FF13 Bosses Respond to Western Review Scores
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
As much as I want to say I prefer the linearity, we have to address both sides this coin:
JRPG's are, to put it simply, single novels that tell a form of epic story. And it is through this linear nature we can see a progression of the plot. A player can see the story unfold and characters become more fleshed out, and interesting; and in some cases, likable.
Not that I'm saying Western RPG's aren't as story-driven as their eastern counterpart, but they are less obsessive of the main plot. Instead of linearity, these games act as a large 1000-piece puzzle, in the sense that every individual plotline will build up the story it's trying to tell.
If I had to describe the two, JRPG's are obsessive compulsive, and WRPG's have attention deficit disorder.
JRPG's are, to put it simply, single novels that tell a form of epic story. And it is through this linear nature we can see a progression of the plot. A player can see the story unfold and characters become more fleshed out, and interesting; and in some cases, likable.
Not that I'm saying Western RPG's aren't as story-driven as their eastern counterpart, but they are less obsessive of the main plot. Instead of linearity, these games act as a large 1000-piece puzzle, in the sense that every individual plotline will build up the story it's trying to tell.
If I had to describe the two, JRPG's are obsessive compulsive, and WRPG's have attention deficit disorder.
I will probably rent it, and I will rent it BECAUSE it is linear. I like both linear and open world, just depends on what I want to do at the time. If I don't want to think about what I am doing, I'll play something like this. When I want to aimlessly wander around for hours, pulling out my map ever 10 seconds, then I will play an open one. In short, both are good.
Do they not remember FF7? Or hell, even the first FF on the NES? Ya, those were far from linear, didn't force you to go in a practically straight path the entire game, allowed you to revisit previous areas, ect. And they did fine jobs telling a compelling story. They really shouldn't blame lazy development on cultural differences, because I'm sure either way you cut it, it still amounts to the same thing.
Because the first half is "too linear".
This is why Metacritic is BS. This is a fundamental disagreement on game design; reviewers are basically leveraging against things they don't like - not things that don't work well. I suppose I'm getting ahead of myself since I haven't played it yet, but wow.
This is why Metacritic is BS. This is a fundamental disagreement on game design; reviewers are basically leveraging against things they don't like - not things that don't work well. I suppose I'm getting ahead of myself since I haven't played it yet, but wow.
There's a good deal of light between the concepts of "difficult" and "can't". They never said they couldn't tell a story in an open ended world, just that it was more difficult for them. Be careful that you don't transform meaning when looking to rephrase.
BTW, their actual answer seems to indicate that linearity was both a design and a utilization choice.
BTW, their actual answer seems to indicate that linearity was both a design and a utilization choice.
I agree that the critics should be treating the linearity as a design choice rather than a flaw so quickly, considering it was obviously a conscious choice. It just seems like a rather childish thing to gripe about.
Still, scores around 80 are hardly bad in any way, shape or form, they really shouldn't get so defensive about it.
Still, scores around 80 are hardly bad in any way, shape or form, they really shouldn't get so defensive about it.
I believe the real issue is, that those who say its to linear, aren't playing the game to completion.
and IMO you should be taken out and shot if you review a game before completing it.
and IMO you should be taken out and shot if you review a game before completing it.
Aby_Z said:
I much prefer linear story-telling. Getting from A to B in a story is usually a lot faster than having to navigate a huge world to get to your next informant. I prefer linear games for their story, whereas I play games like Fallout 3 or Dragon Age for the aethestics of the environment, mostly the atmosphere.
Silent Hill 2 is a great example of doing everything properly. Except for combat, but as sucky as it is, it works. My only issues with SH as a franchise is the camera that retards itself around corners. Anyway, I'm trailing on now. Silent Hill let you go wherever your fancy took you, however there weren't millions of things to do along the way, and the map wasn't ridiculously huge, so it didn't take you half an hour to make it back to your main objective.
While I admit that comaplaining about a game being linear, saying that people are seeing from a 'western point of view' is dumb because of one simple thing. They are selling it to the West and by default, saying that is pretty much a straw man agrument.
