Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Mmorpg's First Impression Updated 07/03/2013Follow

#77 Jun 28 2013 at 2:44 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,174 posts
I do admire the optimism, but...

1) MMO gamers and Single-player RPG fans are a very different breed.

I'm not saying that single player RPGers wouldn't enjoy MMOs or vice versa, but the numbers didn't translate before and I don't see what would change that now. The reason why people generally MMO on PCs is because of their ability to support things like voice chat, modding, multi-tasking... ect.

2) The million man mark seems much more than generous to me.

Open beta keys are like demos. The number of people trying out a demo is never a solid indicator of how well a game will sell, especially when you consider that actually playing the game requires buying it and maintaining a subscription fee. XIV shipped less than half as many copies the first time it was released. Not sure how the prospective subscribers would double, much less have everyone of those and more sticking around.

Time will tell I guess...

____________________________
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.
#78 Jun 28 2013 at 3:46 PM Rating: Excellent
Guru
***
1,310 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
1) MMO gamers and Single-player RPG fans are a very different breed.

I'm not saying that single player RPGers wouldn't enjoy MMOs or vice versa, but the numbers didn't translate before and I don't see what would change that now. The reason why people generally MMO on PCs is because of their ability to support things like voice chat, modding, multi-tasking... ect.


Blizzard converted a modest, but loyal, RTS crowd into 12 million subscribers to WoW. Most of those people hadn't even heard of the original Warcraft, let alone played it (**** many people over here probably don't know what I mean when I say RTS for that matter... but everyone knows WoW). These are the footsteps Yoshida is following in. If he can take a modest, but loyal following of Final Fantasy fans and get them into an exceptionally approachable game that their friends and family can easily get into themselves, maybe he won't get 12 million subs, but it could potentially be enough of a following to breathe easier. The question is, does this formula from 2004 work in 2013 or have things changed too much for it to make a difference?

FilthMcNasty wrote:
2) The million man mark seems much more than generous to me.

Open beta keys are like demos. The number of people trying out a demo is never a solid indicator of how well a game will sell, especially when you consider that actually playing the game requires buying it and maintaining a subscription fee. XIV shipped less than half as many copies the first time it was released. Not sure how the prospective subscribers would double, much less have everyone of those and more sticking around.

Time will tell I guess...


I should point out the million mark was reached (nearly reached, whatever) with a limited set of closed beta keys, not all of which were consumed, and not everyone who wanted one got one. Let's just see how popular the unrestricted open beta is, first.
#79 Jun 28 2013 at 3:52 PM Rating: Good
***
3,178 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Gnu wrote:
Sovjohn wrote:
...if they time their launch in the first few months of PS4 lifetime, they can become a solid seller there, with beautiful graphics and an Eorzea inviting RPG players to immerse in there.


Totally agree. I think FFXIV will help sell PS4 and PS4 will help sell FFXIV.

I know at least one person who got the PS3 recently because of the FFXIV beta (and the Last of Us).


I think the biggest deterrent for the consoles is the timing. Yes, I'm doing my 'toldja so' dance here, but I predicted that Yoshi would announce PS3 release date shortly before the announcement for PS4. Now the question is, do I go buy a soon to be outdated console to play at launch or do I start months(possibly longer) waiting on PS4 release? Those things coupled with the fact that PC generally has more to offer MMO gamers make it seem unlikely that console releases will make a big impact on sales/subs.


Just a guess, they will focus heavily on the PS4 version shortly after ARR release. Sony is a smart company and I'm sure they are talking release timing with SE. If they can crank out a PS4 version by Christmas, it will certainly increase PS4 sales. (I wouldn't mind having 3 machines that could play it myself. I'm probably on that list.) I'd love to compare what my PC can do vs. the PS4, and it seems FFXIV is the perfect game for that comparison.

That said, I hear the PS4 is a whole new operating system. How long does it take to rewrite a completed game for a new system?

Ooh, ooh, will the PS4 version use the new touch screen feature for FFXIV menu management? Hmmmm.
#80 Jun 28 2013 at 4:06 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
Ooh, ooh, will the PS4 version use the new touch screen feature for FFXIV menu management? Hmmmm.


