Double Jeopardy - March 31st, 2000 - Chris Jones
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this column are those of
the participants and the moderator, and do not necessarily reflect those of the GIA. There
is coarse language and potentially offensive material afoot. My first time away from you
all... I don't know if I can do it! Don't say we didn't warn you.
Little disappointed about the Tokyo Game Show this year. No real knockout games that I've
seen so far, but then, it's not like I'm actually there or anything. If there's anything
of real interest it's Square's Play Online plans, and for once I'm worried instead of
pleased about the direction Square wants to go with Final Fantasy. While I might, might
plop down money to play FFXI if it upholds the Final Fantasy name, I can't see paying for
Play Online plus FFXI. Unless, of course, they brought other prime Square franchises under
the PO umbrella... hmm. If you added Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy Tactics online
games, you might really have something.
Another thought, if we're going to pay for PO and to play a specific game, perhaps
Square should look at changing the economic model a bit. If it's charging, say, $20 a
month for PO and another $10 a month on top of that for FF, then it's overkill to make us
pay $50 for the game itself, right? CDs are dirt cheap to manufacture, what if they gave
away FFXI? More users, more money for them, and it's a chance to overcome people's fears
about moving FF online - if you like it, you keep playing and paying, if not, then you're
just out the trial fee. Hmm. I like this idea.
At any rate, I'm not the only one pontificating about the future of Final Fantasy
today, so let's get this show on the road.
| You're wrong! Wrong, Wrong, Wrong! Maybe. |
| Regarding this: .....As for Square and Nintendo breaking up, I don't
know the exact details, but the release of Super Mario RPG, Square's last game for the
SNES, seems as good a milestone as any. And that date was (drumroll please...) May, 1996!
Thank you, thank you very much!.....
I could be wrong, but wasn't Treasure Hunter G the last game that Square made for
Nintendo?
Chad |
The research I've been able to do suggests your answer is correct, as Square's own
Japanese website lists Super Mario RPG released for the Super Famicom on 3/9/96, and
Treasure Hunter G released on 5/24/96. Ironically enough, this doesn't change my original
answer of 5/96, but thanks for playing! We have some lovely parting gifts for you.
Also, all those of you who read Japanese, or are at least smart enough to use a
hiragana/katakana translation table might be interested in this. It lists the exact Japanese
publication date of just about every game Square's ever published, straight from the
source. You'll have to have your browser configured for Japanese text though, and please
don't ask us how to do that. Of course, there's no sane reason why anybody should need
this info, but hey, we're all about pointless obsessions here at DA.
| Actually, DA is all about total ambiguity |
| I was going to write out a lot of long and interesting expositions about
why Xenogears is nowhere near the caliber of great art, and why that guy is right about
people liking FF4, and all sorts of other crap. But you know what? Screw it. You're
already going to get 500 million letters on these damn things. Drew did this too, it's
annoying to me, and it's a well-established scientific fact that I am more important than
anyone else. It just doesn't seem like a good idea to post letters encouraging heated
debate on a letters column...but if you do, it'd be best if you could only put up one
thing capable of spawning intelligent discussion per day, and the rest could be
nonsensical things by IanP and stuff about hamsters. That way people only have one thing
to think about at any given time, and can focus their thoughts more effectively on the
particular topic, without having to pick and choose which are more appropriate. We need
sweeping change in letters columns today. Well, okay, this letters column. I don't
actually read any others. See, the great thing about this letter is that depending on
what you consider to be sarcastic and what not, it could be interpereted as a defense of
or attack on any aspect of DA. |
Hey, you're right, your letter is open to interpretation! Wide open! You can pull
almost anything out of that mess, and you'd be right! Because it's art! Your letter is the
Citizen Kane of video game letters column submissions, unnamed artist! Congratulations! I
salute you!
| Your daily recommended dose of intelligent
commentary |
| Hello, my name is Jeremy and I like to beat topics into the ground. |
ALL: Hi, Jeremy! (The Topic Beaters Anonymous meeting continues...)
