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

[darkcalling]

I've played FF7 (not when it was brand new, I played 8 first) and I never liked it.

I liked parts of it. Random battles and turn-based combat are something I've always liked and something I miss in rpg's.

What I hated were the characters. Cloud is a dull near emotionless idiot. The only emotion he showed was when he was in an emo coma for about 3 hours worth of gametime. Aeris was useless in gameplay terms since due to the materia system there wasn't really anything she could do that no one else couldn't do as well or better. I actually cheered when she died because i'd never feel obligated to use her again.

Sephiroth was a terrible villain. His entire motivation seemed to be "they grew me as a weapon? Then I'll kill them all!" Jenova or even Dr. Hojo were more the true villain, but jenova was in inscrutable eldritch abombination with no actual characterization, and Hojo almost seemed like an afterthought.

With all that plus multiple not really sequels and prequels wearing out their welcome, the only good thing I can see in the remake is that the fanboys have what they want and can finally stop begging for it.

You couldn't pay me to play this game.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

I remember getting FF7 for my PSX in my preteens, and it was a pretty good game, but by no means great. Even at the time the graphics it used were really inconsistent and it looked like ass, that's even compared to FF8 and FF9 both of which were on the PSX too. It's one of the worst looking PlayStation games I've still ever seen to this point, to the point that it even makes the ugliest N64 games look amazing. If they can make the art consistent and good looking then it deserves a remake just for that. The voice acting really sucked too, any improvement to that would be welcome.

As far as narrative, well FF4, 6, 9, and 10 were all better, though the story is good enough.

Honestly FF7 is vastly overrated, it's still a good game, but god is it an overrated one. I think one reason is most people who played it were around my age and younger at the time, when they did, so the nostalgia glasses are on for it. Still, it's vastly overrated.

 

[Bat Vader]

Analysis like these are bullshit tbh, and articles like these show how thick said analyser's are.

FF7 is about wonderful setups, rhythmic movement and flow (both in story and battle), complimented by stunning music, camera shots and atmosphere to create an absorbing and immersive RPG. Picking things apart such as dialogue show just how dumb said pickers are. It's like having a wife who cooks amazing, cleans like a trooper, is a super mum, and then someone saying "she's a bit boring with conversation" - it totally misses the point.

All the points he points to may be flawed in isolation, but that's like saying Maradonna wasn't a great tackler or Winston Churchill wasn't great with the economy. All it does is display said critic's ignorance and incapability to actually grasp the point of them in the first place.

To further that, these mathmatical ways of analysis are generally bullshit and they have been killing gaming for years.

"Not truly open world", "Another 'save the world' story", "no ammo", "no voiced protagonist" etc. etc. - all these bullshit complaints mean absolutely nothing in context of game enjoyment, and the fact that devs feel obliged to keep these scrotes who set these false standards happy means we get dross games like Dragon Age:Inquistition and Mass Effect 3, instead of class ones like Dragon Age:Origins and Mass Effect 1.

These people are actually killing gaming, and I urge devs to ignore this bizare drone they all seem to spew forth. If you begin to look at it, it's usually issues in their own lives which their can't/daren't solve, so various media serving as an outlet for that, nothing more.

The whole point of a critic is to criticize stuff though. That's their main thing. What's wrong with picking things apart? If a game has weird or terrible dialogue people should know that the dialogue is weird or terrible. Shitty dialogue can ruin the immersion for me in a game. I highly doubt what these people say are killing gaming.

I bought and played FFVII back when it was released on PC again and I didn't really care for it. I thought it was decent but nothing special.

I don't get the complaints about the combat? I absolutely love turn based or ATB battles, and FF7 does them incredibly rhythmically and stylishly, with a wonderful amount of flexibility and development.

Some people don't like turn based combat. I sure don't. Most battles felt like a boring slog to get through. There were a few I liked but they were few and far between. My favorite combat systems in JRPGs is the combat system in Kingdom Hearts II and the combat system in Tales of Xillia.

 

[Lightspeaker]

the combat system in FF10 absolutely demolished every FF game before it...

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 has the same exact combat system under-the-hood has FF10, you could even play FF12 just like FF10 if you wanted to. FF12 merely allowed you to automate all the basic stuff. Like everyone is at good health levels so I'll attack or that person is under 25% health so I'll heal them. It was all common sense stuff you just constantly had to do ad nauseam in prior FFs. I'm not praising FF12 system as great or anything, it was just merely better because it kept me out of blasted menus as much as possible. Put in if-then-else statements (gambits) in FF10 and it would play itself too.

