Support NeoGAF

[Bernardougf]

I mean, I’m not mad it’s neither open world or turn based, but:

A) games like BOTW and Horizon 1 and 2 did not take 15 years or even close to make,
and B) Persona 5 and Dragon Quest 11 (and hell, Fire Emblem 3 Houses, yes it’s a strategy RPG, but still turn based) were both very successful, hell even less mainstream RPGs like Digimon Story Cyber Sleuth did well enough to get a follow up “despite” being turn based. Also, in terms of the origin coming from tabletop RPGs, well Dungeons and Dragons has more mainstream appeal now than anything even close since it was first created, again “despite” being turn based

Again, I’m cool with real time action and no fully open world, like no explanation was even needed, but that doesn’t mean I won’t raise an eyebrow if the argument for why it “had” to be that way doesn’t match a good deal of evidence

Well said

 

[Bernardougf]

Is this just a linear action game then?

So it's just final fantasy by name?

Its been final fantasy by name only for quite some time now...

 

[Fbh]

Was just about to say that. They do however have teams working on those games for years btw, but I regardless, I'm not even sure what exactly Square is saying here and what they mean by 15 years to make lol Make what? What in their minds leads them to believe it takes 15 years to make a open world game? lol So we'd need context in what they are talking about.

He didn't say it takes 15 years to make an open world game.
He said I'd take 15 years to make an open world that would allow them to tell a story on a global scale. Which is kinda true as there isn't any good example of an open world game where it feels like you are actually traveling through an entire planet and not just a region.

If Ubisoft decided to make a game that isn't limited to a region or country (like Odyssey in Greece) but rather a story on a global scale with major events happening in Greece, China, Mexico and New Zealand it would probably take a long time if they wanted to make it all a single seamless open world where it doesn't feel like you can travel from Greece to China in 10 minutes on a horse.

 

[Rat Rage]

turned-based combat is straight trash. always hated it and im over 40. lived through the best years of that system and never enjoyed it. Good call on the combat changes.

I don't get these takes. Let's say, there's someone who hates FPS games. Sometime in an alternate gaming universe, Id software suddently changes the next DOOM game from an FPS to a 3rd person character action game. This person suddently says: "first person shooter combat is straight trash. always hated it and im over 40. lived through the best years of that system and never enjoyed it. Good call on the combat changes."

Why can't people just accept that there are people with different tastes? I don't like every video game genre or combat system every created, but I wouldn't be happy if suddently a game franchise I didn't like (and never played) changed its genre so others, who do like it, can't enjoy it anymore.

 

[SlimeGooGoo]

.

 

[Javthusiast]

All open world games are just cities or open areas.

You can't create an open world with the feeling of the story playing on a global fucking scale, hence why he rather wanted this game to have open areas from the whole planet or continent etc instead it being another ffxv thing.

I am all for it.

I will also never stop beating this dead horse: TPP should have consisted of ground zeroes like hand crafted levels instead of the barren open world with even worse lame bases.

 

[Myths]

Prepare for the linear FF13 surprise treatment.

 

[lyan]

Ubisoft is truly insane. I sat through the credits off an AssCreed once and it goes on forever with studios from Canada, China and Singapore.
How they can even make money is beyond me.

They aren't making a lot for their size, even with the weak JPY conversion rate today SquareEnix makes like 30% more profits despite being much smaller.

 

[Wildebeest]

Younglings find it oppressive and creepy to issue commands to characters in games. Just leave those characters alone and let them vibe out, they say.

 

[Barakov]

I respect what Yoshida did with FFXIV but appealing to the lowest common denominator always has its' drawbacks. IF there is some depth to the combat then that could make it interesting but for JRPGs I still prefer the turn based style.

Minecraft and Fortnite really fucked people up in the same way the 'accessible' push really fucked people up from the PS3/360/Wii era.

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

I don't get these takes. Let's say, there's someone who hates FPS games. Sometime in an alternate gaming universe, Id software suddently changes the next DOOM game from an FPS to a 3rd person character action game. This person suddently says: "first person shooter combat is straight trash. always hated it and im over 40. lived through the best years of that system and never enjoyed it. Good call on the combat changes."

