Your place for discussion about RPGs, gaming, music, movies, anime, computers, sports, and any other stuff we care to talk about...
FF6
- Because playing them is not enough, we have to bitch about them daily, too. We had a Gameplay forum, but it got replaced by GameFAQs.
I just started playing the game last week. It FINALLY came out on Virtual console. I have been jumping between this, Animal Crossing, Chrono Trigger, and Ocarina of Time.
I am actually right at this part of the game now =P
Oddly enough, I have been finding some new things, even though I have played this game 20-30 times or something in my lifetime (mostly excessive with this game because it came out in 94, and that was about a year before any other RPGs which even came close to it were out - like Chrono Trigger, Earthbound, Lufia 2, Wild Arms, Mario RPG, etc...)
* I discovered the merchant actually walks through South Figaro and gives Cider to the old man. Also, I found an Atlas Armlet that I never knew about before.
I am actually right at this part of the game now =P
Oddly enough, I have been finding some new things, even though I have played this game 20-30 times or something in my lifetime (mostly excessive with this game because it came out in 94, and that was about a year before any other RPGs which even came close to it were out - like Chrono Trigger, Earthbound, Lufia 2, Wild Arms, Mario RPG, etc...)
* I discovered the merchant actually walks through South Figaro and gives Cider to the old man. Also, I found an Atlas Armlet that I never knew about before.
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
Hey, I would be happy with an 8 remake =P
I love the game as is; but I would love to see more ways to gain magic (even buying it at shops like items, rather than buying items and refining them); and also to emphasize these other ways (along with cards and item refinement) in Tutorials early on, so that the meat-headed critics, who somehow only ever figure out how to gain magic by drawing, will be able to play the game.
Also a change to the magic system; linking it to game progress:
ie. Early period magic has a capacity of 30 instead of 100 at point A, but the capacity will increase as GFs are leveled or something like that... Also eliminate player levels as they are unnecessary and the mechanics linked to them are unnecessary and difficult to communicate via any mechanic in the game.
Also many more Easter eggs, like Selphie's blog..... Which was in FF8 LOOONG before blogs came into existence on the Internet.
FF7 needs a full graphical re-work, new minigames, and cutting down on animations. Also the game is poor at loading, a problem which no remake would have.
FF6 just needs some script touch ups and a graphical re-work. I was noting yesterday as I went through Phantom Forest how beautiful the graphics still looked, despite the pixelation. Phantom Forest is even up there with Chrono Trigger in terms of flashiness.
I love the game as is; but I would love to see more ways to gain magic (even buying it at shops like items, rather than buying items and refining them); and also to emphasize these other ways (along with cards and item refinement) in Tutorials early on, so that the meat-headed critics, who somehow only ever figure out how to gain magic by drawing, will be able to play the game.
Also a change to the magic system; linking it to game progress:
ie. Early period magic has a capacity of 30 instead of 100 at point A, but the capacity will increase as GFs are leveled or something like that... Also eliminate player levels as they are unnecessary and the mechanics linked to them are unnecessary and difficult to communicate via any mechanic in the game.
Also many more Easter eggs, like Selphie's blog..... Which was in FF8 LOOONG before blogs came into existence on the Internet.
FF7 needs a full graphical re-work, new minigames, and cutting down on animations. Also the game is poor at loading, a problem which no remake would have.
FF6 just needs some script touch ups and a graphical re-work. I was noting yesterday as I went through Phantom Forest how beautiful the graphics still looked, despite the pixelation. Phantom Forest is even up there with Chrono Trigger in terms of flashiness.
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
Anarky wrote:New graphics? If that's the case, I've already pre-ordered it. If it's just the old game with faux-3D tacked on, Squeenix can pucker-upZeus wrote:VI is so screaming for one, too. Imagine that game with current tech? Or even last-gen tech? *drools*The rumor I've heard is it will get a 3DS remake.
I was there on that fateful day, were you?
Zeus wrote:Anarky wrote:New graphics? If that's the case, I've already pre-ordered it. If it's just the old game with faux-3D tacked on, Squeenix can pucker-upZeus wrote:VI is so screaming for one, too. Imagine that game with current tech? Or even last-gen tech? *drools*The rumor I've heard is it will get a 3DS remake.
On April 27, 2010, Square Enix producer Shinji Hashimoto stated that the development of a remake of Final Fantasy VI for the Nintendo DS is at present "undecided" due to "technical issues".[99] Later, however, Square discussed remaking VI as well as V for the newly announced 3DS.[100]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Fantasy_VI
The scope of FF6 is considerably larger than FF4. Doing a full remake like with FF4 DS would take a lot more work. But one like the port of CT shouldn't be that hard, and I would definitely buy it - I still have my SNES, but I don't want to get it out and I shudder to think what it would look like on my HD tv.
