Final Fantasy 16

[Old_Hunter_77]

Had Old_Hunter_77, used Guardian Heroes or even Code Of Princess and saying they're better RPGs than FF16, then I would have left it mostly alone. Assassin's Creed is when I put my foot down. Especially when it's the games with crappy RPG mechanics, and expect you to pay a high price just to get to a high level cap, and skip their bad, tedious, grinding they made by design. Fuck off, Ubisoft.

Yeah man you really showed me, put my in my place with that, good for you.

Except I didn't actually say AC is a better RPG than FF16 (god forbid that would be worse than the Holocaust!), I was talking about how it FEELS... to ME.. to play them, as a point of comparison. Me, the guy playing them, that's how it feels, in terms of story progression and player choice. And that's why you don't know what the fuck you're talking about because you didn't play them.

But for a guy who doesn't care about how you look on the internet, you sure are killing it here "winning" arguments and making moral declarations about two video game companies that have committed immoral practices. Congratulations.

 

[Old_Hunter_77]

I don't think SkillUp's review was posted here, sorry if i missed it:


It is, as usual, thoughtful and long.
In short, he is making many of the same criticisms that bouth u/CriticalGaming is making a fan of the franchise and that I am making as fan of story action games who has not played much FF. The big difference between him and me is that he very much does not like the game while I am having a blast with it.
It's also funny how careful he is with how he phrases it- going so far as to not put his usual final verdict in the video title- to avoid the hilariously silly anger of internet gamers who disagree with his opinion about a video game.

 

[immortalfrieza]

I haven't played it yet and I probably won't touch it until it's on PC and on sale so... yeah, not for a long time.

However, there's so much gatekeeping going on from all I hear about it. Like... It's not an RPG (even though it clearly is), it's not a Final Fantasy game (even thought it clearly is). The only consensus I seem to be able to find is that a lot of people love the game, even in spite of promoting the gatekeeping which is surprising.

 

[BrawlMan]

Except I didn't actually say AC is a better RPG than FF16 (god forbid that would be worse than the Holocaust!), I was talking about how it FEELS... to ME.. to play them, as a point of comparison.

I know and understood your words. How you feel that way is beyond my comprehension, but even under those circumstances, I can't agree to that. Though as I mention before, I can't change how you feel. I would never dream of doing so.

But for a guy who doesn't care about how you look on the internet, you sure are killing it here "winning" arguments and making moral declarations about two video game companies that have committed immoral practices. Congratulations.

You can cut it with the attitude. I do apologize, if I upset you or how I exactly reacted, but I wasn't trying to "win" anything. Never the intention to being with. As for those two companies, neither are off the fucking hook, but I hate Ubisoft even more by comparison. At least Square is trying course correct. I don't exactly like SE either. I am sorry for the misunderstanding, how I acted, and do not want to ends things a bad note.

It's also funny how careful he is with how he phrases it- going so far as to not put his usual final verdict in the video title- to avoid the hilariously silly anger of internet gamers who disagree with his opinion about a video game.

Which is weird, because Skill Up rarely ever gets blowback for his opinions. He shouldn't need to carefully phrase anything. Fuck the fanboys

 

[Dreiko]

I haven't played it yet and I probably won't touch it until it's on PC and on sale so... yeah, not for a long time.

However, there's so much gatekeeping going on from all I hear about it. Like... It's not an RPG (even though it clearly is), it's not a Final Fantasy game (even thought it clearly is). The only consensus I seem to be able to find is that a lot of people love the game, even in spite of promoting the gatekeeping which is surprising.

The game is legit less of an RPG than the ps4 God of War games, easy. It plays 100% like a DMC game. That's not a criticism, that's just a fact. And I love it for that cause it's basically a DMC with FF-tier production values, worldbuilding and epicness.

 

[Old_Hunter_77]

I saw a journalist say this on twitter but got roasted because people found out he had all the auto-accessories equiped.

Twitter idiots aside (and honestly isn't that just a good way to begin any sentiment), I agree both with the sentiment that combat is button mashy AND that you can execute sick combos and have a diversity of experiences. The two are not mutually exclusive.