Why can't people just accept that there are people with different tastes? I don't like every video game genre or combat system every created, but I wouldn't be happy if suddently a game franchise I didn't like (and never played) changed its genre so others, who do like it, can't enjoy it anymore.

“Suddenly?” Dude, the last turn-based mainline FF game released almost 21 years ago. Let it go. It’s not like this is some shocking new turn of events that betrays all their loyal fans.

More like, if they went back to traditional turn-based combat it would just be pandering to nostalgic boomers so others, who do like it, can’t enjoy it anymore (and those boomers would probably hate it anyway)

 

[Pilgrimzero]

Final Fantasy hasn't been good in years. So par for the course, I guess.

FF7R was good though, even if the combat was kind of shit.

Best ones are 1, 4, and 6 anyways.

 

[TheDarkPhantom]

Like they delivered with XII, XIII, XV, right?

Precisely, I loved all 3 of those games

 

[CrimsonSquall]

Like they delivered with XII, XIII, XV, right?

They did deliver for 12 and 13 though. The ending for 12 was kinda meh but all else was amazing and 13 was a spectacle to see, had some of the best cutscenes in a game at that time and I really loved those characters.

People really lost their mind to the linearity thing but I just did not find that a problem

 

[ULTROS!]

It has Large Open Zones, similar to XII or XV.

Correction: More like DQXI

 

[Graciaus]

“Suddenly?” Dude, the last turn-based mainline FF game released almost 21 years ago. Let it go. It’s not like this is some shocking new turn of events that betrays all their loyal fans.

More like, if they went back to traditional turn-based combat it would just be pandering to nostalgic boomers so others, who do like it, can’t enjoy it anymore (and those boomers would probably hate it anyway)

Series has also been trash since the ps2 days.

 

[Wooxsvan]

I don't get these takes. Let's say, there's someone who hates FPS games. Sometime in an alternate gaming universe, Id software suddently changes the next DOOM game from an FPS to a 3rd person character action game. This person suddently says: "first person shooter combat is straight trash. always hated it and im over 40. lived through the best years of that system and never enjoyed it. Good call on the combat changes."

Why can't people just accept that there are people with different tastes? I don't like every video game genre or combat system every created, but I wouldn't be happy if suddently a game franchise I didn't like (and never played) changed its genre so others, who do like it, can't enjoy it anymore.

I think your conflating things. I have no problem with what people like, Im glad to see them change the system because i might actually play it now. Other aspects of their games have looked awesome, art, music etc. So now with these changes im more likely to jump in. Sorry to those who dont like the changes, but thats what opinions are for.

 

[iHaunter]

Then how come Ubisoft churns out 2-3 open world games per year?

He meant a GOOD open world game. Theirs are generic copy/paste garbage games.

 

[timmyp53]

I"m with Yoshida on this one(in regards to open world aspect). Creative vision is more important in this day and age of videogame development. Some of the biggest jrpgs from the past are not really complicated in open world game design/general things to do and see. For the time those games seemed like they had amazing scope but they don't really hold up now under modern expectations. There has to be a middle ground. With all the hubbub about how long FF7 remake is being made and if it will have an open world I think we need to reexamine if open worlds are really even necessary in that instance. For example as someone who loved Final 7 OG, if you actually look at the world map it is completely barren and serves no purpose besides getting from point a to b. If you take the world map out of the equation, is FF7 anything more than a few hundred corriders and maps?

Curious what others think.

 

[OOGABOOGA]

The witcher 3: three and a half years
Development began in 2011 and lasted for three and a half years. Central and Northern European cultures formed the basis of the game's world. REDengine 3 enabled the developer to create a complex story without compromising the game's open world.


Red dead redemption 2:
The game's development lasted over eight years, beginning soon after Red Dead Redemption's release, and it became one of the most expensive video games ever made. Rockstar co-opted all of its studios into one large team to facilitate development.

 

[saintjules]

Then how come Ubisoft churns out 2-3 open world games per year?

The quality between both companies are quite different.

