Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

[Feba]

Re: Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

How can any adult?

In the case of Zelda, the entire point is that the protagonist is young. It was originally inspired by the creator's adventures as a kid-- that's what he was trying to get into the game.

If you can't be nostalgic at least about your childhood, I feel sorry for you. You don't have to be all "hey, the main character is being pressured by his parents! I'm pressured by my parents! STUPID ADULTS" in order to identify yourself with a child protagonist anymore than you need to be black in order to play a game with a black lead or female to play a game with a female lead. Honestly, not playing Pokemon because the lead characters are kids is as stupid as not playing Metroid because the lead character is a female.

[Armando]

Re: Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

That's not because Mario is "casual," its because Mario has sound game design that everyone knows, loves, enjoys or wants to learn. Its not too easy or too insanely hard. Its just a good game, that's why its still selling weeks after other games have met their sales goals or had less satisfactory results.

Uh, that's precisely why it's a casual game. You don't need extensive tutorials. You don't need to do heavy reading. You don't need a lot of twitch skill. You don't need to be a gaming veteran or genre-savvy. You don't even need to play it on a constant basis or have lots of free time, like RPGs (lots of time sinks + having to play often enough to track the plot) or playing fighters or FPSs competitively would demand.

They couldn't push the industry forward if they tried, they live in the past. They're wringing out every penny they possibly can from their popular characters. Look at Sonic now, so lonely and unnoticed. Mario, Link, Samus, and the rest will eventually head in the same direction. I'm surprised an Italian plumber could remain iconic for so fucking long.

You can attack just about any game company like this. Does Square not milk Final Fantasy for all it's worth? Do modern Final Fantasies not involve extremely effeminate characters more often than not? Is teen drama not the driving force in most of them? And what about the Ivalice Alliance or Compilation of Final Fantasy VII?

Does Bungie not continue to make Halo games instead making a new FPS? Does Capcom not continue to sell the same Street Fighter characters over and over and over again? How many Call of Duties are we up to now again? Why is it OK for these companies, but not Nintendo, who has more IPs than most current developers?

You don't fix what's not broken and you don't ditch a perfectly good cash cow.

P.S. Sonic died because Sega died internally and they started making very shitty games, not because there was nothing wrong with the Sonic concept. Sonic could've continued on as a franchise simply because it was fun in similar ways to Mario games; simple, fast, platformy gameplay.

[Feba]

Re: Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

Why is it OK for these companies, but not Nintendo, who has more IPs than most current developers?

Just to pile on: Not to mention that Nintendo's franchises tend to have MUCH more creativity and invention than other franchises. A Halo is a Halo is a Halo for the most part; but a Metroid Prime and a Super Metroid are very different, and Other M looks different too. Zelda went in a pretty different direction for Majora's and Wind Waker. Mario Galaxy had a huge gameplay innovation, and NSMB was a revival of a style of gameplay we hadn't really seen from Mario in a long time. Even Brawl changed things up with SSE, though that wasn't incredibly innovative or popular.

[DakAttack]

Re: Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

In the case of Zelda, the entire point is that the protagonist is young. It was originally inspired by the creator's adventures as a kid-- that's what he was trying to get into the game.

If you can't be nostalgic at least about your childhood, I feel sorry for you. You don't have to be all "hey, the main character is being pressured by his parents! I'm pressured by my parents! STUPID ADULTS" in order to identify yourself with a child protagonist anymore than you need to be black in order to play a game with a black lead or female to play a game with a female lead. Honestly, not playing Pokemon because the lead characters are kids is as stupid as not playing Metroid because the lead character is a female.

It's not stupid at all. It's actually perfectly reasonable. I have no child friends, nor do I associate with children, and I don't really enjoy their company. Playing a game as a child holds no interest for me, even if they are tasked with saving the world. I don't think I could get into it even if they're acting like adults. If Pokemon grew up I think I could probably get into it.

You can attack just about any game company like this. Does Square not milk Final Fantasy for all it's worth? Do modern Final Fantasies not involve extremely effeminate characters more often than not? Is teen drama not the driving force in most of them? And what about the Ivalice Alliance or Compilation of Final Fantasy VII?

Does Bungie not continue to make Halo games instead making a new FPS? Does Capcom not continue to sell the same Street Fighter characters over and over and over again? How many Call of Duties are we up to now again? Why is it OK for these companies, but not Nintendo, who has more IPs than most current developers?

You don't fix what's not broken and you don't ditch a perfectly good cash cow.

P.S. Sonic died because Sega died internally and they started making very shitty games, not because there was nothing wrong with the Sonic concept. Sonic could've continued on as a franchise simply because it was fun in similar ways to Mario games; simple, fast, platformy gameplay.

