I never denied they filled that purpose. I'm pretty sure I even mentioned why that doesn't mean it should be removed. I figure in-universe materia that grants people abilities they might be able to do without it enhance the person's ability to do so, possibly in ways they wouldn't be able to pull off or increase their efficiency with it. For example someone with a crap throwing arm could use a throw materia to have better aim or to get what they're throwing to reach a greater distance.
To me it seems like you're just trying too hard to incorporate purely gameplay elements/items/stuff into FF7 world so they could exist in-universe. It usually doesn't work that way. I mean, you can try and I have nothing to disprove such theories. But is this likely? Not one bit.
Perhaps such "materia" would work in the Remake, by, as you say, improving characters' efficiency at doing stuff. But in that case I would still prefer it being something else than materia (logic doesn't allow me to believe that such materia exists in-universe). Perhaps an unlock or a special item (which doesn't exist in-universe) or something else entirely, so as not to mix logical in-universe items with their complete opposites.
Real talk counter would look hilarious in active combat.
I think, yeah, I think some materia would look and feel absurd in a more realistic setting. I'll give you that, hlev.
Never took me out of it in the OG though. I think there's a degree to which all of us were able to suspend our disbelief because you know, video games. Video games can be kind of ridiculous and maybe we're just all thoroughly in the habit of separating game mechanics from story.
It might be nice to see them integrated better. I like materia, I think it's as important to the world of FFVII as Midgar and the lifestream. It was rarely referenced outside of battle in the story, though. That's something I'd like to see just because I'd like to understand its place in the world a bit better. Do people use it for things other than battle? Can you cook your dinner with fire materia? I feel like I remember something about materia being rare and only really used by Soldier. I'd just like to see it referenced more outside of combat. And maybe if they do that, they can spin it in a way as to subvert any plot holes you may be feeling.
(Also I feel like I remember something about, materia not being literal? Like when titan tears up the ground he's not literally tearing up the ground, and when supernova crashes the sun into you, it's not actually the sun hitting you, it's just inflicting onto you the force of what these attacks symbolize. I mightttt be thinking of something else. I might be thinking of Tales of the Abyss. Even if I am, maybe that's a way they could make things feel a bit more realistic.)
Indeed, it would be great to see materia being utilized much more outside of gameplay so we could better grasp how it is used and works in-universe. But then I believe that at this point they should be capable of portraying that during gameplay, too.
Not sure about rarity of materia, but supposedly SOLDIER are more fit for using it (I guess due to them having been showered in Mako), however normal people can use it too as proven by Zangan's letter in Tifa's piano (he had used Cure spell many times when Tifa was hurt by Sephiroth).
Yeah, I think as far as actual in-game, the most literal discussion of Materia and its actuality takes place during Sephiroth's little "mako fountain" speech in the Nibel mountains. I can't remember exactly what he says though, he describes how it's formed, and that it interacts with the knowledge "....calling up magic." It always stuck out mostly cos it's one of the only times 'living Sephiroth' shows emotion, with that "you REALLY don't know about MATERIA?!"
To me it seems like you're just trying too hard to incorporate purely gameplay elements/items/stuff into FF7 world so they could exist in-universe. It usually doesn't work that way. I mean, you can try and I have nothing to disprove such theories. But is this likely? Not one bit.
Perhaps such "materia" would work in the Remake, by, as you say, improving characters' efficiency at doing stuff. But in that case I would still prefer it being something else than materia (logic doesn't allow me to believe that such materia exists in-universe). Perhaps an unlock or a special item (which doesn't exist in-universe) or something else entirely, so as not to mix logical in-universe items with their complete opposites.
The whole point of gameplay and story segregation is that the gameplay isn't 100% exactly like in the setting. For example, we as players can potentially end up with way more items, materia and money than the party might be expected to have at a given point. Characters who likely have decent combat experience start off at a low level and can end up overleveled from excessive grinding. The combat system has elements meant to make the gameplay usable, rather than an exact representation of how something works. Towns are only accessible by means that we aren't expected to be the only way to get there, even if we don't have access to more routes.
I'm really not trying that hard to incorporate the gameplay and setting. 'm trying to point out that it's really not as divided as you seem to think it is, even though it's not entirely exact either, hence stressing the existence of gameplay and story segregation as an acceptable break form reality even the most realistic of games is going to have.
As I've already said, yes, some materia are in the game for gameplay function. No, that doesn't mean they should be removed on the basis of not being realistic enough. The materia was basically made to allow players to set up characters however they'd like, not being constrained to the setup of a given class or job like in other FF games, but still giving you the option to do that if you want. It's a level of freedom of customization that you can't just restrict without lessening the quality of the game.
My point about the removal of certain materia was that otherwise it would be redundant (some of them are overly too powerful and illogical like Mime, but we've been through that already), because if we are given free control of our character, then we no longer need such materia. E.g. Counter served as a way to take the hit for your friend. You can now use your skill to jump in front of an attack meant to land on your friend, rendering Counter materia useless. If we leave it, then how does it work? How, in a realistic setting, does Counter materia know that your friend is being attacked and manages to teleport you between the attacker and the victim? It's just illogical. It only works if the gameplay doesn't attempt to be realistic.
Admit it, you only want it to be kept because you like it, not because it makes sense to be left in. It's always hard to argue with someone who takes personal preference over logic.
I don't want the remake to be a good game for a FF7 remake, I want it to be a good game on its own. And mimicing FF7 won't work for that.
My point about the removal of certain materia was that otherwise it would be redundant (some of them are overly too powerful and illogical like Mime, but we've been through that already), because if we are given free control of our character, then we no longer need such materia. E.g. Counter served as a way to take the hit for your friend. You can now use your skill to jump in front of an attack meant to land on your friend, rendering Counter materia useless. If we leave it, then how does it work? How, in a realistic setting, does Counter materia know that your friend is being attacked and manages to teleport you between the attacker and the victim? It's just illogical. It only works if the gameplay doesn't attempt to be realistic.