 

[hemo memo]

The quality between both companies are quite different.L

I mean, I’m not mad it’s neither open world or turn based, but:

A) games like BOTW and Horizon 1 and 2 did not take 15 years or even close to make,
and B) Persona 5 and Dragon Quest 11 (and hell, Fire Emblem 3 Houses, yes it’s a strategy RPG, but still turn based) were both very successful, hell even less mainstream RPGs like Digimon Story Cyber Sleuth did well enough to get a follow up “despite” being turn based. Also, in terms of the origin coming from tabletop RPGs, well Dungeons and Dragons has more mainstream appeal now than anything even close since it was first created, again “despite” being turn based

Again, I’m cool with real time action and no fully open world, like no explanation was even needed, but that doesn’t mean I won’t raise an eyebrow if the argument for why it “had” to be that way doesn’t match a good deal of evidence

It is about efficiency. Latest AssCreed games are basically open world RPGs now and we have 3 in the last 5 years with the latest one to be released late this year or early next year.

Say what you will about Ubisoft but it is not just about throwing devs at a project and hope for the best but about organization and they are more efficient and organized than Square Enix.

 

[EDMIX]

He said I'd take 15 years to make an open world that would allow them to tell a story on a global scale.

yea, I'd still say this man isn't doing that team any honor here lol You can still tell on story on a grand scale without taking 15 years or something. Many have already stated you can do some globe shit on a scale that makes sense only making the areas on the globe just the cities and towns needed or something. If this man is talking about some fucking Star Citizen type shit, no one asked for any of that and maybe they are hearing the term "OPEN WORLD" as some literally WORLD size shit lol

"with major events happening in Greece, China, Mexico and New Zealand "

ok, they can still fucking do that though.

The issue here is many of you are hearing what he is saying as a LITERAL thing, you can still fucking make a open world game will all of that listed, make it the same size as any other title and simply just have those areas in the game.

I don't think you fully get what me and others have been saying about this. You seem to think saying the word "CHINA" means ALL OF CHINA 1.1. The fuck? What game is doing that, asking that, saying they'll do all that shit 100%? lol So its a stupid, stupid response and it seems like what Square hears as Open World is something no one is doing and they are using a term they can't even give a fucking example to.

Be like "Can you make it open world sir"?


Square "oh we can't model the whole world son, that'd take at least 15 years"

It only makes you question if they fucking understand what those terms mean.

Lets make it even simpler for you. The Crew 1 and 2 are not 1.1 of the world...... do you now understand what the fuck is being stated or? lol I don't know why anyone thought saying a whole bunch of different cities magically means something that can't be done, sir...that is just making the same type of open world game and just spreading those cities around some other city.

GTA SA had Vegas, LA and San Francisco..... to say they should do Miami, Cuba, Columbia isn't some massive thing, its the same fucking concept, its just different cities, countries etc. HOW big those countries are is irrelevant as they are no 1.1 in the first place.


SO this whole "If Ubisoft decided to make a game that isn't limited to a region or country (like Odyssey in Greece) but rather a story on a global scale with major events happening in Greece, China, Mexico and New Zealand it would probably take a long time if they wanted to make it all a single seamless open world where it doesn't feel like you can travel from Greece to China in 10 minutes on a horse."

I gotta disagree with this big time.

Your entire assumption is to do that, it needs to be 1.1. That simply isn't true and its a argument you just made up, used zero logic or reasoning and I don't think you even thought about this for 10 minutes. Think long and hard here, if They make a game like this that is many regions, what is stopping them from just making that world smaller to fit all those regions and just having the map be the same size as they did Odyssey? So the issue you have is you are assuming it NEEDS to be this 1.1 thing where they'd even make 5 games worth of cities, instead of just realizing Ubisoft already done massive worlds, shrink that distance between those cities, keep the same size, split that difference between those countries annnnnd here you go.

 

[CS Lurker]

I don't think every game has to be an open-world.

Now, about turn-based, I always disliked it. It's a good way to make me sleep fast.

 

[NeoLed]

In terms of manpower, Ubisoft are several times large than Square Enix.
It is one of the reasons why they are able to do annual and biennial releases with AAA budgets.

Tbh quantity doesn't necessarily equate to quality.

