Final Fantasy 7 Remake Undergoes A Big Development Change

[Ealyssa]

Are they still planning to release it episodic?

Selling one of the most awaited game ever in multiple part instead of one ? Hell yeah they gonna do it, it's Square-Enix.

[Ehrenpanzer]

That's if FF16 is even in development yet. Between FF7,KH3 and any other titles they got in the pipeline its highly likely they don't have FF16 out of concept yet.

Sure they do, FF16: A new Hope, followed by FF17: Lightning Strikes back and finally FF18: Return of Jecht

[Tech614]

It's not just that, they also mostly remember how those games made them feel like at the time…. when they were 10 or 20 years younger.

Also when they where broke kids who only got games purchased a few times a year by their parents so they had to make games last and find ways to continue to play them and have fun with their imagination.

Nostalgia is a hell of a drug, especially when it's from your younger years of life.

[Cæli]

Neither I am wrong nor it’s dangerous to shit at all, it’s just as it is.

As I said, it might feel less unique to YOU, exactly because as I mentioned, you had way less diversity, less to pick from, on top of that gaming was fairly more expensive than it is nowadays, therefore you would embrace every title like it was the best shit ever… not only you didn’t knew better, but you also couldn’t be much picky since there wasn’t much to pick from.

Nowadays the technology behind it is far more advanced and due the video gaming popularity the budgets behind some titles are just insanely huge, the only thing that could be better from older titles is the stories, but even that you need to focus into really specific titles, because most of popular ones didn’t even had much of a story to begin with…

If nowadays video games don’t make YOU feel as excited as they used to, it’s not really the games fault.

more budget doesn't really mean more genius as seen in the last 10 years
really I don't know why you bring up technology, technology will never make a good game, felt like I spoke in vain

give an orchestra to someone with no talent, give a crappy snes chip to a genius, don't tell me the orchestra will produce a better result it is wrong, what matters is the actual genius, not the means of production

[Tech614]

more budget doesn't really mean more genius as seen in the last 10 years
really I don't know why you bring up technology, technology will never make a good game, felt like I spoke in vain

give an orchestra to someone with no talent, give a crappy snes chip to a genius, don't tell me the orchestra will produce a better result it is wrong, what matters is the actual genius, not the means of production

Last 10 years? Some of the best games of all time have been released in the last 10 years.

[Cæli]

Last 10 years? Some of the best games of all time have been released in the last 10 years.

some very good games have been released yes but budget have nothing to do with it, give 10M to someone with no talent, he won't grow genius magically

[Tech614]

some very good games have been released yes but budget have nothing to do with it, give 10M to someone with no talent, he won't grow genius magically

Budget means nothing? GTAV has probably the largest dev budget ever(note dev budget only, not dev+marketing) and it is objectively the highest quality game ever made(from the things we can actually measure, not opinions). Every area is unique, no building is used twice, thousands of different ped models, every road with unique pot holes, every patch of grass grows differently.

Claiming budget has nothing to do with the quality of a game just shows your ignorance. You can make good and even great games on a low budget, but they're always going to be lacking in scale, density and immersion.

It's also hilarious you're acting like high budget games are some new phenomenon when they have existed since the mid 90s. Shocker, some of the highest budget games of that era are also considered some of the best FFVII, MGS, RE2.

A good or great game can always be made better with a higher budget. That is a fact. More money = more unique models, more features, better animations, better bug testing, better optimization, higher quality art work, should I go on?

Bad games with high budgets does not magically make this false.

[Cæli]

Budget means nothing? GTAV has probably the largest dev budget ever(note dev budget only, not dev+marketing) and it is objectively the highest quality game ever made(from the things we can actually measure, not opinions). Every area is unique, no building is used twice, thousands of different ped models, every road with unique pot holes, every patch of grass grows differently.

Claiming budget has nothing to do with the quality of a game just shows your ignorance. You can make good and even great games on a low budget, but they're always going to be lacking in scale, density and immersion.

It's also hilarious you're acting like high budget games are some new phenomenon when they have existed since the mid 90s. Shocker, some of the highest budget games of that era are also considered some of the best FFVII, MGS, RE2.

A good or great game can always be made better with a higher budget. That is a fact. More money = more unique models, more features, better animations, better bug testing, better optimization, higher quality art work, should I go on?

Bad games with high budgets does not magically make this false.

I didn't said budget means nothing. without genius a game is not interesting. of course genius + budget is better. don't tell me I'm ignorant and read me before saying this please.

a game with low budget and genius is better than a game with high budget and no genius.

[Tech614]

I didn't said budget means nothing. without genius a game is not interesting. of course genius + budget is better. don't tell me I'm ignorant and read me before saying this please.

a game with low budget and genius is better than a game with high budget and no genius.