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.

 

[LetalisK]

I don't think it was a very good game and got most of its mileage simply because it was ambitious, but I hate when people come down and by fiat declare something is shit or good as if their personal taste means shit. I don't like FF7. That doesn't mean no one else is allowed to like it. "If we're being honest"? Jesus.

 

[Danbo Jambo]

The whole point of a critic is to criticize stuff though. That's their main thing. What's wrong with picking things apart? If a game has weird or terrible dialogue people should know that the dialogue is weird or terrible. Shitty dialogue can ruin the immersion for me in a game. I highly doubt what these people say are killing gaming.

I bought and played FFVII back when it was released on PC again and I didn't really care for it. I thought it was decent but nothing special.

It's not wrong to pick things apart, but it is wrong to do it mathematically as if certain aspects not being up to scratch take away from the game's overall experience. When what the whole experience is actually about has little to do with said aspects.

They are killing games, because you end up with companies like Bioware trying to appease everyone, and worrying about stuff like having to be open world, having to have action based combat instead of turn based, etc. etc.

It's bollocks. So long as it's a good experience then that's all that matters. Emotion and an enjoyable experience isn't to do with maths, yet we've these scientific types trying to turn everything into a formulaic mass production product.

Some people don't like turn based combat. I sure don't. Most battles felt like a boring slog to get through. There were a few I liked but they were few and far between. My favorite combat systems in JRPGs is the combat system in Kingdom Hearts II and the combat system in Tales of Xillia.

That's fair enough, but again we're back to out of context criticism.

You don't buy a driving game then state you don't like driving mechanics, or by a RTS game then say you much prefer turn based combat.

Criticizing FF7's ATB system is like going to a prostitute and moaning that she's a bit easy, or drinking 12 pints of lager and moaning it's made you fat - you know what you're getting and you shouldn't be surprized.

I love the ATB system and FF7 battles, they're about great atmosphere, exciting camera shots and dramatic attacks. It's one great show like watching KISS' Ace Frehely fire a rocket out his guitar and Gene Simmons fly up to the roof. If you start whining about Ace's inability to shred or the cheesey nature of songs you've missed the entire point. Hence why that critic is thick and coming from the angle of "too dumb to grasp the game in context"

 

[Orga777]

Found this today.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-petite/if-we-are-being-honest-ab_b_7617648.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592

TL;DR (even though it's not too L to R): FF7 is the most overrated game ever.

It has aged terribly, but even compared to other games that came out around the same time, it was never very good. The story is bland, the dialogue is awful, the world is uninspired, and with all the things it tried to do at once, it did none of them well.

Now, I've never played FF7, but we all grew up suckling at its teat regardless of whether we personally partook or not. And whether it's actually good or not, I really enjoy lobbing grenades at the untouchable classics.

So. Discuss.

Eh. There are more overrated Final Fantasy games. Namely IV and X, which while both have amazing game play, the story is a bit wonky and plot contrived to such a high degree that it can feel disjointed. VII is actually pretty decent when all things considered when it comes to story. It really isn't even a bland story. There are some messed up moments in the game, especially when dealing with Hojo. There is also a strong sense of finding yourself in the story, and despite what Advent Children would do to Cloud, he really isn't that mopey through most of the game. He is a bit off-putting early on, but he gets better pretty much as soon as he meets Aerith, and he doesn't stay down long even when his mind is getting totally f-ed with by Sephiroth.

I wouldn't even say the world is uninspired. There is very strong set-up and atmosphere through most of the game. The setting is bleak because of the story they are trying to tell.

The dialogue is less a problem than the rather shoddy translation of the game. Pretty much every English translation of Final Fantasy I-VII had horrifically bad translations. They didn't start getting better till IX (maybe VIII, but the dialogue in that game I think was just terrible in both versions), and none of the older games got a decent translation till their re-releases on the GBA where the dialogue was cleaned up and actually makes sense. Which is why if people are going to play Final Fantasy VI (the best one) they should get the GBA version. Final Fantasy VII never really had a cleaned up translation in comparison.

