Forum Settings
       
1 2 Next »
This Forum is Read Only

If FFXIV had been a true sequel to 11?Follow

#52 Apr 24 2011 at 1:50 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
**
351 posts
Caesura wrote:
Quote:
In the case of FFXI which is on the brink of oblivion subscription-wise, you really don't want to make a FFXI-2 just on the historic record alone.

So, your argument is that rather than making a "sequel" to FFXI, which peaked at more than half a million regular players and still has more than a hundred thousand paying $13/month nine years later, SE was smart to do something completely different and end up with a game that has thirty thousand people playing for free six months after launch?

And, while I doubt anything this generation will ever beat WoW's 12 million, I'm not sure it's useful to say that a "sequel" pulling in more than a million subscribers very shortly after launch did worse. It's factually true, but not a meaningful comparison because Rift is still a wild, runaway success by modern standards. It's accurate that the count-on-the-fingers-of-one-hand MMO sequels have never done better than the original, but the statement "no one should make a sequel because they never do well" doesn't follow from that at all. If all game designers had gone with that logic, the folks at Trion wouldn't be dancing and singing right now, and FFXIV would still be terrible. "Be original" is clearly not a successful MMO design philosophy in the current generation of games, regardless of how three sequels in the last eight years have done.


I've said it before, but the reason Rift is a fluke is because it's chipping off a 12 million subscriber block. No other subscription-based MMO has ever pulled off the kind of numbers WoW has, and while Blizzard wouldn't be happy with a million subs for one of their sequels, just about everyone else would.

But you and I both know that for SE to make a WoW-clone would be insane. That's not a strategy that will work for them or their customers.

And while making a veritable sequel to a 12 million sub game works for Rift, it wouldn't work out so well for a 250k sub game. FFXI-2 is a guaranteed failure.

What SE has in its pocket are millions upon millions of Final Fantasy fans, many of whom have never played FFXI. These are the people who bought a PS3 just to play FF13 on. So, it's no small wonder that the clear choice for FF14's PS3 release is to appeal to the Final Fantasy crowd in general. That's where the money is. That's where the enthusiasm is. All they have to do is tap it.

Edited, Apr 24th 2011 3:52pm by ForceOfMeh
#53 Apr 24 2011 at 5:14 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
**
787 posts
I was hoping that the Devs would have taken all the good combat/magic/Final-Fantasy-Look&Feel from FFXI and build an even better fantasy world for FFXIV. But it looks like the Devs went off and created a brand new fantasy universe from the ground up which could be good in a lot of ways if they could have gotten it all off the ground. It looks like Devs created the world of FFXIV as though they weren't allowed to adopt any of the excellent qualities of FFXI or dip into any other Final Fantasy lore. IMHO that made the whole FFXIV universe rather bland all around.
#54 Apr 24 2011 at 8:48 PM Rating: Good
****
4,146 posts
rubina wrote:
It looks like Devs created the world of FFXIV as though they weren't allowed to adopt any of the excellent qualities of FFXI or dip into any other Final Fantasy lore. IMHO that made the whole FFXIV universe rather bland all around.


Great point. There have been a lot of people talking about WoW clones and how FFXIV could have been a FFXI clone, but I think many are overlooking the benefits of starting with a solid foundation. I'm really curious why SE decided to go the route of starting completely from scratch.

There is a large difference between cloning FFXI and borrowing ideas from FFXI that worked like AH, auto-attack battle system, UI features and class/combat mechanics. They could have changed these or redesigned them to be far better or tweaked them for the world of Eorzea but instead they tossed it all out, good with the bad, and designed something horribly unintuitive and mediocre.

With each passing patch I see incoming it seems they're slowly adding some new features mixed in with features that are already in place in FFXI or other MMOs. Not sure why they thought it would be a good idea to go away from a good thing in the first place, but now they're playing catch-up for no other reason than to be unique? /shrug
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#55 Apr 24 2011 at 10:24 PM Rating: Excellent
****
7,106 posts
Quote:
And while making a veritable sequel to a 12 million sub game works for Rift, it wouldn't work out so well for a 250k sub game. FFXI-2 is a guaranteed failure.

You keep saying that, but to be honest so far you haven't said anything to make me think it's the correct analysis. Yes, 100% of MMO sequels have failed, but so have, what, 95% of MMO non-sequels? Far, FAR more original MMO games have failed in the last ten years than have succeeded. Three sequel failures compared to dozens of "original" failures suggests to me that "all sequels will fail" isn't really a useful interpretation of the numbers. If 95% of MMO's are going to fail, it's not exactly a statistical anomaly if all three sequels happen to have fallen into that 95%.

It also seems odd to me to call games that make money and last for years a failure. EQII is a failure for lasting eight years, and Rift is a failure for having a million subscribers after a month, just because neither game surpassed its "original"?
Quote:
What SE has in its pocket are millions upon millions of Final Fantasy fans, many of whom have never played FFXI. These are the people who bought a PS3 just to play FF13 on. So, it's no small wonder that the clear choice for FF14's PS3 release is to appeal to the Final Fantasy crowd in general. That's where the money is. That's where the enthusiasm is. All they have to do is tap it.

All true, but I don't see how any of that has to do with the original/sequel distinction. It seems to me that far more, you're talking about simply making a good game that people want to play. And, doesn't "appealing to the FF crowd" by definition involve making a game with elements that have appealed to the FF crowd in the past? Because, the more you do that, the more the game looks like an FF sequel.

