Insane Difficulty: Squaresoft vs SquareEnix - Insane Difficulty

Fixed an odd issue when you hit "VIEW COMMENTS" from the front page where the background graphic for a post wouldn't show properly.

Anyway, Square is dead to me, carry on!

I guess my stance on the linear style is that generally in newer games it basically spells it all out for you. In X for example all areas are just connected, and the path through most is pretty straight-forward. There is not much variety there for me. Harb's example of high level enemies controlling where you go really is only prevalent in FF2 IMO where if you took just a few steps away from the current area you would fight some crazy encounters that would murder you. I understand the comparison there in saying that it is linearity in a different way.

I think for me though world maps give you the option to explore. And in older games they will tell you a generalization of where to go but the player has to explore to get there. And you might go the wrong way, or the long way, or find something like Matoya's Cave for example. Games gave you less info to work with back then, and even if they told you "The next place to go is north", that is vague and wasn't always as telling as you might think. IMO this enhances the game as it makes the player explore the world. The disappointing part of X for me is when they did show you the "world map" when you got the airship and it felt so much bigger then what you traveled through.

I like a balance between sidequests and the main story. I don't mind having to do linear things as long as there is a break there. The extreme is something like X-2 which is just a giant sidequest and felt like a mess. I like to have a story unfold but I want to feel like I am actually in a world. Most games have disappointed me though with the general size of areas...I always felt like dungeons and caves should be a pretty decent size. FFVII is a prime example of most caves and towns just being too damn small. I understand it can't be 100% realistic but just make it seem like there is some size to a town, not some place where like 5 people live.



EDIT

I was thinking more on Harbs point and I know in FF1 after you use the TNT the world is more open to you and you can land different places, but some areas have stronger monsters to discourage you. I think as I replayed the game I actually found this more interesting though because I thought "What if I tried to get the airship before I defeated the Fire Fiend?" In FF4 I would always try to go to Eblan and fight the monsters in the chests with the weak party of Cecil, Tellah, Cid, and Yang. It was fun and a challenge and even though you were not really supposed to do it the game left it there for you to try.

Yes monsters are stronger but if you are a good player and if you want to you can make variety from a game that gives you options. Make each playthrough a little different, challenge yourself. That gives more replay IMO then something that is more linear in regards to where you can travel.

auraplatonic, on 06 September 2012 - 10:54 PM, said:

auraplatonic, on 06 September 2012 - 10:54 PM, said:

auraplatonic, on 06 September 2012 - 10:54 PM, said:

These are the exact points I've been trying to get at. Thank you.

I'm done with this argument. We're having an argument over subjective aspects of a game series, therefore there is no correct answer.

In conclusion, I like a heavily driven narrative in a game, and I don't enjoy exploration as much as everyone else seems to. But, since my opinion is clearly more important to me, my answer is definitely correct.

Stann, on 07 September 2012 - 05:07 AM, said:

It's pretty much over with regardless. Most everyone has said their piece on the matter.

Yeah, there really is no "correct" answer, but as I said before, I just wanted to get a conversation going with this article. I enjoy looking at how others see a subject in contrast to my own view.

Stann, on 07 September 2012 - 05:07 AM, said:

That goes without saying, that is why comments are enabled on these articles.

Is it just me or are we not including the amazing Enix-TriAce games? Valkyrie Profile and Star Ocean+Star Ocean: Second Story is close to my heart and my Top 5 RPGs. There are also more Squaresoft games like Front Mission 3, Senken no Densetsu, Breath of Fire, CHRONO TRIGGER.

Of course, the ones that were made in SquareEnix's wake were... less than Stellar. Star Ocean 3 was... okay, except for that terrible plot twist. Star Ocean 4 was "bearable," but both games can't compete with their 6 and 10-year-old predecessor, respectively. Front Mission 4 was a mess, and the saving grace, Front Mission 5, was only available in Japan.

With regards to Final Fantasy, consider me not a fan of FF7's story. It was... overrated for me. I consider FF8 the best of the series, but granted I have not played anything earlier than FF7, plus I'm a sucker for romance elements. I also thought FFX was a great game, because of the multiple instances of character development that happened throughout the game. Everyone in your party experiences growth, and I'm not talking the statistical kind.