And as I've said in the past, the cost of remaking FF7 with current-gen quality would be just as expensive as making current-gen Final Fantasies. It could even be more work than FF13. One of the reasons that FF13 was so linear was it cut down on the assets they had to make. They can't limit the scope of FF7.
Seeker, FF7's loading problems is completely a result of its implementation and the technology it used. A remake would use none of the original assets or code, so there's no reason to think it would suffer the same technical problems.
And as I've said in the past, the cost of remaking FF7 with current-gen quality would be just as expensive as making current-gen Final Fantasies. It could even be more work than FF13. One of the reasons that FF13 was so linear was it cut down on the assets they had to make. They can't limit the scope of FF7.
Seeker, FF7's loading problems is completely a result of its implementation and the technology it used. A remake would use none of the original assets or code, so there's no reason to think it would suffer the same technical problems.
Kupek wrote: And as I've said in the past, the cost of remaking FF7 with current-gen quality would be just as expensive as making current-gen Final Fantasies. It could even be more work than FF13. One of the reasons that FF13 was so linear was it cut down on the assets they had to make. They can't limit the scope of FF7.When you have a previous game that lays out the story, events, and world I'd think that would cut down on creative time to a degree. Sure you need to make the art asserts and world, but I don't see how it could take the same time as an entirely new Final Fantasy.
Creating art assets - character models, animations, locations - dominates development time. They are why games are so expensive to make now. That is exactly why FF13 was so delayed. They have the benefit of an engine, but they would probably have to create more assets in that engine for a FF7 remake than they did for FF13.
Kupek, I don't why you think if you repeat something long enough and then quote yourself again and again it makes it true. Of course a remake of FF6 or FF7 will be mostly a brand new game that isn't going to be free. Even FFX2 took a while to make and that's about as close to a copy & pasted game as you get. But on the other hand according to you no new game would ever get made because it's 'too much work'. You act as if one of the biggest video game company don't even have the generic abilities to make models or maps of location that has been made before. We're not talking about a remake of a game with no credential like Brave Fencer Musashi here. A remake of FF6 or FF7 is the closest thing Sqix has of a sure thing internationally (Dragon Warrior doesn't have the same renown globally, though I believe they remake them for Japan all the time).
Nobody has a crystal ball to say if a remake will be a success, and I guess Sqix doesn't want to take a chance that the remake sucks and ruins their reputation, though looking at all the spinoffs for FF7 I don't think reputation is really that important because some of those spinoffs really did suck. In the absence of a crystal ball a remake of FF6 or FF7 is the closest thing to a sure thing especially given the newer Final Fantasies haven't gone anywhere, which is why people are puzzled on why it hasn't happened yet. Obviously there's a business case to make or not make the game but given Sqix has put significant money behind some unmitigated disaster with the FF name (FFX2, FF14, various FF7 spinoffs) it's hard to imagine a spinoff of FF6 or FF7 do worse than say, FF14 which was universally hated.
For the record everyone should know I don't like to dwell in the past. If they remake FF6 or FF7 I won't be getting it, and I didn't even like FF6 very much. But I don't see why they're not doing it, since there are far worse games with the 'FF' label compared to a remake of either games, and I know at least one that definitely left Sqix in a worse shape than if it never existed (FF14).
Nobody has a crystal ball to say if a remake will be a success, and I guess Sqix doesn't want to take a chance that the remake sucks and ruins their reputation, though looking at all the spinoffs for FF7 I don't think reputation is really that important because some of those spinoffs really did suck. In the absence of a crystal ball a remake of FF6 or FF7 is the closest thing to a sure thing especially given the newer Final Fantasies haven't gone anywhere, which is why people are puzzled on why it hasn't happened yet. Obviously there's a business case to make or not make the game but given Sqix has put significant money behind some unmitigated disaster with the FF name (FFX2, FF14, various FF7 spinoffs) it's hard to imagine a spinoff of FF6 or FF7 do worse than say, FF14 which was universally hated.
For the record everyone should know I don't like to dwell in the past. If they remake FF6 or FF7 I won't be getting it, and I didn't even like FF6 very much. But I don't see why they're not doing it, since there are far worse games with the 'FF' label compared to a remake of either games, and I know at least one that definitely left Sqix in a worse shape than if it never existed (FF14).