I'd be most excited by Sony's pledge that anything playable on the PS4 will also be playable via remote plan on the Vita.

That would have been such a cool feature to have around during the heyday of FFXI.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#81 Jun 28 2013 at 4:22 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
972 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
I do admire the optimism, but...

1) MMO gamers and Single-player RPG fans are a very different breed.

I'm not saying that single player RPGers wouldn't enjoy MMOs or vice versa, but the numbers didn't translate before and I don't see what would change that now. The reason why people generally MMO on PCs is because of their ability to support things like voice chat, modding, multi-tasking... ect.

When FFXI first released, internet was really slow and console gaming was barely massive anything online. I think PS2 was the first main console to include an HDD option. So asking console players to upgrade at that time wasn't very likely. All those extra pc perks you list can possibly be done by ps4 minus the mods.

Another reason why console players might have not have done XI is it's late entrance into the US. Another thing could be how time demanding XI was. There is something about starting a fresh game when it all shiny and meeting or making friends.

FilthMcNasty wrote:

2) The million man mark seems much more than generous to me.

Open beta keys are like demos. The number of people trying out a demo is never a solid indicator of how well a game will sell, especially when you consider that actually playing the game requires buying it and maintaining a subscription fee. XIV shipped less than half as many copies the first time it was released. Not sure how the prospective subscribers would double, much less have everyone of those and more sticking around.

Time will tell I guess...


Fast forward to the present. Faster internet is much more affordable, HDD is commonplace, and console players have been exposed to current mmos as well as future mmos and quasi mmos incoming. ARR is not as timesinked as FFXI was until Abyssea. A game demo is good or bad for a game. If your game is PoS then most demo players will not be buying the final game. But from what I have read on non official beta forums. ARR might not be the mmo that is original at every turn. But it is a quality experience. It has content and accesibility to offer players not just mmo veterans.

How all this plays out. Your guess is as good as mine until time tells us. If the game gets 8+ in reviews and still fails to meet whatever SE target is of subscribers. Then that's a clear indicator that it's the payment model for the most part. It's Yoshi's stance that P2P is the future of this mmo.

Edited, Jun 28th 2013 6:27pm by sandpark
#82 Jun 28 2013 at 4:24 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
972 posts
Gnu wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Gnu wrote:
Sovjohn wrote:
...if they time their launch in the first few months of PS4 lifetime, they can become a solid seller there, with beautiful graphics and an Eorzea inviting RPG players to immerse in there.


Totally agree. I think FFXIV will help sell PS4 and PS4 will help sell FFXIV.

I know at least one person who got the PS3 recently because of the FFXIV beta (and the Last of Us).


I think the biggest deterrent for the consoles is the timing. Yes, I'm doing my 'toldja so' dance here, but I predicted that Yoshi would announce PS3 release date shortly before the announcement for PS4. Now the question is, do I go buy a soon to be outdated console to play at launch or do I start months(possibly longer) waiting on PS4 release? Those things coupled with the fact that PC generally has more to offer MMO gamers make it seem unlikely that console releases will make a big impact on sales/subs.


Just a guess, they will focus heavily on the PS4 version shortly after ARR release. Sony is a smart company and I'm sure they are talking release timing with SE. If they can crank out a PS4 version by Christmas, it will certainly increase PS4 sales. (I wouldn't mind having 3 machines that could play it myself. I'm probably on that list.) I'd love to compare what my PC can do vs. the PS4, and it seems FFXIV is the perfect game for that comparison.

That said, I hear the PS4 is a whole new operating system. How long does it take to rewrite a completed game for a new system?

Ooh, ooh, will the PS4 version use the new touch screen feature for FFXIV menu management? Hmmmm.

I don't see why not the touch screen wouldn't be used. Diablo 3 is using it for drag and drop interfaces simulating mouse.
#83 Jun 28 2013 at 5:06 PM Rating: Good
****
4,174 posts
Xoie wrote:
Blizzard converted a modest, but loyal, RTS crowd into 12 million subscribers to WoW.


