|
It's a turn-based game, still, and it seems like turn-based games on major consoles are getting less and less prevalent. I think that's interesting. Is that because it's important to a core tenet of the game? Is it what the audience wants? Is it just fun? Because you did a very good job of making it a fast turn-based system that, actually, I think people could really enjoy, but in this day and age...
MT: The concept for the game was to have speed and have it be tactical, so those are the two items -- and, in terms of that, Final Fantasy is known for turn-based battles. We felt that was a good aspect for players to be able to play out their strategy, and we didn't want to eliminate them.
But, you know, usually, in turn-based games, characters spend a lot of time kind of standing around and waiting for their turn, and so we did want to make it speedier and get rid of some of those aspects and improve upon it.
In the future, if someone were to ask, "Would we return to a complete turn-based game?" -- probably not. But what's important to me is to have a combat system that offers players the ability to be strategic and to really think about their next move and use their brain in order to proceed in the game.
Final Fantasy XIII really, really gradually introduces the gameplay and really gradually introduces new elements over the course of a long period of time, and I was interested in why you went with a design that is structured that way.
MT: Because the game is extremely story-driven, and because the battle system is really all-new from the previous games, we wanted to create a step-by-step process to introduce people to it that would allow them to really delve deeper into the strategic components of the gameplay. We wanted the players to experience each character's role in battle very well so that, after they experience that, they get a little bit more freedom going on.
You are getting complaints, though, from people who feel like it takes too long to get to that sort of level of freedom, especially from experienced users. What do you think about that balance? Is it more important to guide less experienced users or to satisfy the experienced gamers?
MT: The game itself offers two worlds, Cocoon and Gran Pulse, and we divided the gameplay between those two worlds. It's true, as you mentioned, until you get to Gran Pulse, the story is long; but, when it really comes down to it, that open world gameplay that you receive at Gran Pulse is about the same amount of time. It's about 50/50 in terms of the actual gameplay. The game is story-driven, but that is one element that we do have some kind of hindsight looking backwards that's kind of like a learning point.

It's very rare for a high-profile game to get a wide range of scores from reviewers. Usually, they're all up at the top. With Final Fantasy XIII, we've got tens out of ten; we've also got, from mainstream reviewers, five out of ten. Are you surprised to see a huge disparity? It's a polarizing kind of game.
MT: Because we created a completely new style, and because the game is so different from XII, if you were expecting that [game], then yeah, it was probably a little bit of a let down or was different from what you had hoped for. But the challenge for us is to create something new. I don't really mind that the reviews are kind of all over the place, in particular since, in North America and in Europe, the reviews have probably actually been better than in Japan. I found that to be a nice surprise.
One of the things I think is really interesting about Final Fantasy is that, when you eliminate Nintendo from the question, there are very, very, very few games that sell equally well in Japan and the Western markets, and Final Fantasy is one of them. That's got to be difficult, right? To create a game that can do that.
MT: Final Fantasy VII is what really changed our thoughts for the game when it succeeded worldwide; before that, we didn't really think globally. It was mostly domestic. But with that kind of success, the games became bigger worldwide, and the thought was natural to us to begin to think more about the world.
It's not that we purposely changed anything that we wanted to do or that we were doing; the idea just began to permeate among the team that it is a global phenomenon, a global game. Because that concept exists, that's why I feel that the game sells so well worldwide.
In particular, the recent news of the huge lines in France and people waiting to buy FFXIII was really amazing and incredible news. It was very emotional; it was the first time in a long time that I've felt that, and I don't want to forget about that. I know that we need to continue that feeling for the future.
I always feel like Japan and France have some sort of special cultural connection. When you go to Japan, there's so much French culture and French food particularly, and I feel like there's almost a meeting of the minds there, culturally. Do you have a similar feeling?
