Represent.
Represent(ative) of bad opinions
thats pure incompetence. ridiculous statement.
Watch the 30 minutes credits of an AC and you’ll know.Then how come Ubisoft churns out 2-3 open world games per year?
15 years is probably hyperbolic, but we know 16 will take place over the entire world and not just a region or two, including multiple cities, towns, dungeons and large environments, whilst also offering high level cinematics and visuals. As well as distinct art styles betweem the 5-6 different kingdoms, as is common in FF. Makes complete sense to go down the open zone / wide linear approach here.thats pure incompetence. ridiculous statement.
I sort of get the impression he's talking about a true 'world', not a smaller in game area/continent. Even as big as a game like Odyssey is, some of the classic JRPGs from years past could absolutely dwarf games like that and BOTW if the whole world map was completely fleshed out.Then how come Ubisoft churns out 2-3 open world games per year?
I have the same exact reaction to you in preferring tactical turn base games over traditional ones. Traditional ones are so overdone at this point and feel shallow. SRPG's on the other hand still offer much more in the way of player choice and risk and reward. Divinity Original Sin 2 is a great example of that. It is much more involved than a simple turn-based game using the elements, environment, positioning, and cover to your advantage. Your combat skills are also used in and out of battle seamlessly. Hopefully with the success of Triangle Strategy and hopefully Diofield Chronicle, they will consider FF Tactics.I love SRPGs where you have to move and position your team (do I try to keep my distance with ranged attacks? Rush in for a quick kill but leave myself open to counterattack if I fail? Try to lure the enemy into a less advantageous position? Etc). There are plenty of strategic decisions and risk/reward propositions you have to make.
I’m bored to death of traditional turn-based JRPG battle systems where your guys stand on one side and the enemy stands on the other side. Either they’re piss-easy and you just pick “attack” from a menu until you win, or else they try to ratchet up the difficulty and end up being very tedious.
Good riddance. If S-E wants to give us another FF Tactics then I’d be overjoyed. But I’m good if they never make another ATB game again.
The funny thing is a lot of them do. And I'm still wondering where Square got this notion to begin with. It's not like a mainline Final Fantasy title has ever outright flopped just because it was turn based and other big rpg franchises are still doing quite well with turn based combat.Fuck young people for not liking turn based games.
Same! I grew up on NES and SNES rpgs, and I just don’t have the patience for that battle style anymore…I much more enjoy action RPGs these days.I’m far from a youngling but I can’t stand the traditional DQ/FF JRPG battle systems anymore. Good riddance.
Also glad it’s not open world. Last thing I need is another game filled with zany quest giver NPCs asking for you to forage for tomatoes and shit (and you know that’s what we would get).
Yes, it’s sad they are dumbing the game down for the gaijin dudebro audience. Too simple minded for complex strategic gameplay like “pick attack from a menu until everything is dead” or “use the kind of element that can hurt this enemy” or “use a potion if your HP is low”."Younglings" is his nice way of saying simple minded.
Yes, it’s sad they are dumbing the game down for the gaijin dudebro audience. Too simple minded for complex strategic gameplay like “pick attack from a menu until everything is dead” or “use the kind of element that can hurt this enemy” or “use a potion if your HP is low”.
Look at world of Warcraft as another example of splitting large continents up. It can be done and still be interesting.This was FF6's "world" for instance, which just amounted to 3 islands. You could absolutely do a FF world to Genshin's scale and make it feel massive. Just because Genshin is a mega-continent doesn't mean you couldn't split it into 2-3 sub-continents.
Then how come Ubisoft churns out 2-3 open world games per year?
They didnt tell this kid what was going to happen in this take or hes already a hell of an actor.
Yoshida went on to explain that he believes the evolution in console technology has pushed RPGs towards action-based mechanics rather than turn-based:
They think their style of turn based is complex, which is laughable. Those are simple minded compared to the likes of games based off DND 5E like Baldur's Gate 3 and Solasta.
Zone/Area based world ARPG since it's a globe spanning adventure than one location.Is this just a linear action game then?
So it's just final fantasy by name?
How is that any better? If it’s “open world” but you scale it down to the point where snow-covered mountains, swamps, rainforest, deserts, and beaches are all within a couple minutes’ jog of each other, all that does is make the world feel tiny and not at all like the world-spanning adventure of the classic FF games.Man, it’s almost like some of those open world games, or any games with fields and such, also aren’t meant to be exact scale or something…..
Like, does he think in Ocarina of Time that Kokiri Forest is actually meant to be literally 3 minutes away from Hyrule Castle?
It’s called scaling, seriously. Anyone could have a game‘s entire world, as long as it’s not Earth as we know its scale and layout, be open world and work. Nobody is asking for a realistic scale of a planet. That would mean walking between towns would take actual DAYS of play time. No open world game I’m aware of bothers with that level of realism for obvious reasons.
So really, good job. You just made the developer’s argument even more baffling.
World of Warcraft is not an open-world game.Look at world of Warcraft as another example of splitting large continents up. It can be done and still be interesting.
Thank goodness. I never want to see FF go the route they did with FFXV again.So this is not an open world game? That’s really weird.
Then how come Ubisoft churns out 2-3 open world games per year?
but they play the same : (Then how come Ubisoft churns out 2-3 open world games per year?
Valhalla shows that higher quantity reduces overall quality.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.
From what I've googled Persona 5 + P5R sold just over 6.5 million, FFXV sold over 10 million. Square wants that bigger number. Also they haven't completely given up on it. Dragon Quest had it and quite a few of their non-AAA products have featured turn based systems. For the time being, Final Fantasy is too big of a franchise and has moved on.Persona 5 Royal is amazing, has sold tons of copies, and is turn based. I don’t understand why Square has completely given up on it.
It's been hit and miss, depends on who the combat lead is.Squares version of action combat really sucks IMO.
ditched its traditional turn-based battle system in order to appeal to younglings
Dragon Quest had it
The oddly developed open world was only one of many of 15's problems.I find this to be awesome and great news. Open world was a disaster for FF15 IMO.