In Defense of Final Fantasy XIII

[wooty]

Nice article, but I didnt think FFXIII needed defending.

Some people liked it, some didnt.

 

[medv4380]

snip

Didn't they also say that you can't tell a compelling story on an open world game?

Perhaps he never heard of Grand Theft Auto... or previous FF games...

I don't remember that prior to launch, but it may have been put forward as an argument to justify some of the complaints. I do remember them saying that it was originally designed for the PS2, and that could actually explain some of the design choices. For the PS2 to do that level of graphics many things have to be cut out. This would explain the lovely but small linear hallways all over the place.

I completely disagree with the articles argument that FFXIII was innovative in any way shape or form. I don't think they were going for innovation ether. Thinking back on those original interviews prior to launch this is always what they were building up to. They always wanted in interactive movie, and that's not to surprising given where these companies originally started with way back. It's also not my fault or the users fault for not believing them as Jeff Dunn implied. The entertainment industry is notorious for over hyping anything it produces, and, for the most part, the audience has accepted that a long line of buzz words is not actually reflective of the real product.

FFXIII and -2 have already proven that they've killed the franchise and square must know that they have to do something to fix it. 13 never come close to the sales of 10 which is a bad sign. per vgchartz
7 = 9.72 million
10 = 8.05 million
10-2 = 5.29 million
13 = 4.77 PS3 + 1.84 XBox 360 = 6.61
13-2 = 1.69 PS3 + 0.39 XBox 360 = 2.08

10 is at least a couple of million to 7 which is good since 7 has had a longer sales period and works on 3 generations of consoles where 10 only works on 1. I'd expect both of the -2 to do less then the first release but 10-2 did 65% of what 10 did and even though 13-2 hasn't been out as long the initials sales don't look good since 90% of what is going to sell should be about out the door. This looks even worse when you look at the Japan figures only (which have a longer time on the market), and that's the primary market for JRPGs.

13-3 can expect even less performance if it is even done. Honestly with the damage 13 did to the franchise, as shown by 13-2s performance, I'd be looking to escape out of the money-pit I put myself into.

They should probably reorganize, and put some effort into some of their old and dusty properties. Then move back and make a decent FF title.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

The battle system, however, is one of the best in any JRPG, and certainly the best in a Final Fantasy. It makes the most of the fact that there is no attrition to make almost every combat a meaningful challenge, usually with a solution based not on luck or brute force of levels but on understanding and manipulating the system provided to you, using the right mix of classes at the right time, and changing them in response to the flow of the battle. You might not be clicking on "attack" every round yourself, but you'll be making far more decisions than you would in any other FF game.

I would like to add that is they had of changed the UI for combat. Three columns rather than 2 and had things separated by spell type as in 1 row for Fire one for Blizzard it would be the best combat system. The UI is what ultimately killed the combat for me. There are a couple of tweaks I would do the combat myself but it is far from the worst.

OT: While I do agree with many of the points put across or the general reason why this article was written(as in FF fans don't like change as all games have wildly different aspects and mechanics) I do agree with the sentiment that game was not entirely bad. Especially, since you seem to like to alienate readers on their decision and opinion as you go to refute another different opinion made the whole article a lot more hard to swallow.

 

[Tharticus]

Even with the innovations they added on the game, FFXIII still blows monkey balls.

My issues with the game:

1. The storyline is terribad. With about 7 hour gameplay, you barely their character's ambitions, what their universe is about and what the villains are up to. Being that this is also an interactive medium, it fails on its storytelling with little to no exposition. Datalogs? This is about as bad as watching a movie "Clash of the Titans" and read cliffnotes about Greek history. At least what FFX did the exposition right by having Tidus the main character not knowing what world is he in.

2. Characters are about as a cookie cutter from their predecessors notably from 7 - 10. Hope happens to pull a boomerang out of nowhere. Inconsistency much?

3. The combat system is about the same as the old except the active time battle, removing magic points and put inside two characters on auto attack and your main character getting knocked out means you start over.

4. Badly interfaced upgrading system. Why would I even bother giving Hope or Vanille the Commando class when they are fine as Ravenger or Medic. I guess if people are curious on playing all Commandos. That's considered non linear gameplay. Speaking of which...