SakuyaP, on 08 September 2012 - 12:44 AM, said:

This is Squaresoft vs SquareEnix, but I suppose I should've done this whole thing differently. In any case, Enix and tri-Ace are neither of the aforementioned two; though they are awesome. I have a lot of love for tri-Ace; such that when I see they've done work on a game I'm automatically tempted to check it out.

SakuyaP, on 08 September 2012 - 12:44 AM, said:

Yeah, you're right; however the reason I based this article on Final Fantasy is because just to me personally that's the series that holds the most weight. This article was intended to spark a conversation about this so I could see everyone's opinions.

That said, I haven't played very many of Squaresoft's other RPGs, sadly. I hope to get around to it sometime.

SakuyaP, on 08 September 2012 - 12:44 AM, said:

I loved Star Ocean 3, and 4 to a lesser extent story-wise. A big reason for that could very well be that I've never played the first two, but regardless. More than the story though -- vastly more than the story -- I enjoyed the gameplay.

SakuyaP, on 08 September 2012 - 12:44 AM, said:

Bare my children.

Advent, on 08 September 2012 - 08:50 AM, said:

SIDEKICK-SIDEKICK-SIDEKICK-SIDEKICK.

Or would you prefer the waifu material, instead?

SCATTERBEAM-SCATTERBEAM-SCATTERBEAM-SCATTERBEAM.

SakuyaP, on 08 September 2012 - 09:31 AM, said:

I enjoyed Star Ocean 4 more than I did 3, but I didn't use Maria much, oddly enough. XD

And when I did, yeah I used Sidekick but not as my only attack.

Dragon Quest X is an MMO. It's for the Wii. You need a 16GB USB hard drive to play it. On your Wii.

I take back everything I've said in this thread.

Squeenix does not have a fucking clue.

Stann, on 10 September 2012 - 01:57 PM, said:

Made my day.

Stann, on 10 September 2012 - 01:57 PM, said:

Not sure if I'm infuriated, or incredibly curious as to what they were thinking...



...or what they were smoking.

SakuyaP, on 10 September 2012 - 06:56 PM, said:

Bet you'd like some, huh?

Warning this post contains my opinions and is very long. Thank you for you time. This has been a public service announcement.

Quote

I might be just a bit late reading this all.


But I noticed something about the subject of the different generations of FF's and about a lot of JRpg's in general. There seems to be one aspect of the story that isn't always mentioned that puzzles me when judging story. Characters and plot are of course the forefront of what creates a good story but world and how its presented can mean an amazing amount to the player. The reason I quoted Arch here was the fact that most people could agree that these games are some of the best to come out of square. And one of the things they all have in common is a well presented and memorable world not just a good plot, characters and gameplay. A lot of the FF main series has been known for this even as far back as FF1.

FF1's plot if you compare it to other games at the time was quite interesting and the monsters and locations became very memorable as well. I'm sure many people can remember obtaining the herb to wake the sleeping prince of Elfland. Or going to the bottom of the earth caverns to slay the vampire that attacked a nearby town. Or who could forget the dwarven caves where you get TNT to blow your way to the outside world. The main characters you made so it helped give you a since of attachment as opposed to most Rpgs now showing the hardships the characters go through the create a feeling of attachment. Something that Square broke away from in FF2 and returned to in FF3.

I believe this is why people hold the main series to such a high standard. This is also why I believe some of the series is more universally loved than others. Some great examples are 8, 10, 12, and 13. Pretty much all of these games had an unequal balance when it come to the world, plot, and characters.

SOME SPOILERS AHEAD!
8's characters are often called very bland and the way its plot is presented is often criticized as being very confusing, but the world concepts were radically different and that made the world very interesting by extension. 10's falls to a lot of the same problem but I do want to note that I believe 10 did a great job making you hate the villains where a lot of people don't care for the main cast you control most can probably agree they did well on making you want to see the villains fall. Seymour who will never stay the fuck down is a great example of this. To be honest I think 10's story is pretty good just poorly told and that really hurts it in some people's eyes.