What Sovjohn is doing is taking combined sales from two separate games. Let's assume that all of the 6ish million copies of XIII that shipped sold. It's completely fair to say that all of those people who purchased the game would at least have an interest in trying XIV. The problem I have with the numbers is that it's also just as likely to say that many of that 6ish million that picked up XIII also picked up XIII-2.

Double dipping. The numbers are inflated because many (certainly the majority and probably close to all) of the people who are being counted for having purchased XIII, bought XIII-2 also. It would make more sense to only draw from the pool of players once. Shall we?

Final Fantasy X sold roughly 10 times as many copies as Final Fantasy XI had subscribers, at their peak. If everyone who played FFXI did so because of their experience with the prior FF title, they still only managed to reel in 10% of that crowd. Not saying that's a bad thing, but if you assumed it were true(which isn't likely); that's what it looks like.

Assuming the same for Blizzard... had everyone that played WoW been turned on to it by Warcraft III; they captured all of their WC3 players and continued on to more than double that. To be fair, Blizzard converted a very niche genre into a large chunk of the gaming market. Not to sound like I'm on their **** or anything, but what they did with WoW isn't likely to ever be seen again unless a game can come along and capture the majority of it's audience.

It would be amazing to see, but I'm not sure FFXIV will be the 'WoW killer' it would almost certainly have to be in order to pull off what's being suggested here.

Xoie wrote:
I should point out the million mark was reached (nearly reached, whatever) with a limited set of closed beta keys, not all of which were consumed, and not everyone who wanted one got one. Let's just see how popular the unrestricted open beta is, first.


I'm thinking we should just wait on the real numbers. I still don't think that the number of people playing a free trial indicates how successful a product will be.



Edited, Jun 28th 2013 7:06pm by FilthMcNasty
____________________________
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.
#84 Jun 29 2013 at 2:50 AM Rating: Excellent
*
138 posts
Since when is a million players worldwide, in >1 platforms, a "WOW Killer"?

SWTOR (Excuse me, taking a break, have to laugh here) "wanted to have" 2 million subscribers, and was actively promoted as "WOW Killer" "The Next Big Thing" "If Star Wars Can't Do it, Nobody Can", etc.

Well, this game had numerous problems, ranging from a bad, bad game engine to absolute lack of support (unless you believe that critical bugs resulting to entire raid parties being...killed ought to be fixed in 1-2 months after discovered. While Blizzard and any respectable developer would hotfix them within mere days).

You cannot fathom that a game can do reasonably well and maintain a player base of several hundred thousands, reaching a million.

Yet EVE Online (which in my view is a very niche, very complex to get into game, however CCP games is eternally grateful for stats like this:

Quote:
In February 2013, EVE Online reached over 500,000 subscribers.


...and continues polishing and adding content to the game in perpetuity) could maintain the interest of several hundred thousand players, without offering the mainstream accessibility of WOW or the fully voiced quests of SWTOR.

I'm not daring to say that beta phase 3 applications are an indicator of active players. They certainly are not. However, approaching a million beta applications (this does not include "given away keys") does certainly mean that you can expect a X% of these players to play in the end. It'd be quite different -and hard- to gauge popularity if beta applications numbers were never disclosed, or were 250,000 worldwide.

It's not my job to make sales and subscription forecasts for ARR, although I do have the skills to do it if I had access to the commercial data SE has.

So, as a completely rough estimate, I'll take:

300-500,000 Japan players (all platforms)
200-300,000 North America, Europe, Rest of World players (PC)
200-250,000 North America, Europe, Rest of World players (PS3/PS4 in the future)

These numbers are including players I'd expect to stick around, mind you. "Initial sales" or "1st month free" players could be more by 30-40%.

Oh, and - In late 2003, when XI launched in Europe, it was nowhere as accessible as it could be. Neither broadband / decent PC's were considered the majority these days (a decent PC cost most definitely over $1,000 without a monitor), nor was XI exactly 'forgiving' to players.

Heck, I loved its visual style and world much more than I did WOW's, but never managed to level above level 20-23 or something, and gaining EXP solely by having a full group and taking on random mobs around the map was not exactly my -or many others- cup of tea.