One of the most fascinating things about games- and especially games I play which almost always involves some sort of combat- is how wildly different everyone's perceptions about "good" and "bad" combat. When you're dealing with so many micro-interactions, so much visual information and feedback, I think it ends up hitting some primal part of our brain that makes the experience so personal that if one person is having a fun rewarding experiences with the same game combat that bored the shorts off of someone else, it's kind of wild. Like when you really really really love a song and you don't understand how everyone around isn't also going nuts hearing it.

I'm gonna risk making another comparison about both the combat and "RPG" stuff, and they are related- The Witcher 3.
In both games, you are playing a created character- you cannot effect his look in any meaningful way, personality, etc. And combat is always you're a dude with a sword and you're attacking and dodging. Sure you can block/parry sometimes, and there are some extra abilities, but you HAVE to use a sword and it is melee. Contrast with, say, Elder Scrolls or Elden Souls where you can build yourself to be an archer or sorceror or brute or whatever.
And in both, there is customization- you slot skills. But they are secondary. In Witcher 3 the skills you slot may have you rely a bit more on magic but you're still primarily attacking with your sword. In FF16, you may have a few lightning or earth magics, but those are secondary actions to hitting square button to attack.

And I've said many times that Witcher 3 doesn't feel like an RPG either. It is my favorite game of all time but it plays to me more like just another 3rd person action game. Fortunately that is my favorite genre so whatever. And, as with FF16, there were a lot of salty Witcher fans who felt the game sacrificed a lot in order to go mainstream.

Anyway, I'm dicking around on the internet because I just had a boss fight in this game that was like an hour long or something... it was insane. That is both good (epic!) and bad (so tired).

Oh.. I'm gonna make another comparison: Ghostwire Tokyo. Japanese games that really seem to wanna feel "western." And are both extremely simplified in combat/gameplay and really, really pretty. I enjoyed Ghostwire- I am a sucker for really pretty, and really cool worlds. Reminds me of a couple girlfriends I had (a very very long time ago when I had girlfriends hahah) for way too long because they were so, so cute.

 

[immortalfrieza]

The game is legit less of an RPG than the ps4 God of War games, easy. It plays 100% like a DMC game. That's not a criticism, that's just a fact. And I love it for that cause it's basically a DMC with FF-tier production values, worldbuilding and epicness.

FF16 has levels, it has exp, it has stats, it has equipment, it has Action RPG combat, it has sidequests, it has abilities you can learn, it has you taking on a role, and more. If that combat is fast paced like DMC, good, that's just means it's a good Action RPG because it's fast paced instead of slow and prodding.

This gatekeeping is what I'm talking about. It's narrowing what qualifies as an "RPG" down and dismissing what it does have in order to exclude it as an RPG, when under any reasonable metric it is one. Whether FF16 compares to some other RPG game is irrelevant. FF16 is no less an RPG than any other game in the series. There's a ton of semantics going on to justify this odd viewpoint.

 

[BrawlMan]

I saw a journalist say this on twitter but got roasted because people found out he had all the auto-accessories equiped.

Gaming journalism 'tegrity strikes again!

agree both with the sentiment that combat is button mashy AND that you can execute sick combos and have a diversity of experiences. The two are not mutually exclusive.

True, but with most games, at some point a road block that will stop you from button mashing when you get a tougher chapter, or playing on a harder difficulty. Even a game like Viewtiful Joe's easy mode, you pretty much have to know what you're doing by the end of the 4th stage.

This gatekeeping is what I'm talking about. It's narrowing what qualifies as an "RPG" down and dismissing what it does have in order to exclude it as an RPG, when under any reasonable metric it is one. Whether FF16 compares to some other RPG game is irrelevant. FF16 is no less an RPG than any other game in the series. There's a ton of semantics going on to justify this odd viewpoint.

Thank you!

Anyway, I'm dicking around on the internet because I just had a boss fight in this game that was like an hour long or something... it was insane. That is both good (epic!) and bad (so tired).

Been there many times.

Oh.. I'm gonna make another comparison: Ghostwire Tokyo. Japanese games that really seem to wanna feel "western." And are both extremely simplified in combat/gameplay and really, really pretty. I enjoyed Ghostwire- I am a sucker for really pretty, and really cool worlds.