Admit it, you only want it to be kept because you like it, not because it makes sense to be left in. It's always hard to argue with someone who takes personal preference over logic.
I don't want the remake to be a good game for a FF7 remake, I want it to be a good game on its own. And mimicing FF7 won't work for that.
In what world is a battle system involving magic in any way, shape or form even trying to be realistic? What you're proposing basically amounts to taking all the materia you find illogical and either not calling them materia, which is an extremely pointless thing to do and would require adding redundancy to the existing system in order to satisfy your need for a more logical approach, or removing altogether because you think they're overpowered. It's just not practical to change that aspect of the battle system. Also, OP spells have a place in RPGs and as such shouldn't to be removed. What else would they reward all that time and effort spent on optional game content with?
The end of your post seems extremely hypocritical seeing as we're having this argument because you prefer to have your preference for your idea of logic over a battle system that remains faithful to the original, when the original battle system worked just fine. Gameplay has a logic to it that you seems to be ignoring. As a remake of FF7, it wouldn't make sense for it to just throw everything to the wind as if it's an original game coming out for the first time. It's not, and therefore must remain faithful to the original with all the changes it makes.
My point about the removal of certain materia was that otherwise it would be redundant (some of them are overly too powerful and illogical like Mime, but we've been through that already), because if we are given free control of our character, then we no longer need such materia. E.g. Counter served as a way to take the hit for your friend. You can now use your skill to jump in front of an attack meant to land on your friend, rendering Counter materia useless. If we leave it, then how does it work? How, in a realistic setting, does Counter materia know that your friend is being attacked and manages to teleport you between the attacker and the victim? It's just illogical. It only works if the gameplay doesn't attempt to be realistic.
Admit it, you only want it to be kept because you like it, not because it makes sense to be left in. It's always hard to argue with someone who takes personal preference over logic.
I don't want the remake to be a good game for a FF7 remake, I want it to be a good game on its own. And mimicing FF7 won't work for that.
I think, if they go with a more action-style combat like you're thinking of, cover could actually work. Perhaps it would be that when you equip it, you would set it to only cover one of the other party members out at the moment, and when they get attacked, there's a certain chance the damage will reflect off of them and land on you instead; or it would be that you teleport in front of them to take the hit if they're within a certain range.
As for explaining it in-universe, perhaps there's two pieces of materia for it, and you give the 'signal' piece to the one you want to protect while holding the cover piece yourself.
I'm assuming you meant cover and not counter; counter could easily work, by having you do a quick counterattack, faster than normal.
By having Cloud counterattack a hit he never took? Do you mean Cover?
On a serious note, surely somewhere deep inside you realize that most Command and Support materia is there to provide characters with more abilities (unrelated to magic) other than simple attacks. They're abilities that characters are normally capable of, but in a gameplay of that kind, they're presented in the way of materia.
So look at Crisis Core's use of them. Access to Super Jump, The power of Darkness, Attacks that inflict status effects, attacks that literally explode, or fire energy from the sword without a limit break.
Also, any time someone brings up how serious FF7 is to say we can't have silly shit in the battlefield, I am going to look right at FFT and sigh fondly at my Ramza screaming himself into super speed, my accountant nuking the field with an abacus spawned holy bombardment, and my mime being a mime, all set against a backdrop of war, betrayal, politics, the corruption of souls into demonic forms, and the resurrection of a dead death god.
Plus a side plot about a man and his girlfriend the dragon in the same game as two orphans raised as weapons by the very man who killed their parents!
It seems you somehow have a hard time grasping that we're talking about realism to the world at hand. I don't know how to tell you better. I am not comparing this to our world. Jesus Christ do you at this point really believe I am?
Like I've pointed out multiple times before, FF7 world has its own logic. It is not portrayed all too well in OG. Obviously the graphics in OG weren't actually portraying FF7 in all its beauty. Neither did the gameplay as proven by most other FF7-related media. Why are you so insistant on keeping all the illogical gameplay stuff? They can introduce new, logical stuff to account for the loss of the old one, you know. Like I said, you choose preference over logic. You can't say that logic is my preference and use it as an argument. Logic is logic. Either you use it or you don't.
What you're proposing basically amounts to taking all the materia you find illogical and either not calling them materia, which is an extremely pointless thing to do and would require adding redundancy to the existing system in order to satisfy your need for a more logical approach, or removing altogether because you think they're overpowered.
I don't want some materia removed because it's OP, I want it removed because it's OP in a way that breaks the in-universe logic.
Feel free to point out how my understanding of FF7 world's logic is flawed and how I'm wrong, as right now it really seems like you just want your old, obviously illogical game set in a realistic HD setting (the irony) and will argue to no end if somebody wishes for a more realistic approach.
It seems you somehow have a hard time grasping that we're talking about realism to the world at hand. I don't know how to tell you better. I am not comparing this to our world. Jesus Christ do you at this point really believe I am?
Like I've pointed out multiple times before, FF7 world has its own logic. It is not portrayed all too well in OG. Obviously the graphics in OG weren't actually portraying FF7 in all its beauty. Neither did the gameplay as proven by most other FF7-related media. Why are you so insistant on keeping all the illogical gameplay stuff? They can introduce new, logical stuff to account for the loss of the old one, you know. Like I said, you choose preference over logic. You can't say that logic is my preference and use it as an argument. Logic is logic. Either you use it or you don't.
I don't want some materia removed because it's OP, I want it removed because it's OP in a way that breaks the in-universe logic.
Feel free to point out how my understanding of FF7 world's logic is flawed and how I'm wrong, as right now it really seems like you just want your old, obviously illogical game set in a realistic HD setting (the irony) and will argue to no end if somebody wishes for a more realistic approach.
Graphically? Yes. I'm not trying to argue, I'm stating a fact. Unless AC and the upcoming remake is wrong and FF7 world is actually made of chibi characters and pixelated 2D and low quality 3D environments.
