Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Common Misconception of Final Fantasy Games?Follow

#1 Jul 06 2013 at 1:08 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
*
87 posts
Now I talk to someone on World of Warcraft about Final Fantasy games and he is more of a Kingdom Hearts fan and he says he doesn't play Final Fantasy that much because he claims its turned base but he has only played Final Fantasy Crisis Core and a little bit of FF XIII-1 which I can assume is very turn-based. Now I know there are turn-based games in Final Fantasy like Final Fantasy Tactics and X. FF 10 seems to be as turn-based as the series could get. When I think of turn based games, chess comes in mind. The person also thinks FF XIII is a turn-based game which confuses me. The battle system in FF XIII-1 seems more like a active time battle system due to the fact that pace action is really fast. In other words you wait for a bar to fill up and once it gets past a certain point you will be able to attack the enemy and if you do nothing you would get slaughtered by the enemy since they will continue to go regardless of whether you select your commands or not. I told him this but he never responded or created any argument to explain to me why it is a turn-based game. I also asked Trade Chat due to the amount of people there but no one seemed interested to respond. It's kind of annoying how I'm not getting an explanation, especially if its just ignorance coming out of people who have maybe played the game series only once like a 7-10 years ago?
#2 Jul 06 2013 at 4:58 AM Rating: Excellent
***
1,079 posts
Now my question to you and your friend is: What's wrong with a turned based game? We really can't give you an explanation if your friend is being dumb.
____________________________
FFXIV
Articus Vladmir
PLD WHM BRD DRG BLM
#3 Jul 06 2013 at 5:39 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
Avatar
*
155 posts
14 isn't turn based. For a WoW player you can think of it as WoW with a Final Fantasy wrapper. Of course it's more than that but that's how I've been explaining it to MY WoW friends.
____________________________
"Wars come and go, but my soldiers are eternal..."

Guild/LS: Weekend Raiders
#6 Jul 06 2013 at 5:55 AM Rating: Good
***
3,177 posts
You really can't change someone's opinion in that regards. They have to want to try it with an open mind.

I have a friend who absolutely loves FFVII but I loaned him FFIX and he turned it off and hates it because it "has four person parties". I kid you not.

____________________________
Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn
Grover Eyeveen - Hyperion Server
Viva Eorzea Free Company/Linkshell Leader - Hyperion Server

Aegis Server (2012-2013)
Figaro Server (2010-2012)

Final Fantasy XI:
Retired

Blog
#7 Jul 06 2013 at 6:36 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,202 posts
FF1-13 are turn based.... So he is not wrong, FF is primordially turn based, XI and XIV are not because they are MMOS.
____________________________
MUTED
#8 Jul 06 2013 at 7:15 AM Rating: Excellent
Guru
Avatar
*****
11,084 posts
I'd argue a global cooldown imposes a turn limit for the duration of its activity, but hey, the guy wants to deprive himself of entertainment.

Part of why the old games were turn-based was because of system limitations. Even more action-y pseudo-fighter RPGs like the Tales started off as side-scrollers before jumping into 3D planes for combat, kind of like how Mortal Kombat and Street Fighter was before 3D arenas became more of a thing, too.

Suppose this just leads me to the old argument that real RPG fans don't care about stuff like graphics or game mechanics as long as there's a good story. I don't quite agree, as eyesores and terrible combat do turn me off, but I guess as someone who grew up on FF1 and earlier, I'm more tolerant of "dated" gameplay. And ultimately, this rejection sounds like it's coming from someone under the age of 18.
____________________________
Violence good. **** bad. Yay America.
#9 Jul 06 2013 at 8:38 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
970 posts
Traditional turn base= Battle are not real time, player A takes turn, then player b, no element of time.
Traditional Active Time Bar= Still turn based, defined by character speed, ATB adds an element of time.
Conditional turn base= Same as turn base, but a graphical timeline is shown, and you can manipulate that timeline or swap characters.
Active Dimension Battle= Same concept as ATB except charge time was added(cooldown on skill)
Segmented ATB= Same concept as traditional ATB except each action cost atb slots, you can do actions before the atb gauge is full.
Cooldowns= Are time restrictions put on skills, affected or unaffected by character speed.