Enjoy it, because it's the last game from Shinji Mikami before he retired. I know GWT is a love it or hate it type game. I still have some interests, though I'm somewhat disappointed that the game was supposed to be Evil Within 3 at one point. I get why they did the change, and respect artistic and creative vision. Hopefully, Tango Games can get started on EW3 or some other new project at some point. The DLC for HF Rush comes out in a couple weeks.

 

[Old_Hunter_77]

> True, but with most games, at some point a road block that will stop you from button mashing when you get a tougher chapter, or playing on a harder difficulty.

Right. And I'm at a crucial point in the game which is like.. more than halfway through, I think? And I'm curious to see if/when that happens.

One of the side quests is these monster hunts (I don't think this is a spoiler, I for one heard about them in reviews and previews and such), where you gotta find and kill these enemies. These are the only good side quests in the game and I have been doing them. I have encountered some of these at higher level than me and defeated them.

What I'm saying is that combat is pretty easy, as others have said. Clearly the designers want people to get through the story/campaign without too much stress and then come back for harder challenges. Ok fine.
I should clarify that I'm not really harping on this, I have found a couple of those monster fights fun and actually cheered when I came upon one by accident, was higher level, and I took it out. I yelped with joy.
But so far, I have not hit a point where I have to re-think my strategy. Button smashing my way through victory! Also helps/hurts that the game is VERY generous with checkpoints for retries, so there's like no stakes, really. As sick as I am of Souls bullshit, it does remind me why the difficulty and risk of loss in those games is so special/horrible/wonderful (I have a lot of mixed feelings about that in case you couldn't tell).

Then there is a NG+ with a harder difficulty. Generally that doesn't interest me but I am also a bit of a trophy whore so I'll probably try it. That could be the point- the harder difficulty that will make me actually think and not button mash.
BUT... there are also things you can equip to like auto dodge and whatever to make it easy? I do love that there are no difficulty modes and instead there is equipment for that- but then it may cancel itself out? I dunno, obviously I'll see when I get there.

I know I'm writing a lot about this game as I play but I find this one really fascinating, in the general landscape of games and everything. It's the most curious game I've encountered in a while. My initial feeling that it is praised at first and will get shit on soon is only getting stronger as I play through it. I just did a whole story sequence that is like identical to an earlier one. If Yahtzee and Frost shit on Ragnarok for its pacing, they should, in all fairness, slaughter this game. I am wondering if/when/how it will be called out for this.

FF16 is yet another game that is trying to be the Witcher 3. And it's so NOT The Witcher 3, doesn't hold a candle. But like all these games that are trying to be The Witcher 3- Horizons, PS5 Gods of Wars, and yeah recent AssCreeds- they offer much fun and much crap in a big stew of... modern AAA gaming.

 

[FakeSympathy]

Final Fantasy 16 review bombers claim game “completely betrays” fans - Dexerto

Final Fantasy 16 review bombers claim the game "completely betrays" fans of the Square Enix JRPG franchise.

www.dexerto.com

Geez, I don't think the game is THAT BAD to get review bombed. It's certainly disappointing, but it's nowhere near as bad as games that actually do deserve to get review bombed like Redfall or Gollum

 

[BrawlMan]

But so far, I have not hit a point where I have to re-think my strategy. Button smashing my way through victory! Also helps/hurts that the game is VERY generous with checkpoints for retries, so there's like no stakes, really. As sick as I am of Souls bullshit, it does remind me why the difficulty and risk of loss in those games is so special/horrible/wonderful (I have a lot of mixed feelings about that in case you couldn't tell).

Honestly, I'll take overly generous checkpoints over, bad/sporadic checkpoints any day of the week. I like a challenge, I am not going to cry over the game making things more convenient for the player. It's the programmer respect the players' time.

If Yahtzee and Frost shit on Ragnarok for its pacing, they should, in all fairness, slaughter this game. I am wondering if/when/how it will be called out for this.

Yahtzee I don't trust for shit when it comes to pacing in most games. He had it for a minute, but as mentioned before, most of these critics were crying about "too many games to play". Get a bigger staff, or pick what's more important at the moment. You can't have it both ways you whiny hypocrites! I don't know who Frost is though.

FF16 is yet another game that is trying to be the Witcher 3. And it's so NOT The Witcher 3, doesn't hold a candle.

