"A Rose By Any Other Name Would Smell...."? Sweeter!

For those of you who do not take Shakespeare in high school, or have yet to take his works in English class, the title of this blog is in reference to Romeo and Juliet Act II scene 1. The full quote is: "What's in a name? that which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet;". Juliet is lamenting, her of the Capulet family and he a Montague, that they could not be together. In this line she is commenting on our word association. To us a rose smells sweet. The name of the Rose could be changed to garbagedump, and its aroma would still enrapture us. Lasagna would still taste delicious even if it was called stinkycheeseloaf.

Names or nouns' purpose is for us to call into our minds what the person or item is. Our experiences will be varied as we are individuals and interact with each and every specific item or person out there differently. If I go back to Lasagna: Few people do not like Lasagna outright. More often people may not like optional ingredients that you can use like mushrooms or spinach. Say the word Lasagna though, and everyone thinks essentially the same thing with delight. To go against these associations can be equally rewarding as it can be dangerous.

I use this introduction because I believe that in the world of Video Games a person’s thoughts with franchises cannot be toyed with. This means that our major franchises cannot pee on our heads and say it is Final Fantasy or Zelda. I thought of writing a review of Final Fantasy XIII when it came out with the same blog title I am using now. Though Square Enix called it Final Fantasy, to me the game certainly didn't feel like one. Yes some of the changes needed to happen; random battles with separate areas for the battle to take place, extreme grinding to progress, super long dungeons... etc. Certainly we can find something that annoyed us about the Old School way we played games. But Final Fantasy XIII was such a departure of what Final Fantasy was and I believe should be.

The long linear hallway that was ten chapters long. The locked progression which held your characters back. Not being able to choose your lead character. There were no shops, mini games, interaction with other people, not even controlling anyone other than your lead character, interesting or character building side quests... the list goes on. I played the game and finished it, and in the forefront of my mind was the thought that this isn't Final Fantasy. Sure there were chocobos, summons and moogles, but almost useless NPCs don't mean the qualities of Final Fantasy are there. The wrong things had changed. Square Enix should have called the game Cocoon or Pulse, or some other more creative title, and made a whole new franchise.

Coincidentally, though they kept the ill-fitting name, they did create a whole new franchise that we are awaiting the third installment: Lightning Returns. The Fabula Nova Chrystalis nonsense is not even recognizable of what it was intended to be as first announced. We have gone from 3 different games to 1 game and 2 sequels. We have gone from a long tunnel, to time travel, to now a Majora's mask, Skyrim? experience. All these changes are Square Enix's response to the criticisms they have faced.

I believe, and all has been pretty much confirmed, in order to attract more users Square Enix simply dumbed down the gameplay. By making it more accessible and less of a traditional Final Fantasy they were hoping to attract new rather than take care of the ones that got them where they were. Anyone who sacrifices one loyal customer to take on 1 or 2 flippant customers is not actually looking out for their best interest. Just look at Resident Evil 6. It should not have been a Resident Evil game. If it was a new action game Capcom had created then surely it would have done better critically. But more importantly they wouldn’t have had to shoehorn old franchise story lines to try to convince people it was a Resident Evil title and a better game may have ensued. Extra time certainly could have been spent polishing the game instead of trying to tie it in to RE universe. The loyal fans of Resident Evil would have bought this new game too while waiting for the next RE because they could always count on Capcom to deliver. And the ones to try the new that never played Resident Evil may give it a shot. The new action game was awesome and they wanted to see what else Capcom had in its repertoire.

To make games more accessible and mainstream a lot of companies are looking to Open Worlds, where a player’s choice of multiple points of interest is able to be explored at a moment’s whim. But many to accommodate this apparent need for massive open world are leaving behind the staples that made their games unique and beloved; staples that held the game together. The gamers who played Zelda or Final Fantasy and gave it to their friends and said, “Here try this!” are not saying that anymore. Anyone who complains that Zelda is always the same basic game with different trappings or details obviously doesn’t really love Zelda. Mind you I am not saying it is impossible to make a bad Zelda game.

