Getting medieval on your ass - September 1st, 1999 - Drew Cosner
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this column are those of the participants and the moderator, and do not neccessarily reflect those of the GIA. There is coarse language and potentially offensive material afoot. Tomorrow is my birthday. Send me stuff, you filthy little man. Don't say I didn't warn you.
Always willing to start where the others stop and take on the topics others won't touch with a ten foot poll, I invited you readers to tell me what you thought about the idea of a less advanced, more medieval Final Fantasy IX. Of course, I knew I could do this because my readers are smart, stylish and sexy. And you all look so darn cute when you're arguing. The number of emphatic bosh I received was minimal, and many good points were made.
So without an further holdup on my part, let's get this column started.
| Completely backwards |
|
Yo, Drew man!
I just wanted to mention a simple notion, or trail of thought that seemed forgotten by your readers. The next generation playstation will be backward compatible. This means that you can buy the new FF and the PSX2/Y (whatever) too. Therefore, the situation is simple develop for the present model knowing the "new and improved" version can still handle it.So, buy your new machines and still experience F IX.
Keepin' it real and reel, or somethang.
-BrightLight
|
That's true, but somehow I doubt that people who've just shelled out for a new console are going to want to play a game on it that could be run just as well on their old machine. People pay for a new console to play games that simply weren't possible before. If they can just stick with their current console and still get the latest games, what's the point of moving on to something newer and more expensive?
Sony knows this as well as we do. While backwards compatibility will undoubtedly be used as a selling point, don't expect them to be preparing to launch the machine with titles that could be played on the original Playstation.
| Searching high and low |
|
Hey Drew,
I was reading your column today and saw FF9 screenshots mentioned.
Where can I find them?
-tsorovan
|
I realize that they're in a rather obscure and difficult to locate area and all, so I'll help you out. You can find them right here: http://www.thegia.com/ff9.html.
| Foolish enough to ask for my opinion |
|
Dude,
I wanted to get the PocketStation (import, of course), but there are no
import shops around, and i don't have a credit card, so i can't order one off
the internet. So I saved my money and i now have enough for the DC, and I am
psyched about it. But yesterday I saw a commercial for some import shop not
five minutes from where I live. Now, I only have ~$200 (plus the $50 for
FFVIII, of course). So should I get the DC at launch, without any games (i'd
rent em for a while), or should I get the PocketStation (mainly for FFVIII),
which they sell for $69, plus 1-2 PSX games? Of course, if i bought the
PocketStation, I probobly wouldn't get the DC for a while, since i wouldn't
save my money for a while, cause too many damn good games are coming out soon
(FFA, Lunar 2, Grandia, etc.). Agh, I'm just so confused, can you please
advise me on this?
-Rydel
|
Personally, I'd just get FFVIII and the Pocketstation. Put away some money until you can afford to buy a Dreamcast with at least a game or two. Renting is a real bummer, especially when you're going to wish you could keep the game once you've become hooked on it.
Naturally, that's just my rentaphobic opinion. Ever since I rented a PSX game that looked somebody had taken a Brillo pad to the data side, I haven't been to keen on renting games.
| I hate you |
|
Uh, Drew.
Why are we even discussing what FFIX will be like, when only a small
minority has had the chance to play FFVIII yet?
-Sane_Man- "who thinks the FF series should return to it's medieval
roots"
|
When I opted to go with a topic focusing on Final Fantasy IX, I knew it was only a matter of time before somebody sent me this astute observation. It was more a question of when rather than if. Well, the answer is "because I hate you." Yes, that's right. When thinking of ways I could most effectively cheat and inconvenience the RPG community, it occured to me that glossing over Final Fantasy VIII at a time when its release is imminent would be a solid step towards my goal.
Soon I'll only entertain questions and discussions concerning the upcoming consoles, and any games coming out on the current systems will be left without mention in the column. I want you to spend more money. I want you to be discontent with what you have; constantly looking to the future rather than being satisfied with the present. I want to spread misery and hatred, and you have no other choice but to sit there in your underpants, writing spiteful letters pointing out my insidious and hateful ways.
| It's been a while, good friend |
|
Drew,
While the final letter in the column (as well as your answer) noted that
this game might *not* be Final Fantasy IX, there was no mention of Square's
own feelings on the game in development: i.e., that even they're not sure if
they should call this game Final Fantasy IX. This suggests that the
developers/designers were probably only calling it FFIX out of sheer
convenience.
