I hate to be completely predictable here, but Oscar's point is exactly why I didn't really understand the criticism against FFXIII at first. I never thought of Final Fantasy as the premiere series for fiction in games or being the leader in game mechanics. I only ever saw the series as a gaming hardware showpiece. To that end, FFXIII satisfied me. It's an absolutely gorgeous game (save for some weird compression on the FMVs in the 360 version) and had the exact same sprawling, breathtaking vistas I've come to expect from the series.
Of course, having played quite a ways into it I can understand where some people might've been put off by the baffling dialog, but maybe it's a little naïve to expect anything more?
spoiler (click to show/hide)
cue Other M jokes
Final Fantasy is not the premiere fiction in games, but story, world building, characters, variety, exploration wrapped up in a pretty package, are all huge proponents in what makes FF 'FF'. At least for me. FF is a series that lets you see things and you get involved in them in the events as a viewer as well as participant. It's the anti-DQ in the sense that in DQ, you're always the catalyst to and hero of every single event. It's like an interactive novel in that regard and Final Fantasy brings worlds to live through its gameplay. It is similar to an wrpg in that regard for me. Interactivity and player agency are pretty big things when it comes to FF for me. FF13 is not like this. At all. You go from dungeon to dungeon, without a lick of explaining why I'm there, what created it, what's the history, where am I? who do I talk to? How do these people live? what quests are there to find? Are there any quests? How come my progression is so static if there's nothing to do but just fight monsters? Why is the interactivity lower than even FF1? Why is the pacing so abysmal? Why is this game literally a linear trek to watch the next cutscene? Why are all the cool world details tucked into a datalog? Past FF's let you experience it, they don't TELL you about it. Everything about it is wrong except battles and arguably music.
Questioning why FF fans didn't like 13 just shows a rather limited exposure to FF.
FF isn't about mechanical depth. But it still allows you
options. FF stories aren't AAA caliber, but they usually have heart and something that makes them interesting. FF13's main positive are battles, nothing more. FF without all of what I listed and with nothing but battles is going to have a backlash. Especially since, as said, FF rarely has mechanical depth to back it up, so it's not as good a dungeon crawler as Breath of Fire V or Digital Devil Saga - whose structure is very similar to. If it were, less people would complain. I know I would! No dungeon mehanics, just walk, walk, walk. No variety or something to help the pacing. Just battles, battles, battles. This is decidedly un-FF, and in many ways, very anti-jrpg.
I'd say playing FF games for the gameplay is about as bad as playing for the plot.
This is erroneous. It depends on the game. If you play VII for gameplay, I don't know what to say. V? Hell yeah. Tactics? Shit yeah. XII? God yes.
No, I think it's just fine. The ones you listed that are Final Fantasy games (not Tactics, that's TO with a coat o' paint) are about as good at gameplay as the best plot FFs are at plot. It's not the best in either category by any means.
I disagree on XII. I think it has some of the best gameplay in a jrpg. As for V, I think the four job festival has shown that V has a lot of versatility in its gameplay. So I think you're wrong there as well.
More than that, I think you are doing the jrpg fanboy thing where they equate good gameplay as only mechanically rich battles. I find that does the series, and by the extension, the genre, a disservice. Final Fantasy games are usually fantastic at hidden secrets, easter eggs, sidequests, and exploration where it counts. In fact, I'd say, it's the best jrpg at this. FFVI has a broken battle system that's rarely challenging (though some dungeon in WoR push it depending on your gear) but it still has an open-ended approach that has a tremendous amount of hidden, missable side content that you have to dig to explore. I feel the same way about VII, VIII, X-2, and to a lesser extent IV, V, IX, and X. XII has it too. It's a big part of the series. Even 1 and II have exploring and talking to people and finding hidden shit to progress as a key feature. II even has text dialogue to figure out what to do.
I think FF is really good at this. And I think you do the genre a disservice if you equate gameplay depth as merely battles. And this is another reason FF13 is such a divisive game - it is only battles in a series that has proved that it is more than that when it comes to its gameplay. There's something about exploring and doing sidequests in FF that I don't get in any other jrpg series.
I realize you're not big on exploration and prefer structure, but FF is good at a lot of things beyond presentation. You also ignore that FF wraps its presentation up in a way that others jrpgs fail to match that aren't the Shin Megami Tensei franchise in that it uses its well crafted art and design to tell a story. FF is great at this and has been since VI. In VII, for instance, it wasn't a big deal just because of the graphics. It was a big deal because you were a part of the game and how the game used its presentation to its advantage.
It isn't that I don't find battles important in jrpgs - I find them VERY important as it's a huge part of the play time - but I separate different games and different emphasis from different goals. If jrpgs were only judged based on their battle depth, we might as well just play something that looks Rogue or play a MUD. Because FF's gameplay isn't about mechanical depth does not mean its gameplay is
poor. It just has completely different goals as to how to approach different types of rpg gameplay, and many of its entries (namely 1, V, Tactics - which is NOT a dressed up TO because their class systems are totally different - and XII) are mechanically great.
A good movie comparison would be...Star Wars. Final Fantasy is very similar. They're technical marvels and embrace new tech to tell stories and do things in a totally more realized manner than compared to the past. That said, that doesn't mean Star Wars' (Final Fantasy) is the best there is. But there's still more to Star Wars than just pretty special effects. Sure, it's not Rashomon (Dragon's Quest), or Vertigo (SMT), or even the 2001 (insert random gameplay focused jrpg here). But it doesn't have to be. It's good at what it does and is great at what it does best. Doesn't mean it sucks.
