hleV
Pro Adventurer
They're not more acceptable. I just don't care about CC too much.
Argument split from gameplay/combat hopes thread
- Thread starter hleV
- Start date
They're not more acceptable. I just don't care about CC too much.
- AKA
- Tets
Look, it's okay to not like turn-based mechanics but the "world logic based" explanation makes no sense.
Starling
Pro Adventurer
I strongly suggest you read the gameplay and story segregation page I linked earlier, as well as related pages regarding videogame mechanics and why they are the way they are. If videogame mechanics had to accede to your insistence that they function like the real world, it'd be extremely limiting to the variety currently present in videogames. So FF7's turn-based combat doesn't allow for dodging or freely moving around. Who cares? Plenty of other games have that too and it doesn't make them any less fun. You don't see people complaining about Pokemon's turn-based combat, in which you can take all the time in the world without worrying about being attacked before your next turn.
Wolf_
Pro Adventurer
I'm not disagreeing with you. Just giving a different point of view. Like I said, I love the materia system and Pokemon for that matter. I just think other options should be discussed. It's the problem with gamers. Lots of them have a preference. Most people who like final fantasy like just that sort of thing. I was telling my mates about the remake (they play cod, Fifa, gran tourismo etc) and what I got of them was "ff7? Why do I care about that fairy shit" same with rpg players. Tell them call of duty and they just laugh at you. Where I like a little of everything and I think it makes me more open to alternatives.
Although it seems that nobody here agrees with hleV, he does make some sense. Everyone here is used to playing turn-based games, but for many people, it's a big turn-off. As I mentioned on the first (relaunched) podcast, one of my best friends, who has never been a Final Fantasy fan, says he's excited for XV because it has "action" combat.
I actually believe that Square Enix have the mindset that hleV is describing, for better or worse (and I'm another in the "worse" camp). They've become risk-averse, particularly with the main series, and they know that a turn-based system would be seen as a step backwards, leaving them open to criticism.
I actually believe that Square Enix have the mindset that hleV is describing, for better or worse (and I'm another in the "worse" camp). They've become risk-averse, particularly with the main series, and they know that a turn-based system would be seen as a step backwards, leaving them open to criticism.
- AKA
- The Man, V
There's nothing wrong with preferring one form of gameplay over the other. What I think people have a problem with is the refusal to accept gameplay and story segregation, which is generally regarded as an acceptable break from reality. I mean, let's face it, Sephiroth's Supernova destroys the entire solar system in a cutscene and then shifts back to the players and they're still shown intact with the planet. If people are able to deal with that then combat differing between entries of a series, or between cutscenes and gameplay, should be nothing.
Wolf_
Pro Adventurer
This is true. I think people's differences come from where they draw the line. From my understanding about what direction this remake is taking I wouldn't hold your breath for turn based. I'm happy either way. They're remaking what I consider to be the greatest game ever made. I'm going to buy it and enjoy it regardless of what the do to it.
Starling
Pro Adventurer
Apologies for the confusion but my previous post was more addressed to Hlev. Unfortunately, I didn't get my post in before yours, making it look like I was addressing you instead.
hleV
Pro Adventurer
I am perfectly aware of what gameplay and story segregation is. Your premise is that since other games do it (many did it due to technical limitations, it is less common in today's games that have photo-realistic graphics), it is perfectly fine to continue doing it. Well only to people who don't care. I do. I should be able to make Cloud dodge that slow-ass attack because I know he's capable of that. After seeing what FF7 characters can do in after-OG media, I don't want them to again be limited with turn based mechanics that make no sense from in-universe perspective. The gap between actual events in the story and gameplay should be lessened since it is possible with today's tech. Don't make it like cutscenes completely (hardly possible without making everything scripted). Draw closer to that since you now can.
We do have an "active" ATB option in OG, right? It could be similar in the Remake except that you can also run, jump around, dodge while you select a certain spell or something. Certain materia would have to be sacrificed for the sake of making the gameplay more logical, but that doesn't mean they can't introduce something new to accommodate for that.