I think you're missing the point, or can't see the difference. Nintendo doesn't have static worlds where their characters belong. Their characters are used over and over in different plots, however weak the plots may be. Square-Enix reuses names, sure, but they don't reproduce characters in completely different and unrelated plots for the sake of selling video games. Bungie doesn't either. The Halo universe is huge, and they're detailing it through books and video games.

Capcom, on the other, is very much like Nintendo. Fuck me, I don't think I can possibly think well of anybody who purchases SSF4, which is going to be a lot of people. If you're a fan of boring fighting games, I can see why you might purchase SF4, but now they're offering the same exact game with enough new content to warrant a five-dollar DLC.

[Armando]

Re: Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

Nintendo doesn't have static worlds where their characters belong. Their characters are used over and over in different plots, however weak the plots may be

Only Mario and Kirby can be truly accused of this, and Mario/Kirby games are about gameplay first and foremost; the plot is always an excuse plot. Zelda is a gray area, because it's always a Link, Zelda and Ganon, but unless it's a direct sequel, it's never the same Link/Zelda as before, and there's yet to be a direct sequel where Ganon comes back from the dead (let's not count WW as a direct sequel to OoT for these purposes; I'm talking more along the lines of MM to OoT and Phantom Hourglass to WW.)

Metroid, Star Fox, Donkey Kong, Fire Emblem, Advance Wars, Mother, Golden Sun, F-Zero, Pokemon, and Wario games however have their own universes and they're pretty consistent about it. Fire Emblem doesn't even make a habit of reusing characters, neither does Mother.

Making yet another Metroid, Star Fox or Pokemon is no different from yet another Halo - each new game details the game's world further, like you said, even if Star Fox or Pokemon are too kiddy for you. This is especially true for Metroid because of thematic similarities to Halo. Yet Bungie with its one IP (which belongs to a now very oversaturated genre) is somehow more legit than Nintendo's dozen+?

Don't get me wrong, if you don't like Nintendo games that's none of my business, but I'm really not seeing a strong case against Nintendo here.

[DakAttack]

Re: Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

I hand't realized how extensive the Star Fox franchise had become. I have to doubt that Star Fox: Adventures is in any way true to canon, unless they're writing it on the fly. They took a failed game about dinosaurs and added Star Fox. Command is more along the lines of what I'm talking about.

Donkey Kong is totally what I'm talking about. Originally he antagonized Mario, but was given an entirely different world to play in. He was given the Link treatment with a rehash of DKC that involved the same core characters with a slightly different plot. Since then, he's been featured in a metric asston of different games, all unrelated to hoarding bananas or saving islands from crocodile creatures.

I'm not going to pretend I know everything about Pokemon, because I've stated I don't play it. But, while I did play it, it was never anything new. The premise was always the same. Collect pokemon, train them, obtain gym badges, and win the final tournament. There were usually some problems along the way, but mostly minor inconveniences. I doubt it's changed much.

I've either not played the other games, or I agree that they aren't reused or rehashed for the purpose of making money.

I don't like Nintendo, and I don't even like most of the Halo games, but I still don't see how you can compare it like that to Star Fox or Pokemon. They've not created a game that didn't explore different aspects of the universe or plot. They couldn't even if they tried, because it's all based on books, albeit it rather loosely. I think the further they've come to what Nintendo does is including a female spartan in DOA4.

[TheGrandMom]

Re: Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

Sure. Most of the notorious NES-era difficulty was due to poor design, and the industry has learned a lot in the years. RPGs in particular are better balanced and better thought out than Famicom/NES RPGs. The more fair forms of challenge have been preserved, but not every game these days is made to be hard.

Of course games now are smoother, games were in their infancy back in the day! Thats like calling a little kid an idiot because he doesn't know as much as you. All I'm saying is that the many games are easier and have gotten progressively easier as gaming has evolved. I find it annoying to have the hand holding that a lot of games have just because they are catering to a younger crowd or to newer gamers. I'd love to have the ability to toggle features (like maps, tutorials, etc) on and off in some games. I don't have an issue with companies wanting to hold some gamers hands through a game, I'd just like the ability to pass on that.

[Armando]

Re: Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

The premise was always the same. Collect pokemon, train them, obtain gym badges, and win the final tournament. There were usually some problems along the way, but mostly minor inconveniences. I doubt it's changed much.

While you're right on the money, how is this any different from Halo? In any of the ones with a number you're going to use Master Chief and you're going to spend the entire game shooting things just like the previous games. Odds are that if you didn't like Halo 1, you wouldn't like 2 or 3, because not much changes in between.

New Pokemon games add new areas and lore to the world. Gameplay's roughly the same as before. New Halo games add new areas and lore to the world. Gameplay's roughly the same as before. Both companies keep making more of them. The target audience and scope of the plot is very different for both games, sure, but both companies are essentially doing the same thing.