In what way? Because, if it's combat, W3 can't hold a candle to FFXVI. Thematically, I see some minor influence, but it's your standard dark fantasy from Berserk (as are most Japanese developed games source of inspiration. Even FF7.) and GoT who are the major contributors. Gaming wise, Tales of Berseria seems to be the major influence for XVI.

Final Fantasy 16 review bombers claim game “completely betrays” fans - Dexerto

Final Fantasy 16 review bombers claim the game "completely betrays" fans of the Square Enix JRPG franchise.

www.dexerto.com

Geez, I don't think the game is THAT BAD to get review bombed. It's certainly disappointing, but it's nowhere near as bad as games that actually do deserve to get review bombed like Redfall or Gollum

Biatches be biatches. Let them continue to cry, while the game sees high success. They're the FF hipsters that act like they own the fandom and what it means to be a "true FF fan". They're the assholes who hate on anything that gets popular. Ironic, because the franchise was already mainstream for a long time.

 

[CriticalGaming]

FF16 has levels, it has exp, it has stats, it has equipment, it has Action RPG combat, it has sidequests, it has abilities you can learn, it has you taking on a role, and more. If that combat is fast paced like DMC, good, that's just means it's a good Action RPG because it's fast paced instead of slow and prodding.

Fortnite and call of duty have those things too. Are they RPG'S?

Games can have RPG things without really being RPG's. Hell that was a lot of the problem with gaming throughout the 2000s, was that more and more games were tacking on RPG elements like levels and especially crafting, because they allowed devs to pad out the experience and increase the grind/playability of a game.

However just because those elements are there, doesn't make the game count as an RPG. And just because Final Fantasy elements are here, like Chocobos, doesnt mean it is a Final Fantasy game. There are a lot of toppings on the pizza of an FF game this game only has Pepperoni and Pineapples.

If this game was some spin off, it would be the best spin off FF game ever. Because spin offs can just have the toppings on the pizza and have it fit. But even the spin off games have more of the FF DNA to them than this. FF16 has a coulle of toppings, but most spins have dough, sauce, cheese. Barebones and doing their own thing enough of a pizza for children.

Kinda lost track of the analogy, and now im hungry.

 

[CriticalGaming]

Final Fantasy 16 review bombers claim game “completely betrays” fans - Dexerto

Final Fantasy 16 review bombers claim the game "completely betrays" fans of the Square Enix JRPG franchise.

www.dexerto.com

Geez, I don't think the game is THAT BAD to get review bombed. It's certainly disappointing, but it's nowhere near as bad as games that actually do deserve to get review bombed like Redfall or Gollum

It's one thing to be mad, it's another to be dishonest dumbasses about it. The game is still very good so the review bombing makes no sense.

Funny how people didnt review bomb the FF7Remake despite the obvious reasons to be salty buttholes about that game. Only being part of the game, changes to the combat, changes to the story, etc etc etc.

But it is a remake and this is a new entry in the mainline series that people had very high hopes for. And Yoshi-P has a lot of credit with people because it is clear he knows what he is doing as a director and what makes Final Fantasy people happy.

My theory is that he misjudged this game quite a bit. I think the move to full on action was a mistake because it limits the characters the player can control. And i think he is misguided in his judgement that people dont like RPGs anymore especially turn based one when turn based RPGs are just as popular as ever. The biggest fucking franchise on the planet is a turn based RPG for fucks sake. Not to mention Persona and all the best rated FF Games ever made.

Nobody praises the action FF games. So the fact that they decided to bail on everything the series has been built up by over 30 years is an astonishing misplay. Evolve the series if you want, tell darker more mature stories, do something new with the combat but keep thr FF traditions.

I mean Dragonquest is a national holiday in Japan when a new mainline game comes out and that combat is the same everyfuckingtime. Yoshi even started with Square working on DQ games so he should know this.

There never is anything good that comes from evolving a game just for the sake of evolving it. Its this same ideology that killed WoW.

 

[BrawlMan]

Funny how people didnt review bomb the FF7Remake despite the obvious reasons to be salty buttholes about that game. Only being part of the game, changes to the combat, changes to the story, etc etc etc.

Hypocritical fans, am I right?

