• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

How is it that Zelda maintained its status while Final Fantasy couldnt?

protonion

Member
PS360 era almost killed FF.

FF13 was pure garbage. I truly consider it the worst jrpg ever made.
Then they burned the rest of the gen with TWO sequels!! Never played them, they may be decent but I don't care.
Then online FF14... and then FF15....
If it wasn't for the ff7 remake we would be at 12 years with no good mainline FF game!!

All that time the series made no new fans and possibly lost many.

FF16 and FF7 part 2 HAVE to be really great games.

Beyond that, they should try to re introduce the series to gamers. Pixel remaster is a good move. And they should continue with good remakes of FF8 and 9. They are the last truly awesome FFs and they deserve a remake.

Also, they should not abandon their roots.
They should alternate between a "modern" FF and a classic one. An expensive psone era FF with 8k pre rendered backgrounds and yes, random battles. A good classic FF (of ff9 quality) will be huge.

As for Zelda, if they do not return to the previous formula, it is dead to me. I couldn't stand botw for more that a few hours. It is just a waste of time and unbelievably tedious.

Open world is the cancer of game design.
90% of the gameplay is pushing up the stick running empty spaces and climbing... Very fun.
 

Clear

CliffyB's Cock Holster
They were developing XI alongside X, so much less of a risk than BOTW. It's not nonsense.

That's not relevant; if you put out 2 big games in the same franchise both contribute to its perceived status.

The key thing is that the misses are as important as the hits, especially if the misfire turns into dumpster fire, like what happened with the original version of FFXIV, then its extraordinarily difficult to recover.
 

Honey Bunny

Member
That's not relevant; if you put out 2 big games in the same franchise both contribute to its perceived status.

The key thing is that the misses are as important as the hits, especially if the misfire turns into dumpster fire, like what happened with the original version of FFXIV, then its extraordinarily difficult to recover.
Sorry that is relevant, for precisely the reason you outlined. Misses are as important as hits, so Square wisely released X just before XI and had XII development already going. Ninty had no such luxury. If BOTW bombed it would be the only mainline Zelda for many years either side of its release.
 
If it wasn't for the ff7 remake we would be at 12 years with no good mainline FF game!!

All that time the series made no new fans and possibly lost many.

I'm intrigued that you hold both of these views, because to me FF7R is exactly the wrong kind of remake for attracting new fans. All the self-referential alternate timelines Kingdom Hearts bullshit is totally incomprehensible to new fans, the only people who might care are people who have already played the original (and frankly as soon as I saw what Nomura was up to I lost all interest in playing however many sequels to remake they come out with). And by truncating the game and bloating it up with busywork they manage to lose all sense of narrative flow and adventure, plus they spoil the suspense of the Sephiroth reveal multiple times.

If FF7R had been more like the RE2-4 I think it would have stood a much better chance of winning over new fans to the series.
 

-Zelda-

Banned
I find I can still enjoy Final Fantasy, even the "bad ones," but the recent Zelda games have not been in a style I enjoy. Don't care how well a game reviews or sells, I care whether or not I enjoyed it and I did not enjoy BOTW. I am interested in FF16 though.
 

protonion

Member
I'm intrigued that you hold both of these views, because to me FF7R is exactly the wrong kind of remake for attracting new fans. All the self-referential alternate timelines Kingdom Hearts bullshit is totally incomprehensible to new fans, the only people who might care are people who have already played the original (and frankly as soon as I saw what Nomura was up to I lost all interest in playing however many sequels to remake they come out with). And by truncating the game and bloating it up with busywork they manage to lose all sense of narrative flow and adventure, plus they spoil the suspense of the Sephiroth reveal multiple times.

If FF7R had been more like the RE2-4 I think it would have stood a much better chance of winning over new fans to the series.

It is not the ideal remake sure, but it is good.
It brought back the bombastic soundtrack, the art and set pieces of a top tier FF game.

If you follow angry Joe, his review of the remake compared to FF13 is an actual example how each game resonates with a non fan.
 

Flutta

Banned
You pretend like Zelda has maintained the "boTw" streak for a long time.... Before BotW which Zelda games did Nintendo release that took the world by storm?

I'm a big Zelda fan but even i can see that every Zelda game isn't always good or special. Also FF16 looks amazing, haters who want a turn based old school FF game can take a hike, that shit is niche, only a minority wants that crap.
 

