Any Final Fantasy VII remake "might delete things, add elements"

[Alessa Gillespie]

It's funny, when you break down pretense to it's raw context that covers things like... Technology shock, revolutionary features, flash over function. Those things pretty much defined FFVII. I mean yeah they didn't overtake it, but it was the first at many things.

It's not a bad thing to be relevant and influence your peers. Isn't that half of why FFVII was so impressive at it's time? I recall just moving the camera around on the world map was considered surprising back then.

okay, but did FF7 honestly 'redefine' what it meant to be a JRPG when it first came out?

cause i was pretty sure that when it arrived, JRPGs had been doing the whole 'seek big villain, fight monsters, etc.' thing when it first came out. I mean, the battle system was basically from FF6, really. The whole thing wasn't anything that new, it was just very graphically stunning and the story was interesting and engaging. it honestly wasn't that it 'redefined' JRPGs in any way, honestly.

 

[Max Payne]

It's funny, when you break down pretense to it's raw context that covers things like... Technology shock, revolutionary features, flash over function. Those things pretty much defined FFVII. I mean yeah they didn't overtake it, but it was the first at many things.

No they didn't.

FF7 is remembered for doing some things first, but those things are not what defined the game at all.

If it hadn't been a good game with an engrossing story, no one would have given two shits about the fancy graphics, and graphical advancements in themselves aren't that big a deal. Had FF7 not done all that, some other RPG would have came along and done it.

When you try and aim for things like "revolutionizing the genre" you lose vision of the one simple then you actually need to do: make a good game. FF7 did not succeed because of it's advancements in technology for rpgs(tech that wasn't new to the industry at all mind, just RPGS, so it really wasn't much of a revolution at all).

They just need to make a good game.

 

[Guts]

If you're going to look at things with such a generalizing overview you're probably not very right brained. No, perhaps that's not it - maybe you just don't realize how pathetically generic most JRPGs had been up until that point. Aerith's death was considered revolutionary at it's time for how realistically it portrayed loss and how sudden it was. I mean yeah it took dev notes for me to realize it, but how it stunned me way back in 2000 when I first played was pretty opaque. (not emotionally as much as 'haha holy cow you bastards')

A heroine growing up in the slums, the slightly modern (I always thought it was like the 60s... It must've been that one car advertised in Shinra HQ.) atmosphere...

I mean it was hardly standard fare, was it?

The fact I came in four years past it's release and still found plenty of things still left relatively unexplored was pretty telling.

Edit: That wasn't directed at you Terry, I'll reply with something diff if I do. Excuse me to you both for any "wut" vibes.

Edit 2: @Terry FF games, especially VII aren't defined as much by their gameplay as their atmosphere. Edge did a huge article on this I don't think is on their site or that I can dig up, but atmosphere is why a lot of people put up with the cakewalk difficulty, mediocre strategy and shoddy writing. Matsuno games are on a different level here, but going on the train ride back to Sector 7 with Anxious Heart playing was enough to rival any other game for me in 'feel good' factor alone.

If you stripped away the plot, world, music, and just left the basic game mechanics this is hardly Dark Souls. I mean flashes of brilliance are everywhere in FFVII, but I'm confident as an overall game it's pretty bad... And yet I love it anyway.

Why do I love a game I know is objectively bad and actually does a lot of things I subjectively can't stand? Why do I feel I'm not just putting up with it and that I'm having fun?

 

[Alessa Gillespie]

If you're going to look at things with such a generalizing overview you're probably not very right brained. No, perhaps that's not it - maybe you just don't realize how pathetically generic most JRPGs had been up until that point. Aerith's death was considered revolutionary at it's time for how realistically it portrayed loss and how sudden it was. I mean yeah it took dev notes for me to realize it, but how it stunned me way back in 2000 when I first played was pretty opaque. (not emotionally as much as 'haha holy cow you bastards')

i am pretty sure that a character was also permakilled in ff5 as well. and yeah, it's not as soon as aerith's death was, but it's not like he was forgotten entirely after death.

maybe the cyberpunk sort of angle hadn't been explored yet, idk, i am not a huge expert on early JRPGs. but i know that lunar: sss was vastly different than dragon quest 3, which was vastly different from chrono trigger.

now given, i have no idea what criteria you are using for 'painfully generic' but i don't think every single JRPG had particularly generic story or gameplay, for that matter.

