Final Fantasy XVI

[estragon]

I think that when people refer to it as "like Game of Thrones" they mostly just mean there's a scene in the trailer where blood gets splashed on a young boy, and also maybe some elements of the tone that suggest dark/gritty. Maybe also some of the fashion choices, but I think part of that is that Game of Thrones is a recent high production values fantasy series, and most fantasy costuming is as much about current fashion as it is about the historical periods it's drawing inspiration from.

Obviously we don't know enough about plotting/themes etc to make any conclusions about whether it will have any significant resemblances to either the TV show Game of Thrones or the source material the show was based on.

 

[Gaer]

I think that when people refer to it as "like Game of Thrones" they mostly just mean there's a scene in the trailer where blood gets splashed on a young boy, and also maybe some elements of the tone that suggest dark/gritty. Maybe also some of the fashion choices, but I think part of that is that Game of Thrones is a recent high production values fantasy series, and most fantasy costuming is as much about current fashion as it is about the historical periods it's drawing inspiration from.

Obviously we don't know enough about plotting/themes etc to make any conclusions about whether it will have any significant resemblances to either the TV show Game of Thrones or the source material the show was based on.

My point if this game was an Ivalice title, no one would have blinked about the setting or artstyle.

 

[fanboymaster]

??? This just seems wrong? Of all the FF's I have intimate knowledge about:

FF6 - Overthrowing the evil empire as a band of loosely affiliated, non-state actors.
FF7 - Overthrowing the evil (corporate) empire as a band of loosely affiliated, non-state, eco-terrorists.
FF8 - Overthrowing the evil empire as a band of closely affiliated, non-state actors.
FF9 - Overthrowing the evil kingdom as a band of loosely affiliated, non-state actors.
FF10 - Overthrowing the evil church as a band of loosely affiliated, non-state actors.
FF13 - Overthrowing the corrupt theocratic future techno-state as a band of loosely affiliated, non-state actors.

In FF12 and FF15 you do represent states, but those states are already conquered and you're leading a liberating revolution.

In a lot of these games, you might receive aide from friendly states, like Esthar in FF8, or Lindblum in FF9, but you're never representing them and their support is almost never the crux of your ability to succeed. And in cases like FF8, that competing state isn't "just another kingdom" but a liberal democracy.

Revolutionary politics is hard baked into FF's DNA as far as I'm concerned.

7, 8 and 10 are all in cases where, as mentioned in that very post, there aren't kingdoms in the medieval sense. FFVI literally has two brother royals as party members and the well meaning kingdom of Figaro. 9 you're pretty consistently allied with the good king of Lindblum who is your tech advisor and backer for huge portions of the game. The problem in 9 that starts the game isn't "the kingdom of Alexandria should not exist" like how 7's is "Shinra shouldn't exist" before it goes elsewhere, the problem is that the Queen has become corrupt. I am drawing distinction between installing a new ruler versus tearing the kingdom to the ground. 13 I'll cop to but also admit that the actual world of 13 has completely left my brain.

 

[MetManMas]

If you replaced the chocobos with horses and take out the malboro from the reveal trailer then Final Fantasy XVI would look like nigh every other dang edgy AAA western fantasy game from the past decade. That's my big issue with it so far, it feels far too homogeneous for a Final Fantasy game.

Like say whatever you will about the previous game, but some modern day dudes in regular clothes smacking down goblins and giant enemy crabs is usually something that only happens in games with cartoonish or more blatantly animesque art styles. The FF8-esque real life mixed with fantasy is what's kept me interested in Final Fantasy XV.

 

[Zef]

If you replaced the chocobos with horses and take out the malboro from the reveal trailer then Final Fantasy XVI would look like nigh every other dang edgy AAA western fantasy game from the past decade. That's my big issue with it so far, it feels far too homogeneous for a Final Fantasy game.