Now, besides that, no, the game did not age well at all. The graphics are pretty terrible and the look is not really good for today's sensibilities. Of all the games in the series, this one probably aged the worst. IV-VI get by with classic 16-bit sprite based graphics that age very well over time. I-III are not that great in the old 8-bit style they had, but it still looks okay, and these games all had nice remasters later on that made them more in line with the 16-bit games and they look great. VIII still looks pretty good for a PS1 game, and IX had a more stylized look that also aged nicely. VII doesn't really have this stuff going for it at all. I guess it was good at the time, but, really, it did age poorly in that department. However, a remake would obliterate that issue completely. So it shouldn't be an issue there. Although, I hope they tone down the hyper-realism. That tends to age poorly the older it gets.

In conclusion... you really should play the game. I wasn't even one of those people that grew up with the game. I started with VIII and X, moved on to XII, then IV, V, and VI, followed by I and II before I ever played VII. I was worried going into the game, too, since it was all reputation, and the feelings on it were mixed, really. However, I played it and after playing every game in the main series, it is probably the third best in the series overall. I only put VI and IX over it when it comes to overall quality. VII isn't that bad a game.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

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.

 

[Orga777]

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.

Why are you comparing a game like XCOM, which is a turn-based strategy game, to a standard turn-based RPG? ALL standard RPG's can be optimized in a way that make the player broken. This is true in Final Fantasy games all the way up to Dark Souls. Do not compare apples to oranges. It doesn't work. However, I liked to play the game with only about four gambits on per character and with me taking control of all the action myself. It feels more hectic and fun that way instead of letting it play all on its own... also, Final Fantasy XII is very underrated. I love that game.

It is true that X is pretty easy, though. The game is not really a challenge. My last play through I died only once to Seymore at Gagazet, and that had had to do with his dumb random damaged missiles wiping out the whole party... >.<

 

[TheVampwizimp_v1legacy]

Ummm, anyone care to explain why we should care about gaming opinions from a traditionally more political publication? I saw Huffington Post in the link and already knew I didn't have to click the link as anything said in the article wouldn't even be worth the grain of salt it's served with due to the fact that they're hardly a reputable source for gaming information/news.

Really any point the author of that article brings up can be easily countered with two questions: "Who the hell are you? And why the hell should I give a damn about what you think regarding any game?"

Well you're absolutely right that hearing Huffington Post does not conjure thoughts of video game journalism or pop culture phenomena. And I almost didn't bring this up because of the likely questionable source.

But if they have people writing articles about video games, I think we can assume that they hired people who at least know something about them. This guy may work for a primarily political publication, but his opinion is not automatically less than yours because of it.

Besides, can you really trust ANY game journalist these days?

 

[RJ 17]

But if they have people writing articles about video games, I think we can assume that they hired people who at least know something about them. This guy may work for a primarily political publication, but his opinion is not automatically less than yours because of it.

For starters: he doesn't work for the Huffington Post...he's a freelancer. This means that he quite literally is "random jackass with an opinion." It'd be one thing if he was HP's "official gaming coverage", but that's not the case.

In the end, it's just an opinion piece...one that has very little merit, judging by the comment section of that article (yes, I did eventually click into it...specifically to read through the comment section). There's nothing wrong with having an opinion of course, and I'm not faulting the guy for stating his. I'm just saying that there's no real reason to care - or get upset about - anything that guy has to say.

 

[TheVampwizimp_v1legacy]

But if they have people writing articles about video games, I think we can assume that they hired people who at least know something about them. This guy may work for a primarily political publication, but his opinion is not automatically less than yours because of it.

For starters: he doesn't work for the Huffington Post...he's a freelancer. This means that he quite literally is "random jackass with an opinion." It'd be one thing if he was HP's "official gaming coverage", but that's not the case.

In the end, it's just an opinion piece...one that has very little merit, judging by the comment section of that article (yes, I did eventually click into it...specifically to read through the comment section). There's nothing wrong with having an opinion of course, and I'm not faulting the guy for stating his. I'm just saying that there's no real reason to care - or get upset about - anything that guy has to say.

Perhaps, but people will be upset by it. And people who agree with him will be upset that fanboys are upset. And the world keeps on turning.

Just to be clear, I don't have an opinion on FF7. I thought this was an interesting wrench to throw into the topic of the remake. But if he is just 'some random jackass,' I guess it's your prerogative to call bullshit.

 

[Saltyk]

(and let's face it, crossdressing Cloud would just look WEIRD with an HD upgrade)

Is it weird that I'd actually looking forward to that scene in the Remake? Also, the motorcycle escape should be awesome.

I can't really comment much on FF7 personally, but I'm not entirely sure what it is with the need to prove classic games are overrated and just loved because of nostalgia. It comes across as losing an argument and then coming back twenty years later to see if you can get your revenge. Basically, it's pretty much the most pathetic form of the "this game is so overrated!" arguments.

