0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Tbh... I hate that it plays like Kingdom Hearts. I get that this is the direction Final Fantasy games have been going these days .... Don't get me wrong the cutscenes look amazing and so does exploring out of combat. But I'd rather have turn based combat with control of all units and such, I wouldn't mind the old system being updated to look better , I guess nowadays people want it to feel more like an actual battle .I don't think I will be getting a ps4 anymore.
I mean, in this day in age you can't expect something this huge to simply be turned based (especially since its called a remake). And the trailer does in-fact show you can play as your party members, so yeah! I am pretty hyped up personally, the game reminds me of Crisis Core and Kingdom Hearts/FFXV.
In response to anyone complaining about the fact that it's an action RPG instead of a turn-based RPG (which I imagine will be more than just Roxas), if you want a turn-based Final Fantasy VII, you already have it, and nothing will stop you from going back to play it. Like I said, I think it's preferable to a straightforward rehash because it's a sign that they're actually doing something different and unique with the remake. I generally don't feel any need to purchase a remake that's just a graphics update if I already have the original, but even if I did own Final Fantasy VII, this would probably catch my eye solely for the fact that it's a fresh take.
I saw that you can play as your teammates but I really just don't like the way it's done . I don't know , it just doesn't feel right to me , but it's probably only me who feels this way , I can be picky about stuff. That's just my opinion on it , honestly besides the way the combat works everything else shown in the trailer looks good. Character voices are alright but I'm not really gonna complain on that ( Barrett should sound cooler)
A huge RPG can't be turn-based?I know a few games that disagree, including the upcoming title above.Because IT IS a remake, it should probably be the same genre, shouldn't it? You wouldn't expect CAPCOM's remake of Resident Evil 2 to be a first-person shooter right?If it's simply a more "active" looking game, that's fine. However, changing the gameplay itself would be a bad choice (not to mention the sheer negativity the similarities to FFXIII may produce).Not to mention the turn-based RPG has been doing exceptionally well for the last decade. The return of titles like Persona, original titles like Bravely Default, and even the constant rereleases of old Final Fantasy titles have been well received.Not to mention going by size is irrelevant. A single playthrough of say... Persona 4 takes around 60 hours for a first time player. Again... a turn-based RPG.This is clearly Square-Enix's big gamble, and if they screw up a remake of possibly the most famous turn-based JRPG of all time, that'll probably be the end of them.If they want to make an action RPG, they should make an action RPG... but they shouldn't market it as the remake of Final Fantasy VII.But what about games like Resident Evil and it's GameCube remake? Or Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes compared to the original PS1 MGS?Both are straightforward remakes that cover the same ground, but improve upon the originals without altering the core.If they want to add new stuff, I'm all for that, but not at the cost of what made the original so beloved.
I mean, its called a remake. It tells us that it would be different just from the title.
Yeah but they remake Draon Quest titles all the time . Also remember soulssilver and heartgold? Remakes that they added to but it was essentially still the game at heart.
I'm seeing an interesting pattern here. Diehard fans of FF7 seem to be the new idea, while newer fans or not really fans seem really interested in the new direction. Maybe this is supposed to be aiming for a more general audience? I don't really know, but I feel there is a pretty clear divide here. I mean, even I admit the combat sounds interesting, but Roxas and Nia who are older fans of the franchise seem to really dislike this new move.As I said before, it is possible they might have two game modes, where you can choose between oldschool combat and more modern, kind of like how Fire Emblem Awakening added a "casual" mode for newer players while still having a "classic" mode where your units have permadeath as usual.Either way, knowing Square Enix like I somewhat do, chances are if they're making a move like this, they've already thought it through and won't plan on changing it. Let's just hope they have both combat modes to please the entire fanbase.
