Support NeoGAF

[Mayar]

Oh, I'm more than sure that they know about 33. They probably hate it with all their hearts. All discussions and forums are filled with post - that this is how FF should have been done. The question is different, seeing it is of course good, but doing it is completely different. Yes, of course they will make turn-based AA games and remakes of old games, but I don't think they have the courage to release a new FF in turn-based mode. The current Square Enix and its new management hardly have the balls to make such a decision.

 

[Killer8]

A return to form is not a "kneejerk pivot". Expedition 33's critical and commercial success proves that a high fidelity turn-based JRPG is what Final Fantasy fans have wanted for YEARS. XV and XVI were chasing a different audience and hoping Final Fantasy fans come along for the ride.

I'm so tired of the fellating of Clair Obscur.

It's a good game no doubt but it's also one game. People are suddenly treating it as the blueprint for how everything should be done in gaming, from its turn-based combat to the way it was developed (did we mention how it was made by only 30 people yet?). You can't take what is obviously a lightning in a bottle release and think it's a) indicative of a broader trend or b) replicable by every turn-based game.

Square Enix have continued to make turn-based games for years (Bravely Default, Octopath Traveller). It's not like it's become a completely alien play style for them. These games were well received by players but SE have the sales data showing it's a style that doesn't normally set the world on fire. Even other companies like Sega, who's sales numbers recently leaked, showed their newer releases Persona 3 Reload and Metaphor only did 2 million units each, while Yakuza: Infinite Wealth sold 1.6 million.

If turn-based is the magic bullet, why did none of these games do as well as the mighty Clair Obscur? Or even Pokemon? The answer is that there are obviously many other factors influencing success than just the battle system...

Let's also not forget that the real-time Final Fantasy XV was more commercially successful than any turn-based Final Fantasy game since VII. FF has been a series in sales decline for decades, even while it was a turn-based series (IX saw a sales drop-off of nearly 50% on PS1).

So yes, basing future strategy of mainline FF on the surprise (keyword) success of Clair Obscur, specifically, is kneejerk. And would also be a pivot, both to a style - the appeal of which progressively wore off based on sales data - and from a style, real-time, which actually delivered their first big hit in a long time (XV).

That is why people talk of the identity crisis at Square Enix because it's simply not clear what route will bring the series back to the relevance it once had. Turn-based is not a silver bullet.

 

[KenaiPhoenix]

The sacred cow of Yoshi-P that can never do anything wrong once claimed: "People want instant gratification! Now turn based RPG". He got lucky there was a gap between FF16 and Baldurs Gate 3

I would like a FF game with the FF12 systems in them again.

That would be so fucking amazing. SE really created peak RPG systems and then abandoned it.

 

[IFireflyl]

I'm so tired of the fellating of Clair Obscur.

It's a good game no doubt but it's also one game. People are suddenly treating it as the blueprint for how everything should be done in gaming, from its turn-based combat to the way it was developed (did we mention how it was made by only 30 people yet?). You can't take what is obviously a lightning in a bottle release and think it's a) indicative of a broader trend or b) replicable by every turn-based game.

People are treating Clair Obscur as a blueprint for how Final Fantasy should be done, not every game. Which makes sense as Clair Obscur is closer to Final Fantasy VII through X than any Final Fantasy game released in the last two decades. Square Enix told us that realism and turn-based combat can't go hand-in-hand. Some small development group showed Square Enix that they're idiots. What else are you going to call "lightning in a bottle"? Final Fantasy VII? Final Fantasy VIII? Final Fantasy IX? Final Fantasy X? These games sold extremely well, and they're using the same basic formula that Clair Obscur is using.

Clair Obscur: ~3.3 million
Final Fantasy VII: ~10 million
Final Fantasy VIII: ~8.6 million
Final Fantasy IX: ~5.1 million
Final Fantasy X: ~8.5 million

All of these are sales totals for the original PlayStation 1 releases (PlayStation 2 for Final Fantasy X), and do not include remasters/remakes in their sales figures. Clair Obscur hit ~3.3 million sales in 33 days. Considering it is also available on Game Pass, and it was an obscure (pun intended) development team, that's freaking awesome.

