FF7 remake most important ever, and that's not a compliment

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I haven't played the game so I can't really agree or disagree with the writer or people here disagreeing with him, but I do have a question about the fervent clamor for the remakes.

Why?

That sounds really dismissive, but I just have never understood the demand for remakes in general. In this forum alone I've seen people want the first 3 Uncharted games to be remade, despite that being only a console generation ago. FF7 is older, but the devs have stated they are basically remaking the game to be on next gen consoles, so why not just make a new game altogether?

What do these remakes provide? Is it new content like Kingdom Hearts Final Mixes? Is it just better graphics? Is it to allow younger gamers to experience past games?

I know the answers to those questions will vary from person to person, but I still genuinely have never really understood game remakes, especially ones that are done so soon after the original game was released. I'm definitely not saying wanting a remake is wrong, but I am definitely having hard time understanding what a remake does that the original game does not.

A real remake is different than say a remaster. I'm not a fan of remasters at all. Why waste time remastering something like say Uncharted (when only 1 of them was good) or The Last of Us when it's not going to change the game at all? I did buy the remaster of The Last of Us but only because I never got around to playing it on PS3 so why not? I would've played it on PS3 if there was no remaster. The only remaster that I ever bought that I had already played the games in it was the ICO/Shadow of the Colossus remaster because those games are so good and my PS2 didn't work anymore. It was nice seeing the games in a better resolution and framerate for Shadow. But I do hate how many remasters come out nowadays, that time and effort can go towards new games.

Remakes are different though and rather rare. I never played FF7 because I knew I would never like it because I hate turn-based combat when there's no strategy to it, it just wastes my time (and a lot of it). I'm sorta looking forward to playing a remake of FF7 because it might be a game that I'd actually enjoy this time with an enjoyable battle system.

 

[Frankster]

And come on, don't tell me that FF7 is just as open to criticism as any other game. This thread has already proven that some people will completely dismiss you for having a less than glowing opinion of their favorite nostalgia trip.

Oh I won't go as far as that, but out of the various "untouchable" classics, Ff7 is the lowest hanging fruit you can find.
The kind of people you describe, even in this very thread, are outnumbered by those who fully admit FF7 wasn't the best game evar and a lot of its enduring appeal comes down to nostalgia and how much of an impact it had back then, but who would like to correct you on some inaccurate misconceptions all the same.

but don't try labeling people who actually play the game and didn't like it as "hipsters," who just want hate on it for being cool, otherwise if people can't express their views on it with actual constructive criticism

Why not? Why can't I call a fish a fish?

OP literally admits he never played FF7 so I was right on calling him out on that, and I really do think the article is hipster BS and the author's opinions are to be laughed at rather then listened to, but certainly not because I think Ff7 is some flawless masterpiece of a game.

 

[Frankster]

Then you're no better then fans who love the game, defend it, and say no one should criticize it honestly, or the people hating on it when they didn't play it, like the OP and the author of the article.

You are very confusing to me.

You're telling me I can't call things out as I see them because.....Reasons you've never really explained besides wagging your finger at me even though I was actually right.
So we can't call BS on BS opinions now? I think that's the death of free speech I hear.

And then follow it up by basically going "hmph! well you're no better then those OTHER guys, so there! take that!" *storms away in a puff* to which I'm left scratching my head and going... Mmkay? Good for you dude, I 100% support your ability to disagree with people and dismiss their opinions just like I did, for whatever reasons you want. That's the way I hear free speech is supposed to work, people say stuff, and other people can say stuff about the stuff that was said, it's wonderful really. Of course we are on a private domain and stuff, but I'm pretty sure that as long as you don't breach the code of conduct, then the escapist is a site where free speech is encouraged. Correct me if this is erroneous though.