So don't make comparisons under that light. I still find it miraculous that XI maintained its clientele as long as it did.

Edited, Jun 29th 2013 4:57am by Sovjohn
#85 Jun 29 2013 at 4:53 AM Rating: Decent
****
4,174 posts
Sovjohn wrote:
You cannot fathom that a game can do reasonably well and maintain a player base of several hundred thousands, reaching a million.


That's not at all what I said. You implied that they would keep 100% of their beta testers and another 300k+ on top of that. Based on what? Has there ever been a game that even reached it's beta test numbers on launch(much less hundreds of thousands more)?

Sovjohn wrote:
It's not my job to make sales and subscription forecasts for ARR, although I do have the skills to do it if I had access to the commercial data SE has.

SE shipped 600k+ copies of XIV 1.0 worldwide. It's probably safe to say that they produced and shipped these boxes based on some sort of 'commercial data', wouldn't you say? I mean, you wouldn't create a zillion boxes of product if you didn't at least have some indication that you could sell them. Why would that number double all of a sudden? The hype just isn't there.

You keep making these speculative estimates about numbers, but it seems that you completely ignore the numbers that are accurate and real. All I ask is that you at least try using some real numbers as a basis for your predictions.

Sovjohn wrote:
Oh, and - In late 2003, when XI launched in Europe, it was nowhere as accessible as it could be. Neither broadband / decent PC's were considered the majority these days (a decent PC cost most definitely over $1,000 without a monitor), nor was XI exactly 'forgiving' to players.

Neither broadband nor a high priced PC were requirements to play FFXI...

FFXI System Requirements wrote:
Intel® Pentium®III 800Mhz or faster processor
128 MB RAM
NVIDIA® GeForce™ series with 32 MB or ATI® RADEON™ 9000 series


These standards were really low even for 2002. I'm sure there are other people who can attest that FFXI ran just fine on dial-up internet connections. I can't have been the only broke *** student who played back in the day Smiley: lol

Sovjohn wrote:
So don't make comparisons under that light. I still find it miraculous that XI maintained its clientele as long as it did.

Valid comparison is valid. If you want to try and speculate FFXIV sales based on it's prequel, why isn't it fair use FFX and FFXI when we already have real data?

____________________________
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.
#86 Jun 29 2013 at 8:20 AM Rating: Good
Guru
Avatar
*****
11,147 posts
While perhaps not a unique perspective, at the time of XI's launch, I helped run a FF-themed MUSH (basically a text-based roleplaying hub). We had our share of people that felt XI "didn't count" because it was an MMO and you had to pay the monthly sub. This was also the time where the only other real mainstream MMO alternative was Everquest. So I feel XI "failed to grab" in part because people weren't so susceptible to the idea of P2P gaming. Keep in mind, this was also the time where stuff like Warcraft or Starcraft were free to play on Battle.net, which served as an excuse for "Why can't they do that?" even then. Also had a RL friend who, even though I had the game installed on his PC, wouldn't pick up XI for the above despite watching me play and explaining things to him. I find out later he got into WoW, but I'd also say the accessibility played a role there even though I would've had no issue in letting him try a mule of mine.

Nowadays, I think brand loyalty will hold a bit more sway than it did then, but XIV also has the black mark of 1.0. You'll still have people who staunchly don't support 2.0 because of it. You'l have some who just want SE to fail because they're SE and not remaking FF7. You'll also have plenty of people who just don't care, which will mean advertising will be the determining factor. I'd say loyalists have already made their decision, and if it's to not play, it might not be entirely because they don't want to. Time requirements, other game interest, or just being burnt out on MMOs is possible. So, yeah, I'm waiting to see what kind of advertising campaign SE rolls out.
____________________________
Violence good. **** bad. Yay America.
#87 Jun 29 2013 at 1:16 PM Rating: Default
***
2,202 posts
GW2 had a million pre orders, based on Beta :) SWOTOR had over a million people on beta, and sold 2 million on launch, so it is possible to get close to 100% of beta testers to buy your product, the problem is retention after the first 1-2 Months! Combat and Content are King Makers in MMO'S, if your combat system is iffy and your end game content is not really all that much, people will leave for the next big thing or go back to their MMO of Choice! It happen in Swotor, in Gw2 in tera etc etc.