I never said "it's too much work." However, I think it's far more work than most people realize. I think a FF7 remake would sell very well, probably more than FF13. But I think there are two related reasons why it's not being made. The amount of work required is at least as much as a new FF, and the high-level people who would have to be involved probably don't want to spend several years revisiting something they've already done.
If you mean a remake as in with current high end technology then yeah. Wild Arms Code F might as well be a brand new game compared to the original Wild Arms, but if you're going to put FF7 remake in a 'generic 3D RPG' with say, FFX's level graphics (or lower, if going for handheld systems) there's no way that's going to stretch the resources for a company like Sqix. Now you can say if they aim low maybe it hurts the franchise's name in the long run and it's not worth it to make a buck for the big picture, but recent FF games have been colossal failures that did far more damage than a generic 'grab more money' remake (FF14 comes in mind). A FF6/FF7 remake is almost certainly going to be profitable if they don't go for the most cutting edge technology stuff, and there's no way they'll be perceived worse than FF14 which caused Sqix to lose a ton of money. Now FF14 is a pretty low bar to compare to, but there's really no guaranteed something like FF13 Agito/Versus/whatever is going to be profitable or well-received either and those certainly do require a lot of money too. I won't say I know what's best for Sqix, but looking at recent Final Fantasy games, certainly Sqix don't exactly know what they're doing either.
Since when did anyone said Sqix will remake in current technology? You're talking about a company that adds a dungeon and puts in some cutscene and call it a remake back when it was Squaresoft. I'd be very surprised if a FF7 or FF6 features anywhere near cutting edge technology, especially if it's on 3DS since the limitation of the system inherently prevents you from going overboard on graphics.
Kupek, I didn't suggest that loading would be a problem in a remake, I made a statement about a critical flaw in the existing version of FF7, and that a remake wouldn't have it.
I agree with Don here. I don't think it is necessary to have the graphics of that PS3 demo - and I personally would probably be more likely to buy a game with characters and atmosphere that resembled the original more than one that didn't. I thought the backgrounds in the PS3 demo were excellent, but the model they used for Cloud looked like Ellen DeGeneres. That's just me though, I was not a fan of Advent Children (Well, the good guys and Sephiroth at least; I liked the Turks in that movie quite a bit; Rude was well done.) or any of that later FF7 stuff that didn't really have the same soul as FF7 - in a way Chrono Cross lacked the true soul of Chrono Trigger. My thinking is that a PSP, PSV, or 3DS quality remake, that was fixed angled 3D with pre-rendered assets running at proper resolution would be adequate. Although, I do think PS2 marked a highly missed opportunity for the remake of FF7.
FF6 - what I want to see is simply a flashy 2D version - probably on Wii U rather than 3DS. Chrono Trigger 3D would be a cool fit for 3DS though.
I agree with Don here. I don't think it is necessary to have the graphics of that PS3 demo - and I personally would probably be more likely to buy a game with characters and atmosphere that resembled the original more than one that didn't. I thought the backgrounds in the PS3 demo were excellent, but the model they used for Cloud looked like Ellen DeGeneres. That's just me though, I was not a fan of Advent Children (Well, the good guys and Sephiroth at least; I liked the Turks in that movie quite a bit; Rude was well done.) or any of that later FF7 stuff that didn't really have the same soul as FF7 - in a way Chrono Cross lacked the true soul of Chrono Trigger. My thinking is that a PSP, PSV, or 3DS quality remake, that was fixed angled 3D with pre-rendered assets running at proper resolution would be adequate. Although, I do think PS2 marked a highly missed opportunity for the remake of FF7.
FF6 - what I want to see is simply a flashy 2D version - probably on Wii U rather than 3DS. Chrono Trigger 3D would be a cool fit for 3DS though.
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
Uhhh no, I agree with Kupek here, I want exactly what he's talking about, a full high rez amazing looking Final Fantasy VII with next gen graphics, not some shitty low rez handheld remake with a touch better graphics. People have been begging for this ever since they saw the tech demo. Hell I think @ Final Fantasy XIII's release party in Japan some kid won a contest, got a free copy of the game, and was allowed to say something to the Square guys there at the time and he simply said "Remake Final Fantasy VII" regardless of the fact he just got Final Fantasy XIII lol.
If they remake FF7 or FF6 with the budget of say, FF13, people would just say why spend money to make something everyone already knows how it'll turn out that wasn't really all that great to begin with. I suppose you could make it like Shining Force Neo which is in theory a remake of Shining Force 1 but the only similarity there is that the hero is named Max and Chaos Breaker shows up at some point (I think), and again if you did that people would ask why didn't you just call it FF15 or whatever if it didn't remotely look like the original.
