thephoenix
-
Posts
71 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Articles
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by thephoenix
-
-
Well, it's a company's duty to protect their IP.
I'd agree if they were going to lose money off of it, but this is fan based work. All credit was given, no one was stealing their IP, and there's nothing wrong with being creative and making an off-story. Hell, that'd be like saying Fan Fiction is a violation of IP (which, if you find the right lawyer, could be argued and won). Most companies love what their fans do to show that appreciation and will not only accept it, but sometimes will even promote it themselves. It's not only free marketing for them, it's potentially pushing people to go out and get the other games that drove these projects to be created. With this game here specifically, no one was going to see a profit on it at all. Sure, if they make a sequel, would they want to protect the possibility of doing a similar story to a game released? Maybe, but if you're to that point that you hit anything with a C&D like this, when they've done all this out of their appreciation for the game, it comes off as the kid at recess that brings a ball, but then when others ask to play with it, he screams "NO, ITS MINE! YOU CAN'T HAVE IT!"
-
Actually Chrono Resurrection was supposed to be a "short interactive technical demo" of sorts featuring 10 locations from the original game (Crono's Room and Crono's Kitchen count as 2 locations). It was to have a basic battle system but not much gameplay and Ayla and Robo weren't supposed to be playable. It would have been awesome to play but don't mistake it for a real game.
Well, you're both right and wrong. It was a tech demo, but it was playable, going through 10 scripted scenes in the game, flowing from one to another. All in all, it still was a remake of those scenes in full 3d, which is what I said to begin with. Nothing saying they remade the entirety of it, but they were still working on a remake.
Regardless, the sad thing with Square is how quick they are to hit ANYTHING that's fan crafted. I started creating a Final Fantasy CCG game a few years back, ended up getting some steam going behind it (released the card info for the entire first two set releases, and worked with coders on an online way of playing) and found myself getting a Cease and Desist a few months later. I have it printed and framed back at my parent's house somewhere. At that time, and up until just recently, Square showed no signs of making any FF card games of any kind. It seems as if their mindset is "If it's something popular using our IP, we need to stop it in case we decide to do the same thing."
Then again, at E3 a few years back, the Square-Enix Senior VP Shinji Hashimoto said to those asking about a Chrono Sequel, "If people want a sequel, they should buy more!" So, yeah, they can go fuck themselves. The Chrono fans have been more than loyal and patient.
-
I looked into it more, and I agree with the "meh" feelings most seem to have towards it. It's fanfiction you can play. Nothing amazingly exciting, and the fact that they took almost too much creative license only serves to take away from the game, not add to it.
-
Square is quick to shoot of C&Ds with the explanation that they don't want something to "compete against" if they decide to release a game that may come close to one already released. While I get that, they haven't touched the Chrono series in a long time, besides porting it. They show no sign or intention of continuing, and honestly, most companies take things like that as an honor that their fans have that much backing of a game after all this time. They've already hit quite a few other projects, to include a fully 3d version of Chrono Trigger remade a few years ago. The info still is on youtube for it.
Meh, good on them for leaking it anyway. I want to see SE's response.
-
Yes, if you use small sampling sizes, the results will be inaccurate. The best you can do is take as wide a polling as possible. Hence the purpose of sites like Metacritic which aggregate opinions.
Metacritic pulls from professional review sites, citing a single opinion in most cases, not a "wide polling". Again, a big reason critics are hard to go off of is because of the numerous variables to their reviews and the ways they do them. By the way, Metacritic only lists 83 critics. If you want to say that you're using small sample sizes, getting the opinions of 83 people that have played the game and going off of that would literally fall under the exact analogy I used.
