and it's still a game that is heavily reliant on story. The difference is that the story is told while the player is still in control. Nier doesn't present its story in a more sophisticated manner than Final Fantasy, but it seems to treat its audience with more respect, allows them to make their own connections, and on at least one occasion, presents the player with a choice that forces them to really think about the game's themes. It does more with less. I think the humorous tone helps as well - you don't have to be self-serious to tell a bleak story or to play with heavy themes. And it makes less subtle or sophisticated elements seem less jarring.
That's just one example. Games like Disco Elysium are full choice and consequence - despite the main character being well defined rather than a blank slate. The Valve games have the story playing out around you but you're always in control of your character. Souls games impart a feel and emotion though their world and gameplay systems. And it's not right to downplay a game like Zelda where the adventure is experienced through playing it out, giving a thin narrative much more meat.
Click to expand...
I think this post is both insightful and missing the point at the same time.

In regards to storytelling, I don't think the issue per se is that Final Fantasy is too silly compared to western games. Anime storytelling is literally as popular as its ever been worldwide, anime as a medium has become entirely "normified," as it were, and manga aisles have consumed vast swathes of bookstores.

What I think you point to, though, is that the Final Fantasy producers, to a certain extent, feel ashamed of that anime-ness. To some degree that is understandable, if you recall the discourse earlier this year about disavowing the JRPG label, and the clips of rampant, deranged racism and xenophobia from gaming media toward Japan in the early aughts. So I think some of that cringe is less about it being too silly, but it being too transparently western-aspiring. This isn't necessarily a problem in of itself, IMO, and some game series actually do a good job of straddling that line well, but if it's not done well it can result in the same kind of feeling as when a western animation studio tries to consciously produce "anime." It's almost impossible to avoid a feeling of in-authenticity, but you can try to lean into that aspect for humor (hello Resident Evil). Honestly though I can't comment if this is actually a problem or not with FF XVI since I haven't played it, just pointing out that I don't think ambitious storytelling is a problem in of itself.

The decline of the Final Fantasy brand almost certainly has a myriad of causes, so I don't think there's a silver bullet. There are multiple things they would probably have to change, along with some luck.
 
catonkatonk said:
This is kind of the problem.
In delivering story-focused, cinematic narratives even back on the SNES, they were actually way ahead of the curve. But the benchmark now is Witcher 3 or The Last of Us or Disco Elysium. Games have, in general, advanced in how they tell their stories. Look at the shift God of War took.
Final Fantasy simply has not kept pace (and neither has most of its peers - certainly this also applies to Xenoblade Chronicles). The presentation is at the level of a Saturday morning cartoon.
I'm aware that a lot of people kind of love that, and they really enjoy the sort of cheesiness of these games in general. But I feel like they're a minority, and that the more successful narrative games of this era (which is what Final Fantasy endeavours to be) don't rely on that factor. In fact they seem to want to avoid it.
It is an active detriment to your game to have a story that is front and centre that most players can't take seriously. Having long cut scenes that make players cringe is bad, actually.
So Final Fantasy 16 appears to have been an attempt to fix that, to be something modern audiences can take seriously. For me, it's a huge miss. The cringe factor is in full effect, except it's coupled with some really funny direct lifts from a popular fantasy series in another medium. Time will tell if that's just me or if the mass market also feels that the storytelling is at a significantly lesser level than the big Sony exclusives. We can be certain that the battle system is no longer a barrier to entry at least.

To circle back to the point though: If 16 is Square's absolutely best effort to make a cinematic game to compete against Sony's best, and if it fails to resonate on the same level as those games, then it makes sense for Square to try a less cutscene-heavy direction.
That doesn't mean full sandbox. Square's own Automata has an open(ish) world, short and infrequent cutscenes, and it's still a game that is heavily reliant on story. The difference is that the story is told while the player is still in control. Nier doesn't present its story in a more sophisticated manner than Final Fantasy, but it seems to treat its audience with more respect, allows them to make their own connections, and on at least one occasion, presents the player with a choice that forces them to really think about the game's themes. It does more with less. I think the humorous tone helps as well - you don't have to be self-serious to tell a bleak story or to play with heavy themes. And it makes less subtle or sophisticated elements seem less jarring.
That's just one example. Games like Disco Elysium are full choice and consequence - despite the main character being well defined rather than a blank slate. The Valve games have the story playing out around you but you're always in control of your character. Souls games impart a feel and emotion though their world and gameplay systems. And it's not right to downplay a game like Zelda where the adventure is experienced through playing it out, giving a thin narrative much more meat.
Click to expand...