12 had a interesting plot, engaging characters and the environments were amazing but I feel like the enemies were lack luster due to the majority just feeling like pallet swaps that didn't do that much different from the last version of that creature you saw. which hurt the feel of the world. I will admit that some creatures such as the some the hunts, the T-rex (right near Dalmasca), or the Demon wall in Raithwall's tomb and many of the other bosses were very well done. The gameplay had a lot of depth but almost never felt like you needed to use any of the cool strategies you could come up with because the enemies were either oh look another wolf that will get murdered in 2 hits or wait that thing is neutral therefore its 30 lvls above me and I should most defiantly not fuck with it. (I will admit that FF12:IZJS remedied this issue!)

13 is where I believe shit kinda hit the fan (just my opinion here) the characters, plot, and to an extent the world as a whole were interesting but the way they were presented is where it all fell through. A lot of people accuse the game of being too linear and that's something I can agree with because its hard to find the right way to summarize how the game presented itself. I think the best way to put it is not linear but the play feels forced to a degree. Instead of the normal "soft wall" (thank you for who ever presented the term originally I can't remember at the moment.) the player is presented with very little area to move around and explore until very late into the game. Something that is not only odd for a Final Fantasy but rare for a Rpg in general. Many rpg's have a very open world in terms of each location, in terms of the world map, and in terms of the ability to return to places you've been. Not to mention the fact that usually the player is rewarded for exploring these areas. Treasure chests, side quests, or even just some interesting things about the world (FF10's historian Maechen anyone?) are examples of what I'm talking about. I will admit I did not finish 13 but I did play it for a fair bit and did also sit and watch my friend play a large part of it as well. The maps I think are the biggest thing that I think hindered this game, a large majority of the maps especially early felt like a straight line and it felt like there was no reason to explore because all the treasure chests were in plain view. I really feel that was why a lot of older FF fans didn't like it and why some people who either rarely played the Final Fantasy series or even Rpg's in general loved it. It was all of the plot without any of the distractions.

As far as SquareEnix as a company in terms of game design vs Square. I really feel that SquareEnix makes a lot of "Safe bet" games where Square experimented quite a bit, especially in the PS1 era. Look at some the titles that Square released during that time period you had the FF's (Rpg), Brave Fencer Musashi, Threads of Fate, Vagrant Story (Adventure A-Rpg), FFT (S-Rpg) all of which seem kind of safe and then you have stuff like Bushido Blade, Ehrgeiz, Tobal, (Fighting) Einhander, (Side-scrolling Shooter), Chocobo Dungeon, (dungeon crawler), Cyber Org, (Beat-em-up) and I think you get my point. Square Enix on the other hand may have a lot of IPs but putting their publishing aside has made the Dragon Quest games, the FF's including and after 12, The Last Remnant, and Kingdom Hearts. The only games they have recently released that they developed (to my knowledge) that have been even a slightly unsafe bet are still pretty safe and those are Dissidia, and Mario Sports Mix.

Both of which had a very popular IP tied to it. Also before someone brings up Theatrhythm that was actually developed by Indieszero notable for Sutte Hakkun (A Japanese SNES puzzle game), Electroplankton, and GameCenter CX: Arino's Challenge (aka Retro Game Challenge in the states). Also I would like to note something that may explain why many people who hated FF13 enjoyed FF13-2 more. FF13 was developed by SquareEnix alone but FF13-2 was developed by SquareEnix and Tri-ace together! I find this funny because it seems almost like their marketing team looked at FF13 and FF14 and said, "No you will fuck it up. Here lets have someone tell you what not to do because clearly you all need a refresher course" On a side not SquareEnix alone was working on Dragon Quest X unless you count Armor Project which is literally one guy that already works for them.
So yes you can still thank them for this,

Quote

soltaker21, on 23 September 2012 - 04:49 AM, said:

This is a big part of my pull to FFVIII, honestly. I think the world concept is absolutely awesome.