Also FFXIII &XIII2 sold 9 million because FFXIII was the first Final Fantasy of the ps3/360 Generation.
____________________________
MUTED
#88 Jun 29 2013 at 3:48 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
972 posts
And FFVII sold 10 million because it was the first ps1 FF. And what was the first FF on snes? I guess ARR could beat FFXV to release on PS4 then it will sell 9 million too just because it will be on the system first.

I think FFXIII sold well because it was a large wait from FFXII and regardless of our opinion. People liked it and hated it. No game sells 9 million on name alone, not even Final Fantasy.

Edited, Jun 29th 2013 5:52pm by sandpark
#89 Jun 29 2013 at 3:55 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
972 posts
Uh maybe Call Of Duty
#90 Jun 29 2013 at 4:06 PM Rating: Excellent
Guru
***
1,310 posts
Thayos wrote:
Quote:
Ooh, ooh, will the PS4 version use the new touch screen feature for FFXIV menu management? Hmmmm.


I'd be most excited by Sony's pledge that anything playable on the PS4 will also be playable via remote plan on the Vita.

That would have been such a cool feature to have around during the heyday of FFXI.



Having a Vita, I think it could be useful for small, routine things (maybe a short solo quest or checking up on your sales), but communication will be a big problem, even with a touchscreen keyboard. It will be tough to play and talk at the same time.
#91 Jun 29 2013 at 4:52 PM Rating: Default
***
2,202 posts
sandpark wrote:
And FFVII sold 10 million because it was the first ps1 FF. And what was the first FF on snes? I guess ARR could beat FFXV to release on PS4 then it will sell 9 million too just because it will be on the system first.

I think FFXIII sold well because it was a large wait from FFXII and regardless of our opinion. People liked it and hated it. No game sells 9 million on name alone, not even Final Fantasy.

Edited, Jun 29th 2013 5:52pm by sandpark


FFXIII did not sold 9 million, it sold 6.3 million, you are adding XIII2 numbers to XIII to make an Argument... Which is Sad! Also yes VII sold well because it was the first PSX Final Fantasy, and sony got behind it, if instead of VII, we had gotten VI on the PSX it would have sold 10 million, VII did not sell 10 million copy's because it was the best RPG (Which is not is not even the best FF) it sold because it was a title, delivered at the right time.
____________________________
MUTED
#92 Jun 29 2013 at 8:15 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
972 posts
FFVII was the best rpg that released on the PS1 at that time and maybe the lifespan. Whether or not it is the best FF ever is subject to arguments. You can read countless articles that FFVII is the rpg that took rpgs to a brand new place, especially in the production values department. Now since then rpgs have surpassed FFVII. It's the equivalent today of like playing FFXV at the release of PS3. That's how far ahead the FF was in terms of other console rpgs at the time ut released.

FFVI is my favorite FF. But I don't think it would even sell 10 million if it released today without pushing production values.

You probably blame the release of FFVII on the lesser sales of FFXII. But that just isn't the case. The truth is while FFXII was a great game and had forward thinking ideas. It's being different from the core titles 1-10 is what made that happen.I think if FFXV releases first on the PS4 it might sell more or less than FF 16. But I imagine it being different is going to spawn a love and hate relationship with it as well. This series just can't get a break. Damned if they stick the core and damned if they stray too far. In the end, they keep selling like hotcakes even through all the controversy they bring.

