Squeenix Is Final Fantasy XVI Going to Suck?

[ptolemy]

Personally I'm feeling the return to a classic fantasy setting, not sure what to make of the battle system though with the DMC guy in charge. Is it an ARPG or just straight up action?

 

[Falksi]

It looks fucking dire. Like a Final Fantasy fan created their first ever mod for The Witcher 3

All the ingredients of both, blended & baked with the precision & measurement skills of a blind retard with no thumbs.

 

[taxalot]

It's going to be okay, which everyone will agree that it is an improvement, but not enough in front of the competition.

 

[Deleted member 7219]

If they are basing the combat on DMC, it's going to be absolutely horrible.

Why can't they go back to turn-based?

 

[Funposter]

the best thing about action games is usually that you can beat them in 5 hours, so I don't know why you'd want to play one that lasts 50.

 

[downwardspiral]

I never expect battle too much from a FF game. I just hope the enemy won't be as bullet sponge as other action games.
So If it has more photo realistic picture of medieval cuisine than FFXV. I will play it as a traveling game.
At least the women are womanly and the men seems to be capable.
Still a better movie games than many AAA movie RPGs.

 

[Gastrick]

Could be an action game, where they try to pass off the skill trees as rpg mechanics.

If they are basing the combat on DMC, it's going to be absolutely horrible.

Why can't they go back to turn-based?

They did go back a few years ago with FF-inspired octopath traveller.

 

[Lincolnberry]

Maybe I'm allowing my optimism to veer in to naivete, but I'm at least curious to see what they do. There hasn't been a good FF since 12 (arguably 10 if you only count finished products, or 9, or 6 depending on how much of a curmudgeon you are), and I think Square has slowly and painfully learned who to place their trust and money in (Yoshi P), and who to push in to a group to keep the keys away from (Nomura) to at least have a chance at a good finished product.

I realize people were disappointed by the trailer graphics (meh - especially since that is comparatively easy to clean up) and maybe the combat departing from traditional - but I think it will be at least "ok" - and that will already be the best product they've made in almost 20 years.

 

[ADULF HITLOR FAN KLUB]

It is going to be a decent game and sell like hotcakes, because it isn't turn-based.

 

[Delterius]

an account with 2 posts makes a thread advertising a youtube video

nice

 

[Hobo Elf]

Could be an action game, where they try to pass off the skill trees as rpg mechanics.

If they are basing the combat on DMC, it's going to be absolutely horrible.

Why can't they go back to turn-based?

They did go back a few years ago with FF-inspired octopath traveller.

And the western release of Scarlet Grace

 

[Gastrick]

And the western release of Scarlet Grace

Didn't hear about this game, it looks even better than Octopath.

It is going to be a decent game and sell like hotcakes, because it isn't turn-based.

 

[Duraframe300]

Considering the team behind it, it very much should be the best FF in years.

But we've been there before, so who knows?

Edit: That video is p. shit btw.

 

[Hobo Elf]

And the western release of Scarlet Grace

Didn't hear about this game, it looks even better than Octopath.

Check it out, along with the Romancing Saga 2 & 3 rereleases (don't let these being SNES games fool you in the least, they were so way ahead of their time in terms of mechanics and gameplay that they still feel fresh and exciting). There's a Saga thread here so you might wanna peek inside there for more info if you're not familiar with Square's excellent Saga series. They're all TB. True TB, not ATB/RTwP combat.

 

[JDR13]

It can't be worse than FF XV and certainly not as bad as FF XIII.

 

[Gastrick]

Check it out, along with the Romancing Saga 2 & 3 rereleases (don't let these being SNES games fool you in the least, they were so way ahead of their time in terms of mechanics and gameplay that they still feel fresh and exciting). There's a Saga thread here so you might wanna peek inside there for more info if you're not familiar with Square's excellent Saga series. They're all TB. True TB, not ATB/RTwP combat.

I played an hour into Romancing Saga 1 and wasn't feeling it, but I'll check out the second one. Good to hear they don't have ATB, it's always been annoying in square games.

 

[ADULF HITLOR FAN KLUB]

It is going to be a decent game and sell like hotcakes, because it isn't turn-based.