If all the critics were simply being 'bought' (which in reality doesn't happen, Kane & Lynch has a very low score on MC) that wouldn't explain why the aggregate user rating is just as high.http://kotaku.com/gaming/rumor/gamespot-editor-fired-over-kane--lynch-review-328244.php
^^I'm talking about this, specifically...and sadly it's not the only time it's happened^^
Where is the "very wide consensus"? It certainly isn't among reviewers, or among any user opinion aggregates I've seen. You're only going on your own subjective view. And yes, I posted several pages ago that Square admitted to doing international playtesting too late. However, they certainly didn't say that they "knew it wouldn't do as well in America."So, I want you to take a few seconds, go back, read the two words AFTER the "very wide consensus", then realize that by ignoring those two words it changes the statement completely. Bravo. From what I've seen in numerous ways, from conversations with the numerous gamers I talk with daily, to various reviews, to news sites and review sites, to so many other things...for every one person praising it I get ten saying it's nowhere near a good game. Kind of helps to finish reading, right?
Trying to find the story on the admission. However, those arguing about the linear storyline, even the creators state that it was made to be more linear, arguing that the US has become used to being dropped into an open world and that makes it harder to do storytelling. Honestly, I beg to differ, but still. I'll see if I can find the story about the admission, but it fell under the same lines as that...it's very different from the current US benchmark for RPGs.
http://kotaku.com/5472712/square-enix-attempts-to-explain-low-western-reviews
In your opinion. You keep making grand statements like "there is a wide consensus" with no source to back them up. When I show you sources to the contrary you just arbitrarily dismiss them.So not only do you ignore the full statement I made, you changed it and added more to it to misquote me. Nicely done. And I'm the one not showing logic? Read above once more if you need to.
Look, you're entitled to your opinion. But you're not talking opinions. You are trying to describe reality - how the majority of people feel about Final Fantasy XIII. You're insisting that most people didn't like the game, without showing any evidence of that. What's the point of a discussion if you're just going to say whatever you feel like without backing any of it up with logic or facts?I'm talking about how a majority of those I've spoken with at length about this have responded and reacted. This is actually the most backing I've seen FOR FFXIII since it's release. But you're right, I'll get right on having them all put signed statements up, detailing exactly what I've said. We're in a day and age that games are given much more leverage and exceptions...it's the reason why Call of Duty can release a game every year and sell millions of copies even if it's the same thing on repeat.
-
Why did I start this thread again? Oh that's right, it's because train wrecks are hilarious.
So in all seriousness, the pulse section of FFXIII was passable. If this game were to explore a newly settled pulse, and actually had FF like elements such as:
- Towns
- NPCs
- Sidequests that aren't just talking stones with grudges
- Characterful places to explore for no other reason then to explore them
I might actually have some hope for this on reflection. The graphics were awesome, and they won't change. The battle system sounds like it's gonna be adapted, hopefully for the better. Pulse was a much better setting to me, and felt more like a typical FF epic setting.
I'm changing my status from 'confused and angered' to 'quietly optimistic'.
I guess what kind of bugs me is...this could have been DLC. In fact, DLC was in talks but apparently got canceled. They even asked in a few interviews about it and he said it was something they were working with, but then apologized as it wasn't happening. With this info now, that leads me to believe that the DLC was canceled to instead sell an entirely new game, and I've seen that before with games pawning expansions off as completely new games. That's bullshit. At this point, I question exactly how much more they could build on the story, especially having Versus, Dissidia, Kingdom Hearts, and all their other games on the table, not to include any other titles we have yet to hear about. Like the op-ed posted by someone on here, it's too much too fast and they're going for quantity over quality. I'd rather have 1-2 amazing games a year than 15+ that are sub par.
-
So, in other words, your answer to my question "I guess your opinion is the only one that matters?" was "Yes, I'm the only one who decides whether a game is good or bad."
Sorry, but by every objective measure, FF13 was a good game. It's unreasonable to say that critics don't matter (ALL critics, as MC aggregates and weights them), the general public doesn't matter, and sales don't matter. Your argument that "well, nobody knows what a good RPG is anymore" is inane.
Yes, because I said that, right? Maybe if you get your head out of your ass you'd hear what I'm saying a little better. Especially because neither of your quoted statements there are even remotely close to something I've said, and are in most ways contradictory. Then again, I guess most people can't be assed to actually read anything if they're only thinking about what they're going to say next.