Logically? Still yes. In the actual world of FF7 fights do not go by turn-based rules.
I have no reason to assume that ALL items and materia within OG actually exist/behave the same in the actual FF7 fictional universe as they do in the game.
Graphically? Yes. I'm not trying to argue, I'm stating a fact. Unless AC and the upcoming remake is wrong and FF7 world is actually made of chibi characters and pixelated 2D and low quality 3D environments.
Logically? Still yes. In the actual world of FF7 fights do not go by turn-based rules.
I have no reason to assume that ALL items and materia within OG actually exist/behave the same in the actual FF7 fictional universe as they do in the game.
Yes, it is true that in the "actual" world/storyline-only reality of FFVII do not go by turn-based rules. But you're just basically highlighting the prominent aspects of FFVII's Gameplay and Story Segregation.
But making FFVII (or any game) have more Gameplay and Story Integration doesn't automatically make it a better game, it may not be your intention, you come off as arguing that the more Gameplay and Story Integration a video game has the better it is objectively. Your desire to have more Gameplay and Story Integration is also a type of preference.
But as you must have surely noticed many people prefer it when there is a greater degree of Gameplay and Story Segregation because it allows for a type of gameplay that is more appealing to them, consistency with the story be damned. This is because people want to have fun playing a video game (of certain style), not watch a film/tv series or read a book (which don't require active participation on the part of the audience to advance the narrative).
But making FFVII (or any game) have more Gameplay and Story Integration doesn't automatically make it a better game, it may not be your intention, you come off as arguing that the more Gameplay and Story Integration a video game has the better it is objectively. Your desire to have more Gameplay and Story Integration is also a type of preference.
The whole argument stemed from a question "why is turn-based mechanic in a realistic setting a bad thing" where I proceeded to point out that it breaks in-universe logic (this is unquestionable, yet sparked a long long argument) and I would prefer it be avoided in the Remake.
The story and gameplay segregation would still be there (to completely avoid it you'd have to ditch any gameplay mechanics and make everything mostly scripted), however action combat with free character control is leaps and bounds more realistic to what we have in OG and actually allows one to think "hey, this kind of battle may actually have happened".
Obviously this is my preference, however people appearantly have a problem with my reasoning.
Yeah, personally in my experiences with RPG games with "real time battles", I still end up with that feeling of "a second ago, in the town talking to people, none of this stuff would have made any sense or seemed possible. But because we're on the 'battlefield', I'll allow it". I do understand though, how even just the general process of a 'cutaway' to the battle screen (breaking glass in FFX, anyone?), could "take you out of it" way more than if the fight just starts. I don't feel that way, but I get it.
Actually, if you'll humor me, what your whole feelings in general remind me of, is the argument that you should never have a narrator in film. I for one don't mind it at all, even favor it (A great example is the film "Fight Club"). But I have had many friends who could enjoy that movie overall, but go "Who the fuck is this guy talking to? He's supposed to just be experiencing these events in the moment, he's not writing a memoir, this is breaking my immersion", and this is a movie where a guy shoots himself in the mouth and comes out with a minor flesh wound and able to talk fine. It's again just a preference thing, but it's a preference based around an experience you were otherwise enjoying being sabotaged by an element(s) that sticks out to you. This, it would seem, is turn-based gameplay for you. Alot of other people here would be fine with the narrator filling in some of the blanks for us, so to speak, but you are not diggin' it.
It seems you somehow have a hard time grasping that we're talking about realism to the world at hand. I don't know how to tell you better. I am not comparing this to our world. Jesus Christ do you at this point really believe I am?
Like I've pointed out multiple times before, FF7 world has its own logic. It is not portrayed all too well in OG. Obviously the graphics in OG weren't actually portraying FF7 in all its beauty. Neither did the gameplay as proven by most other FF7-related media. Why are you so insistant on keeping all the illogical gameplay stuff? They can introduce new, logical stuff to account for the loss of the old one, you know. Like I said, you choose preference over logic. You can't say that logic is my preference and use it as an argument. Logic is logic. Either you use it or you don't.
We're discussing the battle system, which, as has been pointed out multiple times, is not 100% equivalent to how things occur in the setting. We've talked about why it should stay that way, as well as how despite the gameplay and story segregation, it still has relevance to how things work within the setting. If you still have to ask why I'm insistent on the gameplay staying true to the original, then you haven't been paying attention to what I've been saying.
You keep insisting the OG is illogical simply because it's not the kind of logic you value. Again, your claims that I'm the one choosing preference over logic is hypocritical, especially when you claim I have no right to argue the point. You aren't even arguing about logic. Just because something isn't realistic doesn't make it illogical. For example, the gameplay follows a logic that allows players to use it properly. Gameplay and story segregation follows the logic that there are acceptable breaks from reality in order to provide a game that's more enjoyable to play. We were never expected to assume characters just line up and wait their turn to fight in games where combat is turn-based.
hlev said:
I don't want some materia removed because it's OP, I want it removed because it's OP in a way that breaks the in-universe logic.
We've already talked about how in the setting, OP materia that can destroy everything actually exists. Black materia, white materia, summons (special attention to Zirconiade in BC), protomateria (can control Chaos and Omega in DoC) and materia in general is said to be something not everyone has easy access to (at least not the stronger stuff) or knows how to use. Most of the OP materia you get in the OG is from going around in remote places to find materia caves, where materia took many, many years to form in locations that were left undisturbed for who knows how long or doing some difficult task at which point you get the chance to have it.
In gameplay, powerful materia is a reward you earn by working hard on optional stuff or for advancing at a certain point of the game. If you'll notice, a lot of the stuff materia does is stuff found in other FF games. To remove them would not only deprive players of a reward for their hard work, but also remove essential elements of a FF game.
hlev said:
Feel free to point out how my understanding of FF7 world's logic is flawed and how I'm wrong, as right now it really seems like you just want your old, obviously illogical game set in a realistic HD setting (the irony) and will argue to no end if somebody wishes for a more realistic approach.