5. Linearity is about as a straight rod. Half Life 2 was also strict but give little freedom to roam around at least.

The only praise I give to this game is how gorgeous it is both cutscenes and game.

All in all, Final Fantasy XIII might as well be a rail RPG. Or a damn movie to make up their awful CGI movie The Spirits Within.

Despite all this, the game sold well. And Squenix is in trouble, especially Versus XIII and XIV.

 

[Callate]

There's a reason the phrase isn't "build a different mousetrap, and the world will beat a path to your door." Change that exists solely for change's sake is one of the forces in the universe uniquely suited to shooting itself in the foot, and "the designers were getting bored" is an out-and-out stupid reason to monkey with a successful franchise without serious consideration of how players would react to those changes.

Now, full disclosure: I haven't played FFXIII, in fact, my most significant exposure to the series has was the demo for FFVII. But I object to this notion that all criticism of a "new direction" is hypocrisy, even if the critics might have felt some elements of a series were starting to stagnate. Considered change with a particular end in mind can be a great thing indeed. But by many accounts, FFXIII was the new mousetrap that, incidentally, also killed all your household pets, is that a problem?

 

[panosbouk]

The people didn't want Final Fantasy XIII, the game, the attempted reinvention of streamlining a decades-old formula. They wanted "Final Fantasy," the template, the familiar modus operandi, the standard, comforting type of game that, even in the eyes of its own creators, was frankly starting to get old.

NO! we do not want that! We do not want the tamplate only!

There's a reason for that, though: Final Fantasy XIII wasn't really an RPG. Nor did it ever want to be.

That is not a bad idea for an RPG title? It should never been supported or try and defend it either.

Linear, cities, minigames that is not the only things that made the funbase divided, not what defines a good RPG.

The limited leveling system. "once you get to Pulse the game expands etc" that is why only after you finish the game you unlock the final sphere lvl?

For the final weapons you get (farm) the material from the "hardest" enemies. So where you supposed to use them then?

Data logs? Another bad idea to use for your naration. Whatever is not presented on screen should be optional and not mandatory!

You cannot have 6 main protagonists in a game. It doesn't deliver well. Lightning was presented as the main hero but she wasn't. At the very end Fang was.

A combat system that was playing by its own. (here a big congrats to the programers that had such a good AI at least)

FFXIII was a game of bad ideas and bad implemented ideas.

In FF-XII you had the gambit system that it was bad for reasons i will not explain here, but another company actualy took that system and used it right. Bioware with Dragon Age:Origins had tactics, the exact same system. Where it worked for the best?

Just because something is new doesn't mean it is good as well. Same goes for the old things as well. We look at those things and we try to expand them not ignore them.

 

[ArkhamJester]

Jeff Dunn, this is adressed to you, how did FF13 innovate? I know what the commenters think but in the forums and the even the article you said the game was different and innovative, but how? A change of setting doesn't equal innovation (Black ops anyone?)I'm just curious because you said the game was innovative and different but you didn't give any reasons how it was. Just something that bothered me.

 

[Smokescreen]

You don't do major innovation within an established and popular franchise, ever. It never works.

Have you played Resident Evil 4, sir?

Was it still a bad game anyway? Well, yes.

Now we're getting somewhere. The article even says so!

This might have been forgivable if the majority of characters had been ones we liked or grew to like but they didn't do that. Most of them started off as insufferable and became tolerable. Story can go a long way to keeping players interested, because as GloatingSwing says:

The battle system, however, is one of the best in any JRPG, and certainly the best in a Final Fantasy. It makes the most of the fact that there is no attrition to make almost every combat a meaningful challenge, usually with a solution based not on luck or brute force of levels but on understanding and manipulating the system provided to you, using the right mix of classes at the right time, and changing them in response to the flow of the battle. You might not be clicking on "attack" every round yourself, but you'll be making far more decisions than you would in any other FF game.

The problem with it is repetition, because there are quite a low number of potential encounter groups in each area the player will find themself fighting the same encounter repeatedly, and because the nature of the encounters is that they are now almost a puzzle, when you have solved the puzzle there is no need to modify your approach.

Exactly. Once you know the pattern, there's no need to change.

Contrast that with, say, Enchanted Arms, an otherwise pretty terrible game which had a similar restoration of characters between battles, but which rationed the restoration of HP and MP (used by all attacks) by the reduction of another resource, so there was always an incentive to improve your solution to the same encounters so that you could keep fighting further towards the next save point.