This also makes me think that this game has been in development longer than
we realize - probably in tandem with FFVIII - and therefore won't be "rushed"
in any way. Square has also alluded to the fact that FFIX will be a PS2 (or
rather, a next-generation system) title, so that would suggest to me that
this game will definitely not turn out to be FFIX.
What WILL it turn out to be? Well, as we've seen, as much as FFVIII deviates
from the swords-and-sorcery "tradition," so will this game embrace it. It's
been too long without a classic FF style game, and I think Square knows it.
Final Fantasy IX - not this game - will continue on the path that the series
has been traveling, but this game will serve to placate those who demand
retro FF games.
About damn time, too.
-Chris Kohler
|
It would certainly seem that there have been those within Square tossing around ideas for quite some time now. And what you say could wind up being right in the end. For all we know, what was at one time referred to internally as Final Fantasy IX may very well turn out to be a side story or spinoff of some nature. Or perhaps that was just one preliminary idea amongst many, and it will end up getting scrapped. Who knows.
However, FFIX has been confirmed as a PSX title by Digicube, the company responsible the marketing and merchandising of Square's products. When questioned, Square didn't deny it, they merely stated that they had no comment. Which is the corporate way of saying "What the hell? You parasitic press people aren't supposed to know that yet."
| Not gonna do it |
|
Hey Drew,
Responding to whether or not FFIX should consist of a medieval setting, it
doesn't matter what your opinion is, it will not happen. Why, you ask?
Simple...
Final Fantasy 7 and Final Fantasy 8 are set in a more futuristic world for a
reason, you know. With a futuristic setting comes more potential for those
eye-opening FMVs that Square loves to sprinkle generously into it's games
(especially the FF series) nowadays. While us enlightened gamers know it
isn't all in the graphics, most people do not. I don't think I am going out
on a limb by saying at least half of FF7 and 8's sales are generated soley
by advertisements. What do the advertisements advertise? The graphics; and
frankly, I think a commercial with eye-opening explosions (a la FF7's
commercial) will sell more games than castles, dragons, and the rest of
those medieval stalwarts.
So why would Square knowingly cut into the sales of it's flagship series
just to please it's long time fans, who unfortunately, are dwarfed by the
number of gamers that got into the series at the same time the eye-candy
did.
Bottom line is that the futuristic settings=more eye candy=more $$$. And
all you buisnessmen know that a company's number one priority is money, and
pleasing it's fans is a distant second. No way FF9 goes medieval.
-Opoggo
|
The fact that Square has opted for more mature and realistically proportioned characters doesn't mean that they've decided never to make use of a more medieval setting in future titles. In fact, Final Fantasy VIII's world is far less technological and gritty than that of Final Fantasy VII's. So Square fluctuates between whatever backdrop they feel would most appropriately suit the storyline.
And of course, I can't argue that FMV and eye-candy sells. I'm still amazed by the number of people who will point at a FMV segment as evidence that the Playstation can crank out better graphics than the N64. However, a medieval setting leaves plenty of opportunities for flashy renders. Shining suits of armor, dragons, majestic, fog-shrouded castles; the whole schpeel. Whether or not the casual buyer would prefer a futuristic setting to a medieval one, however, I can't really say.
Many gamers do equate mature with futuristic, so you could very well be right. If you think about it, most of the games to have been huge successes of late have featured futuristic or modern settings. However, that doesn't mean that gamers prefer such settings; it just means that nobody's offering anything else. Who knows, maybe Square could use their clout to buck the trend. It would be an interesting experiment on their part, if nothing else.
| Fantastic! |
|
Hi, Drew.
Should the next Final Fantasy be medieval or science-fantasy as is its
current trend? I suppose I'm pretty biased in my opinion, but essentially,
here's my thought: Whatever the setting of FFIX, I would like it to be one
OR the other.
