Support NeoGAF

[Dark_castle]

I'm a big fan of Namura... and I was so happy when I saw his name in the trailer as the director.

But now, I wish if Kitase reclaimed his director's role because I'm afraid that Namura is going to change the game too much from the original one we all loved and adored :

I'm really worried now

It sounds like Kitase actually has a lot of input into making this remake though, that even nomura didn't expect himself listed as director.

 

[SkylineRKR]

Your idea to update one of the easiest, most straightforward, and repetitive battle systems is to add visual flair? And that is "modernized"? Do you work for Ubisoft or something?

The original game is brain dead easy, there is no strategy. There are less than 10 battles in a 60 hour game that requires thinking (and some of them are optional). This is not enough to warrant an ATB/Turn-based system, a system that relies completely on strategies and customization to be fun. But hey, at least you are the one ordering everyone to do nothing but attack instead of the AI, right?

The problem with the original is not that it has an ATB battle system, the problem is that the game is not fun to play. It takes dozens of hours to find any challenge, they are rare, few and far between, and not worth the slog that all the other battles are.
Random battles don't need to be hard, but they should require more than attacking nonstop.
Bosses should require a deeper strategy than "don't attack when it's tail is up".
Customization in that game is great, yet all it does is leave you overpowered for the endgame (that is also easy).

I love FFVII and wouldn't mind either battle system, but if they are going to keep the game as easy as the original, then at least make it action so it's more fun to mash...

Even during my first playthrough I probably ignored 75% of the materias. I used them to see what they were like. Summons were strong in the early game, they did more damage than your attacks but later on they were simply weaker than a normal attack. KOTR was stronger but took ages. Could as well strike a few times during that time. Non optional bosses HP was nothing to write home about anyway.

The likes of double cut and counter were just overkill, they weren't needed at all.

 

[Shadow_FFVI]

The point of ATB is that it's simple and easy to get into for a general audience. That was the point of menu based combat in the first place.

There are a billion ways you can make ATB more tactical, balanced and interesting without throwing out the entire system.

Yes. Materia has to matter, equipment and accesories have to matter. All while being able to control all of your characters, and selecting each move.

 

[Arkeband]

Your idea to update one of the easiest, most straightforward, and repetitive battle systems is to add visual flair? And that is "modernized"? Do you work for Ubisoft or something?

First of all tone down the hostility.
Second of all if you read my post, adding "visual flare" is the opposite of:

if they're going to spice up the ATB, X-2's added some things that legitimately worked - ATB bars with variable lengths and chain bonuses. With this, bosses would also be more dynamic since they could execute attacks while your members are carrying out commands.

Do you not understand how fundamentally that changes the flow of combat and the mechanics involved? The difference between FF7's combat and FFX-2's is evolutionary, not aesthetic.

The problem with the original is not that it has an ATB battle system, the problem is that the game is not fun to play. It takes dozens of hours to find any challenge, they are rare, few and far between, and not worth the slog that all the other battles are.
Random battles don't need to be hard, but they should require more than attacking nonstop.
Bosses should require a deeper strategy than "don't attack when it's tail is up".
Customization in that game is great, yet all it does is leave you overpowered for the endgame (that is also easy).

All of these things are made more complex and add potential layers of strategy if they follow FFX-2's lead.

In FF7, combat flows this way - You attack - WAIT- They counterattack -> They attack - WAIT - You counterattack.
FFX-2 does away with the WAIT. You suddenly now need to time attacks to avoid animation patterns that signify raised defenses, etc. Being able to fire off attacks from your whole party at the same time isn't just 'modernization' it's a complete and total revamp.

 

[ShadowSoldier89]

FF7 was a LONG time ago, man. Copies sold is irrelevant when a lot of those people have likely grown out of gaming already. It's about what demographics are still interested in playing videogames, and what demographic Square Enix thinks is still worth marketing towards.

Let's give ourselves a hint - Square Enix makes more games nowadays like Kingdom Hearts than FF7.