I really don't appreciate the condescension I'm getting from the way you're addressing me, especially considering I'm not the only one arguing these points.
Realism is defined as being accurate to how things work in real life. Therefore, to say that something is unrealistic is to say it's not close enough to how it is in the real world. In this sense, a setting where dragons, magic, aliens and such exist is not realistic. To argue that the battle system to a game with an unrealistic setting is unrealistic is rather pointless, as that's to be expected. You seem to think better graphics automatically means the game is more realistic. While the characters becoming less chibi would be a case of more realism, it doesn't change that the world of FF7 contains things that wouldn't be possible in real life. Also, to have better graphics doesn't mean the world or gameplay have to become more realistic.
For example, Xenoblade Chronicles has graphics that can be considered more realistic than the OG's. It takes place in a world that by nature, is unrealistic due to containing many, many things that wouldn't be possible in real life. therefore, the setting can be considered unrealistic. The gameplay, while real-time, contains auto-attacks and various acceptable breaks from reality.
That has no bearing on whether or not a game is good.
Another example is the Kingdom Hearts series. It also contains real-time combat, this time without auto-attacks. You can do plenty of flashy stuff in combat you don't see the characters using in story circumstances. At times you can practically ignore gravity and swing around in midair for several minutes. Is that realistic? No. Does it still make sense? Yes. Making the game's combat real-time isn't going to add as much realism to the game as you think it will.
I have a few ideas about the combat system. First of all, what is an action RPG? FF XV? Kingdom Hearts? Crisis Core? If the answer is yes, then FF7R will not be an action RPG. Why? Because FF7 has the most nice characters in franchise. Everybody loves Tifa, Barret, Red XIII, Vincent, Yuffie, Cid, and, why not, Cait Sith. So, it's kind impossible to made a remake only controlling Cloud.
Action RPG may very well allow you to control any character, however I doubt you'd be able to control multiple in real-time, but rather switch between them. In fact, I would prefer it that way instead of only being able to control one, just that it wouldn't be the end of the world for me if such restriction made it to the game.
We're discussing the battle system, which, as has been pointed out multiple times, is not 100% equivalent to how things occur in the setting. We've talked about why it should stay that way, as well as how despite the gameplay and story segregation, it still has relevance to how things work within the setting.
It should not stay that way as far as I'm concerned. There is no good reason for it to stay the same way. It may appeal to 90s+ RPG players but that's not what SE limits themselves to, and that's a good thing.
Just because something isn't realistic doesn't make it illogical.
Exactly. Then why are we to assume that other things that appear illogical (to FF7 world!) really do exist and are not there just for gameplay purposes?
We've already talked about how in the setting, OP materia that can destroy everything actually exists. Black materia, white materia, summons (special attention to Zirconiade in BC), protomateria (can control Chaos and Omega in DoC) and materia in general is said to be something not everyone has easy access to (at least not the stronger stuff) or knows how to use. Most of the OP materia you get in the OG is from going around in remote places to find materia caves, where materia took many, many years to form in locations that were left undisturbed for who knows how long or doing some difficult task at which point you get the chance to have it.
You didn't get it. There's no problem with OP materia. There's a problem with some materia being OP in a way that it's illogical for it not to be used to destroy pretty much everything. Yet, such materia only appears in gameplay. Why? Because it doesn't actually exist (or at the very least, the party had never optained it), as otherwise it would be abused to make everyone's life easier.
Realism is defined as being accurate to how things work in real life. <pointless wall of text>
It should not stay that way as far as I'm concerned. There is no good reason for it to stay the same way. It may appeal to 90s+ RPG players but that's not what SE limits themselves to, and that's a good thing.
The combat system of the OG was made with turn-based combat in mind. Even if they plan to overhaul a bunch of stuff in the remake, one of the core rules of remaking a game is that you don't remove content. Some elements of the turn-based system wouldn't mesh well with a real-time combat system and I worry too much would be lost in transition. For example, once you have weapons with a decent number of materia slots, you can end up with a materia set up that gives you a number of options that would be difficult to allow in real-time combat without having to scroll through a long menu. I don't want to lose the ability to access that much variety in a fight.
As someone who grew up when CGI and the internet were still new things that were in their early stages of improvement, graphics have never been what I considered important for immersion. What gets me invested is the world and characters. Unrealistic elements have just as much a place in videogames as realistic ones and they don't have to be mutually exclusive.
As this is a remake rather than a completely new game, they have to keep in mind the original when they make changes. FF7's turn-based system allowed for a lot of options in what you could do in combat, which might not translate well into a real-time combat system, where that many options to scroll through would hinder your ability to respond quickly. If they were to solve that problem by reducing the variety of options you have access to at a time, you'd probably end up losing part of what was great about the turn-based system. You have to keep in mind the advantages and disadvantages and even then, not everyone's going to come to the same conclusions on which option is best suited for the game.
As you can see, I've already given valid reasons for wanting the combat system to stay turn-based. Also, saying only 90s+ players would want it to stay that way means we're talking about all the FF7 fans born from 1990 onward that either want the remake to keep the OG's turn-based combat or at the very least wouldn't mind if it did. Unless, of course, you mean people aged 90 or older, in which case I'm pretty sure everyone who's disagreed with you on this thread is younger than that. Either way, the majority doesn't share your opinion on what should be done with the combat system. Just because you disagree with that opinion doesn't mean it's not a good reason and should be disregarded in favor of yours. That's not how opinions work.
hlev said:
If it's not realistic to how things work in the universe at hand, then it's illogical.
You keep using illogical and realistic interchangeably, as if they're synonymous. They're not, and you shouldn't treat them that way.
