[insane_cobra]

Originally Posted by sethsez

I used to think that.

Then I went back and actually looked at the tech demos.

Metal Gear Solid 2 and 3, Tekken 5, God of War, GT 2 and 3, etc are all leaps and bounds beyond anything the demos showed.

Go back and look at the demos. They don't look nearly as impressive as you remember them.

Okay, I'll take another look at those videos, but even if that was the case, the fact is it took a lot of time for developers to get under the hood of PS2, bring out everything it's capable of and make those games. Maybe five or six years from now PS3 games would really look like that Killzone demonstration, but Sony is cheating the customers into thinking that games will look like that on PS3 launch. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe they really will, but I'll believe it when I see it.

[No_doubtsy]

Mag, you are being harsh. If three games with an average rating of 87% (KH) and 86% (X-2 and XI) on gamerankings are their biggest failures, I think they are doing really well. All three are best-selling games and X-2 is one of the fastest-selling games ever too. What was so wrong with Kingdom Hearts, anyway?

[mag]

Originally Posted by No_doubtsy

Mag, you are being harsh.

Yes. Yes, I am. And Squenix deserves every bit of it.

Originally Posted by No_doubtsy

If three games with an average rating of 87% (KH) and 86% (X-2 and XI) on gamerankings are their biggest failures, I think they are doing really well. All three are best-selling games and X-2 is one of the fastest-selling games ever too. What was so wrong with Kingdom Hearts, anyway?

I'm somewhat puzzled by this relationship you folks seem to think exists between quality and popularity. If crap were to suddenly become the most popular thing in the world, it would still be crap.

And I didn't say that those games were the worst they've ever made. They've made a lot of crap. The problem with those particular games is that they bastardized one of, if not the, best series in all of gaming.

Final Fantasy XI just should never have happened. If they want to make an MMORPG, fine, but don't call it Final Fantasy XI. It's not a real Final Fantasy.

Kingdom Hearts was just complete nonsense. You don't just go and drag our favorite FF characters down to the same level as Disney drivel. They don't go together. If you could give form to cognitive dissonance, Kingdom Hearts would be the result. And I'm sorry, but Ansem was just the most ridiculously over-the-top villain I've ever seen. The parts with Cloud and Aeris were really the game's only redeeming virtues, but even that wasn't enough to save it from the pure absurdity of the idea.

And Final Fantasy X-2 was BY FAR the worst of the bunch. It actually did have a pretty decent story. But it was buried under so much cheese that it was hardly even worth it. It's like they wanted to make a Charlie's Angels game, but they couldn't get the rights. So they made Yuna's and Rikku's original outfits more revealing and slapped the name Final Fantasy X on it instead. Practically the whole game is fluff. You don't take your Pretty Princess Dress Me Up game and try to pass it off as a sequel to the best game ever made. THAT'S...NOT...RIGHT!

Final Fantasy was one of the main reasons I got a PS2. Not for MMORPGs. Not for Disney-on-crack. And certainly not for Final Fantasy XXX. I want Final Fantasy done right. So far, the only good, traditional FF game they've made for the PS2 is Final Fantasy X, and quite frankly, I'm feeling more than a little cheated.

mag

[sethsez]

Originally Posted by mag

Kingdom Hearts was just complete nonsense. You don't just go and drag our favorite FF characters down to the same level as Disney drivel.

Switch that around and you have my opinion. Disney defined an industry and an artform. Final Fantasy (at least from VI on) is the angsty Livejournal of gaming.

[mag]

Originally Posted by sethsez

Disney defined an industry and an artform.

You mean the artform of taking classic literature and butchering the hell out of it? Yeah, they certainly did that.

mag

[Once A Villain]

Square has never really had any idea what good stories are. If I see another plot with a hero who has amnesia (Terra, Cloud, Fei, etc.) or a "save the world" adventure...I don't know what I'll do... That being said, at least they used to make fun games. I'm talking about Final Fantasy VI especially. Since then it's all been downhill. I did go through a period where I thought Final Fantasy VII was a good game, but I was only 17 years old, and hopefully I can be forgiven for the mistake.

