Crash Station
Member
We're purely talking about whether an RPG with a turn-based battle system can be successful or not, not what the rest of the game brings.
Final Fantasy 7 Remake Announced (First on PS4)
- Thread starter NeOak
- Start date
- Status
We're purely talking about whether an RPG with a turn-based battle system can be successful or not, not what the rest of the game brings.
manipulate
Member
Pokemon is:
a) on a hand-held
b) a series with minimal emphasis on spectacle
c) not in the same budgetary realm
It also sells on a completely different basis. It's an established everpresent cultural phenomenon that has continually engaged multiple generations. FF7Re needs to make new fans. The legacy of FF7 is not insignificant, but the gulf here is enormous.
This is pretty obvious guys, why do we have go through this?
Crash Station
Member
There's also that new studio, but we don't know if they're actually doing any turn-based stuff. Would be nice.
And a multitude of spells, summons, party members, attack types, items, dozens of unique enemies are a major aspect of FFVII. You think all of that is going to transfer into an actio game?
BlackBuzzard
Banned
Lol it did not take long for that excuse to pop up.
Lol, what?
I was about to ask you the same question, because you've pretty much spun in every direction during this conversation to avoid accepting the reality of the type of games Square Enix makes in the present tense, and what the game director himself has said about the project so far.
brotkasten
Member
No, but the games are pretty popular. And I still don't see why turn-based combat would be unpopular or why it would be a reason for the game tanking, compared to action RPGs.
Dark_castle
Junior Member
I still don't get why console/handheld has to become a factor. You also can have flashy and fast-paced battles with turn-based, just look at Persona 5 or SMTxFE.
Scrooge McDuck
Member
Did people have this problem about homogenization during the PSX era when most of Squaresoft's high-profile outputs consist of battle systems in which the characters stand still on the same place and take turns attacking?
This is a serious question, by the way. I was not into gaming during the PSX era.
This is a serious question, by the way. I was not into gaming during the PSX era.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Pokemon is actually a good point in favour of turn based.
Though I think the difference is this: FF's high fidelity graphical appeal tends to hook people instantly based on the promise of kinetic visual action.. but the turn based nature is kind of a shock, and many never make it past that barrier.
It happened in 1997 when people watched the commercials on MTV. The turn based gameplay was an utter shock to many... many of whom stuck with it and became converts. But that was a different time. It's reasonable to expect that fewer would make that leap today. The graphics didn't promise as much "post-Matrix action" and the gameplay wasn't as bitter a pill to swallow in that less action-oriented age.
And I saw it again in 2005 with Advent Children and 2009 with the Blu ray release when I they were demoing it at my job. People came around and gawked at the style. Many went on to play the games... and many came away a little puzzled.
I think there is financial motivation to remove barriers and capitalize on the appeal of the action-packed visuals. I'm not saying it's right, but that's why there is the move towards more action-oriented game styles. FF stumbled onto a visual style which may be more popular in the mainstream than its traditional gameplay style.
Though I think the difference is this: FF's high fidelity graphical appeal tends to hook people instantly based on the promise of kinetic visual action.. but the turn based nature is kind of a shock, and many never make it past that barrier.
It happened in 1997 when people watched the commercials on MTV. The turn based gameplay was an utter shock to many... many of whom stuck with it and became converts. But that was a different time. It's reasonable to expect that fewer would make that leap today. The graphics didn't promise as much "post-Matrix action" and the gameplay wasn't as bitter a pill to swallow in that less action-oriented age.
And I saw it again in 2005 with Advent Children and 2009 with the Blu ray release when I they were demoing it at my job. People came around and gawked at the style. Many went on to play the games... and many came away a little puzzled.
I think there is financial motivation to remove barriers and capitalize on the appeal of the action-packed visuals. I'm not saying it's right, but that's why there is the move towards more action-oriented game styles. FF stumbled onto a visual style which may be more popular in the mainstream than its traditional gameplay style.
manipulate
Member
So, out of curiousity, why do you think that turn-based games are rare now, compared to 15 years ago?
Edit: I'm honestly not being a dick, I'm just genuinely confused here as to how people think the heavily-abstracted nature of turn-based combat doesn't turn a whole lot of people off.
There are more options now due to hardware capabilities. It's normal for games to branch out more, but that doesn't mean previous mechanics must die off.
manipulate
Member
That's true, which makes some kind of FF13-esque thing likely. Which would be kind of a bummer
Meccanical
Member
So they aren't allowed to try new things?
To be fair, there was a difference between the game styles of FF7-9, Xenogears, Vagrant Story, FF Tactics, Parasite Eve, Front Mission 3, Brave Fencer Musashi, etc....definitely.
But is Square still that company putting out a diverse portfolio of games on one console? Hell no.
