A Chat With the Final Fantasy XIII Team
1up's Shane Bettenhausen had the chance to sit down for a chat with the team behind FFXIII. They discuss the multiple versions of the games planned, the character of the title's heroine, the futuristic setting, and just a little bit about the game's battle system. From the article: "At first sight, it might seem like an action game, but FFXIII inherits the long tradition of the numbered FF games, which is the active-time battle command system. We are trying to use a similar system to what you've seen, but the major difference is that the battle will be speeded up considerably. In the past, you had to wait to input commands, but our goal here is to reduce that waiting time as much as possible, so that the battles are greatly speeded up."
FFX-2 had battles that were so "speeded up" that they felt like... just a mess. I haven't gone past the first mission.
Are folks really so impatient that waiting a few seconds to input a command is just intolerable? I fire up FFIV-FFVI from time to time and just tool around in the battle system--I _enjoyed_ the old turn based system. Hell, the FFX system wasn't so bad, either. I guess they're trying to cut out either the "random battle" syndrome or just make them as "painless" as possible.
(Don't pin me as too slow to keep up, either. I've held my own in FPS since Quake.)
I think that's the first time I've heard FF's 1980's-style turn-based interface described as "active".
Actually, the name 'Final Fantasy' is because it was expected to be the last thing Hironobu Sakaguchi would be creating before retirement, as well as possible Square's final game. However, its immense popularity created sequels, and the rest is history.
How can the FIRST response get scored "Redundant"?
because people who dont understand what "Final" in final fantasy means keep asking the same thing
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
It's good to hear that FFXIII is going back to the roots with their battle system and not going along the same route as XII. Granted, we haven't received the game yet but the demo of XII really turned me off.
XIII is starting to sound like a game I'll enjoy. Of course, I still don't like the idea of announcing three of them at once. If I have to buy and play all three to get the complete story then I won't be a happy camper.
I really miss the old settings of the pre FFVII games. Bring back the epic tales of knights and castles, and leave the dull Blade Runner-esque cities to lesser games, I say.
Does he really mean, "All the mainline FF games?" Or did he leave off the word "odd?"
(Honestly curious; I've just played FFVII, which was ATB, and FFX, which was not, as I understand the term. So odd-numbered would fit my two data points.)
--
Carnage Blender : Meet interesting people. Kill them.
We already had something like a high-speed Final Fantasy. Who here remembers Seiken Densetsu 3? Who here remembers just how well that actually worked, how it took place in real time, how you could quickly switch between characters to control them so you could micromanage battles, or how you could program the AI of your other characters to make them behave a certain way in battle to automate the process, and how easy it was to access items and magic in battle? It was pleasantly un-nightmarish while being fast paced and highly intuitive, unlike what FFXIII is looking to be at this point.
Meanwhile, somewhere, somebody on a Square Enix design team is scraping the bottom of a barrel labeled 'Creativity' with a rusty spoon... The line how they want to essentially make the female lead a 'female version of Cloud' really got me. Just let the series fucking rest until you come up with some good ideas, okay?
The American release was called Secret of Mana. I played a translated version of Seiken Densetsu 3 (Secret of Mana 2 I believe?) on an emulator and it was fantastic as well.
One of the coolest features of this game is that it was multiplayer. Someone could pick up the second controller and take control of one of the toons.
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
Because every Final Fantasy thread includes an obligatory "How can it really be FINAL fantasy if blah blah" question and an obligatory "Actually here's the explanation" response. Both comments are redundant. (Mine is just off topic.)
Allow me to translate for you:
...playing the 13th version of the same system is just stupid, even if it's "speeded up" and has even more impressive cutscenes.
You're all stupid for playing this game!
I'm hoping that when the Wii dominates the PS3...
I'm a fanboy!
Oblivion should be the standard, not the exception.
Someone made a good game, so now we should all clone THAT game instead! Then, ten years from now, we'll bitch about Oblivion clones!
Now, for the record, I don't play video games much at all these days. When I do, it's usually sitting in my friend's living room. However, when I do play, I enjoy Halo 2 just as much as Warcraft III and just as much as any Final Fantasy. Are you telling me that I'm an idiot because I will enjoy playing FFXIII? Or better yet, are you telling Sony that they're stupid for making a 13th (14th) game whose predecessors have broken sales records?
I think you're an anti-Sony or anti-FF fanboy and you don't care what the game has, you just want to see it burn. Don't criticize a game before it's even released.
FFX almost perfected the active-time battle system in my opinion. It kept the order of initiative preserved, kept you from getting pounded on if you needed to dig into the menus (which I hate), and allowed you to pound away as fast as you could select actions. FFX was just smooth.
The only was ATB could be made better is to eliminate any need to dig into menus without getting rid of the pretty. I wish FF XIII luck, but I'm not sure I like where the series is going with FF XII in terms of control schema.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
I think it's time to put the Final Fantasy series to rest. This one is going to be more of the same with fancier graphics. But it's still got the same tired gameplay, the same kind of over-used storyline and the same types of whiny, troubled characters.
The Final Fantasy games were good, but not after having been redone for the hundredth time.