Your arguments contain quite a few logical fallacies. For example, you treat your opinion, which is subjective, as objective fact, rejecting others' opinions as incorrect or "illogical". You also can't pick and choose what gameplay and story segregation is acceptable and what isn't. Also, if you want to make clear you're talking about the gameplay's relation to the setting, you're better off phrasing it as "It has no relation to how the setting works" or something to that effect.
hlev said:
Exactly. Then why are we to assume that other things that appear illogical (to FF7 world!) really do exist and are not there just for gameplay purposes?
Gameplay and story segregation, as well as acceptable breaks from reality. Despite those, the gameplay actually contains uses of gamplay and story integration as well.
For example, in the Kalm flashback, Sephiroth is set up to kill almost everything in one shot, while Cloud is lvl 1, barely able to do any damage and absolutely no match for what's being fought, let alone Sephiroth. This serves to show how powerful Sephiroth is compared to everyone else, as is being stated by Cloud when he talks about Sephiroth to the party. The Midgar Zolom is used similarily to highlight how much stronger than the party Sephiroth is in the present day.
If Tifa is in the party when fighting Rude, he avoids attacking her, which reflects dialogue indicating that he has a crush on her.
The gameplay tutorials are explained by Cloud from an in-universe point of view.
Limit Breaks are things that people in FF7's setting are actually capable of doing, as shown throughout the compilation. Cloud even teaches a little girl to use one in the tutorial.
When Airbuster gets between Cloud and the others, they're fighting from separate sides of it. When Motor Ball attacks the party from where they came, the fight starts as a back attack.
Turks escape fights when defeated. Rufus leaves by helicopter. Palmer gets run over by a truck. Cloud warns Barret about the guard scorpion's tail laser when it raises it. All of this happens during fights.
What's contained within the combat system still has relevance, even if it contains gameplay and story segregation.
hlev said:
You didn't get it. There's no problem with OP materia. There's a problem with some materia being OP in a way that it's illogical for it not to be used to destroy pretty much everything. Yet, such materia only appears in gameplay. Why? Because it doesn't actually exist (or at the very least, the party had never optained it), as otherwise it would be abused to make everyone's life easier.
I literally just cited examples of OP materia as shown outside of combat throughout the compilation, as well as why excluding materia on those grounds doesn't make sense. Pretty much all the materia we get access to is intended for use in combat and doesn't necessarily have an applicable use outside of it. You initially claimed that your issue with the OG was that the combat was turn-based, which is why I pointed out how OP stuff like you mentioned would continue to exist regardless of the type of combat the remake ends up with. A standard use of gameplay and story segregation is that they prefer to assume you only have the bare minimum of what you can have (i.e starting equipment and whatever is received in a cut-scene) as far as the plot is concerned, rather than to assume you have everything ever despite most players not having all the items and equipment they could have at that point. Some games choose to have current equipment show up in cutscenes but as many who've played such games can tell you, it can lead to some pretty weird versions of scenes.
hlev said:
Realism is defined as being accurate to how things work in real life. <pointless wall of text>
Are you seriously calling 3 short paragraphs a wall of text? You disregarded everything I said after the first sentence just because you don't think it's relevant to the discussion, when it is. In light of this, I seriously wonder how much of what I and others on this thread have said you actually paid attention to, especially considering how few times you've fully quoted posts that weren't that long.
It's exceedingly disrespectful to disregard what someone says in a discussion as pointless, especially if you're expecting them to care about what you're saying. How do you expect to have a proper discussion about something when you pick and choose what parts to respond to? This is yet another fallacy in the way you're approaching this discussion.
As for your claim of not regarding real life when discussing the combat system:
You explicitly compared FF7 to the real world, therefore making all mention of the real world relevant to the discussion. Even if you didn't, every mention of something being realistic or unrealistic implicitly compares it to the real world, still making it relevant to the discussion.
I never questioned anyone's desire to stick with turn-based system. It's obvious that you and quite a few others would prefer it that way. However, the only valid reason for that is mere preference for turn-based mechanics, nostalgia or desire to not have the Remake changed. You simply don't care enough about in-universe logic portrayed well enough in the gameplay and the existence of Gameplay & Story Segregation for you is an excuse to have as ridiculous gameplay mechanics as you wish. Good for you. Let's carry on.
Also, saying only 90s+ players would want it to stay that way means we're talking about all the FF7 fans born from 1990 onward that either want the remake to keep the OG's turn-based combat or at the very least wouldn't mind if it did. <...> Either way, the majority doesn't share your opinion on what should be done with the combat system. Just because you disagree with that opinion doesn't mean it's not a good reason and should be disregarded in favor of yours. That's not how opinions work.
Somehow it's so hard for such fans to think of new ways that the Remake could work. Photo-realistic graphics is somehow okay, but a more realistic approach in gameplay is a no no? If SE is to only consider TLS members when making the Remake, then it'll be a disaster. Obviously most active TLS members are here due to them liking the OG quite a lot. Your statistic of "who shares my opinion and who doesn't" is unreliable as far as I'm concerned, and you should really stop using fake statistics as an argument instead of actually giving a proper one.
You keep using illogical and realistic interchangeably, as if they're synonymous. They're not, and you shouldn't treat them that way.
I don't know, I'm pretty sure I use them correctly (as long as we're aware I'm talking about FF7, rather than real world) whilst being well aware they are not the same.
Your arguments contain quite a few logical fallacies. For example, you treat your opinion, which is subjective, as objective fact, rejecting others' opinions as incorrect or "illogical".
I can pick what's more logical and realistic and what's not, though.
Also, if you want to make clear you're talking about the gameplay's relation to the setting, you're better off phrasing it as "It has no relation to how the setting works" or something to that effect.
If I have to go through such effort just for you, when I had told numerous times that I'm not talking about real world, then I would rather just stop replying altogether.
Gameplay and story segregation, as well as acceptable breaks from reality. Despite those, the gameplay actually contains uses of gamplay and story integration as well.