The same would happen if Dragon Age runs until Dragon Age 10. Everyone has their favorite.
#93 Jun 29 2013 at 11:12 PM Rating: Default
***
2,202 posts
FFVII was not the best RPG to have touched a PS1, Xenogears is far better, so is Star Ocean 2 or Suikoden. FFVII was the flagship title of the PS1, sony alone poured over a million dollars in advertisement, SE put so much money on the game, that if it had failed, they would have been bankrupt, you can put any Squaresoft title relased on the PS1 timeline, and replace it with VII, and it would have been the same success, FFVII was an OK rpg, it was an upgraded graphic version of VI, with a stupid storyline on it, that is what VII was.
____________________________
MUTED
#94 Jun 30 2013 at 2:48 AM Rating: Excellent
Guru
***
1,310 posts
Ostia wrote:
FFVII was not the best RPG to have touched a PS1, Xenogears is far better, so is Star Ocean 2 or Suikoden. FFVII was the flagship title of the PS1, sony alone poured over a million dollars in advertisement, SE put so much money on the game, that if it had failed, they would have been bankrupt, you can put any Squaresoft title relased on the PS1 timeline, and replace it with VII, and it would have been the same success, FFVII was an OK rpg, it was an upgraded graphic version of VI, with a stupid storyline on it, that is what VII was.


Most people can't name a character from Xenogears or Star Ocean (any of them really) or Suikoden. (Don't worry Ostia, I'm sure you can, and I'm sure you can even Google the ones you can't... it's not the point).

But Cloud, Septhiroth, Tifa, and Aerith are still popular icons to this day. I still see them show up in popular art or cosplay, and they're instantly recognizable in a way that the characters from the other series are not. I think FFVII left its mark on gaming culture a lot more than most games ever will, and that's really where you can tell the difference with which of these games were legendary and which were simply good. You don't find the answer in sales numbers, it's in who remembers the experience and for how long.
#95 Jun 30 2013 at 8:47 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
273 posts
sandpark wrote:
A staff member at mmorpg has just posted his first impression.
Have a look at it.
http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/446/feature/7532/First-Impressions.html



Personally, I wouldn't play the game if it was to be microtransaction... I see nothing appealing about a game where uberness is determined by how much money I spent on it, rather than how much time/effort I put into it.

The fact that this is even a question truly scares me for the future, not of XIV, but of MMOs in general... As with all things, enjoy and cheerish XIV while we have it, I could imagine this type of immensely in depth game being gone in the future.

The younger crowd cares about, give it to me NOW, button smashing, and "this is too hard."

Example, I helped some younger guy out yesterday on the Lv 15 main story quest battle (he was 18, I'm 28)... he was a THM and Cure from the CNJ can really help you beat the battle.

I helped him go to Gridania to get CNJ and cure, it took maybe all of 20 minutes to get there, change jobs, learn cure, and go back to the battle again... This guy was telling me he was going to go on the beta forums and complain because it's ridiculous he had to do all that. (I told him in XI that would have been literally an all day task... he didn't respond lol.)

All I can say is, 2040, God Save Us All!!!!

Edited, Jun 30th 2013 10:52am by Parathyroid
____________________________
[ffxivsig]2041793[/ffxivsig]

I probably understood about 1/10th of what was discussed in this thread and I'm sober as a rope. (I don't know if that's actually a saying or not). -Kierk
#96 Jun 30 2013 at 9:47 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
972 posts
Xoie wrote:
Ostia wrote:
FFVII was not the best RPG to have touched a PS1, Xenogears is far better, so is Star Ocean 2 or Suikoden. FFVII was the flagship title of the PS1, sony alone poured over a million dollars in advertisement, SE put so much money on the game, that if it had failed, they would have been bankrupt, you can put any Squaresoft title relased on the PS1 timeline, and replace it with VII, and it would have been the same success, FFVII was an OK rpg, it was an upgraded graphic version of VI, with a stupid storyline on it, that is what VII was.


Most people can't name a character from Xenogears or Star Ocean (any of them really) or Suikoden. (Don't worry Ostia, I'm sure you can, and I'm sure you can even Google the ones you can't... it's not the point).

But Cloud, Septhiroth, Tifa, and Aerith are still popular icons to this day. I still see them show up in popular art or cosplay, and they're instantly recognizable in a way that the characters from the other series are not. I think FFVII left its mark on gaming culture a lot more than most games ever will, and that's really where you can tell the difference with which of these games were legendary and which were simply good. You don't find the answer in sales numbers, it's in who remembers the experience and for how long.


