Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Square Enix Admits Final Fantasy XIV Damaged Brand

Posted by Soulskill on from the all-downhill-since-tellah-died dept.

_xeno_ writes "It's taken a year since Final Fantasy XIV launched to what can at best be called unfavorable reviews, but Square Enix CEO Yoichi Wada is finally willing to admit that the (still subscription-free) MMO 'greatly damaged' the entire Final Fantasy brand. Despite this damage, Wada said Square Enix will continue to work on 'reviving' the game, with an upcoming patch promising to finally introduce such series staples as chocobos and airships. Even so, there's still no word on the PS3 release, which was delayed until the game was 'fixed,' nor is there any sign that Square Enix feels the game will be worth a subscription fee any time soon."

22 of 234 comments (clear)

  1. Never considered the MMOs part of FF by bipbop · · Score: 4, Funny

    FF11 and FF14 never seemed like they were FF games in the first place, so they didn't tarnish my perception of the brand, at least as far as I'm aware. On the other hand, FFX, FFX-2, FF12, and FF13...

    1. Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF by radiumsoup · · Score: 2

      I played FFXI for over 5 years, only stopping after life changes made playing too costly from a time sink standpoint... I played the FFXIV Beta for all of 10 hours before uninstalling with a simple note to the devs: "This game is nowhere near ready for Beta." I'm quite surprised it was released at all... but FFXI was a very good game for the brand, even if it was quite obviously geared with a large bias toward the Japanese market with North America (and finally Europe) as an afterthought.

    2. Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF by genner · · Score: 4, Insightful

      FF11 and FF14 never seemed like they were FF games in the first place, so they didn't tarnish my perception of the brand, at least as far as I'm aware. On the other hand, FFX, FFX-2, FF12, and FF13...

      Hey now FFX was a good game and I'm pretty sure the sequel was just some lame fan fiction that people mistook for a real release.

    3. Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF by vga_init · · Score: 2

      9 definitely had its redeeming qualities. Heck, even 8 was a pretty good game, but the problem is that neither of them even came close to reproducing the magic that went into 7. Now I'm just convinced that Square got lucky with 7 and that was just a fluke--a one-off occurrence that will never be repeated in the series. It's been more than 10 years so we should all just accept that fact and move on.

    4. Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF by the_humeister · · Score: 2, Funny

      How can you even call it fan fiction when there wasn't any nudity involved?

    5. Re:Never considered the MMOs part of FF by Toonol · · Score: 2

      FFX-2 had some of the best mechanics in the entire series; the battle system/jobs system was great, and it had a non-linear mission based storyline. I think a lot of people hated it because (1) girls and (2) it had a very different feel and mood than X. That was deliberate, I'm very sure. The theme of FFX was death, almost oppressively so... but in the end you won, and so X-2 was about life and optimism, and the lighthearted-silliness was part of that.

  2. Stability and Performance Issues by ShakaUVM · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It wasn't just "Stability and Performance Issues" that caused the game to suck so bad.

    It was, well, everything.

    A map that wouldn't show you where things you wanted to find were
    A bizarre bazaar and shop system
    No real story or major quest line (that I could find at least, in the week or so I spent playing it)
    A UI that was designed for consoles - which is ironic since it never launched on the PS3.
    Sloow animations on the menus. You have to hit menu (and wait for all the elements to slide in) then click on the submenu, and wait for all the elements to slide in and then click on "map" (instead of just being able to hit 'm' or whatever).
    Class system didn't make any sense.

    I dunno, there were other things I can remember really hating about the game, but it's been a year and I've tried to black out that part of my memory as best I can.

  3. The problem is by chispito · · Score: 5, Insightful

    they are still JRPGs, and the industry (outside of Japan) has grown. Western RPGs keep growing and innovating. I feel like Western developers learned from Japan back in the 16 bit era, but Japanese developers are stuck in a time warp. There is more to life than turn based combat and angsty teenage heroes.