So Final Fantasy 1-3 are traditional turn base, FF IV-IX are traditional atb, FFX is conditional turn base, XI and XII are versions of ADB,
XIII and XIII-2 are segmented atb. All Final Fantasies are turn-based, if the element of real time is added it stops being traditional turn-base. A cooldown system is not an actual main battle system unless character speed was absent and all skills are governed by the cooldown including standard attacks.

Final Fantasy XI has individual cooldowns and I think XIV has a global cooldowns. Since ATB was introduced I think most FF had a toggle for active or wait.

Edited, Jul 6th 2013 10:42am by sandpark
#10 Jul 06 2013 at 9:03 AM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
Thing is, in both XI and XIV, you're still swinging even if you're not actually hitting any of the actions buttons.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#11 Jul 06 2013 at 9:05 AM Rating: Default
Scholar
**
970 posts
Yes and they are still turn-based which is a good thing in my opinion. Smiley: grin
#12 Jul 06 2013 at 1:30 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
*
87 posts
I have no problem with turn-based games unless I don't know how to play it. FF X was one of my favorite games. I think he assumes FF XIV ARR is going to be turn based.
#13 Jul 06 2013 at 1:36 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
*
87 posts
I think many people have different interuptations of what type of battle system 13 is , I have basically explained why I think it is not. My dad isn't interested in playing XIII just because he doesn't think its turn based. Now I can tell the combat difference between XIII when you compare it to Call of Duty or Kingdom Hearts but XIII combat system isn't as slow as some might think.

Edited, Jul 6th 2013 3:41pm by IvanStine207
#14 Jul 06 2013 at 3:20 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,339 posts
IvanStine207 wrote:
I think many people have different interuptations of what type of battle system 13 is , I have basically explained why I think it is not. My dad isn't interested in playing XIII just because he doesn't think its turn based. Now I can tell the combat difference between XIII when you compare it to Call of Duty or Kingdom Hearts but XIII combat system isn't as slow as some might think.

Edited, Jul 6th 2013 3:41pm by IvanStine207


FFXIII is the same as FFIV-VIII -- it's ATB.

Frankly, despite how people want to argue this, your dad's right as it isn't turn based. However, neither are any of the ATB Final Fantasy games.

Turn based implies it happens outside of time and either it's individual or party issued commands before a turn is executed. Final Fantasy I-III are turn based, Dragon Quest is turn based, Lost Odyssey is turn based, FFX is turn based, Blue Dragon is turn based.... ATB isn't turn based. The Civilization series is another example of turn based even if it's not an RPG. Time has no meaning, only the order of turns.

ATB is a predecessor to MMO combat and despite what people want to argue TB does not mean turn based. ATB relies on your AGI/Speed rating while the GCD is defined by whichever MMO you choose. In both situations everything's in real time and thinking about doing something doesn't cause the enemy to stop moving. Yes, I'm aware you can activate "Wait" or even pause the game but the principle and design of the combat systems are entirely the same -- cooldown driven.

Turn based means time has no meaning in combat: only four of the Final Fantasy flagship titles uses this (I, II, III, and X). The rest are all evolutions of the various Time Based (notice, TIME based, not turn) combat systems be it ADB, CTB, ADB, or RTB. FFXIII (ADB) is nothing more than the usual ATB but combos can be stored up or you can go as soon as your cooldown's refreshed. Even Chrono Trigger's merely an evolution of ATB.

sandpark wrote:
Yes and they are still turn-based which is a good thing in my opinion. Smiley: grin


Except they're not.