Ive had 3 different people tell me they are looking into getting a PS4 to relive FF7. None of these people play games anymore. These people would all change their mind if it was an action RPG

Small sample size, I know, but there is also this
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/168653-final-fantasy-vii-remake/72027538
70% with a 500 sample size requesting turn based of some sort 83% if you also include people who wouldnt mind a psuedo classic turn based (eternal sonata given as an example)

 

[threelights]

First of all tone down the hostility.
Second of all if you read my post, adding "visual flare" is the opposite of:

Do you not understand how fundamentally that changes the flow of combat and the mechanics involved? The difference between FF7's combat and FFX-2's is evolutionary, not aesthetic.

All of these things are made more complex and add potential layers of strategy if they follow FFX-2's lead.

In FF7, combat flows this way - You attack - WAIT- They counterattack -> They attack - WAIT - You counterattack.
FFX-2 does away with the WAIT. You suddenly now need to time attacks to avoid animation patterns that signify raised defenses, etc. Being able to fire off attacks from your whole party at the same time isn't just 'modernization' it's a complete and total revamp.

I'm not being hostile as much as I'm baffled by your choice of "modernization".

FFX-2 was fun because it actually required more actions than FFVII, it was harder and faster. It doesn't reach SMT levels of difficulty, but it's not any less fun to play.

You don't even need to add more stuff on FFVII. If they do, that's fine, but it will mean nothing if the game continues with the same mind-numbing difficulty. The original game had enough pre-battle elements and enough in-battle mechanics to make plenty of interesting encounters, yet they made such a negligible amount of them...

 

[Fdkn]

You are the one saying that you only died once in the whole FFXIII including optional bosses (anyone who has played that game knows this isn't true) but also claim that FFVII, one of the most straight-forward and easy games on the genre, requires strategy

the contradiction is strong.

 

[KTallguy]

The game doesn't need to be bone hard. It does need to have interesting player choice. It needs to frame that player choice well. But it doesn't need to be Dark Souls.

It can achieve interesting player choice in the ATB context.

 

[Steel]

You are the one saying that you only died once in the whole FFXIII including optional bosses (anyone who has played that game knows this isn't true) but also claim that FFVII, one of the most straight-forward and easy games on the genre, requires strategy

the contradiction is strong.

They're both pretty damn easy. Neither battle system is that deep.

 

[Karkador]

Ive had 3 different people tell me they are looking into getting a PS4 to relive FF7. None of these people play games anymore. These people would all change their mind if it was an action RPG

Small sample size, I know, but there is also this
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/168653-final-fantasy-vii-remake/72027538
70% with a 500 sample size requesting turn based of some sort 83% if you also include people who wouldnt mind a psuedo classic turn based (eternal sonata given as an example)

Is it fair to say that people who visit and post on GameFAQs aren't representative of the whole gaming audience?

 

[threelights]

The game doesn't need to be bone hard. It does need to have interesting player choice. It needs to frame that player choice well. But it doesn't need to be Dark Souls.

It can achieve interesting player choice in the ATB context.

The game doesn't need to be in either end of the spectrum. The problem is that FFVII is so far on the easy side, that it needs to be harder. Much harder, to even reach a normal difficulty. That doesn't imply becoming Dark Souls...

 

[Fdkn]

They're both pretty damn easy. Neither battle system is that deep.

there is no such thing as a hard Final Fantasy, but only one of those two requires you to watch the screen while you play. That's all I'm saying

 

[ShadowSoldier89]

Is it fair to say that people who visit and post on GameFAQs aren't representative of the whole gaming audience?

Id say its representative of a large sample size and shows more evidence than "gamers dont want turn based anymore" hearsay

 

[Digital-Hero]

there is no such thing as a hard Final Fantasy, but only one of those two requires you to watch the screen while you play. That's all I'm saying

I doubt that. At least I doubt how you worded this in your post.

Did you play FF IV Hard Type?