It's cut from the same cloth as the constant droning of how sequels and franchises are the devil; it's a way for people to feel like they're more daring and curious than they actually are, as well as to make up for the MASSIVE insecurity of how a game nearly twenty years old still hasn't been beaten. A remake of it pretty much means that the guys at Square have given up on ever surpassing it as they frequently said they would not remake it until they released an FF that surpassed it in sales and acclaim, which still hasn't happened. Seriously, stuff that's twenty years old isn't remembered fondly solely due to nostalgia (because if nostalgia was the sole or main factor then the FMV phase of gaming wouldn't be relentlessly mocked as it is).

Damn, you are kicking some ass in this thread. I really have to agree with the statement that nostalgia isn't enough. Yes, FF7 is my all time favorite game, but it's not simply due to nostalgia or my history with the game. It's because it's a great game.

It's the same reason I still love Jurassic Park to this day. It's why movies like Casablanca are still good to this day. It's why the classic Abbot and Costello "Who's on First" routine is still hilarious to this day. It's why Shakespeare is still relevant. Why the work of artists like Michelangelo and Da Vinci are still respected today.

Good is good.

If you go into anything expecting it to be great based on word of mouth, you will almost always be disappointed, which is why I think we get people calling it overrated. They heard nothing but good stuff about it and expected something that it could never live up to. I suspect that the aged graphics are more than a small part of this.

Seriously, I legitimately play FF7 almost every single year. I've beaten it over a dozen times. I'm practically the game's strategy guide in flesh. At this point, I'm really considering downloading it from Steam and using some of the Mods that make it more difficult for the Hell of it. I love the game and while I have stated that I didn't want a remake in the past, I still look forward to it. I want to see all those environments and enemies in all their glory. I have some misgivings (especially when it comes to the combat as stated in another thread), but I have hope.

 

[jklinders]

Someone get the author of that huffpo piece a pair of black thick rimmed glasses. I smelled hipster pretty early in. Then he went on his utterly useless irrelevant rant about things in that era that went sour. He could have made his point in third of the words and probably trimmed it down some more. So I rate that article about 4/10 with most of those points going towards the fact it was reasonably well edited.

In my opinion, there is not one issue he raised about the game that cannot be adequately addressed with the newer tech currently available. If he is serious, well that's more his problem than anyone else's if he feels that way, but I feel that it was a clickbait piece and I feel dirty for clicking it.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Why are you comparing a game like XCOM, which is a turn-based strategy game, to a standard turn-based RPG? ALL standard RPG's can be optimized in a way that make the player broken. This is true in Final Fantasy games all the way up to Dark Souls. Do not compare apples to oranges. It doesn't work. However, I liked to play the game with only about four gambits on per character and with me taking control of all the action myself. It feels more hectic and fun that way instead of letting it play all on its own... also, Final Fantasy XII is very underrated. I love that game.

It is true that X is pretty easy, though. The game is not really a challenge. My last play through I died only once to Seymore at Gagazet, and that had had to do with his dumb random damaged missiles wiping out the whole party... >.<

I'm not really comparing FF10 to XCOM. I'm merely pointing out that a good turn-based combat system would not play itself with a few if-then-else statements. If you can make a turn-based combat system play itself with a few if-then-else statements, then it's not strategic enough to merit it being turn-based; make the combat action-based if there's not going to be any strategy to it so it's actually fun and isn't a huge time waste for the player. Just imagine how long it would take to defeat all those skeletons in that one mine in FF12 with FF10's battle system, all poorly done turn-based battle systems do is waste the player's time.

I use Xenosaga II instead of XCOM if you want; while not being super strategic, Xenosaga II at least had enough strategy to it to not play itself with a few if-then-else statements. Xenosaga II had the best battle system of the series yet people disliked it the most in the series.

I did enjoy FF12 but the game is very flawed. One thing that is great about FF12 is how you can just walk out that first gate and see all those creatures like that dinosaur and such, the world feels alive. Due to random battles being in prior FFs, the world felt lifeless (like the Calm Lands in FF10).

 

[Bat Vader]

The whole point of a critic is to criticize stuff though. That's their main thing. What's wrong with picking things apart? If a game has weird or terrible dialogue people should know that the dialogue is weird or terrible. Shitty dialogue can ruin the immersion for me in a game. I highly doubt what these people say are killing gaming.

I bought and played FFVII back when it was released on PC again and I didn't really care for it. I thought it was decent but nothing special.