 

[Mexen]

Clarity Obscured: Final Expedition 17

 

[peronmls]

People are treating Clair Obscur as a blueprint for how Final Fantasy should be done, not every game. Which makes sense as Clair Obscur is closer to Final Fantasy VII through X than any Final Fantasy game released in the last two decades. Square Enix told us that realism and turn-based combat can't go hand-in-hand. Some small development group showed Square Enix that they're idiots. What else are you going to call "lightning in a bottle"? Final Fantasy VII? Final Fantasy VIII? Final Fantasy X? These games sold extremely well, and they're using the same basic formula that Clair Obscur is using.

Nobody wants FF like that. Only the obnoxious Clair Obscure fans who won't stfu about it. No real FF player wants another mediocre Final Fantasy turn based game. There are plenty of those in other games and FF does not need to be that same boring formula. Good for them that they moved on from it to do something new. Indie fans want the same boring game mechanics. We get it you suck Clair c***.

Go play your shitty indie titles and keep echoing about it with the fandom on how amazing it is and that you want to give it a reach around in bed.

 

[Danjin44]

I LOVE Clair Obscur but that doesn't mean I want FF turn based combat be like them.

I do want to see turn based combat in mainline FF one day but I want that turn based combat be closer to FFX or Bravely/Octopath than Clair Obscur.

 

[IFireflyl]

Nobody wants FF like that. Only the obnoxious Clair Obscure fans who won't stfu about it.

Am I a Clair Obscur fan "who won't stfu about it"? Nope. I still want turn-based combat ala Clair Obscur.

No real FF player wants another mediocre Final Fantasy turn based game.

What is a "real" Final Fantasy player exactly?

There are plenty of those in other games and FF does not need to be that same boring formula. Good for them that they moved on from it to do something new.

Keeping turn-based combat doesn't mean that gameplay can't evolve. Final Fantasy VII delivered an evolution of turn-based combat in the form of ATB. Clair Obscur delivered an evolution of turn-based combat in the form of adding parry/block/jump mechanics.

Indie fans want the same boring game mechanics. We get it you suck Clair c***.

You're seriously acting like a douchey little cunt because someone has a different opinion than you?

Go play your shitty indie titles and keep echoing about it with the fandom on how amazing it is and that you want to give it a reach around in bed.

Step away from the keyboard and move towards the sunlight. You are absolutely unhinged.

 

[Lokaum D+]

But if it doesn't have fun FF combat why bother.

And FF12 mmo combat style os fun ?

 

[Crayon]

And FF12 mmo combat style os fun ?

Yes it kicks ass!

 

[calico]

The sad reality is that the company which brought us Goetz's trading pass, decided to put 70 hours of Ubislop in Rebirth and managed to fumble recreating the most iconic death scene in all of gaming couldn't make Exp33 or anything like it if they tried. It would require an almost totally different mindset to that which they have demonstrated lately. I say 'almost' because they do at least share a willingness to experiment with core gameplay.

FF is heavily reliant on branding and nostalgia at this point, and I think even that might not be enough to avoid FF7 pt3 from struggling commercially. Not only that, but they have put themselves into a position with the remake trilogy where if they fail to deliver on the radical new mystery box elements they've chosen to introduce to the story (good on them for attempting it, but literally nobody asked for it) they are going to be looking at a Lost / Game of Thrones style backlash which could cause real harm to the franchise going forward.

 

[Fbh]

I'm so tired of the fellating of Clair Obscur.

It's a good game no doubt but it's also one game. People are suddenly treating it as the blueprint for how everything should be done in gaming, from its turn-based combat to the way it was developed (did we mention how it was made by only 30 people yet?). You can't take what is obviously a lightning in a bottle release and think it's a) indicative of a broader trend or b) replicable by every turn-based game.

Square Enix have continued to make turn-based games for years (Bravely Default, Octopath Traveller). It's not like it's become a completely alien play style for them. These games were well received by players but SE have the sales data showing it's a style that doesn't normally set the world on fire. Even other companies like Sega, who's sales numbers recently leaked, showed their newer releases Persona 3 Reload and Metaphor only did 2 million units each, while Yakuza: Infinite Wealth sold 1.6 million.