He wasn't talking about popularity. He was talking about his perceived quality of the game.

People use this example a lot, but Justin Bieber is one of the most recognizable artists in the world but not necessarily 'the best', and that could also apply to Final Fantasy (VII) and other RPGs. So, just because a lot of people haven't played Suikoden II on the PS1 doesn't necessarily mean that Final Fantasy VII is better, just because people know the names Cloud, Sephiroth, Tifa, etc.
#97 Jun 30 2013 at 10:19 AM Rating: Good
Killua125 wrote:
Xoie wrote:
Ostia wrote:
FFVII was not the best RPG to have touched a PS1, Xenogears is far better, so is Star Ocean 2 or Suikoden. FFVII was the flagship title of the PS1, sony alone poured over a million dollars in advertisement, SE put so much money on the game, that if it had failed, they would have been bankrupt, you can put any Squaresoft title relased on the PS1 timeline, and replace it with VII, and it would have been the same success, FFVII was an OK rpg, it was an upgraded graphic version of VI, with a stupid storyline on it, that is what VII was.


Most people can't name a character from Xenogears or Star Ocean (any of them really) or Suikoden. (Don't worry Ostia, I'm sure you can, and I'm sure you can even Google the ones you can't... it's not the point).

But Cloud, Septhiroth, Tifa, and Aerith are still popular icons to this day. I still see them show up in popular art or cosplay, and they're instantly recognizable in a way that the characters from the other series are not. I think FFVII left its mark on gaming culture a lot more than most games ever will, and that's really where you can tell the difference with which of these games were legendary and which were simply good. You don't find the answer in sales numbers, it's in who remembers the experience and for how long.


He wasn't talking about popularity. He was talking about his perceived quality of the game.

People use this example a lot, but Justin Bieber is one of the most recognizable artists in the world but not necessarily 'the best', and that could also apply to Final Fantasy (VII) and other RPGs. So, just because a lot of people haven't played Suikoden II on the PS1 doesn't necessarily mean that Final Fantasy VII is better, just because people know the names Cloud, Sephiroth, Tifa, etc.


My gods someone gets it! I usually find it hard to identify with your posts, and means of doing so, but this time I can identify. Perfect example and to the point. Rate up!
____________________________
Michael Tyrael
#98 Jun 30 2013 at 10:22 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
273 posts
Killua125 wrote:
Xoie wrote:
Ostia wrote:
FFVII was not the best RPG to have touched a PS1, Xenogears is far better, so is Star Ocean 2 or Suikoden. FFVII was the flagship title of the PS1, sony alone poured over a million dollars in advertisement, SE put so much money on the game, that if it had failed, they would have been bankrupt, you can put any Squaresoft title relased on the PS1 timeline, and replace it with VII, and it would have been the same success, FFVII was an OK rpg, it was an upgraded graphic version of VI, with a stupid storyline on it, that is what VII was.


Most people can't name a character from Xenogears or Star Ocean (any of them really) or Suikoden. (Don't worry Ostia, I'm sure you can, and I'm sure you can even Google the ones you can't... it's not the point).

But Cloud, Septhiroth, Tifa, and Aerith are still popular icons to this day. I still see them show up in popular art or cosplay, and they're instantly recognizable in a way that the characters from the other series are not. I think FFVII left its mark on gaming culture a lot more than most games ever will, and that's really where you can tell the difference with which of these games were legendary and which were simply good. You don't find the answer in sales numbers, it's in who remembers the experience and for how long.


He wasn't talking about popularity. He was talking about his perceived quality of the game.

People use this example a lot, but Justin Bieber is one of the most recognizable artists in the world but not necessarily 'the best', and that could also apply to Final Fantasy (VII) and other RPGs. So, just because a lot of people haven't played Suikoden II on the PS1 doesn't necessarily mean that Final Fantasy VII is better, just because people know the names Cloud, Sephiroth, Tifa, etc.



I've played them all, and I consider myself a fan of high-quality products...

Any reasonable human being could understand why any of the three would be someone's favorite, in terms of not only sentiment but quality.