Final Fantasy usually use one full planet as their maps. One planet with countries and cities as good open world map is a gigant task to do.

 

[Outlier]

Even though I never saw this movie, in an altered context this scene is extremely sad.
To see the children look towards him in trust that he will protect them, only for him to respond in cold malcontent.

 

[EDMIX]

Final Fantasy usually use one full planet as their maps. One planet with countries and cities as good open world map is a gigant task to do.

sure, but it depends on how its done.

 

[DeliciousDoc]

I really don't see how designing a game with turn based combat can take more time than the typical action adventure game.

How does that connect to the world at all? Does every battle have its own variation of the engine to keep things fresh? Don't piss on my face and tell me it's raining.

Oh and modern action games aren't any different than hitting attack a few times in RPGs either. Don't act like fights are designed where there is a possibility you will lose. Turn based isn't easy mode it's different. Not every game needs to be an action adventure game with a massive graphic budget, rpg lite mechanics, some degree of exploration and some crafting.

Make a game that doesn't fit what people like in 5 different genres and dilute it into one bland product. We get enough of those already.

 

[Benniewise de Clown]

The guy managed to turn FFXIV into one of the biggest comebacks in gaming history.

I have full faith in his decisions.

 

[vkbest]

I mean, I’m not mad it’s neither open world or turn based, but:

A) games like BOTW and Horizon 1 and 2 did not take 15 years or even close to make,
and B) Persona 5 and Dragon Quest 11 (and hell, Fire Emblem 3 Houses, yes it’s a strategy RPG, but still turn based) were both very successful, hell even less mainstream RPGs like Digimon Story Cyber Sleuth did well enough to get a follow up “despite” being turn based. Also, in terms of the origin coming from tabletop RPGs, well Dungeons and Dragons has more mainstream appeal now than anything even close since it was first created, again “despite” being turn based

Again, I’m cool with real time action and no fully open world, like no explanation was even needed, but that doesn’t mean I won’t raise an eyebrow if the argument for why it “had” to be that way doesn’t match a good deal of evidence

BOTW have a shitty story

 

[nowhat]

Then how come Ubisoft churns out 2-3 open world games per year?

Square Enix hasn't yet learned the arcane art of Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V.

 

[intheinbetween]

So, let me get that straight, since the open world approach would require time and effort he preferred to go with a linear design since it’s easier to get it done.

Not that I prefer an open world game over a linear one, but man that reasoning is so cheap..

 

[Kumomeme]

Didn't he drop the ball when it came to Demon's Souls back in 2009?

not Demon Soul but Bloodborne!

 

[GenericUser]

I hope it's like FF12 where you visit big "zones". That game nailed it imo. It had a huge variety of "biomes", thanks to the seperation into smaller parts. I liked that. I just hope that "not being open world" does not mean "linear hallway gameplay", like in FF10 or 13.

I'm more worried about the action combat. I don't know why they don't leave action combat to action games and focus more on a tactical combat system. FF7 remake had a awesome hybrid combat system between hack and slash and turn based combat, I don't know why they don't build upon this foundation.

 

[Panajev2001a]

I hope it's like FF12 where you visit big "zones". That game nailed it imo. It had a huge variety of "biomes", thanks to the seperation into smaller parts. I liked that. I just hope that "not being open world" does not mean "linear hallway gameplay", like in FF10 or 13.

I'm more worried about the action combat. I don't know why they don't leave action combat to action games and focus more on a tactical combat system. FF7 remake had a awesome hybrid combat system between hack and slash and turn based combat, I don't know why they don't build upon this foundation.

Not sure about FFXIII, but FFX did a good job of making the world of Spira feel interconnected and open IMHO.

 

[GenericUser]

Not sure about FFXIII, but FFX did a good job of making the world of Spira feel interconnected and open IMHO.

You think so? I played it again 2 years ago and it felt pretty linear. I don't really mind it, because the characters, the story and the combat system are all top notch in FF10, but compared to FF7,8,9 - it definitely felt more restrictive to me.

 

[Go_Ly_Dow]

I guess The Witcher 3 was just a dream that I had

Is it really compareable?

