The problem with FF16 is that they refused to go all-in. They wanted to eat their cake and have it too. What came out was something that neither satisfied the traditional turn-based old-school Final Fantasy fans, because of the gutted RPG elements, nor engaged the "modern gamers" who enjoyed action games like Dark Souls, (modern) God of War, and hell, even DmC. To an action fan, the gameplay in FF16 is extremely tepid. There is little to no directional requirement, and so you can pretty much just be anywhere and press your buttons. The buttons do not have many interesting side effects, or in other words, most of them are just do X damage.
It's become increasingly concerning that the so-called revamp of FF14 in 8.0 is trending in that same direction. They don't want to alienate the "traditional" FF14 fans, and yet they are desperate to attract these "modern gamers" with Evolved mode gameplay and promises of ever more flexibility in the MSQ and in acquiring gear. I think CBU3 and the SE leadership need to take a hard look at their own assumptions of what makes a game attract more players. It is 100% not trying to play both sides and ending up producing something that is mediocre to every camp of gamer. If evolved mode jobs just feel like reborn jobs with fewer buttons, but each button has a tooltip as convoluted as Starry Muse, you're not fundamentally evolving the gameplay. It just becomes, like FF16, much pomp over nothing. What is the point of going from a static rotation with 30 buttons to a static rotation with 16 buttons?
The scarce details that we've seen from the first two Fanfests do not inspire confidence. Take the MSQ change that they spent 15 minutes on. What is there fundamentally different from that and a typical linear MSQ with two branches at the start? They did not say anything about whether the story beats would change if you choose a different sequence. They did not explain how they could affect gameplay, like, for example, a solo quest having different objectives or mechanics based on the path you've chosen.
Is this a cost issue or are they too scared to do anything that rocks the boat too much? If Evercold is supposed to be a rethinking of FF14, why is nearly everything we've seen so far so tepid? If this game is to ever grow again, it needs to be willing to take risks and stick to a vision, not offer watered down ideas that barely shift the paradigm.
Continue reading...
It's become increasingly concerning that the so-called revamp of FF14 in 8.0 is trending in that same direction. They don't want to alienate the "traditional" FF14 fans, and yet they are desperate to attract these "modern gamers" with Evolved mode gameplay and promises of ever more flexibility in the MSQ and in acquiring gear. I think CBU3 and the SE leadership need to take a hard look at their own assumptions of what makes a game attract more players. It is 100% not trying to play both sides and ending up producing something that is mediocre to every camp of gamer. If evolved mode jobs just feel like reborn jobs with fewer buttons, but each button has a tooltip as convoluted as Starry Muse, you're not fundamentally evolving the gameplay. It just becomes, like FF16, much pomp over nothing. What is the point of going from a static rotation with 30 buttons to a static rotation with 16 buttons?
The scarce details that we've seen from the first two Fanfests do not inspire confidence. Take the MSQ change that they spent 15 minutes on. What is there fundamentally different from that and a typical linear MSQ with two branches at the start? They did not say anything about whether the story beats would change if you choose a different sequence. They did not explain how they could affect gameplay, like, for example, a solo quest having different objectives or mechanics based on the path you've chosen.
Is this a cost issue or are they too scared to do anything that rocks the boat too much? If Evercold is supposed to be a rethinking of FF14, why is nearly everything we've seen so far so tepid? If this game is to ever grow again, it needs to be willing to take risks and stick to a vision, not offer watered down ideas that barely shift the paradigm.
Continue reading...