They should just do one spectacular finale and leave it at that. Call it The True Final Fantasy.
Screw FFXII(I'm a turn-based fan myself. Long live FFX.). I want to know what this FFVersusXII thing is. There is a total void of information on it. The only thing that is stated is that Tetsuya Nomura (Kingdom Hearts and Advent Children) is leading the project. Just hearing that makes me salivate. Supposedly it will run parallel to the FFXII world and the "versus" in the title means something about changing directions. All very cryptic; all very exciting.
I didn't know it was possible to get excited about the FFXII suite of games before FFXII has even hit American shores, but it's happening!
If this signature is witty enough, maybe somebody will like me.
I believe your comment is redundant as well.
Beside's everyone knows FFVII was THE final fantasy to end all final fantasy....yet they keep making them.
Beer! It's what's for breakfast!
So you're saying that you don't like final fantasy sequels so everyone should play the 4th iteration of elder scrolls. Why is a sequel of one so much better then a sequel of another?
Both games are good they are just for different audiences. From my point of view I actually hate open ended game. To me when a developer says they are making an open ended game they mean they are making a game completely devoid of plot.
Why is it everyone should want to play a game where you get to do nothing of any importance, your character doesn't matter and the world stays completely stagnant no matter what. Why do you have the have a choice in everything that happens in a game? Why are your ideas only the good ones? Are the only good books "choose your own adventure" books? Or are those too rail based for you as well?
Wake up! You're not a little kid anymore. The world doesn't revolve around you. Other people ideas and stories to tell, listening to them may be entertaining and beneficial to you. Entertainment has been long dominated by non interactive story telling. Theater, movies, books, and music are all non interactive mediums with interactive counterparts but the non interactive part of it has always been more popular.
Bringing the final fantasy movie into this is completely irrelevant too. The final fantasy move was nothing like any of the game. It was its own work. I think the only reason they game it that name is because the marketing department said it would be a good idea. If they just called it "the spirit within" I don't think it would have had nearly as bad of a reputation.
I will say that RPG is the not the correct term to call a final fantasy game or any other the others like it. They are interactive stories. But for a long time now they have been called RPGs and RPG when talking about video games does not mean the same thing as RPG when referring to pen and paper games so I'll keep referring the them as such.
No, it's retarded. People pick RPGs for the strategic combat and the story -- or at least that's why I do. So if your combat is so dumbed down that it seems like auto-battle (esp. as the default option) is a good idea -- fix the friggin' combat. Make it hard enough that the player wants to play the combat. Make the combat fun. Do the work rather than trying to hide behind an automated system. I play games to play them, not to watch as AI fights for me.
Hopefully, we'll never be subjected to auto-battleH^H^H^H^H^Gambits again.
Oh, WTF, why did this get modded up?!
So, what was the plot in Super Mario Brothers? In Super Smash Brothers? In Pac-Man? Games don't need a plot. If you want something with a plot, trying watching a movie or reading a book.
Good question, why would anyway want to play Final Fantasy? Because nothing really changes throughout those games. You have zero impact on the world. You have zero impact on the way your character evolves.
No, dipshit, "choose your own adventure" books are kind of like Final Fantasy: both use the wrong media for what they're attempting. Final Fantasy is, effectively, a graphical "choose your own adventure" book - just without the "choose" part. A book isn't interactive. Games are supposed to be interactive - that's the entire point to a game! If the game isn't going to be interactive like, say, Final Fantasy, it might as well be a movie.
The plural of "medium" is "media", and no kidding. A GAME, unlike those, is supposed to be interactive . When you play a game, you're supposed to play a game. Final Fantasy misses that part.
No, it's not. The Final Fantasy movie was literally all Final Fantasy cutscenes with no non-interactive "game" section. It demonstrated quite clearly how crappy the Final Fantasy stories are. It's entirely relevant because it demonstrates perfectly how the Final Fantasy games are nothing more than long, boring, movies - just for consoles. They're not games, and anyone who thinks they are is, by definition, an idiot.
(I hate this stupid new CSS crap, it messes up "plain old text" so that the only way to get quotes to inline properly is to use "HTML Formatted" with blockquotes. I shouldn't have to manually format my post with HTML to make it look right.)
Like any game base movie had success.
Do you think they meant the 360 by the "next gen platform"? It's not like them to be coy, why didn't they just say PS3? In fact in the next sentence they say
But we altered that plan and decided to make both titles on PlayStation 3.
Did you get that thing I sent ya?
...you wish you had named everyone the same as the villain (Kefka, Sephiroth, or what have you) to make the conversations more interesting. (C'mon Sephiroth, we have to go rescue Sephiroth from Sephiroth! et al.)
What sound do people on rollercoasters make? Hint: it's not Xbox 360.
The games are vastly different anyway. Going from FF7 to FF10 and unless you know the names of the games, you'd never know that they were by the same company.
Hmmm... Pie...
Why do you employ a universal definition of what games are "supposed to" be like beyond what people find fun to play? Some people like games with extensive plot - some people find that all the hype about "deep" interactivity in game development today takes too much away from plot. Who are you to tell them what kind of games they are "supposed to" enjoy?