Clear

CliffyB's Cock Holster
Sorry that is relevant, for precisely the reason you outlined. Misses are as important as hits, so Square wisely released X just before XI and had XII development already going. Ninty had no such luxury. If BOTW bombed it would be the only mainline Zelda for many years either side of its release.

I disagree, but I see your perspective.

The more attempts you make may allow for a bit of more "cushion" if things don't go well, but it also splits focus internally and brand value/identity externally. Which I guess cuts through to what we consider the biggest risk.

Personally, when everything is a big "bet" I'd say the safer option is to carefully consider and calculate every move, than to double-up on options and spread the risk that way. But I can't argue that both are valid ways of mitigating risk.
 

93xfan

Banned
Aside from quality fluctuations, Zelda seems to have a lot less competition.

*I don’t consent to being fact checked on that. :p
 

Robbinhood

Banned
I'm much more high on FF than Zelda right now.

After FF14 and FF7R/Integrade, leading into FF16 I would take it over ToTK any day. TBH I couldn't stand SS or TP and while I enjoyed BotW, half of the time playing it was in boredom. The beginning of the game is actually the most fun you have with it. When it's overwhelming and new and you have no idea what to expect. The journey doesn't live up to that initial feeling.
 

Doom85

Member
I find I can still enjoy Final Fantasy, even the "bad ones," but the recent Zelda games have not been in a style I enjoy. Don't care how well a game reviews or sells, I care whether or not I enjoyed it and I did not enjoy BOTW. I am interested in FF16 though.

Wait, Zelda herself isn’t big on the recent Legend of Zelda games?!

Animated GIF
 

Fredrik

Member
It is not the ideal remake sure, but it is good.
It brought back the bombastic soundtrack, the art and set pieces of a top tier FF game.

If you follow angry Joe, his review of the remake compared to FF13 is an actual example how each game resonates with a non fan.
I have a love-hate relationship with FF7RI, the combat is definitely not my thing but I love the visuals and music and nostalgia I feel from getting to experience old known places and scenes from my fav JRPG.
FF13 is a weird one, in general I like it but it was no doubt too linear, at least early on because then comes chapter 11 and it’s this huge open map all of a sudden. I need to replay that whole trilogy some day.
 

pgtl_10

Member
Much of SquareEnix's talent has left over the years to form their own studios while new talent has not performed as well.

On top of that, RPGs became extremely popular and eventually western ones such as Elder Scrolls starting with Morrowind took the RPG concept further than FF. Japanese developers such as the creators of Persona and Tales also showed everyone different aspects of RPGs. FF seemed to have played it too safe.

Nintendo has not lost as much talent and to have knack for developing more polished games. Zelda's gameplay and style is not implemented as often despite being a benchmark for AAA gaming.
 
Just like any first party exclusive game. See horizon, Halo infinite, God of war ragnarok in recent memory.

Has nothing to do with first party exclusive. It's a storied franchise with many decades of history backing it. Same thing happens for third party releases.

The effect is MUCH stronger for series like Zelda or Mario due to the history. Even the most panned in the series score extremely well, but the sales tell the story sometimes.
 
Quite simply Zelda games on average are better. Zelda is more consistent with its quality while Final Fantasy is a little more unpredictable. Square Enix in general is very inconsistent with it's output as a whole. Put it this way I would but 100$ on Tears of the kingdom getting above 90 on Metacritic but I wouldn't put 1$ on Final Fantasy 16.
 

Nautilus

Banned
You forgot all those posts on fans ranting about how they want proper dungeons and how Link's sword shouldn't break every 3 seconds, that BotW isn't a Zelda.
There is a difference between wanting things back that were left behind, and something abandoning th CORE principles of the frachise.

I am also one of those that want dungeons back. But I want them in BOTW's mold.
 

captainpat

Member
The premise of this thread feels flawed, cause even at FF height it was always a step below Zelda in regards to prestige.
 

pgtl_10

Member
Zelda didn't maintain its status. It massively boosted its status with BoTW. People need to understand that it's an entirely new sales benchmark for the franchise, where the ceiling for previous entries was usually at the 10 million mark.