If you stripped away the plot, world, music, and just left the basic game mechanics this is hardly Dark Souls. I mean flashes of brilliance are everywhere in FFVII, but I'm confident as an overall game it's pretty bad... And yet I love it anyway.

Why do I love a game I know is objectively bad and actually does a lot of things I subjectively can't stand? Why do I feel I'm not just putting up with it and that I'm having fun?

it's a dated game. but it's not terrible and horribly unfun to play, that's only if you dislike JRPGs. if you love them, then FF7 based on gameplay alone would be fine. not compelling or anything, but fine

 

[Max Payne]

Edit 2: @Terry FF games, especially VII aren't defined as much by their gameplay as their atmosphere. Edge did a huge article on this I don't think is on their site or that I can dig up, but atmosphere is why a lot of people put up with the cakewalk difficulty, mediocre strategy and shoddy writing. Matsuno games are on a different level here, but going on the train ride back to Sector 7 with Anxious Heart playing was enough to rival any other game for me in 'feel good' factor alone.

If you stripped away the plot, world, music, and just left the basic game mechanics this is hardly Dark Souls. I mean flashes of brilliance are everywhere in FFVII, but I'm confident as an overall game it's pretty bad... And yet I love it anyway.

Why do I love a game I know is objectively bad and actually does a lot of things I subjectively can't stand? Why do I feel I'm not just putting up with it and that I'm having fun?

FF7's writing despite how "shoddy" you may consider it definitely carried the game, and made for an incredibly well told story that I would have loved whether it was 3d or not, and the 3d wasn't all that impressive, even back then.

The impressive bits of the game came from the pre-rendered cinematics and the gorgeously rendered 2d backgrounds that the 3d models were rendered on.

Also, Dark souls isn't a jrpg. It's an action adventure game with rpg elements, the game has no place in this discussion in no context.

I can't speak for anyone but myself, and MAYBE a few of my friends, but if FF7 was nothing but a bunch of trappings of shiny graphics and pretty music, but ultimately a shallow experience with hollow characters and an uninteresting plot, I wouldn't give two shits about the game. FF7 could definitely get by without it's aesthetic trappings, just like all of the FF games that came before.

Hell I don't let that garbage fly with games in modern times that have amazing graphics.

 

[Octo]

Whether or not FFVII redefined the rpg genre or not (and I'd say in some ways it did - since it came out there have been many rpg games trying to be the next FFVII, and not just from SE) The fact remains that for many in the west FFVII was the first big epic JRPG they played, there is alot of emotional investment there and expectations are high.

I don't think its possible to make a remake 'genre-redefining' and at the same time please the fans, at its heart FFVII is a pretty old fashioned RPG down to the plot, gameplay etc etc If they wanted to redefine the genre they're going to have to cut away alot of what people loved about it.

Whatever they do, its not enough for it just to be a 'good' game, its got to be something special. Right now SE aren't even capable of doing good games (yeah my opinion) and I think they know that they're not up to the job. Its not going to stop them stringing us along with hints at a remake, all the while milking the FFVII name for all it is worth.

 

[Guts]

Edit: This post's @Fef. (Though anyone can respond idc) Heh, hasty responses. I hope it doesn't seem like I'm provoking an argument, but I do find the different views fun to match against.

It's cool. Yeah you're right there are some JRPGs from before FFVII that were very unique and strong, Terranigma stands alongside it creatively. Square's own FFVI is good. But few really approached the cinematic angle or had the technology to, fewer still had realistic deaths.

it's a dated game. but it's not terrible and horribly unfun to play, that's only if you dislike JRPGs. if you love them, then FF7 based on gameplay alone would be fine. not compelling or anything, but fine

All due respect for your opinion. Mine is - as a game it is terrible to play, but as an experience it's still a blast. It's too easy. ATB was never that strategic compared to Grandia's timing.

To accentuate and put the limelight on this proposal, what about FFXIII? As a game, that one's brilliant on paper... Relatively speaking. It breathes down your neck, it's fast, it actually has a strategic combat system and it flows wonderfully. The freedom in FFVII and other games was more of an illusion anyway. It looks great. It's difficult too.

As a game, it is not terrible to play for me... But why is it I absolutely, positively cannot stand this game at all because it lacks the illusion of freedom and atmosphere I enjoy? Why did it score so badly?

We've gone a bit of a detour, I just think accusing pretense or fluff as the goal of my argument and something to stray from is silly when strong pretense is actually FF's goal.