Wolf_
Pro Adventurer
I was almost with you until you said sacrifice some materia. And the active atb option still didn't allow you to move about. You still stood there like a plank. And it had the disadvantage of making chocobo catching impossible as it would always run before you could get an attack in.
- AKA
- Tets
But every single game does it? It's practically impossible not to.
hleV
Pro Adventurer
In active ATB, opponents didn't wait for you while you were browsing menus, so there's that.
Materia such as Mime, Cover, Long Range, Transform (way too unreal), Exit, Added Cut, Magic Counter would not go well with mechanics where you can move and attack when you want, as it would be making automated actions for you. But even with that I would be fine as long as I don't have to wait because the game said so.
Can you read the whole thing? Thank you.
Materia such as Mime, Cover, Long Range, Transform (way too unreal), Exit, Added Cut, Magic Counter would not go well with mechanics where you can move and attack when you want, as it would be making automated actions for you. But even with that I would be fine as long as I don't have to wait because the game said so.
Can you read the whole thing? Thank you.
hleV
Pro Adventurer
- AKA
- The Man, V
Action RPGs date back to the 8-bit era (if you count Zelda II) or possibly the 16-bit era (if you don't). So no, Tetusjin's point really does stand. Why was turn-based combat an acceptable break from reality in the 32-bit era but not in the modern era?
edit: Actually I was wrong; action RPGs date to way before Zelda II. The genre is as old as I am.
edit: Actually I was wrong; action RPGs date to way before Zelda II. The genre is as old as I am.
Starling
Pro Adventurer
Dude, you can't remove all those materia just because the "aren't realistic enough". At most, they'd remove the ones rendered redundant by whatever they change in the combat system. You have games with real-time combat where stuff like the ability to dodge or block must be equipped to be usable, which is essentially what command materia such as steal are for. Also, nothing forces you to use materia if you don't want to so if you find one too unrealistic, you can just choose not to use it. You're basically suggesting they handicap the materia system just to be more realistic, in a game that uses magic as an important part of its combat system and is therefore not trying to be realistic.
hleV
Pro Adventurer
The ones I listed would be removed for exactly the changes in combat system (besides Transform, I guess I just don't find it cool or fit for that kind of game). If it's an action combat system where you freely control your character, then why would there be materia that does those things for you? If it's not then it's a different matter, of course.
- AKA
- Yop
Let's chill out again guys, thanks, 
.
How about the FFVII remake is the first modern game with high-def graphics in old-school turn-based combat? Imagine what they could do?
(Actually I'll be honest: I don't think it'll end up being an AAA-quality title; just the same game in slightly better graphics, at best PS3-quality)
.How about the FFVII remake is the first modern game with high-def graphics in old-school turn-based combat? Imagine what they could do?
(Actually I'll be honest: I don't think it'll end up being an AAA-quality title; just the same game in slightly better graphics, at best PS3-quality)
Starling
Pro Adventurer
I don't see how a spell that is essentially teleporting you or your opponent out of a fight (exit materia), a spell to copy whatever copiable action was last made (mime) and a spell to turn people tiny or into frogs (transform) unable to coexist with spells to shoot lightning, ice, fire and such. Cover, long range, added cut and magic counter function as abilities, which I don't see a reason to separate or remove from the materia system. They don't have to do anything to the materia system, that's just what you think they need to do. Also, you've never seen a real-time combat system with auto-attacks have you?
hleV
Pro Adventurer
Considering gameplay is what I dislike the most about OG (seriously I only put up with it the first time because I wanted to finish the awesome story) it would be a disaster for me.
Because the former don't make sense. How would that work in a real, non-game situation?
Abilities that you should be able to achieve by skill, not a selection from the menu.
Nobody has. It cannot be a real-time combat if you are not the one doing the combat.
Last edited:
