SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic

Posted: Dec 16 2010 09:41 am

Coming out to Japan in Spring next year (roughly two decades after the first release on SNES), FF 4: CC will be for the PSP and consists of yet another graphically updated/remade version of FF4 as well as FF 4:The After Years. In addition, the Complete Collection will contain an entirely new scenario set between Final Fantasy IV and The After Years, however Square Enix has not yet released any details about it.

Joined: May 22 2008 Location: Goshen, VA Posts: 6544

You know, I didn't enjoy Final Fantasy 1 on the GBA because it was made way too easy and a lot of the enemies had really retarded names instead of the original ones. They probably won't fuck it up that bad, but I also probably won't enjoy a graphic updated Final Fantasy IV, as it is my favorite SNES RPG and would like to see it left alone.

But it's for the PSP so no one will play it anyways.

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Dec 16 2010 10:58 am

Nifty.

Woodzy hit the key point, however.

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

I was so disappointed by the 3D DS version of the game that I don't ever want to see another handheld version of FFIV. Ever.

I love FFIV. It is my favorite RPG of all time, and it sucks on a tiny screen with shitty 3D models. If this game is going to be remade, do it right, do it fucking huge. No EMO, no anime. No fucking PS3/P or XboX. Throw that shit up on the Wii with a Nintendo console. That is where it belongs.

Posted: Dec 16 2010 12:52 pm

joshwoodzy wrote:

You know, I didn't enjoy Final Fantasy 1 on the GBA because it was made way too easy and a lot of the enemies had really retarded names instead of the original ones.

Not an attack on you Woodzy, but why the fuck is this such a big deal to people? So the spell casting enemies in robes with squid heads are called "Mindflayers" now instead of "Wizards", why/how is that such a terrible affront to the game? Why is a more descriptive name than something like "Wizard" a huge deal? I just played IV on the DS not too long ago and (our) III too and they changed a bunch of stuff like that that in no way shape or form affects the game but people freak the fuck out about it, why? Is nostalgia that strong that if generic enemies aren't named exactly the same it ruins it? I can't vouch for altered difficulty as I didn't really notice a difference but why are name changes such a sore spot?

Posted: Dec 16 2010 01:30 pm

Zarak, it's the same reason a lot of us hate Mario All-Stars. It's different from what we grew up playing, and not in a good way. The big issue with Dawn of Souls is that it's too easy. FF1 on the NES may have been a little grind heavy, but honestly, that's what made FF1 and the first three Dragon Warrior games fun. You didn't have a map, so you had to explore, and god forbid you ended up somewhere you weren't supposed to go, or you'd be dead within two rounds.

Dawn of Souls, I don't think I died a single time. Reduced enemy strength and item costs made the game boring. It didn't have any real story either, so you couldn't even play it to enjoy the story.

I don't hate all enhanced remakes though. For enhanced remakes done right, see:

Link To The Past (GBA)
Chrono Trigger (DS)
Book of Ys I+II (DS)
The Mario Advance series
Final Fantasy 4-6 Advance
Kirby: Nightmare In Dreamland

Also, fuck the PSP. Sony users don't deserve this game, I do. It better fucking end up on the DS or 3DS.

Posted: Dec 16 2010 01:59 pm

GPFontaine wrote:

...no anime...

In a FF game? Good luck...

Posted: Dec 16 2010 02:10 pm

If they wanted to remake IV for X360/PS3 and the graphics looked like the cut-scenes from the PSX port, then sign me up!

Rowr!

Posted: Dec 16 2010 02:58 pm

Heh, as long as the content was very faithful, I think that would be awesome.

Posted: Dec 16 2010 03:12 pm

They'd need to include Knights Of The Round as a summon, it would need to be an all-new Director's Cut of the spell, and the animation should be unskippable. In fact, mashing buttons to try and skip it should cause it to startover.

Posted: Dec 16 2010 03:46 pm

i sooo buy that. i never played FF IV but i heard the best about it.

Posted: Dec 16 2010 04:16 pm

Sounds pretty awesome. I bought a PSP off of a friend for 30 bucks. I'll definitely spring for this. I like my RPGs on the go, so while FFIV is excellent in and of itself I can't play it on the bus as of yet. Sad

Posted: Dec 16 2010 06:19 pm

joshwoodzy wrote:

But it's for the PSP so no one will play it anyways.

You do know the PSP system base is somewhere around 50 million units, while DS has a commanding lead at about 130-140 million, the fact remains that Sony has sold more PSP's then Microsoft has sold 360's.

My point you ask...I'm pretty sure a lot of people will play this. (Including me)

Joined: May 22 2008 Location: Goshen, VA Posts: 6544

I was just being a dick to be silly, settle down Beavis.

Posted: Dec 16 2010 08:12 pm

I was just being silly to be a dick, settle down Butthead.

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Dec 16 2010 08:43 pm

Black Zarak wrote:

joshwoodzy wrote:

You know, I didn't enjoy Final Fantasy 1 on the GBA because it was made way too easy and a lot of the enemies had really retarded names instead of the original ones.

Not an attack on you Woodzy, but why the fuck is this such a big deal to people? So the spell casting enemies in robes with squid heads are called "Mindflayers" now instead of "Wizards", why/how is that such a terrible affront to the game? Why is a more descriptive name than something like "Wizard" a huge deal? I just played IV on the DS not too long ago and (our) III too and they changed a bunch of stuff like that that in no way shape or form affects the game but people freak the fuck out about it, why? Is nostalgia that strong that if generic enemies aren't named exactly the same it ruins it? I can't vouch for altered difficulty as I didn't really notice a difference but why are name changes such a sore spot?

I can vouch for the altered difficulty. But yeah, it's not a big deal. In fact, Goblin, Mindflayer, and so an -are- the original names. It was the original translation that was the butcher job, not the remakes.

Posted: Dec 16 2010 10:01 pm

No one cares about your gay otaku trivia, you spoony bard.

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Dec 16 2010 10:25 pm

Syd Lexia wrote:

No one cares about your gay otaku trivia, you spoony bard.

Son of a submariner! You'll pay for that!

Posted: Dec 17 2010 05:38 am

UsaSatsui wrote:

Syd Lexia wrote:

No one cares about your gay otaku trivia, you spoony bard.

Son of a submariner! You'll pay for that!

It was not by my hand that I am once again given flesh. I was called here by humans who wish to pay me tribute.

Posted: Dec 17 2010 07:33 am

Syd Lexia wrote:

The big issue with Dawn of Souls is that it's too easy. FF1 on the NES may have been a little grind heavy, but honestly, that's what made FF1 and the first three Dragon Warrior games fun. You didn't have a map, so you had to explore, and god forbid you ended up somewhere you weren't supposed to go, or you'd be dead within two rounds.

But see, that kind of stuff was only fun in 1988 when we didn't know any better or have anything else. Grind heavy sandbox games with no direction is a primitive form of game design that today's gamers absolutely will not put up with. So they have to remake these classic games with today's gamer in mind and I for one appreciate that.

But another FFIV remake? There's already one on the DS. I'm starting to lose patience waiting for a FFVI remake.

Posted: Dec 17 2010 08:25 am

Pandajuice wrote:

Syd Lexia wrote:

The big issue with Dawn of Souls is that it's too easy. FF1 on the NES may have been a little grind heavy, but honestly, that's what made FF1 and the first three Dragon Warrior games fun. You didn't have a map, so you had to explore, and god forbid you ended up somewhere you weren't supposed to go, or you'd be dead within two rounds.

But see, that kind of stuff was only fun in 1988 when we didn't know any better or have anything else. Grind heavy sandbox games with no direction is a primitive form of game design that today's gamers absolutely will not put up with. So they have to remake these classic games with today's gamer in mind and I for one appreciate that.

But another FFIV remake? There's already one on the DS. I'm starting to lose patience waiting for a FFVI remake.

I didn't care for the DS version's graphics. The PSP collection will likely look more realistic like the remakes of 1 & 2 on it. This is most definitely a buy for me. 4 is my first and favorite Final Fantasy, and the only one I've beaten, too. I never played the After Years because my Wii has no memory left. I wonder if the characters will all survive like the GBA version, or become unplayable like the other versions.

Also, as for a FF6 remake, you'd think that would've happened already, seeing as though its one of, if not the, most popular titles in the series. Maybe they're doing a big, fancy console remake?

Posted: Dec 17 2010 08:32 am

Here's an idea, Final Fantasy needs to just disappear for awhile. How many times can you rerelease or remake a game? Go away and come back in five years with something fresh. Also, take Sonic with you when you go.

Posted: Dec 17 2010 08:42 am

I guess I'm in the minority since I actually liked IV DS (I also need to get back to cleaning out the Challenge Dungeons in After Years before I do the final chapter); the augment system was a nice way of customizing my characters (Cecil was a damn beast by the end of my game, able to cover anyone being attacked and counterattacking, while Rosa could Double All Cast the best heal spells even while my party had Reflect up, etc. Honestly the only character I couldn't really decide what to do with augment-wise was Edge).

Posted: Dec 17 2010 08:55 am

lordsathien wrote:

I guess I'm in the minority since I actually liked IV DS (I also need to get back to cleaning out the Challenge Dungeons in After Years before I do the final chapter); the augment system was a nice way of customizing my characters (Cecil was a damn beast by the end of my game, able to cover anyone being attacked and counterattacking, while Rosa could Double All Cast the best heal spells even while my party had Reflect up, etc. Honestly the only character I couldn't really decide what to do with augment-wise was Edge).

I liked it too. The challenge was actually pretty nice. I just really hated the art style. Had they just kept it 2D or made it less cartoony, I would've liked it a lot more.

Posted: Dec 17 2010 09:52 am

Pandajuice wrote:

Syd Lexia wrote:

The big issue with Dawn of Souls is that it's too easy. FF1 on the NES may have been a little grind heavy, but honestly, that's what made FF1 and the first three Dragon Warrior games fun. You didn't have a map, so you had to explore, and god forbid you ended up somewhere you weren't supposed to go, or you'd be dead within two rounds.

But see, that kind of stuff was only fun in 1988 when we didn't know any better or have anything else. Grind heavy sandbox games with no direction is a primitive form of game design that today's gamers absolutely will not put up with. So they have to remake these classic games with today's gamer in mind and I for one appreciate that.

But another FFIV remake? There's already one on the DS. I'm starting to lose patience waiting for a FFVI remake.

But they didn't update the storyline at all or add any more depth to the game. So the game was basically just "walk your way through a weak story". It was pointless. It was like reading a shitty book. The game was what it was, and Dawn of Souls did nothing to modernize it. The only thing Dawn of Souls serves to do is make Mystic Quest look challenging.