| If I may, I'd like to interject an (absolutely subjective, possibly
unfounded, totally personal) opinion into this Xenogears vs. Citizen Kane thing. Besides
the fact that people are comparing Xenogears to the wrong work of cinema (think cruel
angel's thesis here), I think it's a bit silly to compare games to movies by judging the
same aspects. Games aren't movies, and you'll never find a game that tries to be a movie
(or a book, or a play) which succeeds in capturing as wide an audience as it would were it
simply a movie (or a book, or a play). "Perhaps the same could be said of all
media," sneers Dracula. And in this case, his words AREN'T as empty as his soul. A
radio play that transpires like a book - a lot of words with no inflection, leaving all
verbal expression up to the audience's imagination - would suck. A movie that unfolds
on-screen like a theatrical production would be terribly dull, because theatrical plays
are created to be performed live with the audience sitting in a fixed position. Movies can
incorporate dynamic camera tricks, special effects, location changes and post-production
fixes that simply cannot be done with a live performance (no matter how Andrew Lloyd
Webber may try). As noted before, that's why Citizen Kane has been so enduring; it was the
first movie to really demonstrate the potential of film as something other than a
recording of people performing a play. And it influenced almost everything in its wake.
Now look at the games people have touted as being true examples of demonstrating
gaming's merit - Xenogears, Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy VIII, Silent Hill, etc.
Personally, I feel all of those fall desperately short, because ultimately, those try
simply to ape movies with some concessions given to the idea of interactivity. Yes, it's
very interesting to watch them, but there's little about them that's going to compel a
casual audience to jump into the medium and stay. They might be attracted by some of the
cinemas, but when they get bogged down by 30 minutes of scrolling text or 3-minute spell
animations they're going to realize "This isn't worth the effort - I'd rather be
watching a movie instead of getting to see little movie bits doled out as a reward for
playing some stupid video game."
If you ask me (and you didn't, but I'm sure you would have if email were more
interactive), the games which can best be compared to benchmark films like Citizen Kane
are the games that enable people to do something they can't in any other medium - because
these are the games which truly pull people in. Games that people who don't normally like
video games will play. Things like Bust-A-Move/Puzzle Bobble, Tetris, Parappa the Rapper -
these are titles which I have seen non-gamers pick up and refuse to hand over the
controller. On the other hand, these same people would simply prefer to *watch* me play
titles like MGS and FFVIII - "Let me know when you get to the good part." Well,
if someone would rather watch a game than play it, it's a better movie than a game, and
certainly doesn't do much to show the true potential of gaming as a medium... merely the
potential of games to mimic film.
Movie-like games are fun for me as a long-time gamer, because it's great to see this
added element of sophistication in what used to be scorned as a kid's hobby. But they've
got a long way to go before they're something other than B-grade sci-fi/fantasy/action
movie plots shoehorned into sometimes-questionable gameplay. When a game as simple and
addictive as Bust-A-Move 3 manages to get inside my brain like The Shawshank Redemption,
then we'll have our Citizen Kane of gaming.
Verbosely yours,
J. Parish |
What he said, yeah. Regardless of whether we're talking objective or subjective, art or
crap, good or bad, that reasoning just plain makes sense, and leaves me at a loss for
words for once. Moving on...
| Death of a Pomeranian |
| Ruff ruf ruffruff ruffff! Ruff ruff ruf ruf rrrrruff!! Grrrrrrrrr! -Fluffy
|
"Helen paused. With an audible 'wumph,' Fluffy's familiar yipping had ended, and
only the sounds of Chris' Front Mission 3 game now emanated from the living room."