If turn-based is the magic bullet, why did none of these games do as well as the mighty Clair Obscur? Or even Pokemon? The answer is that there are obviously many other factors influencing success than just the battle system...

Let's also not forget that the real-time Final Fantasy XV was more commercially successful than any turn-based Final Fantasy game since VII. FF has been a series in sales decline for decades, even while it was a turn-based series (IX saw a sales drop-off of nearly 50% on PS1).

So yes, basing future strategy of mainline FF on the surprise (keyword) success of Clair Obscur, specifically, is kneejerk. And would also be a pivot, both to a style - the appeal of which progressively wore off based on sales data - and from a style, real-time, which actually delivered their first big hit in a long time (XV).

That is why people talk of the identity crisis at Square Enix because it's simply not clear what route will bring the series back to the relevance it once had. Turn-based is not a silver bullet.

Clair Obscur might just be my favorite JRPG (or JRPG-type game ) of all time. But I'm honestly tired of seeing the success of it and games like Baldur's Gate 3 and Persona 5 being reduced to "they are good because they are turn based".
All of those games had a wide variety of reason why they are good and connected with a large audience beyond the simple fact that their combat is turn based instead of real time. I've had a lot of friends and acquaintances tell me how much they loved Baldur's Gate 3, and only a small number of them focused on the combat when praising the game.
Similarly, games like FFXV or XVI have a bunch of issues that run much deeper than their combat not being turn based.

It's like when people go "But Persona 5 sold over 10 million units and it's turn based so clearly the audience wants more turn based". And it's like yeah, but it also sold so much because people love the setting and style and music and the story and the social link stuff and picking their waifu to date and the highschool simulator mechanics, etc.
SMTV is almost literally as if you took Persona , took out the highschool and social link stuff and focused the entire experience on the dungeons, the turn based combat and the demon fusing. So naturally it sold 10 million units too...right? Oh wait, no, it's only at 2 million after 4 years including the OG release and Vengeance Rerelease.....it's almost like the turn based combat isn't the main appeal of Persona.

 

[Zacfoldor]

Read this if you want to have an aneurysm.

Final Fantasy 16 Designers Discuss Why The Series Hasn’t Been Turn-Based For A While

They don't rule out a return to turn-based combat one day, though.

www.gameinformer.com

 

[GateofD]

Salty Foraaken

Clair Obscur might just be my favorite JRPG (or JRPG-type game ) of all time. But I'm honestly tired of seeing the success of it and games like Baldur's Gate 3 and Persona 5 being reduced to "they are good because they are turn based".
All of those games had a wide variety of reason why they are good and connected with a large audience beyond the simple fact that their combat is turn based instead of real time. I've had a lot of friends and acquaintances tell me how much they loved Baldur's Gate 3, and only a small number of them focused on the combat when praising the game.
Similarly, games like FFXV or XVI have a bunch of issues that run much deeper than their combat not being turn based.

It's like when people go "But Persona 5 sold over 10 million units and it's turn based so clearly the audience wants more turn based". And it's like yeah, but it also sold so much because people love the setting and style and music and the story and the social link stuff and picking their waifu to date and the highschool simulator mechanics, etc.
SMTV is almost literally as if you took Persona , took out the highschool and social link stuff and focused the entire experience on the dungeons, the turn based combat and the demon fusing. So naturally it sold 10 million units too...right? Oh wait, no, it's only at 2 million after 4 years including the OG release and Vengeance Rerelease.....it's almost like the turn based combat isn't the main appeal of Persona.

The masses seem to focus on the turn based aspect since it's gotten a much more mainstream appeal from people who don't play turn based games liking it enough to play it.

Non turn based fps joe isn't going to pick up P5 or BG3. Too weeb or nerdy for him. E33 just manages to feed the turn based like vegetables hidden in the meatloaf to that crowd.