 

[Karkador]

Id say its representative of a large sample size and shows more evidence than "gamers dont want turn based anymore" hearsay

All it says is that people who visit a website as old as FF7 prefer the old FF7 gameplay

 

[ShadowSoldier89]

All it says is that people who visit a website as old as FF7 prefer the old FF7 gameplay

its evidence that people feel that way, please provide evidence saying that a larger amount of people would prefer that it was an ARPG

 

[Fdkn]

I doubt that. At least I doubt how you worded this in your post.

Did you play FF IV Hard Type?

Yeah well I should have clarified that I'm not taking into consideration 24 years old japanese exclusive versions of the games.

And it wasn't called Hard Type fwiw.

NES games were also harsher but that was because of ancient design more than proper difficulty

 

[Karkador]

its evidence that people feel that way, please provide evidence saying that a larger amount of people would prefer that it was an ARPG

I already said that it's apparent by looking at the catalog of Final Fantasy games Square has made in the past decade (and continues to make)

 

[KTallguy]

If I was working on the game, I'd make sure that the people who played PS1 era FF7 could get through the game, but allow more advanced players to seek out difficulty if they choose. Not make the game much, much harder.

The game can be less mindless, but ask you to make more choices. Persona 4 is a great example of a game that isn't very hard on normal difficulty.

 

[Aceshighhhh]

To quote the man himself again:

But the original is out again: The "HD" PC version is coming to PS4 already. We don't need two of the same thing. Even if we beautified and upgraded the visuals -- something that's bound to happen. If it's a full remake, then of course, we want to take a different approach. If we actually just upgraded the visuals -- there'd be no need for me to direct it.

 

[Digital-Hero]

Yeah well I should have clarified that I'm not taking into consideration 24 years old japanese exclusive versions of the games.

And it wasn't called Hard Type fwiw.

NES games were also harsher but that was because of ancient design more than proper difficulty

Final Fantasy IV for PS1 WAS the hard version of FFIV. Exclusive? Not quite.

 

[muteki]

I already said that it's apparent by looking at the catalog of Final Fantasy games Square has made in the past decade (and continues to make)

I'd speculate if anything Square's catalog of FF games over the past decade shows they have no idea what people want.

 

[ShadowSoldier89]

I already said that it's apparent by looking at the catalog of Final Fantasy games Square has made in the past decade

square's catalog says nothing. This provides 0 insight on what gamers actually want, just what 1 company thinks they want. Square also has not been releasing very many games in the last decade that are major sellers. Eidos has been carrying that load

Bravely Default sold 1million
Kingdom Hearts Dream Drop Distance: 600k

 

[Skilletor]

I already said that it's apparent by looking at the catalog of Final Fantasy games Square has made in the past decade (and continues to make)

You think it's evident that people WANT action oriented stuff based on what SE has made the past 10 years?

 

[Fdkn]

Final Fantasy IV for PS1 WAS the hard version of FFIV. Exclusive? Not quite.

It was? then I've played it thinking it was the same as the SNES. Not that hard tbh, except the grindy final dungeon.

Now we can stop the ot. FFs have been very easy since VI. They don't even give us the option for hard modes.

 

[Two Words]

See, the problem I have with people poo-pooing the remake being turn based is they are holding it to a 1997 standard. They're limiting their imagination to what a 1997 RPG played like. That would be like poo-pooing an action RPG according to what action RPGs were like in 1997.

 

[Steel]

there is no such thing as a hard Final Fantasy, but only one of those two requires you to watch the screen while you play. That's all I'm saying

So you're saying that it's better to be forced to look at a screen while playing with a dull battle system like XIII's? Yeah.... I disagree. Turn-based is just as capable of being hard as action RPGs, and both can be fun. Of course, Final Fantasy doesn't do that for either set of mechanics.