Had FFXIII had either a system like that to push the player to continue thinking even in repeated encounters to refine their approach to them, or altered the encounter design to provide a steadily staged and increasing challenge curve through each area (a tricky task), it would have fully succeeded in what it attempted to do.

But what this post is boiling down to is: Once we (as players) figured out the game system, there was no further challenge to us and with 20+ hours left to go in the game, why should we continue playing if there is no challenge and the story is filled with people we are apathetic about?

It isn't about the changes to a 'series' or 'genre' it's about the changes that don't work.

 

[Jeff Dunn]

Jeff Dunn, I like the way you think. Good article even though there are 3 pages of hate (for the most part).

Aw man. I don't hate anybody...We're just all of different opinions, that's all.

The battle system, however, is one of the best in any JRPG, and certainly the best in a Final Fantasy. It makes the most of the fact that there is no attrition to make almost every combat a meaningful challenge, usually with a solution based not on luck or brute force of levels but on understanding and manipulating the system provided to you, using the right mix of classes at the right time, and changing them in response to the flow of the battle. You might not be clicking on "attack" every round yourself, but you'll be making far more decisions than you would in any other FF game.

I would like to add that is they had of changed the UI for combat. Three columns rather than 2 and had things separated by spell type as in 1 row for Fire one for Blizzard it would be the best combat system. The UI is what ultimately killed the combat for me. There are a couple of tweaks I would do the combat myself but it is far from the worst.

OT: While I do agree with many of the points put across or the general reason why this article was written(as in FF fans don't like change as all games have wildly different aspects and mechanics) I do agree with the sentiment that game was not entirely bad. Especially, since you seem to like to alienate readers on their decision and opinion as you go to refute another different opinion made the whole article a lot more hard to swallow.

Didn't want to "alienate" anybody, Glade. To buy into my argument, people kind of have to be of the mind that FF13 wasn't that bad of a game. Lots of people don't think it was on its own merits, I knew this going into the article. Whatever, that's cool. You have your opinions, I have mine.

But when I researched fan feedback to the game, much of what I read basically hated on the title because of how it wasn't like 7/8/9/10/what have you. I thought this was a startling way of going about things. Gamers like new things, typically. But here was a case where people distinctly wanted the old ways. I'm not trying to lump all detractors of FF13 into one pot, I know some people genuinely felt that the changes were "just bad," but I don't feel that way. One thing I am trying to say is that the game should be appreciated for risking its livelihood and risking commercial failure for presenting a different product. I think there's something noble in that, even if it doesn't make everybody happy. And, as we've seen, interest in the series as a whole is FAR from the days of FF7.

Again, though, this is just my informed opinion. I felt this was an important issue to make note of. If the article made people think, and sparked healthy debate (which it has here, something I'm very proud of), then I can't complain.

 

[Jeff Dunn]

You don't do major innovation within an established and popular franchise, ever. It never works.

Have you played Resident Evil 4, sir?

Was it still a bad game anyway? Well, yes.

Now we're getting somewhere. The article even says so!

Nope. Said that it wasn't great, but it certainly wasn't bad, IMO.

But, your RE4 comment sort of hints at what I was getting at. Anyways, thanks Smoke.

 

[Jeff Dunn]

....Oops, I meant to edit another post, and hit the wrong button. Well, this is awkward...

 

[Smokescreen]

Nope. Said that it wasn't great, but it certainly wasn't bad, IMO.

But, your RE4 comment sort of hints at what I was getting at. Anyways, thanks Smoke.

Well OK: I didn't catch your opinion correctly but you did spend half your article complaining about the game/understanding why the complaints. I apologize for misrepresenting you, though.

A series can innovate, I'd agree. But this game failed to implement the gameplay or story that would've made it worth it and I think that's why it failed, as opposed to RE4, which is STILL looked at as a classic.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

snip

That is fair enough and just because parts of it alienated me as reader doesn't mean it was like that for everyone. You gave your opinion and that is fine personally I think there are much more different reasons as to why FF XIII can be considered a bad game in some respects.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

All of what you said is complete and utter bull considering the game was not enjoyable, I understand the fact that so many people are holding things back, but you can't treat the internet as 1 entity, you say we are hypocritical, but I say there are two groups here, both voicing their opinions directly at the Publisher.