 

[Larxia]

The problem is that there is turn based... and turn based.
Yes, people did enjoy the combats in Clair Obscur, but that doesn't mean they would enjoy something like FF X or Dragon Quest.

I myself really dislike the "classic" turn based systems such as Dragon Quest, Pokemon, old FF etc. I find that boring, pointless, there's no strategy, no depth, it just always felt like a waste of time to me.
However, I loved it in Midnight Suns, Baldur's Gate 3, and even enjoy it in Persona 5, if we have to stay in the more classic jrpg realm. These games all offer more systems than just spamming the auto attack to win or every now and then throwing a fire spell on an ice enemy.

If Square Enix would interpret the success of something like Clair Obscur, as "people want FF X again", they would be in for a bad surprise. I know a lot of players seem to think that way too, I see it here and on other places, but no, it doesn't work like that, I know many people who enjoyed it in clair obscur but who can't stand the regular turn based games I mentionned.

Turn based can be good, but it has to be modernized, to offer more, and not just be some super passive, easy, no brain thing.

 

[Camreezie]

' Yeah we heard about that product that did our formula better than us'

 

[IFireflyl]

Clair Obscur might just be my favorite JRPG (or JRPG-type game ) of all time. But I'm honestly tired of seeing the success of it and games like Baldur's Gate 3 and Persona 5 being reduced to "they are good because they are turn based".
All of those games had a wide variety of reason why they are good and connected with a large audience beyond the simple fact that their combat is turn based instead of real time. I've had a lot of friends and acquaintances tell me how much they loved Baldur's Gate 3, and only a small number of them focused on the combat when praising the game.
Similarly, games like FFXV or XVI have a bunch of issues that run much deeper than their combat not being turn based.

It's like when people go "But Persona 5 sold over 10 million units and it's turn based so clearly the audience wants more turn based". And it's like yeah, but it also sold so much because people love the setting and style and music and the story and the social link stuff and picking their waifu to date and the highschool simulator mechanics, etc.
SMTV is almost literally as if you took Persona , took out the highschool and social link stuff and focused the entire experience on the dungeons, the turn based combat and the demon fusing. So naturally it sold 10 million units too...right? Oh wait, no, it's only at 2 million after 4 years including the OG release and Vengeance Rerelease.....it's almost like the turn based combat isn't the main appeal of Persona.

Maybe I'm just not seeing the same threads or websites that you're seeing. What I am seeing isn't, "These games are good because they are turn-based." It's, "These games show that turn-based still works." The problem I have with Final Fantasy is that it's not Final Fantasy anymore. They literally said in the interview that Zacfoldor mentioned a few posts back that they:

• think they can't have realistic graphics go hand-in-hand with turn-based combat as that would be "jarring".
• have to sell as many copies as possible, and that means moving away from turn-based combat
• it's easier to go back to turn-based combat if they go back to pixel graphics.

The turn-based combat excuses are removed with the successes of Baldur's Gate 3 and Clair Obscur. I don't think the majority of people are saying, "Everyone should move to this because this is what gamers want." It's, "You are changing the thing that put you on the map, but that's not your problem." Square Enix needs to fix their vision, not change to action-based combat. Their action-based combat games are so boring that I gave up on Chapter 9 of Final Fantasy Rebirth, and after getting the second Eikon with Final Fantasy XVI. For JRPGs, the gameplay and story go hand-in-hand. If the story sucks, you don't want to play the game to experience more suck. If the gameplay sucks, you don't want play the game to experience more of the great story.

If you love real-time combat, great. I prefer turn-based combat, but Square Enix's issue is that they took away the combat I loved, and they keep releasing these morbidly depressing main characters (Lightning, Cloud, Noctis, and Clive) for a story that doesn't excite me. Final Fantasy used to be captivating, but it has been decades since they captivated me. I am looking forward to Final Fantasy Tactics: The Ivalice Chronicles more than any other modern Final Fantasy game.

 

[nordique]

Turn based games has its place. It's not my thing anymore but I have good memories of the older FF games and Pokémon on game boy

Now a days I prefer more action oriented rpgs. The ff7 remake series is right up my alley.

 

[AJUMP23]

And FF12 mmo combat style os fun ?

