Did Ff16 Flop?

Wasn't the bear sex thing well after release, though? I thought the news about that came weeks after the initial release, when it was already a success. I don't recall Larian announcing that as an option, but I do recall the uproar over it when it was found later in the game (IIRC wasn't it bugged at the start too?).

As for the rest and having choices, I think again, if you look at the way a lot of big game studios think gamers want things to be, that's not on their radar. It strikes me that they are more focused on simplicity, "push button to get power ***", and mobile-style gameplay instead of depth and decision making. The fact a game with so many interwoven plot lines, in depth character building, choices numbering in the thousands, and so on is successful still seems contrary to what you would expect from big game studio particularly to casual audiences. I know people who never play video games who played BG3 and tried different builds, decisions, etc, which I think isn't something larger studios can really grasp.

I would say the reason why other games aren't as big as BG3 is because of the budget lol. Really it is one of the biggest budget game in the recent years, very few studios have that kind of resources to make games this huge.

2 million words in a game. That's how big BG3 is.

Yoshi P's game tend to have simplified mechanics, it's been like that since FF14. it isn't only because it is "for casual", but really I think that's because he aim to get ***done on time, and polish it enough that it doesn't suck. So many features in his games were often cut, that he can use time and resources on polishing.

It is just his style on management, and this style wasn't wrong depending on the need of the company. People just expected more ambitious projects than he can handle, that's all.

Edit: I also have to point out less choices in a game does not mean it is easy nor bad. Sekiro has an extremely simple combat system and yet the game is hard. BG3 is crpg, it just happened to be a genre that really really focuses variety of choices and freedom.


I didn't further analyze the reason behind bear sex craze. Maybe it is purely words of mouth marketing, maybe it is a well coordinated PR done by marketing team and game journalists. What matters is that it worked and pushed the visibility higher, that's all that matters.

I don't get how you think ff7r is simplistic without even playing it, and comparing it to 16 where you literally get a ring that plays the game for you.

Both games have easy and simple combat if you want them to be. Both have complex combat systems if you want them to be.

Both games lock the better difficulties behind beating the game.

The sin FF7R committed was they padded it out far too much to allow them to split it 3 ways, ensuring most people who bought it didn't finish it.

Since they didn't finish the first one, they are less likely to buy the 2nd one and the same issue with impact the 3rd part.

It doesn't matter how good it is, they made it too long and boring and so ensuring each part will get way less sales than the last.

If they have sense they will create an "ultimate cut" edition at the end with all 3 parts and cut it to a decent length (40-50 hours total with lots of side endgame stuff) and then add extra features like classic turn based battle ontop of the action combat and alternate story cut scenes (original story)

The 3rd one will sell horrible, no matter how good it is.

I liked the story content in Remake. I actually didn't mind the combat and most of the gameplay.

The minigames and side quests, along with the number of them...not so much. That's why I didn't buy Rebirth, a lot of that stuff just feels like filler content and I read a lot of complaints about the same. I realize the OG title had a lot of this too, but it feels like they had character whereas in the FF7:R it just feels empty, like some of the side quests related to Aerith, Tifa, and Barrett in Remake. It's why I only played it through once and never played it again even after they added Yuffi.

Where did I say that? I said OG FF7's battle system is simplistic. Basically you just pick a command that does mathematically highest damage and fill up HP/MP when they are low. The game also doesn't punish you harshly if your resource management isn't at max efficiency. And the game basically tell you which move does the highest damage too. This mob is weak to fire, then fire is the correct answer. This character's limit break is full, then limit break does more dmg than attack. There are no real chess-like puzzles to figure out in old FF battle systems. But chess-like puzzles is something that I would look for in turn based games.

FF7R's system is slightly more intricate than the OG because they added player control between each turns and stagger. So there are more decisions to made between turns. Generally more decisions available to a player=harder to figure out the right answer.

That being said, personally I still find FF7R's system still fairly easy to figure out the combat solutions behind it. I beat the entire remake and all the optional boss+combat sim with relatively ease, even started hard mode and still find it fairly easy. But I also heard a lot of people find it hard. So I guess I probably can't represent most players when it comes to figuring out combat math in a game.

I actually find Remake have better characterization than the OG. probably because OG doesn't have voice acting and motion capture to deliver character nuance.

But Remake does have weaker plot structure than the OG, mostly because they cut a perfect story structure that worked into 3 pieces. Fighting the final boss in remake, before Cloud finds resolution for his internal conflict, completely weakened the drama, tension and satisfaction.