For example, in the Kalm flashback, Sephiroth is set up to kill almost everything in one shot, while Cloud is lvl 1, barely able to do any damage and absolutely no match for what's being fought, let alone Sephiroth. This serves to show how powerful Sephiroth is compared to everyone else, as is being stated by Cloud when he talks about Sephiroth to the party. The Midgar Zolom is used similarily to highlight how much stronger than the party Sephiroth is in the present day.
If Tifa is in the party when fighting Rude, he avoids attacking her, which reflects dialogue indicating that he has a crush on her.
The gameplay tutorials are explained by Cloud from an in-universe point of view.
Limit Breaks are things that people in FF7's setting are actually capable of doing, as shown throughout the compilation. Cloud even teaches a little girl to use one in the tutorial.
When Airbuster gets between Cloud and the others, they're fighting from separate sides of it. When Motor Ball attacks the party from where they came, the fight starts as a back attack.
Turks escape fights when defeated. Rufus leaves by helicopter. Palmer gets run over by a truck. Cloud warns Barret about the guard scorpion's tail laser when it raises it. All of this happens during fights.
What's contained within the combat system still has relevance, even if it contains gameplay and story segregation.
OG having back attacks and attacks from both sides in no way passes it all as realistic. The ability to attack itself could be considered a relevance. In the bigger picture it's still nothing but a mess if you attempt to compare it to how it would work in the real setting.
I literally just cited examples of OP materia as shown outside of combat throughout the compilation, as well as why excluding materia on those grounds doesn't make sense.
And I literally wrote in my last post that materia being just OP is not the problem.
Pretty much all the materia we get access to is intended for use in combat and doesn't necessarily have an applicable use outside of it. You initially claimed that your issue with the OG was that the combat was turn-based, which is why I pointed out how OP stuff like you mentioned would continue to exist regardless of the type of combat the remake ends up with. A standard use of gameplay and story segregation is that they prefer to assume you only have the bare minimum of what you can have (i.e starting equipment and whatever is received in a cut-scene) as far as the plot is concerned, rather than to assume you have everything ever despite most players not having all the items and equipment they could have at that point. Some games choose to have current equipment show up in cutscenes but as many who've played such games can tell you, it can lead to some pretty weird versions of scenes.
I will agree that in my examples of why it doesn't work I enforce an assumption that the user has the materia and whatnot in question. However the point still stands: rationally thinking, some materia in OG is simply too out there to actually exist and work the same way in the real setting.
Are you seriously calling 3 short paragraphs a wall of text? You disregarded everything I said after the first sentence just because you don't think it's relevant to the discussion, when it is. In light of this, I seriously wonder how much of what I and others on this thread have said you actually paid attention to, especially considering how few times you've fully quoted posts that weren't that long.
It's exceedingly disrespectful to disregard what someone says in a discussion as pointless, especially if you're expecting them to care about what you're saying. How do you expect to have a proper discussion about something when you pick and choose what parts to respond to? This is yet another fallacy in the way you're approaching this discussion.
I read the whole thing. I simply excluded it from the quote because it was irrelevant and needlessly taking up virtual space of my post, as the content was simply an expansion of your irrelevant point addresses in the first sentence.
You explicitly compared FF7 to the real world, therefore making all mention of the real world relevant to the discussion. Even if you didn't, every mention of something being realistic or unrealistic implicitly compares it to the real world, still making it relevant to the discussion.
Guys, I'm gonna have to ask you to calm down a bit; there's nothing really bad in here yet, but I can see it escalating pretty fast. Don't take things personally, and don't be argumentative for the sake of argument. Also, IMO, whether it's realistic or not... doesn't really matter, we all play video games because it's not realistic, else we'd all be playing My Job That I Don't Really Like Simulator 2015 right now,
I never questioned anyone's desire to stick with turn-based system. It's obvious that you and quite a few others would prefer it that way. However, the only valid reason for that is mere preference for turn-based mechanics, nostalgia or desire to not have the Remake changed. You simply don't care enough about in-universe logic portrayed well enough in the gameplay and the existence of Gameplay & Story Segregation for you is an excuse to have as ridiculous gameplay mechanics as you wish. Good for you. Let's carry on.
About why I and many others would want to keep gameplay elements you find "illogical". It's not about nostalgia or change, it's about staying true to the game it's based on. You can't just scrap everything if you want the remake to live up to the original. You haven't actually refuted any of my arguments; just dismissed them as invalid without elaboration. Just because someone would rather keep turn-based combat doesn't mean they don't care about the way the setting works. Saying otherwise is essentially devaluing their opinion simply because you disagree.
Instances of gameplay and story segregation are acceptable breaks from reality in order to provide a method of gameplay that is enjoyable. By definition, they aren't required to be a 100% accurate representation of how things occur in-universe, but are still relevant to it. Another problem with what you're saying is that you draw arbitrary lines of what gameplay elements are acceptable (levels and stats) and which ones are not (materia you don't think can exist in the setting, turn-based combat). What makes levels and stats more acceptable than the stuff you don't want? Is it that they're essential to any proper RPG? Why is gameplay and story segregation acceptable for those but not other staples of the RPG genre? That's flawed logic (AKA a fallacy).
hlev said:
Somehow it's so hard for such fans to think of new ways that the Remake could work. Photo-realistic graphics is somehow okay, but a more realistic approach in gameplay is a no no? If SE is to only consider TLS members when making the Remake, then it'll be a disaster. Obviously most active TLS members are here due to them liking the OG quite a lot. Your statistic of "who shares my opinion and who doesn't" is unreliable as far as I'm concerned, and you should really stop using fake statistics as an argument instead of actually giving a proper one.