I enjoyed the gambit system.

 

[Killer8]

People are treating Clair Obscur as a blueprint for how Final Fantasy should be done, not every game. Which makes sense as Clair Obscur is closer to Final Fantasy VII through X than any Final Fantasy game released in the last two decades. Square Enix told us that realism and turn-based combat can't go hand-in-hand. Some small development group showed Square Enix that they're idiots.
What else are you going to call "lightning in a bottle"?

"Lightning in a bottle" means achieving a rare or difficult success. Why do you think the words describing Clair Obscur's success are frequently "runaway", "surprise", "against the odds" or "unexpected"? Because it's a hit despite using a combat system which popularity is known to have declined, and despite coming from a small unknown studio. It's an exception proving the rule ie. that typically these sorts of releases don't succeed.

Final Fantasy VII? Final Fantasy VIII? Final Fantasy X? These games sold extremely well, and they're using the same basic formula that Clair Obscur is using.

Of those games I would only call Final Fantasy VII lightning in a bottle in the context of it being a breakout hit overseas. For many Western players it ended up being their introduction to JRPGs.

The following games, VIII and X, not really. They released in the eye of the storm of the genre's global popularity, and in the case of X was an early showpiece for the new PS2 hardware. Their success was more expected.

Clair Obscur: ~3.3 million
Final Fantasy VII: ~10 million
Final Fantasy VIII: ~8.6 million
Final Fantasy IX: ~5.1 million
Final Fantasy X: ~8.5 million

All of these are sales totals for the original PlayStation 1 releases (PlayStation 2 for Final Fantasy X), and do not include remasters/remakes in their sales figures. Clair Obscur hit ~3.3 million sales in 33 days. Considering it is also available on Game Pass, and it was an obscure (pun intended) development team, that's freaking awesome.

Final Fantasy XV: >10 million

(sold 5 million on launch day, as much as IX on PS1 did total)

The peaks on the graph get gradually lower and lower over time (10 -> 8.5 -> 7) until XV released.

The data is showing exactly what I said my post:

Let's also not forget that the real-time Final Fantasy XV was more commercially successful than any turn-based Final Fantasy game since VII. FF has been a series in sales decline for decades, even while it was a turn-based series (IX saw a sales drop-off of nearly 50% on PS1).

a pivot, both to a style - the appeal of which progressively wore off based on sales data - and from a style, real-time, which actually delivered their first big hit in a long time (XV).

Real-time XV broke the trend and got the series back to the sales numbers FF enjoyed at its peak. It's little wonder why Square Enix felt confident that real-time was the direction the series should continue in to maximize its audience, and therefore decided to fully embrace 16 being a character action game.

 

[Mister Wolf]

And FF12 mmo combat style os fun ?

Hell yeah it is. They can find ways to make it more dynamic like the Xenoblade games.

 

[IFireflyl]

"Lightning in a bottle" means achieving a rare or difficult success. Why do you think the words describing Clair Obscur's success are frequently "runaway", "surprise", "against the odds" or "unexpected"? Because it's a hit despite using a combat system which popularity is known to have declined, and despite coming from a small unknown studio. It's an exception proving the rule ie. that typically these sorts of releases don't succeed.

WHat do you mean by "typically"? Please give me a list of games of similar scope/scale of Clair Obscur that failed.

Of those games I would only call Final Fantasy VII lightning in a bottle in the context of it being a breakout hit overseas. For many Western players it ended up being their introduction to JRPGs.

The fact that subsequent games did about as well should be an indicator that it wasn't some freak accident (aka, lighting in a bottle).

The following games, VIII and X, not really. They released in the eye of the storm of the genre's global popularity, and in the case of X was an early showpiece for the new PS2 hardware. Their success was more expected.

This is an excuse and nothing more. There is absolutely no evidence to show that these types of games would fail in today's climate. You're presenting conjecture as fact. In fact, games like Persona (which you previously referenced) and Clair Obscur would indicate that you don't know what you're talking about. Additionally, Clair Obscur sold over 3.3 million copies in 33 days. Final Fantasy XVI is estimated to have sold between 3.4 - 4.1 million copies since it was released two years ago. How expected do you think that was?