Like say whatever you will about the previous game, but some modern day dudes in regular clothes smacking down goblins and giant enemy crabs is usually something that only happens in games with cartoonish or more blatantly animesque art styles. The FF8-esque real life mixed with fantasy is what's kept me interested in Final Fantasy XV.

Well, as far as the first part goes, you'd have to replace the chocobos, take out the malboro, take out that giant potbellied goblin, take out the magic that Joshua casts on Clive, take out Clive's magical attacks that use specifically eikonic (heh) FF summons, take out Phoenix, Shiva, Titan, and Ifrit, all of which have specific FF designs (Phoenix is the most "generic"-looking and it still has clear FXIV motifs), take out the Crystals, and take out the logical series escalation that Summoners and Crystals are valuable wartime assets that FF8, 9, X, XII, and XIII (and probably XIV) has been steadily building up to.

There's far too much of the FF bloodline in the trailer to do away with.

As for the second part, well, Joshua and Jill look straight out of Bravely Default or 4HoL, at least. Clive could pass for a Riskbreaker pretty easily. If the FFTactics cast were redrawn with noses and realistic proportions they'd look just as medieval as these people, and even the FFXI characters (and I'm willing to bet the XIV ones) at least start off in plain-looking tunics and bits of armor before looking like Yoshitaka Amano's fever dreams.

 

[Oathbreaker]

If you replaced the chocobos with horses and take out the malboro from the reveal trailer then Final Fantasy XVI would look like nigh every other dang edgy AAA western fantasy game from the past decade. That's my big issue with it so far, it feels far too homogeneous for a Final Fantasy game.

Which ones? I'd like to find out what they are so I can check them out because I'll freely admit outside of FF the closest I can think of is the Witcher titles and they're so significantly different in both tone and appearance I don't see any homogenizing factor. Dragon Age got mentioned but... I can't really draw a good line of comparison in my mind? Other than MAYBE the Human Noble origin. Even the area the Malboro fight takes place in looks totally unique to me.

Every western fantasy artstyle I can think of in major/AAA games is nothing like this. Pieces of FFXIV are the only things that bear resemblance beyond things like the fact that a castle exists. In THIS sense GoT comes closer than any videogame I know of but only to the point of shots that look vaguely like the scene during the day when Joshua gets called back inside? And I guess people were displeased around a table. Things like outfits and armor still scream a specific flavor of Final Fantasy. Plus all the stuff Zef just said.

 

[MetManMas]

I'll give you the rendition of Shiva as an ice woman, but the new age Ifrit looks like he could be any old demon man (Yes I know FF14's looks kinda like that) and phoenixes and titans are far from being Final Fantasy exclusives and goblins take many forms even in wRPGs.

Also unless we're talking about traditional mages or something I don't really get what makes the outfits specifically Final Fantasy outfits.

 

[4-So]

Final Fantasy hasn't been Final Fantasy for a long time. Fans need to make peace with that. I think it's interesting that S-E continues to play with new ideas in the (ostensibly) flagship franchise while, by and large, something like Dragon Quest just remains Dragon Quest. Whether this shift in what Final Fantasy "is" works or not will, as always, depend on if (and how gracefully) they stick the landing.

In terms of the what little gameplay they've shown, it reminds me more of Devil May Cry or perhaps Bayonetta than the Witcher. Aesthetically, maybe Dragon Age or Last Remnant? Really, it reminds me of FF14 in a lot of ways, especially the music they chose, but that's to be expected considering the pedigree.

 

[Gaer]

If you replaced the chocobos with horses and take out the malboro from the reveal trailer then Final Fantasy XVI would look like nigh every other dang edgy AAA western fantasy game from the past decade. That's my big issue with it so far, it feels far too homogeneous for a Final Fantasy game.

Like say whatever you will about the previous game, but some modern day dudes in regular clothes smacking down goblins and giant enemy crabs is usually something that only happens in games with cartoonish or more blatantly animesque art styles. The FF8-esque real life mixed with fantasy is what's kept me interested in Final Fantasy XV.