They really should have never cut one story into 3 pieces imo. The rest is whatever, they are fine as they are.

Only half you say?

PS5 users are half of PSN

I thought you were talking about the remake/rebirth.

Well, games don't have to be ridiculously and annoying hard in terms of combat, especially to understand. I actually despise fighting games that require intricate combos, or games like dark souls in general. I regret spending the 70 something dollars on elden ring, I absolutely hated and despised it.

FF7R gives a lot of freedom in the battles, you don't have to do them all the efficient way and there are many ways to approach battles. They are pretty tough in hard mode for most gamers without looking up guides on the best materia setups.

These are all opinions, but I feel like they should cater to their core audience more than that crowd. I hate how they think its the only way to profit, while they are just continuing to alienate their loyal fans that made them. If thats the case, why even bother remaking 7, they could create a new FF game thats a FPS or another that is a fortnite game. Just seemed they have artistic integrity and don't want to copy things, then Yoshida comes along and does it for 16.

Remake and Rebirth are as easy or hard as you want them to be, just as 16 is. What I think sucks for both games is having hard mode locked behind a playthrough of the game.

I want the enemies to be difficult as I'm learning the game, that just doesn't happen when I've already played through the game once and understand all the battle systems and mechanics.

Square have allowed the corporates to have too much control over the production process, they have effectively done this



This is why I think their move to going full AAA titles will backfire, cause they will just have more pressure to succeed and the suits will have even more say in how the games should be.

Difficulty and depth(amount of viable decisions to make at any given time) in a battle system are 2 different things.

Sekiro is difficult, but it doesn't have much depth in actual combat. As your moveset choices available at any given time is not very high. the difficulty comes from execution of the optimal move choice(such as parry, jump, dodge) that you already know, but not figuring out what the optimal move is.

When I said a combat system is simple, I don't mean difficulty nor game being good or bad. I meant viable decisions available.

This is why I am generally not a fan old school elemental weakness system. It basically lowers optimal choices available in any given situation: if an enemy resists fire, then there is no reason to use fire. So that's one less move you can use against this enemy.

I do agree that FF7r system is slightly better than old school elemental weakness system because you can move and attack between turns, so that increased move choices available per turn. That doesn't make elemental weakness a fun system to play with though.

I vastly prefer a more DMC style system that every move is useful in different situation because of their "traits"(such as stun, push back, air, swing speed etc) but not because this move does 50% more dmg/stagger than another against specific enemy. Being able to pick any move because of traits but not because of weakness is what I would call "freedom" in a battle system imo.

Lmao... did you actually play the game? Move sets not very high? The game has 7 different TREEEEESSSSS of skillsets you can learn, not to mention upgrades to your left-arm. You have multiple and completely different approaches to kill bosses thanks to all the skills you learn throughout the game.

Skills and move sets are 2 different things lol.

Some skills are passive like "increase spirit emblem", that doesn't increase moveset count.

I think there are like 18(?) combat skills and 10(?) tools in Sekiro. Feel free to correct me if this numbers are wrong, I need to recheck to be 100% sure.

DMC Dante has around 70-100 moves.

Not that I think more moveset = more fun(balance is more important) but Sekiro is certainly not on the high end when it comes to moveset counts.

Who said that they are the same? You can use combinations of the 7 different skill-trees to create move sets.

I'm pretty sure you haven't played, or beaten Sekiro. You don't seem to know anything about the game.

Also, lmao... are you at least remotely trying to suggest that duh-huh smash buttons DMC has a deeper, more complex battle system than Sekiro?

If you don't agree with people, argue math numbers or mechanics design philosophy. Don't argue emotions.

Does Sekiro have over 100 move set available in combat or not, and what's the usage percentage of each move on average? Are they relatively even or lopsided? This is a yes no question.

If not you need another countable, variable metric to convince me. Or you may as well say "it is objectively the deepest game ever" and walk away.

You would know the answer if you had played the game. Like I said before, you can use a combination of left arms and 7 different skill trees to form move sets. You clearly haven't played the game, because maybe it's too difficult for you.

But you don't know the answer yourself because you never counted the number.

I've played the game, I don't find it particularly difficult tbh. Just bored. (I never say it is a bad game, in fact I think it is very well made, just got bored from it)

Yeah, because I played the game to enjoy it, not to memorize metrics to with a semantic argument on FFAH against a person who didn't even play the game, yet speak to the battle system depthness. lol.

But do the math, check all skill-stree skills times all arm upgrades. Make sure to check which skills actually combo with each other and which arm you need to have on. If you are right, and the game "doesn't have much depth in actual combat" you should be able to come up with an answer pretty quickly.

Well if you are not interested in discussing numbers behind a system, why are you engaged in such conversation?

You like the game, I get it. I didn't even say it is a bad game, I only say it has relatively low move count compare with DMC system. not sure why are you offended about THAT.

But if want to have a conversation about a system, then don't resort to emotional arguments. That kind of argument is meaningless .

https://youtu.be/rYcHlOgI7pg?si=8Y8u6gUxfHUi0TSV


No need to memorize, someone got the number.

Yes the moveset count is lower than DMC, before we even discuss usage percentage. And you haven't prove otherwise, not that you bother to count anyways. Not sure why would you get mad over numbers.

You provided a video with demos, but how many possible move-sets are there, since you provided a possible source? Again, the video you provided is more inditaction that you have no idea of what you are talking about. Moreover, the video you provided speaks to how diverse the skills and movesets can be.

But since you are a DMC button smasher, you might think that seeing a 20000x COmbOoooOOOO is inditaction of depthness. Which it isn't. The boss design, how the boss reacts to your actions, boss strength and weaknesses etc. You pull a DMC duh-huh on Sekiro the boss will whoop your ***.

Also, even hardcore DMC fans I know wouldn't be so bold as to say DMC is a game with a very deep battle system. They play DMC for the lols. Just like Metal Gear and Doom. I like both, but I play Doom for the lolz.

It looks like we aren't even on the same page when it comes to defining what "depth" is.

To you "depth" probably means something fun. hence you are offended.

To me "depth" is simply a number game. It is the number of move players can choose from, AND the percentage of how likely this move will be picked by the player.

So if a game has 10 move set but each move set are being used by players 10% of time, then this system is probably deeper than another game with 100 moveset but one move is being used 95% of time, the remaining 99 moves are used 5% of time.

It has nothing to do with boss difficulty , or 20000000 combo or whatever. Everything you argued here, are completely unrelated to my point.

Also optimal choices available in a game also isn't by all end all the only thing that makes the game fun. Level design, story, polish etc is also part of it.

Therefore if I say one game has lower amount of optimal move available than another, it does not mean that game is not fun.

If we are only discussing numbers, then focus on numbers. If you are not interested in numbers then don't get mad over people talking about numbers. You are free to say Sekiro is better than another game I don't care. I didn't even talked about anything else except numbers.

To you depthness means smashing button and seeing 2000x flashy combos in the air. That's why you are offended.


You are probably the only person in the planet that plays DMC for story and level design. The game was meant to be button smasher.



We are not discussing numbers. You are, because that's clearly what you cater to. 2000x Super duper combo before touching the group.

It's a waste of time if you didn't bother reading any of my points. Where the *** did I say I play DMC for story and level design? I said it is some examples of what may make a game good, not I play DMC for story and level design LOL.



Yes I was. If you aren't interested in numbers why are you responding to my post about numbers? I don't understand.

I'm reposting to your boldness to call DMC button smasher duh-huh a game with deep battle system. lol.

A person who picks DMC will likely make a the more numbers you see the better claim.


Then you play it for smashing the buttons, which is ok... IT's the audience the devs cater to.

Yeah, because you can't prove otherwise with numbers too. You didn't even bother to count movesets available in Sekiro despite you claim to love it.

So if I say DMC's system is deep you can't make a counter statement anyways. You don't have data on moveset numbers on any games you played.

No, I've been posting things about numbers on this forum WAY before I like dmc. Literally every time when I discussed FFXI math on optimal builds I have to reference numbers and spreadsheet.

My love with numbers in video games has nothing to do with DMC, you blamed the wrong thing lol.

Lmao.. because you never play the game you have no idea of what you are talking about. I don't know by heart all the possible combination of skillsets and arm upgrades that work with each other. Also, because unlike DMC duh-huh, a boss will react to you just pressing a bunch of buttons, dodge-deflect and whoop your ***.

Remember, Sekiro is not button-smashing... it's you being super aware and quick on your feet TO SURVIVE, not to see 2000x BADASS combo... yeah... they call a bunch of duh-huh combos BADASS in DMC... lol.