arcthemonkey
Sponsor
Square's White Engine only works on the PS3, so I don't seem them using it to make any 360 games any time soon.
Final Fantasy 1 & 2... AGAIN!
- Thread starter arcthemonkey
- Start date
Celesinator
Member
Zankoku no Yami;139824 said:
Revenant Wings is for the people who doesn't own a PS2 and wants to enjoy it. It's not the power of the DS, but for us Nintendo Owners.
He's smoking the "That's a lot of remakes." reefer.
And he's right, that is a lot.
But it isn't unwarranted. Final Fantasy 1 has the nostalgia value that attracts old customers who can afford new systems and new games, as well as new customers who want to try the old classics in a more enjoyable format.
But he's also right that they would have done a much better service to the gaming community by applying a little of that Final Fantasy 3 DS touch to it. Meaning instead of just updating the graphics, coding the game from scratch with a new engine, completely redone graphics and sounds, new gameplay elements, and the like. While FF1 doesn't really have the most depth (whereas FF3 has about the bare minimum of gameplay depth to warrant that kind of attention), it's nostalgia value gives it that edge.
And he's right, that is a lot.
But it isn't unwarranted. Final Fantasy 1 has the nostalgia value that attracts old customers who can afford new systems and new games, as well as new customers who want to try the old classics in a more enjoyable format.
But he's also right that they would have done a much better service to the gaming community by applying a little of that Final Fantasy 3 DS touch to it. Meaning instead of just updating the graphics, coding the game from scratch with a new engine, completely redone graphics and sounds, new gameplay elements, and the like. While FF1 doesn't really have the most depth (whereas FF3 has about the bare minimum of gameplay depth to warrant that kind of attention), it's nostalgia value gives it that edge.
No, he said he wanted another remake over an enhanced port. That's what's confusing. FF1 is mediocre by all measures, I think you're overestimating what pixelphiles are willing to spend on a mediocre game that happens to be a name they're familiar with(by warrant of later games actually being worth playing, not FF1 being worth playing). They're willing to spend about 5 dollars, if the Wii is any indication. This should of been a forgettable 3-5 dollar downloadable arcade outing for the PS3(maybe 360) and nothing more.
macchia;140359 said:
yeah the game may be mediocre, but consider it's of the first RPGs, and it was released on 1987. 20 years ago man, twenty. it started one of the best selling video game series.
so they DO deserve somethin as their 20th anniversary...but not another port damn it, make it a REMAKE
xmcdohlx;141629 said:
Or maybe a sequel. Final Fantasy I-2!
Something about the graphics is very off-putting for me. It looks like it's trying to retain the familiarity through simplicity (the poses in battle, and what I can assume is the old two-step walk animation), which clashes horrifically with the enchanced design of the sprites themselves. It's almost self-parody. Not to mention that I own the FF1&2 compilation on two different systems already, and I've never been able to stomach the gameplay for long enough to finish either game on either system.
xmcdohlx;141629 said:
So what? Release it in xbox arcade, Wiiplay, and whatever PS3 has going on then move on to content people actually want. I hate this arguement because it implies older games werent fun by warrant of their age. No, RPGS of the time werent fun by origin of their age. The NES predated genre fitting so people were mixing and matching all sort of intuitive and unique gameplay mechanics that are still fun to play to this day. Final Fantasy wasnt the first RPG and it was mediocre even at the time compared to its competition. I just dont understand why it deserves any celebrating at all, your argeument seems to be limited to brand loyalty. I love my MAC OSX, does that mean if they released their original crappy mac I'd have to appreciate what it was at the time? I can appreciate what things 20 years old were like at the time by just digging them out of the garage, I dont need people peddling archaic crap to me now cus I loved it 20 years ago.
That's you Macchia. And while your trolly antics are definitive of much of the online community, there happens to be a vast majority of people who probably don't agree with you.
Judging by the sales of the FF1-6 Advance games, SquareEnix is right on the money by porting old games with slightly enhanced features. The nostalgia effect of archaic games is a bit selling point, both to old gamers who want to relive their childhood classics and to new gamers who want to see the roots of the games they play today.
Judging by the sales of the FF1-6 Advance games, SquareEnix is right on the money by porting old games with slightly enhanced features. The nostalgia effect of archaic games is a bit selling point, both to old gamers who want to relive their childhood classics and to new gamers who want to see the roots of the games they play today.
Doesnt answer anything. If they really want nostalgia, they'd play the original version or, like EVERY OTHER MODERN CLASSIC, get a release in arcade and wiiplay. So they dont, they're selling the name and masking the poor gameplay with pretty new graphics. Its just a stupid argeument, you want nostalgia, the same boring gameplay, but nonono, change the graphics. I only want to remenisc the poor gameplay, not the old look, not the original translation, not the original sound, and certainly not the original controller and absolutely not the original method of play(portable) for the 'new generation' that's formed in the last 2 years since the last time these exact games were ported instead of Chrono Cross or Xenogears or Parasite Eve or the stuff that actually made Square noteworthy. Yeah OK dude. SE counts on people like you I suppose who're willing to put 40 more dollars down for this. Haha.
Not every person can get their hands on an NES and a cartridge of FF1/2 (Infact, I defy you to do it.)
I'm also fairly sure that SquareEnix wants more money. Meaning they won't put it on the VC (because that's less money!)
Remember, they're a business. These kind of things sell, whether they make sense to you or not. Money is a result of sales, so doing that which brings in more sales makes more money.
I'm also fairly sure that SquareEnix wants more money. Meaning they won't put it on the VC (because that's less money!)
Remember, they're a business. These kind of things sell, whether they make sense to you or not. Money is a result of sales, so doing that which brings in more sales makes more money.
Im not argueing what their fans are willing to buy or that SE has some obligation to quality control. I was simply trying to understand people defending the idea of this game as opposed to, say, a brand new game with these very same graphics or a direct port to arcade of their 'classics', or both(which in a perfect world would be more marketable I would think). Understanding why SE is doing this doesnt explain to me why you'd be willing to buy it knowing all this. I want to know why people are encouraging SE to continue down this path by making it more financially viable than, say, a new game without FF in the title .
That was a really nice twist they added.arcthemonkey
Sponsor
Prexus;141965":1gv1kwrt said:
I resent this comment. I, for one, wouldn't keep buying them if I didn't think they were actually good.