The new Nomura?

[Atelier-Bagur]

As much as I love Banri Oda, I don't think he has directing experience to lead an entire development team (unless he personally ever had the interest to direct then hey I'm all for it).

The only reason why Yoshida got the job for FFXIV was because of how successful he was in directing Dragon Quext X which is SE's other big MMO, but only in Japan

[Kaurhz]

I would say we have had good things, but they haven't quite hit the nail on the head. I mean, sure exploratory content was great, but the reality is this particular piece of content started initially in Heavensward with Diadem and had to be scrapped... Not once, but twice before we got something a little more flushed out with Eureka, and even then, personally, I don't think it offered a great deal until it came with the introduction of Logograms, and then Bozja really solidified the whole exploratory content, in terms of what it offered, but they essentially had to throw the entire kitchen sink at it to make it work as well as it did. - This pretty much reigns true for any piece of content. It's never been solid to start with really. Same with Island Sanctuary... I would say though, both Island Sanctuary and combat exploratory content could actually do with taking concepts from each other.

The thing to keep in mind is that it's always going to be a somewhat trial by fire. Budget and resources unfortunately are finite, so you aren't going to get something new without it coming at the expense of something else. This hits the nail harder than anything else, because then they still need to iterate through it, e.g., Pagos > Pyros. So it's like restarting the cycle of content development I guess.

I would say, placing this on a singular individual is a big mistake, as I don't think the issue is wholly on that one person. I don't think XIV gets the budget it really deserves, again, going back to the whole getting x must come at the expense of y - In an ideal world we would have gotten an exploratory zone in addition to everything we've gotten this expansion. With this in mind, I don't think it really matters who you actually put in that seat, to be honest. - Taking into account that they will still be under the same budgeting constraints and would still be developing for the same community, and we're a very divisive community. - You'll find as many people discontent with something such as exploratory content as to what there are people content with it. Similarly, you'll find just as many people discontent with relic grinds as there are people content with it. It's really not just as simple as a 1 person issue.

Dawntrail has given me things to be skeptically hopeful about, and a lot of it is around the interviews, etc., suggesting another exploration zone and a 'never before seen' piece of battle content. Based on this it does have the potential to be one of the most content-heavy expansions we've had... Now whether this potential does make it into reality is a different subject matter.

I think the best thing they need to learn is to reflect on older systems and to see what worked, and how it could be fed into newer systems, e.g., there is no reason why Variant/Criterion couldn't have borrowed a lot more duty actions from the Logos/Essences system.

[Atelier-Bagur]

It's not even 90 on Metacritic.

So is Nier Automata which is considered universally succesful but has an 88 on that site while FFXVI is an 87.

[TheNight]

So is Nier Automata which is considered universally succesful but has an 88 on that site while FFXVI is an 87.

And Cyberpunk also got 87 despite it being a disaster. Only games over 90 can even be plausibly considered as universally successful.

Nier Automata is not. There are many issues with that game.

[Renathras]

Excuses. PS5 obviously doesn't have PS4 or combined PS4-PC-Xbox numbers, but neither did PS1, 2 or 3 when their first final fantasy games came out and still sold as well or better than the company expected.
...
And before you go "but muh economy crisis/muh lower buying power", even PS5's current price in the current economy doesn't hold a candle to how overpriced PS3 was.

You were right in your first paragraph, but this is a pretty bad take.

I didn't buy FF7:R. Know why? PS5 exclusivity and I don't have a PS5.
I didn't buy FF16. Know why? PS5 exclusivity and I don't have a PS5.

See a pattern?

I DID eventually get FF7:R when it came to PC, but mostly because I REALLY needed a diversion from irl around that time and I've long loved the series and world and was invested in it. I have no such ties to 16. I watched a Let's Play and will probably never buy it. I got FF15 on X-Box because I had an X-Box at the time. I got FF13 on an X-Box because I had an X-Box at the time.

SE is going to start losing a lot of money with those PS5 exclusives, and fast. But it's not an excuse. It's a valid comparison.

Even going back a ways, the PS1 was super cheap by the time FF8 and especially FF9 came out. The PS2 had done down in price by the time of FF11 and FF12. A lot of sales counts for them also include literal decades and often ports and remakes into the figures as well. A brand new game exclusive to a single console that had supply chain shortages, is around 2-3x as expensive as its competitors, in a world where many gamers have switched over completely to PC gaming and where the home country of the game release has it as the least owned and least played console? Yeah, that's not an excuse, that's entirely relevant.

And...X, sure, but 12 and 13? lol, no. Those weren't selling systems. FF7, 8, and X have that distinction, but the others likely do not. Not to the level you make it out. I got a PS2 for Kingdom Hearts, not FF12 or FF13, rofl. And know what system I played FF13 on? X-Box. For exactly the reason you mentioned - how overpriced PS3 was.

And Cyberpunk also got 87 despite it being a disaster. Only games over 90 can even be plausibly considered as universally successful.

As long as we're taking Metacritic seriously for some reason, let's look at the scores...

Heavensward: 86

Stormblood: 87

Shadowbringers: 90

Endwalker: 92

Let it be known forevermore and throughout the land!
TheNight/Kiros/Titanmen/altarmy has declared that EW (and ShB) are considered universally successful as EW got over 90. ShB he might still wiggle out of since it wasn't "over 90", but EW at 92 is clearly "over 90", and thus "plausibly considered as universally successful".

TheNight has spoken!

[Aword3213]

Let it be known forevermore and throughout the land!
TheNight/Kiros/Titanmen/altarmy has declared that EW (and ShB) are considered universally successful as EW got over 90. ShB he might still wiggle out of since it wasn't "over 90", but EW at 92 is clearly "over 90", and thus "plausibly considered as universally successful".
TheNight has spoken!