My theory is that he misjudged this game quite a bit. I think the move to full on action was a mistake because it limits the characters the player can control. And i think he is misguided in his judgement that people dont like RPGs anymore especially turn based one when turn based RPGs are just as popular as ever. The biggest fucking franchise on the planet is a turn based RPG for fucks sake. Not to mention Persona and all the best rated FF Games ever made.

At least he didn't treat those new or invested in the genre like thundering dumb asses, nor insult his target audience. Unlike some other developers involved with a long running franchise! If there's any net positive, the game will open the gateway for those peeking interests into RPGS, can try the older FF titles, and other RPGs in general.

Games can have RPG things without really being RPG's. Hell that was a lot of the problem with gaming throughout the 2000s, was that more and more games were tacking on RPG elements like levels and especially crafting, because they allowed devs to pad out the experience and increase the grind/playability of a game.

Difference being, they all sucked at their job hard. I'll take cheers to ripping on bad 2000s game design all day! Cheers!

Nobody praises the action FF games.

I wouldn't say nobody, but Lightning Returns definitely needs more appreciation for its combat.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

I'm gonna risk making another comparison about both the combat and "RPG" stuff, and they are related- The Witcher 3.
In both games, you are playing a created character- you cannot effect his look in any meaningful way, personality, etc. And combat is always you're a dude with a sword and you're attacking and dodging. Sure you can block/parry sometimes, and there are some extra abilities, but you HAVE to use a sword and it is melee. Contrast with, say, Elder Scrolls or Elden Souls where you can build yourself to be an archer or sorceror or brute or whatever.
And in both, there is customization- you slot skills. But they are secondary. In Witcher 3 the skills you slot may have you rely a bit more on magic but you're still primarily attacking with your sword. In FF16, you may have a few lightning or earth magics, but those are secondary actions to hitting square button to attack.

And I've said many times that Witcher 3 doesn't feel like an RPG either. It is my favorite game of all time but it plays to me more like just another 3rd person action game. Fortunately that is my favorite genre so whatever. And, as with FF16, there were a lot of salty Witcher fans who felt the game sacrificed a lot in order to go mainstream.

Most video game RPGs I don't consider RPGs because you don't have any player agency besides for combat. Player agency is makes a game an RPG, it's not stats or leveling or equipment or loot. If I can't dictate my character's personality and make story decisions, it's not an RPG. The Final Fantasy series has static characters and a static story, that's not an RPG to me. It's like adding levels and stats to Nathan Drake in Uncharted, that wouldn't make Uncharted an RPG. Witcher 3 at least has some character and story choices, but not nearly enough to make it primarily an RPG as it's not the core game. And not considering a Final Fantasy or Witcher game an RPG isn't some knock or anything against them, it's like saying Uncharted isn't an FPS, which isn't some criticism against it, it's just not an FPS.

 

[immortalfrieza]

Fortnite and call of duty have those things too. Are they RPG'S?

If they do, then yes. Really, all an RPG needs to be an RPG is levels, EXP, and stats to increase via said EXP and levels. If a game has that, it's an RPG.

Games can have RPG things without really being RPG's. Hell that was a lot of the problem with gaming throughout the 2000s, was that more and more games were tacking on RPG elements like levels and especially crafting, because they allowed devs to pad out the experience and increase the grind/playability of a game.

Then the term "RPG" is meaningless. FF16 doesn't have any less RPG elements than any other game in the series and few would argue that say FF4 is not an RPG. That's the thing, people are just saying "it's not an RPG" because they want to bash it and are looking for any excuse to do so, despite the fact that there are plenty of RPGs that have just as many, more, or less than FF16 does.

Most video game RPGs I don't consider RPGs because you don't have any player agency besides for combat. Player agency is makes a game an RPG, it's not stats or leveling or equipment or loot. If I can't dictate my character's personality and make story decisions, it's not an RPG.

Player agency has nothing to do with being an RPG. That's a No True Scotsman fallacy. No RPG needs player agency to be an RPG, it's nice when it's there, but it's not needed. Levels, EXP, and stats effected by those levels, that's the bare minimum that's needed to be an RPG. Even now, most RPGs, whether one is willing to identify it as an RPG or not, don't have any player agency whatsoever.