Also I don't think I'll ever recover from the blow to my self esteem with that parting sentence.. I'm no better then a FF7 die hard fanboy? Dude.... That's deep..Like, I wouldn't even call my worst enemies that D:

 

[Frankster]

I wasn't defending the people who hate on the game, just the people with actual legitimate complaints, the ones who did play the game. I think we misunderstood each other.

I think that makes more sense. Cos I seriously got no problem with someone coming up and telling me FF7 is the worst game ever made so long as they can provide some decent reasons for it. I'd probably still disagree cos would seem too extreme a statement (Bubsy3d and Superman64 make for still competition in that category), but I'd at least respect the position.

All right dawg guess we cool.

 

[Lightspeaker]

Saying that makes me think you haven't actually played 10 or any FF other than 12 (since you explicitly mentioned having played 12). Because FF10's combat is nothing like 12s and, indeed, is nothing like anything I can remember from other games. And 12s is drastically different to any other Final Fantasy outside of the MMOs.

FF10 wasn't an ATB system like that used in games since FF4. It used an action order system (referred to as CTB) in which characters took their actions in a specific order according to an explicitly clear timeline. This meant that firstly you could actually consider your actions without 'worrying' about having to do it quickly (as happened in at least some iterations of ATB), secondly it was MUCH clearer of in which order actions would be taken meaning it was more tactical and thirdly it had the single finest summoning system of any Final Fantasy.

And you cannot play 12 like any other FF game other than the MMOs. Because it was an open area battle system rather than the random encounters system with a separate battle screen seen in every single other main Final Fantasy prior to it and as also seen in 13. It was also largely pointless and difficult to control all three characters at once which was a stepping stone to the "control one character only" silliness of FF13, which I personally think was the most ridiculous idea in that entire game.

I said "under-the-hood" FF12 is the same. You could literally play FF12 one character at a time if you wanted to, it would take forever, but you could do it as you could pause the battle and issue commands at any time. There was an order to when everyone acted in FF12 based on their speed attribute just like in FF10, Rikku would go like 3 times for every one turn of Auron. Come on now, FF10 wasn't strategic, I always knew exactly what to do on my turns. I barely even died in FF10 (I only died occasionally on a boss) and I didn't grind either, the game was so easy. FF10 was like using a computer program instead of playing a game whereas FF12 was programming a computer program. Put gambits in FF10 and it would play just like FF12. If a few if-then-else statements will make the game play itself, it's not strategic or tactical. You wouldn't be able to make XCOM play itself with a few if-then-else statements. I like turn-based combat when it is actually strategic and tactical, FF10 was not that at all. When a turn-based combat system has no character positioning to it, you lose most of the strategy.

No, it plays nothing like the same. It is not a classical Final Fantasy turn-based RPG battle system. It does not involve a separate battle screen and it does not involve the same strategic puzzles. That is a simple fact. It is NOTHING like the previous games in the series, it is styled after an MMO-type system.

Applies and Oranges with XCOM and FF games. You might as well compare it to Doom. But fine, I'll make the statement clearer: of the classical RPG style battle system variations found in Final Fantasies 1 through 10 (plus 13), 10 had by far the best system.

Its also totally pointless to complain that it could play itself with a bunch of if-then-or statements. CHESS can play itself in a much similar way. Fundamentally the old-style FF RPG battle system wasn't difficult, but it wasn't supposed to be difficult. It was rather like a tactical puzzle for each battle, figuring out the optimal strategy to beat each enemy. And it hasn't been done better than in 10 (in fact its hardly been done since 10, 13 technically counts but it was poorly done).

 

[Urgh76]

I'm already sick of seeing all these edgy reports about it, going "against the grain" of praising FF VII, because it will no doubt guarantee replies.

This is bait of the highest order, and nothing more. If you enjoyed playing the game, then that's that.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

No, it plays nothing like the same. It is not a classical Final Fantasy turn-based RPG battle system. It does not involve a separate battle screen and it does not involve the same strategic puzzles. That is a simple fact. It is NOTHING like the previous games in the series, it is styled after an MMO-type system.