And why did BoTW boost its status so much? Because Nintendo gamers were finally exposed to the pseudo-HD open world design that's been available on other platforms for 15 years; only infused with the same formula (sans dungeons) that activates the nostalgia factor that practically all of Nintendo's most successful franchises harbor. That, and Nintendo consoles have been so 1st party reliant since the Wii, that the comparative perspective of Nintendo's output is massively skewed.

Nintendo has almost always been reliant on first parties.
 

pgtl_10

Member
The movie didn't kill Squaresoft, the movie gave Yoichi Wada the pretext he needed to kill Squaresoft.

From my understanding, the movie delayed the merger between Squaresoft and Enix. It have nearly killed it buy both companies wanted to merge because game development started to get expensive.
 

Rat Rage

Member
Simple answer: Zelda's dev team and leadership know what they are doing, and they have maintained their talent over the years, while the Final Fantasy team lost some of their key figures and started suffering from a bad leadership, chasing after western trends like bitches and completey abandon Final Fantasy's original identity.

SquareEnix are fucking morons. Instead of throwing the Final Fantasy IP under the bus, they could have started developing other, original IPs instead, to satisfy their thirst for 3rd person action games.
 

lyan

Member
There is a difference between wanting things back that were left behind, and something abandoning th CORE principles of the frachise.

I am also one of those that want dungeons back. But I want them in BOTW's mold.
The format abandoned rewarding you with sense of progression for completing dungeons. If that is not a core principle of zelda I dont know what else is.
 

EverydayBeast

thinks Halo Infinite is a new graphical benchmark
Zelda like most games have their issues, rocky dungeons, boring quests etc. but they give you a ton of AAA gameplay.
 
Aside from quality fluctuations, Zelda seems to have a lot less competition.

*I don’t consent to being fact checked on that. :p
Its because most developers can't make a game like Zelda with focus purely on 3D level design and interactive new items used in consistently creative ways, and then playtested and redesigned over and over so that it remains tricky but never unfairly obtuse to even casual players. FF tried making a few puzzles in X and look how basic and odd they are. They had to bring in outside help to design a combat system similar to 20 year old DMC. They excel primarily in artistic elements and thats it. Nintendo developers are far, far above them in skill.
 

SmokedMeat

Gamer™
It’s almost impossible to beat a strong action adventure game with a solid lineage, and major nostalgia that gives a lot of games the feels.

Final Fantasy just isn’t on that level.
 

DenchDeckard

Moderated wildly
Has nothing to do with first party exclusive. It's a storied franchise with many decades of history backing it. Same thing happens for third party releases.

The effect is MUCH stronger for series like Zelda or Mario due to the history. Even the most panned in the series score extremely well, but the sales tell the story somsometimes.

What effect?
 

Nautilus

Banned
The format abandoned rewarding you with sense of progression for completing dungeons. If that is not a core principle of zelda I dont know what else is.
Its... not. Even if its widely beloved. Dungeons are a feature, not a core principle(And BOTW does have them, they simply suck). Zelda core principle mostly lies in exploration, discovery and puzzles. Dungeons served to evoke those feelings, but they are not the only tools you can use to evoke them.
 
Last edited:

BootsLoader

Banned
To be honest, I think Zelda games are more innovative in comparison to final fantasy games. I feel like final fantasy games stayed the same, Zelda games are always innovating.
 

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
To be honest, I think Zelda games are more innovative in comparison to final fantasy games. I feel like final fantasy games stayed the same, Zelda games are always innovating.

laughing-hard-controlling-laugh-tp9t6yodxng1bnk4.gif


People shitting on FFXVI because it doesn't play like old FF and now people literally complaining FF staying the same!? Am I reading this right?

You people dont know what you want to complain about.
 
laughing-hard-controlling-laugh-tp9t6yodxng1bnk4.gif


People shitting on FFXVI because it doesn't play like old FF and now people literally complaining FF staying the same!? Am I reading this right?

You people dont know what you want to complain about.
I think they both innovate. But Zelda games are far more innovative mechanically where it counts in terms of core game design in an interactive medium. FF is very innovative in terms of art design and battle systems, but those battle systems are typically less mechanically complex than what it takes to design a Zelda game with multiple new interactive items used in 3D space in creative ways for puzzles, traversal and combat. FF is not nearly as good at actual active gameplay mechanics. The FFXV teleport is akin to a very poorly made hookshot and hardly works in comparison to games that came 20 years earlier.