Final Fantasy XII, despite being created by the guy who did Final Fantasy Tactics and Vagrant Story, looks ABYSSMALLY bad in the latest E3 trailer. "A boy who would be a pirate" "A girl who wants peace" "Do you hate the Empire?" blah blah... They can call me "A guy who doesn't give a shit anymore..." Square has told the same story again and again for over a decade... I've saved so many planets, rescued so many princesses, crushed so many Empires with my band of ragtag rebels, and seen the characters "overcome" their amnesia so many times that I just don't care anymore.

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by vansau

I think Squaresoft needs to become its own company again. I realize it's a stretch, but all the crap games seemed to start coming out after they merged with Enix.

I dunno... I pretty much agree with everything sethsez has said in this thread so far. Squaresoft started to suck long before they merged with Enix, and quite frankly...Enix is cooler anyway (if only because they publish games by tri-Ace). I haven't played RPGs much lately at all, but I have fond memories of the Dragon Quest games and Valkyrie Profile is probably my favorite single player RPG. So, if anything, I think Enix sold out by merging more than Squaresoft did. However, Dragon Quest 8 might be really cool because it's by the team that did Dark Cloud 2, and I absolutely loved that. It was probably the last RPG I really enjoyed (aside from MMOs, which I have sworn off now because they are far too addictive).

[mag]

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Square has never really had any idea what good stories are. If I see another plot with a hero who has amnesia (Terra, Cloud, Fei, etc.) or a "save the world" adventure...I don't know what I'll do...

This is without a doubt the dumbest thing Final Fantasy critics have ever said. How can saving the world be a cliche? Do you have any idea how many ways there are for the world to be destroyed? In the Final Fantasy series alone, the world has been endangered by demons, meteors, sorceresses, giant monsters, and numerous other threats. It doesn't tell you anything about the story. All it tells you is what's at stake. And Final Fantasy games are meant to be epic in scope. It wouldn't be much of an epic unless the stakes were that high.

Saying that saving the world is a cliche is about as ridiculous as saying that a romance story is a cliche. It's something that's so broad that it never gets old.

And frankly, somebody who's a fan of adventure games has no right to complain about rehashed and recycled stories. Really, how many stories can we come up with that revolve around the premise of "I want to be a pirate/hero/king/fill-in-the-blank?" How many princesses are we going to rescue? And just how many conspiracies are those Templars involved in anyway?

A story can have familiar elements and still be good. It all depends on how you use those elements. Final Fantasy has produced some of the best stories in all of gaming. If the stories in the average adventure game had even a fraction of the creativity that goes into a good Final Fantasy game, the genre probably wouldn't be in the state it's in.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

I did go through a period where I thought Final Fantasy VII was a good game, but I was only 17 years old, and hopefully I can be forgiven for the mistake.

I guess that was before you lost the other half of your brain.

mag

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by mag

This is without a doubt the dumbest thing Final Fantasy critics have ever said. How can saving the world be a cliche? Do you have any idea how many ways there are for the world to be destroyed? In the Final Fantasy series alone, the world has been endangered by demons, meteors, sorceresses, giant monsters, and numerous other threats. It doesn't tell you anything about the story. All it tells you is what's at stake. And Final Fantasy games are meant to be epic in scope. It wouldn't be much of an epic unless the stakes were that high.

Saying that saving the world is a cliche is about as ridiculous as saying that a romance story is a cliche. It's something that's so broad that it never gets old.

And frankly, somebody who's a fan of adventure games has no right to complain about rehashed and recycled stories. Really, how many stories can we come up with that revolve around the premise of "I want to be a pirate/hero/king/fill-in-the-blank?" How many princesses are we going to rescue? And just how many conspiracies are those Templars involved in anyway?

A story can have familiar elements and still be good. It all depends on how you use those elements. Final Fantasy has produced some of the best stories in all of gaming. If the stories in the average adventure game had even a fraction of the creativity that goes into a good Final Fantasy game, the genre probably wouldn't be in the state it's in.

Uh, there are plenty of epic tales where the fate of the world isn't at stake. However, I'm not saying it can't be done well when the world IS at stake, but Square lacks the storytelling talent for the job. Besides, when this is ALL a company can do...the only kind of story it can tell (and tell badly)...that's pretty sad. If there was some characterization then the stakes would seem more important, but if you dont give a crap about the spike-haired hero with amnesia...then what's the point? Basically I just despise the characters in most FF games so much, that I find myself hoping the world ends anyway.