Remakes with cutting edge graphics tends to be for games that weren't successfully originally since you can argue not many people played it because it wasn't cutting edge enough, not that I believe it really works. On the other hand all the FF games are cutting edge games of their time and they're designed with a budget with a plan to sell big. At best you can throw big budget at the remake and hope it duplicate the success before, but it seems unlikely since people are cheap and don't like paying full price for something they've seen before. You'd have to make it like 'FF7 20th anniversary version' like the Star Wars remastered version but Sqix don't seem to have much talent in repackaging the same stuff, since the cheap remakes for various FFs + Chrono Trigger wasn't exactly a smashing success. I'm sure they made money but it obviously isn't something you can rely on like the Star Wars franchise that seems to just re-release the same stuff 25 times. That said, a cheap remake that looks like 5 random guys could've done it is still almost certainly profitable and you can't say that about a lot of the recent Sqix ventures.
Remakes with cutting edge graphics tends to be for games that weren't successfully originally since you can argue not many people played it because it wasn't cutting edge enough, not that I believe it really works. On the other hand all the FF games are cutting edge games of their time and they're designed with a budget with a plan to sell big. At best you can throw big budget at the remake and hope it duplicate the success before, but it seems unlikely since people are cheap and don't like paying full price for something they've seen before. You'd have to make it like 'FF7 20th anniversary version' like the Star Wars remastered version but Sqix don't seem to have much talent in repackaging the same stuff, since the cheap remakes for various FFs + Chrono Trigger wasn't exactly a smashing success. I'm sure they made money but it obviously isn't something you can rely on like the Star Wars franchise that seems to just re-release the same stuff 25 times. That said, a cheap remake that looks like 5 random guys could've done it is still almost certainly profitable and you can't say that about a lot of the recent Sqix ventures.
Don wrote:Remakes with cutting edge graphics tends to be for games that weren't successfully originally since you can argue not many people played it because it wasn't cutting edge enough, not that I believe it really works.I will debate this point!
Metal Gear Solid got an update to PS2 generation graphics, along with the first person mode.
Resident Evil has probably one of the best remakes of all time on the Gamecube.
Street Fighter II HD Remix, Capcom admitted they spent a crap ton of money redrawing all the sprites and frames.
Granted that's not alot, but there aren't THAT many remakes out there. :>
Eric wrote:As far as I know MGS might be critically acclaimed but it actually didn't sell that well so updating the game makes sense since people might want to see about the game they heard was great but never played. I don't know much about Resident Evil but being on Gamecube might help too (Nintendo tends to have limited third party support). I think SF2 HD was mostly talk. It's really hard for me to imagine making a game that is this outdated can be expensive, either that or Capcom is just good at wasting money (look at the staff of MM9 for example). At any rate Sqix doesn't have a good history with remakes, as their effort so far has been cheap attempts to get more money kind of like how Super Street Fighter 2 Turbo Championship edition can be thought of as the 3rd remake of Street Fighter 2. Again the bar for FF7/FF6 is also much higher because those games were the height of Sqix's dominance. It'd be like if Nintendo remade Zelda: Ocarina of Time and the game would be subject to huge scrutiny, and if it wasn't super successful people will think badly about it. I know they re-released it a few times but it's still fundamentally the same game, not a complete remake.Don wrote:Remakes with cutting edge graphics tends to be for games that weren't successfully originally since you can argue not many people played it because it wasn't cutting edge enough, not that I believe it really works.I will debate this point!
Metal Gear Solid got an update to PS2 generation graphics, along with the first person mode.
Resident Evil has probably one of the best remakes of all time on the Gamecube.
Street Fighter II HD Remix, Capcom admitted they spent a crap ton of money redrawing all the sprites and frames.
Granted that's not alot, but there aren't THAT many remakes out there. :>
Err Don, the first Metal Gear Solid is the best selling game in the series. 
Likewise the first Resident Evil wasn't a slouch in the sales department either, I don't wanna get into a sales debate here, because I think Resident Evil 4 is probably the best selling Resident Evil ever if you factor in all of the crossplatform re-releases, BUT Resident Evil was the 2nd best selling Resident Evil after Resident Evil 2.
These sales are all in the 4+ Million range.
Likewise the first Resident Evil wasn't a slouch in the sales department either, I don't wanna get into a sales debate here, because I think Resident Evil 4 is probably the best selling Resident Evil ever if you factor in all of the crossplatform re-releases, BUT Resident Evil was the 2nd best selling Resident Evil after Resident Evil 2.
These sales are all in the 4+ Million range.
Ocarina of Time 3D has sold nearly 800,000 so far.
