Final Fantasy 16 not open world

[MidnightDragon]

Is that a bad thing?

[Sunny]

Good, glad we are moving away from the time where every single game had to be open world, kinda like back in 2013 when almost every game had an online mode shoved in.

[Baranov_925]

I'm down with that if story lasts at least +/- 30 hours.

[Valyrious]

They're finally learning from where XV was lackluster. SO glad it ain't open world. Story focused linear game  >>>>>>> massive, densely populated open world any day of the century.

[Infected Elite]

1 hour ago, Rozalia1 said:

 

My experience with that Noctis was people liked the cutscene shown, but wrote Noctis off as an edgelord. Later stuff that revised things was met with "so when is this actually going to come out". By 15 most were just relieved the thing actually came out. Though all this was a long time ago so perhaps others had a different experience.

 

He is apparently the only human party member but I think the summons are playable too.

 

yeah, i remember the V13 trailer thinking "holy crap. they cant make this game play like this can they?" and well, the sword and vanishing combat was okay, but yeah when V13 got scrapped and they said it would now be FF15, while i was still hyped, my level of excitement dropped big time. I remember FF13 and Versus 13 were originally rumored to release around the same time... 

 

Ah interesting. Wonder how that will play out. I saw the gameplay trailer bits and pieces that showed combat. The summon fights totally remind me of Godzilla. I also get a weird Last Remnant sense from watching it

 

29 minutes ago, Valyrious said:

They're finally learning from where XV was lackluster. SO glad it ain't open world. Story focused linear game  >>>>>>> massive, densely populated open world any day of the century.

Look at Trails of Arise, even Berseria, wasnt open world. But had open-ish areas, and never felt too linear despite being that. No one complains about those worlds(that ive seen). So if FF16 follows that route, then hell yes.

49 minutes ago, MidnightDragon said:

Is that a bad thing?

no. its a very good thing. Empty open worlds are the worst. Extra padding for the sake of padding

[Infected Elite]

Updated OP with more info

[TJ_Solo]

3 hours ago, Infected Elite said:

 

 

While true, i think it could benefit from that "semi-open" area style that games like Tales of Xillia and Arise had. But have open world like XV... ill pass. 

 

Again, it not being open world isn't a selling point. It should not be a headline.

Make a good game. End of story.

[Deluziion90]

Can we also sign for no comrades surprises. That messed up my 100% for years on FFXV ?

Edited June 22, 2022 by Deluziion90

[Silver-I-Chariot]

Really depends on how they are going to implement it. I hope it's not as linear as FF13 or 7R.

[jgm4789]

I hope what they mean is going back to an ff1-9 style where theres an overworld that connects smaller areas and not ff13 hallway simulator style design. Mainline final fantasy is supposed to be an rpg, not devil may cry.

[Infected Elite]

1 hour ago, TJ_Solo said:

 

Again, it not being open world isn't a selling point. It should not be a headline.

Make a good game. End of story.

 

Yeah thats a fair point. But if it's not open world, could mean less padding which may ultimately help things. Time will tell it seems..

1 hour ago, Deluziion90 said:

Can we also sign for no comrades surprises. That messed up my 100% for years on FFXV 

 

God i hate how much dlc xv had.... like what, 5 episodes + comrades then an update for a bonus dungeon awhile later?

26 minutes ago, jgm4789 said:

I hope what they mean is going back to an ff1-9 style where theres an overworld that connects smaller areas and not ff13 hallway simulator style design. Mainline final fantasy is supposed to be an rpg, not devil may cry.

Combat looks to be exactly like DMC V though...

 

 

[TJ_Solo]

Quote

Yeah thats a fair point. But if it's not open world, could mean less padding which may ultimately help things. Time will tell it seems..

 

Those are just assumptions. 

It's like you hating fish and going to a restaurant that doesnt serve fish and assuming all the non-fish dishes are better for just not having fish in them.

 

Sounds like giving a Chicken Bourguignon a 10/10 without tasting it or judging it on the merits of what makes a good Chicken Bourguignon. It is just 10/10 because there's no fish. 

