Post by: theaveng on February 07, 2003, 01:54:40 PM
From Gamefront.de (through Babelfish)
Square speaks over finally Fantasy XII
31.01.03 - UNCONFIRMED: In the Famitsu, which appears to 07.02.03, is to be an interview with Shigeru Miyamoto of Nintendo and Yasumi Matsuno of Square. The two speak with a reporter about their current projects and plans. The following passage of the discussion is interesting:
Miyamoto: ' as they advance with finally Fantasy XII ?'
Matsuno: ' co-operation with Nintendo was good. Or haven't I might say that now (laughs)?'
Reporter: ' isn't Fantasy XII final for PlayStation2?'
Miyamoto: (laughs)
Matsuno: ' if the time is ripe, I it will say.'
Since the Famitsu did not appear yet and we cannot examine next week ago whether the discussion ran available and/or in such a way, applies to this message: WITHOUT GUARANTEE and UNCONFIRMED .
=================================
Japanese Developers Talk About New Projects
"Comments from Yasumi Matsuno, Shigeru Miyamoto and Level 5 inside."
"In interviews published in the recent issue of Weekly Famitsu, Square's Yasumi Matsuno said that about 120 people are working on his current project, Final Fantasy XII, which will be released later this year in Japan. From a development standpoint, he wants the game to be a truly unique title this year. Furthermore, he mentioned the possibility of doing something with the card e-reader."
FACTS:
- Nintendo's president last year made a statement that more FF series will come to Nintendo's platforms.
- PS2 outnumbers GC by 4 consoles to 1. It has the largest userbase resulting in PS2 titles dominating in sales.
- PS2 can store all of FF12 on a single disc=8.5 gigabytes. GC discs are only 1.5 gigabytes and will likely require 3-4 discs, thereby increasing Square's publishing costs $3-4... and reducing profits by about $3*500,000 units = $1.5 million reduced profit.
- Square is desperate for cash. The flop of FF:Spirit Within hurt them financially. They need every dollar they can get.
- Every initial release of previous Final Fantasies was exclusive to only one console. FF1-3=NES, FF4-6=SuperNES, FF7-9=PS1, FF10-11=PS2.
MY OPINION:
- Nintendo's president's statement very likely refers to FF: Crystal Chronicles and FF: Tactics for the GameCube/GameBoy respectively. He didn't say all FF series were coming to the Nintendo... just more of them. So FF12 could remain on PS2, and the president's statement would still be 100% accurate.
- Based upon the above facts, I think PS2 is the best choice for FF12 (exclusive). It would make the most profit at minimal publishing costs.
- The other possibility is that Square might target both PS2 and GC. I hope that happens, but I don't expect it to. It doesn't fit Square's love of exclusive titles.
Post by: AlphaDragoon2002 on February 07, 2003, 01:56:40 PM
Post by: alexzman on February 07, 2003, 02:05:14 PM
Post by: Duriez on February 07, 2003, 02:31:52 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: theaveng
ON-GOING RUMORS:
From Gamefront.de (through Babelfish)
Square speaks over finally Fantasy XII
31.01.03 - UNCONFIRMED: In the Famitsu, which appears to 07.02.03, is to be an interview with Shigeru Miyamoto of Nintendo and Yasumi Matsuno of Square. The two speak with a reporter about their current projects and plans. The following passage of the discussion is interesting:
Miyamoto: ' as they advance with finally Fantasy XII ?'
Matsuno: ' co-operation with Nintendo was good. Or haven't I might say that now (laughs)?'
Reporter: ' isn't Fantasy XII final for PlayStation2?'
Miyamoto: (laughs)
Matsuno: ' if the time is ripe, I it will say.'
Since the Famitsu did not appear yet and we cannot examine next week ago whether the discussion ran available and/or in such a way, applies to this message: WITHOUT GUARANTEE and UNCONFIRMED.
I've heard this is fake.
Post by: Sirmorphix on February 07, 2003, 02:35:39 PM
If anything if Square was REALLY really hurting for cash they would be smart to make versions for all 3 consoles. Or play the companies off each other to pay for exclusive rights to the game. And in theory I bet Nintendo would be more than willing to dole out a couple million to Square for a chance at FFXII.
Post by: Oni_Link on February 07, 2003, 02:51:52 PM
Post by: Toolvana on February 07, 2003, 03:05:50 PM
Post by: Sullichin on February 07, 2003, 05:09:00 PM
Post by: ssj4_android on February 07, 2003, 05:24:21 PM
Post by: UberFlop on February 07, 2003, 05:30:09 PM
Also, I don't think that 1 PS2 disc equals 3 - 4 GODs. The PS2 and GameCube use different compression algorithms (though the GameCube is supposed to have better and more efficient programming toolkits), and have two completely different formats. Just because the GOD has about 1.9GB per disc amd the PS2 disc has about 4.1GB per disc (not exactly sure abou this number) doesn't mean that the PS@ can have 2x times as much game as the GameCube.
Post by: Mojo on February 07, 2003, 05:42:41 PM
Post by: yrrab436 on February 07, 2003, 06:30:20 PM
What would be in it for Square Enix though? If it is coming to Nintendo, I certainly don't think it would be exclusive. Looking objectively, that would be a bad business move (not that I know anything about business).
Post by: Blade on February 07, 2003, 06:48:58 PM
DVD = Approximately 4.7GB. (one side)
Do the math, and you'll see that one PS2 DVD is little more than 3 GOD's..
Post by: Uglydot on February 07, 2003, 07:03:41 PM
I am speaking in strictly American numbers here, I have no clue how they were after the classic FFs.
Post by: theaveng on February 08, 2003, 05:43:31 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Mojo
Square will lose no money with extra discs. You know why? They charge $3-4 extra dollars per game.
So $50 for the PS2 version, and $54 for the GameCube. Possible. But wouldn't that make GC owners angry?
Also:
GC disc = 1.5 gigabytes max
PS2 DVD = 8.5 gigabytes max
Post by: VariantX on February 08, 2003, 01:36:22 PM
Post by: clearacell on February 08, 2003, 03:38:57 PM
Post by: XzIbIt_23 on February 08, 2003, 03:44:59 PM
Post by: Kobun Heat on February 08, 2003, 04:43:14 PM
Post by: DrForester on February 08, 2003, 05:04:01 PM
FF: CC is nothing more than a payoff game to get GBA development rights. Maybe if Nintendo makes the GBA sucessor, and doesn't let Square develop for it, Square will let Nintendo rent some employees to make another Nintendo funded FF game.
Oh, and lets not forget that a few days after Square-Enix was made, they stated flat out that they have no gamecube plans, just PS2 plans and some GBA and PC ambitions.
Post by: SaMuS on February 09, 2003, 01:42:19 AM
Now for FF12 on GameCube, I would be delighted to see that happen, just to help Nintendo to sell the Cube. INstead of that, I don't blame it if it's not happening.
Post by: Hemmorrhoid on February 09, 2003, 04:25:14 AM
I hope its as long as other FF games. Like 50+hours.
Post by: theaveng on February 09, 2003, 06:11:16 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: XzIbIt_23
ok, i don't know if i'm right but..isn't mini dvds cheaper then normal dvds?
1-2 cents cheaper. Insignifigant.
.
.
.
GC discs are already double-layered. Layer 1 is copy protection. Layer 2 is 1.5 gigabytes of data.
And yes, a dual-layer PS2 disc (such as Xenosaga) can hold 8.5 gigabytes.
So a double-layer PS2 disc is equal to *[6]* GC discs. GC has better compression thanks to DivX, but even so FF12 will still require 3-4 discs. IMHO.
Post by: theaveng on February 09, 2003, 06:17:11 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: SaMuS
I am so serious when I say that FFX is such an ugly, but ugly and terrible game
I can understand why you might think it's not a good game. Myself, I thought it was too easy. But "ugly"? hahahahaha! You have to be joking. FF10 has the most beautiful graphics ever produced for a PS2.
Post by: Kobun Heat on February 09, 2003, 06:34:23 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: DrForester
Also Square has gotten out of the red from the FF movie, thanks to Kingdom Hearts doing better than expected, and the already expected sucess of FFX.
FFX and Kingdom Hearts made Square eighty million dollars?
Post by: GoldShadow on February 09, 2003, 07:43:59 AM
"GC discs are already double-layered. Layer 1 is copy protection. Layer 2 is 1.5 gigabytes of data.
And yes, a dual-layer PS2 disc (such as Xenosaga) can hold 8.5 gigabytes.
So a double-layer PS2 disc is equal to *9* GC discs. GC has better compression thanks to DivX, but even so FF12 will still require 3-4 discs. IMHO."
Er... 8.5/1.5 = 5+2/3 != 9
I doubt FFXII will come to GCN, but I sure wish it would.
Post by: Hemmorrhoid on February 09, 2003, 08:26:05 AM
Post by: DrForester on February 10, 2003, 08:19:20 AM
Quote
FFX and Kingdom Hearts made Square eighty million dollars?
Well $50 games
Kingdom hearts has done about 3 mill worldwide, FFX about 5 or more. Plus their other games, like Saga Unlimited In Japan. And revenue from other projects and such
That's $400,000,000 right there. And I'm sure FFX and Kingdom Hearts did not cost 320 million to make, distribute, and promote
Post by: manunited4eva22 on February 10, 2003, 12:16:13 PM
Post by: theaveng on February 10, 2003, 12:28:14 PM
If you do not like battles, play an adventure game like Zelda where you can just run around the monsters without fighting. Play Adventure games, not RPGs.
Final Fantasy is an RPG, and therefore will always involve lots of battling.
Post by: nolimit19 on February 10, 2003, 12:28:23 PM
Post by: "Sky" on February 10, 2003, 12:53:19 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: GoldShadow
How was FFX so terrible? I never got a chance to play it, but I've heard great things about it. The character-switching dynamic sounds great. I just wish they would stop clinging to the random battles that everybody (except hardcore RPG fans) hates.
Good concept... that was already executed many times in the past... and somehow Square does the worst job of it... no penalties for switching... and they turned the game into too much of a rock-scissors-papers situation...
Just to show you what I mean...
Enemy is weak against certain element- Use Lulu
Enemy is swift and therefore has high evasion- Use Tidus
Enemy is flying- Use Wakka
Strong enemy- Use Yuna
Enemy weak against piercing- Use Auron or Kimhari
Treasure chest in Battle- Use Rikku
There are exceptions, especially during boss battles (which for the majority so far from what I played are well designed), but I think Square tried to do something "special" with the character switching and in the end turned it into a "switch this character in for this enemy, repeat when needed" situation.
Post by: Marcus Arillius on February 10, 2003, 12:56:32 PM
I think FF12 is coming to Gamecube. There would be no reason for it not too, even if the rumored interview is fake. Just think, why would Square license Nintendo to have some of the new FF games, and even old ones for GBA, and not allow them to have ALL new FF games? Profit wise it would be a mistake.
Most likely, FF12 will be appearing on both PS2 and gamecube. More importantly, Sony will have first stab at it for a good time period. Why? Well, you don't get to own a huge portion of SquareSoft's shares, save them from ruination, and not get anything out of the deal.....*cough* heh hem..."Sony".... *cough*. Excuse me, I'm a little flemmy. Its important that Sony gets to sell FF12 on the PS2 first before it goes to the cube because of the ever increasing multi-console owner. Those who own both a PS2 and a Cube are most likely avid "gamers" ( or are spoiled by their parents) and will be very aware of FF12's release, meaning they'll want it as soon as it comes out. If it comes out for PS2 first, they'll buy it for PS2 first, leaving the cube out in the cold. Don't get me wrong. When the cube gets FF12 it will definitely sell extremely well, but not as good as it could. Sony won't care in the least that FF12 will be on Gamecube, as long as they get it first, for several weeks, more likely months, in advance. By the time Cube gets it, anyone who would have bought FF12 will have already gotten it for the PS2, therefore, sales for the PS2 will be affected minimally, probaly not at all. I knew econonmics would help me one day.
Post by: Uglydot on February 10, 2003, 01:18:59 PM
Post by: mac<censored> on February 10, 2003, 01:24:09 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: theaveng
The purpose of role-playing games is to battle. It's always been that way since the 1970's/80's Dungeons and Dragons craze. It you subtracted the random battles from Final Fantasy, you'd no longer have a RPG.
That's just bullshit -- maybe you really enjoy battles, but many people don't, and an RPG without any battles at all would still very much be an RPG.
I played a lot of D&D in college, and one thing I noticed is that it was only the worst campaigns that involved lots of fighting (usually run by an incompetent DM, who couldn't come up with a good story). Far more interesting were the ones where you spent most of your time really role-playing, actually interacting with other characters, not just throwing a few dice and getting a score.
[note that if battling where what people enjoyed about RPGs, you'd see a lot more `american-style' RPGs around, but in fact the story-heavy `japanese-style' seems far more popular]
Post by: Kobun Heat on February 10, 2003, 06:30:07 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: DrForester
Well $50 games
Kingdom hearts has done about 3 mill worldwide, FFX about 5 or more. Plus their other games, like Saga Unlimited In Japan. And revenue from other projects and such
That's $400,000,000 right there. And I'm sure FFX and Kingdom Hearts did not cost 320 million to make, distribute, and promote
Nnnnnnnnnnnnno.
Publishers profit a few dollars off of every game - not $50.
This is also ignoring that other money pit, FFXI.
Post by: nolimit19 on February 10, 2003, 06:45:30 PM
i am sure it didnt cost 320 million, but i wouldnt be suprised if i cost a 3rd of that. what did square give disney to use its characters???? money of some sort i assume. plus there were tons of commercials for kingdom hearts. and if i am not mistaken, kingdom hearts didnt sell 3 million copies. i know it didnt sell 1 million in japan, and i dont think it did it north america too. i think u over estimate how much money they actually make, but there popularity is undeniable. there games have huge budgets though and it comes at a price. thats why nintendo hasnt gone realistic, because the dev time for those games is high and costs are higher as well. thats why nintendo is still the most profitable videogame company.
Post by: PaLaDiN on February 11, 2003, 03:18:17 AM
If Square wants to bring FFXII to GC, they'll do it. It has nothing to do with CD size. If a little thing like "Oh no! It has to be multiple CDs!" bothers them...
Then perhaps we're better off not having FFXII at all.
But I digress...
To answer the topic question, I think not. I won't go ahead and say "not a chance in Hell!" because stranger things have happened... but I do think it's pretty unlikely.
I don't really care either... if you really want Final Fantasy, maybe you chose the wrong system... unless FF:CC delivers, which I think it will.
Post by: WesDawg on February 11, 2003, 05:40:42 AM
"FF: CC is nothing more than a payoff game to get GBA development rights"
Nintendo has never that I know of used GBA to leverage GC games. In fact Konami gives the GC complete crap for games and Big'N still lets 'em make those amazing Castlevania's for GBA. Same for Rare who don't make anything for GC anymore. I think Square was interested in the connectivity and in making a game that you could play on your Cube and on your GBA at the same time.
Secondly, I like Random battles. I like working hard to develop a charactor into someone great. I like putting lots of time into making a great team. It's tedious during the process, but when you're done you have a sence of accomplishment and bonding with your group. In the old DW games you had a huge sence of accomplishment just cause you made it to the next town without your whole team dying finally, and when you thought back about how you only had that one White Mage left and you ran clear across the game map running from every enemy that attacked to finally stumble into town with 10 hit-points left, you can't help but be proud. Vive le La Random Battles!
Post by: theaveng on February 11, 2003, 05:44:57 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: nolimit19
i am almost positive that an extra disc does not cost 1 dollar a piece. i think they are about 12 cents a piece.
Don't think. Prove. We have provided proof that DVDs cost ~$1.00 per disc/ ~$1.40 per disc/slipsheet/case: http://www.gnscd.com/dvd.htm Where is your proof that DVDs cost only 12 cents each? Got proof?
.
.
.
CHRONO TRIGGER: Although this game didn't have random battles, it did have monsters standing in your way. You were forced to fight them. Also, you had to level up, so again you had to wander around and randomly fight monsters... or else the Bosses would kill you. So, this method is not much different from the Final Fantasy design.
Post by: Hemmorrhoid on February 11, 2003, 06:00:09 AM
I hope its as long as any FF.
Post by: theaveng on February 11, 2003, 06:04:20 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: macshitQuote
Originally posted by: theaveng
The purpose of role-playing games is to battle. It's always been that way since the 1970's/80's Dungeons and Dragons craze. It you subtracted the random battles from Final Fantasy, you'd no longer have a Role-Playing Game.
That's just bullshit -- maybe you really enjoy battles, but many people don't, and an RPG without any battles at all would still very much be an RPG.
Uh huh. An RPG without battles. Riiiiight. If there are no battles, why would you need stats like "Defense" "Health" "Hit Points" and so on? I agree story is important, but without the battles you wouldn't even a game! You'd have a D&D drama play. Or in the case of Final Fantasy, a movie.
You guys are forgetting Final Fantasy is a GAME, and the joy of playing the game is forming a team of characters, leveling them up, and kicking random monster ass. The story is merely icing on the cake... a very nice addition but not absolutely necessary. Look at Final Fantasy 1 on the Original Nintendo... the story was almost non-existent... but still a fun, fun game. Same applies to modern games like Final Fantasy 10/11/12/CC.
If Square followed your advice to create "an RPG without any battles", Final Fantasy would no longer be a game. It would be a joke.
Post by: Marcus Arillius on February 11, 2003, 07:08:10 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: theaveng
Square's record with the Final Fantasy series is similar to Paramount's record with the Star Trek movie franchise:
FF1 =good
FF2 =sucked
FF3 =good
FF4 =good
FF5 =sucked
FF6 =good
FF7 =good
FF8 =sucked
FF9 =good
FF10 =debatable (50% say sucked; 50% say great)
FF11 =good (from Japanese reports)
Square has a hit-or-miss record with every third game royally sucking.
no no no. vewy vewy wong. If you are speaking of the U.S releases then I think FF2 was the best game in the whole series. Its the one that got me hooked. Now, 4 (psx) and 2 (snes) are the same game in U.S. releases so you can't say one was good and one sucked.
Post by: DrForester on February 11, 2003, 07:42:38 AM
Square cares nothing about the GC, they just care for the GBA. They want to make money on GBA, so they agree to let nintendo publish a FF title.
Square cares about the bottom line, and they aren't going to put FFXII on GC when they can sell 5 times more on the PS2. As for FFXII being multi-console, that goes compeltly against square's (And enix's) track record, so I don't know why anyone brings it up, when outside ports of old games, Square enver does ports.
Post by: Hemmorrhoid on February 11, 2003, 08:21:23 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on February 11, 2003, 09:37:01 AM
Some of guys are assuming that random battles and battles period are the same thing. They're not. When people complain about random battles they mean battles when you walk around and suddenly you enter a battle out of nowhere. That is irritating as hell and a lot of people justifiable hate it. However there are battles that aren't random. The Mario RPG and Chrono games are proof of this. Battles still exist but you can SEE the enemies ahead of time and can therefore avoid them if you are low on health and don't want to battle. Battles should stay in RPGs. Random battles (and the key word is RANDOM) should not.
Someone said they weren't going to buy FF:CC because it's not a "real" Final Fantasy game. That's just stupid. Would you not buy it if it was the exact same game without "Final Fantasy" in the title? If FF:CC is a good game buy it. If it's not don't. Anyone who cares because it's not a "real" FF game shouldn't be allowed to play videogames. It's the exact same thing as not buying a game because you don't like the title.
As for FFXII I'm going to make a bold claim and say that it's NOT coming to Gamecube. There just isn't any reason for Square to release it on Gamecube when not only does the PS2 have a larger userbase but most Final Fantasy fans already own a PS2 and therefore moving the series to another platform will only piss off the fanbase. Square would be better off doing what they're doing now: establishing a Final Fantasy spinoff series on a different platform. If the "real" Final Fantasy series ever switched platforms it would be early in a console generation's life (like when FFVII switched).
Post by: Hemmorrhoid on February 11, 2003, 09:48:51 AM
Random battles can be a pain, but people saying FF shouldnt have battles at all really should learn what games are about.
Post by: ruby_onix on February 11, 2003, 01:35:07 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Marcus Arillius
no no no. vewy vewy wong. If you are speaking of the U.S releases then I think FF2 was the best game in the whole series. Its the one that got me hooked. Now, 4 (psx) and 2 (snes) are the same game in U.S. releases so you can't say one was good and one sucked.
He's most likely referring to the FF2 and 3 that you haven't seen. The originals. Not the FF4 and 6 that were renamed 2 and 3 by Square USA back in the SNES days.
The original FF2 will hit the PSX in a few weeks. You can judge it for yourself shortly.
Post by: Marcus Arillius on February 11, 2003, 05:11:06 PM
Also, square making more money on the PS2 is precisely why FF12 will be on the PS2.....FIRST then it will go to the GC. There would be no reason at all for it not to come to the GC, just because of their "track record" of not multi-platforming. This is the first time square is developing for two competing game companies ever. There are no groundrules to base their actions on now. Everything is completely up to chance. The SMARTEST and most practical thing for Square to do profit wise, is to bring EVERY title they create to EVERY company they're developing for, for EVERY console or handheld the companies have. It may sound like wishful thinking on my part to have ff12 on the cube, but I don't care. I'm buying it for whichever console has it first, or whichever one has it at all. So I guess I'll be playing on the PS2
Post by: DrForester on February 11, 2003, 05:51:31 PM
Wait...I know...
NONE
Post by: Marcus Arillius on February 12, 2003, 01:53:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: DrForester
Ok, what POSSIBLE hint has square given to sugest that after nearly 20 years of NEVER porting anything, outside old games to newer platforms, that Square is suddenly going to port FFXII to GC?
Wait...I know...
NONE
Actually, you may not remember but they are kinda developing for this thing called the Game Boy Advance and something else called the Gamecube, both being made by Nintendo, while alternately developing for the Playstation 2, ya know, Nintendo's biggest competitor. As I stated before, (in other words) Square never ported anything before because they've never had ties with two competing companies at once, so none of us can really predict whats going to happen, because your right, they haven't given us hints about anything, including what they would do if they are developing for more than one console. Square has already decided to make brand new Final Fantasy games for the Gamecube and GBA. It is possible that they may keep FF:CC exclusive to the Gamecube so Sony can have FF:12 exclusive to it's system but someone please tell me why they would do that? If they want to maximize their profits, which they really should try and do after that whole movie mess, they must expand to meet as large a market as possible with all their products, meaning FF:CC and FF:12 could be on all consoles, including X-box (although highly unlikely, the Japanese probaly see Bill Gates as the Devil, and I don't blame them). However, its more likely FF:12 will be on the cube because they already have a relationship established with Nintendo. I could be wrong about FF:12, but don't be surprised if I'm right. Square may shock us all and make some smart business decisions someday.
Post by: theaveng on February 12, 2003, 02:44:31 AM
And even if you could somehow avoid battles (by escaping), your characters would never level up, and you'd be so weak that the bosses would wipe you.
Anyway, I think the difference is trivial and unimportant.
.
.
.
Clarifying: NES=Original Nintendo/ S-NES=Super Nintendo. I'm using the Japanese-numbering system.
.
Square's record with the Final Fantasy series is similar to Paramount's record with the Star Trek movie franchise:
FF1 =good (NES)
FF2 =sucked (NES)
FF3 =good (NES)
FF4 =good (S-NES)
FF5 =sucked (S-NES)
FF6 =good (S-NES)
FF7 =good (PS1)
FF8 =sucked (PS1)
FF9 =good (PS1)
FF10 =debatable (50% say sucked; 50% say great)
FF11 =good (from Japanese reports)
Square has a hit-or-miss record with every third game royally sucking.