Regardless, I stated reasons why it's hard to judge the "success" of a game off anything. Put 100 people in a room with one game, 80 of the 100 like it, it's a huge success! Put another 100 in a room with a game, only 20 of them like it, it's a huge failure. Most gamers I know don't put weight on critics viewpoints for many reasons, and all of them are pretty valid. Most reviewers don't get more than a few hours of gameplay to test and review a game, many tend to have bias for this or that reason, some companies have pushed reviewers to give higher scores to sponsors (see: Kane and Lynch and that whole shitstorm), so on. Can't really base off the income the game brought in because most of that come from sales to people that DON'T have an opinion on a game one way or another until after the money is already spent. Again, I use Transformers 2 as an example. Beyond that, the very wide consensus I've seen is that FFXIII was not well received. I believe there was even an interview where the lead designer (may be wrong) KNEW that it wouldn't do as well in America. I'd need to check Kotaku, I remember seeing that somewhere.
Either way, stand it on it's own, take away the nostalgia and the exceptions given to it, and the substance just isn't there. It's hollow. Sure, it looks pretty on the outside but once you get into it, there's not much there. The story was broken, the characters weren't as easy to attach to, and it felt poorly designed. I'm a fan of deeper gameplay. I want that intriguing story that doesn't make me stop and go "this is retarded" every 20 minutes. That was pretty much my exact thought pattern through the entire game. Especially when Hope was on screen.
-
Ah, I love that style of debate...someone makes a point, gets proven wrong, writes it off with some half-hearted attempt at sounding uncaring ("I'm not listening to your opinion any more"), more people come on, repeat the same things or offer different viewpoints against what they say, prove them even more wrong, "LOLS TL;DR I AGREE NOW WITH EVERYONE ELSE EVEN THOUGH I SAID THE EXACT OPPOSITE!" ...hell, I'll say it.
umad?
Come up with something a little more convincing than OMG NO AGGRO EXCEPT FOR THIS ONE GUY (by the way, was that a really poor attempt to make a crack at my username? Really) BECAUSE NOW THERE'S MORE THAN ONE SAYING IM WRONG AND I STILL WANT TO BE AN INTERNET TOUGH GUY.
Whatever. Back on topic, FFXIII-2 is unnecessary. They haven't even released Versus yet, and if that bombs, they're going to have a hell of a time with XIII-2. This is why the FF system has always worked for the most part. New games, new situations, still the same great story telling (for the most part, up until recently at least) and it leaves you wanting more. They need to stop milking it dry and just get on with things.
-
Not sure if anyone has seen this either (was looking to find info on the KH chars in dissidia) but apparently in a month or two, SE is releasing a Final Fantasy card game, that looks to be able to mix with a KH and some other card game running off the same system. I'm intrigued, probably will buy a box or two.
-
The winter theme (song played throughout winter) for Harvest Moon 64. While the game wasn't the best HM game to date, it was a very memorable one. I figured with the cold weather outside and it snowing in Texas, which is still hard to believe, this song would work perfectly. Made it a bit more dark and cold, so to speak. Let me know what you guys think.
My piano arrangement:
Original:
-
True though, FF6 characters are the least outlandish....
Let me introduce you to Kefka and Gogo.
Though I do agree with you on that, it didn't seem like it was a showcase of discarded Lady Gaga outfits.
However, on the topic of Dissidia as it seems to keep coming up, I'm a bit scared about rumors that Kingdom Hearts characters may be added. I'm doubtful, but I wouldn't put it past them. Anyone heard anything one way or another?
-
then its pretty simple to note none of us will be listening to you anymore because your opinions are shit 'when you see it you know it' isn't going to convince anyone
moving on
It's about emotional impact, replay value, and "fun factor". Something FFXIII, and most other recent rpgs, don't have. Pretty simple concept there.
This is where you have to stop. I'm an old-school RPG fan. I loved Final Fantasy XIII just as much as any other entry in the series. Your use of this phrase is incorrect.Fine, let me rephrase, "every old-school rpg fan I've ever seen comment, with apparently some exception to that now"...fill in the rest. It's semantics arguing now.