 

 

[SelectiveGamer]

So glad to see how this changes the entire game from positive to negative reception. ?

 

Except it doesn't matter at all

 

I'll laugh at you all win it wins GOTY

[DrBloodmoney]

3 minutes ago, SelectiveGamer said:

So glad to see how this changes the entire game from positive to negative reception. ?

 

Except it doesn't matter at all

 

I'll laugh at you all win it wins GOTY

 

Uh…
 

….virtually every response here so far is somewhere between neutral and positive though…

[Infected Elite]

45 minutes ago, TJ_Solo said:

 

Those are just assumptions. 

It's like you hating fish and going to a restaurant that doesnt serve fish and assuming all the non-fish dishes are better for just not having fish in them.

 

Sounds like giving a Chicken Bourguignon a 10/10 without tasting it or judging it on the merits of what makes a good Chicken Bourguignon. It is just 10/10 because there's no fish. 

 

 

 

again, we will see when it releases lol.

[Zephrese]

Even as someone who adores FFXV despite its numerous flaws, I'm honestly relived to hear that XVI isn't going to be open-world. lmao

I love plenty of open-world games, and I'm looking forward to plenty more. That said, however, I've also grown sick of everything becoming open-world just for the sake of it.

Edited June 22, 2022 by Zephrese

[technole]

You can tell who didn't play XIII-2. That was a leaps-and-bounds improvement over XIII in almost all respects, none of that linear hallway baloney. That'll probably be a better direct comparison as YoshiP said XVI is more episodic and time skips since we play Clive through his years.

 

[Infected Elite]

5 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

 

Uh…
 

….virtually every response here so far is somewhere between neutral and positive though…

I'm definitely positive on it. Density in small areas can still mean hours of meaningful content.

 

I guess so far the only thing I'm kind of annoyed with is only Clive is playable but, FFXV was only Noctis anyways (base game). So yeah, i do hope we see 1 or 2 new summons even if just for the sake of villains.... otherwise, lets not have Bahamut be the main villains summon. Too predictable. 

 

[Dreakon13]

What's the good points about a semi-open world exactly?  Other than it not being fully open world.

 

I'll go back to FFXIV.  The game operates in smaller open zones and as much as I love it, the parts of the story that rely on it are as big of a slog as any fully open world game.  Pointless activities and fetch quests aren't suddenly better because the zone is smaller (fully open world games tend to be compartmentalized too).  Honestly we need to get past the open world trend altogether.  It's all designed to be padding.

 

17 hours ago, Void said:

So an Open World Final Fantasy does not bother me as Final Fantasy 1-9 were open world

 

I haven't played all of them but Final Fantasy 7 and 8 at least were not open world.  They were unabashedly linear games, even in the world maps, until you got past a certain point, unlocked airships, etc.  The fact some people don't realize that, is a credit to the impeccable craftsmanship of those games.  Very focused but felt big.

Edited June 23, 2022 by Dreakon13

[DEMON]

On 22/06/2022 at 2:43 PM, DrBloodmoney said:

Well, the only one I'd really consider Open World was FFXV, and it was deeply flawed (not just because of that, but for a lot of reasons, and that was arguably one of them,)...

...so I'd say abandoning that is a step in the right direction.

 

I wouldn't even consider FFXV Open World, the story was linear, Open World to me is being able to take the story in a variety of different paths and resulting in different endings.

 

Personally I think it's better they just not bother with open world, as SE's idea of open world (with the exception of FFXIV/XI) is just big open spaces with next to nothing exciting to look at. People hate on FFXIII, but I think it had some of the most beautiful locations in the series.

Edited June 23, 2022 by DEMON

[DrBloodmoney]

5 minutes ago, DEMON said:

 

I wouldn't even consider FFXV Open World, the story was linear, Open World to me is being able to take the story in a variety of different paths and resulting in different endings.

 

Personally I think it's better they just not bother with open world, as SE's idea of open world (with the exception of FFXIV/IX) is just big open spaces with next to nothing exciting to look at.

 

 

True - I think of that as being the more extreme end of Open World, but I get your point...