I see you are very upset that Squeenix completely dropped turn-based combat for Final Fantasy, because action RPGs are more popular and sell substantially better.

Final Fantasy 7 Remake has real-time action with pause combat and sold 5 million copies in three months (3.5 million within the first three days), so they obviously aren't going to change anything.

 

[Gastrick]

I see you are very upset that Squeenix completely dropped turn-based combat for Final Fantasy, because action RPGs are more popular and sell substantially better.

Final Fantasy 7 Remake has real-time action with pause combat and sold 5 million copies in three months (3.5 million within the first three days), so they obviously aren't going to change anything.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_game_franchises
What sub-genre is that at number #3?

 

[ADULF HITLOR FAN KLUB]

Feel free to call up Squeenix and scream into the phone that Final Fantasy should be turned into a turn-based Pokemon clone.

 

[Gastrick]

Feel free to call up Squeenix and scream into the phone that Final Fantasy should be turned into a turn-based Pokemon clone.

Just keep up your bullshitting. I enjoy ARPGs as well, they just aren't as capable of reaching the heights combat-wise that turn based games can. Gothic fanboys seem to get butthurt easily.

 

[ADULF HITLOR FAN KLUB]

Feel free to call up Squeenix and scream into the phone that Final Fantasy should be turned into a turn-based Pokemon clone.

Just keep up your bullshitting.

Super Mario is much more popular than Pokemon, so I'd actually recommend you call up Squeenix and scream at them until they turn Final Fantasy into a Super Mario clone.

 

[DJOGamer PT]

Seeing some credits, apparently the Capcom guy they've hired - Ryota Suzuki - has been a combat designer for Capcom since the '99 JoJo fighting game.
Dragon's Dogma, Mosnter Hunter World and DMC5 being the biggest titles he worked on.
In the latter he seemed to have been one of the main designers for V's combat - I would say this was one of the biggest reasons Squeenix hired him since looking at this game's premise controlling summoned monsters will be an important part of the game.

Overall this might be the best FF, at least gameplay-wise, ever since Squeenix decided to make the series ARPG's.

I enjoy ARPGs as well, they just aren't as capable of reaching the heights combat-wise that turn based games can.

When it comes to control multiple PC's sure, turned-based will always be better. If the game is about controlling only 1 PC then action combat blows turn-based the fuck out

 

[downwardspiral]

Seeing some credits, apparently the Capcom guy they've hired - Ryota Suzuki - has been a combat designer for Capcom since the '99 JoJo fighting game.
Dragon's Dogma, Mosnter Hunter World and DMC5 being the biggest titles he worked on.
In the latter he seemed to have been one of the main designers for V's combat - I would say this was one of the biggest reasons Squeenix hired him since looking at this game's premise controlling summoned monsters will be an important part of the game.

Overall this might be the best FF, at least gameplay-wise, ever since Squeenix decided to make the series ARPG's.

I enjoy ARPGs as well, they just aren't as capable of reaching the heights combat-wise that turn based games can.

When it comes to control multiple PC's sure, turned-based will always be better. If the game is about controlling only 1 PC then action combat blows turn-based the fuck out

My problem with ARPGs is that the concept of dodge related stat become ambiguous and less abstract.
Sometimes it is harder to picture what exactly my character is good or bad at when I can control them to dodge the attack due to action gameplay.
Or sometimes the speedy character has too much edge over the less speedy character due to player can manually dodge all the attacks.
Also the lack of abstraction, because actions in turn based RPG usually can be seen as abstract concept. Sometimes I view HP in JRPG as statistic luck point where a NPC can statistically absorbed/dodge/last that many attack before the fatal one actually hit him.
But in ARPG it is harder for me to think in this abstract way. Every bullet that hit an enemy is an actual steel puncture the body, then sometimes those bullet sponge nature of enemy take away my immersion.
So even for one PC, I still prefer less action orientated system for my RPGs, unless that action RPG remove all the abstraction.
No hitpoint, no attack speed but go full physics simulation of steel and fresh where a hit to arm actually cut and disable the arm.
The blood lose and tissue damage eventually cause the character to go down but not the abstract concept of hit point.