There are a lot of FF7 fans on TLS, seeing as FF7 is the main subject of this forum. That's not a quantity of people you can just dismiss. They represent a valid sample pool for the opinions of the fandom. You have no way of backing up your claim that the remake would be a disaster if SE took into account the opinions of the fans, the majority of which want the remake to remain faithful to the original, as a remake should be. If they had to disregard all the opinions on this forum, then by posting here, your opinion would have to be disregarded as well. In case you haven't noticed, it's not so much that you want real-time combat that's the issue, it's that you seem to think any other option is unreasonable and think less of the people who disagree with you, going by how you've been phrasing your posts. You also haven't given any solid arguments, as you just keep saying everything is unrealistic and "illogical", which is like saying "I'm right, therefore you're wrong, no need to debate any further", with really doesn't support your side of the argument at all. You should stop using fallacious arguments and calling it logic.
You implied the portion of the fandom that would want turn-based combat was insignificant. I refuted that point, giving my observations of how there are more people who want or at least wouldn't mind turn-based combat than you seem to think. If you want statistics, Flintlock made a detailed survey about what FF7 fans want out of the remake, with most entries coming from non forum members.
hlev said:
I don't know, I'm pretty sure I use them correctly (as long as we're aware I'm talking about FF7, rather than real world) whilst being well aware they are not the same.
Unless you find a thesaurus entry that shows realistic/logical and unrealistic/illogical are synonyms, you aren't. As I go into detail later in the post, your use of realistic and illogical when comparing the gameplay to both real life and FF7's setting, leading to unnecessary ambiguity unless proper clarification is made.
I've named examples. You have the burden of proof to refute them.
You dismiss arguments as irrelevant instead of actually disproving them. (Appeal to stone)
You insist that the gameplay has to change because you think it's illogical, simply because you don't understand the appeal of it. (Argument from [personal] incredulity)
You use terms like realistic and illogical in reference to real life and then claim you were only referring to FF7's setting. (Hedging)
You make hypocritical statements such as comparing the game to real life, then claiming that you only ever compare the gameplay to the setting. (Kettle logic)
Your self-righteous belief that your opinion is worth more than that of others. (Moral high ground)
Insisting that something doesn't make sense for reasons that have been repeatedly contested (proof by assertion) and expecting more elaboration without having actually refuted the counter-arguments (moving the goal posts)
Arguing that gameplay and story segregation as applied to the combat system is an insufficient reason for it to stay the way it is without actually elaborating. (Special pleading)
I highly doubt I've even listed all of them but you should get the point.
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.
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) are unable to coexist with spells to shoot lightning, ice, fire and such.
You listed a bunch of materia you thought should be removed. I pointed out they could coexist with the other materia in the setting. You dismissed it simply because it doesn't make sense to you, citing it wouldn't work in the real world. Tetsujin pointed out that was irrelevant on account of it being in a game, where what is and isn't possible in the real world is irrelevant. When I agreed with Tetsujin, you insisted it was relevant to what you were discussing. In this exchange, you ignored my counter-argument without actually countering it and disregarded the point that real world logic doesn't apply to what can and can't be done in FF7's setting.
I still don't really get why anyone would think it breaks suspension of disbelief to have a turn-based battle system in PS4-quality graphics, but not in PS1-quality graphics.
PS1-quality graphics break suspension of disbelief on its own. There is no point of good graphics if it's instantly ruined by very unrealistic gameplay. Well, besides "omg it looks nice", which I don't think SE limits themselves to.
That doesn't make the games bad, and if that breaks suspension of belief for you then it sounds like the problem is with you rather than with the game.
You sarcastically dismissed what The Man said, saying that FF7 and Mario aren't real without actually addressing the fact that the OG's combat system breaks your suspension of disbelief is an issue with you, not the game.
hlev said:
I can pick what's more logical and realistic and what's not, though.
No you can't, as that is stating subjective opinion as fact, which it's not. Logic and realism is not dependent of your opinion. It is or isn't regardless of what you say. Therein lies one of the biggest flaws of what you've been saying. You say thing like:
Where you make your opinion out to be the only way, which it isn't.
hlev said:
If I have to go through such effort just for you, when I had told numerous times that I'm not talking about real world, then I would rather just stop replying altogether.
It takes less effort to use more accurate wording than it does to go realism (in FF7 world!), which comes across as condescending. No one's forcing you to reply either, you know.
hlev said:
OG having back attacks and attacks from both sides in no way passes it all as realistic. The ability to attack itself could be considered a relevance. In the bigger picture it's still nothing but a mess if you attempt to compare it to how it would work in the real setting.
Back attacks are relevant in that the characters are on those sides of the opponent before the battle starts and stay that way once it does, making it a case of gameplay and story integration. As I've said, the combat system the OG uses doesn't have to be realistic, nor is it trying to be. That doesn't make it a mess.
hlev said:
And I literally wrote in my last post that materia being just OP is not the problem.
You're missing the point. I bolded the part where you said OP materia doesn't exist in the game setting, signifying that was the main focus of my reply. To be absolutely, unambiguously clear on all points concerning materia:
On the way up to the reactor, Sephiroth explains how materia is formed and is used. He explains that naturally formed materia is rare, only occurring in
mako springs, which are generally found in remote, hard to reach places. In the OG, the materia caves are only accessible by various colored chocobo, meaning most people can't get there.
From a gameplay perspective, those materia are rewards for spending all that time and effort breeding chocobos, something that takes hours to accomplish. When a game makes you spend that much time to complete something optional, the reward is generally something really powerful so you won't feel like it was a waste of time. In such a case, the reward may or may not make sense in-universe, as its primary goal prioritizes gameplay. Because of this, it is perfectly acceptable for it to fall under gameplay and story segregation.
According to Cloud's explanation of materia to Barret, equipping materia generally increases your magic but lowers your physical strength, making it best not to overuse it. this seems to indicate someone has to have good physical strength to begin with if they don't want to be too hindered by the effects of equipping multiple materia.
All magic materia works simply by casting a spell that inflicts an opponent with either an attack or status, which works perfectly fine within the setting. In CC, we've seen Genesis use some variation of Fire and Angeal use Quake. In the OG, we've seen Meteor and Holy, who are both magic materia by virtue of casting black and white magic spells respectively, which is the type of magic that falls into this category. Zangan's letter mentions he used Cure spells to try to heal Tifa. While it can't be said for sure, there's a chance Ifalna escaped Shinra HQ by using an Exit materia. In ACC, we see Loz use Quake, as well as a combination of Flare and Ultima with Yazoo when creating that large explosion to try to kill Cloud.