For me, the gameplay was not fun compared to that of FF12, and I didn't know exactly what was going on in the story so it was hard for me to give a shit.

I just got fed up with it, and to me that game failed.

 

[Ace of Spades]

FF13 did not give me anything new. It gave me a game with great animations, horribly written characters, a confusing and poorly presented story, unengaging and repetitive combat, and extremely linear environments. It might have been trying something different from other Final Fantasy games, but that doesn't excuse it from being a thoroughly bad game, and a waste of $60. If it wasn't trying to be an RPG, then whatever it was trying to be was crap.

 

[theultimateend]

All I know is I literally fell asleep while playing FF 13. I've never done that with any other game. It was the dullest experience of my life. I'd rather sit through my cousins piano rehersal. If it wasn't trying to be an RPG, that's cool; but whatever it WAS trying to be it did that really poorly.

I thought I was the only one. I rented it from GameFly, then about an hour in on the bridge that falls apart at the beginning I just got so bored I turned off the XBox and went to sleep.

Also, Zell was a fine character. I'm not sure I'm interested in you as a person, author.

Friendy of mine fell asleep while playing 13.

A day or two later he wrote on facebook "FINALLY I beat this game..."

Finally? really?

Is that what we've come to. People being relieved they don't need to think about a game anymore .

You don't do major innovation within an established and popular franchise, ever. It never works.

Have you played Resident Evil 4, sir?

Was it still a bad game anyway? Well, yes.

Now we're getting somewhere. The article even says so!

Nope. Said that it wasn't great, but it certainly wasn't bad, IMO.

But, your RE4 comment sort of hints at what I was getting at. Anyways, thanks Smoke.

The difference with RE4 though is that it isn't that it just "did something new because" it did something better.

That's the difference. Change for the shit of it is not what people want and anytime a franchise just changes things for no reason they say "Look people hate it!? This is why we churn out the same games normally."

A great example is Sim City Societies. Damn near nothing in that game was the same as Sim City and almost everything new was bad. If it had been called "City Town" or something else it STILL would have been bad because the ideas in it were bad.

Change for the sake of change is not a good thing.

But I don't necessarily think that was your point. But yeah, RE4 is not a good example to defend FF13. Because Re4 actually improved the formula, instead of just changing it.

 

[Hugga_Bear]

No.

See I understand where you're coming from and I'd be inclined to agree if you didn't trip up. The reason we want the same stuff from Final Fantasy, or the reason I do is because they are producing things which are similar but different. FF7, FF9, FF10, X-2 (yes even X-2) and XII are all individually enjoyable games. I like all of them for their own reasons and many of them cross over. 7 and 12 had a fascinating story, 9 was a throwback to the childish style backed with a brilliant story and A-grade characters. X-2 had a really interesting approach to 'jobs' and the fighting which I thoroughly enjoyed. X was in my view a jack of all and master of none, with some fascinating story parts, several really cool characters (with their own arcs) and some nifty parts to the gameplay (man do I love aeons).

I haven't played 8 for more than ten minutes (I lack my PS3 here at uni) and though I have 1-3(6) I've only played 6 and have yet to finish it so no comments there.

Point is they're similar but different, each installment WORKS for me.

If CoD put out a GOOD game, you know what? I wouldn't care. I wouldn't care that it was using the same mechanics (give a tweak here and there) or a similar style or character archetypes. If MW2 had made me care as much as CoD4 had then I would not utter a complaint. It didn't though, CoD is complained about because it's akin to those sports games EA loves to churn out. It's not that they're similar, it's that they're exactly the same.

 

[Susan Arendt]

If they tried so hard to break from the Final Fantasy M.O. why did they bother putting "Final Fantasy" in the name. If they wanted to make a different game, MAKE A DIFFERENT GAME! Don't try to increase sales by slapping "Final Fantasy" on the title. Almost everything that defines a Final Fantasy game has been cut from this, either bring back the world map or give it a new title!

Because name recognition counts for a lot. It helps with marketing, it helps with built-in audience...take two games that are otherwise equal, from a quality perspective. The one with a well-known name attached to it will, typically, sell better than the one that's a brand new IP, because people like to stick with what they know. They feel more comfortable buying something that they recognize in some way, even if it's just a name.