MT: I think it's that the French really appreciate Japanese culture: they love our films, and they love our anime, and our games as well. They've always been very positive in their reception towards Japanese things. The long lines I had mentioned in France, again, were very emotional for me and made me very happy because it's something that we didn't even see in Japan -- all the cosplayers who were there, and everything. So I was very happy. (Laughing) When I'm here now, there's GDC, and I have all this work; I wish I were in France.
|
What a terribly disappointing answer! I haven't played the game yet, but from what I've read, the lack of towns, etc. is due to poor planning, not lack of time. I was just watching the documentaries on the God of War 3 disc, and I think square could learn something from the team that made that game. In their game, the player has no control over the camera. That allowed them to smartly devote their resources to making some truly amazing environments, because they only focus on one part. All the pre-final fantasy 10 titles controlled the camera for you, and no one complained. So why did they decide to invest so heavily in the scenery? That would be a good interview question...
This is funny. This goes with what Robert was saying. I'm also about half way through and my brain has been in cruise control the entire time. Everything is just too simple and it takes far too long to open everything up. SquareEnix made everything to simple. I know they were trying to get new fans interested in the series and that is all well and good, but I hate it when games lead the player by the hand. I feel that they insulted my intelligence by making everything so damn easy.
Has anyone else noticed this trend and if so can anyone explain it? I feel as though JRPG developers are trying to add AI and timers to Chess when they should be thinking about making Go.
For example, increased visual qualities in production means either you ramp up budget wise on artists, animators, and art managers. You can out-source this, which increases either the number or responsibilities of your art team. But a fixed budget means you're going to have less development time on code and design (apart from character, level, and art) which can also reduce the number and amount of hours on QA. Since visuals, particularly the review for quality, are done by art and FX directors, you can have management do the quality review as to visual presentation since the goal is consistency of art style and set presentation.
Japanese development and organization has a tradition of following trends as opposed to establishing them. Most titles prior to western release had a long standing history and model before being localized to outside markets. An effect of this process is that rising costs to development, much like in the west, increased dramatically with little consensus on how to leverage the power of consoles beyond graphical thru-put. While motion controllers can be considered a 'new' concept, you have to remember how little developers actually use it in their titles. This is in direct opposition to Microsoft / Xbox 360 with NATAL where the emphasis is to do away with the controller entirely.
Finally, established brands and IPs. There is A LOT of discussion that goes into development and with franchises and IPs, not all opinions are equal...or the voices of those in the process. Quick check! Who here wants to kill a successful IP and cost the company several million dollars? This becomes more critical when you understand the company / corporate structure where PRODUCTIVE success is more important than informative failure. Poor, low-growth markets means that every dollar of every hour has to be assessed and taken responsibility for since even a successful project can now be assessed as being to costly to produce / develop.
Final note:
An interesting note is SE's crystal tools which focused on in game development of cinematics and the announcement of SE's next generation engine--whatever that means. Since most studios have already developed a solid core set of code for current consoles (and I am really looking forward to IDs Tech 5 engine and seeing if the 60 fps across SKUs is sustainable!), it's up to SE to correspondingly make the toolset design and code open and modifiable. This is something the western developers already understand, continue to make innovations on, and develop titles on the drawing board!
I find FFXIII to be the most difficult FF in the series. Auto-battle isn't good in a lot of situations, and is good in others. I only use it when I know what it is going to give me. For instance when I change to medic paradigm I will sometimes use auto-battle because I know the computer is going to queue 5 cures on the lowest HP teammate. If I were controlling it I would do the same thing. There are other times however that the computer will decide to cast cures on a teammate when the main character needs it more, in those situations I manually do it. Point I'm trying to make is that the auto-battle button really isn't an auto-battle button, it's just another way to enter the commands you intended to enter.
Also you can't blame a game for including an optional game mechanic, I see a lot of people do that. No one has to use auto-battle, but those that want to are welcome to.
Call of Duty players are never going to play Final Fantasy. If you're going to make a Final Fantasy game, including all the japanese art styling and story peculiarities, you have already lost the shooter fans. hell, you probably lost them as soon as you named it final fantasy.
From what I hear it seems like they're trying to push the realism too hard on this one; if they took an art direction that would allow them to not waste time on useless super realistic items then they could get stuff out on time...
"The second one is to deliver a story that's truly universal."