Honestly if you want to sell something then you must be perpared for those who don't like it and such, though 80 is a good score. The whole thing I hold against the FF seires right now is that the stories beind the games are bad and you know what's going to happen.
A linear game can be good, such as the Shin Megami Tensei games, their good and this is because the people making them can creat good stories. They can make somewhat likeable characters and add humour into their writing. FF always takes itself too seruously for my tatses.
Honestly if you want to sell something then you must be perpared for those who don't like it and such, though 80 is a good score. The whole thing I hold against the FF seires right now is that the stories beind the games are bad and you know what's going to happen.
A linear game can be good, such as the Shin Megami Tensei games, their good and this is because the people making them can creat good stories. They can make somewhat likeable characters and add humour into their writing. FF always takes itself too seruously for my tatses.
The linearity isn't the dealbreaker for me. What is the dealbreaker is the defensive attitude they're showing about it.John Funk said:
Until this, I didn't think there was a problem with the title being a little more linear.
They're just making poor excuses here for it when they don't need to make excuses at all: we knew it would be more linear and that there would be no "towns." And the argument that it's a difference between East & West sensibilities, that's just stupid. Until recently, almost all jrpgs were non-linear and that's going back to the beginning with the originals like Dragon Quest, Phantasy Star, and FF.
I'm still interested in this game but now I'm thinking that a rental might be satisfying enough.
John Funk said:FF13 Bosses Responds to Western Review Scores
Final Fantasy XIII director Motomu Toriyama and producer Yoshinori Kitase have addressed concerns that the game is too linear by saying that critics are seeing the game "from a western point of view."
The Final Fantasy XIII duo of Motomu Toriyama and series veteran Yoshinori Kitase have been quite active as of late in order to promote the Western launch of the long-awaited RPG. The two have spoken out on topics ranging from a remake of Final Fantasy VII (again) [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/98084-FF13-Producer-Explains-Why-FF7-Remake-is-Unlikely].
Now, Kitase and Toriyama have taken on the few Western critics who have gotten their hands on Final Fantasy XIII: Speaking with CVG sister site [http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=235030] Xbox World 360, the duo discussed criticism of the game's linearity. "We try not to listen to the critics too much. Most of the criticisms have come because the first half of the game is very linear," said Kitase, "But we've got a story to tell, and it's important the player can engage with the characters and the world they inhabit before letting them loose..."
Toriyama chimed in, suggesting that the difference could be a cultural one between Japanese RPGs and Western critics. "We think many reviewers are looking at Final Fantasy XIII from a western point of view. When you look at most Western RPGs, they just dump you in a big open world, and let you do whatever you like... [It] becomes very difficult to tell a compelling story when you're given that much freedom."
I don't think anyone would disagree that there are certain cultural differences between Japanese RPGs and Western ones like Fallout and Dragon Age. I'm not sure I'm with Toriyama on the idea that you can't tell a compelling story in an open-ended world, though - it's just a different kind of storytelling.
With little over half a month to go before Final Fantasy XIII's March 9 release date, the few Western critics to judge the game seem to have mixed opinions [http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps3/finalfantasy13?q=final%20fantasy%20xiii] on the matter. Game Informer gave the game a 93, calling it a "phenomenal RPG destined to be remembered as a technical milestone," the PS Official Magazine UK followed suit with a 90 - but other outlets like Play UK and Games Master UK were less kind, with scores of 79 and 81, respectively.
Is too much linearity a dealbreaker? Or is it just a design choice?
Permalink
I'm going to make my own topic with regard to this but I guess I can start here so to speak.
If the player has to be given less control for the sake of enhancing the story then I say it's worth it. I too would rather be told a story than be forced to make my own story.
Interestingly enough, I get the strong impression that a considerable amount of the "compelling" part of games that follow the open-ended world model comes from the "freedom" itself as opposed to the actual story of the game.
But I guess I'll get more into that later when I make my own topic on the subject.
To anyone who's interested, it's going to be entitled "Pre-set vs. Blank Slate" or something like that.