Sure, and you can take away all the giant crabs etc from FFXV and it would do the same thing. You can not like it but it's kinda frustrating to see constantly. The trailer was as FF as any other game in the series.

 

[Oathbreaker]

Also unless we're talking about traditional mages or something I don't really get what makes the outfits specifically Final Fantasy outfits.

For me, apparently lack of knowledge, which is why I'm wondering what other games resemble this. Admittedly when I said armor, I had the dragoon armor in mind which is distinctly an iteration on FFXIV's Heavensward Dragoon armor, while the character that fights the Malboro also looks far more like armor I've seen in Final Fantasy titles than anything I've seen elsewhere (the popped collar on it is very evocative of Vaan's outfit that everyone liked in Tactics Advance 2). A lot of the less central character armor in the castle with Joshua also seems to resemble the basic/leveling designs in XIV. I feel like I've seen the dress the girl laughing with Joshua has just in the game fullstop. Joshua's outfit for instance is very similar to the red version of Agrias's outfit from the FFXIV Orbonne Monastery raid minus the actual pieces of metal on it.

This is the most identifiably "that looks like Final Fantasy" game I've ever seen not counting monsters, remasters or remakes. Every other FF game before this looks wildly different than the rest of the franchise to me other than XIV using several styles from several of the non-MMO games. But this one? This one is iterating on art styles I can actually identify from previous FF stuff. Granted, a lot of it is FFXIV or XIV's iteration on Ivalician styles.

I will say though on rewatch the only game I can think of that's ever done armor like Clive's little group at the start of the trailer is the sad samey armor-coats in DA: Inquisition. The armor of the opposing army they're fighting is using a style I know nothing about.

 

[Mogri]

The trailer was as FF as any other game in the series.

I don't know about that. Here we go, time for a list of games by how Final Fantasy they are:

Extremely Final Fantasy: 1, 3, 4, 5
These are the most Final Fantasy games of all. 1 loses points for no chocobos or moogles, but it gets bonus points for everything else.

Very Final Fantasy: 2, 9, 10, 12
9 very nearly makes top tier, but in the end, it's too weird to make it there.

Somewhat Final Fantasy: 6, 7, 8, 13, 15, Tactics, Adventure
"But Adventure has chocobos and moogles!" Yeah, but what's going on with that battle system?

Not very Final Fantasy: Legend, Legend 2, Legend 3, Mystic Quest
Who are you trying to kid?

 

[WildcatJF]

Not Final Fantasy: WildcatJF
Someday one of these games will land with me!

 

[WisteriaHysteria]

time for a list of games by how Final Fantasy they are:

Different people have different qualifiers for what makes an FF game. For me, the franchise is defined more by its willingness to evolve or break past conventions. In that sense, I would probably reverse all of your rankings.

7, 8 and 10 are all in cases where, as mentioned in that very post, there aren't kingdoms in the medieval sense.

Seems like flimsy reasoning to just dismiss a big swath of the franchise that doesn't conform to your theories, tbh.

 

[Peklo]

Were Matsuno directly involved with this game, that would give me reason to voice the same concerns I have up to this point, to a stronger degree of scepticism and not less. Comparatively I have more faith in understudies and successors working in a previously established formal style in being able to evolve and better those concepts than a simple return to the old creative status quo, but I'm not going to pretend it isn't an uphill battle in either case. The granular examination of whether XVI appears as sufficiently Final Fantasy (a discussion that every new game in the series invites anyway) isn't an angle I'm especially interested in considering the single most defining aspect of the series to me is its persistent mutability. Any time I've actually resented a game in the series for not conforming to personally integral standards has been the solitary case of XV, which chose to exclude women and so was the least "Final Fantasy" experience I'd had with the games even though it oozed holistic adaptive ingenuity of series concepts and iconography with every other facet of itself. Whether XVI leans in on that precedent narratively, tonally and thematically is something I'm most interested in and what likely decides whether or not it'll be a game I play once and put out of mind, or something I actually enjoy thinking about after the fact and return to as desired.