...though in fairness, I suspect that when the devs themselves said it's not "Open World" they meant in the sense that - in that context - FFXV was, in their eyes.

 

 

Quote

People hate on FFXIII, but I think it had some of the most beautiful locations in the series.

 

I'm a FFXIII defender too - I actually liked it more than FFX!

Personally, in terms of that more linear, focused-narrative style of FF game, I'd put the FFVII Remake at the top of the tree, then FFXII-2, then FFXIII, then FFX.

Edited June 23, 2022 by DrBloodmoney

[Dreakon13]

35 minutes ago, DEMON said:

 

I wouldn't even consider FFXV Open World, the story was linear, Open World to me is being able to take the story in a variety of different paths and resulting in different endings.

 

Not that anyone asked me, but most open world games have linear stories (see: almost every AAA Ubisoft game ever made)... but IMO it's more in the idea of one continuous seamless map and, this day and age, relentless side content, map markers, things to collect, etc.  A lot of non-story related progression gates.  An open world game with branching story paths and multiple endings is ambitious enough that I don't think it happens very often (at least not to any meaningful degree) and probably isn't a reliable metric.

 

In that sense I kind of agree FFXV isn't "open world", at least not in the way people want to label it in this thread.  It's been a while but I don't think it committed a lot of the sins of modern open world time wasters, and later in the game it actually gets more linear... but it does technically have one large land mass you spend most of your time on.

Edited June 23, 2022 by Dreakon13

[Rozalia1]

On 23/06/2022 at 0:43 AM, technole said:

You can tell who didn't play XIII-2. That was a leaps-and-bounds improvement over XIII in almost all respects, none of that linear hallway baloney. That'll probably be a better direct comparison as YoshiP said XVI is more episodic and time skips since we play Clive through his years.

 

5/7 of the people who mentioned 13 before your post played 13-2. The second game was better yes, but it sold half what the 1st one did and could not repair the brand. 13-3 then sold half what the second one did and destroyed any goodwill the second game built up.

[Infected Elite]

3 hours ago, Rozalia1 said:

 

5/7 of the people who mentioned 13 before your post played 13-2. The second game was better yes, but it sold half what the 1st one did and could not repair the brand. 13-3 then sold half what the second one did and destroyed any goodwill the second game built up.

 

Yeah my issue with 13 was too linear. Trailers made it look far bigger than it was but at the time i still enjoyed it . 13-2 was better in some aspects too but i hated that monster/enemy idea as a 3rd party member. Also not having lightning in it sucked. Sure she became a dlc "monster" but come on SE... lol but a lot of fans wanted more Lightning, and that didn't really happen. 

 

as for 13 LR, never played it but by that point my interest in the 13 series was gone, especially knowing 13 Versus was in limbo, not even sure they had officially declared it as 15 yet or that it was still coming. I had more hype for Versus 13.... then XV happened. yeah.

-------------

 

 

 

Anyways, 16 is supposed to have events happening at a "break neck" pace... curious what they mean by that, cause if the game is just go go go, it may feel like a rushed story? curious to see 

 

[AJ_Radio]

On 6/23/2022 at 7:13 AM, Dreakon13 said:

 

Not that anyone asked me, but most open world games have linear stories (see: almost every AAA Ubisoft game ever made)... but IMO it's more in the idea of one continuous seamless map and, this day and age, relentless side content, map markers, things to collect, etc.  A lot of non-story related progression gates.  An open world game with branching story paths and multiple endings is ambitious enough that I don't think it happens very often (at least not to any meaningful degree) and probably isn't a reliable metric.

 

In that sense I kind of agree FFXV isn't "open world", at least not in the way people want to label it in this thread.  It's been a while but I don't think it committed a lot of the sins of modern open world time wasters, and later in the game it actually gets more linear... but it does technically have one large land mass you spend most of your time on.

Open world games have been done to death at this point. Nobody is innovating them, and we’ve run the course of providing anything new to the genre. 
 

Sometimes when an open world has endless amounts of content, I tend to do very little of it.

Edited July 6, 2022 by AJ_Radio