This is the company that spent all of last gen eking out a Final Fantasy XIII, XIII-2, and XIII-3. The homogenization has been happening since the PS2 era.
Crash Station
Member
Misaimed appeal to the west, personal taste of creators, lack of JRPGs jumping to consoles in general (turn-based is still plentiful on handhelds), etc.
There could be a ton of factors involved.
manipulate
Member
So you genuinely don't think that marketability has been the main driving force behind that transition?
Dark_castle
Junior Member
Because the developers think we're all monkeys with ADHD who needs everything to be fast-paced action than slower-paced strategic.
manipulate
Member
Haha this is in some respects analogous to people complaining about the calibre of politicians we have. It's the market speaking; they're just going where the sales are.
Meccanical
Member
The notion that turn based automatically means strategic is laughable.
BlackBuzzard
Banned
I wanted to say this but i thought it would be too harsh.
Scrooge McDuck
Member
Aaa, when you put it that way, I just realized that the company's output during the PS3 era was dire. I've only started going through Square's library around 2006, so the lack of diversity hasn't been something I really felt.
Now this is something I couldn't agree with. Being slow-paced doesn't necessarily mean strategic just as being fast-paced doesn't equal mindless.
manipulate
Member
Dark_castle
Junior Member
If it didn't before, then make it means that now. Like the example I've given earlier regarding to FFIV on DS. Even some of the regular encounters actually requires paying attention and strategize, exploiting enemy weaknesses and so on.
Crash Station
Member
It's important to note that JRPGs outside of FF and Pokemon were never big sellers in the west, with some Square games as exceptions due to the pedigree involved. Persona 4's numbers would be a sweeping success even when turn-based was common.
With growing development costs, many companies opted out of big productions on consoles altogether. They didn't transition over to action based like you're saying.
We'll never know if a AAA budget console turn-based RPG would be successful these days because no one has ever tried it.
To give more context as to the taste of some of the people making these games in Japan today, in one of the recent interviews, Nomura as asked what caught his eye at E3 this year. His response? Ghost Recon Wildlands and Horizon. He said he was interested in the approach to open world taken in Wildlands, and the combat mechanics of Horizon.
Previously when he was working on Final Fantasy Versus XIII, he constantly talked about how he wanted the game to be more immersive with dynamic cutscene events as you played through them, similar to many FPS games which were emerging at the time (HL2, CoD).
Previously when he was working on Final Fantasy Versus XIII, he constantly talked about how he wanted the game to be more immersive with dynamic cutscene events as you played through them, similar to many FPS games which were emerging at the time (HL2, CoD).
manipulate
Member
I actually remember exactly this at the time, when I tried introducing my friends to the game. Most of them were able to get over the initial shock, but it was certainly very jarring, even back then. In fairness I think with the preservation of player movement, modern ATB could look fine-ish.
BlackBuzzard
Banned
He is off his damn rocker, SE should pay Sakaguchi to consult on this, so this clown does not completely tank this before it even launches. No wonder this clown has not made a game since forever.
Meccanical
Member
He's far too busy making mobile games now, sorry.
Dark_castle
Junior Member
Don't know about Wildlands, but Horizon does look great. But as I've argued a million times, I really don't appreciate the fact that SE keeps shying away from turn-based to the more action-based approach. Hell, I'm one of those who LOVED Action RPG. But I don't need everything to be Action RPG. SE/Nomura wants everything to be Action RPG minus a few select ones. Goddamn it.
He's really not. Nomura has a very good understanding of what gamers actually like, because he himself plays a lot of current games on the market, and is not limited to just Japanese titles. I'm sure there's a small vocal minority who want everything to stay the way they are and be traditional, like Dragon Quest, but I guess there's a reason why we're still getting FF games released globally, and the only Dragon Quest game coming out anytime soon is a Musou game.
manipulate
Member
The first part of what you're saying is true, but remember the market is much bigger now than in SNES/PSX days. 1m global sales isn't that big a deal now.
The latter... I'm suggesting there's a reason for that. I don't think developers (not just limited to Japan) are THAT dumb; I mean they have all the sales data, focus testing, etc. There's a reason why nobody's making AAA budget console turn-based games anymore.
donkey show
Member
LOL, Smosh Games did an honest trailer for FF7 a day before FF7R was announced: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0hVwfD_s-g
EDIT: ...if we moved the announcement a year back. Whoops!
EDIT: ...if we moved the announcement a year back. Whoops!
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I think a lot of the ideas about "Japanese do it like this, and they only play games like this, and they always make games like this" is so greatly eroded. We're all evolving as gamers all around the world, finding new experiences over time. Even if we're not early adopters of innovations in new and foreign games, it's only a matter of time before we get exposed to new game concepts, or have the concepts trickle down to our level.