 

[Darksol]

Haha, Amazon just emailed me with an update to my order:

"Final Fantasy 7 Remake - PlayStation 4"
Estimated arrival date: January 09, 2017 - January 16, 2017”

Even for a placeholder, that's pretty bad
　

 

[Skilletor]

See, the problem I have with people poo-pooing the remake being turn based is they are holding it to a 1997 standard. They're limiting their imagination to what a 1997 RPG played like. That would be like poo-pooing an action RPG according to what action RPGs were like in 1997.

Well, even for 1997, FF7 was pretty standard. Materia made the system interesting, but withouth that, it's nothing FF hadn't done before. Grandia is almost as old. Breath of Fire 4 is turn based and does awesome things with it.

Battle Systems in FF aren't the best in the genre. Never have been, imo. Tons of ways they could go with this to make ATB more interesting.

 

[Koozek]

Haha, Amazon just emailed me with an update to my order:

"Final Fantasy 7 Remake - PlayStation 4"
Estimated arrival date: January 09, 2017 - January 16, 2017”

Even for a placeholder, that's pretty bad
　

January 31, 2017, would be the 20th anniversary, by the way.

EDIT: OT, but:
How do you say it correctly in English: 31st (of?) January 2017 or January 31 2017? Dates are honestly one of my only big issues with the English language

 

[Karkador]

I'd speculate if anything Square's catalog of FF games over the past decade shows they have no idea what people want.

It's been fairly consistent, at least.

square's catalog says nothing. This provides 0 insight on what gamers actually want, just what 1 company thinks they want. Square also has not been releasing very many games in the last decade that are major sellers. Eidos has been carrying that load

Bravely Default sold 1million
Kingdom Hearts Dream Drop Distance: 600k

The HD port of KH1 on PS3 sold more than Bravely Default (and FFX/X-2 HD)
So did FF13.
So did Crisis Core.
So did Dissidia.

 

[MogCakes]

If they somehow miraculously hit the Jan 31st anniversary I will be doing backflips. Impossible.

With this, bosses would also be more dynamic since they could execute attacks while your members are carrying out commands.

That would be nice. Put in a stun/interrupt mechanic too so that timing becomes a factor instead of just executing actions as soon as the bar fills. Bosses can interrupt your attacks/skills, and vice versa.

 

[ShadowSoldier89]

It's been fairly consistent, at least.



The HD port of KH1 on PS3 sold more than Bravely Default (and FFX/X-2 HD)
So did FF13.
So did Crisis Core.
So did Dissidia.

I compared an Action RPG to a turn based RPG on the same console

But lets look at your list
Crisis Core: 3.1mil
Final Fantasy XIII: 6.9mil
Dissidia: ~1.3mil
Kingdom Hearts HD: ~1.5Mil

oh, the turn based game sold the most there too.

 

[Meccanical]

FFXIII is not turn based.

No FF game past III is turn based.

Why do we keep using this term?

 

[Pagusas]

January 31, 2017, would be the 20th anniversary, by the way.

EDIT: OT, but:
How do you say it correctly in English: 31st (of?) January 2017 or January 31 2017? Dates are honestly one of my only big issues with the English language

you say it "January thirty first, twenty fifteen"

 

[ShadowSoldier89]

FFXIII is not turn based.

No FF game past III is turn based.

Why do we keep using this term?

bar fills up, that character can take their turn

turn based doesnt have to mean you have a set order of character turns. ATB is still turn based, it just differs in how your turn comes up

 

[Hubbl3]

there is no such thing as a hard Final Fantasy, but only one of those two requires you to watch the screen while you play. That's all I'm saying

 

[KTallguy]

FFXIII is not turn based.

No FF game past III is turn based.

Why do we keep using this term?

FFX?

 

[Meccanical]

FFX?

I forgot that game exists.

 

[SniperHunter]

what an amazing announcement! Really excited about this remake! I hope its full 3D like Final Fantasy XV and retains the awesome atmosphere.

this is going to be really hard to pull of though!