Zelda A Link Between Worlds I fear may suffer the same fate. The idea of a central item hub where you need to rent items like I rented movies at blockbuster makes me cringe. This is supposed to enable you to go to any dungeon in an order you see fit. It seems way too dumbed down. I will withhold final judgement until I play it, but if it is true you simply rent the tool you need, why couldn’t they have it where you explore the world to find the tool but with less hand holding. Just direct players subtly or at least give us the option to shut the fairy that follows you up. Have people gotten stupider? I beat A Link to The Past when I was 8! (Played it hard-core in 1994) No internet and I couldn’t afford Nintendo Power. All I had in some spots was remembering what my Uncle did when I was able to watch him play. ALTTP had a very open world with quite a few optional items. I remember finding the blue wand (couldn’t remember Cane of Byrna) all by myself by looking at my map realizing I hadn’t been there, approaching the cave, walking the spikes and finding it. A Link Between World’s method is trying to change a formula that may simply need to be brought back from where Skyward Sword left us: an ultra linear, father walking his son down the street, game (Side quests left me unimpressed). Link Between Worlds needs to be what A Link to the Past was with new stuff and new experiences not just to keep us in nostalgia but give us a ZELDA. Again I cannot say the game will be good or bad, just developer comments on it make me worried. Looking at Wind Waker, graphics were shown and the ensuing skepticism was silenced when the game was released and it has stood the test of time.

Open World itself is overrated and can simply be a means to fatten a game up. I will not be impressed if Lightning is sent on quests to find juice to make a popsicle, or cut down a tree to make toilet paper and then use it to wipe some person's ass. GTA series is part LINEAR!!!! Skyrim is part Linear!!! All open world games have a Point A and a point B. They may have tons of other points in the game but the main overarching story has to be played out in some linear Progression. In the case of Skyrim you can choose a different point as your endpoint but once on that path to see a proper designed resolution you have to follow it through. But what makes these games successful is that they have kept what they are and have simply changed what needed to be changed. They didn't reinvent the wheel they simply changed the tread.

If we look at Castlevania, we see a game that drastically changed its play style and characters. Castlevania 1-4 you played as a whip wielding Belmont. In Symphony of the Night you play as Alucard. SOTN has a Metroid type of exploration with an RPG leveling system, cinematic and voice acting. Of course you cannot praise the voice acting or writing. The game let you explore as your heart’s content, a huge departure from the linear stages of Castlevania past. Symphony of the Night still had all that one expected of a Castlevania, the gothic atmosphere, the return of Dracula, monsters and combat. I believe that is what players ultimately identified the game as being, the result? The changes were not only easy to digest but made Castlevania something new and these new elements are invoked still in the series. Importantly Konami kept the 2d aspect even before the failure of Castlevania 64. The gaming culture was screaming 3D. Publishers were demanding 3D saying that 2D content would not be successful. Castlevania, and a slew of other titles, proved them wrong. Castlevania didn’t have to reinvent itself, it just needed to evolve…. properly. (Note: I do believe the game had some faults, with difficulty being easier and other stuff. But I am always blown away each time I play for the detail and experience it is.)

Metal Gear to me is my prized example. People gripe over the long cutscenes, but to those who actually love the games, and the lore, the cutscenes are part of what make a Metal Gear experience a Metal Gear EXPERIENCE!!! The gameplay has evolved from what is was on the MSX to the Playstation, PS2, PS3, and now next-gen. Peace Walker even has a home base simulator mini-game that dramatically effects the items and weapons you get playing the story. MGS5 will apparently have a similarly awesome side part. Metal Gear has kept true to all its roots. Every game changed enough and the right things to make the experience more entertaining and fun to play. These evolutions took place along with the hardware evolutions too. Alas, MGS5 has my hopes up, but some doubt in my heart. With the open world how will the story play out? I cannot imagine Kojima-san not coming through, but with a fully open world I have yet to see an epic story play out. The only way I can see it happening well is using GTA as a reference and having the missions activated then you can go from beginning and end of each mission in a more linear way.