(Fake edit: after writing i feel like i was a little to harsh/confrontational in the beginning, just tone it down somewhat while reading =D )

.... i think your conflating your change in taste to a "forward development".
The "saturday morning cartoon" comparison kinda confirms that.
The games you compare it to have a western "adult" style, the aspects you talk down an seem to be less western and less "male in their 30ties" focused to be somewhat derogative. (DE, The Witcher, GoW)

"They are a minority" ... why? almost all of nintendos output has it, and it has a huge audience. FF7R is cheesy as hell, RE4 to and both where liked well enough. Cheese, humor or etc are important tools in storytelling, and done right they can elevate a story. Done badly, and you have crap, but thats true for to much simpleminded maturity.

Where do you cringe in FF6-9? i get that 10 has some memed cutscenes (take into context that it was their first Voiced FF)

"Modern audiences can take seriously" honestly, i CANT take most of modern Fantasy Story telling seriously, because it is serious all the time. Thats not how humans work, that not how any aspect of reality works. People cant be serious all the time, and those media products often lack levity to humanize the characters.

Does it mean they are bad? not at all, same as overly zany or off kilter stories, they have their time and place, but they are not more "real" then the others. People talked about Breaking Bad as if it was a story thats REAL. Depends on what you compare it to, to a sitcom? to the then usual crime dramas? Probably. To reality? nah, it was still really stylized. (and i loved it).

I like your examples of DE and Automata. While Automata hinges a little to much on the "my first time hearing about philosophie" side of things
(Kinda the modern "Evangelion"/"Xenogears" effect, where superficial philosophy and theology takes are blown out of proportion to make the Work deeper then it is, and doing it a disservice by that cause the work itself is great and something fresh for the medium), it definitely manages to make the emotions of the characters believable and to ground the story with the gameplay in a way where it never actively contradicts it.
(Well, ok, adam and Eve are kinda bad, but the naivity and simplicity of some of the philosophy can in universe be reasoned as the robots all only recently gained Consciousness and are still kinda children).

Disco Elysium, haven't played it, but for sure seemed like its one of the better depictions of substance abuse, and some of the dialogue i looked into seemed well written, butt that game hinges 100% on that.

Back to FF16: i only have seen the prologue, so i have no idea how it develops further on, but outside of Clive, Joshua and their dad all interactions seemed as if everybody is miserable and they all hate living on the same planet. The writing seemed to be a step up from 13 and 15, but firmly rooted in the "grimm fantasy" style, where to many people are misserable or just assholes. Im curious if the game manages to rectify that when stuff gets uncovered, but if its mostly a revenge and people killing story, then im worried. I wont read it up, since i still expect to play the game in a few years. (switch 2 or pc or PS5 slim)


Xenoblade Cronicles has the problem that it wants to tell grand stories, and also provide 100h of content, but cant great as much content, so the in between aspects often feel... episode of the week like? and with that reducing the impact. The Konsules in XC3 definitely fit your "saturdaay morning cartoon" thing, but it feeles more like they are there to fill out the playtime.

Anime is hugely popular, and it can work really really well, if you have good writing, don't relly TO much on the tropes, and don't stretch your game out so that you have to fill it with second grade bloat.

Edit:
Ok, @Branduil s post above me kinda gives a more coherent take...
 
Lozjam said:
What I don't get, they keep wildly grasping so many different styles all at once. When, if they actually want the west to be enthralled, and cater to Japanese gamers. It really is looking at them square in the face. Go back to the original final fantasy game, and build from there.

Imagine a game opens up, and you get to customize not just 1 character, but 4. And actively change their class between a few archetypes. Fighter, Red Mage, white mage, blue mage, monk, and thief. And you get to just completely make your party whatever you want, and name them.

Then the game opens up into a rad cutscene of these four warriors going to town on some goblins. The game cuts to gameplay. Now, this game could be action, or turn based, and something in between like FF7. That really doesnt matter.

Because when you get out of that tutorial.... You have no idea of an objective, but you see a castle shortly in the distance. You can choose to go to it, or not. But the story is in the hands of a player.

Does that sound familiar? That's basically Elden Ring, Tears of the Kingdom, Skyrim, ect. Basically the exact same of catalyst as those games, of going back to what used to make games so great. Discovery, improvisation, curiosity, intrigue. And it wouldn't be a complete ripoff, as long as it stuck to the series roots.

Final Fantasy, weirdly enough, always feels ashamed of its legacy, besides FF6 and FF7. If they went back to FF's roots, and did it well, they would have a smash hit.
Click to expand...
I think this + a more stylized "anime" art-style is their best bet going forward.
 