    --
    The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    1. Re:The problem is by DigiShaman · · Score: 2

      Perhaps it can be traced back further, but I've always had the impression that Western fantasy RPG character sets can be traced back to J. R. R. Tolkien's work. Talk about being stuck in a time warp.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:The problem is by PwnzerDragoon · · Score: 2

      You can blame Dungeons and Dragons for that. I imagine if it never existed, today's WRPGs would be far different than they are.

    3. Re:The problem is by Baloroth · · Score: 2

      Mass effect is barely even in the category of "RPG." Although the quest system is pretty good, the equipment and skills were lacking. No, what OP (I suspect) is talking about is games more like The Witcher (1&2, especially 1), KOTOR (going back a ways), Oblivion (kinda), even Dragon Age or the soon to be released Diablo III. None of those games can be played by sitting something on the controller and walking away which is what can be done with some of the new ones (I think this sums it up nicely).

      The Last Remnant, which I did play and while fun, was a terrible RPG (worse than Mass Effect. Seriously) 3rd person cover shooters are more innovative RPGs than this (in fact, they actually did involve innovation at the time.) Walking down a single pathr, absolutely no choice of skills to update (you can choose which ones a character focuses on... that is all), 2-3 choices (which you don't entirely control) for combat, group-based fighting. Honestly, it's fun for a while especially since it is more or less the only JRPG I ever played, but I cannot see how people could ever spend massive amounts of time playing games like that. I tried one of the recent FF (13 I think) games for about 30 mins once. It... didn't even feel like an RPG, it felt like walking down a narrow corridor holding down a button.

      Also, neither Magicka nor Torchlight were very good RPGs, no idea why you chose those as examples. They were a lot of fun, but deep RPG action they were not. OP is right: Western RPGs have, if not grown deeper, at least expanded and experimented in the genre. JRPGs seem to have devolved.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
  4. Yeah I'm sure it wasn't 13+ sequels. by Beelzebud · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No such thing as brand dilution. No sir. At no point did they stretch the brand thin.

    1. Re:Yeah I'm sure it wasn't 13+ sequels. by artor3 · · Score: 2

      Just from memory, you've got the 14 numbered games, X-2 and XIII-2, three Tactics titles (Tactics, Advanced, and A2), Crystal Chronicles, Mystic Quest, the three game Legends series for the Gameboy, the three VII spin-offs, the Dissidia fighters (2 of them) + another fighter with a different name that I forget.

      That's 30 right there. I'm sure there are more. That's more games than there are in the Madden series!

  5. No Chocobos and Airstrips? OF COURSE! by Jayfield · · Score: 2

    I haven't even played this game but I'm quite positive that the lack of airships and chocobos (which I'm about as fond of as Cait Sith and Moglies) is not the problem here.

  6. Re:What the hell is a "chocobos"? by dido · · Score: 5, Informative

    Chocobos are a species of giant, normally flightless bird sort of like ostriches or large chickens, that have basically appeared in one form or another in every Final Fantasy since Final Fantasy II (and now XIV should have them too). They are most often used as mounts, but some have magical abilities as well. One example of their appearance is in Final Fantasy VII, where the party has to capture a chocobo which they can ride across a swamp inhabited by a swift and deadly serpent monster. Crossing the swamp on foot without getting attacked by the serpent is all but impossible, and the serpent is too powerful to be defeated at the levels your characters are when they reach that point, but mounted on a chocobo your party can move fast enough to escape the serpent and reach the caves beyond.

    --
    Qu'on me donne six lignes écrites de la main du plus honnête homme, j'y trouverai de quoi le faire pendre.
  7. How many would still play Asheron's Call 3? by GoodNewsJimDotCom · · Score: 3

    Asheron's Call 1 sometimes comes up as best MMORPG ever. I played both AC1 and WOW, and AC1 was far more exciting. AC1 let you dodge arrows and magic if you were agile enough. AC1 wasn't the perfect MMORPG, drain health1 broke the game by itself, but it seemed worlds more fun than WOW. AC1 had free updates and they happened every month. AC1 had a bigger explorable area when you're low level, not containing you to zones. If your stats were primed enough, your low level could take on things far outside your level, not using some artificial level comparison rule(if monster over 7 levels, you can't hit it).