I think adventure games often suffer from lousy plots as well, and I never said otherwise. However, the actual writing, characterization, and dialogue is usually never as piss poor in adventures as it is in Squaresoft games.

Originally Posted by mag

I guess that was before you lost the other half of your brain.

Ha ha. Keep 'em coming man. Every childish insult you throw my way is another victory for me I guess. However, it seems a bit too easy this time. Basically I just type something, and regardless of what it is, you explode. LOL. Don't get me wrong, it's still somewhat satisfying, I just prefer more of a challenge...

[Hammerite]

Originally Posted by mag

Kingdom Hearts was just complete nonsense. You don't just go and drag our favorite FF characters down to the same level as Disney drivel. They don't go together. If you could give form to cognitive dissonance, Kingdom Hearts would be the result. And I'm sorry, but Ansem was just the most ridiculously over-the-top villain I've ever seen. The parts with Cloud and Aeris were really the game's only redeeming virtues, but even that wasn't enough to save it from the pure absurdity of the idea.
mag

Did it have Sephiroth in it? Because if it did then I think that would kind of be an insult.

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by Hammerite

Did it have Sephiroth in it? Because if it did then I think that would kind of be an insult.

He was in it, yes. Though it's not saying much, I thought he was the coolest character in FF7 and I would have enjoyed seeing him again, but I never actually got that far in Kingdom Hearts myself...

[sethsez]

Originally Posted by mag

You mean the artform of taking classic literature and butchering the hell out of it? Yeah, they certainly did that.

No, I mean creating the first animation with sound, creating the first full-length animated feature, and constantly pushing foward what could be done with animation. The popularity of animation as an art form is almost entirely due to the early efforts of Disney, and they've done more to shape entertainment than Square could ever dream of.

In the Final Fantasy series alone, the world has been endangered by demons, meteors, sorceresses, giant monsters, and numerous other threats. It doesn't tell you anything about the story. All it tells you is what's at stake. And Final Fantasy games are meant to be epic in scope. It wouldn't be much of an epic unless the stakes were that high.

Sure it would. Most classic epics aren't about the world being blown up in one way or another. That's a plot device normally reserved for bad anime, cheesy Saturday morning cartoons, and Roland Emmerich movies.

Final Fantasy has produced some of the best stories in all of gaming.

My dog has produced some of the best crap to ever reside on my lawn.

Oh, and the stories in Final Fantasy are almost all terrible. They're melodramatic pap with cliched characters and moments that would make any screenwriter or author worth his salt cringe (especially FFVIII, which has some of the most bone-headed twists I've ever seen in addition to being an apocalyptic Dawson's Creek). FFVI partially avoided this due to actually having interesting characters, and Chrono Trigger avoided it by not taking itself seriously, but from FFVII onward the series has been about on par with a mediocre anime. That's not much of a hurdle to clear.

[Once A Villain]

Wow Seth...every single thing you said I agree with... I loved your knock on Roland Emmerich movies, ha ha. Sooo true. And the stuff about Disney, you couldn't possibly be more right on.

I wanted to expand on this comment, about the FF games, in your post: "They're melodramatic pap with cliched characters and moments that would make any screenwriter or author worth his salt cringe." One of the big problems with Squaresoft games is that they don't respect the player's intellectual ability to put 2 and 2 together. They beat you over the head with everything over and over. There is endless expository dialogue (a big no no for those "screenwriters" you mentioned), and characterization that would be banal even in a second rate comic book. When you throw the rebels vs Empire and save the world stuff in on top of all that, you get a mess...

[mag]

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Uh, there are plenty of epic tales where the fate of the world isn't at stake.

Of course there are. I never said there weren't. All I'm saying is the bigger the stakes, the bigger the story. And that's really all that something as broad as "saving the world" tells you; it doesn't say anything about the actual story.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

However, I'm not saying it can't be done well when the world IS at stake, but Square lacks the storytelling talent for the job. Besides, when this is ALL a company can do...the only kind of story it can tell (and tell badly)...that's pretty sad.