Who arbitrarily decides what games have "geniuses" behind them? You? Your entire argument is bunk and you're trying to run in a circle but you're already out of breath.

[Cæli]

Who arbitrarily decides what games have "geniuses" behind them? You? Your entire argument is bunk and you're trying to run in a circle but you're already out of breath.

what is your point ? genius/talent makes better games compared to game makers with none of that let's not waste our time to debate on this because it's a fact

[Silversorrow]

i lost interest in the remake once they revealed it would be real time combat instead of turn based. and their "it's our franchise, we can do what we want" response to the people who didn't like that.

100% my thoughts exactly!

[Super Kami Dende]

Never. /10char

If they can remake the pile of shit that is 7. I can hold onto hope.. Hell even the god awful 12 is getting a remaster.

[DesMephisto]

Well, rip this game. FF13 is the worse FF to ever be made.

[Tech614]

what is your point ? genius/talent makes better games compared to game makers with none of that let's not waste our time to debate on this because it's a fact

Once again who gets to arbitrarily decide who is a genius or talented? You?

There are talented people that get stuck working on shit games, there are also talent less hacks who sometimes get credited on masterpieces. Your argument is non nonsensical because on 50-200 man dev teams not everyone is talented, nor is everyone bad. It's amazing that I have to point this out to you.

Also some food for thought to you, someone who is a "genius" can have a brilliant idea for a game and it just doesn't come together in the final product for any number of reasons. Peter Molyneux, I'm looking at you.

Unless you think we live in this perfect world where everyone who works on a game is either an idiot or Einstein, which seems to be the case you can pretty much give up.

Your original argument was that modern games are bad and now you're bringing up shit that doesn't even make sense because you got ran out of town.

[Cæli]

Once again who gets to arbitrarily decide who is a genius or talented? You?
There are talented people that get stuck working on shit games, there are also talent less hacks who sometimes get credited on masterpieces. Your argument is non nonsensical because on 50-200 man dev teams not everyone is talented, nor is everyone bad. It's amazing that I have to point this out to you.

Unless you think we live in this perfect world where everyone who works on a game is either an idiot or Einstein, which seems to be the case you can pretty much give up. Your original argument was that modern games are bad and now you're bringing up shit that doesn't even make sense because you got ran out of town.

my original argument was not that modern games are bad, I said there is less genius and creativity overall
to decide who is a genius or talented, I think we should seek a consensus of persons with experience, so a specialized platform/website that gather opinions and votes would be fine for that I guess

you try to explain how genius/talent doesn't make better video games ? that's a waste of time
genius exists, fact, my opinion has no relevance on that. maybe you can make a link between genius and creativity well you certainly realized that the need to make profit in this now huge industry means you can't take creative risks like that, so most companies caters to what people expect and doesn't make exceptional games as often as they used to, we need more risk, more creativity, and in my opinion in today's industry there is less genius who can match those who worked earlier at their prime, persons like nobuo uematsu, koji kondo, Sakaguchi, I believe that the amount of creativity per person is limited and those creators said most of what they wanted to say, and nowadays I hardly see any persons matching their genius.
don't tell me FF15 is better than earlier FF, that the spirit of the video games is the same, it is wrong, the industry is growing in the wrong direction, and there's a reason why so many indie games get success, or why big developers like nintendo get so much love (not sure what to think about the last zelda yet, literally everyone praise it), people want them to succeed and keep driving the industry in the right direction like they used to.

like I said when a game has genius in it it's a better game than when there is not, the flesh of the game, the creativity, how good the artists are, how the gameplay and the flesh work together, making a good game is not an accident, you need actual talent to succeed. else you end up with a game with "no soul". I'm sure you already heard about that.

please don't tell me that I bring things that doesn't even make sense, you will need to quote what doesn't make sense so I can see if I'm wrong or if you're just stuck in a loop wasting our time and trying to dismiss whatever I say because your brain ordered you to do so, please think about the actual points before going offensive.

I say that there were more better game before, and I'm not the only one to think so, is there a recent game you love to death that prevents you to think otherwise ? I never said there is no good games anymore.

I think we're wasting our time, better to stop on that subject.

Technology is what makes a game, good or bad, the more advanced it is, the better the quality it may achieve, the budget takes a huge part on that as well, it doesn’t automatically makes it a good product but it gives it a better chance to be so, easy as that.