Applies and Oranges with XCOM and FF games. You might as well compare it to Doom. But fine, I'll make the statement clearer: of the classical RPG style battle system variations found in Final Fantasies 1 through 10 (plus 13), 10 had by far the best system.

Its also totally pointless to complain that it could play itself with a bunch of if-then-or statements. CHESS can play itself in a much similar way. Fundamentally the old-style FF RPG battle system wasn't difficult, but it wasn't supposed to be difficult. It was rather like a tactical puzzle for each battle, figuring out the optimal strategy to beat each enemy. And it hasn't been done better than in 10 (in fact its hardly been done since 10, 13 technically counts but it was poorly done).

FF12 is FF10's battle system but allowing the player to automate everything so you don't have to constantly select everything from menus over and over again. What don't you get about literally being able to play FF12 exactly like FF10? There's no strategic puzzles in FF10 or FF12 for that matter. Some bosses or unique creatures require a slightly different broad strategy that doesn't require you to go turn-by-turn to execute. You fight the same damn creatures hundreds of times, you know what to do to beat them rather easily like use the guy with the blitzball to kill flying enemies or just use doublecast on everything with regards to FF10. And you somehow think each battle was a tactical puzzle, seriously? FF10 or any regular FF is not Tactics.

If you want I'll compare FF10 to Xenosaga II, which had a battle system that merited it being turn-based because you really had to plan out your moves, it wasn't terribly strategic or difficult either, but you at least had to think several moves ahead.

It takes probably at least millions of if-then-else statements to automate chess, a whole freaking computer was developed just to play chess called Deep Blue. Whereas FF12 (and FF10 with gambits) takes 5-10 if-then-else statements to play itself and can be programmed as such by players with no programming experience. It's annoying as hell to play a game just doing the same repetitive inputs all game when you can easily program the game to play itself, it's a complete waste of my time. There's a reason why that particular type of turn-based combat is almost non-existent now whereas something like DnD's turn-based combat system that is much older is still used in games as XCOM uses DnD's combat system.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

The only thing that matters in an FF7 remake is an extended Cloud crossdressing scene. Everything else is secondary.

 

[Tilly]

Can't be doing with writers like that.

"Let me tell you everything that's wrong with....."

For every 1 person who can do something, there are 100 who will tell you they can do it better but will never even have the guts to try. That's this guy!

 

[CritialGaming]

The Final Fantasy Remake boils down to the fact that Square has remade almost all of their old Final Fantasy games. 5, 6, 7, were the prime canadates for the next remake. However FF7 has been clamored be the fan community to be remade the most often. Of the Final Fantasies still awaiting a remake. FF7 is the one that has the fan desire behind it, and frankly the most need of a remake. Five and six are old but they have the 16-bitness going for them which is a graphical style that continues to hold up to this day. Of the PS1 games 7 is the one that suffered from clunky 3d modeling and just has not stood the test of time, which is not something that 8 or 9 suffer from.

And top it all off with the fact by doing a FF7 remake, they do not have to start from scratch as they have a lot of high powered character and scenery assets already made for them. Advent Children, Crisis Core, and Derge of Vincent, all had updated cinematics and set pieces in which they can reuse to help recreate FF7 on a whole. Any other Final Fantasy literally means starting completely from scratch.

 

[elvor0]

To me, you were implying that people that play FF7 now say it's bad because of how genre has evolved. You could've played it on released and called it a bad game too is what I'm saying. I played FF6 and it's a bad game to me. I tried the series again and actually beat FF10 mainly due to the random battles (the series was still using random battles on fucking PS2)

Yes, it was using random battles. Because it's not an action game, it's a turn based/ATB based game. Random battles are a staple of the JRPG genre.

I played FF12 and actually liked it to a degree and FF12 is basically a proof of all prior FF games having combat that doesn't require them being turn-based.