Summon materia as a whole has been firmly established in the setting, as CC shows both Ifrit and Bahamut Fury in cutscenes, ACC shows Kadaj summon another version of Bahamut and the OG has Priscilla give Cloud the Shiva summon as an unskipable part of the game. BC also features a potentially world-ending summon called Zirconiade, which requires specific support materia to summon and ends up defeated by the Turks.
Support materia functions by linking it to a compatible materia to gain an effect you normally wouldn't have. While many of these function like abilities, there is no need to create a separate interface to equip them without calling them materia, simply because you refuse to accede to gameplay and story segregation. I've already explained that doing so would be redundant, as all it would do is make the gameplay less streamlined. In an ability based system, you'd need to add a redundant menu option and keep the materia's effect linked to a particular character rather than have it be freely equipable to anyone.
Independent materia function a lot like support materia but without needing to be linked in order to offer their passive effect. While some of them (ex: __ plus) are strictly for gameplay purposes, others, such as chocobo lure, enemy lure and enemy away are perfectly capable of functioning much as they do in-universe. Again,, there is no need to stop calling them materia and making a separate menu just because you find their existence in gameplay to be "illogical". In DoC, the Protomateria seems to function like an independent materia.
Some command materia, such as Mime, Sense, Manipulate and Enemy Skill function much like magic materia does, in that you're basically casting a spell in much the same way. We've already gone over how mime is only as useful as what you can copy, making it something you can't solely rely on in combat. Enemy Skill suffers a similar problem in that it's only as useful as the spells it contains, which you get by surviving being hit by them, meaning all of them are survivable in some way. Enemy Skill therefore isn't something you can solely rely on either, as useful as it can be. In a setting where multiple people can survive things like being impaled by Sephiroth, falling from ridiculous heights and a bunch other things, it's not surprising strong materia that doesn't explicitly exist to destroy the world can be countered by others. In fact, even an explicitly world-ending spell such as Meteor have been shown to have spell existing specifically to counter it in the form of Holy.
None of these are things characters will be able to do from the beginning, nor are they things they would be able to do permanently once they acquire the materia. I see no benefit to changing this aspect of gameplay beyond your refusal to accept gameplay and story segregation.
I've also explained that from an in-universe perspective, it's possible to see it as the materia allowing someone to do something they could potentially do normally (ex: steal) with greater skill than they could without it, or in a way that they flat-out wouldn't be able to do normally. For all we know in-universe, steal works by trying to teleport an opponent's possessions into your hand or pocket.
hlev said:
I will agree that in my examples of why it doesn't work I enforce an assumption that the user has the materia and whatnot in question. However the point still stands: rationally thinking, some materia in OG is simply too out there to actually exist and work the same way in the real setting.
We've already been over how some materia is there for gameplay purposes and how that doesn't mean they have to be removed from the game.
hlev said:
I read the whole thing. I simply excluded it from the quote because it was irrelevant and needlessly taking up virtual space of my post, as the content was simply an expansion of your irrelevant point addresses in the first sentence.
You called it pointless and are currently calling my point irrelevant, which isn't something people do when excluding part of a post to shorten their reply. It is relevant to what's being discussed, as I've explained in my previous post. I'm not seeing you address how disrespectful it is and how treating what people say to you in that manner isn't conductive to having an actual discussion, nor the fact that it's a fallacy.
hlev said:
When did I compare it to real world? When mentioning that most fiction has most of their logic based on real world, FF7 not being an exception?
My point in bringing up that quote was that you said real-world logic can't be dismissed, even in a fictional setting. Now, you're dismissing anything I say about the real world as irrelevant to the discussion. I've just explained in my previous post in what ways you reference the real world and why it's relevant to the discussion, despite your claims. FF7 is not the real world. We've been over this with all the stuff that exists in the setting that wouldn't be able to in real life. Since you still don't see where you bring up the real world:
I hope that rather than RPG idea in general, we're arguing turn-based and not-so-real-time combat where your actions are limited and do not portray how your controlled characters would/could behave in a real life scenario in order to be more efficient.
As I've said in my previous post, any use of the word realism and realistic in this context references the real world as well and since you use realistic and illogical interchangeably, uses of illogical also end up being indirect comparisons to the real world.
I don't find lack of logic that fun. Perhaps in an environment that didn't pretend to be at all serious and realistic, I wouldn't mind. In a photorealistic version of FF7? I want my damn logic, in gameplay and otherwise.
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.
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.
It can always be acceptable. The question is by whom and how much. Back in the day the graphics weren't good and we used to play as these chibi characters. That alone lets us understand that things aren't potrayed realistically (the reason would be technical limits, creators' desire to keep it that way or something else, it doesn't matter). This allows one to ignore all the silly things and simply enjoy the game the way it is. Because who cares, right?
To some, that is no longer the case in modern times with modern graphics. Now if we get this photorealistic game and it happens to have this outdated battle system with silly unrealistic (even if fun) mechanics, surely it will feel off. Now if said mechanics are fun, to some it might be enough while others would like it be fun and accomodated for photorealistic graphics.
Old games: unrealistic graphics - don't care about unrealistic gameplay.
New games: realistic graphics - weird to see unrealistic gameplay.
That is not to say that the new gameplay has to be super realistic. It just has to make more sense compared to the environment that is presented in the game. It's natural that in a realistic environment you would expect more realism out of the gameplay. As long as it is enjoyable, of course.
EDIT: By realistic I of course mean realistic to the setting in question.
You still haven’t explained how any of FFVII’s combat doesn’t make sense in FFVII’s setting when gameplay and story segregation is taken into account. Starling did a pretty good job demolishing your claims above.