 

[Makoeyes987]

I can't speak for anyone but myself, and MAYBE a few of my friends, but FF7 was nothing but a bunch of trappings of shiny graphics and pretty music, but ultimately a shallow experience with hollow characters and an uninteresting plot, I wouldn't give two shits about the game. FF7 could definitely get by without it's aesthetic trappings, just like all of the FF games that came before.

This. I think what made FFVII memorable wasn't just it's atmosphere or graphics, but it's actual tangible storyline and characters. A game like FFVII doesn't establish itself just on atmosphere, graphics and surface alone. It's certainly far from a bad game. The content and exploration of FFVII alone makes it stand up to most shovel ware games that are out today.

 

[Alessa Gillespie]

All due respect for your opinion. Mine is - as a game it is terrible to play, but as an experience it's still a blast. It's too easy. ATB was never that strategic compared to Grandia's timing.

To accentuate and put the limelight on this proposal, what about FFXIII? As a game, that one's brilliant on paper... Relatively speaking. It breathes down your neck, it's fast, it actually has a strategic combat system and it flows wonderfully. The freedom in FFVII and other games was more of an illusion anyway. It looks great. It's difficult too.

honestly, ff13 isn't much of a JRPG in my opinion. every JRPG i have played had some sort of exploration, interacting with people, shops, what have you, that i enjoyed. modern JRPGs i enjoy include the persona and Shin Megami Tensei series. i like games like disgaea and other nippon ichi junk as well.

it's not because of the difficulty of the games that i play them, it's because of the experience of playing them, the unfolding of the story, the laughs i get when i hear laharl freak out upon hearing the zombie has a horse penis. it's shit like that which is why i come back time and again to japanese rpgs.

 

[Max Payne]

We've gone a bit of a detour, I just think accusing pretense or fluff as the goal of my argument and something to stray from is silly when strong pretense is actually FF's goal.

Now THAT is silly.

 

[Guts]

I think what we're experiencing is a simulacra issue. Language is sort of confining me to an illusory weakspot. Allow me;

Plot, atmosphere all fall under the collective umbrella of presentation. And my definition of pretense, is anything besides the core mechanic - this is probably misleading our debate. Forgive that. Let's roll with that. FFVII's presentation strength is what I feel I prefer about it ahead of FFXIII... That's not a concrete designation for my thoughts either since presentation is often entirely about technology, in review terms, but there's what I think about it.

And I never said the plot wasn't revolutionary. Perhaps this is about - if they do a remake and add anything, it should be as mind bending and interesting as it's source was. That's the one thing they probably shouldn't change much at all (if at all) as it wouldn't be FFVII otherwise, but everything else wouldn't take any damage from being revolutionary or genre defining.

I brung up Dark Souls because it is valid. It's a game that works on it's gameplay and FFVII wouldn't be fun without a story whereas Dark Souls is. Your inability to think abstractly is a pain to work through, but I'll clarify on that.

 

[Alessa Gillespie]

I brung up Dark Souls because it is valid. It's a game that works on it's gameplay and FFVII wouldn't be fun without a story whereas Dark Souls is. Your inability to think abstractly is a pain to work through, but I'll clarify on that.

i think basically the problem is you are arguing a novel is no good without words, but a picture book is just fine without words. You see what the problem is? You're comparing two different things and treating them like they should be the exact same.

 

[Guts]

Also forgive/merge double post or delete if it's an issue, one off. There is an instance where I think plot escapes my definition of presentation/pretense, and that's when it offers player fidelity. Deus Ex. The few scenes in FFVII that diverted the main plot, though they're all disproved by canon and stupidly rare. And that non linearity stuff, it's entirely unnecessary for FF, don't you think?

Also, if this conversation is stemming from a 'need' to do those things, I can't argue against that as you're correct. FF doesn't need to innovate, not even VII-2 or a VII remake. VII didn't need to either... But it did. And I subjectively would like a remake to have a shot.

Edit: Heh, Fef's came first. False alarm.

 

[Max Payne]

Plot, atmosphere all fall under the collective umbrella of presentation. And my definition of pretense, is anything besides the core mechanic - this is probably misleading our debate. Forgive that. Let's roll with that. FFVII's presentation strength is what I feel I prefer about it ahead of FFXIII... That's not a concrete designation for my thoughts either since presentation is often entirely about technology, in review terms, but there's what I think about it.