Final Fantasy XV: >10 million

(sold 5 million on launch day, as much as IX on PS1 did total)

The peaks on the graph get gradually lower and lower over time (10 -> 8.5 -> 7) until XV released.

The data is showing exactly what I said my post:

Final Fantasy VII was released in 1997 when the gaming industry was much smaller. It had a more limited global reach, fewer distribution options, and no digital storefronts. Selling over 10 million units back then was a monumental achievement. Final Fantasy VIII got close to that, as did Final Fantasy X. Final Fantasy XV, on the other hand, released in 2016 in a vastly different environment. It had a decade-long development cycle, a massive marketing budget, and access to a much larger gaming audience across multiple platforms including digital sales, and PC. Despite all of those advantages, it only managed to match the raw sales total of a game from two decades prior (and marginally surpass two others). There were approximately 300 million console and PC gamers around 2005. There are almost 2.5 billion console and PC gamers now. And yet Final Fantasy XV did about the same numbers as Final Fantasy VII through X, and Final Fantasy XVI has sold less copies than any single game from Final Fantasy VII through Final Fantasy X. That signals stagnation, not growth.

P.S. I want to reiterate that those sales numbers don't include subsequent releases from outside of the original console for Final Fantasy VII-XIII, meaning that with remasters and PC ports those numbers are higher. The Final Fantasy XV totals do include PC release already.

Real-time XV broke the trend and got the series back to the sales numbers FF enjoyed at its peak. It's little wonder why Square Enix felt confident that real-time was the direction the series should continue in to maximize its audience, and therefore decided to fully embrace 16 being a character action game.

Something you are not considering is that Final Fantasy XV also is a worse reviewed game, both by critics and consumers alike. But I can see why you would want to frame your argument the way you did. Anything to paint that game in a good light, huh? Also, Final Fantasy XVI is worse reviewed by critics and consumers alike. This isn't to say it's a terrible game, but the games you're insulting had better scores across the board.

 

[laynelane]

I enjoyed the gambit system.

Same. It was very divisive at the time, but I enjoyed learning the system and how to use it. I feel the same about all the variations they've put into the games over the years. The variety is fun.

 

[Raven117]

Hey Square, while turn based is fine, the real takeaway from Expedition 33 is not to shy away from deep and complex subject matter.

 

[Hollywood Hitman]

Makes me recall years back when idiots would try to say that turn based was only due to lack of power back in the 80s and how it's unnecessary these days when it's always been a loose form of table top/pen and paper rpg styles.. Turn based is and forever will be incredible, there's room for real Time action and turn based in gaming, both styles can make for amazing games... The market has forever been there

 

[calico]

Why do you think the words describing Clair Obscur's success are frequently "runaway", "surprise", "against the odds" or "unexpected"? Because it's a hit despite using a combat system which popularity is known to have declined, and despite coming from a small unknown studio.

It is overwhelmingly because of the latter. If a Persona or FF game released using that exact combat system and sold 3m copies in ~a month, I don't think it would be considered particularly against the odds or unexpected.

Not that this combat system is even really the traditional JRPG turn-based style which is 'known to have declined' to begin with. Half of the combat system is reaction/rhythm based, which potentially allows it to appeal to a broader audience (ie. people who would not be open to playing a traditional strictly turn-based JRPG).

 

[rofif]

I don't want everyone out there now making turn based combat. It wasn't my fav part of the game.
I am still of a mind that turn based was used back in the old days when real time combat was technically harder to do.
And I really loved both xv and xvi.

Square take on "turn" combat is good in remakes. You can do real time and you can pause

 

[pulicat]

Read this if you want to have an aneurysm.

Final Fantasy 16 Designers Discuss Why The Series Hasn’t Been Turn-Based For A While

They don't rule out a return to turn-based combat one day, though.

www.gameinformer.com

They managed to sell the same amount of copies as new IP like Octopath Traveller after splurged $150m budgets.