The fact that you liked FF12 more isn't "proof that all prior FF games shouldn't have had Turnbased/ATB systems". It's proof that you don't like Turn based/atb style systems. I mean I don't like ARMA because the combat is so "realistic", so I don't play the ARMA series. Just because I enjoy Duke Nukem 3D more, that is not proof that DN3D is more enjoyable and ARMA is terrible.

Anyways, I'm actually sorta looking forward to a FF7 remake with an entertaining combat system so I can experience the story without having to trudge through combat that I hate.

They're....not going to change it that much that it's going to be substationally different.

 

[EvilRoy]

I haven't played the game so I can't really agree or disagree with the writer or people here disagreeing with him, but I do have a question about the fervent clamor for the remakes.

Why?

That sounds really dismissive, but I just have never understood the demand for remakes in general. In this forum alone I've seen people want the first 3 Uncharted games to be remade, despite that being only a console generation ago. FF7 is older, but the devs have stated they are basically remaking the game to be on next gen consoles, so why not just make a new game altogether?

What do these remakes provide? Is it new content like Kingdom Hearts Final Mixes? Is it just better graphics? Is it to allow younger gamers to experience past games?

I know the answers to those questions will vary from person to person, but I still genuinely have never really understood game remakes, especially ones that are done so soon after the original game was released. I'm definitely not saying wanting a remake is wrong, but I am definitely having hard time understanding what a remake does that the original game does not.

Well, and keeping in mind that I did not like FF7 at all, in this case I think its related to a combination of ease of access for an older title and getting some issues sorted while they're at it.

FF7 came out originally for Playstation and later on it got a PC release - and right off the bat there are problems. Emulators aside, it isn't easy to get a legit PS1 copy of FF7 going anymore if only because the PS1 hardware had a lot of moving parts and the damn things disintegrate over time. You can use a PS2, but eventually you will start bumping into the same problems for the same reasons. They just don't last like the old cartridge consoles because there are so many sensitive lenses and moving bits. The PC release, conversely, will more or less work on any machine today as well as it did on release. And it was a goddamn travesty on release. Fixed issues in the original version, and introduced a shit tonne of its own. The steam version is apparently less fucked, but I've never been willing to test it.

Beyond being able to play an older game at all again, there is just the problems with the game itself. Well maybe not "problems", but things could be fixed if they are going to the trouble of releasing a version of the game that is legit and fully functional on todays hardware.

The graphics have not aged well, and even at the time they really did not measure up to the competition (this game came out in 97, same year as the second Crash Bandicoot, and one year before MGS1). It managed to look like lego demons despite the technology clearly being capable of way more. Related is an outdated combat system, which pales in comparison to many of the FF series offerings in the years since. People tend to get pretty antsy around 9 and 10, but both of those had distinct and very streamlined combat systems that blow the many of the older iterations away. Add to that bizarre little sections and mandatory weirdness that wasn't super fun at the time, and there are things that could be addressed.

From my perspective, this may as well be a new game anyway. I know its going to have "FF7" on the front, and I know that the story will be fairly related to that game, but unless they copy/paste the text and game elements from the original to the remake then chances are there will be enough things different that it will be notably distinct from its predecessor. The fans will get the game they liked over again, and the nonfans like me will get a second try at giving a crap. I hated everything since about half of FFX anyway so a return to form might work for me anyway.

 

[Smooth Operator]

I see OP, so you didn't play it, know nothing about it, but are very keen on condemning it all... essentially you have an issue that other people like some game you never bothered to play.

You have truly and indisputably earned the top spot on my spam filter list.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Yes, it was using random battles. Because it's not an action game, it's a turn based/ATB based game. Random battles are a staple of the JRPG genre.