Okay, but that's not what pretension is. In a discussion "your definition" isn't the one that matters, the actual meaning of the word takes precedence. FFVII at it's core has to be a good game, and it is, it is the sum of its parts, but some of those parts stand on their quite well enough that they don't need the others as a crutch.

I brung up Dark Souls because it is valid. It's a game that works on it's gameplay and FFVII wouldn't be fun without a story whereas Dark Souls is.

When you're talking about JRPGs, you don't make make comparisons to an entirely different genre with completely different gameplay systems and design philosophy. It's not valid. FFVII is a wholly different game, and if you're going to make comparisons to games that make a focus on gameplay opposed to story, it the context of this conversation it makes more sense to compare it to another Jrpg.

Your inability to think abstractly is a pain to work through, but I'll clarify on that.

Your unwarranted tone of superiority that you've displayed since Aki's post is a pain to work through.

What is the point in thinking abstractly? Let's just talk about Tekken in reference to FFVII, after all that's all about gameplay.

 

[looneymoon]

I think I'd be more willing to agree with you, Aithex, if I actually... understood what it is that you're trying to argue? You're not being very cohesive with your language, and what you're saying just sort of reads as a bunch of vaguely related thoughts.

Your inability to think abstractly is a pain to work through, but I'll clarify on that.

also no need to be condescending dood.

 

[Octo]

And I never said the plot wasn't revolutionary. Perhaps this is about - if they do a remake and add anything, it should be as mind bending and interesting as it's source was. That's the one thing they probably shouldn't change much at all (if at all) as it wouldn't be FFVII otherwise, but everything else wouldn't take any damage from being revolutionary or genre defining.

.

Have to jump in here and say in response to the bolded part; that depends on what they do with it.

FFX didn't have a world map, and even though it should have been a small thing it spoiled the game for me (along with other things) that 'illusion of freedom' is very important to me, even if it is just an illusion. It could be argued that removing the world map was 'revolutionary' but that didn't mean it was for the better.

I just dont trust SE to do anything revolutionary, and personally I don't want them expermenting with a game that I love. Too much risk involved.

 

[Guts]

Heh, I apologize. It's a pet peeve because I think people who define themselves by culture/language/loopholes and stuff like the absolutely wild straw man argument you pulled out of your ass (Tekken) are an... Unwanted pain to deal with, if you're going to take that tone. I mean if you want I can do the CSI Miami yell or canned laughter if it was meant to be clever.

Anyway, yeah I'm sorry if my tone is half of the issue here. I'll just quieten down if you find no material value in speaking to me about this. The beauty of any instilled and completed media is that two people can think different things about something set in stone anyway, and FFVII was so damn vague in form it's no wonder.

Oh. Yeah. Aki's post would mean? That's not ringing any bells.

 

[Max Payne]

Heh, I apologize. It's a pet peeve because I think people who define themselves by culture and stuff like the absolutely wild straw man argument you pulled out of your ass (Tekken) are an... Unwanted pain to deal with, if you're going to take that tone. I mean if you want I can do the CSI Miami yell or canned laughter if it was meant to be clever.

What? Sense it makes none. Also durr hurr, it wasn't an arguement. It was a deliberate comparison made to your silly reference to Dark Souls in comparison to FFVII. Dismiss it as a straw man if you want, any pseudo intellectual can do that. You still have yet to say how I was wrong.

Also, you started it.

FFVII was so damn vague in form it's no wonder.

No it wasn't. FF7 had some vagaries in its story yes, but the game itself cannot be anymore clear or defined.

Oh. Yeah. Aki's post would mean? That's not ringing any bells.

You said this in response to her:

If you're going to look at things with such a generalizing overview you're probably not very right brained

Your tone has been the presiding one ever since. That of arrogant mockery and self importance. I'm all for a discussion, but don't assume the position of superior know it all if you want a respectful discussion guy.

 

[looneymoon]

Anyway, yeah I'm sorry if my tone is half of the issue here. I'll just quieten down if you find no material value in speaking to me about this. The beauty of any instilled and completed media is that two people can think different things about something set in stone anyway, and FFVII was so damn vague in form it's no wonder.

Idk who this is in response to but I don't think your tone is really all that offensive. I mean really my issue with reading your posts is that I really... don't understand what you're trying to say? I feel like perhaps Aki and Dacon are pissing the point of your posts too and I understand that's maybe why the frustration/condescension maybe coming in on your part? But at the same time it's hard because... I really don't think you're making much sense bro.