Edited, Jul 6th 2013 5:21pm by Viertel
#15 Jul 06 2013 at 4:28 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
**
970 posts
Yes they are turn based Viertel. The character speed determines who goes first or last or who gets more turns. That means there is an order of turns aka turn-based. ATB has nothing to do with cooldowns. Cooldowns apply to skills not character speed. To say otherwise is to neglect auto attack speed. If that were the case you could take FFXI dragoon or monk and they would attack the same amount of times and at the same rate per 60 seconds.
#16 Jul 08 2013 at 5:15 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
**
970 posts
This link is to shed light on my discussion for the atb.
Watch the 2:53 mark when the creator Ito himself talks about the ADB.



http://www.1up.com/features/final-fantasy-hiroyuki-ito-science


Another interview with Minagawa, Ito's right hand man on later titles.




What are your thoughts on Final Fantasy as a series?
Minagawa:
It's about overdoing things.
It's a force of nature.
You can't sit back and build these games logically.
You have to throw caution to the wind.
You have to laugh at the absurdity of the task.
I think you can really feel the series as it's own force.


They are working on a big project which is not FFXV after all.
http://ffxvhome.com/2012/7/19/rumour-final-fantasy-xv-to-be-announced-this-year-information-explosion

Edited, Jul 8th 2013 7:17pm by sandpark
#17 Jul 08 2013 at 6:17 PM Rating: Excellent
Guru
***
1,310 posts
A "turn" is an ancient gaming concept going back to prehistoric times. It means a period of time where one player can perform one or more actions and no one else can (with some exceptions, of course), with the idea that when that turn ends, a new turn will start granting a new set of actions to another player (or even the same player if the rules call for it).

FFX is thoroughly turn-based. It's very clear when it is someone's turn, who's turn will be next, and even the monsters in that game wait for their turn in a rotation shared with the player characters.

Games of the ATB variety, like FFIV, are pseudo-turn-based in the sense that in a monster-versus-party battle, the participants on either team can only act one at a time even if they don't have to wait for the other team to move. I can't order Cecil to attack at the same time as Kain in FFIV, for example. Even if Kain is berserk and won't listen to commands, he can't act while Cecil is selecting his move on "his turn." And even the monsters you fight can't all attack simultaneously either. The fact that each team can "take turns" regardless of how often the other team is taking them is what blurs the turn-based concept.

So FFXI and FFXIV are clearly not turn-based. If a Monk and Warrior are fighting (each other or a mob, it doesn't matter), there's no point where it's "the Monk's turn" and the Warrior has to wait for that turn to end before she can do anything or even some things. Everyone acts completely independent of what anyone else is doing. Since there's no concept of "it's your turn" in FFXI and FFXIV combat, it can't possibly be turn-based.
#18 Jul 08 2013 at 6:43 PM Rating: Good
***
3,450 posts
I've only played 1 MMO that used turn-based combat... and that was in the days of dialup, so it was probably as much to account for unreasonable latency as it was a design choice.

I'm not sure why anyone would expect FFXIV to use turn-based combat.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#19 Jul 08 2013 at 6:47 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
972 posts
You have to wonder why Ito isn't working on Final Fantasy anymore considering he directed 6 and 9 which are my favorites.

Maybe he doesn't want to...? I don't know. The heck Square.

Wow. Nope. Ito says he would work on another Final Fantasy game but he hasn't been asked. Jesus. lol

Edited, Jul 8th 2013 8:48pm by Killua125
#20 Jul 08 2013 at 6:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Anterograde Amnesia
Avatar
*****
12,363 posts
Killua125 wrote:
You have to wonder why Ito isn't working on Final Fantasy anymore considering he directed 6 and 9 which are my favorites.

Maybe he doesn't want to...? I don't know. The heck Square.


For once we agree on something. I would rather see a remake of 9 before 7 any day Smiley: thumbsup
____________________________
"Choosy MMO's choose Wint." - Louiscool
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the world he didn't exist.
Keyser Soze - Ultros
Guide to Setting Up Mumble on a Raspberry Pi
#21 Jul 08 2013 at 6:51 PM Rating: Excellent
*
153 posts
Seriha wrote:
I'd argue a global cooldown imposes a turn limit for the duration of its activity, but hey, the guy wants to deprive himself of entertainment.