 

[Karkador]

I compared an Action RPG to a turn based RPG on the same console

But lets look at your list
Crisis Core: 3.1mil
Final Fantasy XIII: 6.9mil
Dissidia: ~1.3mil
Kingdom Hearts HD: ~1.5Mil

oh, the turn based game sold the most there too.

It's a stretch to say the "turn-based" combat in FF13 is comparable to FF7. You're ignoring how many "classic FF fans" didn't like that game because the battles were so different. It didn't stop Square from moving ahead with more active, action-heavy games.

 

[Zukuu]

You are the one saying that you only died once in the whole FFXIII including optional bosses (anyone who has played that game knows this isn't true) but also claim that FFVII, one of the most straight-forward and easy games on the genre, requires strategy

the contradiction is strong.

Dude, what are you even talking about? Managing MATERIA and picking your spells, summons etc alone is called "STRATEGY".

 

[The Jason]

Your idea to update one of the easiest, most straightforward, and repetitive battle systems is to add visual flair? And that is "modernized"? Do you work for Ubisoft or something?

The original game is brain dead easy, there is no strategy. There are less than 10 battles in a 60 hour game that requires thinking (and some of them are optional). This is not enough to warrant an ATB/Turn-based system, a system that relies completely on strategies and customization to be fun. But hey, at least you are the one ordering everyone to do nothing but attack instead of the AI, right?

The problem with the original is not that it has an ATB battle system, the problem is that the game is not fun to play. It takes dozens of hours to find any challenge, they are rare, few and far between, and not worth the slog that all the other battles are.
Random battles don't need to be hard, but they should require more than attacking nonstop.
Bosses should require a deeper strategy than "don't attack when it's tail is up".
Customization in that game is great, yet all it does is leave you overpowered for the endgame (that is also easy).

I love FFVII and wouldn't mind either battle system, but if they are going to keep the game as easy as the original, then at least make it action so it's more fun to mash...

FFVII is designed to be an accessible mainstream RPG, they want it to be easy enough for most players to beat the game. The hardcore players have things like emerald and ruby weapon to challenge them. The remake will not be more difficult.

And I disagree, FFVII is fun to play for me. All they need to do is speed up the combat and add character movement of some sort to satisfy the ADD crowd that wants an action game

 

[threelights]

FFVII is designed to be an accessible mainstream RPG, they want it to be easy enough for most players to beat the game. The hardcore players have things like emerald and ruby weapon to challenge them. The remake will not be more difficult.

And I disagree, FFVII is fun to play for me. All they need to do is speed up the combat and add character movement of some sort to satisfy the ADD crowd that wants an action game

I pretty much addressed everything you said in the post you're quoting...

I'm glad you have fun with the game, but it doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of battles are won by just doing nothing but attacking over and over again. There's a world of difference between an accessible game and a game that poses no challenge whatsoever outside of a small handful of fights.

And no, speeding up fights will not satisfy people that want an action game. ATB and Action are fundamentally different games that have completely different focus.

 

[Makoto Yuki]

The strategy in FFVII, to me at least was setting up the right Materia combinations before battle. While in actual battles it's up to me how I utilize them. Or I can hold down O and Attack/Limit Break my way to victory through most battles.

Nothing about the combat was particularly challenging outside of Super Bosses, KotR trivializes just about any battle. Hell, Cloud with Ultima Weapon, Full Health and 4x Cut Materia will do 39996 damage with one attack. Or using Flash to destroy just about anything in your way. While these are late game Materia, just goes to show you that preparation is half the battle.

On a different topic, I hope there will still be enemies I can morph into Source Items.

 

[ponpo]

Enemy Skill also trivialized a lot.

 

[OmegaDL50]

I pretty much addressed everything you said in the post you're quoting...

I'm glad you have fun with the game, but it doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of battles are won by just doing nothing but attacking over and over again. There's a world of difference between an accessible game and a game that poses no challenge whatsoever outside of a small handful of fights.

And no, speeding up fights will not satisfy people that want an action game. ATB and Action are fundamentally different games that have completely different focus.