 

[Physiognomonics]

ff15 was the lastgood ff. bu the worst things in that game was the combat and the immatures themes / characters.

 

[Felessan]

Non turn based fps joe isn't going to pick up P5 or BG3. Too weeb or nerdy for him. E33 just manages to feed the turn based like vegetables hidden in the meatloaf to that crowd.

It sold 3 mil, not 33. Roughly the same as other good AA turn-based jrpg. So fps joes ignored genre as usual and E33 fans just exaggerate success of the game.
And E33 not even proper turn-based with all that shitty souls-styled mechanics blended into combat

 

[Esppiral]

This literally says nothing new.

Turn-based RPGs are like half of their output already lol.

Bit bit anymore with the big budget games....

 

[LimanimaPT]

Nobody wants FF like that. Only the obnoxious Clair Obscure fans who won't stfu about it. No real FF player wants another mediocre Final Fantasy turn based game.

Well, you're wrong.
I want a turn based combat FF game and I'm a FF fan. This is the main reason I ditched FF games. The last one I play was FF XII.

 

[March Climber]

I'd prefer it if Square Enix doubled down on the character action gameplay from 16. It was refreshing.

Maybe 17 could expand on the RPG elements more and perhaps open up the world more.

By going further down that road they're just going to realize that this whole time, Kingdom Hearts had already solved the genre-blend equation, specifically KH: Birth By Sleep.

 

[Jinzo Prime]

And Elden Ring even for souls was a surprise success. But what do you suggest here, that FF goes toward souls? Not even From software's next Souls game is guaranteed as much success as Elden Ring got.

Atlus doesn't have SE's marketing budget, or anything close to SE's budget of a mainline FF.

Thinking action is the path to huge success is why they keep failing and the franchise going into a downward spiral every iterations. The sales in Japan decline iteration to iteration since FF7.

Directors are dropping likes flies with these projects

Trying to get COD crowd mainstream and changing the entire reason of existence of a franchise's historic core mechanics will do that.

SE in the meantime

Maybe next time will be the right one

The solution to selling lots of copies of your JRPG is to put it on the platform where all the JRPG fans are (Switch).

One important reason FF isn't selling in Japan is that it has been exclusive to systems... that aren't selling in Japan. Big budget, high graphic games don't work on Switch, but that platform was what the people bought, so of course FFVII Rebirth and FFXVI sold modestly.

Switch 2 needs to be the lead development platform for the next FF game, and they should focus on gameplay systems, story, and characters over graphics over everything else.

Crisp, clear, fluid gameplay and art. Sweeping and emotional soundtrack. Characters that you love put in situations that you hate. That is how you make a new Final Fantasy game that sells better than the old ones.

 

[Killer8]

WHat do you mean by "typically"? Please give me a list of games of similar scope/scale of Clair Obscur that failed.

'Failed' is too strong a word so i'll go back on what I said - not seeing the same level of success [as Clair Obscur], or what would be expected from a mainline FF, would be more accurate.

I've already mentioned several games within the same genre which paint a picture of what typical recent JRPG sales look like eg. Persona 3 Reload, SMT Vengeance, Yakuza: Like a Dragon + Infinite Wealth, and Metaphor have all barely exceeded 2 million units.

At 3.3 mil Clair is tracking beyond most of its peers, including long established franchises by major developers. As you say: "that's freaking awesome", but it also isn't suggestive of a trend. People are taking one game as a signal that turn-based is back, when it was already here with unimpressive sales...

The fact that subsequent games did about as well should be an indicator that it wasn't some freak accident (aka, lighting in a bottle).

FFVII - 10 mil
FFVIII - 8.6 mil
FFIX - 5.1 mil

What sales analyst would consider a near 50% decline in the following two entries, and then not being able to regain the same 10 mil peak for nearly 20 years as "about as well"?

What sales analyst would consider peaks getting progressively lower across the generations (10 mil for FFVII -> 8.5 mil for FFX -> 7 mil for FFXIII) as "about as well"? It's a description of a bear market if ever there was one.