FF16 will lhave much more cutting edge visuals than witcher, much more variety in environments and less repetition of asset use. FF has stylstic gameplay and cutscene cinematics that the Witcher doesn't. I'm not saying one is a better approach over another, but that there is tradeoff somewhere when focus is giving to those areas.

Witcher 3 cutscene



FF7 Remake



Witcher 3 Combat



FF7 Remake

 

[NahaNago]

This isn't that surprising. Creating a whole world with tons of cities, towns, nps, and wildlife just seems like a waste of money and time. I do think that squareenix does need to expand it's final fantasy crew so that they can create larger "worlds".

 

[Spaceman292]

Then how come Ubisoft churns out 2-3 open world games per year?

Because they're all the same and all shit

 

[Spaceman292]

Its been final fantasy by name only for quite some time now...

I bet people said this when 7 came out. FF has never been just one thing, it's always changing radically.

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

I bet people said this when 7 came out. FF has never been just one thing, it's always changing radically.

There were lots of people saying stuff like “I remember when Final Fantasy used to be FANTASY” and “I want to play a game, not watch a movie”.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

So, let me get that straight, since the open world approach would require time and effort he preferred to go with a linear design since it’s easier to get it done.

Not that I prefer an open world game over a linear one, but man that reasoning is so cheap..

There's nothing cheap about it. Ask any dev why they cut x or didn't include y and the most common answer you'll get is time

 

[Kev Kev]

If this man is talking about some fucking Star Citizen type shit, no one asked for any of that and maybe they are hearing the term "OPEN WORLD" as some literally WORLD size shit lol

im not sure why some of you people think we mean planet sized open world when we say that. it doesnt need to be that and no one is asking for that. they can do an FF7 sized open world, it doesnt need to be a 1:1 realistic scale. thatd be ridiculous. but in typical square fashion, their ego for needing everything to be this massive, realistic, cinematic, EPIC is making them think thats what an open world is, so of course tthey are like "well thats impossible". smh, what a bunch of morons.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

im not sure why some of you people think we mean planet sized open world when we say that. it doesnt need to be that and no one is asking for that. they can do an FF7 sized open world, it doesnt need to be a 1:1 realistic scale. thatd be ridiculous. but in typical square fashion, their ego for needing everything to be this massive, realistic, cinematic, EPIC is making them think thats what an open world is, so of course tthey are like "well thats impossible". smh, what a bunch of morons.

Imagine trying to fit America, Asia and Europe with a small ass open world map

That would be fucking retarded.

 

[Clear]

The guy managed to turn FFXIV into one of the biggest comebacks in gaming history.

I have full faith in his decisions.

Exactly. I wouldn't take the "15 year" line as being an absolute statement, more of an rough indication of how long he'd suspect the process would be to create what he had in mind based on prior experience and his team size.

The reason I wrote that I approved of his words was that it suggested to me the man has a clear goal in mind and a realistic time-scale within which to execute its production. That might not sound like a big deal, but I have to say that's exactly what you'd want to hear from a leader if you were working on the project.

The last thing anyone wants or needs is to find scope and creative direction drifting along the way.

 

[JLB]

No open world and no turn based? wat? This thing is no longer a FF.

 

[sigmaZ]

I sure hope this game has Townz

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

No open world and no turn based? wat? This thing is no longer a FF.

Yes. Despite the last mainline turn-based FF releasing in 2001, and only having one open world game in the series (that most of the fandom ranks near the bottom), it’s totally not FF without these two things.

 

[Fuz]

They did deliver for 12 and 13 though. The ending for 12 was kinda meh but all else was amazing and 13 was a spectacle to see, had some of the best cutscenes in a game at that time and I really loved those characters.

People really lost their mind to the linearity thing but I just did not find that a problem

 

[pleaseinsertdisctwo]

Yep, that's all there is to it.

They lost all confidence in themselves after 13 bombed hard. Now they just follow trends to appeal to the masses, it's all about sales now regardless of quality.
And it's working, it's selling more than ever but the quality is as bad as 13's.

XIII didn't "bomb hard" lol wtf? Your opinion isn't a fact.

If anything, Yoshida said XIV 1.0 and XV affected the series' reputation.