Suikoden, Xenogears, and Final Fantasy VII are three completely different games... and three very high quality games at that. I for one choose not to select a favorite. I love all three of them for different reasons.

Philosophical and mental flexibility are a true sign of intelligence, if you can't understand why others feel a different way from yourself perhaps some introspection is in order.
____________________________
[ffxivsig]2041793[/ffxivsig]

I probably understood about 1/10th of what was discussed in this thread and I'm sober as a rope. (I don't know if that's actually a saying or not). -Kierk
#99 Jun 30 2013 at 11:01 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
972 posts
Ostia wrote:
FFVII was not the best RPG to have touched a PS1, Xenogears is far better, so is Star Ocean 2 or Suikoden. FFVII was the flagship title of the PS1, sony alone poured over a million dollars in advertisement, SE put so much money on the game, that if it had failed, they would have been bankrupt, you can put any Squaresoft title relased on the PS1 timeline, and replace it with VII, and it would have been the same success, FFVII was an OK rpg, it was an upgraded graphic version of VI, with a stupid storyline on it, that is what VII was.

I agree with Xenogears being the better rpg between the two. I do not agree on Suikoden 2 or Star Ocean 2 being better even though those were fantastic games. No, just no. FFVII was the most influential cultural rpg that affected rpg design from then on after. This isn't a battle of which rpg was written better or had better combat systems. This isn't about my personal preference vs what is the truth. Advertisement or time released isn't what sold it for 10 million. Or else XIII would have been received similarly.

Xoie wrote:
Most people can't name a character from Xenogears or Star Ocean (any of them really) or Suikoden. (Don't worry Ostia, I'm sure you can, and I'm sure you can even Google the ones you can't... it's not the point).

But Cloud, Septhiroth, Tifa, and Aerith are still popular icons to this day. I still see them show up in popular art or cosplay, and they're instantly recognizable in a way that the characters from the other series are not. I think FFVII left its mark on gaming culture a lot more than most games ever will, and that's really where you can tell the difference with which of these games were legendary and which were simply good. You don't find the answer in sales numbers, it's in who remembers the experience and for how long.


Yes and it's not because Sony advertised it or because it was a great/ok rpg. It left a mark on the gaming world for things it brought to what it means to be an rpg. I hold a few FF in higher regard over VII. But those didn't have the same effect on gaming culture as VII did. Square was a bold pioneer in that era. The franchise that other rpgs aspired to take things from. Everything they touched was golden.


Killua wrote:
He wasn't talking about popularity. He was talking about his perceived quality of the game.

People use this example a lot, but Justin Bieber is one of the most recognizable artists in the world but not necessarily 'the best', and that could also apply to Final Fantasy (VII) and other RPGs. So, just because a lot of people haven't played Suikoden II on the PS1 doesn't necessarily mean that Final Fantasy VII is better, just because people know the names Cloud, Sephiroth, Tifa, etc.


World Of Warcraft is the Justin Bieber of the gaming world. I would apply Metallica to be more like Final Fantasy. It's been around forever. In the beginning it had a hardcore following, then as the years passed on it began to alter it's playstyle. It's popularity grew and grew, with the more albums they produced. People found an era that they clinged on. And the old school had a hard-on wishing for the days of yesterday. Even Metallica has that one album(In SE's case FFVII) that everyone remembers more.
#100 Jun 30 2013 at 11:31 AM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
***
1,104 posts
FFVII doesn't really need defending. It's massively popular because it's a great game, period. If you're not a huge fan of it that's fine, but trying to convince people that it isn't a quality game is silly. Its success and influence speaks for itself.
#101 Jun 30 2013 at 12:02 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
**
972 posts
I noticed that we are getting off topic. I'll just link these two articles to show some of my point. Whether you view this as a negative or positive. FFVII had an effect on rpgs and games in general that reverberates today.

http://www.gamespot.com/final-fantasy-vii/videos/great-games-terrible-legacy-final-fantasy-vii-6403927/

http://www.ign.com/articles/2008/05/01/ign-presents-the-history-of-final-fantasy-vii



Edited, Jun 30th 2013 2:05pm by sandpark
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 1 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (1)