 

[DJOGamer PT]

concept of dodge related stat become ambiguous

There doesn't need to be a dodge stat in ARPG's.
Dodging is an action, therefore there's no abstraction to how it's performed.
The player simply makes an input and that's it.
There can be (and there is) however abstraction the Dodge's properties.

it is harder to picture what exactly my character is good or bad at when I can control them

No it isn't.
The Stats, Skills and Perks tell you exactly what actions and disciplines your PC is proficient with.

Now of course, because of the nature of ARPG's, there can exist an inconsistensy resulting of the fact that the PC, supposedly, in the game world is an expert of X art, but performs badly at it since the player's actual skill with those mechanics suck

Or sometimes the speedy character has too much edge over the less speedy character due to player can manually dodge all the attacks.

That's a problem with the game's balancing and/or mechanical design, not the fact it's gameplay is Action oriented

Also the lack of abstraction

It does have abstraction, after all it's still an RPG
The only thing that isn't abstract in ARPG's is the actions that the characters can perform
Now the range of possible actions, their properties and the properties of everything else (characters, weapons, enemies, etc...) are abstracted

That's what separates an ARPG from being just an Action game
In a ARPG the abstractions are of equal (if not greater) importance to the actions, as the former is what the rules the latter. The player has to engage with the former if he wants to progress the game
In Action games the tune is played in reverse and the actions are clearly much more important than the abstractions. Has such the player can very well complete the game without investing in any of the abstractions.

But in ARPG it is harder for me to think in this abstract way.

That's already your problem with immersion
Literally every action game has a degree of abstraction and, most importantly, exageration of reality - obviously simulators need not apply
Yet you barely see anyone complain how retarded it is for Max to just chug down a painkiller bottle and suddenly that 9mm that lodged itself in his lung no longer impairs his breathing

unless that action RPG remove all the abstraction.

If there's no abstraction whatsoever then it's no longer a RPG

 

[downwardspiral]

concept of dodge related stat become ambiguous

There doesn't need to be a dodge stat in ARPG's.
Dodging is an action, therefore there's no abstraction to how it's performed.
The player simply makes an inputs and that's it.
There can be however abstraction the Dodge's properties.

it is harder to picture what exactly my character is good or bad at when I can control them

No it isn't.
The Stats, Skills and Perks tell you exactly what actions and disciplines your PC is proficient with.

Or sometimes the speedy character has too much edge over the less speedy character due to player can manually dodge all the attacks.

That's a problem with the game's balancing and/or mechanical design, not the fact it's gameplay is Action oriented

Also the lack of abstraction

It does have abstraction, after all it's still an RPG
The only thing that isn't abstract in ARPG's is the actions that the characters can perform
Now the range of actions, their properties and the properties of everything else (characters, weapons, enemies, etc...) are abstracted

That's what separates an ARPG form just a Action game.
In a ARPG the abstractions are of equal (if not greater) importance to the actions, as the former is what the rules the latter. The player has to engage with the former if he wants to progress the game.
In Action games the tone goes is played in reverse and the actions are clearly greater than the abstractions. Has such the player can very well complete the game without investing in the abstractions.

But in ARPG it is harder for me to think in this abstract way.

That's already your problem with immersion
Literally every action game has a degree of abstraction and even exageration of reality - obviously simulators need not apply
Yet you barely see anyone complain how retarded it is for Max to just chug down a painkiller bottle and suddenly that 9mm that lodged itself in his lung no longer prevents from breathing

unless that action RPG remove all the abstraction.

If there's no abstraction whatsoever then it's no longer a RPG

I should worded it better, what I mean to say is the abstraction scale or area.
Like in wargames, lower level of units is usually been abstracted.
In personal combat situation, this high vs low can be harder to define.
To me, most action RPG is to the point that I wish the combat can be more detailed and the combat resolution can be higher because it is already getting more resolved in many area.
But often they don't actually have more detail due to the game need to have simpler information and they usually take in game concept from action games (dodge frame, no stun and such).
I don't know it is rather hard for me to explain but I felt like playing a wargame where I can actually move my piece to dodge attack in a simple mini game, it just felt out of place.
I do like action games, but the higher resolution in terms of control and space/time contrast to not much improvement in details just rub the immersion out of my brain.
Of course this is different from person to person, Just to say that to me even one PC RPG, I still prefer less action element.