Again, this is just an absurd statement. There are so many different kinds of stories you can tell with the concept of saving the world that complaining about it being the "only kind of story" they can tell is stupid. It's like saying, "When ALL Stephen King can do is write horror novels...that's pretty sad." And really, Stephen King's stories aren't even as good as Final Fantasy.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

If there was some characterization then the stakes would seem more important, but if you dont give a crap about the spike-haired hero with amnesia...then what's the point?

You've got to be kidding. The characterization in Final Fantasy is great. Not as much in the earlier games, but definitely from 7 onward. What makes Final Fantasy stories so good is that you actually DO care about the characters. Look at Final Fantasy VII.

Spoiler:

Why do you think people were so shocked by Aeris' death? Square had spent the entire first half of the game making sure the player cares about what happens to the character. That's why her death is such a sad moment. And that's also what makes killing Sephiroth so much fun.

Really, a good Final Fantasy game isn't about the world ending. It's about the effects that such an event has on the characters. If you don't like the characters, then I guess there's nothing I can say that will make you like them. But you can't accuse Square of poor characterization. They've created some of the greatest and most memorable characters in all of gaming.

Originally Posted by sethsez

No, I mean creating the first animation with sound, creating the first full-length animated feature, and constantly pushing foward what could be done with animation. The popularity of animation as an art form is almost entirely due to the early efforts of Disney, and they've done more to shape entertainment than Square could ever dream of.

Now if only they could make a cartoon that doesn't suck...

Originally Posted by sethsez

That's a plot device normally reserved for bad anime, cheesy Saturday morning cartoons, and Roland Emmerich movies.

Yeah, and that Tolkien guy...what a hack!

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

They beat you over the head with everything over and over. There is endless expository dialogue (a big no no for those "screenwriters" you mentioned)

Because we all know that the worst fate that could possibly befall someone is having to watch two people...talking. It makes me cringe just thinking about it.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Ha ha. Keep 'em coming man. Every childish insult you throw my way is another victory for me I guess. However, it seems a bit too easy this time. Basically I just type something, and regardless of what it is, you explode. LOL. Don't get me wrong, it's still somewhat satisfying, I just prefer more of a challenge...

Who exploded? I was simply referring to your brain damage. You yourself said:

Originally Posted by Sanjuro2

I don't have half a brain.

All I'm saying is that this period when you liked Final Fantasy VII must have been before you suffered your severe brain damage and started trolling message boards.

mag

[squarejawhero]

Now if only they could make a cartoon that doesn't suck...

I'd agree with that in terms of some of their recent output, but that said there's some gems post Lion-King in amongst the musical-theatre mire. Lilo and Stitch is utterly charming and beautifull designed and directed by Chris Sanders, The Emporers New Groove is considered one of the funniest animated films ever created (wierd considering the mess making it) and Mulan is very highly regarded in critical circles.

Even some of their second-rate films like Tarzan, Pocahontas and Hunchback have a high level of artistry despite the narrative misfiring and token songs and sidekicks. Hell, despite it being a terrible film, at least Atlantis had designs by Mike Mignola! As for Treasure Planet, the less said about that the better...

Previous films have highs and lows, but to say Disney creates movies that suck is a bit absurd. They're totally lost the plot recently though, but the recent Chicken Little trailer doesn't look half as bad as I thought it would.

[mag]

Originally Posted by squarejawhero

I'd agree with that in terms of some of their recent output, but that said there's some gems post Lion-King in amongst the musical-theatre mire. Lilo and Stitch is utterly charming and beautifull designed and directed by Chris Sanders, The Emporers New Groove is considered one of the funniest animated films ever created (wierd considering the mess making it) and Mulan is very highly regarded in critical circles.

Even some of their second-rate films like Tarzan, Pocahontas and Hunchback have a high level of artistry despite the narrative misfiring and token songs and sidekicks. Hell, despite it being a terrible film, at least Atlantis had designs by Mike Mignola! As for Treasure Planet, the less said about that the better...

Previous films have highs and lows, but to say Disney creates movies that suck is a bit absurd. They're totally lost the plot recently though, but the recent Chicken Little trailer doesn't look half as bad as I thought it would.