As FMcN notes above, a lot of the problems with FFXIV seem to come directly from the effort to be completely original, to not be a sequel. I don't see how you can argue that sequels are bad and then argue that FFXIV's success will come in tapping what people love about the FF series.
#56 Apr 25 2011 at 1:37 AM Rating: Default
Scholar
**
970 posts
I am in the boat against a straight sequel. I liked XI alot, but played it 7 years.. I want a brand new Final Fantasy Online experience. Some elements may carry over from each FF to the next. But not battle systems or progressions systems.. I know there are some who want an XI sequel. BUt Kuja hit the nail on the head.
The playerbase would be limited from day one. When two games offer the same style of play, it doesn't matter what your graphics look like. The majority of users will choose the game with most content. Argue all you want but that is the bottom line.This limiting would go in addition to the high spec pc requirements.
XIV didn't fail ta launch because it was different from XI. It was rushed, lag, unrefined systems(at that point), the high pc requirements and a few other things.
Rift might have launched polished, but not unique enough to sustain retention. At this point this is only my opinion. But in 3-6 months give or take around the time GW2, TOR, Tera, and other mmos. I am confident rift subs will drop by more than 1/2 of it's current base. Call BS now, but If I'm right I will post it here.

The Armoury system is night and day a cut above the old overly restricted job system from XI. It is the system that draws in outsiders more than any other existing feature. Someone said that reviewers would shun the freedom given after long play times. Maybe so and maybe not. It should do with a few more restrictions and upgrades to flesh it out though.

Unique battle effect graphics and character animations per weaponskill and certain spells.
No Weaponskills and a few class unique spells should not be cross classable.
No class should have innate dual roles due to the freedom of the armoury system.
Innate class Actions should only cost 1/2 or nothing in accordance with your main class.
If the XI jobs only gave 1/2 freedom, imo the armoury should give 75% or something closer to Final Fantasy Tactics restrictiveness.

I can't say for sure how the new XIV combat system will turn out. But if it is really similar to XI. Imo if a game has combat that users go afk, watch tv shows, or fall asleep during long stretch play sessions. You might find it hard to convince non XI users that the system is engaging in normal parties.
That said, there is things wrong with the current battle system. And if it just had the chance to get tweaked more and strike a balance bewteen two worlds. It could be original and engaging. We will never know that now at this point. I know I have read reviews on auto attack mmos releasing recently and there is neither good or bad write ups. It just gets referred to as basic combat system.

Edited, Apr 25th 2011 3:41am by sandpark
#57 Apr 25 2011 at 9:24 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
351 posts
Caesura wrote:
Quote:
And while making a veritable sequel to a 12 million sub game works for Rift, it wouldn't work out so well for a 250k sub game. FFXI-2 is a guaranteed failure.

You keep saying that, but to be honest so far you haven't said anything to make me think it's the correct analysis.


First of all, it doesn't matter if I convince you or not. You're not the keeper of truth here, the undecided forum audience is. You're just on one side of the debate, as am I.

Quote:
Yes, 100% of MMO sequels have failed, but so have, what, 95% of MMO non-sequels? Far, FAR more original MMO games have failed in the last ten years than have succeeded. Three sequel failures compared to dozens of "original" failures suggests to me that "all sequels will fail" isn't really a useful interpretation of the numbers. If 95% of MMO's are going to fail, it's not exactly a statistical anomaly if all three sequels happen to have fallen into that 95%.


While it's true there's a litany of "new content" MMOs that have arrived in various states of failure, even WoW-clones among them, there have been successes. Producing an MMO is a gamble with a huge payoff if you succeed. But even the worst gambler would be loathe to place a bet on a venture that has so far fumbled 100% of the time when there are better alternatives available that could succeed and with greater pay offs.

In other words, a "WoW-killer" is not going to come from a sequel, but will cost just as much as sequel would to make. Who, then, would want to make a sequel, unless like in the case of Rift chipping off WoW, there's enough of a base to make a living off of? FFXI just doesn't have enough of a following to sustain a new sequel. There's no way it could ever work out.
#58 Apr 25 2011 at 10:09 AM Rating: Good
***
1,636 posts
The problem with sequels is that you are targetting a small demographic. Here's why I think they don't historically go well, and will never because these issues:

You are targeting a group of people who liked the first game, yet are no longer 100% happy with it and want to move forward. You are then forced to make the follow up both better enough to make it worth moving on from the original (which EQ failed at), without branching too far off and becoming unrecognizable to the population of the first game.

You are trying to get new people, who for some reason did not play the first game. Why didn't they play, most likely its either that it wasn't for them, or because they felt too far behind to catch up.


now Caesura is right in saying, just cause the previous few examples of MMO sequels did poorly, doesn't mean that any future ones will 'fail' (i think that term should be kept for games that acutally did fail, such as APB and FFXIV had SE not decided to keep trudging through), however there is much less evidence to suggest that they would do better. I cannot see a single reason to make a sequel rather than continue to update the original.

I fully support SE's attempt to make a new game, they aren't trapping themselves with a narrow market that way. They could have made an awesome game that would have been played by FFXI fans, WOW fans, non-MMO fans alike. But they made a poor game, they rolled the dice and designed something that sucked. FFXI-2 would have been a safer bet, but in all likelyhood never would have matched the success of the first.
____________________________


1 2 Next »
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 13 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (13)