Square Enix's DS remakes (Dragon Quest Zenethia trilogy, CT, FF3 and FF4) sold 9 million.
Nintendo's Pokemon Gold/Silver remake sold 10.34 million.
Remakes can be highly successful.
The thing is about all of these remakes, they are not made by the main dev teams - they were all made by primarilly third party contracted dev teams. A Square project to remake FF7 by their top studio would stall their main dev stream. Square's output has already been abysmal this generation. A smaller Matrix project would probably be fine, and would likely sell nearly as many copies, get the game out much faster, and not tie up resources and avoid screwing the Square dev side of the company further. A higher quality re-make can always be done later in a later generation.
As Square Enix has shown; it is a successful model to re-release new versions later. FF4 was successfully re-released 4 times since the PSX. People will always want to re-experience a classic.
.....
Although.....
One could speculate that the major reason why Square has been so sluggish lately is because they actually DO have an FF7 remake in the works that surpasses FF13 in budget and scope. That would actually be fairly exciting actually.
Just one last question though, who's prettier?
Square Enix's DS remakes (Dragon Quest Zenethia trilogy, CT, FF3 and FF4) sold 9 million.
Nintendo's Pokemon Gold/Silver remake sold 10.34 million.
Remakes can be highly successful.
The thing is about all of these remakes, they are not made by the main dev teams - they were all made by primarilly third party contracted dev teams. A Square project to remake FF7 by their top studio would stall their main dev stream. Square's output has already been abysmal this generation. A smaller Matrix project would probably be fine, and would likely sell nearly as many copies, get the game out much faster, and not tie up resources and avoid screwing the Square dev side of the company further. A higher quality re-make can always be done later in a later generation.
As Square Enix has shown; it is a successful model to re-release new versions later. FF4 was successfully re-released 4 times since the PSX. People will always want to re-experience a classic.
.....
Although.....
One could speculate that the major reason why Square has been so sluggish lately is because they actually DO have an FF7 remake in the works that surpasses FF13 in budget and scope. That would actually be fairly exciting actually.
Just one last question though, who's prettier?
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
Eric wrote:Metal Gear Solid got an update to PS2 generation graphics, along with the first person mode.And that game sold a little over 500k worldwide and considered to be a failure by the developer and even publisher
Simply put, remakes just don't sell that well, certainly not enough to warrant the costs which are often not THAT much less than a brand new game. No reason to sink real coin in them, better to just make a sequel/offshoot. Only real place they'll likely appear is on the handhelds as the dev costs are so much less. We'll see if Halo Anniversary, Microsoft's answer to the HD updates coming out on the PS3, sells well enough to warrant the full $40. It'll be the first of these HD updates to be a single game for the full $40 established price points
I was there on that fateful day, were you?
Meh, that was Konami's fault for making it a Gamecube exclusive, it reviewed well.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/gamecube ... win-snakes
Resident Evil remake and Resident Evil 4 sold Gamecubes, I know I wasn't alone in specifically buying a Gamecube just for Resident Evil.
And RE Remake sold 1.4 milly or so.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/gamecube ... win-snakes
Resident Evil remake and Resident Evil 4 sold Gamecubes, I know I wasn't alone in specifically buying a Gamecube just for Resident Evil.
And RE Remake sold 1.4 milly or so.
A million isn't a lot for Zelda especially for The Ocarina of Time. That said as long as it doesn't erode brand name it doesn't hurt and only Nintendo can answer that question for sure. I don't know the 3D stuff pretty well but I thought to make a game 3D is requires the same process for any other game so you might as well do it on something you've a history of success. You to spend $X to figure out how to do stuff in 3D and you happen to have a game considered by many as the best game of all time that roughly matches your system's capability, so you might as well put the two together. If you didn't spend $X to make Zelda in 3D you'd still have to spend it on something else, and as long as you're sure people don't think of it as "another Megaman game" it's obviously pretty safe to spend that money on Zelda instead of a new game.
In the case of Pokemon/Resident Evil, as far as I can tell these games are almost 100% gameplay + graphics. Nobody seems to actually play them for the story value, so if you put new graphics/pokemons on that it might as well be a new game anyway that happened to be named the same as a game in the past. It's sort of like how sports game (year+1) is pretty much a remake of last year's game with newer roster and one feature but still sells fine since the new roster itself pretty much defines the 'new game' in that genre.
At any rate I don't think you'll have anybody saying I'm not getting the Resident Evil remake because I shot this zombie before, or not getting the new Pokemon because some of the monsters are repeated. But you might be turned off from a RPG because you've already seen the story before compared to a brand new game.
