Animation Lock: Why don't you like it?

[Shurrikhan]

I haven't seen any giant turtles yet. I'm on chapter 6, so far it feels like a long movie. So pretty much I have to wait till the end of the game to get into good game play?

Combat-wise the game doesn't flesh itself out until chapter 10, so that's relatively correct... Until then it's about on par with your one mage and everyone else hit Attack a lot. Should be fun by Chapter 7 though if you've learned the timing tricks and the bits and pieces of indirect control. By Chapter 7 auto-battle, while still decent, should be noticeably inferior to good active control. By Chapter 9 you'll probably want to switch Abilities to your default instead of Auto-Battle, as long you don't mind pressing more buttons. You start theory-crafting (if you're into that) around Chapter 11.

Now to continue this more relevantly to the thread's recent subject of the three core RPG components, let's go ahead and use FF13 as an example.

Awesome premise that's probably understood only by one in 20 players. That's a problem, even if possibly a worthy sacrifice. Story itself--lackluster, but feels microcosmic, befitting the design of the story. However, there are few high points for those who wish to occasionally de-immerse from (stop drowning in) the general sad or vague-emotion-filled feel of the thing, which lends itself to tedium.

Transformer eidolans fit the premise but lose any positives from that to ridiculousness. Settings were amazing. Level design was fluid, generally impressive, but occasionally lacking in ways that can really be pointed at. Animations were good, but further interlinking of combat movements and deeper gameplay mechanics would have been appreciated. Cinematic feel of battle was impressive during times in which the area or story themes were being played instead.

[Shurrikhan]

LOL Come on, let's get real here. Fans hear something about the new Final Fantasy, here's the details they're asking for...

"How does it look? Pics, please!"
"What's the story?"
"What summons will be available?"
"Can we see city designs?"
"Can we see character designs?"

You know, questions that revolve around the aesthetics of the game.

A lot of that has to do with the simple fact that you can't put a full storyboard on a platter to feed to the fans. For many, that's precisely because it's the meat of the meal meant to be enjoyed later.

Note that you still had "What's the story?" on that list. While I agree that the as a concept is hugely intertwined with the aesthetics of the game (just as camera work or scene display is with the storytelling), it is also... well... story. And as long as the rest are good (good is enough), that'll be the hook that gets me.

[Seirra_Lanzce]

～（へ＿へ）～

[Shurrikhan]

(reactive weighted animation system, which can handle limiting actions intelligently - pure locking isn't an intelligent solution). Though I dont think many people are looking for that much action oriented gameplay - you've got the ATB crowd and then lightning combo smashers.. right now its in the middle(ish).That and I bet a lot of response will be resource polices magically knowing the resource availability for Yoshida

A weighted animation system really should be versatile enough by itself to appease either crowd. It's just a matter of active timing vs. preparatory triggers, both of which are essentially realistic as well. (Just got myself bruised pretty badly in my sword matches last night until I started thinking things through in sequences of triggers instead; especially in nighttime combat there isn't enough time for sense-by-sense reaction. For reasons like that, I don't see why people would say that an ATB-style or prepared-string-of-actions use of such a system is unrealistic.)

[SkyeWindbinder]

A lot of that has to do with the simple fact that you can't put a full storyboard on a platter to feed to the fans. For many, that's precisely because it's the meat of the meal meant to be enjoyed later.

Note that you still had "What's the story?" on that list. While I agree that the as a concept is hugely intertwined with the aesthetics of the game (just as camera work or scene display is with the storytelling), it is also... well... story. And as long as the rest are good (good is enough), that'll be the hook that gets me.

I don't know. I think it has more to do with the fast that what pleases Final Fantasy fans most are the story and graphics aspects of the game. I mean, that's what people who create FF games focus on tweaking the most. Because those are the aspects of the game that it's usually built around and for. A huge emphasis is put on gameplay and story. That's what fans of the series clamor for. Not how the game controls. As long as it's at least controllable, awesome. Final Fantasy is graded on mostly aesthetics.

[Shurrikhan]

I don't know. I think it has more to do with the fast that what pleases Final Fantasy fans most are the story and graphics aspects of the game. I mean, that's what people who create FF games focus on tweaking the most. Because those are the aspects of the game that it's usually built around and for. A huge emphasis is put on gameplay and story. That's what fans of the series clamor for. Not how the game controls. As long as it's at least controllable, awesome. Final Fantasy is graded on mostly aesthetics.

I agree with that. I was simply saying that story is as high an expectation, even if not as ostensible a part of the hype for a not yet released game, as aesthetics.

[Alhanelem]

I don't know. I think it has more to do with the fast that what pleases Final Fantasy fans most are the story and graphics aspects of the game.

So what you're basically saying is final fantasy gamers are the worst kind of gamers- They don't care how the game plays as long as the story is good and the graphics are pretty?

Final Fantasy fans are pleased by games that play awful but look great? Didn't FFXIV fall into this category? Look how well that went...

Even 1.0 was unquestionably good looking for the most part and at least the premise of the story was good. But FF fans didn't go for it. Wonder why... Oh, right, that's because at launch the game played like a$$ and was plagued with poorly designed/implemented mechanics, not the least of which was the animation lock, but many others as well.

Now they're fixing all those problems, and one barely noticeable graphical compromise made for the sake of gameplay has FF fans up in arms about how aesthetics are everything and this ruins the aesthetics.

If graphics and story are the only thing that matters, go play one of the single player FFs. A multiplayer game demands better gameplay.

