Square Enix acknowledges Expedition 33 success as inspiration for next Final Fantasy as turn-based is still beloved by gamers
Square Enix acknowledges Expedition 33 success as inspiration for next Final Fantasy as turn-based is still beloved by gamers
Pleaaaaase make 8 and 9 remakes that remain FAITHFUL to the originals!!! I loved them because they were turning based.
I don't care about down votes: ff7 remake sucks.
Why not both?
I've been pretty impressed with the Oblivion Remastered of putting a brand new skin on old tech. I want to play FF8
And honestly, I like FF7 remake. It was a love letter to PS1 fans.
You mean 4 and 6
as if Baldur's Gate 3 wasn't any indication..
Sure but that’s a crpg whereas Clair is a jrpg (well more of a hybrid but mostly jrpg). FF historically leans towards Clair over baldurs gate
I'd love to see another more standard turn based FF, but people also have to realize that the last pure turn based game was X in 2001. FF changing shit with every game is what FF does.
Final Fantasy X was also the first pure turn-based game in the mainline series since 1990.
I keep hearing people cite Final Fantasy nostalgia with Expedition 33, but pure turn-based combat with realistic graphics happened exactly once in all of Final Fantasy. I don't get it. Pure turn-based is much more of a thing in the rest of the genre, including SQEX's other properties.
XIII and XIII-2 were both standard turn based. It just had stacked ATB gauges. But it was still standard menu battling.
I'd argue XII was turn based too, it just let you move while the ATB gauge filled.
Final Fantasy Dimensions and World of Final Fantasy exist too. But people forget those.
12 was turn based. But bad. Those were bad changes. FF somehow started going in the wrong direction with that game.
12 is remembered more fondly than maybe it deserves. The Gambit system was interesting though.
This won't affect FF 17, but it could mean for a return to turn based with FF 18. Because FF 17 is probably already half way through development and these massive games are too large to make such a major change this late in the dev cycle
The writing was already on the wall following the massive successes of Persona 5 and Honkai Star Rail. Expedition 33 had its moment in the zeitgeist, but at this time it's not clear it will be the massive revenue generator those games are. And that's the goal for mainline FF.
That said, SQEX has been very internally-driven for a while now, and their major teams get more excited about developing games with action elements. I'd be very surprised if FF17 returned to turn-based for that reason alone.
Maybe SE should set aside a smaller team to make FF games that are turn based? Just the zealots and the necessary people. Sure it would splinter the company essentially, but I'd rather them be splintered and still make games that I want to play, then be cohesive and be all animations and bad.
Personally, due to the roots of FF, I think the core team should be turn-based, and the spin-off titles can be non-turn-based.
Edit: (Fuck. What am I even arguing against... I don't even give a shit if they're turn-based or not, I just want them to be fun again and not shitty.)
Or a FFX remake
They could pull a Dragon Age: The Veilguard and change directions 6 times during development.
Ff16 combat is fun as hell. And FF7 remake/rebirth too. I'm sure I still would have enjoyed both games if they were turn based, as I enjoyed the original FF7 and FF8 back in the day, but I really don't get the hate for the realtime combat. It's tight and polished and fun.
I don't think anybody hates real-time combat. That feels like a strawman.
I think when it comes down to it though, there are huge demographics in the gaming community that are underserved and craving something that the industry has turned its back on because of loud people hating on turn-based combat.
Expedition 33's success is simply a validation to the gamers left waiting, and to the developers that indicates that not all gamers hate turn-based combat, and maybe it isn't an age thing.
In a different perspective, though, I hate the executives and studios who rely on others to lead, and I see it as spineless. If you were a developer afraid to make what you thought was fun because you thought you couldn't maximize your sales around a combat system (cough cough square enix cough), you're chicken shit.
I don't think anybody hates real-time combat. That feels like a strawman.
I do, but just because I have a disability that makes more button presses painful and turn-based tends to have fewer per hour. I also know others who dislike real-time because they're bad at it. I agree with your sentiment completely, though. Liking real-time isn't exclusive of also enjoying turn-based.
When all the decisions have to come rapid-pace, I don’t feel like I’m doing anything notable. It feels like mashing out light or strong attacks and maybe some block/dodges.
I’ll admit that there have been some action JRPGs where I just didn’t understand how the mechanics worked together, even after some explanations, because I had to play it out so quickly in combat. Those games ended up having low difficulty so that people that “weren’t getting it” could still see the story.
I’m still okay at Soulslike games where there’s not quite as many meters and illogical systems. And of course I’m okay with turn-based games having those weird systems because I can process things slowly until I get it, and am taking my turns at full speed.
FF16 was a very long CFI movie with interactive cytscenes.
Baldur‘s Gate 3, too, and the free turn-based updates for PoE.