Fun fact: Final Fantasy was never old-school. If it was, it'd be using the same turn-based system that Dragon Quest is still using(not a statement about the quality of Dragon Quest games). The series has always thrived on the evolution of its mechanics. Problem is that you never noticed that until the last few entries when they really changed things up. If you liked those more that's totally cool Final Fantasy IV will probably maintain an honorary first place in my book simply because of my nostalgia for it.Old school is a pretty relative term detailing games of an older time frame than the current one. Doesn't matter what changed with it or from it. The "old school era" of rpgs for this current time frame started around the beginning of the SNES and ended approximately with the PS1, and that's still arguable. You really can't go back further because the NES had little to offer for most RPG fans, with some exceptions. The SNES was the birth of the RPG console game that's grown into what we know and love today.
Another fun fact: There is no RPG aside from pen & paper, tabletops, and Hack/Net Hack that are non-linear. As long as there is a goal that you are being directed towards with a set beginning and ending, then that game is functionally linear. This applies to western as well as eastern RPGs. As Jeremy Parish of 1up puts it(and I'm paraphrasing) "Final Fantasy XIII puts aside all pretense of lying to you and just asks you to walk in a straight line for awhile". It's efficient, and within the context of the story(which may or may not have been the result of constrained development issues), it works.Again, linear depends on your context. Hell, we could argue whether games like Knights of the Old Republic or Elder Scrolls are linear, but in the end it boils down to one simple mindset...does it feel like me getting to the end of the game is by my own choosing and decision, or does it feel like I'm just following exactly where the game wants me to go, and doesn't allow much room for deviation? The beginning and end may always be the same (with some exceptions to that rule, of course), with many things in between being necessary checkpoints, but the game isn't anywhere near as locked down. FFXIII didn't give anywhere near the same freedoms you have in most other FF games.
Do you really enjoy walking into the same NPC house and listen to him or her spout out the same "Man, things were pretty peaceful around here until all these monsters started popping up!" over and over again? Is that freeing to you? Does it "set up the world's lore"? Give me a fucking break....and that has what to do with storyline? Yes, please, explain to me how a random NPC there for nothing but aesthetic reasons has any flow on the story, the characters, the gameplay, pretty much anything in an RPG...
"Resonance of Fate is what FFXIII should have been"? Resonance of Fate is a great game, but the way it does things isn't the end all be all of the genre. What about Mass Effect 2(which incidentally makes some of the same design choices of FFXIII)? Beyond critically claimed, millions sold, and plenty of satisfied customers.ME2 also took far too many steps back from ME1. The freedoms allowed in the first game were removed, and it was extremely simplified. I, for one, was not a fan at all, and that's disappointing considering how much I loved the first game. Plus, again, we're in a time that games like that are few and far between, so it's easier for them to get that acclaim because there really isn't much to compare them to. I know many people that like ME2 but have went on and on about how they wish it was more like ME1 (which was much more freeing than 2) and didn't remove many of their favorite things. Sadly, like many gaming companies, people said "this is kind of broken" and instead of the company fixing it, they just took it out completely.
"Who cares about that, though. It isn't what I want the genre to be, so it's shit."Name an RPG and I can guarantee you'll have a hard time finding one I haven't played. It's not about the genre. I could care less if it falls under the proper genre. I'm looking at the game itself. The story, the gameplay, the characters, everything. Hell, I could care less if FFXV turns into a God of War clone, if they do it right, good on them. However, as most of the original FF team is gone (and went on to make Lost Odyssey, another game I highly recommend that does things right) I doubt we have much to look forward to. Especially if they've decided to make a sequel.
That's the message you and a lot of others in this thread are giving off here. If anyone is guilty of "tunnel vision", it isn't the devs working at Square-Enix. Not by a long shot.Thankfully the rest of the game development community doesn't think like this, or the medium would have died off years ago.