Am I the only one who played FFXI because it was fun?

[Zantetsuken]

It was noted earlier that aesthetics and gameplay are not mutually exclusive, this is most certainly true.

However: 'Realism' (read: the Ease of suspension of disbelief within a game's established framework) and 'Hyper-Convenience' (read: a player's ability to oversimplify tasks or to accomplish difficult/impossible goals with ease) are very much at odds with each-other.

Why does nobody complain about Mario being able to grow a tail and fly? It's because the aesthetic of Mario games is not based on 'Realism'. Mario's, gameplay is it's core mechanic -- all aesthetic decisions are made to accommodate it. We expect Mario to be unreal, so that we can enjoy the mechanics of it. If Mario was given human proportions and photo-realistic textures, that game would lie deep in the uncanny valley and in the waste-bin of failed games.

An RPG or MMO (especially Final Fantasy) is on the other end of the spectrum. Aesthetics are a primary engagement tool, and that aesthetic is based on 'Realism' (*see definition above).

We expect a Final Fantasy reality to be largely restrained by the same rules that we follow in real life. In Eorzea, we expect life to mimic ours roughly 90%, with the remaining 10% being fantastic and unreal.

The unreal 10% is given credibility and bridged to the realistic 90% via magic/magick/crystals/gods/sci-fi tech/etc. This is what makes a fantasy world engaging, it goes to great lengths to keep everything as relatable as possible, spices it up with the fantastic, and gives the player a plausible bridge between the two.

So it is very important to make decisions based on what your game's intended core engagement. Aesthetics based on 'Realism' will ultimately conflict with Gameplay that is based on 'Hyper-convenience'. We can't have both at 100%, or we'd all be playing gods.

In a Final Fantasy game, the 'Realism'(*again, see definition above) always comes first.

[SkyeWindbinder]

So what you're basically saying is final fantasy gamers are the worst kind of gamers- They don't care how the game plays as long as the story is good and the graphics are pretty?

Final Fantasy fans are pleased by games that play awful but look great? Didn't FFXIV fall into this category? Look how well that went...

Even 1.0 was unquestionably good looking and at least the premise of the story was good. But FF fans didn't go for it. Wonder why... Oh, right, that's because at launch the game played like a$$ and was plagued with poorly designed/implemented mechanics, not the least of which was the animation lock, but many others as well.

Now they're fixing all those problems, and one barely noticeable graphical compromise made for the sake of gameplay has FF fans up in arms about how aesthetics are everything and this ruins the aesthetics.

If graphics and story are the only thing that matters, go play one of the single player FFs. A multiplayer game demands better gameplay.

If you think that I'm trying to say that Final Fantasy gamers are "the worst kind of gamers", and that gameplay absolutely does not matter in a Final Fantasy game, then you really need to learn to pay attention. Because in none of my posts did I say that gameplay does not matter. And if you wish to say I did, then I challenge you to find the post in which I did so. Go ahead, take your time. I can wait.

My point is that gameplay, while important, is third on the list after aesthetics and story in Final Fantasy games. Because those are the main things that draw FF gamers back to play the newest FF games. That's why they're built mostly around these two aspects, putting a huge amount of emphasis on them. What draws FF gamers into an FF game is not "Oh! Lookee here! I push X button, and it makes Y do that! Sold!" The way it controls is not the major selling point of FF games. It's the story and lore. And that's how it is for any story-based Final Fantasy game, multiplayer or otherwise. I'm talking about the major releases with the roman numerals after them, not games like Dissidia. LOL Gimme a break.

[Alhanelem]

It was noted earlier that aesthetics and gameplay are not mutually exclusive, this is most certainly true.

No, they're not mutually exclusive, but having one most definitely does not mean having the other.

An RPG or MMO (especially Final Fantasy) is on the other end of the spectrum. Aesthetics are a primary engagement tool, and that aesthetic is based on 'Realism' (*see definition above).

err, actually, no, it's not on the other end of the spectrum. Final FANTASY is a FANTASY game. Fantasy meaning stuff that's not real. Magic isn't real. A lot of the things many of the characters do in many of the games is not physically realistic. I think you may be confusing 'realistic" with "natural"- something that looks like it belongs and doesn't feel out of place.

When animation blending is implemented, you will most likely not notice the lack of animation lock. Animations will be blended, such that there isn't a sudden instant change in character's positions when they initiate different actions. Blending creates a smooth transition automatically, without needing special transition animations that lock your character in place (which is what 1.0 had).

In a Final Fantasy game, the 'Realism'(*again, see definition above) always comes first.

False. Many final fantasy games have good gameplay. Good aesthetics come with that gameplay, but that doesn't mean the aesthetics came first.

The TL;DR if your post is: in Fnal fantasy, graphics are everything and gameplay is not important. Even if I agreed, which I don't, this isn't a standard final fantasy game. It's an MMORPG, and gameplay is inherently more important to an MMORPG than a singleplayer one. In a single player RPG, the gameplay is sometimes more shallow because it is only a vehicle to drive the story (and by extension, the aesthetics). However, in an MMORPG, the main story is just the beginning.

Without strong gameplay mechanics, this game will fall flat on its face just like the first one, no matter how pretty the grpahics are or how good the story is.

Soo, once again- In this thread: Gameplay doesn't matter as long as it is pleasing to the eye and the story is good. Everything else is secondary! Read that again. Are you sure that really sounds like a good idea?