 

[Positronic Brain]

Just dropping by to say this is the only FF I've anticipated since *XII*, and it is in no small part because of the Ivalice and fantasy vibes I'm getting.

 

[Mogri]

Different people have different qualifiers for what makes an FF game. For me, the franchise is defined more by its willingness to evolve or break past conventions. In that sense, I would probably reverse all of your rankings.

The list was largely in jest, but at the same time, I don't think that you can say that the defining feature of the series is being unlike itself -- that strikes me as tautologically untrue. It's a little like saying, "For me, roguelikes are defined more by their willingness to innovate rather than stick to the formula" -- it's all well and good if you like games like that, but it doesn't make them any more like Rogue. And we have a much stricter standard for whether a game is Final Fantasy than for whether it's a roguelike.

(This post brought to you by Chocobo Mystery Dungeon: both Final Fantasy and roguelike)

 

[Fyonn]

I think the only defining feature of whether a game is a Final Fantasy game or not is whether Square Enix names a game Final Fantasy or not.

 

[SabreCat]

The list was largely in jest, but at the same time, I don't think that you can say that the defining feature of the series is being unlike itself -- that strikes me as tautologically untrue.

I mean, we are talking about an open-ended series of titles, every one of which is "Final". The self-contradiction is right there!

 

[TyrMcDohl]

The Final Fantasy series is like Doctor Who: there are underpinnings that keep it tied to its legacy, but the series changes remarkably as new blood takes the helm. FF4, 5, and 6 are markedly different in technology and tone from 7, 8, and 9. Same way as the shift in tone from the Russell T Davies era of Doctor Who (Christopher Eccleston, David Tennant, plus the spinoff shows), and Stephen Moffat (Matt Smith, Peter Capaldi).

 

[Mogri]

I think the only defining feature of whether a game is a Final Fantasy game or not is whether Square Enix names a game Final Fantasy or not.

I would agree, except Final Fantasy Legend is right there

 

[YangusKhan]

Nornally this discussion isn't something I'm that interested to participate in, but I do want to chime in a little: I can clearly see a thematic through-line for most Final Fantasy games that remains consistently similar in each iteration. And that to me is what constitutes the "soul" of this series more than anything else. The shared iconography is merely just that: iconography and visual styles that stay roughly similar but ultimately are just window dressing to serve the greater purpose of world-, character-, and narrative-building.

 

[Fyonn]

I would agree, except Final Fantasy Legend is right there

Final Fantasy Legend 1/2/3 and Final Fantasy Adventure just get to be two games each, making them especially powerful.
The more titles a game has, the higher its attack power is.

 

[Kirin]

This is the most identifiably "that looks like Final Fantasy" game I've ever seen not counting monsters, remasters or remakes. Every other FF game before this looks wildly different than the rest of the franchise to me other than XIV using several styles from several of the non-MMO games. But this one? This one is iterating on art styles I can actually identify from previous FF stuff. Granted, a lot of it is FFXIV or XIV's iteration on Ivalician styles.

Emphasis added, I think this is a lot of the disconnect we're seeing in this discussion. Obviously, XVI shares a ton of design DNA with XIV, and people who've played a lot of XIV have seen these styles being seamlessly combined with, like, everything Final Fantasy, as XIV events draw on the whole history of the series, so they're used to looking at this style and thinking "this is the most Final Fantasy thing ever". Whereas for people who haven't played any XIV, the "base" style under the iconography looks a lot closer to "generic medieval RPG" than it does to the (largely Nomura-derived) flashy styles underpinning other recent FF games like XV and XIII, so it looks "not very Final Fantasy".