*points above*
It's not about what you do, it's if you do it right. While many games have that capability of going far outside the realm, there are still right ways and wrong ways of going about it. I have always praised S-E for going outside the mold...hell, I was THRILLED when I saw FFXIII was going to be something a little more "modern" or "futuristic" because it did bring those new elements to the game, which is one of the few things I liked about VII and VIII. I even liked IX's character design because, again, it was different. Different isn't bad. Bad is bad. S-E, sadly, has been releasing a lot of bad recently.
-
I'm glad we have you around to tell us the future
enlighten us more oh ancient one
actually just dont bother, i'd rather see you reply to derrits post
It's pretty simple to note. The game simply wasn't the classic, epic RPG that older FF games were. They're the kind of games that stick with you, that you remember. The story was broken, bland, and not the kind of thing that really grips you. Doesn't take much intelligence to look at something and go "this is an instant classic" because when something is, it tends to be pretty obvious. Then again, if they're turning XIII into the new VII I doubt Square will let it die for the next 20 years anyway...
-
All depends on how you measure success. If success is making a classic game that will be talked about and still played 15+ years from now, they failed. Horribly. If success is measured by the money they put in their pocket? Then yes, they succeeded in paying the bills. The game is forgettable at best. They need to just work on FFXV and stop going "wait, this horse just moved when I beat it, maybe it's still alive! LETS BEAT IT MORE!"
likeable characters: the only thing that made the older characters more likeable was their lack of personality. it allowed people to fill in what was missing (aka everything but the text they spoke) to make an idealized version of whatever character it was that was talkingFor what was given, numerous characters DID have that personality that existed. Yes, it's hard to read pixelated emotion but that's like saying "I don't read books because it doesn't give me a visualization of what the character feels". That's the sign of good storytelling. They can take a pixelated figure and make you see them as something much deeper, and something actually enjoyable. You empathize with them, you understand them, and while your imagination builds them up, it does so within the guidelines presented by the game...something much harder to find nowadays.
amazing stories: they're good. no one's really arguing with that all that much. but they're not drop dead spectacular eitherConsider, once again, the time period they came out in. It was the birth of storytelling in video games in the SNES era. They took what they had and made gold out of it. They story HAD to be the biggest part of the game because what else could you sell it on? The graphics, like games nowadays? Of course not. Even still, the story flowed very well, it made you connect to it, and presented itself in a way that it is memorable. I can remember FFVs storyline extremely well, and I haven't played it in YEARS. That's the sign of amazing storytelling.
deep backgrounds: what does this even mean. if it means that there's substance behind the ingame worlds they're completely blown away by the modern ones. hell 13 practically had an in game encyclopedia, it was hugeBackgrounds for the characters, the reasons you're doing what you're doing and what drives the story forward, and so on. I'm not talking about the random whatever that just exists, I'm talking the fact that the games present backgrounds to so much very well. Not saying FFXIII didn't but FFIV-VI certainly did (as well as Tactics) so that's another point to them doing well on their own.
difficult challenges: no one who hates the new ones hates them for lack of challenge i've never heard anyone here say that everTwo words: auto-battle. Plus, it heals you at the end of every battle? What the hell is that? The game didn't feel challenging at all the entire time I played it. I can't tell you how many times I saw the game over screen in the SNES-era games, but when you beat someone it was much more challenging, much more intense, and much more satisfying.
so pretty much what it comes down to is every new character isn't cecil or cloud and every ff villain isn't kefkaYou said that the games would be hated if they came out now instead of when they originally released. Those games DID have Cecil and Kefka, and Kain, and Rydia, and Shadow, and Edge, and Locke, and Sabin, and Shadow, and Edgar, and Delita, and on and on and on...and they're memorable because of how well crafted they were. If anything, it shows even more how bad the FF games have gotten because they DO have the tools to better craft characters but appear to be taking a step backwards. Again, go get Resonance of Fate and see exactly what I mean. RoF is what FFXIII should have been, hands down. A few of us have even started to just call RoF "FFXIII" because it seems much more appropriate to the series.