If you throw out games that are essentially like sports games where a new set of graphics/roster/gimmicks defines a new game, I don't know of any wildly successful remakes of any major title, so I don't think a current-gen FF6/FF7 remake is a good idea. However it's hard to imagine doing worse than FF14, so in retrospect they should've remake FF6/FF7 with current-gen graphics over that, but they didn't have a crystal ball at the time (though the fact nobody liked FF14 in beta should've clued them in). However FF has a history of throwing its name around cheap remakes so I'm not sure why they haven't done that with FF7 yet. There's almost as many FF4 remakes/spinoffs compared to FF7 and that's pretty mind boggling conside how much bigger FF7's fanbase is compared to any other FF game.
In the case of Pokemon/Resident Evil, as far as I can tell these games are almost 100% gameplay + graphics. Nobody seems to actually play them for the story value, so if you put new graphics/pokemons on that it might as well be a new game anyway that happened to be named the same as a game in the past. It's sort of like how sports game (year+1) is pretty much a remake of last year's game with newer roster and one feature but still sells fine since the new roster itself pretty much defines the 'new game' in that genre.
At any rate I don't think you'll have anybody saying I'm not getting the Resident Evil remake because I shot this zombie before, or not getting the new Pokemon because some of the monsters are repeated. But you might be turned off from a RPG because you've already seen the story before compared to a brand new game.
If you throw out games that are essentially like sports games where a new set of graphics/roster/gimmicks defines a new game, I don't know of any wildly successful remakes of any major title, so I don't think a current-gen FF6/FF7 remake is a good idea. However it's hard to imagine doing worse than FF14, so in retrospect they should've remake FF6/FF7 with current-gen graphics over that, but they didn't have a crystal ball at the time (though the fact nobody liked FF14 in beta should've clued them in). However FF has a history of throwing its name around cheap remakes so I'm not sure why they haven't done that with FF7 yet. There's almost as many FF4 remakes/spinoffs compared to FF7 and that's pretty mind boggling conside how much bigger FF7's fanbase is compared to any other FF game.
Don wrote:However FF has a history of throwing its name around cheap remakes so I'm not sure why they haven't done that with FF7 yet. There's almost as many FF4 remakes/spinoffs compared to FF7 and that's pretty mind boggling conside how much bigger FF7's fanbase is compared to any other FF game.Well, the first-level answer is that they haven't gotten to it yet. For real remakes - as opposed to the ports, like FF4, 5 and 6 Advanced - they've been going in order. FF4 has been re-released a ridiculous number of times, but I would say it's only had two true remakes: FF4 DS and FF4 Complete Collection for the PS. All of the others I classify as ports. (My distinction here is that a port has mostly - if not completely - reused assets.) FF5 is next for a true remake.
And again, you may not be satisfied with it, but I think the increased investment costs in a FF7 remake is a big part of why we haven't seen it. A FF7 remakes in the style of FF4 DS is completely reasonable, but 1) it would be a bigger undertaking than FF4 DS, and 2) I think people would be disappointed and see it as a step-down from the original. I bring up 1) because I think it explains why we've seen FF4 DS and not FF7 DS even though many more people would buy FF7 DS.
A FF7 remake for the PSP is probably the most realistic option. They could reuse some of the engine and assets from Crisis Core, and doing PS2 level assets is much more manageable than PS3/360 assets.
Kupek wrote:It's not like Final Fantasies form some kind of chronological order so there's really no reason why you've to do it in order, and it's pretty obvious FF6/FF7 are definitely the most popular to work with. I'm not sure how DS compares to the original PSX in power. If it'll actually look worse than the original then of course it's not going to show up there. Final Fanasy 'remakes' are indeed closer to ports with something extra thrown in so I always assumed a FF7 'remake' is at best just using a more modern engine but definitely not current cutting edge stuff, because at that point you might as well call it FF15.Don wrote:However FF has a history of throwing its name around cheap remakes so I'm not sure why they haven't done that with FF7 yet. There's almost as many FF4 remakes/spinoffs compared to FF7 and that's pretty mind boggling conside how much bigger FF7's fanbase is compared to any other FF game.Well, the first-level answer is that they haven't gotten to it yet. For real remakes - as opposed to the ports, like FF4, 5 and 6 Advanced - they've been going in order. FF4 has been re-released a ridiculous number of times, but I would say it's only had two true remakes: FF4 DS and FF4 Complete Collection for the PS. All of the others I classify as ports. (My distinction here is that a port has mostly - if not completely - reused assets.) FF5 is next for a true remake.