Part of why the old games were turn-based was because of system limitations. Even more action-y pseudo-fighter RPGs like the Tales started off as side-scrollers before jumping into 3D planes for combat, kind of like how Mortal Kombat and Street Fighter was before 3D arenas became more of a thing, too.

Suppose this just leads me to the old argument that real RPG fans don't care about stuff like graphics or game mechanics as long as there's a good story. I don't quite agree, as eyesores and terrible combat do turn me off, but I guess as someone who grew up on FF1 and earlier, I'm more tolerant of "dated" gameplay. And ultimately, this rejection sounds like it's coming from someone under the age of 18.


Just because gameplay is more modern doesn't necessarily mean it's better... give me a dated game with an awesome story and "dated" battle system any day over a button smasher with flashy graphics that has a crap story...

Unfortunately, recently more often than not game developers don't see it like this...

Edited, Jul 8th 2013 9:00pm by ClydesShadow
#22 Jul 08 2013 at 7:10 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
972 posts
Too bad they couldn't get Ito to help with ARR's combat system. He created the ATB system and the job change system to begin with. He seems like he has a very good idea of what makes battle systems FUN. He designed Tactics' battle system too. I wonder how in the world he isn't getting work if he wants to be involved with FF again.

Wint wrote:
Killua125 wrote:
You have to wonder why Ito isn't working on Final Fantasy anymore considering he directed 6 and 9 which are my favorites.

Maybe he doesn't want to...? I don't know. The heck Square.


For once we agree on something. I would rather see a remake of 9 before 7 any day Smiley: thumbsup


6 and 9 are my favorites but I think 7 would benefit the most from a remake... if that makes sense.

Edited, Jul 8th 2013 9:13pm by Killua125
#23 Jul 08 2013 at 7:12 PM Rating: Excellent
****
4,153 posts
Killua125 wrote:
Wow. Nope. Ito says he would work on another Final Fantasy game but he hasn't been asked.


There is no palm large enough to be applied to the face of the gaming industry on this one...
____________________________
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.
#24 Jul 08 2013 at 7:13 PM Rating: Good
***
3,450 posts
Killua125 wrote:
Too bad they couldn't get Ito to help with ARR's combat system. He created the ATB system and the job change system to begin with. He seems like he has a very good idea of what makes battle systems FUN. He designed Tactics' battle system too. I wonder how in the world he isn't getting work if he wants to be involved with FF again.

Edited, Jul 8th 2013 9:11pm by Killua125


He did do a good job with those... they're also WAAAAAAY too slow for an MMO. Work great for single-player RPGs though.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#25 Jul 08 2013 at 7:15 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
972 posts
He also directed and created the battle system for Final Fantasy XII which basically seems like an MMORPG battle system.

I wasn't proposing that he make it exactly like IX and VI? I'm sure he's perfectly capable of making a battle system that would work for an MMO

Edited, Jul 8th 2013 9:16pm by Killua125
#26 Jul 08 2013 at 7:21 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
970 posts
He did not make the XI combat system. He actually consulted with Matsui during the ADB implementation.
#27 Jul 08 2013 at 7:28 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
972 posts
I didn't say he did.
#28 Jul 08 2013 at 7:30 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
970 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Killua125 wrote:
Too bad they couldn't get Ito to help with ARR's combat system. He created the ATB system and the job change system to begin with. He seems like he has a very good idea of what makes battle systems FUN. He designed Tactics' battle system too. I wonder how in the world he isn't getting work if he wants to be involved with FF again.

Edited, Jul 8th 2013 9:11pm by Killua125


He did do a good job with those... they're also WAAAAAAY too slow for an MMO. Work great for single-player RPGs though.

Quickness of combat is less important to me than depth. Give me the deepest option in the fastest system and I like it. Give me the deepest combat in a slower system and I like it.
#29 Jul 08 2013 at 9:10 PM Rating: Good
***
3,450 posts
sandpark wrote:
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Killua125 wrote:
Too bad they couldn't get Ito to help with ARR's combat system. He created the ATB system and the job change system to begin with. He seems like he has a very good idea of what makes battle systems FUN. He designed Tactics' battle system too. I wonder how in the world he isn't getting work if he wants to be involved with FF again.

