-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
People understand the FFVII Remake doesn’t say Part 1 for Square’s benefit, not the consumer’s benefit, right?
- Thread starter BAD
- Start date
I responded to the Avengers comparison several times. Earlier entries like Avengers: Age of Ultron is a very loose adaptation of Age of Ultron where Stark and Banner create Ultron and he's like an evil twin of Stark, Captain America: Civil War is also a very different story than the comic
some people thought Cap may have died at the end but weren't upset
Iron Man 3 too uses a loose adaptation of the Extremis story and we know it's not called Extremis, the series is all very loose.
Now you could say FFVII remake is very different also... but the comic book names are accepted to be more like inspirations and homages when they sound cool, and at the risk of generalising, the mainstream doesn't follow the comics enough to be upset, or comic book fans also knew Marvel didn't have all the rights to like the X Men or Fantastic 4, to set up and do a straight adaptation of The Infinity War. But it was still a story worth doing.
But even focusing on it being referred to as Infinity War Part 1 on a table and reasonably just being called Infinity War in the end, look at the ending of Civil War and Dark World which kind of have cliffhangers with
Loki as King
Cap on the run
But in the end simply for many different reasons people have a broader expectaction of a comic book adaptation. I'm not going to get in the mobile comparison because I'm not very tech savy with mobiles, maybe thet do rip you off but I know anyway FF VII Remake is in its own criteria and has it own standard.
They do it and because know they can do it. The front cover definitely is meant to make some think it's the whole sequence but I guess the defender would say the implication is too ambigious or the imformation is technically there, even though we know what is being inferred. I think only enough bad publicity may have made them reconsider.
Are the people who embrace anticonsumer policies here trolling or are they Square Enix representatives? I can't really explain what's going on here.
"It" also does not have the full "It" original story (only the first half), so the context is not completely different. I don't think that's hard to understand.
I find it hard to understand because both IT film have different lead actors, which means people accept the split more easily, and it's also known that horror films aren't always specific with their names, there's several films called Halloween, and they're not all remakes. The Thing (2011) is also a prequel, I think the new Candyman film, simply titled that, is also a continuation. I think in general with horror films the title often makes you think more of the monster rather than the specific events.
Now the simple names are for marketing reasons too but it also makes sense when the audience is fine with it, using the word Remake also is more specific.
Part of the irony of this is that it would have almost been more acceptable for Square Enix to just flat-out title this "Final Fantasy VII," and let all the expanded and added Midgar stuff stand for itself, as there IS already precedent within the game industry to reuse game titles when you're rebooting a franchise. We've seen it with stuff like Sonic the Hedgehog, Prince of Persia, and more recently DOOM, among others. However even in those cases I feel like the messaging was pretty clear from moment-one that these were indeed reboots and intended to be considered as a new and separate entity.
The fact that they chose to title this Remake, specifically, conjures up specific expectations that differ from a game being a reboot or a reimagining. Doubly so with the cover art being a recreation of the previous full game.
Meanwhile I see my little questionnaire has gone largely ignored, aside from one person who thought the title wouldn't affect sales one way or the other...hmm.
The fact that they chose to title this Remake, specifically, conjures up specific expectations that differ from a game being a reboot or a reimagining. Doubly so with the cover art being a recreation of the previous full game.
Meanwhile I see my little questionnaire has gone largely ignored, aside from one person who thought the title wouldn't affect sales one way or the other...hmm.
Yeah, it's really bad and I'm surprised they didn't put a simple "chapter 1" as a subtitle. I also wonder how they face the development for the other parts, I'm sure FFVII Remake will be a success, and on paper developing the following entries using the same gameplay and engine should be faster, but as we know selling direct sequels is also harder, I wouldn't be surprised if they decide to expand the other game sections a lot less, I don't think they will be able to maintain the same original-remake enhancement ratio for the entire thing.
User Banned (3 Days): Inflammatory point of comparison.
I've read a ton of this topic and the most logical would be they really really like Square Enix. Enough for them to do no wrong.
*POLITICS REFERENCE INCOMING* *Sorry*
The same way a trump supporter would ignore facts or reasoning or reality.