And again, you may not be satisfied with it, but I think the increased investment costs in a FF7 remake is a big part of why we haven't seen it. A FF7 remakes in the style of FF4 DS is completely reasonable, but 1) it would be a bigger undertaking than FF4 DS, and 2) I think people would be disappointed and see it as a step-down from the original. I bring up 1) because I think it explains why we've seen FF4 DS and not FF7 DS even though many more people would buy FF7 DS.
A FF7 remake for the PSP is probably the most realistic option. They could reuse some of the engine and assets from Crisis Core, and doing PS2 level assets is much more manageable than PS3/360 assets.
If it's too much of an investment for a 'generic 3D RPG' (not cutting edge 3D RPG) for Sqix then there's something wrong with their model. It's true a lot of companies now seem to be on the blockbuster model but if you can make a blockbuster you have to be able to make a smaller game for less than blockbuster money unless you're horribly mismanaged. Though to be fair I can't think of too many recent Sqix RPGs that aren't of the blockbuster variety, so it is possible they cannot make a 'cheapo money grab' without blockbuster money.
Obviously a remake for FF7 will be viewed both positively and negatively, and assuming we didn't get anything stunning or amazing it'll probably be viewed negatively since everything is better in nostaglia, but it is likely to be quite profitable. Now is it worth some damage to your brand by diluting it for some unspecified amount of money? It's hard to say but Sqix doesn't seem to have any idea what they're doing with the FF brand and I'd argue diluting it with a cheap FF7 remake isn't going to be worse compared to what they've done recently. We have:
FF9: A nod to nostaglia but was a flop financially and a gimmick to protect PlayOnline that failed horribly. Apparently lost a lot of sales from hint book sales since they specifically forbid them (at least in Japan).
FF10-2: Financially profitable for sure but it's one of those games even a diehard FF fan have a hard time defending. There is certainly damage to the brand at the cost of profit.
FF13: The linear approach and battle system seems to be a turnoff for most. It's not clear if this game was profitable either since it was in development forever, but it certainly didn't become the next FF7 as originally envisioned.
FF14: A collosal failure that should've never been launched.
FF13-2/Agito/Versus/whatever: Jury's still out on this but all these games look comparable to a full fledged game comparable to even a cutting edge FF7 remake, and nobody has any idea if any of those games will be successful either.
Doing even a full fledged FF7 update would probably be less of a gamble than hoping FF13 is going to be the next FF7, and certainly less of a gamble than hoping FF14 would ever turn out to be good (absolutely nobody liked that game in beta). Now you can say they're all horrible ideas and I don't necessarily disagree, but if they have thrown money after some really horrible ideas involving the FF name why not go with one that is probably less horrible compared to most things they've done?
It doesn't matter if you think going in chronological order makes sense or not, it's clearly what they're doing.
I specifically was talking about true remakes and not ports. FF4 DS is not a port; they had to rework the entire game from scratch. Nothing was reused. FF4 Complete Collection is also a remake and not a port: they had to create entirely new art for the whole game. I would also be surprised if they reused any code. On the other hand, FF4, 5 and 6 Advanced were ports. The art and music were reused, as was the original code. Similarly with CT on the DS. One of my main points about FF7 is that they really can't do a port. The game is just a mess, artistically. The CG movies are inconsistent in which kinds of models are used when - sometimes the blocky super-deformed models are used, sometimes the normal proportioned ones are used.
I don't think a FF7 remake would look good on the DS - either power or resolution. But the 3DS could certainly handle it.
I think we're approaching this from different angles. You're asking "What are the reasons for doing a FF7 remake?" I'm not asking that question. I'm starting from the fact that one does not exist, and I'm providing guesses why.
I specifically was talking about true remakes and not ports. FF4 DS is not a port; they had to rework the entire game from scratch. Nothing was reused. FF4 Complete Collection is also a remake and not a port: they had to create entirely new art for the whole game. I would also be surprised if they reused any code. On the other hand, FF4, 5 and 6 Advanced were ports. The art and music were reused, as was the original code. Similarly with CT on the DS. One of my main points about FF7 is that they really can't do a port. The game is just a mess, artistically. The CG movies are inconsistent in which kinds of models are used when - sometimes the blocky super-deformed models are used, sometimes the normal proportioned ones are used.
I don't think a FF7 remake would look good on the DS - either power or resolution. But the 3DS could certainly handle it.
I think we're approaching this from different angles. You're asking "What are the reasons for doing a FF7 remake?" I'm not asking that question. I'm starting from the fact that one does not exist, and I'm providing guesses why.