Edited, Jul 8th 2013 9:11pm by Killua125


He did do a good job with those... they're also WAAAAAAY too slow for an MMO. Work great for single-player RPGs though.

Quickness of combat is less important to me than depth. Give me the deepest option in the fastest system and I like it. Give me the deepest combat in a slower system and I like it.


Depth is important, for sure. But can we at least agree that sluggish combat is not the best fit for an MMO?
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#30 Jul 08 2013 at 9:32 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
972 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:
sandpark wrote:
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Killua125 wrote:
Too bad they couldn't get Ito to help with ARR's combat system. He created the ATB system and the job change system to begin with. He seems like he has a very good idea of what makes battle systems FUN. He designed Tactics' battle system too. I wonder how in the world he isn't getting work if he wants to be involved with FF again.

Edited, Jul 8th 2013 9:11pm by Killua125


He did do a good job with those... they're also WAAAAAAY too slow for an MMO. Work great for single-player RPGs though.

Quickness of combat is less important to me than depth. Give me the deepest option in the fastest system and I like it. Give me the deepest combat in a slower system and I like it.


Depth is important, for sure. But can we at least agree that sluggish combat is not the best fit for an MMO?


There's actually zero evidence to support the idea that a MMORPG's combat system needs to be faster than a single player combat system. There isn't even any evidence to support the idea that a turn-based system like FF9 wouldn't work with a MMO. In fact there are a few smaller MMORPGs which do have turn-based systems and they work quit well. At the very least those combat systems are more fun than whatever ARR has going on.

You're making the same mistake that Yoshi-P is making in your thinking. "Just because it's not like WoW, it's not fit for an MMO." The global standard is a lie. Think outside the box a little

I wasn't even really suggesting that the combat system should be slow, but slow doesn't equal bad, for sure. ARR's combat is "fast", but it sucks.

Edited, Jul 8th 2013 11:34pm by Killua125
#31 Jul 08 2013 at 9:43 PM Rating: Good
***
3,450 posts
Quote:
There's actually zero evidence to support the idea that a MMORPG's combat system needs to be faster than a single player combat system. There isn't even any evidence to support the idea that a turn-based system like FF9 wouldn't work with a MMO. In fact there are a few smaller MMORPGs which do have turn-based systems and they work quit well. At the very least those combat systems are more fun than whatever ARR has going on.


Well...FF9 doesn't have a turn-based system... it uses ATB, which is not the same thing. Consider too that in ATB systems in single-player games, you're given as much time as you're given because you're managing 3-5 party members yourself. In an MMO you're managing 1. You would get bored out of your skull if you had to wait 5-10 seconds between all your actions. I realize it doesn't SOUND like a long time, but it is, and it'd add up.

Like I said above I've only ever played 1 MMO that used a turn-based system, that was The Realm Online, back in the mid 90s. While I've never heard of another MMO that did that, it could certainly have happened. If you'd like to recommend one that did it well, I'd be happy to check it out.

Quote:
You're making the same mistake that Yoshi-P is making in your thinking. "Just because it's not like WoW, it's not fit for an MMO." The global standard is a lie.


It's really not. Please consider that when WoW was brand new, it wasn't even original. It took aspects of existing contemporary games that it liked and tweaked them to make the game more friendly to solo players. At the time, the idea of doing something solo in an MMO was pretty nuts, and keeping people on the grind for as long as possible was the mission statement of the era.

WoW's model has been copied and iterated on a whole bunch since then. Many direct clones have fallen away, a few that innovated well have stuck around. The global standard, as you call it, is what's come out of that evolution. Things like actionbars, WASD-based movement, trackable quests, and solo leveling content.