The way you're describing it, you wouldn't accept anything less than a tabletop RPG as an RPG, which is a ridiculously limited metric to determine what an RPG is.

 

[Old_Hunter_77]

> [re: FF16 trying to be Witcher 3] In what way? Because, if it's combat, W3 can't hold a candle to FFXVI.

No, not combat.
What I mean by this is in quest structure, story progression, and trying traditional linear action gameplay to storytelling.

Witcher 3 is the standard-bearer of quest design in this type of game. Having side quests be as impactful, as deep, and as thoughtful as the critical path quests.

After Witcher 3 came out, it seems to me that other franchises tried to copy it. Yes, that means Assassins Creed (starting with Origins), but Horizon Zero Dawn, and God of War 2018. I wanna say Red Dead Redemption 2 MAYBE but I don't remember the original Red Dead enough so don't hold me to it.

I'm not saying Witcher 3 like pioneered any one thing... they just sort of capped the trends that were coming with their own influences and other franchises like the Bethesdas and the Biowares etc. And it came at a very specific, beneficial time for it in the landscape of gaming.

And FF16 is just another game that seems like they want to capture that feeling but they don't understand what made it work. Which is true for many other games I've enjoyed but it's also why those of us that are W3 fanboys are the way we are... we see it in everything. Like obnoxious Beatles fans listening to rock music for the next 40 years after th White album.

 

[BrawlMan]

No, not combat.
What I mean by this is in quest structure, story progression, and trying traditional linear action gameplay to storytelling.

Witcher 3 is the standard-bearer of quest design in this type of game. Having side quests be as impactful, as deep, and as thoughtful as the critical path quests.

Okay then.

God of War 2018.

GoW4 took more from Last of Us, Dark Souls (with its open ended level design, default attack buttons on the triggers, and Metroidvania intricacies) and Lone Wolf & Cub, than anything Witcher related.

I wanna say Red Dead Redemption 2 MAYBE but I don't remember the original Red Dead enough so don't hold me to it.

Nah, Red Dead 1 was already doing its own thing, and RD2 was just Rockstar doubling down on what they already done beforehand.

Horizon Zero Dawn

I don't see it personally on this one either (yet it would not surprise me, if that is the case), but I never played the game. I did watch a playthrough once, but I am seeing Sony taking from the Ubisoft design formula than anything else. But you know, actually fun.

 

[FakeSympathy]

It's one thing to be mad, it's another to be dishonest dumbasses about it. The game is still very good so the review bombing makes no sense.

Funny how people didnt review bomb the FF7Remake despite the obvious reasons to be salty buttholes about that game. Only being part of the game, changes to the combat, changes to the story, etc etc etc.

But it is a remake and this is a new entry in the mainline series that people had very high hopes for. And Yoshi-P has a lot of credit with people because it is clear he knows what he is doing as a director and what makes Final Fantasy people happy.

My theory is that he misjudged this game quite a bit. I think the move to full on action was a mistake because it limits the characters the player can control. And i think he is misguided in his judgement that people dont like RPGs anymore especially turn based one when turn based RPGs are just as popular as ever. The biggest fucking franchise on the planet is a turn based RPG for fucks sake. Not to mention Persona and all the best rated FF Games ever made.

Nobody praises the action FF games. So the fact that they decided to bail on everything the series has been built up by over 30 years is an astonishing misplay. Evolve the series if you want, tell darker more mature stories, do something new with the combat but keep thr FF traditions.

It's so weird because by the same logic, Kingdom Hearts series should've been review-bombed a long time ago. AFAIK, KH started the whole Action RPG trend in FF series. But despite that and plenty of other things wrong with the series, I've never seen any of them getting actual review-bombed. It's almost like there's a silent rule to not talk shit about KH games, save for CoM, BBS, and 358/2 days.

Come to think of it, FF7Remake was under the direction of the madman himself, Tetsuya Nomura. Nomura also was in charge of KH series. So maybe there's a connection there on why none of them gets review-bombed?

I agree. Yoshi-P, while having good intentions, didn't execute the game properly.


Why do I get the feeling the last bit of video will come to fruition?

 

[CriticalGaming]

Lightning Returns definitely needs more appreciation for its combat.

You just like playing dress up. Now i undersand you