Eh.... It's not the combat in Expedition that keeps me playing. Even with the time-based perfect hits, dodges, and parries it's not as fun as actively being in control during real-time combat.
But the story, characters, and music are incredible.
I love the combat! There's nothing more satisfying than learning an enemy's moves perfectly and then getting that juicy 20% experience boost for whacking them without taking a hit. The balance is a bit off sometimes, but when it's on, it's amazing. I finished a long, difficult fight last night with my last character being the only one standing. It was such a cool moment.
Enemies with huge, super-slow wind ups to their attacks can take a hike, though. If I can accidentally parry four-five times in the time it takes you to wind up your attack, just maybe my character should be preemptively counter attacking, y'know.
I genuinely enjoyed the Kingdom Hearts action-adventure with a couple of celebrity minions supporting your Dark Souls-style main character and the occasional Big Summons to drop a global special effect. I don't think its bad on its face.
But they've invested so much time and energy into making Live Action work as a system that everything from the story to the game mechanics have suffered. Like, if you want to make a FromSoft game, then go over to FromSoft and do a business partnership to make Eldin Fantasy: The Soulslike Crystal Saga. You don't need to keep tinkering with this engine that clearly doesn't work.
Also, the FF7Remakes seem to have found a sweet spot. Why can't the mainline games deliver this level of quality?
Also, also, also why have you abandoned ChronoTrigger? Twelve different DragonQuest titles but you gave up on Chrono in the mid-90s? You monsters.
If anyone wants/needs a turn-based Fantasy/Strategy/RPG game in their life, take a look at Age of Wonders.
Ironically, the turn based combat in Final Fantasy is the biggest reason I don't play it. I find that the combat feels too repetitive, because its always the same animations, same music, same background per area, etc. Also, the random battle encounter mechanic annoys me when I just want to explore and I have to fight an entire army just to move from one side of an area to the other side.
I've loved most of the Final Fantasy games. But the PS1 games (the golden era) were the worst about this.
Pre-PS1 typically required more thought. You had to balance magic use, item use, and of course melee. But even then you had to debate whether to spend a turn reviving your healer or try to get the victory before a team wipe.
Post PS1 you had X's rock paper scissors battle. You had to figure out who could attack who. It wasn't too complicated but it forced variety.
XII streamlined the auto attacking and allowed you to focus on the exceptions (enemy weak against fire, use silence, cure). That could be automated too, but I liked to handle that myself.
XIII & XIII-2 forced you to balance your jobs/classes constantly in battle.
Lightning Returna, XV, and XVI were real time.
Tactics was PS1, but it definitely required more than just attack.
The PS1 games, for the most part, could be dominated with "press X". Most of the strategy took place outside of battle.
I played FFX for like, 20 hours give or take. The combat wasn't so obnoxious in that games like previous ones. But then I got to the Seymour Wedding part, what I can only describe as "the part where you must defeat all these enemies in order with no save points in between and if you werent prepared with 30 billion healing items and Lulu (the GOAT) gets killed, your game is basically softlocked" part. Beat that (thank you savestate scumming) and was already not having fun but that cutscene at the end of that part was frustrating to me. It felt like every character was acting extremely out of character, except maybe Seymour, and it was at that point that I decided I wasn't having fun anymore and didn't really care enough to try to potentially suffer more of that.
I really tried to like Final Fantasy. I want to like it. I just don't like that kind of gameplay experience.
But I do enjoy FF Tactics.
I haven’t played this yet but I need to.
God wonder what dragon quest 12 is going to be like, I loved 11 so much.
I'd love to see a remaster of 8 in 11's engine, personally.
I mean the tactics and 9 remake are still coming.
Tactics is getting more of a remaster than a remake. It's also missing a bunch of content that was added in the PSP version. Honestly I don't think it will sell terribly well.
No it doesn't. Assuming the translation is accurate, they said they still like turn-based games and will continue making turn-based games. Octopath Traveler and Bravely Default would fit here, especially in reference to their desire to make more "mid tier" games when asked about Clair Obscur. "For Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest" does not appear in the translated text as context to making more turn-based games, though I don't think Dragon Quest has been real-time to date? Hey, maybe I'm wildly off base here, but it appears to me like the author of this article added what they wanted the tweet to say rather than what it actually says.
Yeah that's how I understand it, too. They'll do turn-based, but probably not in their "biggest" outings as they know action-based tends to (usually) sell better.
To be fair to the investor, who was probably asking the questions more as a fanboy...do they usually sell better? There are more variables here, like platform exclusivity, to blame for poor sales in Square Enix's recent efforts, but when games like Baldur's Gate 3, Persona, Metaphor: ReFantazio, and Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 are outselling Square Enix's real-time games, I don't think we can say turn-based sells worse in such a blanket way.