I love fantasy settings in books, games, and whatnot. I also enjoy
science-fiction settings. However, I believe Final Fantasy's
"science-fantasy" setting of their last, oh, eight games is becoming a
cliché in and of itself. To run a little psychoanalysis, I'm thinking that
Square chooses this setting--excellently portrayed in FFVII--because they
want a cyberpunk or science-fiction setting, but don't want to give up the
staples of traditional RPGs: swords, magic, mythical beasts you can summon.
They went a little further towards a futuristic setting in FFVIII, but you
still have fantasy throwbacks: Guardian Forces, gunblades (that really
requires some suspension of disbelief), and, of course, magic.
I would like to see a fantasy setting devoid of high technology, or,
conversely, a science-fiction setting without any magic. I don't think it
would be terribly difficult to design such a game, and think of how novel it
would be! I'm hard-pressed to think of any RPGs in recent memory which do
not include some heavy machinery in a fantasy setting, or swords and magic
in a sci-fi setting. It might be a little out of place to mention this, but
look at Blizzard's Warcraft and Starcraft games. Warcraft is high fantasy,
Starcraft is a damn good sci-fi story. What prevents Square from doing
something of the same?
-Matt Blackie
|
I can appreciate what you're saying, but one of the earmarks of a Final Fantasy game has always been the fantasy blending of various styles and settings. Although an entirely furturistic RPG would definitely be cool, at least in my opinion, it wouldn't make for a very good Final Fantasy game.
Damn, now I'm starting to sound like one of those spiteful purists. Excuse me for a moment, I have to go scrape off the outter layer of my flesh and take a shower in near-boiling water.
| It's all about style |
|
Drew,
I hope this doesn't qualify me as "hardcore," or anything like that, but I find myself longing for a return to the old style of Final Fantasy. While I do believe that FF7 was a fantastic game in and of itself, and am certain that FF8 will also be a superb game as well, I feel that part VII fell short as a "Final Fantasy," as will part VIII. Why, you ask?
It's all about balance. I loved the dark and moody settings of FF7, as well as the bizarre plot twists that revealed the relationships between such characters as Cloud, Sephiroth, Hojo, Aeris, Vincent, and others. The ability to customize your characters through materia was interesting. The musical score was filled with powerful melodies. But there were a few problems I saw. For example, many enemies in the game were armed with machine guns. Cloud had a sword. Somehow, Cloud always won the fight. I guess the makers of the game never saw Raiders of the Lost Ark, where the local swordsman is shot dead by Indy.
Guns and swords don't mix, generally speaking. Previous games kept gun/sword interaction to a minimum, and that made sense. Furthermore, the characters were more defined in my personal favorite, FF6. Each character had his or her own unique command which added to the identity of the character. You could have as many as four characters in your party. The characters were not blank slates in battle; they had personalities of their own which fit the character concept, unlike the characters in 7 and 8, where materia and junctions can give any character any power.
The storylines were of equal quality, in my opinion, though I simply liked 6 better. Another important aspect was the quality in the music. The samples from FF6 sounded much more organic than those in FF7. On top of that, the awkward shift to polygons actually resulted in a slight decrease in graphical quality in some areas. Those little 2D sprites had a lot of personality, and were far more expressive than the Popeye polygons in the sequel. In general, the 2D graphics had a sort of charm to them, and were more or less the pinnacle of 16-bit game images. It had a lot of detail, but it didn't shoot for overkill.
Finally, I have to make a big argument for the setting. You asked whether or not we'd prefer futuristic or medieval. I say neither. FF6 had the unique setting some people call "steampunk." It was pseudo-Victorian, with steam engines, gas lights and other technologies found in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, but with a distinctive flair. The technology was a bit scarier after mad scientists' efforts, and the mysticism in the world gave rise to powerful magic (a parallel to the Victorian occult craze of Crowley and the like). It was the best of both worlds: Not too technological, but not so medieval that you got an urge to do nothing but stalk dungeons for dragons to kill with your magic sword.
So basically, I'm writing in to say that 2d graphics, or a blend of 3d and 2d (like in FFT) still have a place in today's gaming, and that I'm an avid fan of the steampunk style of sci-fi and fantasy. I know there will never be another Final Fantasy like the 6th, and I know that I will still enjoy future FF games immensely, but I'd just like to say that I miss the days of characters that weren't 100% customizable and being able to equip shields, armor, and helmets.