Most JRPGs, including FF, FINALLY gave up random battles during the PS2 era, they aren't a staple of JRPGs anymore. The reason random battles suck (and really should've never been used) is because they make the world feel lifeless since it's barren of life (my backyard is more interesting than FF10's Calm Lands). Random battles also hinder exploration because if I want to go over and check out some corner of the map, not only do I have do clear the monsters on the way there (which is fine), but I also have to kill just as many monsters on my way back to my original starting spot when I just fucking cleared a path. Random battles are an archaic mechanic that should have never existed in the 1st place. They only stuck around so long because JRPGs evolve at a snail's pace.

The fact that you liked FF12 more isn't "proof that all prior FF games shouldn't have had Turnbased/ATB systems". It's proof that you don't like Turn based/atb style systems. I mean I don't like ARMA because the combat is so "realistic", so I don't play the ARMA series. Just because I enjoy Duke Nukem 3D more, that is not proof that DN3D is more enjoyable and ARMA is terrible.

You misinterpreted my argument and I do like good turn-based combat like say Xenosaga II or XCOM. My point is that if a turn-based combat system has so little strategy that it can be done and work in real-time, it should be done in real-time because inputting the same common sense commands over and over again is boring and repetitive. Oh, there's a flying enemy, I'll use Wakka to throw a blitzball at it, that's not strategy, it's common sense. Or you can use double-cast on everything in FF10, why make the player input the same thing over and over again through menus when I can just press a button or automate it myself like FF12?

They're....not going to change it that much that it's going to be substationally different.

There won't be random battles and the battle system will be quite a bit different.

 

[BoredRolePlayer]

I haven't played the game so I can't really agree or disagree with the writer or people here disagreeing with him, but I do have a question about the fervent clamor for the remakes.

Why?

That sounds really dismissive, but I just have never understood the demand for remakes in general. In this forum alone I've seen people want the first 3 Uncharted games to be remade, despite that being only a console generation ago. FF7 is older, but the devs have stated they are basically remaking the game to be on next gen consoles, so why not just make a new game altogether?

What do these remakes provide? Is it new content like Kingdom Hearts Final Mixes? Is it just better graphics? Is it to allow younger gamers to experience past games?

I know the answers to those questions will vary from person to person, but I still genuinely have never really understood game remakes, especially ones that are done so soon after the original game was released. I'm definitely not saying wanting a remake is wrong, but I am definitely having hard time understanding what a remake does that the original game does not.

Normally I don't mind a remake or re-release if you can't get the game in a easy legal fashion, Mother being a recent example seeing how before the only method to play it in English was the leaked rom of the prototype. But FF7 is on multiple systems that is still easy to get. PS3/PSP/PSVita/PC all have a version of FF7 you can get, and it's not like Final Mix cause last time I checked the US version is the best version of the game. The only consistent reason I've seen people ask for a FF7 remake was to fix the graphics and dialog (which dialog is dependent on the person cause I've seen people get mad over updated a script in a game). I've learned from gaming that people only complain if it's something they don't want, but if it's something they want it's the best thing ever. I hear Metriod fans are trying to petition Nintendo to cancel the new Metriod game coming out. Instead of you know not buying it.

 

[KarmaTheAlligator]

The only way they'll get me to even think about getting that remake is if they remove (or seriously tone down) the minigames. Way too many of them in Disc 1, they completely destroyed any pacing.

 

[elvor0]

Yes, it was using random battles. Because it's not an action game, it's a turn based/ATB based game. Random battles are a staple of the JRPG genre.

Most JRPGs, including FF, FINALLY gave up random battles during the PS2 era, they aren't a staple of JRPGs anymore. The reason random battles suck (and really should've never been used) is because they make the world feel lifeless since it's barren of life (my backyard is more interesting than FF10's Calm Lands). Random battles also hinder exploration because if I want to go over and check out some corner of the map, not only do I have do clear the monsters on the way there (which is fine), but I also have to kill just as many monsters on my way back to my original starting spot when I just fucking cleared a path. Random battles are an archaic mechanic that should have never existed in the 1st place. They only stuck around so long because JRPGs evolve at a snail's pace.