It's not wrong to pick things apart, but it is wrong to do it mathematically as if certain aspects not being up to scratch take away from the game's overall experience. When what the whole experience is actually about has little to do with said aspects.

They are killing games, because you end up with companies like Bioware trying to appease everyone, and worrying about stuff like having to be open world, having to have action based combat instead of turn based, etc. etc.

It's bollocks. So long as it's a good experience then that's all that matters. Emotion and an enjoyable experience isn't to do with maths, yet we've these scientific types trying to turn everything into a formulaic mass production product.

Some people don't like turn based combat. I sure don't. Most battles felt like a boring slog to get through. There were a few I liked but they were few and far between. My favorite combat systems in JRPGs is the combat system in Kingdom Hearts II and the combat system in Tales of Xillia.

That's fair enough, but again we're back to out of context criticism.

You don't buy a driving game then state you don't like driving mechanics, or by a RTS game then say you much prefer turn based combat.

Criticizing FF7's ATB system is like going to a prostitute and moaning that she's a bit easy, or drinking 12 pints of lager and moaning it's made you fat - you know what you're getting and you shouldn't be surprized.

I love the ATB system and FF7 battles, they're about great atmosphere, exciting camera shots and dramatic attacks. It's one great show like watching KISS' Ace Frehely fire a rocket out his guitar and Gene Simmons fly up to the roof. If you start whining about Ace's inability to shred or the cheesey nature of songs you've missed the entire point. Hence why that critic is thick and coming from the angle of "too dumb to grasp the game in context"

Personally I love DA:I and ME3. They are two of my favorite games. The ending didn't really bother me. I went into FFVII trying to like it. I heard people who hate turn based combat enjoy the combat in FFVII so I thought I would like it. Instead it felt like most of the other turn based combat games I played.

 

[Frankster]

but even compared to other games that came out around the same time, it was never very good

Epic load of BS on this sentence. I know it's the hipster thing to say retroactively that you knew that the game EVERYONE loved at release was crap all along and only now have the common folk caught up to that realization, but that doesn't mean one gets a white card to completely rewrite history either.

Heck do you even remember what rpgs they were on the ps1 prior to FF7? I can, and whilst I would consider at least 1 of them (wild arms) to be better then FF7, they didn't have the wow factor that made people buy the playstation in droves and cement its place as leader of the console wars of that time.

So OP, which ps1 rpg prior to the release of FF7 do you consider a better game? I mean if you're gonna say something like "compared to other games that came out around the same time", then you should give a few examples to show you actually know what you're talking about and not just repeating it cos you read it somewhere.

I really enjoy lobbing grenades at the untouchable classics.

Ff7 an "untouchable" classic? o0
It's like the single most bitched about old classic and cited example of an overrated game there is, and this was even before the announcement of the remake! You could not have found an easier target if you tried..

 

[BytByte]

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.

 

[TheVampwizimp_v1legacy]

but even compared to other games that came out around the same time, it was never very good

Epic load of BS on this sentence. I know it's the hipster thing to say retroactively that you knew that the game EVERYONE loved at release was crap all along and only now have the common folk caught up to that realization, but that doesn't mean one gets a white card to completely rewrite history either.

Heck do you even remember what rpgs they were on the ps1 prior to FF7? I can, and whilst I would consider at least 1 of them (wild arms) to be better then FF7, they didn't have the wow factor that made people buy the playstation in droves and cement its place as leader of the console wars of that time.

So OP, which ps1 rpg prior to the release of FF7 do you consider a better game? I mean if you're gonna say something like "compared to other games that came out around the same time", then you should give a few examples to show you actually know what you're talking about and not just repeating it cos you read it somewhere.

I really enjoy lobbing grenades at the untouchable classics.

Ff7 an "untouchable" classic? o0
It's like the single most bitched about old classic and cited example of an overrated game there is, and this was even before the announcement of the remake! You could not have found an easier target if you tried..

I should have made it more clear in the OP, but again, I'm neutral on this subject. I never played FF7. I didn't even play RPGs in the PS1 days, I played Tekken and Twisted Metal. I know I have no legitimate opinion on the game, which is why I'm not offering one. I just read an article that I thought was interesting, and thought it might also light a few fires on this forum. I'm just having fun, trying to provoke some conversation.

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.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

I think this remake will suck. Especially as they are changing everything about it and i really hate modern FF combat. If they make it modern graphic wise yet keep the combat the same then im happy.