0
Aether said:
"They are a minority" ... why? almost all of nintendos output has it, and it has a huge audience. FF7R is cheesy as hell, RE4 to and both where liked well enough. Cheese, humor or etc are important tools in storytelling, and done right they can elevate a story. Done badly, and you have crap, but thats true for to much simpleminded maturity.

Where do you cringe in FF6-9? i get that 10 has some memed cutscenes (take into context that it was their first Voiced FF)
Click to expand...
1. No, almost none of Nintendo's core games have what I'm talking about. They barely have cutscenes at all. Mario is almost all-in on humour, and if I had a problem with humour I wouldn't be citing Nier or Disco Elysium (and Valve as far as Portal goes) as examples to follow and Final Fantasy 16 as being a faceplant. Pokemon is consistently light hearted in tone, it holds together and is coherent. It's literally a Saturday morning cartoon, but that's fine because it's not trying to be anything other than that. Xenoblade and Fire Emblem are the ones that are guilty of the things I'm criticising, and what a surprise, they're niche as fuck.

2. The point I've been making for ages now is that as the abstraction fell away and we got high fidelity graphics and voice acting, the exact same content was not adjusted to match. With embarrassing results.
6 is a masterpiece, but you can't just turn it HD and voice that same script and get the same effect. You have to evolve. They haven't done it. The "Western" examples have. That's the difference, and that's why the latter are way more successful than the former.

Look, did the devs telling the grimm and dark story of 16 intend for their presentation to resemble a Saturday morning cartoon or a prestige HBO show? It's a failure when it's trying to be one thing and ending up looking like another thing. The audience can feel the disonnance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
catonkatonk said:
1. No, almost none of Nintendo's core games have what I'm talking about. They barely have cutscenes at all. Mario is almost all-in on humour, and if I had a problem with humour I wouldn't be citing Nier or Disco Elysium (and Valve as far as Portal goes) as examples to follow and Final Fantasy 16 as being a faceplant. Pokemon is consistently light hearted in tone, it holds together and is coherent. It's literally a Saturday morning cartoon, but that's fine because it's not trying to be anything other than that. Xenoblade and Fire Emblem are the ones that are guilty of the things I'm criticising, and what a surprise, they're niche as fuck.
Click to expand...
Ok, yeah, then as expected i missread your post somewhat. Im just to used to "grim dark dad games" = "better and more progressive for the medium" takes in regards to gaming, my bad.

Youre not wrong with FE, but honestly: the writing took a nosedive on the 3DS. Awakening was servicable, Fates was cheesecake and really bad, Echoes was actually the best (but thats a remake), TH was a desaster. The more ambition they had, the deeper the fall. Its just not managable to make a coherent story if you dont want to commit.

Xenoblade... dont know to be honest. XC3 is my first, since the reliance on tropes was always to much for me, and with this game, half of the cutscenes and story content is good to great, the other half... is actually saturday morning cartoon caliber, you're right there.

Pokemon: oh hell no. Its a lot, but not coherent. It feels often like main story, league story, side stories, and world lore are written seperately with some notes shared. The writing is sub par even for a "childrens" game. It actually devolved compared to earlier iterations in my opinion, and when there exists stuff like Infinity Train, over the Garden Wall , Avatar or Kipo, i cant accept the notion that pokemons story is even servicable.

I would not call 3.82 Million niche as fuck, but thats a different topic...
catonkatonk said:
2. The point I've been making for ages now is that as the abstraction fell away and we got high fidelity graphics and voice acting, the exact same content was not adjusted to match. With embarrassing results.
6 is a masterpiece, but you can't just turn it HD and voice that same script and get the same effect. You have to evolve. They haven't done it. The "Western" examples have. That's the difference, and that's why the latter are way more successful than the former.

Look, did the devs telling the grimm and dark story of 16 intend for their presentation to resemble a Saturday morning cartoon or a prestige HBO show? It's a failure when it's trying to be one thing and ending up looking like another thing. The audience can feel the dissonance.
Click to expand...

oh i think i get now, its not the tone or the "anime" aspect, its the translation to a different presentation, kinda like when you move stuff from one medium to the other. (best recent example i would have it the Ed scene in the Netflix Cowboy bebop series, just does not work that way when you adapt it).
It goes the same way, many of those games would not work scaled down to 16 bit. Im with you on that one, there needs to be a translation, but without loosing the heart and soul that was present before.

In regards to FF16 and saturday morning... what exactly do you mean there? as mentioned, i only looked up the Demo, and outside of to grim and kinda flat characters outside the mains and their dad i did not get "saturday morning cartoon" vibes.
 