I don't think it's reasonable to assume that Japanese developers want to be slavish to old concepts of RPGs... and it's not that they're trying to reach to the West. It's because it's not the 90s anymore, for any of us.
manipulate
Member
c'mon son
Meccanical
Member
Um no, they did try it, at the very beginning of last generation.
Lost Odyssey, Blue Dragon, Enchanted Arms.
There have been attempts.
E-Cat
Member
In 2014.
BlackBuzzard
Banned
On the Xbox might as well put your non Nintendo game on the WiiU if you want it to tank.
brotkasten
Member
It's okay. I don't want to come over as overly defensive either. I'm thinking that the market was probably over-saturated at some point, people stopped buying them, publishers stopped making them. Just like how 3D platformers kinda disappeared in a short span of few years. That doesn't mean there's no market for that type of gameplay though. People can't buy them, if no one is making them. And yet you have projects like Yooka-Laylee that serves a seemingly dead genre and gets funded in no-time (again, different scope and project size, but I'm simply referring to the genre).
That's why I think it's hard to tell if these type of games are really unwanted, if no one is making a large scale turn-based RPG anymore.
They're not unwanted, but it can be pretty challenging to make a turn based modern blockbuster on high end consoles because there aren't a lot of reference points and there are big gaps between successful ones in the last decade. It would take a team with a strong vision and interest in revitalizing that sort of game to make an attempt.
OmegaDL50
Member
I think it still goes back to the Publishers simply not understanding the wants or demands of the long time fanbase. A degree of disconnect exists.
They only see things in sales charts and revenue metrics.
Those folks adamantly saying a turned based AAA budget RPG wouldn't work in today's era remind of the folks that say the demand of a traditional 2D style console Castlevania game is non-existent.
I don't think it's necessary to say how that one turned out, do I?
Of course, the two probably shouldn't be compared.
FF7 wasn't going to cater to the mainstream action focused gamer that needs to be constantly doing something at all times. It never was that sort of game. I've seen it happen far too often, when a dev changes things up drastically in a bid to get "new fans" and the chagrin of long time existing fanbase.
The thing is the FF7: Remake an all that it entails is something long time fans have been clamoring for, so an appropriate love letter was delivered. So it doesn't make sense to me to shift the games direction into something that would not mesh well with the long awaited fan base were looking forward to all of these years.
Sure people will expect some differences due to technological advances. Improving and making the ATB combat more balanced, more efficient and making it something respectable for today, doesn't mean total abandonment of it. Things can always be improved and ironed out. Outright elimination isn't a reasonable or acceptable alternative.
Dark_castle
Junior Member
Exactly. If developers don't make them, how would we as the consumers know how turn-based JRPG on console would fair. And besides, as awful as I think FFXIII was, it's still turn-based as well, and it still sold quite well. The quote by SE saying that they were surprised by Bravely Default's success in the west is pretty telling. Like they just realized there still are people outside of Japan who likes turn-based combat? Wow.
Of course, but based from what we seeing both KH3 and XV will feature quite large field and hack-n-slash mechanics, and VIIr will inevitably feature similar kind of large field (especially to XV)
Not too mention Nomura most likely taking cue from KH games if he making another action games. as what Versus shown before Tabata adding his own Type-0 Flavor and even then you can still see Nomura influence in it.. I must agree there's decent chance these 3 game can felt somewhat similar if all adopt same gameplay philosophy with Nomura had hand in it.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I'd welcome a really strong traditional turn-based RPG Kickstarter. Bring it on.
I'd argue that few of the RPG kickstarters so far really felt like definitive followups to something beloved and long gone (like Mighty No 9 brought back Megaman and Bloodstained brought back Castlevania)
I'd argue that few of the RPG kickstarters so far really felt like definitive followups to something beloved and long gone (like Mighty No 9 brought back Megaman and Bloodstained brought back Castlevania)
Meccanical
Member
It's not really long gone though.
What people in this thread want is a turn based game with a huge budget, kickstarter won't give them that.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I'd argue that Megaman and Castlevania were even less long gone.
Good point though. Making a small RPG is within reach already. It's that late 90s big budget jRPG which could only exist in the RPG bubble of the late 90s that we are missing....
manipulate
Member
Sure, I agree the 'small' parts of the market are probably underestimated by publishers. I guess the tension I see here is that when we're talking about a project that necessitates spending $50m or whatever, it's a bit of a different ballgame. We'll see I guess, but I think there's a lot of evidence that it's easier to attract people with more direct character action combat systems, than abstracted menu-driven ones.
Turn-based also kind of (unfairly) suffers from an association with older technology and more primitive technology. It's easy to see how a lot of the younger generation might see it as archaic. For something as spectacle-driven as FF, you really don't want that.. it has to be the new amazing shiny immersive thing if it's going to do a large amount of sales on a basis other than nostalgia.
manipulate
Member
I actually really want this too. But I recognise that time's probably long gone.
- Status