-slight paraphrase of Gary Larson from "The Far Side", wisdom from the
master
| Square is the devil, but you already knew that |
| Ever since Square announced that FFXI was going to be a totally online
game, I've had a wait-and-see type of attitude. Up till now, there hadn't been much
information released about the game and so even though I didn't like the idea, I knew I
could not judge how it might be like. It might be different, perhaps? Maybe Square would
try to revalutionize the online rpg? But today the GIA provided some very disturbing news,
and a very bad sign. Here's pretty much what we know so far about FFXI. As the GIA
officially reported today, "Square stated that 'PlayOnline is not the Internet,' but
a more Compuserve-like separate network which will require a monthly fee. Final Fantasy XI
will require another monthly fee on top of that, and there is no single-player component
planned at all. The stated aim of the network is to 'create more enjoyable games with the
use of advanced technology.'" We also know that the whole idea of FFXI and Play
Online were inspired by Everquest as said so in an interview with Sakaguchi. An inspiring
new advancement in online rpgs? I'm afraid not. A huge disaster? I'm afraid so. Again, I
can't judge from this point in time how FFXI will play or how well it pulls off a FF
online rpg. Actually, a open forum for me to assume any character of my choosing from the
Final Fantasy's of old sounds like it could be a blast for a while. O, if it were only
that simple, though.
Whether or not the game is fun is not the point here. People who play console rpgs do
so because that's the type of formula they like. Story and linearity being the strongest
point of their game. People who like online rpgs (and PC-rpgs in the majority) tend to
favor the formula of gameplay and non-linearity as the strongest points in their games.
The two arguably are two different genres.
Doesn't Square realize that most gamers bought Final Fantasy VIII not only because of
the name but also because that name promised to deliver the type of console rpg style that
the FF games are known by? If the audience Square is trying to attract is that of PC
rpg-ers then that's all fine and good. But don't they realize that they're turning off all
console rpg-ers at the same time? Uninformed gamers who buy FFXI will be quickly turned
off by the changed style as they expected something entirely different. And if it doesn't,
the monthly fees for both Play Online and FFXI certainly will. If you're into online rpgs
and don't mind the fees, by all means go ahead and buy FFXI when it's released. You might
have a lot of fun with it. But I think us console rpg-ers need to send square a message.
The only message Square will ever listen to. Don't buy FFXI. Don't let the Final Fantasy
name sway you into a purchase. Leave it be, untouched on the shelf. Maybe then when we hit
the pocket books of Square will they finally realize the errors of their ways.
-Nate |
I have to admire someone who takes a stand against what they see as change for the
worse in something they love. Despite that, I also have to pity someone who thinks they're
going to make a damn bit of difference in not buying a Final Fantasy title, and asking
others to do the same. I clearly remember similar claims being made about Final Fantasy
VII and VIII, and I also remember tons of each game being sold, even more firmly moving
the series away from the 2D style the protesters wanted to preserve.
There are some points to what Nate is saying. I play FF for story, not the interaction
of UO. And if FFXI is merely a franchise version of Ultima Online, we're gonna have words,
Mr. Sakaguchi and I. But as the GIA also
reported today, Phantasy Star Online, a potential test case for online console RPGs,
will have a more mission-based outcome with a definite direction for the quest to go in.
If Phantasy Star Online does well (and, for the record as a Dreamcast owner, I think it's
shaping up quite nicely) then perhaps we can all have a little more faith in the future.
| Information wants to be free, or so they say |
| hello, just wondering regarding the sony ps2 utility disc recall, what
would happen if i do not return the disc?
will ps2 also play region 3 dvds? anybody tried that yet?
pls do respond to my questions, okay?
thanks very much. |
The word is that the recall is not mandatory, and that there's nothing they can do if
you don't return the disk. Also, the regional override code is supposed to be global, meaning
that you can play any DVD. Of course, the fact that you don't know about the recall
already and that you're asking me about Region 3 DVDs (SE Asia) leads me to believe you're
not in Japan, in which case you shouldn't have a PS2 yet anyway. Naughty, naughty!
| His last words |
| His Excellency His Grace the Right Honorable Lord Sir Chris, You said
that for a game to be truly considered a masterpiece it would have to reach out and
'convert the heathens' to appreciating videogames. But I disagree, I believe it is only
necessary for a work to be highly acclaimed by those who already appreciate its field, for
there are plenty who, when viewing Citizen Kane, or the Mona Lisa, or listening to Bach,
would not change their opinion of disliking movies or paintings or classical music. Yet
these are all masterpieces or masters of their fields.