Aether said:
In regards to FF16 and saturday morning... what exactly do you mean there? as mentioned, i only looked up the Demo, and outside of to grim and kinda flat characters outside the mains and their dad i did not get "saturday morning cartoon" vibes.
Click to expand...
I'll give an early example, you've probably seen it already:
Our introduction to the branded is this guy who stumbles into young Clive and drops everything he's carrying. He's extremely apologetic. But Clive is kind to him, and helps him pick up all his stuff.

It's a very transparent setup to show that Clive is Good and Kind and Noble. It's also really, sort of, unsophisticated and kind of cheesy. It's like an early scene in an old Jackie Chan film.
This probably seems very minor. It is.
Later on you get characters that lurk in the shadows, watching our heroes, twirling their moustaches, utter charicatures of villainy. That stuff is right out of a cartoon. It's jarring. Maybe I'm harsher than most, I don't know. I wanted to get a general tone to compare it against so I watched some of God of War Ragnarok's opening. While Final Fantasy 16 honestly looks more fun to play than that at the beginning, the latter is definitely more advanced, more comfortable letting things go unsaid and letting the performance capture and animation carry the storytelling. That's my limited take on it, anyway.
 
catonkatonk said:
I'll give an early example, you've probably seen it already:
Our introduction to the branded is this guy who stumbles into young Clive and drops everything he's carrying. He's extremely apologetic. But Clive is kind to him, and helps him pick up all his stuff.

It's a very transparent setup to show that Clive is Good and Kind and Noble. It's also really, sort of, unsophisticated and kind of cheesy. It's like an early scene in an old Jackie Chan film.
This probably seems very minor. It is.
Later on you get characters that lurk in the shadows, watching our heroes, twirling their moustaches, utter charicatures of villainy. That stuff is right out of a cartoon. It's jarring. Maybe I'm harsher than most, I don't know. I wanted to get a general tone to compare it against so I watched some of God of War Ragnarok's opening. While Final Fantasy 16 honestly looks more fun to play than that at the beginning, the latter is definitely more advanced, more comfortable letting things go unsaid and letting the performance capture and animation carry the storytelling. That's my limited take on it, anyway.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that was definitely a weaker written part, i assumed its more to show that branded ones are kinda like slaves, and since we have seen Clive with a marking, its establishing that whatever happens in the story, the clive we have seen is a slave, not the kings son anymore.

It felt clumsy like so many moments in games, not something i would directly compare to Saturday morning cheese.
The moustache twirling you mention... yeah, that sounds bad.

I have seen enough of GoW that i felt some of it is really not that great, but i also have seem some scenes that where written well, and the handful of moments of ragnarok where either overwritten or good, nothing to wow me, but also nothing to cringe.

I honestly just expect games that are this long, and are not linearly developed (since progression and gameplay need to be balanced, with story progression, unlike series/movies where the story is the core aspect its paced around) will have some lesser writing, moments, characters, and im fine with that as long as its more on the sidelines. (your first example), but im not so happy when its core aspects (like the antagonist or main characters interacting)
 
0
Whew, I really ruffled some feathers with my post yesterday, huh? Oh well, it got people talking and thinking about Final Fantasy, so Iā€™ll take it as a win.

To be clear, I donā€™t even really like Final Fantasy XVI that much. Iā€™m about 20 hours into the game and I find it rather boring. However, I absolutely LOVED FFVIIR and Final Fantasy as a whole is my favorite video game series, so Iā€™m going to defend it fiercely no matter what.

You can criticize the gameplay, story, direction of the series, etc. but it really bothers me when people say the series isnā€™t relevant anymore and that 3 million+ copies in a week isnā€™t a success or something to be proud of. Final Fantasy as a whole is far and away the most popular RPG series in the world (not including PokĆ©mon, obviously). It has sold 183m+ copies, including 27m since April of 2020. 27m is a third of the entire Dragon Quest series sales. Imagine Xenoblade, Fire Emblem, or Persona selling 27m in the last three years. This place would lose their freaking minds if that happened.

Anyway, Iā€™m just trying to put things in perspective.
 
Last edited:
can confirm the negativity isn't because this is a Nintendo focused forum.

FF and Nintendo has a long, if sometimes rocky history, but FF is more or less back on Nintendo and there's no reason to hate on this just because it's not out on a Nintendo platform right now. a version will come out eventually i am sure once exclusivity expires and Nintendo has hardware that can run it.

A few people may take that angle, but i think it's just a reflection of a broader reaction everyone is having on the game and it's not all positive. I'm still interested in playing this.

The only console warry thing i will say is I have no interest to play it right now, since its on PS5, but that's because i don't own one and am not in a hurry to get one.
 