-
i still hold to the statement that if the old final fantasy games came out now for the first time, none of you people who are like 'leik omg squaresux now lolol' would like them AT ALL
and like zircon said XIII was a critical and financial success this =/= terrible and failed like some of you seem to think
Likeable characters, amazing stories, deep backgrounds, difficult challenges...yeah, you're right, those sound like things that make for a bad game that no one would like.
I got FFIV a month after it's original release and loved it. I got FFVI the day it came out and loved it. I got FF Tactics the day it came out and loved it. Tell me how that'd be any different than if they released it now? The game is still the same game, and numerous people that are "Post-FF7" fans that never went back and played the older ones have loved the hell out of FFIV-VI. They had nowhere near the same backing that Final Fantasy has now, so technically in the US they still stood on their own feet and did amazingly well.
-
So if critical reviews are good, popular reception is good, and it sells a lot... what other metrics are there? Is it just that everyone else's opinion doesn't count except yours?
Twilight is a bad comparison. If you look at Metacritic, the movies had both low critical scores and even low user scores. That is a case where it's making money without being good - not the case with FFXIII. "Sizable amount" of people not liking FFXIII is not accurate as the majority of people did in fact like it, along with the majority of reviewers.
Critics are a bad view on exactly how good or bad a game is. You could look at fan reviews but so many people give instant 10s or 1s that it's hard to measure. You could go off critic reviews but most don't get to play the full load of a game, only a partial of it, before reviewing, so they really don't get a full feel for it (and those that do tended to score much lower). You could go off sales, but sales are an iffy metric because most people don't base their own thoughts and opinions off of a game BEFORE they purchase it. As far as reception, you have to factor in for a lot of things for a game like Final Fantasy. The game has many factors that, when removed, would damage the base of the game itself. You have the known IP, the nostalgia factor, the longing for a decent RPG in this time of nothing but FPS games (by the way, play Resonance of Fate if you want a good, recent RPG...it's what FFXIII should have been), the fact that back when many other FF games were released it was in a time of heavy RPG releases, and continued that way all through the PS2 era. The next gen consoles haven't seen many decent RPG games in a long time, so it's going to get a much better reception. Still, you have to look at the game for what, and how, it is. The game was RPG light. Every old school RPG fan hated the over-simplified mechanics, the extremely linear gameplay, the aggrivating characters, poor and broken story, and so on. These are the things that make an RPG, and in this day and age those things are low on the list of what people look for to rate a game. Gone are the days of Earthbound and Super Mario RPG, eh?
Oh, and to jump in on the linearity argument, of course most games start out very linear. They need to direct the story so when it does open up the world you have an idea of what you're doing. It slowly builds up the open world idea as it gives you more freedom to do things, while not forcing you to (and I love this analogy) "run down a long hallway for 40 hours".
By the way, point and case on how reviews by critics can vary to a point that it's hard to judge a game on that alone:
-
The Judge system in FFTA? That was brilliant! It forced you to use other strategies, and to think of new solutions to problems you may or may not have seen before. It was actually forcing the player to use Tactics.
The level of "tactics" it forces you to use would be like playing Metal Gear Solid and, out of nowhere, someone runs in and goes "THE FLOOR IS LAVA!" "Why!?" "BECAUSE I SAID SO, SHUT UP AND DO IT!" There was no purpose or reason to it. Why would I be in a forest, battling bandits (who would be against obeying any laws if you ask me), out in the middle of nowhere, and a judge just shows up and goes "WEEEE, YOU CAN'T USE SWORDS OR YOU GO TO JAIL!"? Even moreso, why would any judge just randomly ban things? Yes, it's brilliant.
Objectively speaking, FFXIII didn't do horribly. Its score on Metacritic (both reviewer AND user) is about the same as Final Fantasy Tactics, about 84%. It sold millions of copies.and...