soltaker21, on 23 September 2012 - 04:49 AM, said:

I loved the love story in there, because as I've said a few times in the comments here, I'm a sucker for love stories. But I do agree with this. I wanted to fucking jump into the game and stab Seymour multiple times when he kissed Yuna.

soltaker21, on 23 September 2012 - 04:49 AM, said:

To me what really killed it was the absolutely bland feeling MMO system (not the system in general, but I think the way they did it was off) in combination with the palettes. Mostly the battle system, though.

soltaker21, on 23 September 2012 - 04:49 AM, said:

After a short time I came to know T-Rexaur as death incarnate in FF12. I might be remembering this wrong, but I seem to recall getting hit by him for 9999 damage with full buffs on.

soltaker21, on 23 September 2012 - 04:49 AM, said:

Yes, indeed. That played a part in my dismal experience with it as well.

soltaker21, on 23 September 2012 - 04:49 AM, said:

You make this point far better than I did. This is what I was trying to say earlier in the thread.

soltaker21, on 23 September 2012 - 04:49 AM, said:

You're hitting the nail on the head, or very close to it, I feel. I will admit, I did enjoy XIII and XIII-2, but in hindsight there was so much that could be done better. I enjoyed XIII's story and also the combat; the piss-poor attempt to satisfy the explorers we know as Gran Pulse seemed a lot like a slap in the face to me.

soltaker21, on 23 September 2012 - 04:49 AM, said:

Oh man, I played the shit out of Ehrgeiz when I was younger. I never was able to pull off an Omnislash.

soltaker21, on 23 September 2012 - 04:49 AM, said:

I can see why it's not that popular, but I absolutely love The Last Remnant. It is one of the hardest games I've ever played, honestly. The vast majority of its difficulty comes from, in my opinion, the combat system. I don't really think I've ever seen a game do what it does, or at least not as well.

If anyone reading this is looking for a fun/difficult SRPG/Turn based (It's really the child of the two genres) I would highly recommend TLR for the PC. The 360 version sucks so bad.

soltaker21, on 23 September 2012 - 04:49 AM, said:

My hatred for XIII-2 (the gameplay is fun I will admit) comes from its writer: Motomu Toriyama. Retconning the ending of XIII -- which had the story completely case closed in a beautiful way I think -- and then using time travel as a plot tool to enable lazy writing is just... WHY?

I get that XIII-2 was supposed to give you exploration and fun as opposed to a story, but oh my fuck. He should've just let the series (XIII) end and moved onto something else.

I'd also like to say that that was a beautiful post. Give this man some rep.

Quote

Completely agreed and I have the 360 version sadly.

Quote

To this day I still want to get into game design at least in some fashion even if its only testing. To me you should never have to hurt the quality of one aspect of the game in favor of bolstering another. Every game has its strengths and weaknesses but when designing a game you should always strive your best in all regards. No game is perfect but that doesn't stop us from doing our best to make a game as perfect and close to the original idea as we can.

soltaker21, on 23 September 2012 - 06:20 AM, said:

I did as well. Then I torrented the PC version. I never looked back.

soltaker21, on 23 September 2012 - 06:20 AM, said:

Yeah, exactly. I couldn't have said it better myself.

soltaker21, on 23 September 2012 - 06:20 AM, said:

This is so important. I don't understand how we can justify "Oh well they just focused on graphics, that's why the gameplay suffered." This makes no sense to me. This links with other things in the world though, people just look at the surface and say "Wow what an amazing game, these graphics are great." Just like they watch some political video and think that Romney is telling them the truth without actually trying to find the truth for themselves. Its so much more than that, we can't accept something dumbed down. It doesn't have to be a duplicate of previous games, I would prefer it not even be a Final Fantasy honestly. They just want to do what's safe, just like all these remakes in the movie industry that didn't even need done and put the originals to shame(Total Recall for example). I'm just starting to rant though, i've been reflecting on things a lot lately.

I have to go but I will give some replies to your larger post later.

Stann, on 10 September 2012 - 01:57 PM, said:

That worked out great the first time they tried it (Playstation 2 harddrive anyone?)