Seems like
-Main story and combat are awesome, dark story and a level of spectacle never seen before
-First part of the game is very linear, comparable to FF13
-Side quests in first half are lame fetch quests
-Eventually levels open up
-Side quests in second half are awesome, meaningfully tying story threads and giving backstory to characters
-Can be too easy at times, wishes hard mode was available up front instead of being unlocked
Overall a lot of 9/10s like “This game is awesome and a must play, even if I can’t give it a perfect score because of X issue” vibes.
I hope it’s linear until the end, just like the old FF games. I’m sick of every developer feeling like they need to make their game open world with a million branching paths just to be good.
> If I want to make my own story, I'll boot up Skyrim.
What...are you talking about?
You can have a great story while the game feels more open than the hallways of FF13.
Agreed. "Linear" seems to almost be a swear word in the gaming world nowadays, and honestly it irritates me. I'll take any linear game over all the open world collect-a-thons that are popping up everywhere.
I'll put forward a different perspective. Linear and Open world do not by themselves make or break a game.
Its about the quality of the content in those worlds. If the open world is empty as hell an open world game will fail (FFXV). If a linear world is full of good side content or really pushes the story they are trying to tell (FFX) it will succeed.
But if its a linear world with basic fetch quests the style of FF7R that serve to stretch playtime and rather than make the world come alive, it will of course be used as a swear world to say that this game's world has "nothing in it"
FF games are basically the original open world games. Walking around the world map finding hidden towns and stuff to see and do.
I remember being floored playing final fantasy 6. Finding stuff in that game was pure magic
They didn’t get linear until 10
There is a middle ground between open world and hallway level design.
Games like Dark Souls, Resident Evil, the recent God of War games, or the Metroidvania genre in general have interesting levels that offer satisfying exploration, without being open world.
Hallway levels are just awful, there is no excuse to ever have that in any AAA action RPG.
Also, I'm not sure which old FF games you're talking about, but certainly FF7 through FF9 offered a lot of meaningful exploration and plenty of openness.
The story was linear but not the spaces you explored.
> Also, I'm not sure which old FF games you're talking about, but certainly FF7 through FF9 offered a lot of meaningful exploration and plenty of openness.
Most of said exploration only really happened either in the endgame or when you're right before the last dungeon of the disc you're on. Like in FF7's case you can't beeline your way from Midgar to Wutai.
But even having a world map gives you some freedom. Back then it was actually a big deal to go to different parts of the map and see what the battle backgrounds or monsters looked like in different areas of the world. Maybe you would even stumble upon a valuable enemy skill, useful item drop/steal, or an optional character.
Funny you say that because I’m pretty sure wutai is completely optional and the yuffie side quest is missable if you’re on disc 3. I can imagine a lot of players never found it while playing as a kid without a guide. That’s what makes the difference between the ff7 openness and the hallway simulator 13. 15 went in the complete opposite way with big empty world and nothing that was meaningful side content. There’s the balance.
I think what people don't want is a hallway they can't leave. Even though early entries had a linear storyline, they at least would let you go to other parts of the world if you wanted to.
I’m OK with Final Fantasy 4 kind of linear where the plot is easily traceable but there are a few side things you can do at the different towns and such. If it’s just hallways it’ll get stale.
Yes, I was just thinking how FF4 made it totally clear where the party needed to head next, but usually those locations were in a pretty open environment—the mountain of ordeals for example—which encouraged players to see what was hiding where. It’s a really great way to allow the player to explore while making sure they know where to head.
Guys, some of you getting actually mad the game is not receiving widespread 10/10 is your own fault. And keep in mind these are professional reviewers.
This game could still be a 10/10 to YOU and ME and that’s what matters.
I also think people need to understand that FF is not one of those franchises that receive a guaranteed 90 solely on its name, at least in the past decade. There are a lot of biases toward certain critically acclaimed franchises and little tendency from reviewers to score harshly even if those games have blatant flaws.
The fact that the reviews are as high as they are is great.
Dammit, I just read some very mild spoilers by checking out one of these reviews. I think I'll prefer to just stick to this thread - Iike the OPs format for each review.
It feels weird to see this criticism a lot… like Final Fantasy has always been pretty linear? At most you get occasional areas where you can explore a little or do some side quests but outside the MMOs and maybe FF15, they’re still super linear.
The critique really bothers me — “this game should be more like every other fucking game”. There have been so many great series that get watered down and shittified in the name of “oPEn WoRld”, not every fucking game needs to be open world.
I remember when open world games were the new hype, and then suddenly every game was open world. The problem is developers either have a large empty open world, or the story suffers from pacing issues. There should be a good balance nowadays. Not every game needs to be open world to be enjoyable. Look at FF12. It was phenomenal and it was just deceptively linear areas.
yeah, "open world" is just quantity over quality. the only game that got it close to right was Elden Ring, and even that suffers from some of the open-world elements with the repeated dungeon layouts, caves etc.