Going back to Resident Evil, Resident Evil 4 was a smashing success. An awesome balance of action and horror, combined with the same survival characteristics with item management. It was still a very different game than the originals. I felt puzzles could have been put in more, but the thought that it wasn’t a true Resident Evil was easily forgotten. I didn’t feel that way with FFXIII. Our new technology enabled developers’ new methods to overcome tank controls and pre rendered backgrounds. So the old template had to be modified. The difference between Resident Evil 4 and Final Fantasy XIII: RE’s changes were almost equal part technological progress and fan criticism. FF’s were simply trying to dumb down certain “boring elements” to make the game more accessible to non-fans and hopefully successful. Ironically it has sold less on two consoles than FFXII has on one. FFXII was a pretty hard-core RPG. RE6 was going after the Call of Duty crowd, and Capcom has to go back to the drawing board.

I play Zelda, Final Fantasy, Resident Evil, and Metal Gear because they are those games. Sequels should instill the qualities of the originals with change and innovation feeling natural and progressive. I play new games for new experiences. They will often get sequels of their own.

BMW doesn’t sell all their cars at the same numbers as they sell their most successful vehicle. Car manufacturers have models they keep producing despite not having the success of their flagship or popular models. They do this to round out their brand. Loyal customers of BMW, Cadillac and what have you will stay in their preferred brand if their needs change. A single guy might drive a M3 Sedan, as he gets married and has kids he will purchase an X5. As gamers, publishers and developers need to understand that brands need to be consistent in a way to keep the loyal ones there and sway new. Changes need to be implemented while keeping a mold, in mind. This is the balance that can’t be accomplished if your goals are simply to get more sales, by playing catch up to some new wave or fad.

If someone doesn’t like a game it is their loss. Not everyone can like the same stuff. COD’s success is that it is so formulaic, so generic that almost anyone with hands can simply put time into to become better. That is part of its appeal. It is why it is successful, but it is in a genre that can support it. A lot of the depth in an FPS game is how many people you can kill. Final Fantasy, Zelda, Metal Gear and others cannot simply turn the table over and try to get COD numbers. There is no point. Because the players they gain will be simply replacing the players they alienated.

Game makers need to understand that if you have a game in a market then keep that game in that market. As discussed, changes can certainly be made, what have to be kept is the qualities, nuances, and appeal that made the originals a success. Otherwise you’re trying to give us a Venus Flytrap and call it a Rose.

Lukejrl

[memots]

i lost all interest in Final fantasy after trying 12.
I loved 9 and and was ok.

I guess i just don't have time anymore for this franchise.
I am married and have a job that often requires me to be available 24 hours a day for weeks on end.

The pace of the game throws me right off and i find myself not caring for the story the same way i did for Final Fantasy 2 and 3 (U.S) ff9 was awesome too.

[e-p-ayeaH]

FF13 wasnt my cup of tea but i see why some people liked it same goes for recent resident evil and devil may cry games, its all a matter of taste disgarding the nostalgia factor and apreciating the game for what it is.

Its sorta like Hollywood movie remakes and sequels some are far more likable for most people than others its all a matter of perspective.

[Lukejrl]

That is another blog I want to write, e-p-ayeaH. People should be more positive about gaming experiences. A more open minded approach to help drive more interesting games.

My point in this article is that a franchise has a signature. To change that signature is a careful give and take procedure.The latest Final Fantasy and Resident Evil are examples that used very little of what made them special and made games that weren't in anyway really Final Fantasy and Resident Evil, besides token story and NPCs. The blurred line is:why? Castlevania introduced familiar game aspects from other games to its signature as an evolution to its gameplay. Final Fantasy and Resident Evil simply tried to get more sales.

Those games are facing the consequences critically and somewhat commercially.

Edit: fixed a typo.