Combat was not one of those things. Combat is actually something virtually everyone has done differently, each in their own way. WoW combat is not the same as GW2 combat is not the same as Secret World combat. They're all different, even if they did come from the same root (Everquest). XIV has its own style of combat too, a little on the slower side, but with an emphasis on skill combos and party dynamics (the limit break system here is unique in my experience). Could it do what it does better? Absolutely. And with time it very well might. But it's got a good beginning and a clear direction to grow in.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#32 Jul 08 2013 at 10:34 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
970 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Quote:
There's actually zero evidence to support the idea that a MMORPG's combat system needs to be faster than a single player combat system. There isn't even any evidence to support the idea that a turn-based system like FF9 wouldn't work with a MMO. In fact there are a few smaller MMORPGs which do have turn-based systems and they work quit well. At the very least those combat systems are more fun than whatever ARR has going on.


Well...FF9 doesn't have a turn-based system... it uses ATB, which is not the same thing. Consider too that in ATB systems in single-player games, you're given as much time as you're given because you're managing 3-5 party members yourself. In an MMO you're managing 1. You would get bored out of your skull if you had to wait 5-10 seconds between all your actions. I realize it doesn't SOUND like a long time, but it is, and it'd add up.

Like I said above I've only ever played 1 MMO that used a turn-based system, that was The Realm Online, back in the mid 90s. While I've never heard of another MMO that did that, it could certainly have happened. If you'd like to recommend one that did it well, I'd be happy to check it out.

Quote:
You're making the same mistake that Yoshi-P is making in your thinking. "Just because it's not like WoW, it's not fit for an MMO." The global standard is a lie.


It's really not. Please consider that when WoW was brand new, it wasn't even original. It took aspects of existing contemporary games that it liked and tweaked them to make the game more friendly to solo players. At the time, the idea of doing something solo in an MMO was pretty nuts, and keeping people on the grind for as long as possible was the mission statement of the era.

WoW's model has been copied and iterated on a whole bunch since then. Many direct clones have fallen away, a few that innovated well have stuck around. The global standard, as you call it, is what's come out of that evolution. Things like actionbars, WASD-based movement, trackable quests, and solo leveling content.

Combat was not one of those things. Combat is actually something virtually everyone has done differently, each in their own way. WoW combat is not the same as GW2 combat is not the same as Secret World combat. They're all different, even if they did come from the same root (Everquest). XIV has its own style of combat too, a little on the slower side, but with an emphasis on skill combos and party dynamics (the limit break system here is unique in my experience). Could it do what it does better? Absolutely. And with time it very well might. But it's got a good beginning and a clear direction to grow in.

Yeah we can agree sluggish combat is not wanted or the initial release of XIV wouldn't have removed the stamina system. I'm going to comment on ATB in an mmo and it is not that I think it's better or wanted by me. An ATB could work without being too slow if the job system centered around changing jobs on the fly with no restrictions like X-2. ARR could pull this off if they capped all dungeons or endgame content to 4-8 members. But then the question would be.

Would that really be an mmo with no 16+ man raids?

I think pretty much anything could be soloed if was one was skilled enough.

I think I prefer ATB or turn-based to stay in my offline rpgs. Maybe XVI could have an online endgame like WTC has, I don't know.
#33 Jul 08 2013 at 11:03 PM Rating: Default
****
4,957 posts
Stilivan wrote:
Now my question to you and your friend is: What's wrong with a turned based game? We really can't give you an explanation if your friend is being dumb.



its teh ssme thing/excuse that EVERYONE gives...

"those games are stupid.. you just stand still and take turns hitting eachother.. who fights like that?"
#34 Jul 08 2013 at 11:48 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
*
121 posts
DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
Stilivan wrote:
Now my question to you and your friend is: What's wrong with a turned based game? We really can't give you an explanation if your friend is being dumb.



its teh ssme thing/excuse that EVERYONE gives...

"those games are stupid.. you just stand still and take turns hitting eachother.. who fights like that?"

Typically your Dex or Agility in other FF games determines when your turn comes up. Turn based is just a different type of strategy. I guess I can see why some people don't like to be made to wait, but that's what makes you have to be more mindful of your actions. I like anything with combos/chains, or button sequences (Sabin!)