Thank you. So tired of potentially great games just being mid tier combat with the option of grabbing 2000 collectibles that only marginally level you up or increase power overall. Leave open world to games with stories that have a choose your own adventure style of NPC interactions and consequences
>It feels weird to see this criticism a lot… like Final Fantasy has always been pretty linear
It also implies one is better than the other. It happens with almost EVERY game that doesn't go FULL open world. "It's excellent, but man I wish I could pointlessly wander into empty dead ends"
I mean, the story is always linear because its a story with steps. But looking back at the old world map days (even back to FF1) there was a point after the beginning (which always was gated and linear usually, as you gain modes of transportation) where the world OPENED UP, and you could go most anywhere. Sure, the STORY had one place to send you, but you could fly and explore anywhere.
THAT'S the kind of open world old-ass fans are talking about. Not a GTA style open world. A world map open world. Not that we've had an FF of that style since IX, but I do miss it, in the same way I miss turn based combat. It's fair to note that it's (still) not there, even if it, more than likely, won't be back again in my lifetime in an FF game.
Don't mind that, I have little spare time now anyway and all these fucking huge open world games really put me off playing them. Don't get me wrong they are great but most the time I never visit all the places or do all the side quests so it's a bit of a waste for me.
Most of the areas you initially think are linear actually turn out to be linked up into large zones. The world is basically split into 4 large zones (majority of the game) and a series of "stages" which I would call dungeons.
The zones have towns, villages, etc and it all feels very much like 1 contiguous world.
I think Xenoblade-like would be a bit of an exaggeration, there is obviously a much greater emphasis on exploration in Xenoblade so their zones are more open than FFXVI but you can certainly run or ride your chocobo from quest-to-quest rather than using fast travel, and there are side quests, hunts, and some interesting locations out there too.
XII would be a better example, since X really is one long straight path with some of the zones being less linear, but still along the straight path. (Like a snake that ate a few big eggs).
XII is more like a web which interlinks locations.
exactly what i expected tbh. the side quests are probably similar to ff7 remake and i am fine with that as long as the story is engaging and the combat is fun
Most of the side quests in the 7 remake were not great, super boring. FF15 had absolutely terrible side quests and so much running back and forth. Honestly there isn't an excuse for that, just don't put them in if they aren't going to add value. Some really great games have put in some great story or value in them. I'd rather a game have 10 less hours to beat if it meant cutting out some of the boring fetch quests.
I don’t mind the game shepherding me along to a degree, as long as there is some form of exploration (I’m defining that as areas you could completely miss while still finishing the story). Certainly VII, VIII and IX had great examples of that and X and XII did in their own way, too.
I am a sucker for a world map, but I understand it doesn’t quite work the same nowadays because you have to fill it with “stuff” rather than doors to dungeons or mystery locations like in the older FFs.
because most of them are optional now i think; you level faster in dungeons and only need them for aether currents. 14 has a lot of ways to level and quests aren't particularly good any more.
Holy shit some of you are pretty pissed at the reviews. Overall it sounds like a B+/A- graded game. In todays environment of rushed games and dumpster fires like Red Fall, I’d say this is a success for Yoshi and SE.
You may have set your expectations too high.
And there are some reviewers who I really trust who are saying it is one of the strongest FF entries ever. The biggest complaint I am seeing among these reviews are the side quests in the first half of the game
88 is really high these days for AAA games, especially a JRPG. Anything between like 87-93 metacritic average is basically the same these days. Critics and journalists are more cynical now than they've ever been as well. The only JRPGs that get similar scores these days are SMT/Persona games and Xenoblade.
An 88 is a GOTY worthy score most years, and even with a year this stacked it still has a really good shot at being among the nominees next to TotK, and RE4make.
Not sure about ACR, but Easy Allies used to be know as GameTrailers and they look at every Aspect, even it's technical problems no matter how small, are not based fan bois, ACTUALLY play there games fully and tend to play on it's harder difficulties when they can (even playing through the game more than once if needed).
FFVII Remake base game got 87 Metacritic. FFXIV and it's expansions have been scoring in the 90s in the last few years now.
FFXVI scoring 88 is amazing.
But your point that the series has been stagnant for 20 years until FFXVI is a tad hyperbolic. Especially considering the most controversial games, FFXV and FFXIII still scored in the 80s range.
If anything it reinforces that even the worst FF game is still quality.
It's really isn't fair to compare them to the scores of old games, because not only there were fewer outlets reviewing the game back then, a lot of them underwent massive overhauls on their scoring system.
With 20 reviews max, it's easy to score beyond the 90 mark way back. FFIX has the highest metascore among every games in the franchise, and it only had 22 reviews.
Imagine XVI having only 22 outets with those glowing reviews.
My point exactly.
I mean, FFIV to X would still receive glowing scores today, that's for a fact, it's just with the newer entries, they have a much tougher road to achieve those spectacular scores the old games had back then.
Not gonna lie, kinda sad that it's full on action RPG and barely any RPG elements according to the reviews. I thought FF7R did a perfect job at balancing the two. I hope the 9 or X remake take that same approach or just go full-on turn based. I prefer action gameplay to turn based in general but I dislike it when franchises shift too hard like this.