As an aside, lightning in a bottle isn't the same meaning as "freak accident". I feel it's worth pointing this out because you're acting like my usage of the idiom is some affront to the games.

lightning in a bottle
to succeed in a way that is very lucky or unlikely

freak accident
something bad that happens that is extremely unlikely and so would have been hard to prevent

Both describe the unlikelihood of an event, but a freak accident couches it in negative terms, while lightning in a bottle is considered positive.

Capturing lightning in a bottle is still an accomplishment albeit an unlikely one. It also doesn't necessarily mean everything just goes back to normal afterwards. There can be longer term consequences, eg. a failing writer suddenly breaks out with a smash hit book which spawns a successful series.

FFVI with 870k overseas sales going to FFVII with 5.8mil overseas sales, popularizing the series and JRPGs for millions beyond Japan, almost certainly counts.

Perhaps Clair Obscur will signal a new trend. And I would welcome it. But we don't know. Because we aren't at the finding out stage yet.

Additionally, Clair Obscur sold over 3.3 million copies in 33 days. Final Fantasy XVI is estimated to have sold between 3.4 - 4.1 million copies since it was released two years ago. How expected do you think that was?

Why should I comment on speculation and not concrete numbers? FF16 sales figures have not been disclosed. All we know is that it sold in one week (3 million) what Clair Obscur sold in one month, and what nearly all of Sega's RPGs released in the last few years have failed to do yet in their lifetime.

Context is also important. You're comparing a game released exclusively on one platform for $70 with one released multiplatform for a budget price of $50. All of these factors can affect sales success moreso than the type of combat system, and i'm surprised (or not) that it hasn't been brought up yet.

Final Fantasy VII was released in 1997 when the gaming industry was much smaller. It had a more limited global reach, fewer distribution options, and no digital storefronts. Selling over 10 million units back then was a monumental achievement. Final Fantasy VIII got close to that, as did Final Fantasy X. Final Fantasy XV, on the other hand, released in 2016 in a vastly different environment. It had a decade-long development cycle, a massive marketing budget, and access to a much larger gaming audience across multiple platforms including digital sales, and PC. Despite all of those advantages, it only managed to match the raw sales total of a game from two decades prior (and marginally surpass two others). There were approximately 300 million console and PC gamers around 2005. There are almost 2.5 billion console and PC gamers now. And yet Final Fantasy XV did about the same numbers as Final Fantasy VII through X, and Final Fantasy XVI has sold less copies than any single game from Final Fantasy VII through Final Fantasy X. That signals stagnation, not growth.

Thanks for describing exactly why VII can be considered lighting in a bottle!

Clair Obscur: ~3.3 million
Final Fantasy VII: ~10 million
Final Fantasy VIII: ~8.6 million
Final Fantasy IX: ~5.1 million
Final Fantasy X: ~8.5 million

^ By the way, if 10 million sales in 2016 isn't as impressive as 10 million in 1997, then why are we acting like 3.3 million in 2025 is at all up there with the 1997?

Really gets the noggin joggin.

Something you are not considering is that Final Fantasy XV also is a worse reviewed game, both by critics and consumers alike. But I can see why you would want to frame your argument the way you did. Anything to paint that game in a good light, huh?

I didn't consider it because it's completely irrelevant to a discussion revolving around sales.

Square Enix have access to the figures and has a whole department doing market research. Why is there this conspiratorial idea that they are just stubbornly acting against what people want rather than following trends in their own data?

If the market says turn-based will make FF17 a big seller, that's what they'll do. But the market after XV released and sold 10 million suggested they do otherwise.

And "insulting" games? Get a grip.

 

[MagiusNecros]

Well, you're wrong.
I want a turn based combat FF game and I'm a FF fan. This is the main reason I ditched FF games. The last one I play was FF XII.

Final Fantasy only exists in Bravely/4 HoL series now.

 

[Hudo]

I just want Matsuno to direct FF17 and make it an Ivalice game. Or at least have him make a new FF Tactics game (he said, he's open to make another FFT, depicting the Fifty Years' War.) Or just say fuck it and let Yoko Taro go wild on FF17. I don't think that Yoshi-P and Nomura are capable of doing a good mainline FF game.