    However AC1 died when AC2 came out. AC2 was flawed in many major ways such as armor didn't work very well, and fighting in a group is much more profitable, especially with a tactician. People went from AC1 to AC2 and when AC2 flopped, people didn't flood back to AC1.
    So AC2 hurt the franchise far worse than if it was never released at all. Still, I think people are not sour on Asheron Call series. I bet if they'd release an AC3 similar to AC1, but with several basic things fixed, they'd be set.

    Sadly this probably will never be since they made LOTRO, and forgot what made AC1 awesome, and adopted WOW game design laziness.

    --
    God spoke to me
  8. Re:I just don't understand by Z34107 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Rumor had it that they outsourced development to China. Chocobos were, for a while, horsebirds, but this was later corrected to "chocopo". (Ads on the linked site NSFW).

    Better yet, the collector's edition included a tumbler which could be "damaged" by "items including salt and solid materials, carbonated beverages, milk or other dairy beverages, fruit juices, etc." Not sure how that made it through QC.

    Then again, Sankaku Complex just really doesn't like China, so it's possible Squeenix just dun goofed. Perhaps after (more than) 14 final fantasies, this was their game design. Anyone who knew for sure what happened met seppuku.

    --
    DATABASE WOW WOW
  9. Completely Enix's fault by jasonla · · Score: 2

    Ever since the merger, the company's games have been shit, and I completely blame the Enix side of the family. Square Co. produced some of the most memorable and genre defining games, such as FF, Chrono Trigger, Xenogears, Secret of Mana/Evermore. (full list here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Square_games). WTF has Enix ever released that was as noteworthy or even approaches the quality of Square?

    1. Re:Completely Enix's fault by ThosLives · · Score: 2

      I think I have to agree with this. Although, I think XII was pretty decent; given its style, though, I think it was done by the teams involved with Tactics and Vagrant Story which were, if I recall correctly, before the merger.

      XIII reminds me of Xenosaga II and III, which both destroyed the awesome Xenosaga (I) with its crazy linear gameplay and "narrative" loading screens.(Seriously - the story should come out during gameplay, not a loading screen!)

      So, yes; while I purchased XIII, I think that's probably it for me. (Personally I fall into the camp that has VI as the favorite.)

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
  10. Re:What the hell is a "chocobos"? by ben_kelley · · Score: 3, Funny

    Oh great. It hardly seems worth even starting playing the series now that you have totally spoiled Final Fantasy VII for me!

  11. Re:Arglebargle... FF6 better by billcopc · · Score: 2

    Annoyingly stupid minigames built on an unresponsive RPG walkabout engine ? Yep. I hated FFX to death for that dumb chocobo race thing near the Monster Arena... the one where you had to catch balloons or something. I mean, What In The Tentacled Fuck Son ? This isn't a driving game, it's an RPG. Give me a list of actions and I'll choose one. "Action: Skip stupid minigame" *click*

    Some people find these Japanese elements cute and quirky. I find them, well, brain-damaged. Japanese culture is just a weird mish-mash of rampant consumerism, OCD, and non-existent self-esteem. It seems every game is about collecting useless things, moping about teenage existential ignorance, and fighting so-called bullies that look like they just got voted off America's Got Talent.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  12. Re:What the hell is a "chocobos"? by SleazyRidr · · Score: 2

    They're something in the Final Fantasy Game Series. If you knew about Final Fantasy, you'd know what Chocobos are; so my question to you is: If you are so clearly disinterested in the Final Fantasy series of games, why are you wasting your time reading about it? Clearly your time is so valuable to you that you can't even spare the 0.18 seconds to Google it.

    --
    Is 1563649 a prime number?