Perhaps I should've said were a staple. They were a staple when FFX came out. We'll have to agree to disagree on that one though. I personally don't mind them much, so long as the game isn't too aggresive with them and doesn't rely on them for run time, or puts systems in place that allow for you to allivate them. However, I don't think they should be removed entirely, they have their place, it's just about execution. Bravely Default has random encounters and it sold like hotcakes.

The fact that you liked FF12 more isn't "proof that all prior FF games shouldn't have had Turnbased/ATB systems". It's proof that you don't like Turn based/atb style systems. I mean I don't like ARMA because the combat is so "realistic", so I don't play the ARMA series. Just because I enjoy Duke Nukem 3D more, that is not proof that DN3D is more enjoyable and ARMA is terrible.

You misinterpreted my argument and I do like good turn-based combat like say Xenosaga II or XCOM. My point is that if a turn-based combat system has so little strategy that it can be done and work in real-time, it should be done in real-time because inputting the same common sense commands over and over again is boring and repetitive. Oh, there's a flying enemy, I'll use Wakka to throw a blitzball at it, that's not strategy, it's common sense. Or you can use double-cast on everything in FF10, why make the player input the same thing over and over again through menus when I can just press a button or automate it myself like FF12?

FF10 plays nothing like FF12. FF aren't SRPGs, they're tradition JRPGs. I'm not going to argue that hot"key"(?) menu commands could be a great idea for commonly used abilites, but I'm not a massive fan of automation. FF12 had so much automation that once you unlocked enough slots, the game could play itself, and really, do you want to do let the game do that? Why not watch a Lets Play?

They're....not going to change it that much that it's going to be substationally different.

There won't be random battles and the battle system will be quite a bit different.

[/quote]

You'll have to give me a source on that. Nomura said he wanted to tweak the combat system (so I'm guessing similar to FF10-2 combat system, which I'm okay with, because it's just a more fluid version of 7/8/9s, but there should be a toggle.) I've yet to read anything from Square or Nomura directly that says they've removing random battles. I have no reason to believe they'd change the combat system so much that it wouldn't even resemble FF7, because that would stupid. FF7 has a pretty feverish fanbase and gutting the combat system is unlikely to go down well. I'd be pretty pissed if it ended up being like FF13 or 12 and I actually liked 12s combat system.

God almighty I hope that was a joke because FF12 is, by far, the absolute worst put-together game in the entire series. That combat system was an abomination that should never have been within a country mile of a Final Fantasy game.

FF12 is worse than FF13 combat system? FF13 combat system was fucking awful. Position conditional spells in a game where you couldn't specifically target, aoe heals where you couldn't position your own team, AI that tried to outheal poison, AI that buffed your casters with Strength, AI that buffed Defence when fighting Magic enemies, the complete lack of any control over your other party members, no resource management, horrendous level capping and grinding once you got to Grand Pulse(grand pulse in general actually), your party leader dies and it's game over, just being able to mash A and occasionally change paradigm, tech points being stupidly designed, Eidolon abush fights that fucked up your paradigms. If you can't control the other two members, being able to tweak their behaviour ala Kingdom Hearts or FF12 should be mandatory.

 

[elvor0]

Ugh, I hate Final Fantasy VII. The name was stupid (who are they to release VII before one through six? I live in Australia, which is part of the PAL reigon.

It was still the 7th game in the series. The rest not having been released there doesn't change the fact it was the 7th game. Granted, Square were wierd for releasing games worldwide prior to FF7, but that was the way it was back then.

The Music was probably composed on a SNES

On the PC maybe, the PS1 version had the proper soundtrack, back in 1997 a full orchestral soundtrack was neither feasible nor expected. Plus the PS1 soundchip was a pile of crap.