And there is no doubt that video games are as honorable a field of artistic creation as
cinema or music. Perhaps one day they will be more so ever, for they are interactive, and
an ever-improving field. Also, I have a bit of an inclusive definition of art: Anything
which has as its purpose to evoke an emotional response (pretty broad, huh?) This can
range from Soap Operas to the Vedas to the Eddas, and anything in between, inluding games.
Dragon Barrel
P.S. Have you heard of a game from Enix called E.V.O. the Search for Eden? If so, you
have to admit that it was the watermark of videogame creation. |
I wouldn't have printed this letter but as a favor for this guy's widow. (Hey, I told
him not to call me Lord Chris.) It's a shame, too, because he had some good points. Why
should we give a damn about "art"? We like it, there are lots of us, and the
game players I know are hardly cretins. Be happy with what you've got. But dammit, that
doesn't let me rub the fact that I'M RIGHT in everyone else's face!
Never played EVO, heard it was good.
| Greed, duh! |
| Whaaasuuup Chris? I just wanted to comment on Konami of America's
decision to change the title of 'Metal Gear: Ghost Babel' to 'Metal Gear Solid'. I just
think this is a really dumb thing for them to do. Playstation MGS and GameBoy MGS are two
completely different games, and I think that they will only end up confusing and angering
customers by giving both the same title. People will think they're getting a port of the
PSX game, only to discover it's anything but. In the end, they would have sold plenty of
copies without changing the title, so a name change wasn't/isn't neccessary. What do you
think?
-CTZanderman |
I think this is a totally predictable and not all that important move from Konami. They
want to increase brand recognition, and I think it's a safe bet that more people will say
"Cool, a Game Boy Metal Gear game" than will say "Hey, this isn't a direct
translation of Metal Gear Solid!" Capcom did something similar with Mega Man not all
that long ago, changing Rockman World, as the GB incarnation was known in Japan, to plain
old Mega Man for the States. I kinda liked Metal Gear: Ghost Babel as a title, but seeing
as how I'm too busy to buy it anyway, it's not a big loss.
| To end on a happy note |
| Chris, You've managed to do community service and insult my
intelligence at the same time. I salute you.
By the way, I'm really NOT that stupid. I probably have a large amount of DA readers
thinking I have the IQ of celery right now, so I'm making a formal apology. Ahem: I'M
SORRY FOR BEING A DUMBASS.
No hard feelings, eh?
Jon |
I tell you, it's tough being DA. I have numerous people complaining that I never insult
anyone, and numerous people claiming that I hurt them deeply. As a statement of policy, I
never mean any real insult or disrespect to anybody I print (the real flames will probably
never reach you folks) so don't take anything I say too seriously. That is all.
Closing Comments:
In retrospect, saying that I printed good long letters may have been a mistake, beause
nearly everything I got today was someone trying to give me their in-depth view on every
topic possible. An earlier version of this column was nearly all lenghtly, serious
discussion, but it read like a phone book, so I rewrote it with only a few long ones
surviving. And perhaps that's for the best - it's hardly a bad thing to have people
competeing for the coveted "big serious letter" slot in the column. Survival of
the fittest, improvement of the species, all that crap.
Anyway, the great Andrew Kaufmann will be on for the next two days, so send him your
letters and be happy. As for me, I'm probably going to just sit in stunned incomprehension
over the fact that I have two whole days of free time. Later.
-Chris Jones, getting away from here as fast as possible |
|
|
|