Which is what I think most people here are having a hard time accepting. The game sold shittons, and there's a sizable amount of people who did genuinely like it, both non and longtime fans of the series alike.Sales =/= how the game did. Again, Transformers 2 was horrible but made 400 million. Hell, Twilight prints money left and right with their books and movies. That's not really a good measure of how good a game is. Again, I'd have loved to have seen how it would have been if it was released as it's own RPG without any popular IP backing. I guarantee those numbers would be worlds lower. Plus, it's very difficult to compare two games by rating numbers alone. I mean, FFVII got a 92 on metacritic whereas FFIV got an 85. Those are fighting words.
True, sales help keep the company alive, but they lose future sales by continuing down the same path. There will always be both sides of the coin, but as far as FFXIII was concerned, the disliking side weighed in much more, and for very legitimate reasons. Like I said, it's done with, they should move on to the next game in the series, and hope for the better next time around.
-
Hey guys, been a long time fan of OC (back when it was remix.overclocked.org) and a video game music writer, both fan and original, for over a decade now. Most of my work never saw the light of day until recently, besides the original work which was mostly for small/indy games released online, and I've come to find my love that I had for it all over again after taking a break for a few years.
I range in everything from piano and orchestral to hard rock and metal re-arrangements and covers, with a heavy influence from early game systems like the NES, Genesis, SNES, and Gameboy. I tend to like to add my own flair to the songs as well, giving them a more personal touch.
Either way, won't bore you with details, anything that I guess could be known about me will come out in due time. I'm on ReverbNation and Youtube as FrozenPhoenixMusic. Catch you guys around.
-
They should be focusing on just putting it behind them (like Mystic Quest) and leaving it where it is to move on to bigger and better. Both FFXIII and FFXIV did horribly, but the biggest issue remains with the fact that most of the original FF team is gone for various reasons. What once was a game that was challenging and deep...that didn't feel like it hit every RPG cliche in the world...is now exactly what we're seeing. Sadly, their IPs will still sell because people know them and it's familiar. It's like the Transformers movies. The second one had dogs humping as the punchline for a joke twice in the first 10 minutes. Still, it made tons of money.
If you focus on many of Square-Enix's decisions you can see the exact business path they're taking. Look at Kingdom Hearts and the very confusing direction they're taking it. Remember the first one? It was amazing. It was deep, it was well executed, and was a lot of fun. Because of that, the games continued to grow in popularity, and in such, will continue from that initial base. Consider this: if FFXIII was the instead an independent release from a new company, exactly the same way it is, and Final Fantasy never existed, the game would be forgotten in no time. The same exceptions long-time fans make wouldn't be afforded to a new game without that base.
For me, I want to see FFXV go back to roots. I agree that IV, V, and VI were amazing, as well as Tactics and IX (and I do kind of like VIII) but the only good thing they've had come out of milking those franchises to date is FFIV: The After Years. Every other one seems to just have became idiot fan service or some of the worst game development decisions I've ever seen. I really hope someone some day punches the guy who created the Judge System for FFTA straight in the face for being retarded.
EDIT: One last thing, they need to stop dumbing down the damn games. RPGs are meant to be challenging, and I shouldn't be able to hit a cruise control button and let the game do the fighting. If I want to watch a movie, I'll do just that. I can't tell you how many times people that complain about FFXIII being too easy go back to FFIV "hard mode" (which is basically just the original difficulty with the game in japan) and learn very quickly that FF games used to be unforgiving.
Crimson Echoes released... sort of.
in General Discussion
Posted
Squaresoft has their IP, others want to utilize it without stealing it or using it wrongly (and it's not illegal in most cases to do so) and Square goes out of their way to slap away anyone that does. It comes off as if the only ones allowed to do anything with their games is Squaresoft, regardless of what you wish to do. No one makes a profit off of it at all. Just doing something fan-based isn't "infringing", and keep in mind that a C&D is a request, not a legal notification. The legality comes into play only if they decide to pursue.
Hell, I'll touch an even closer subject...music remixing could be seen as the same thing. You're taking something that was created by someone else and making your own interpretation of it. Granted, while rights already exist protecting that practice, it'd be as if Squaresoft shot artists here on OCRemix C&Ds for infringing on the rights of their music they own.