The gameplay was some obsolete turn based crap

Not in 1997. Also, Pokemon would like a word with you.

and contradictions (aerith?s death)

What? What was contradictory about Aeriths death? And the story was only non-sensical if you weren't paying attention. You may miss things, but it wasn't nonsensical unless you just mashed throught the text

With the rise of #GamerGate, I hope people will see how corrupt $quare and $ony are.

Um, how are Square Corrupt? Making games you don't like isn't an act of corruption.

 

[CritialGaming]

^^^^^^^
Would you like sunscreen for the burn Matt?

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

FF10 plays nothing like FF12. FF aren't SRPGs, they're tradition JRPGs. I'm not going to argue that hot"key"(?) menu commands could be a great idea for commonly used abilites, but I'm not a massive fan of automation. FF12 had so much automation that once you unlocked enough slots, the game could play itself, and really, do you want to do let the game do that? Why not watch a Lets Play?

Firstly, FF12 is exactly FF10's battle system if you actually look at how everything is happening one turn at a time. It's just that FF12 automated FF10's battle system. You could literally play FF12 just like FF10 and play turn-by-turn, it would take like 20 times longer to play it that way but you could.

Again, you're kinda not getting my argument/point. The whole reason you make a combat system turn-based is because there's too much strategy involved for the player to execute everything in real-time. A turned-based system needs to be strategic enough to merit it being turn-based. I'm not saying a turn-based combat system has to be as strategic as a SRPG like FF Tactics or Disgaea or something like XCOM, but there has to be enough strategy to it that you couldn't do it in real-time. For example, Xenosaga II's combat system merits it being turn-based because there's enough strategy, and it's no SRPG. If the combat could be done in real-time, it should be done in real-time.

Geralt in Witcher 3 has more total combat options (moves/abilities/magic/potions/etc.) than any one FF character and Witcher 3 works in real-time; of course, Witcher 3 doesn't have party members but then you can have the player lightly program their AI team members (with something like gambits) to fight on their own and you can even have the option to pause combat to issue a specific command with any party member (like Dragon Age Origins) when required. Basically, the player has full control of one character, some general control over party members (via something like gambits), and the ability to pause combat at any time to tell any character to do a specific move/spell/ability/etc. That's a much more fun combat system because instead of inputting the same commands over and over again, the player can actually do attacks/magic/etc themselves instead of just inputting a command and watching the same animation ad nauseam. And, with this action-based real-time combat system, there's actually more strategy added because since you can move around, positioning becomes a strategic factor (positioning is not even a factor in FF10). So, not only is the player much more active when fighting, but there is even more strategy involved than the freaking turn-based system. That is why a FF10-like turn-based combat system fails considering a real-time system has MORE strategy; a turn-based system should always have more strategy than a real-time system.

You'll have to give me a source on that. Nomura said he wanted to tweak the combat system (so I'm guessing similar to FF10-2 combat system, which I'm okay with, because it's just a more fluid version of 7/8/9s, but there should be a toggle.) I've yet to read anything from Square or Nomura directly that says they've removing random battles. I have no reason to believe they'd change the combat system so much that it wouldn't even resemble FF7, because that would stupid. FF7 has a pretty feverish fanbase and gutting the combat system is unlikely to go down well. I'd be pretty pissed if it ended up being like FF13 or 12 and I actually liked 12s combat system.

I'm just assuming they are going to actually remake FF7 and not just remake FF7 with better graphics, then what's really the point of it all? No FF has had random battles in over a decade, why would a FF7 remake have random battles? Random battles literally were a mechanic due hardware limitions on the NES I believe, why would a freaking PS4 game (5 generations later) have random battles? No FF game has had a combat system like FF7 or FF10 in over a decade either. A FF7 remake is going to sell so much anyways, you don't have to play it safe, plus the original FF7 is always going to exist. It would be like remaking a NES Metal Gear game and not updating the game mechanics, that would be pretty stupid, even the remake of MGS1 updated the game mechanics to MGS2.