Edited, Jul 9th 2013 1:54am by ErikHighwind
____________________________
[img]http://xivreborn.com/gen/Erik_Highwind_Coeurl_Classes.jpg[/img]
#35 Jul 09 2013 at 8:52 AM Rating: Default
I asked a friend why people don't like ff-fanboys he said that:
*ff-fanboys think that think ff is the best game (not true as most gamers have not 1 favourite since it's hard to compare different types of game)
*ff-fanboys are rude when someone tells why they don't like something in a game. (I have seen many of those in ffxiv beta testing forums and even due that does not speak for them all it does give the aspect.)

He also said that all ff games are the same because of the you don't aim and they all turned based.
But because a game is turned based does not make it a bad game.

Edited, Jul 9th 2013 10:53am by GelbeDattelwein
#36 Jul 09 2013 at 8:58 AM Rating: Good
***
3,450 posts
GelbeDattelwein wrote:
I asked a friend why people don't like ff-fanboys he said that:
*ff-fanboys think that think ff is the best game (not true as most gamers have not 1 favourite since it's hard to compare different types of game)
*ff-fanboys are rude when someone tells why they don't like something in a game. (I have seen many of those in ffxiv beta testing forums and even due that does not speak for them all it does give the aspect.)

He also said that all ff games are the same because of the you don't aim and they all turned based.
But because a game is turned based does not make it a bad game.

Edited, Jul 9th 2013 10:53am by GelbeDattelwein


Sounds like he really has an open mind about it too.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#37 Jul 09 2013 at 8:58 AM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
You don't "aim" because it's not a first person shooter.

That doesn't mean you can't miss, or be too far away or too close or a variety of other things. It just means they simplify things a **** of a lot by having a target lock on.

Edited, Jul 9th 2013 10:59am by Catwho
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#38 Jul 09 2013 at 10:57 AM Rating: Good
Sage
*
139 posts
Catwho wrote:
You don't "aim" because it's not a first person shooter.

That doesn't mean you can't miss, or be too far away or too close or a variety of other things. It just means they simplify things a **** of a lot by having a target lock on.

Edited, Jul 9th 2013 10:59am by Catwho


Not to mention from what I've heard of the THM limitbreak and likely other higher up spells, you do have to aim some things.
#39 Jul 10 2013 at 10:31 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,658 posts
IvanStine207 wrote:
Now I talk to someone on World of Warcraft about Final Fantasy games and he is more of a Kingdom Hearts fan and he says he doesn't play Final Fantasy that much because he claims its turned base but he has only played Final Fantasy Crisis Core and a little bit of FF XIII-1 which I can assume is very turn-based. Now I know there are turn-based games in Final Fantasy like Final Fantasy Tactics and X. FF 10 seems to be as turn-based as the series could get. When I think of turn based games, chess comes in mind. The person also thinks FF XIII is a turn-based game which confuses me. The battle system in FF XIII-1 seems more like a active time battle system due to the fact that pace action is really fast. In other words you wait for a bar to fill up and once it gets past a certain point you will be able to attack the enemy and if you do nothing you would get slaughtered by the enemy since they will continue to go regardless of whether you select your commands or not. I told him this but he never responded or created any argument to explain to me why it is a turn-based game. I also asked Trade Chat due to the amount of people there but no one seemed interested to respond. It's kind of annoying how I'm not getting an explanation, especially if its just ignorance coming out of people who have maybe played the game series only once like a 7-10 years ago?


I like kingdom hearts better than FF series. I didn't like FF at all till I played FFXI... I like the FF mmo's for some reason over the other mmo's. suikoden was my favorite rpg... I know I have odd tastes.



Edited, Jul 10th 2013 12:33pm by Nashred
____________________________
FFXI: Nashred
Server: Phoenix

FFXIV : Sir Nashred
server: Ultros
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 82 All times are in CST
Callinon, Anonymous Guests (81)