Well of course the reason why FF7 doesn't exist is because Sqix doesn't think it's a good idea, but looking at Sqix's history there's no reason to believe they know what's best for the game. I'm not going to say I or anyone knows what is best for the series, but I certainly don't think it's a stretch to say I or fans know what is better for the series compared to Sqix given their recent history. Now being right doesn't mean much since it's not like you or I get to decide if there's another FF, but I think Sqix could listen to fans for once. It's not that these ideas are slam dunk winners but they're certainly not colossal waste of time and money and given the current state of FF, just avoiding a colossal waste of time and money is a good start.
DS is more powerful than the PSX, but it is an obsolete system with piracy issues. 3DS is where FF6 will end up.
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
I actually think it's great. My typical play session for any game these days is about an hour. I know it sounds silly, but there's a small reluctance to turning on my tv, turning on my PS3, and loading up a game. It's nice to just grab my PSP or DS and start playing. I also like that I can sit in a different chair. Small things, I know, but they make a difference.
Constipation is no longer a negative issue, and the newspaper and mens magazines are now obsolete!
Seriously though, I do prefer single player games on handheld; and multiplayer games on home console; although, I like the idea of having both options.... Largely due to the fact that I like to play and read-aloud certain RPGs; like I recently did with FF7, and am currently doing with FF6 and Chrono Trigger.
The reason 95% of RPGs are on PSP and DS is because those are the two most popular gaming systems in Japan - and I would guess over 95% of console RPGs come from Japan.
Seriously though, I do prefer single player games on handheld; and multiplayer games on home console; although, I like the idea of having both options.... Largely due to the fact that I like to play and read-aloud certain RPGs; like I recently did with FF7, and am currently doing with FF6 and Chrono Trigger.
The reason 95% of RPGs are on PSP and DS is because those are the two most popular gaming systems in Japan - and I would guess over 95% of console RPGs come from Japan.
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
FFIV Complete Collection for PSP isn't really a remake. It's a re-release with some added stuff. The only real FF games they've fully remade are 1 & 2 on the GBA, 3 and 4 on the DS. Every other release has been a re-release with some added stuff
Maybe they stopped at 4 for a reason? Thinkin' maybe Vita or 3DS gets some love with the remakes? If I'm not mistaken, 3 and 4 sold pretty well on the DS
Maybe they stopped at 4 for a reason? Thinkin' maybe Vita or 3DS gets some love with the remakes? If I'm not mistaken, 3 and 4 sold pretty well on the DS
I was there on that fateful day, were you?
"The latest port of Final Fantasy IV packs in plenty of content in addition to enhanced visuals,"
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
Well team... What do you consider to be a port and what is a remake?
Does a simply update to the graphics count as a remake? Should there be new elements added to the game (Zelda:OoT's Master Quest)? changes to the interface to suit the new platform it is on (traversing the overworld in P3P)? What does it take for something to be more than just a port?
Does a simply update to the graphics count as a remake? Should there be new elements added to the game (Zelda:OoT's Master Quest)? changes to the interface to suit the new platform it is on (traversing the overworld in P3P)? What does it take for something to be more than just a port?
Well considering it would likely be an entirely new game calling it a port is a disservice. While you can be literally porting it over to another device, if it requires a complete construction from the ground up other than events in the story it's basically a remake. I feel like if you want to consider it a port then you have to classify ports into "good ports" and "bad ports." The differentiation between them is probably improvements depending on the time span of how long it took the port to follow the original (Mass Effect is a good example of this being well done, basically everything else is a good example of the it not).
While changing the interface to take advantage of new developments is worthwhile I wouldn't call it necessary, as much as, say, changing the interface so it at the very least works well with the device it's being ported onto. A poor port won't take into account the limitations of one device with the positives of another.
This is kind of like the Penny Arcade joke with an homage being a fun game that's like another and theft being a shitty game.
While changing the interface to take advantage of new developments is worthwhile I wouldn't call it necessary, as much as, say, changing the interface so it at the very least works well with the device it's being ported onto. A poor port won't take into account the limitations of one device with the positives of another.
This is kind of like the Penny Arcade joke with an homage being a fun game that's like another and theft being a shitty game.
What I said earlier:
Kupek wrote:FF4 Complete Collection is also a remake and not a port: they had to create entirely new art for the whole game. I would also be surprised if they reused any code. On the other hand, FF4, 5 and 6 Advanced were ports. The art and music were reused, as was the original code. Similarly with CT on the DS.If the developers recreate most of the assets for the new platform, it's a remake. If the developers adapt the existing assets to work on the new platform, it's a port. Because it requires creating new assets, a remake should take much more time than a port.