The strategy in FFVII, to me at least was setting up the right Materia combinations before battle. While in actual battles it's up to me how I utilize them. Or I can hold down O and Attack/Limit Break my way to victory through most battles.

Nothing about the combat was particularly challenging outside of Super Bosses, KotR trivializes just about any battle. Hell, Cloud with Ultima Weapon, Full Health and 4x Cut Materia will do 39996 damage with one attack. Or using Flash to destroy just about anything in your way. While these are late game Materia, just goes to show you that preparation is half the battle.

On a different topic, I hope there will still be enemies I can morph into Source Items.

As Makoto Yuki says, it was abilities like overpowered limit attacks, Knights of the Round, or even the Ultima Weapon (which does damaged based on how much HP you have), even stacked with 4x Cut are reasons why FF7 was easy.

Retaining all of theses overpowered skills and making the game more action focused isn't going to make the game more challenging if the damage output remains the same.

Regardless you hit the confirm button on your attack on a turned based system, or mindlessly mash A for awesome, what difference would it make. It's the underlying overpowered skills you are given will trivialize the difficulty regardless if the game is menu driven or action driven.

Just the same thing retaining a turned based combat system doesn't mean the challenge is any less diminished. Games like Persona 4 or Dragon Quest VIII prove that you can have challenging combat mechanics that require careful planning and strategy and still retain a turned based system.

FF7:R having an more emphasis on action does not implicate there is more challenge involved.

 

[threelights]

As Makoto Yuki says, it was abilities like overpowered limit attacks, Knights of the Round, or even the Ultima Weapon (which does damaged based on how much HP you have), even stacked with 4x Cut are reasons why FF7 was easy.

Retaining all of theses overpowered skills and making the game more action focused isn't going to make the game more challenging if the damage output remains the same.

Regardless you hit the confirm button on your attack on a turned based system, or mindlessly mash A for awesome, what difference would it make. It's the underlying overpowered skills you are given will trivialize the difficulty regardless if the game is menu driven or action driven.

Just the same thing retaining a turned based combat system doesn't mean the challenge is any less diminished. Games like Persona 4 or Dragon Quest VIII prove that you can have challenging combat mechanics that require careful planning and strategy and still retain a turned based system.

FF7:R having an more emphasis on action does not implicate there is more challenge involved.

I know that having a focus on action won't increase the difficulty. As I said multiple times before, if the difficulty is going to be so easy to the point where the materia customization is pointless outside of the few super bosses, then make the game action to at least give the player more field control and mobility. At least it's more fun actually attacking in an action game than it is to pick the same choice over and over again in an ATB.

And no, it was not the materia that made the game easy. The game is easy by nature and Materia breaks it.

No one said or is implying that you can't have harder ATB/turn-based battles. Of course you can! When done well, they are harder and more satisfying than almost anything an Action game can do. FFVII is not on that list, it does not do it well, and THAT'S the problem. And if they're not addressing the problem (which I doubt they will), then change the system to something at least fun.

 

[brotkasten]

I hope they can at least explain the outlines of the battle system soon. This announcement was my personal Shenmue 3 moment, but if they turn the battle system into an Action RPG, I'm completely out. It's exactly the reason why I don't care about Kingdom Hearts or XV. I'd be absolutely fine with other changes to the story or even cutting some of the side content. But I want it to be turn/command/menu/whatever based and I want control over my entire party. I look at Persona 4 and think "it still works to this day" and I hope the team can see it as well.

 

[Steel]

I know that having a focus on action won't increase the difficulty. As I said multiple times before, if the difficulty is going to be so easy to the point where the materia customization is pointless outside of the few super bosses, then make the game action to at least give the player more field control and mobility. At least it's more fun actually attacking in an action game than it is to pick the same choice over and over again in an ATB.
.

It's more fun controlling your whole party simultaneously than hack n' slashing to victory, imo. I mean, if press A to win action combat was popular, Musou games and Dragon Age 2 would be at the top of the charts.