For a long time Disney basically made two kinds of cartoons: cartoons with their own regular cast of character (Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, etc.) and cartoon versions of classic literature. They're regular characters are so annoying that those cartoons are nigh unwatchable. And most of the stuff that's based on literature ends up completely bastardizing said literature...and that's their best stuff.

As for their technical skill, I don't think that was ever in question. We all know Disney's animators are really good at what they do. But when an idea for a movie is just bad, no amount of pretty drawings can save it.

mag

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by mag

Of course there are. I never said there weren't. All I'm saying is the bigger the stakes, the bigger the story. And that's really all that something as broad as "saving the world" tells you; it doesn't say anything about the actual story.

Sorry, what you really mean is...the bigger the stakes, the harder it is for a story to have intimate character development, which is the only thing that can make anyone really CARE about those big stakes in the first place. And Squaresoft lacks the talent to pull it off.

Originally Posted by mag

Again, this is just an absurd statement. There are so many different kinds of stories you can tell with the concept of saving the world that complaining about it being the "only kind of story" they can tell is stupid. It's like saying, "When ALL Stephen King can do is write horror novels...that's pretty sad." And really, Stephen King's stories aren't even as good as Final Fantasy.

Horror is a genre. The genre of Final Fantasy would be, well, fantasy. I never said fantasy was bad. Saving the world is NOT a genre, it's part of a STORY. It does tell you about the story, despite what you say. It tells us that we are going to be watching a group of people attempt to save the world. By the way, do your homework...some of Stephen King's best work was non-horror.

Originally Posted by mag

You've got to be kidding. The characterization in Final Fantasy is great. Not as much in the earlier games, but definitely from 7 onward. What makes Final Fantasy stories so good is that you actually DO care about the characters. Look at Final Fantasy VII.

Spoiler:

Why do you think people were so shocked by Aeris' death? Square had spent the entire first half of the game making sure the player cares about what happens to the character. That's why her death is such a sad moment. And that's also what makes killing Sephiroth so much fun.

Really, a good Final Fantasy game isn't about the world ending. It's about the effects that such an event has on the characters. If you don't like the characters, then I guess there's nothing I can say that will make you like them. But you can't accuse Square of poor characterization. They've created some of the greatest and most memorable characters in all of gaming.

Well mag, if you care about generic, cardboard cutouts then fine by me.

Spoiler:

I can assure you not everyone was sad about Aeris' death, I was glad she was gone. I was upset when Sephiroth died, he was the best thing about the game.

And yes, I can accuse Square of poor characterization because that's what they know how to do best. Save the world plots with lame characters.

Originally Posted by mag

Because we all know that the worst fate that could possibly befall someone is having to watch two people...talking. It makes me cringe just thinking about it.

Really? No wonder you like the Final Fantasy games. "Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." One of these days, two characters really talking (not serving as tools for the hack writer to convey endless exposition) won't annoy you so much mag.

Originally Posted by mag

Who exploded? I was simply referring to your brain damage. You yourself said:

All I'm saying is that this period when you liked Final Fantasy VII must have been before you suffered your severe brain damage and started trolling message boards.

Ha ha, nice try mag. It was a childish insult, and no amount of covering it up now will make me feel any less victorious. It's even more satisfying now that you actually tried to go back and quote me out of context. LOL. Keep it up, please.

[tabacco]

Originally Posted by mag

They're regular characters are so annoying that those cartoons are nigh unwatchable. And most of the stuff that's based on literature ends up completely bastardizing said literature...and that's their best stuff.

So basically, what you're saying is that your whole argument comes down to your own personal taste, rather than some broader artistic opinion. I quite like the Big Five characters, for example. Donald Duck remains to this day my absolute favorite animated character of all time. Are you suggesting that this makes me some kind of lowbrow moron?

[fov]

Uh oh. As I learned at E3, you should never cross Doug when it comes to Disney.

[squarejawhero]

Originally Posted by tabacco

So basically, what you're saying is that your whole argument comes down to your own personal taste, rather than some broader artistic opinion. I quite like the Big Five characters, for example. Donald Duck remains to this day my absolute favorite animated character of all time. Are you suggesting that this makes me some kind of lowbrow moron?

Hear, hear.

Uh... on the taste thing. Not that you're a moron.