I personally haven't played any XIV so I don't have that comfy reassuring feeling about this style, but since it is XIV people working on this game and I totally believe all the people who have played XIV that it came out super great, I have a decent amount of confidence that they'll pull off that Final Fantasy feeling in ways that aren't necessarily obvious from just a trailer.

 

[conchobhar]

Slightly more relevant, people are making the GoT comparison because of a tone and aesthetic assumed in the trailer, which associates it more with darker fantasy works. Clive in the key art they're leading with is maybe the first protagonist to be defined by anger as their core emotion in promotional material. The translation here is "people have misgivings about FF taking on the trappings of dark fantasy" which this might not even do, but it's definitely where at least some misgivings are coming from. I've also heard comparisons to Dragon Age if that comparison rankles less, it's a promotional tone thing given how little we know about the actual plot.

Yes, this. When I made the comparison to Game of Thrones and The Witcher somewhere upthread, it wasn't to do with the actual content or plot points (I've never even interacted with those franchises, in any form), but the general aesthetic and tone of the work. Because the greatest influence of Game of Thrones on pop culture is not any particular trope, but in bringing dark, gritty fantasy to the mainstream— or at least convincing studio executives that this is How To Do Fantasy In A Modern Context. My skepticism comes from how the trailer, and now the website, has all the trappings of a "mature" and "prestige" fantasy series in a post-GoT world.

In short, what gives me pause is not that the series is going hard on dark fantasy or medieval stylings, but the possibility of zeitgeist-chasing. Maybe that's a little cynical. My fingers are crossed that it exceeds my expectations; I certainly don't want the game to be bad.

 

[hologramblue]

i had this whole reply typed out then butterfingered ctrl-z.

Obviously, XVI shares a ton of design DNA with XIV, and people who've played a lot of XIV have seen these styles being seamlessly combined with, like, everything Final Fantasy, as XIV events draw on the whole history of the series, so they're used to looking at this style and thinking "this is the most Final Fantasy thing ever".

basically yeah this though. going "back" to a bunch of other ff after xiv, and seeing the things it references absolutely everywhere, it all gels. and visually this is all just xiv as hell, from the fashion to the architecture to the flag designs. i pulled out mspaint and tried to find the xiv gearsets that the characters' getups immediately reminded me of but 1) clive's boots are just most pairs of thighboots in xiv complete with the stylized molded knee bit 2) i could have SWORN i'd seen joshua and jill's exact clothes in xiv before but apparently i was mixing up several different sets instead and they all have the same historical fashion inspirations so there was no point. i think the major distinction between xiv/ivalice? "realism" designs and GoT-and-co "realism" is that xiv loves to use like blocks of lighter or brighter colors under metal/leather/dark over-robes (present in both of clive's outfits, white for younger and red for older, which is the main thing that gave the immediate xiv gearset feel) and from what i have seen before of gritty wrpg stuff (and googled just now to confirm my memories) they do....less of that? they just layer dark shades on dark shades.

on a broader note, XVI is a setting that has vistas like this at minimum, plus at least four other very colorful and weird crystalscapes guaranteed, and like a 75% chance minimum of a lategame twist that takes us into a partial genreshift and aesthetic curveball.

 

[aturtledoesbite]

butterfingered ctrl-z.

most things that take ctrl-z, the undo, will also take ctrl-y, the redo

 

[hologramblue]

butterfingered "ctrl-z" when i meant to type "ctrl-w"

 

[Mogri]

Ctrl+shift+T will reopen a closed tab.

 

[SabreCat]

butterfingered "ctrl-z" when i meant to type "ctrl-w"

One of the deeply unfortunate things about the Dvorak keymap, which I use, is that Ctrl+W "close tab" is immediately adjacent to Ctrl+V "paste from clipboard".

 

[hologramblue]

Ctrl+shift+T will reopen a closed tab.

quite a lot of the time that restores form contents but for what the hell ever reason it didn't this time, so i gently hit my head on the desk, rewrote the post, and tried to make a lil joke about it