Your argument is invalid. Both of the images I just posted show remakes of games from the same era (and incidentally, both of the remakes came out on the GCN). Both were heralded for preserving the spirit and gameplay that was so beloved in the original, whilst upgrading them.Both were remakes.Resident Evil was one of the best known PS1 games, and was pretty much the blueprint for the Survival-Horror genre (despite being preceded by Alone in the Dark). The GameCube Remake is probably the most famous and best example of a remake done right. It not only redid the entirety of the PS1 game with far superior graphics and atmosphere, but it added new stuff in like the quick turn (adopted from RE3), self-defense weapons, new enemies, a mechanic where you have to burn enemy corpses so they don't get back up, new weapons, and an expanded story. Yet, the primary gameplay remained... which is precisely why it was a quality remake.Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes was practically a 1:1 remake of Metal Gear Solid. The PS1 game is again, one of the most widely known PS1 games, and the GCN version didn't change the core of that. It did add in some slight design changes, and elements from Metal Gear Solid 2 (the ability to drag enemies, shooting out enemy radios, hanging off of ledges, new easter eggs, etc.), but again... the core of the game was retained. Again... an excellent example of how to remake a game.Final Fantasy VII is probably the most well-known RPG of all time. This remake wasn't supposed to be for the ADHD-addled Call of Duty dimwits of the modern era. The fans, people who played and adored the PS1 original for almost 20 years... they're the ones who wanted this remake. We've been asking for a remake since the PS1... and if they're changing it to an action game, then it's obviously not a remake, but an entirely new game, trying to pass itself off as a remake.These are the decisions that have been killing Square-Enix.I'm not saying it won't be good... but it absolutely WILL NOT be Final Fantasy VII if it's an action game. Changing the core gameplay means it's not a remake, pure and simple.If they remade Kingdom Hearts II into a turn-based game, is it the same thing? If they remade Dragon Ball Online into a puzzle game, is it the same thing?As I said before... if they want the combat to be faster paced, or if they want it to be more of a visual spectacle, that's fine. But if they're changing the very core of the gameplay, you can not call it a remake.Not only that, but did you ever stop to think why the PS1 game was so beloved? Trying to use "it's a remake, so of course it's going to be different!" as an excuse is ridiculous. The point is, the only differences there should be to a remake is an increase in content, and a new coat of paint.I think Roxas actually understands exactly what I'm saying, and it's pretty clear a good chunk of the fanbase is upset over this decision. And he's exactly right. Those Dragon Quest and Poke'mon remakes retained their core gameplay, whilst expanding on it... exactly what a remake should be.Also a side note in regards to Barret's voice, I'm pretty sure it's the same VA he had in Advent Children, Beau Billingslea, who's probably best known as Jet in Cowboy Bebop.
Remake literally means to do something again but differently. If you recreate a game but with HD graphics thats an HD version or a recreation. Not only that, they said a few months ago that the game would be different, but not un-recognizably different.
I doubt they'd do that (as it'd require them to basically make the game twice), but something like that I don't think would be too bad.And no offense, but... modern Square-Enix isn't exactly known for "thinking things through," otherwise Final Fantasy XIV would never have happened... twice.Of course, who knows? Most likely, in true Square-Enix fashion, what you saw probably wasn't even actual gameplay footage, and was probably just a pre-rendered mock up, like they did with Final Fantasy XIII back in the early days of the PS3 (and we all saw how vastly different that game was from it's trailers). It's possible they're gauging player reactions to the trailer, and deciding where to go from there.But I will say this... the fact that they only now decided to follow through with this remake, after years of telling fans "NO!", and given that I've heard very little praise for Final Fantasy XIV and XV... this is likely a sign that if this game fails, it's gonna kill the Final Fantasy franchise, if not Square-Enix (although, they might be able to sustain themselves with Dragon Quest).And considering the majority of the fanbase is undoubtedly the people who played the original 20 years ago (it's easily the best selling PS1 game), doing something that alienates them would practically be a death sentence, particularly since all that was desired from this game was a fresh coat of paint.My personal suggestion to Square-Enix? Remake FFVII in a proper remake, drop FFXIV, and use this plan to make an FFVII MMO. You get the fanbase who wants a more action-y version of the game without alienating fans of the original, and you get an MMO that doesn't reek of putrid mediocrity (and for feck's sake, they need to drop that monthly subscription BS).The best part is, in such a scenario, the fans of the original WOULD actually like it, seeing as how well recieved Crisis Core was. Having something like this for a remake? It's not a wise choice. Having something like this for a spinoff? Plenty awesome.
Well, any remaining hope I had just died.They're turning it into a "multi part" game (which means in all likelihood, it'll be episodic).http://kotaku.com/sounds-like-the-final-fantasy-vii-remake-will-be-episod-1746564216Granted, all things I've said could be simple misinterpretation.But considering Square-Enix's choices in the last few years? I doubt it.
You're not very bright are you?