Well, that explains it, you wanted pretty graphics and a good story. Next time try adding "fun game" as a goal, clearly that feature got cut making way for the HD. Add me to the list of people who thought the first 20 hours were a tutorial.
And his definition of an RPG could describe pretty much any game. You control a player and they grow. That could be Mario.
Is Squeenix and the FF franchise just too big for its britches? I really think they're missing the point when they talk about the need to push for HD. Back when getting a game on a cd-rom was a novelty, sure, we drooled over cutscenes and the technology required to create them. But they are no longer an effective storytelling device. Look at a game like Heavy Rain, which is basically one long interactive cutscene. That game is WAY more of a role-playing game than FF13.
'Why does FF have to cling to the tradition that they are 50hour games?'.
I feel S/E's insistence on creating Final Fantasys which are 50hour affairs may be what's holding the game back. All this excuse about No time to make Varied Content like minigames, towns and sidequests breaks when you ask them why the game has to be so long. They've scrapped SO MUCH tradition in their game that they may as well sacrifice the longevity of the game for a more varied and enjoyable experience. Did it not cross their minds that the world has changed - and that there are a group of us who are FF fans who do not mind Final Fantasy being shorter games? I guess the main target demographic is younger than you and I think.
WHAT? This is the only question I cannot see your point of view on. Every sub-X (FF1-9) have had great NPC interaction and an extremely well done open environment (FF8 also had one of the best 'town simulations' of any game i've ever played). They decided for FFX (I guess) to mix it up, and it worked for them. And since then, they haven't revisited this, and to some degree have moved further from it. I can't pretend to know their thought processes or why they thought the community didn't want these. I personally believe that this open environment was one of the major factors of 7's success.
The idea that I could play the game in 20-30 hours and rush through the story, experiencing the honors of saving someone/something important while overcoming struggles both internal and external and then spend as much time as I was willing to give the game, finding as many extra content was the hallmark of the franchise (Going so far as to replay the game, attempting to complete it all). Somehow I feel cheated by not being able to really make the game my own.
As it stands now, I'm on course to finish the game in 35 hours and I frankly feel as though I haven't accomplished anything of significance.
'Change simply for the sake of change is an abdication of leadership.' -John Luke Jr, Chairman and CEO of global packaging giant, MeadWestvaco
Many of the commenters pick on SE for taking so long to develop the game, and then continue to complain about the lack of content when in the interview the developer points to both the challenge of building a new engine and sacrificing some FF cornerstones in order to speed things up:
"MT: (Laughing) You can wait longer for the game so that we can improve those... (everyone laughs) The next title that we create will have those elements -- the improvements to those elements that you had mentioned. However, it's important for us to choose what we can and cannot include, and that's the role of a director: to have to decide what we can accomplish within a certain period of time."
I think this is a great retort for the complaints aimed ait the dev. time and the sole focus on story and the battle system. Getting things done and out the door is preferable to tinkering with a game for to long and risk becoming rpg's Duke Nukem Forever.
The groundwork is laid. On the next game they'll be able to move much faster if they decide to keep going with this battle system, and honing it for at least another game. (Which I hope) I'm not an FF-guy, (yet), but what I'm hearing about a fast paced turn-based battle system that punishes people who try to brute force it intrigues me. Some of the games I've enjoyed thoroughly for their hardcore-ness are Bayonetta, Ninja Gaiden 1&2, Devil May Cry and so on. Dare to be hard I say. :)
Another happy aspect that might sell it for me is that the whole "in-your-face-surprise-battle" has been removed. Walking around FF-X and seing the cracking screen for the nth time, made me quit midway. Giving the choice to players when to fight does feel freeing (even though there's still the need to grind). So, I celebrate that simple touch.
Don't know where I was going with this, but I think it's a good feat for this game to spark controversy and love/hate responses. They did some bold and seemingly necessary dev. choices which MT is totally upfront about, and delightfully proud about even. Perhaps this will even increase sales to people who's not already converted to the "FF-religion", like people going "what's all the 'hubbub' about this new FF game? " (People like me)
:)
(At least this game isn't being bashed for being uncreative and not trying to push the genre)