-Rob
|
For every person upset that the series is losing its fantasy elements, you have another person who is upset that it doesn't follow specific rules of reality. Honestly, as cliche as it is to say this, you have to suspend a little disbelief when playing a game, espcially one like Final Fantasy. If it was perfectly realistic, it would be pretty damned boring.
Also, you should be pleased to note that the characters in Final Fantasy VIII all have their own unique desperation attacks, which give them each their own distinct flavor and personality in battle. Unlike FFVII, where all the Limit Breaks other than those of Aeris were merely stronger attacks, certain characters' desperations can heal the party or revive knocked out party members, cause severe damage to the foe in classic style, or do anything in between. You're not going to see the distinct attack options as was the case with FFVI, but each character does have his or her own specialized desperation move.
Lastly, I want to address what you've said about the setting of Final Fantasy VI. The most important thing about any backdrop is not whether it's more futuristic or more medieval or something in between; it's all about style. A lot of people enjoyed FFVII's style not because it was futuristic and for no other reason, but because it had a lot of style and character. Even had you not preferred it, you have to cede the fact that Midgar had a lot of personality. Some people, myself included, don't get particularly excited about a medieval setting because too many developers have taken advantage of the inherent familiarity to create a boring and cliche game world. Rather than taking the time to create a unique and immersive universe for the game, they just stick in a few castles and knights, and assume that is plenty.
One of the reasons I was impressed with the setting featured in the Vagrant Story demo was because it had a lot of mood and atmosphere to it. As long as the setting has style to it, I'm not worried what era it falls into. FFVI was an excellent example of just this. The world wasn't specifically futuristic, and it wasn't specifically medieval. It was unique blend, and because of this many still enjoy it the most of any in a Final Fantasy game to date.
| Well lookee here |
|
Whether anyone else has noticed or not, Final Fantasy has always been about
the evolution of technology. That should have been plainly appearant from the
leap between the american release of 1 and 2. It should have been even more
obvious from american 2 to 3.
Personally, It really doesn't matter what seeting they choose. In fact the
only recent setting that truly irritated me was Wild ARMS wild west motif. To
me, setting isn't half as important as what they manage to do with it, and how
the game itself plays. In FFVII, my favorite part of the game was Midgar.
Not strictly due to the setting, but simply becasue the game deigners seemed
to put a lot of thought into making it a detailed place with an intriguing
cyberpunk story of urban decay. They did the setting well, and I was a little
sad to see that it played so small a part in the game.
By the same token, Lunar SSSC is by no means a very innovative game in any
sense of the word. Everything from the setting the the gameplay feels like
I've done it before... But that isn't a bad thing, becasue Lunar did a good
job of living up to it's cliches. It never pretended to be what it wasn't,
and it actually had Personality.
To me, it isn't what setting the designers choose that makes a game good.
It is how they handle the setting. Do I have a favorite setting? It's the
stark reality of modern day, shattered by the coming of otherworldly powers.
Sigh, Swords&Sorcery fans think THEY have it bad?
-Tony Patino -- "The 13th Zombie to crawl out from the darkest corner of your
soul"
|
I'm used to receiving letters that are either refuting an opinion of my own, or one expressed by a fellow reader in the previous day's column. I've never been one to shy away from debate or topics which people have nearly religious feelings about. It makes for interesting reading.
But every once in a while, I'll get a letter such as this one that's in complete agreement with my own personal opinion, and I am at a loss to think of a suitable reaction to it. What else can I say other than "I couldn't have said it better myself?"
Closing Comments
With all this talk of innovative and unique settings, here's a good topic for tomorrow. Come up with a setting that hasn't been done before in an RPG, that you would like to see. Would you like to see a game taking place on a distant planet of circus clowns? A game taking place at the bottom of the ocean? Or perhaps a game taking place in a world in which beating random citizens to death with table legs rewards you with experience points and money. At any rate, I'll print the most original ideas I receive in tomorrow's column. It's something a bit more fun after a heavy column like today's.
So, put on those Creative Caps and get to work. I'll be waiting, with a suggestive smile on my face.
-Drew Cosner *winkwink*
|
|
|
|