The second would be there are some trolls. Trolling.
Or they work for Square
Holy shit I was eating burgers with two friends of mine a moment ago. They are super nerds. Like, "almost lost their entire social life because of WoW, having 3k€+ LoL accounts, going to Gamescom almost every goddamn year"- nerds.
BOTH OF THEM didn't know it was episodic lmao. They literally went "what the fuck are you talking about" and "is it like the Telltale games?"
BOTH OF THEM didn't know it was episodic lmao. They literally went "what the fuck are you talking about" and "is it like the Telltale games?"
Ah yes if only they could argue in good faith like this where you compare people who disagree with you to the rubber heads who support Trump.
I really would prefer if Square had actually laid out a plan on what the following episodes will cover and a rough timetable as when to expect them.
Like you would expect one or two years for the next episode but with Square I feel like you don't really know.
Like you would expect one or two years for the next episode but with Square I feel like you don't really know.
If the game was called Part 1 i would expect new releases every other month like with Telltale, Life is Strange or Hitman.
To be fair we are not arguing over opinions like who likes food or music or movies.
The topic at hand is about an action by a company was anti consumer and some people are mad about this action making Square Enix look bad. So they're defending Square Enix despite the facts given.
Last edited:
I believe Telltale usually do "Season pass" if it doesn't have the whole episodes, which I think may you investigate further, whether it's the back or Amazon description and also to find a time table for all the episodes. Hitman I believe had different names and places for every episode.
Idk, I've bought this game like a million times to only play through the Midgar section, so this seems like Square knows their audience.
I would bet a lot of people never even got past Midgar, which is ok what your favourite part is, but it doesn't speak for everyone.
You could talk about the topic
a drive by like this tries to make it a non issue and nobody should care about it.
Well, you can be a huge nerd and not follow all the videogame news. I mean, I have co-workers that are into western games but know nothing about japanese games and vice-versa. But yeah, this shows that SE has been kind of misleading with this one.
Nobody expects a 40 hour game to be released every month, but SE should specifiy an estimated release date for future parts. The name doesn't imply anything, take TLOU Part II as an example, I doubt anyone thinks that is a DLC or a simple episode for a periodic released game. But again, SE needs to be clear and detail their release plans.
Last edited:
Good thing I'm not upset over anything and everything. Hell I'm not even upset about this, on a personal level.
I also just think it's really not that hard to look at the situation and admit, "hey wow that seems unnecessarily misleading, that kinda sucks," without getting completely bent out of shape over it. No one's offering to march on Square-Enix headquarters over this.
For my part, I just don't want this to become a trend of things called remakes that aren't actually remakes. I think Square's wound up biting off more than they can chew with this project and I'd rather some lessons be learned out of this.
This is a passion project. They're calling it what they want and making the game they want to make. They're not out to trick you. Focusing on finding the negative in everything is a heavy burden in life
Passion Project is romancticizing it. It's a very commercial blockbuster. It's ok to criticise the marketing.
Square-Enix loves to be technically correct. There's a reason why they mentioned it was episodic around the time the PSX 2015 trailer dropped, but not in the trailer itself. There's a reason why they said the FFXV E3 2013 trailer was CGI in an interview at E3, and not in the trailer itself.
They did technically mention it, the information is out there, just conveniently not in the places they spend the most money and effort into showing. They coincidentally put the HUD over the FFXV CGI and framed the camera as if it was gameplay, but look, they did admit it was CGI, no harm done.
If you want to shutdown the discussion, go complain to a mod or something.
You are on a messageboard that discusses videogames, if the marketing of a videogame cannot be discussed according to you, and it makes our lives empty, maybe you should leave this messageboard.
Since you have such a full wonderfull busy life. Condescending jackass.
At least it's not empty enough to get them to drive by shitpost in threads about issues they don't care about. Imagine being that person. Whew.
Just for fun, I'd like for you to answer the simple question I've posed a couple of times throughout the topic:
What harm would it do for Square to have added a subtitle to the game that more accurately describes what the product is? What is the downside for the product itself if they were to do that?