Also most of these “genius” you speak of didn’t evaporate in this last couple of decades, they are still there making video games or leading teams and even entire companies. In fact, due the increase of video gaming popularity bringing more people into the business, statistically you should have even more of these “genius” out there than ever before…

… again, we can keep going in circles all day long, truth is the problem here doesn’t have much to do with the quality of the games at all, you just can’t seriously hope to get that magical feeling that makes you all wet forever with every purchase, you, just like everyone else, have grown older, more accustomated and more demanding…

I think there is a limited amount of creativity per persons, mozart can write maybe x composition, at some point it will end up being redundant, that's what I believe. miyamoto can't keep creating new characters like mario and link, else he would have done that already. it's up to newer generations to live up to the success of those who came earlier. but they haven't succeeded yet.

[Cæli]

Lol, are you for real? A genius expiration date… sounds legit ~

… and who are you exactly to say they have succeeded or not? They supposedly didn’t just because YOU aren’t pleased enough with the feeling you get from playing their games? Sight ~ I’m done here, this is becoming beyond ridiculous now.

well I believe it's harder and harder to come up with new idea so you're kind of limited, you have a prime where you're prolific and you slow down, doesn't that match what we are seing among the most known creators ?

I base what I say on my experience (I started gaming in 1993) and on players opinion on interesting gaming websites such as https://www.gamefaqs.com/games/ranki...=1&min_votes=1 and https://www.senscritique.com/jeuxvideo/tops/top111 (ignore the top 3 it is inflated by hype it'll change over the years)

so no, it's not me. you don't have to dismiss anything people say there because you think they're clueless. the possibility that I'm right exists and the number of players thinking like me makes me think that I'm reaching the consensus.

[Cæli]

Yeah, I'll ignore whatever is convenient for you ~ considering that many of those reviews were made after over a decade after the games released, shall I also ignore what I just said about nostalgia and whatnot?

Also, don’t put words on my mouth, I haven’t called anyone clueless, I simply pointed out that comparing games from two decades ago with the ones nowadays as a whole is pretty unreasonable, not only because of the shit that I already mentioned such as the tech and budgets differences that allow developers nowadays to provide us much more than they were limited with back in the “good ol days”, but also because the diversity that I mentioned before, decades ago was much easier to come up with “original” ideas because gaming was a pretty new thing to all of us, it’s starts becoming harder and harder with the years.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m don’t entirely disagree with those reviews, they were AMAZING games, IF you take the date they were made into consideration ~ now saying that games back then are simply better than the ones nowadays and that reviews back that up placing them in higher rankings by giving them 10/10 for reasons such as “it’s a classic!”… I mean, c’mon…

the games can and should be compared. if we don't do this we could end up with less and less exceptional games. to begin with technology can hardly make 2d games better. the best 2d games are still hardly matched nowadays, and not because almost everything is 3d. a good idea or a good music, or a good atmosphere is not tied with technology or the year of release.

we should just accept that a game can be exceptional no matter the year of release. and we should not forget those games, we should make newer generations know about noteworthy games. after all we witnessed the birth of video game which alone is something incredible when we think about it. masterpieces exists regardless of technology. and a game is not just gameplay.

[Tech614]

https://www.senscritique.com/jeuxvideo/tops/top111 (ignore the top 3 it is inflated by hype it'll change over the years)

(Ignore what doesn't fit my argument when I link something before reading it)

4 of the top 5 games came out post 2012. Much LULZ, thanks for the laughs bro.

[Cæli]

I didn’t say you can’t compare them, I said that comparing them as a whole is pretty unreasonable. Generalizing the games by the date they were released and say those are better than these is in my opinion pretty silly, however I see no issue into comparing specific titles as long as the implications behind the dates they were made are also taken into account…

Stuff like… “Games back in dah gud ol’days were superior to the ones nowadays!”, or “Dragon Age II is better than Chrono Trigger because it’s has better graphics, sound quality and combat!” or even “Pong is far more original than any of these damn call of poopys!”, it’s just… meh.

Though I entirely agree that games can be exceptional no matter the age, which is part of the point here… you had amazing games decades ago, and you still have them now and you’ll keep having them, they just might be harder to find due the increased amount, and they might never, ever make you feel like you felt back when you were just a kid, but they still do exist.

a game can be better even if it's older; if you have exceptional "unknown" games, I'm really, really interested and would like to hear. but I even browse steam greenlight, steam, and every new games that is covered by news video game website, little luck so far.

- - - Updated - - -

(Ignore what doesn't fit my argument when I link something before reading it)

4 of the top 5 games came out post 2012. Much LULZ, thanks for the laughs bro.

check this ranking and see that the consensus is games were better in quality before
I told you to ignore the top 3 because as a regular user of this site since years, I know that the recent games got inflated rating due to the hype. nier automata top 3 ? yeah sounds legit
or just check gamefaqs but that other site ranking is really interesting

[unfilteredJW]

I played the original and love that they are doing it differently, as I already played the original.