I do think itā€™s nutty to say FF isnā€™t relevant nowadays. While it may not be the JRPG anymore, itā€™s still one of the most popular and most recognized.

That said, SE did want to expand their audience, and to that end, FF16 does not seem like it will meet those expectations. But I donā€™t think they took the wrong step per se in turning FF into a DMC-like with a gnarlier story. It seems to be a solid enough base, but it appears to need an extra oomph in a few places to really spark more interest.
 
FF16's combat probably has very little to do with the franchise's fanbase growing or shrinking. If they want to grow they probably need to go open world (sadly, IMO, I prefer this franchise being linear) and increase the scope and make it a bit more varied visually.
 
If I wanted to play a DMC-like I'd go play DMC or anything by Platinum. If I wanted to play a Square-Enix action RPG I'd go play Nier, Kingdom Hearts, or Mana.

I legit miss ATB and that was one thing that the series basically had to itself. Turn based things like SaGa, Octopath Traveler, and Bravely Default are fine but there's a speed and flow to ATB that you just don't get with those games.

I get why the series/brand is heading in the directionit is (action and Western focused because that's where the money is) but I think the current belief that they have to prioritize graphical fidelity is misguided and untenable long-term. I'd much prefer, like @Bonejack says, if they'd stop chasing trends (which you're always going to be behind when it takes 4-5 years to ship) and go the other direction by cutting the budget, focus on their core strengths (writing direction, creative vision, art direction), create a consistent battle system to be used in multiple games (providing the series some sense of consistency and identity again), and just focus on the fundamentals of making a good-ass RPG.

Smaller budget, tighter games, faster and more predictable release schedules. If a game doesn't connect, it's ok because you've got another one coming down the pipeline in a year or two and you can incorporate fan feedback into that. Win-win.

And seriously, there's no need for a M rated FF game. The series has never been that. Most of S-Es stuff in the 90's barely dipped into M rated territory (and when it did it was just for bare skin on monster models 90% of the time). GoT is tonally the opposite of most FF games where even when there's an oppressive world (ie. FF VI - VIII, XIII and XV) there's still glimmers of hope that's absolutely missing from GoT.

Leica said:
FF16's combat probably has very little to do with the franchise's fanbase growing or shrinking. If they want to grow they probably need to go open world (sadly, IMO, I prefer this franchise being linear) and increase the scope and make it a bit more varied visually.
Click to expand...
I don't think they need to go pure open world. They can retain the hybrid approach that worked in the 90s where the first half of the game is on rails and then in the last 1/2-1/3rd the game goes globetrotting open world. That's basically the formula a lot of S-E titles used back then, and still use.

XIII gets a ton of flack for the "grind tube" and the open world but that's just because they poorly executed the formula by eschewing things like world maps and towns to really give you a sense of scale and an actual world rather than a linear series of environments and set pieces the game shuffles you through like a conveyor belt.
 
I think the Mature rating works really well for this FF...and the gameplay is so good. Like it's Kingdom hearts on crack. Its actually fun to play.

To each their own however.
 
0
Sturmgeist said:
You can criticize the gameplay, story, direction of the series, etc. but it really bothers me when people say the series isnā€™t relevant anymore and that 3 million+ copies in a week isnā€™t a success or something to be proud of. Final Fantasy as a whole is far and away the most popular RPG series in the world (not including PokĆ©mon, obviously). It has sold 183m+ copies, including 27m since April of 2020. 27m is a third of the entire Dragon Quest series sales. Imagine Xenoblade, Fire Emblem, or Persona selling 27m in the last three years. This place would lose their freaking minds if that happened.
Click to expand...
This just simply is not true. No Final Fantasy game has ever sold remotely as well as games like Witcher 3, Elden Ring, or Skyrim. Only looking at cumulative sales across decades is missing the forest for the trees. Final Fantasy's current output has been largely overshadowed by multiple other developers in the sales department. If you looked at cumulative sales, Tomb Raider has outsold Monster Hunter, but one of these series just announced a title passing 13 million units.
 
Mekanos said:
This just simply is not true. No Final Fantasy game has ever sold remotely as well as games like Witcher 3, Elden Ring, or Skyrim. Only looking at cumulative sales across decades is missing the forest for the trees. Final Fantasy's current output has been largely overshadowed by multiple other developers in the sales department. If you looked at cumulative sales, Tomb Raider has outsold Monster Hunter, but one of these series just announced a title passing 13 million units.
Click to expand...
I meant JRPG

Edit: and I wasn't only looking at cumulative sales. I mentioned 27m in the last three years
 
0
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom