Author Topic: I guess Final Fantasy XII really was the final fantasy... (Read 9676 times)

Artimus · « **on:** December 31, 2006, 10:18:55 AM »

...because XIII sure as hell isn't fantasy.

http://www.worthplaying.com/article.php?sid=39619&mode=thread&order=0

This has been a major concern of my, and is one of my major problems with VII. But this one goes beyond acceptable. The gameplay could be interesting but I hope it's a disaster. If you want to make sci-fi then make a sci-fi series. FANTASY means FANTASY.

Arbok · « **Reply #1 on:** December 31, 2006, 11:19:53 AM »

Reminds me A LOT of Phantasy Star Online from looking at those screens...

Sir_Stabbalot · « **Reply #2 on:** December 31, 2006, 11:49:31 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Arbok
Reminds me A LOT of Phantasy Star Online from looking at those screens...

I thought that at first too, but the characters in this FF are wearing NO body armor at all. At least in PSO characters had more protection then the shirts on their backs...

capamerica · « **Reply #3 on:** December 31, 2006, 05:11:02 PM »

Final Fantasy VII and VIII weren't that much of a Fantasy game either.

They were going down such a good path with Final Fantasy IX, X, XI and XII with being Fantasy themed then they screwed it up again with going back with what VII and VIII were like.

All I can hope is that XIV is a Fantasy theme again

UncleBob · « **Reply #4 on:** December 31, 2006, 06:00:09 PM »

Well, duh... "Final Sci-Fi" just doesn't have the same ring to it...

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #5 on:** December 31, 2006, 09:16:03 PM »

I may actually take time to play a new FF game if it goes back to a medieval setting. As it stands I lost interest in the series after FFIV.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #6 on:** December 31, 2006, 09:31:29 PM »

I might care about a sci-fi FF if they actually had plasguns and energy swords instead of the same old swords, nunchucks, staves and revolvers. Why do people think it's acceptable for the main character in a sci fi RPG to use a plain old metal sword?

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #7 on:** December 31, 2006, 09:52:19 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
I might care about a sci-fi FF if they actually had plasguns and energy swords instead of the same old swords, nunchucks, staves and revolvers. Why do people think it's acceptable for the main character in a sci fi RPG to use a plain old metal sword?

Nothing wrong with revolvers in a sci-fi setting, have you not seen Firefly?

KDR_11k · « **Reply #8 on:** January 01, 2007, 01:58:43 AM »

Nope, no idea if that ever aired here.

Artimus · « **Reply #9 on:** January 01, 2007, 02:37:39 AM »

I'm one of the many people who never found Firefly engaging. But that show isn't sci-fi anyway. It's part sci-fi part western, and the two elements rarely ever mix.

SixthAngel · « **Reply #10 on:** January 01, 2007, 03:42:05 AM »

Actually scifi and westerns mix a lot more then you think. The original Star Trek was pushed as a futuristic western. I don't know how I know this though because I never watched the show or cared to.

Sci-fi and fantasy have a pretty blurry line, especially in games, since something like final fantasy can have staples of both.

Artimus · « **Reply #11 on:** January 01, 2007, 03:48:26 AM »

I didn't say sci-fi and westerns don't mix. I said they don't mix in Firefly. Outside of the show the comparisons are no-brainers and go way back to the start of sci-fi and became really popular with people like Bradbury. Space is called "the final frontier" afterall. But I found Firefly failed to mix them well. The two sides felt like they came from two different shows.

Final Fantasy is best when it's fantasy. Here's hoping this one gets bad reviews.

Sir_Stabbalot · « **Reply #12 on:** January 01, 2007, 03:58:28 AM »

I can understand revolvers still being in Sci-Fi, as cramming a more advance laser or plasma system into a sidearm system may be costly, and no one will laugh at a .50 caliber revolver at close range. Of course, I do not in any way condone using a sidearm as the primary weapon. Sure, a revolver would be a great sidearm for if your primary weapons run out of ammo, but I'd much rather have a portable particle cannon.

Edit: And what's with melee weapons still being used as a primary weapon in Sci-Fi? I could understand something like a combat knife with an ultrasonic generator in it for close-combat, but why stab someone with a sword when you could blast them from range?

Edit #2: And if this FF has an android party member, I'm gonna vomit. If I ever run into a machine that thinks its a person and suffers a personality crisis, I'm gonna put it out of its misery. Why have some whiny human wannabe when you could have a hulking engine of destruction war robot? It doesn't even need to be self-aware. Just slave it to me and make it so when I point in the enemies general direction and say "kill" it does what its best at.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #13 on:** January 01, 2007, 04:47:44 AM »

Some sci-fi stories have reasons for their melee weapons (e.g. shields that admit only the slow blade) but some do it just because the japanese feel nostalgic for their samurai era.

wandering · « **Reply #14 on:** January 01, 2007, 05:49:09 AM »

Fantasy and sci-fi are the same genre. Deal with it.

Not really. I remember somebody asking me once if I liked any books other than sci-fi, and I said "sure. Lord of the Rings, Discworld..." and she replied, "no, no. Those are the same genre." And I'm all, "you're crazy."

Quote
Nothing wrong with revolvers in a sci-fi setting

I think more sci-fi should use Blade Runner-style guns. They seem like they're normal pistols, but if you pay close attention, you see they're actually laser guns.

Quote
Some sci-fi stories have reasons for their melee weapons (e.g. shields that admit only the slow blade) but some do it just because the japanese feel nostalgic for their samurai era.

Well, it's easier to romanticize violence if you use older weapons. The irony is, combat has gotten less brutal as time's gone on, so yearning for the glory of ancient fighting is a bit silly.

segagamer12 · « **Reply #15 on:** January 01, 2007, 05:55:46 AM »

its human nature to desire blood.

I liked FF3 or six or whateve ryo call it a lot but I also loved 7. I every other Ff has been decent but none have been realy good IMO. BUT I LOVE Phantasy Star and I wish Sega would bring that back without the MMO crap.

Artimus · « **Reply #16 on:** January 01, 2007, 06:00:33 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: wandering
Fantasy and sci-fi are the same genre. Deal with it.

Not really. I remember somebody asking me once if I liked any books other than sci-fi, and I said "sure. Lord of the Rings, Discworld..." and she replied, "no, no. Those are the same genre." And I'm all, "you're crazy."

Well, TRUE sci-fi is fiction where technology and science are essential to the setting and/or story. Stuff like Star Wars is really fantasy. But for the sense of a workable definition anything futuristic and spacey is sci-fi.

Quote
Some sci-fi stories have reasons for their melee weapons (e.g. shields that admit only the slow blade) but some do it just because the japanese feel nostalgic for their samurai era.

I take it you read Forever War as well?

KDR_11k · « **Reply #17 on:** January 01, 2007, 07:48:38 AM »

I think Sci-Fi is defined as something that at least attempts to explain its technology. You can have a sci-fi story in a tolkien-esque world if you had an explaination how magic worked.

Artimus · « **Reply #18 on:** January 01, 2007, 09:08:19 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
I think Sci-Fi is defined as something that at least attempts to explain its technology. You can have a sci-fi story in a tolkien-esque world if you had an explaination how magic worked.

I'd hesitate at that. The OFFICIAL definition is that science-fiction deals with a change to our world or our future. Fantasy deals more with totally fake realities or pasts. Otherwise it's historical fiction. That way you can fit alternate present stories (Man in the High Castle) and futuristic stories with one major alteration (time travel, telepaths, etc.) but not fantasy where the only difference is "what if there were dragons?" or such.

When technology is fused into the past I think it's mainly fantasy. In this way some sci-fi can almost become fantasy at a later date (a lot of H.G. Wells' stuff). This is why I'd say FFVI is a fantasy but VII is a sci-fi.

D_MaN87 · « **Reply #19 on:** January 01, 2007, 09:58:56 AM »

I dont see what is so wrong with a futuristic fantasy. A fantasy is a dream, dreams can be set in the future can't they? Personally, as much as I love the SNES FF's, and am playing FF3 on my ds at the moment, I love the futuristic settings ff7,8 and 12 have taken. I see no problem with it, as long as its an interesting and orginial story. There are too many RPG's set in a (fictional) past, I see nothing wrong w/ having some sci-fi style rpgs. Though I will not give my opinion on FF13 until more is told about it, or I play it.

Smoke39 · « **Reply #20 on:** January 01, 2007, 02:54:11 PM »

One of the reasons that I tend to not like RPGs is because nearly all of them take place in a (what I find boring) typical medieval-style fantasy. Part of why I liked EarthBound so much was because it had a modern setting. Part of why I like Deus Ex so much is it's near-future cyberpunk style. The only reason I liked FF7 at all was because of it's sci-fi setting.

But this thread isn't really about potential, less-explored themes in RPGs. It's about Final Fantasy and what suits the series. I'm not a big Final Fantasy fan, but I do know that I'd be annoyed if they messed with any of the games I like. I'd be kinda peeved if they tried to pass off Thief 3 as a sequal to Deus Ex. It bugged me that Metroid Prime Hunters wasn't really a Metroid game and only used the name for brand recognition. I can see why someone would want Final Fantasy to, you know, remain fantasy. Too much deviation and you might as well make it a new series.

Artimus · « **Reply #21 on:** January 01, 2007, 03:15:57 PM »

It's kind of odd because I consider the consistant sci-fi/fantasy setting of RPGs to be the undeniable reason the genre fails to do anything profound. Good, bad or amazing they are all so similar and none are truly brilliant. An RPG set in the modern day could be quite powerful.

But, at the same time, I feel Final Fantasy is ALWAYS best when it's more fantasy than sci-fi. I have no problem with a mix, but XIII is clearly not balanced.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #22 on:** January 01, 2007, 09:34:43 PM »

Artimus, grab a few buddies and play GURPS. That supports modern day, WW2 and any other number of realistic scenarios you might want to play (hey, want to play Caspar, Melchior and Balthasar on their route to Bethlehem?).

segagamer12 · « **Reply #23 on:** January 03, 2007, 08:48:17 AM »

have you ever played phantasy star? not online but the old ones? they were modern and sci-fi but still rpg and very good.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #24 on:** January 03, 2007, 09:27:58 PM »

I've seen the Phantasy Star Collection for the GBA in a store lately but balked at the 50€ price and went with Tales of Phantasia for 30€ instead.

News:

Author Topic: I guess Final Fantasy XII really was the final fantasy... (Read 9676 times)