I have to ask, is English your first and/or primary language? I'm trying not to say that in a rude way because your grammar/spelling/etc. doesn't really have any problems, it's just that I'm really having a lot of trouble following your thought process in regards to this argument.

 

[Octo]

I love the internet

 

[Guts]

I'll end this with an explanation for my tone:

I'm easily pissed off when people respond more immediately once they harbor hatred, disagreement or are in conflict mode. Out to satiate or embellish their reputation with stories of victory, when I'm looking for neither dominance or validation by popular vote but an intelligent discussion. Nothing else.

And you're providing a lot of what I don't want, and not much of what I do, see.

In b4 an argument about how I'm just dislikable and attract arguments, and thus do not see eager responses from one's good side more... I wish this was true, fixing myself is easier than an entire world. This occurs between my family members and all sorts of people as well. I've even been in relationships with girls like it and used it as a mental tool to instill interest in them when I was a prick.

And I hate it and it makes me sound abrasive because it sucks. Hard.

It's a problem with most people (including me) I'm not going to saturate, sorry, this ends with that. Carry on saying whatever you want about me or my posts.

 

[looneymoon]

I'll end this with an explanation for my tone:

I'm easily pissed off when people respond more immediately once they harbor hatred, disagreement or are in conflict mode. Out to satiate or embellish their reputation with stories of victory, when I'm looking for neither dominance or validation by popular vote but an intelligent discussion. Nothing else.

And you're providing a lot of what I don't want, and not much of what I do, see.

In b4 an argument about how I'm just dislikable and attract arguments, and thus do not see eager responses from one's good side more... I wish this was true, fixing myself is easier than an entire world. This occurs between my family members and all sorts of people as well. I've even been in relationships with girls like it and used it as a mental tool to instill interest in them when I was a prick.

And I hate it and it makes me sound abrasive because it sucks. Hard.

It's a problem with most people (including me) I'm not going to satiate, sorry, this ends with that. Carry on saying whatever you want about me or my posts.

...What??????????

Damn this was actually a good topic of discussion, I would hate to see it get derailed but

I am legitimately

very

confused...

 

[Octo]

Can we draw a line under this stuff? I don't know what you're talking about being dislikeable. As far as I can see here its just a misunderstanding/personality clash. We can salvage this can't we?

Fuckin Kitase causing drama over a game he's never going to make in a million years


Anyway. Uh. I feel like games these days have all become much of a muchness, the boundaries between genres aren't really defined anymore. What makes an RPG an RPG? (I've had arguments with the husband because he says RPG's on consoles are not the same as true RPGs like Warhammer because you don't get to create your own character >_<) Is an RPG defined by having HP instead of a life bar? Or having turn based battles?

What I am getting at I suppose, in my Lemsip Max Strength addled way, is how would one go about making an RPG revolutionary these days and still have it be an RPG? Maybe this is another topic entirely...

 

[Guts]

It's nothing. I thought I'd just be ousted or my opinion was considered invalidate by popular vote, or that the conversation existed solely for laughing at my expense. Fine with that, I still think that's what it is to most but there you go.

Years of youtube and seeing people do silly things sort of conditioned me negatively. It's not a problem with Terry as much as me, here.

I explained why I sound on edge. As far as haterade goes, this place is actually very lenient compared to /v/ or youtube or gamefaqs or anywhere like that.

 

[Max Payne]

I'll end this with an explanation for my tone:

I'm easily pissed off when people respond more immediately once they harbor hatred, disagreement or are in conflict mode. Out to satiate or embellish their reputation with stories of victory, when I'm looking for neither dominance or validation by popular vote but an intelligent discussion. Nothing else.

And you're providing a lot of what I don't want, and not much of what I do, see.

In b4 an argument about how I'm just dislikable and attract arguments, and thus do not see eager responses from one's good side more... I wish this was true, fixing myself is easier than an entire world. This occurs between my family members and all sorts of people as well. I've even been in relationships with girls like it and used it as a mental tool to instill interest in them when I was a prick.

And I hate it and it makes me sound abrasive because it sucks. Hard.

It's a problem with most people (including me) I'm not going to saturate, sorry, this ends with that. Carry on saying whatever you want about me or my posts.

I don't get it. What the hell are you talking about? Why are you making this personal?

Ehhhhh?