Just thinking of the amount of things they had to break new ground on for Skyward Sword alone mechanically eclipses almost the entire FF series in terms of active gameplay and level design.
 
Last edited:
It’s funny people say this, when was the last time we got medieval dark fantasy from Final Fantasy series?
??? There is nothing about being medieval ir not in what I said........it's about the game art, esthetics, characters, universe. I actually pretty happy to go back to medieval
 

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
I think they both innovate. But Zelda games are far more innovative mechanically where it counts in terms of core game design in an interactive medium. FF is very innovative in terms of art design and battle systems, but those battle systems are typically less mechanically complex than what it takes to design a Zelda game with multiple new interactive items used in 3D space in creative ways for puzzles, traversal and combat. FF is not nearly as good at actual active gameplay mechanics. The FFXV teleport is akin to a very poorly made hookshot and hardly works in comparison to games that came 20 years earlier.

Just thinking of the amount of things they had to break new ground on for Skyward Sword alone mechanically eclipses almost the entire FF series in terms of active gameplay and level design.
I would say Zelda series innovative with level design and interaction, while FF are innovative when it comes to its combat systems. I LOVED BotW and in my opinion it has one more complex open world design out there but I wouldn't call its combat complex at all.

??? There is nothing about being medieval ir not in what I said........it's about the game art, esthetics, characters, universe. I actually pretty happy to go back to medieval
I personally love the aesthetics and character designs they are going for, its similar to their FFXIV but with darker tone.
4IfMDkNronZoUUWW6KeHxz2I.png
final-fantasy-xvi-skill-trees-system.large.jpg
 

DenchDeckard

Moderated wildly
"too big to fail" franchises
Well yeah, I think when you're nintendo you know to put the money behind development and the time to ensure you deliver a special game.

Nintendo just don't miss with their games.

A bad nintendo game is like an 8 out of ten when it's their big franchises. They never miss with them.
 

Vblad88

Member
Zelda never grew up, thats why. Generally Nintendo First-party games seems to be cozy space for developers, where there is no much risk to take, no high technological expectations - the same counts for Nintendo Consoles. When you buy a nintendo console there simply need to be some Mario, some Zelda, some Kirby and Donkey Kong.

FF on the other hand always need to be grandoise, take different approaches on the main theme, always let the gameplay & graphics evolve, so it won't be confused with anything else in JRPG market.

It is like comparing boutique to a second-hand. Second-hands never get out the the fashion.
 
Last edited:
Well yeah, I think when you're nintendo you know to put the money behind development and the time to ensure you deliver a special game.

Nintendo just don't miss with their games.

A bad nintendo game is like an 8 out of ten when it's their big franchises. They never miss with them.

Well, I would consider a Zelda or Mario 8/10 in reality when the press scores it 95+ to be a big miss relative to consumer's expectations. Sure, still good games, but when you generally only look forward to those big mainline games once every 5 years or more it can be a massive letdown

Unlike other platforms that can depend on more third parties, they don't have that luxury so when it's a miss (even if it's a good game), it's an enormous miss
 
Last edited:

64bitmodels

Reverse groomer.
final fantasy got big off of one game whereas zelda kept improving in quality and garnering an audience for being an amazing action adventure dungeon crawler. 🤷‍♂️ The main thing FF7 did really was introduce the mainstream to JRPGs... Zelda completely changed the industry

Let's be honest 90% of GAF probably didn't know what Final Fantasy was until FFVII started appearing on the Playstation magazines

I know this post comes off as bait but really.. FF is regarded for FF7. Not FF6, not FF5, not FF9, and especially not 10 which is divisive in its own right

Zelda's known for more than just Ocarina of time, Zelda's loved for ALTTP, Wind Waker, Twilight Princess, BOTW, and my beloved Majora's Mask.

90% of the time a FF fan's favorite FF game will be FF7. It's not so certain for Zelda.
 
Last edited:

Woopah

Member
It's going to be fun watching the meltdowns as zelda & FF battle in the japanese charts lolololol.
No one should be expecting FFXVI to get anywhere near TOTK in Japan or worldwide. It would be wrong to judge FF's success on whether it matches Zelda.
 

Trunim

Member
Never liked FF but the direction Zelda is going in now is not good. Just imagine if Zelda looked like final fantasy looked in that recent state of play...man...
 
Top Bottom