This is gold

[Renathras]

I did buy a PS1 mostly for FF7 tho. The FF brand doesn't carry that weight anymore sadly.

Not to speak for you personally, but keep in mind FF7 wasn't just a game, it was a huge jump in technology, visuals, and presentation. The polygonal characters, CG cinematics, and pre-rendered backgrounds blew people away at the time and were so iconic, they influenced basically every major RPG made for the next 5 or so years after it, and probably at least influenced games for a further decade.

It'd be kind of like comparing how many people watched "Solo: A Star Wars Story" to the amount that watched "A New Hope", or even "Return of the Jedi". Comparing something so groundbreaking (and lacking in direct competition) that it influenced all of pop culture and fans of the genera - and even somewhat related ones - for several generations...to something that was not? No matter how good 16 is, you can't make a jump in modern graphics on par with the jump between FF6 and FF7. For all that we laud graphics, FF14 1.0 was made 13 years ago and had graphics on par with modern releases (the one thing 1.0 is praised for somewhat consistently is its visuals...which were just so good at the time, most hardware couldn't RUN IT). The point being, "modern" graphics aren't really that different than graphics were a decade ago. Even the FF7:R jump from PS4 to PS5 graphics isn't as big as the SNES to PS1 jump of FF6 to FF7. And what's more, FF7:R already did it, so FF16 can't make the "jump" that its older brother already made first a year ago.

There just isn't really room for a technological jump on par with what FF7 had. FF7 and FFX both made similar jumps (in FFX's case, it was voice acting and moving out of pre-rendering and into outright polygonal worlds with fantastic fidelity a leap ahead of Banjo Kazooie or Perfect Dark, both considered pushing the prior generation's art and capabilities [doubly so since it was the N64's])

It's a pretty unfair comparison. If you want THAT comparison, the better take would be FF7:R. It made the huge tech and graphics jump, and also made what is probably a comparable gameplay jump as well, incorporating "autoattacks" (your basic button mashing attacks) vs spells/abilities (using gauge) to make a souped up, semi-live action version of FF7's menu and turn based combat system, and with a stylish flare (the echo and slow-mo when you pull up the menu).

...and FF7:R was a smashing success and probably WOULD have sold a massive amount of PS5s had there been any around to sell.

FF16 is far more like FF9 or FF13. Later arrivals that were more derivatives of what came before and didn't sell consoles so much as were bought by those who already bought them prior. But as noted, FF7:R could only sell so many consoles due to the shortages, so there's a far smaller pool of people.

And as Tsumdere said:

1. Console exclusive. This objectively makes less sales than just a full release. Full stop. You're an idiot if you think otherwise.
Xbox and PC are massive portions of the market (with some saying PC is the biggest share). PC in particular is growing bigger each year due to lower entry costs and sheer amount of flexibility, so unless you can account for how many people just stopped buying consoles completely because they now have a gaming computer (like me) and then compare Playstation sales with games from 8 years ago it's pointless to do so.

I also was a person who had a PS1 and PS2 (and N64 and SNES), but now do all my gaming on PC. I have an X-Box next to my computer and the TV attached to it isn't even plugged in, and the last time I tried powering on the thing (after a year of not using it) it didn't turn on. I've completely left the console market, much less the PS5 market. People like me would have bought FF7 (and 8 and 9) on PS1 and FFX (and XII) on PS2 and FFXIII on PS3 (or X-Box, which I did on X-Box). But I don't even have a (working) X-Box at this point, and won't be buying more games for it anyway even if it did work. I only buy and play games on PC at this point, with RARE exceptions for Switch or Mobile.

So you can't look at PS1/2 sales numbers and say that FF16 should be matching those. The entire gamer landscape has shifted, PS5s are still both expensive and rare, and exclusivity like that is going to hamper sales. It's just not a tenable position to say they won't or don't.

waah waaah woo woo wahh

/smooch
Love you too, buddy. But you still haven't proposed. I want a rock I can show off to the girls, not something you got out of a CrackerJack box, too! At least 3 months wage is the rule, and I know you're a moneybags with all those alts and RMT, so I'm expecting a big rock.

And glad we've cleared up that you think EW was a "universally successful" game.

Talk to you later, snookums.

[Atelier-Bagur]

And Cyberpunk also got 87 despite it being a disaster. Only games over 90 can even be plausibly considered as universally successful.

Nier Automata is not. There are many issues with that game.

That's the most ridiculous thing I ever heard. First of all, it's funny how you take metacritic as gospel when you just proved that the site sometikes makes no sense when something like Cyberpunk has an 86 when it clearly deserves less but it's delusional to think that the original Nier Automata didn't pop off because it didn't have a 90.

You don't understand how success is gauged at all.

[Koros]

That's the most ridiculous thing I ever heard. First of all, it's funny how you take metacritic as gospel when you just proved that the site sometikes makes no sense when something like Cyberpunk has an 86 when it clearly deserves less but it's delusional to think that the original Nier Automata didn't pop off because it didn't have a 90.

You don't understand how success is gauged at all.

It's even more ridiculous to think FF16 was a success in any way. It was absolutely demolished by BG3.

Next people are going go take GoTY seriously when it's just an obvious corporate marketing catered to mindless masses who care about video games as if they're were politics.

Actually that's exactly what people are nowadays, games are just another form of politics and that's ironic and sad considering how some people say they hate politics, yet the behavior, elitism and White knight is exactly that

Anything to cope that FF16 will win literally zero GotYs bud

[DrWho2010]

anyone who puts XV ahead of XVI has got a screw loose.

metacritic scores mean nothing. stop.

BG3 is being talked about more than XVI because it was released just recently and people are still in the "ooh new shiny" phase.

sales numbers for XVI are doing just fine. once it comes out for PC there'll be more talk again and more sales.