Post by: Uglydot on February 12, 2003, 04:20:19 AM
Post by: manunited4eva22 on February 12, 2003, 05:11:17 AM
Post by: theaveng on February 12, 2003, 05:26:14 AM
Let's propose an alternate Final Fantasy 10:
===============================
No random battles. Instead, you see giant monsters wandering around. That means you have the option to walk around them and never battle (except bosses are still mandatory). So, given that you walk around the monsters, how will your characters get stronger?
ASIDE: Have you guys seen this Final Fantasy cartoon? It's called 8-Bit Theater, and it's quite funny (in a sly, sardonic fashion): http://www.nuklearpower.com/archive.php
Post by: WesDawg on February 12, 2003, 06:21:38 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on February 12, 2003, 08:45:37 AM
You are a team of warriors? What the f*ck? Someone's taking things a little too seriously. A guess in Mario they should make each jump ridiculously hard with like a 10% chance of making it because it's more realistic. You're confusing realism with fun. Yes if you don't battle you won't be able to level up enough to beat the boss but that's your own damn mistake. What's wrong with giving the player a choice? If I feel like trying out the boss at a lower level then let me. The idea of any game is it's supposed to be fun so forcing players to battle "for there own good" or whatever is counterproductive to the goal of game design. Giving the player the option to choose when they want to fight (even if they inevatably have to) makes games more fun. Restricting the player for no reason is often what seperates a good game from a bad one.
Post by: Zaush on February 12, 2003, 09:58:45 AM
I hope you all aren't forgetting the inevitable programming limitations of having multiple discs. The entire game world and it's enemies and whatnot MUST be able to fit on one disc for a multi disc port to work. Remember FFVIII? Cinema filled up so much of each disc that they were unable to pack in the entire world into the last disc, making towns and other areas inaccessible.
To port FFXII would require the entire world and it's elements to be able to fit on one disc. I believe FF:CC could do it simply because it's a completely 3d game, and will probably not even have FMV(In-game 3d cinema most likely).
Let's just hope that the next Nintendo system has a proprietary format that is somehow capable of more storage space than it's future competitors.
Post by: manunited4eva22 on February 12, 2003, 10:02:24 AM
Still profit does not hinge on media costs alone, there are many other factors that go into that.
Post by: DrForester on February 12, 2003, 01:34:19 PM
Square is not developing ANYTHING for the Gamecube, Square is developing for GBA. And according to the newly developed Squ-enix, they have no plans to develop for the GC..
Square is mearly renting out some employees to make a Nintendo funded game that has the Final Fantasy title (This is in no way a shot at the game iteself). And the director and person in charge of this Nintendo funded company was working on a PS2 project up until last December (Saga Unlimited).
Post by: theaveng on February 13, 2003, 02:21:17 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"'I'm not ready for battle' is not really a good excuse. You are a team of warriors. You should *always* be ready for battle IMHO. Even Mario RPG had ambushes (monsters jumping from behind bushes)."
You are a team of warriors? What the f*ck? Someone's taking things a little too seriously.
While you're playing Final Fantasy, you're meant to take it seriously. Square's whole goal is to immerse the player into that world and involve the player into the story (just like movies/shows/books). That includes pretending you are "a team of warriors" and always preparing them for battle.
I see your point about letting players choose when/where they want to battle (like MarioRPG/ChronoTrigger). For me, I never cared. I just fight everything in sight. My advice: Use Final Fantasy's "Run Away" command if you don't feel like battling.
.
.
.
.
.
MORE INFO ON DIVX:
I'm not familiar with DivX, so I went to divx.com to speak to the experts. First, DivX is an MPEG-4 compression standard. For comparison, PS2 and DVDs use MPEG-2, and MP3s use MPEG-1. Next, I asked how much compression can DivX provide without loss of DVD-quality? They answered 75% compression or 1/4 of original size.
So in theory an 8.5 gigabyte PS2 MPEG-2 disc could be compressed to 2.2 gigabytes DivX... or about 1.5 GC discs. That's just the movies... not audio or code or textures. Another compression method would have to be used for the latter data.
So I'll revise my original estimate that FF12 ported from the PS2 would likely require 2 GameCube discs. It would cost Square an extra $1 in pressing costs which is trivial.