And the fact that each Halo game expands on the universe is not exactly amazing. They can and probably will continue to make up new lore for it if it means selling more games with Halo in the title. Square has done it with FFVII. They could build an entire Expanded Universe for it. It would still be milking the franchise; pretty much any company that continues to make sequels to a series instead of make a new one is milking it. The important thing is whether they're just trying to rip you off or if they're actually putting some effort into it and making a decent new game.

[DakAttack]

Re: Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

While you're right on the money, how is this any different from Halo? In any of the ones with a number you're going to use Master Chief and you're going to spend the entire game shooting things just like the previous games. Odds are that if you didn't like Halo 1, you wouldn't like 2 or 3, because not much changes in between.

New Pokemon games add new areas and lore to the world. Gameplay's roughly the same as before. New Halo games add new areas and lore to the world. Gameplay's roughly the same as before. Both companies keep making more of them. The target audience and scope of the plot is very different for both games, sure, but both companies are essentially doing the same thing.

And the fact that each Halo game expands on the universe is not exactly amazing. They can and probably will continue to make up new lore for it if it means selling more games with Halo in the title. Square has done it with FFVII. They could build an entire Expanded Universe for it. It would still be milking the franchise; pretty much any company that continues to make sequels to a series instead of make a new one is milking it. The important thing is whether they're just trying to rip you off or if they're actually putting some effort into it and making a decent new game.

You're overgeneralizing. First, beginning with Halo 2 you played as an Elite in addition to a Spartan. Second, the very reason I didn't enjoy Halo 2 or 3 is because they were too different from the first. It was a radical departure from the story-telling, and an unwanted change in game-play. Reach may be returning to the original Halo style I enjoyed so much, and Master Chief probably wont make even an appearance.

[Malacite]

Re: Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

Does Bungie not continue to make Halo games instead making a new FPS?

Minor nitpick here; Bungie is tired of making Halo. Reach is their last game, then the Torch is passed to 343 Industries while Bungie goes solo to work on their new project.

I don't have an issue with companies wanting to hold some gamers hands through a game, I'd just like the ability to pass on that.

Just wanted to second this. If the developers these days want to cater to the casuals, please try to do so in a manner that doesn't dumb down the entire experience for everyone. And I'm still pissed @ Bungie for not going with the book on Reach but I'm sure it will still be a good game. I'm very anxious to try the MP beta this spring and the new Marksman & Needler Riffles, as well as the new suit powers.

Anyhoo this thread has gone waaaaaaaaaay off course lol O.o though it doesn't really matter with FFXIII coming out in 2 months anyway.

[hexx]

Re: Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

You're overgeneralizing. First, beginning with Halo 2 you played as an Elite in addition to a Spartan. Second, the very reason I didn't enjoy Halo 2 or 3 is because they were too different from the first. It was a radical departure from the story-telling, and an unwanted change in game-play. Reach may be returning to the original Halo style I enjoyed so much, and Master Chief probably wont make even an appearance.

All you're doing in this case is building on Armando's point Dak. Being able to play as an Elite only, yep you guessed it, added more lore to the existing universe. The Arbiter plays the same as Master Chief, asides from not having a flashlight (cloaking instead) and getting different starting weapons. More than likely we WILL see Master Chief in there somewhere because according to the books, doesn't he return to Reach after the events of Halo, but before Halo 2?

[DakAttack]

Re: Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

All you're doing in this case is building on Armando's point Dak. Being able to play as an Elite only, yep you guessed it, added more lore to the existing universe. The Arbiter plays the same as Master Chief, asides from not having a flashlight (cloaking instead) and getting different starting weapons. More than likely we WILL see Master Chief in there somewhere because according to the books, doesn't he return to Reach after the events of Halo, but before Halo 2?

I'm not getting your point. I believe Reach occurs during its fall, which is before the events of the original Halo. Master Chief was on Reach, but I'm not sure how much of a part he has in defending it.

[hexx]

Re: Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

All the Spartan's had a fair amount of exposure when defending Reach, if anything a few died, and a larger amount stayed on Reach (the area that wasn't glassed) according to the book "Halo: First Strike". If you haven't read it, you should =)

[Malacite]

Re: Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

All of the Spartan II's were about to leave on the Pillar of Autumn for their mission when the order to defend Reach came.

Reach WAS glassed (at the end, they were too afraid @ first because of the unknown forerunner relic signal) but the UNSC took it back at some point after the conflict (around the time of Halo 2?) and the majority of Spartan II's died in it's defense. John, Kelly, Linda, Kurt, Fred and I forget who else were the only Spartan II's who made it out (though Kelly was pronounced dead @ the scene and later revived after the events of Halo: CE) John carried her unconscious body aboard the Pillar during the retreat.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Square Enix cut a game's worth of content from Final Fantasy XIII

Destructoid - Kitase confirms Final Fantasy XIII DLC

Used bin purchase now.

Sorry, I only buy complete RPGs and I'm sticking to that.