To be honest I find it really interesting people's radically different thought processes over how a product should be advertised and branded. How such a simple logo and front cover can get such a disputed reaction. I'm not bitter or anything.
Except for the tons of people, some on Era no less, who continually attack the game for it not being that CGI trailer from long ago. Among other reasons.
But its FFXV, not FFVII so people are way more willing to criticize every little detail about it.
Just imagine if the title had never changed and it was still called Versus XIII to this day! Way more would be outraged at it not being the Versus XIII that Nomura envisioned with some probably wondering why Square didn't rename the game.
Heck they'd be better off Calling it Final Fantasy Seven, or something, like God Of War (PS4), making it a reboot of sorts since they want to waste a lot of time with new filler stuff that wasn't in the original. Then after the first game they can go here's a part 2 because this story has more to expand on, and part 3, 4, 5, oh it's no longer selling as good as the first 3 so we may end it on 6.
I'm firmly in the camp of this being not nearly as big a deal as it's made out to be(and that in this age of having smartphones attached to our hips a bare minimum of research should be expected), but this is still probably a better solution or even FF7R: Midgar. Renaming it simply to FF7 is the best because a consumer could pick up the box and think that all they're getting is the few hours of Midgar from the first game with nothing added, since the title is all they'll go off of before buying apparently.
I do wonder why they went with adding Remake to the title. Unless they don't count the DS and PSP versions of I to IV (specifically IV DS and III DS) as remakes. Because IV DS had a couple of things added to it story wise that fleshed it out a tiny bit which I really liked.
Nah the senior directives from the original team are all here. Why would they come back to make an ad. This only exists because of their involvement
I bet they did some surveys long ago that said an overwhelming amount of people put the game down before the end of Disc 1. Its a very vocal minority upset about the titling of the game. I think most consumers know FF7 as Midgar and a little after that.
so now the defense is that nobody really played past Midgar anyways?
this is fucking wild
I think it's too safe and commercial to be called a passion project. That's not a criticism. Usually passion project describes a work that is told likely to fail. Like Apocalypse Now or Avatar, where production was very worrying. FF VII Remake was always going to make money if it's half decent, even with the multi part idea. Also I think the survey speculation needs more evidence, it's a very specific assumption.
There is a huge difference between "Midgar" and "end of Disc 1." Midgar is 10% of the game at the most. Disc 1 is closer to 75% of the game. You can finish Midgar in a single sitting, but Disc 1 will go on long past that.
Every time this topic comes up it's kind of incredible how, despite it being not that big of a deal overall and such an obvious and tiny thing to fix, there's people who are adamantly against it to the point they seem like they'd fall on a sword rather than S-E add a tiny bit of text to the title, and there has literally never been any legitimate arguments as to why they couldn't.
I don't think you're getting that summary because every reason I've seen mentioned is awful:
- Square isn't under an obligation to be truthful (and as consumers we should protect the rights of corporations to be misleading).
- People that don't follow gaming news or read back covers deserve to be deceived.
- "It is a complete game" (only true in the most technical sense, and doesn't address that it isn't a complete remake of FFVII, which is what the cover says).
All of which can be further summed up as:
- The boots of this corporation have delicious taste.
Part of it is a hyperbolic reaction to the seemingly disproportionate amount of attention that this topic has received. I actually can't believe it's still going myself.
"I have othen wondered why Sephiroth became the most iconic villian in rpg history, I mean he wasn't even in the game!" whoops all Midgar 1997
Some of the mental gymnastics in this thread really keep me coming back.
i think simply because people are still buying OG FF7 on pc/console
honestly i'm kind of surprised they even bothered to that extent so i'm not chaffed by the exclusion of the "episode 1" thing. but that's my perspective, i'm well aware this isn't a whole hog re creation of what i played in 1997 but "people" aren't me so i dunno
In basically every issue that comes down to someone having a beef with a company's actions since I joined this community a decade ago - if you're apathetic or think said issue doesn't matter you're immediately labeled as a corporate apologist/lickspittle/shill/bootlicker. I agree it's stupid to try to make up some bullshit reasons around why the title is what it is, but people get so incensed by someone disagreeing on a pretty minor issue.