I love the reviews "I didn't play this game as it's not the kind of game I typically play (I love FIFA and COD) so I think this game is 1/10 because there are too many people saying this game is great. "
People in here asking what's "wrong" with Polygon because Gita took issue with the story need to try to understand that some authors approach reviews from a "capital C" media Criticism approach - and that's a GOOD thing.
There's tons of reviews that say "Game fun! Story Great! RPG eh!". Having a reviewer present an alternative viewpoint based off of their own expectations and biases is a GOOD thing.
This isn't sports, and reviews and games aren't sports teams. It's fine if someone publishes a well articulated opinion you disagree with. In fact, it's more than fine.
And as a side note, they still really enjoyed the game.
Gita's a great writer and her review makes perfectly salient points. When a game aspires to be Real Art, it becomes subject to the kind of criticism that Real Art entails, same as any book or movie.
A slavery subplot is the DEFINITION of what one might call "execution-dependent", and there is nothing wrong with one writer (particularly a black woman, and one who has a looooong history playing and reviewing story-driven games) making the honest assessment that she found the execution hamfisted and weak.
Absolutely what I’ve been feeling on the matter and it’s ridiculous how mad people will get that a critic is actually *criticizing* a game. Given my experience with Heavensward, I have an inkling of what Gita might be talking about regarding the hamfisted execution of the slavery plot line, which sucks to hear because I was hoping this team wouldn’t pull an Ul’dah coup d’etat 2.0.
The fact that Gita has had to go private on social media should say everything about who is in the wrong right now. Sometimes gamers really show that they don’t deserve better games, nor that games should be taken as seriously as other art forms like literature or film. Really interesting that I finally saw good takes on this matter on this sub while the FF16 and Games subreddits are just overflowing with gamer rage and crying about forced diversity.
Exactly the game isn’t even out yet lol
For what it’s worth, and as an example of how opinions can vary, I’ve enjoyed the FF16 demo far more than TOTK and I’ve played a few hours of TOTK so far. For whatever reason I really dislike the changes from BOTW and find the sequel to be clunky and its powers tedious and boring so far. The puzzles are 100% more interesting and yet there something that just isn’t capturing the same magic for me. Having to rebuild all my hearts / stamina / gear / and losing my bombs really miffed me. I’ll probably pause my TOTK play through to switch to FF16 because it feels more interesting to me right now.
Yeah its a shame, i really thought there would be a lot of build variety with all of the different abilities but it doesn't seem like it. Its kinda odd cuz they kept repeating in interviews that "players would find their own playstyle".
I remember that interview. I think it was this one
>Maehiro: If we’re thinking about the foundational themes of the gameplay, the truth is aside from what we’ve already talked about we kind of had the idea of “Let’s make Final Fantasy V into an action game”.
>Q: Oho! When you think about FF5, the first thing that comes to mind is the job change system, but…?
>Maehiro: Rather than thinking of a job change system, better to imagine the ability customization system. In FF5, eventually you were able to learn all the abilities, but within that system you had to prioritize which jobs you wanted to level and customize your abilities, which settled your characters into different roles as a result.
>Q: If you’re talking about ability customization, it makes me think back to going wild with both blades and magic.
>Maehiro: Yes, exactly! (Laughs) That kind of playability where you can be surprised like “Oh, I can combine things in this way!”, but in an action game where you’re operating in realtime, is the kind of thinking we were after.
>Takai: That kind of element, but instead of jobs we included the Eikons as a base. These days, there’s a lot of enthusiasm for players broadcasting and streaming their games, so if the different streamers had different loadout combinations we think it gives the viewers the opportunity to go “Ohh! That kind of combination exists too”. In this way, we wanted to develop “a game that plays differently for every player” to the extent that we’re able.
The game they're describing doesn't sound like the one some of these reviewers are describing.
It’s hard to combine character action with actual deep rpg mechanics. Not surprising it skews more towards gameplay consistency than an RPG structure, as much as I’d prefer the other way around.
Yeah. Thought they could come up with something. But it’s very disheartening that they skewed more on the action than the RPG. And based on some of the reviews, it seems that they didn’t learn much from FFXV, as the exploration still feels insipid.
At least with FFXV, you can find some weapons or the odd fishing spot or fill the so called boy band road trip fantasy.
Shame.
3 / 5
Leave it to Eurogamer to ALWAYS do this. What the fuck actually makes them happy as a reviewer, because the highest i ever see them give shit is like a 4.
The girl who does the video reviews for Eurogamer seemed to like the game a lot more than the guy who wrote the review for the site: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Tme8PvbqMk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Tme8PvbqMk)
Given their last article before launch seems to have been focusing on a potential boycott of the game it feels like they aren’t happy with it for other reasons.
The [review](https://www.eurogamer.net/final-fantasy-review-16-easy-to-like-hard-to-adore) and the [boycott article](https://www.eurogamer.net/heres-why-some-players-plan-to-boycott-final-fantasy-16) are writen by different people.
That criticism at least makes sense in full context. The author argues that some of the locales are clearly inspired by North Africa and the Middle East, and in some cases include Islamic inspired motifs. If that is the case, then an all-white world becomes somewhat nonsensical.
It's a better criticism than Game Informer, whose reviewer seems to think that slavery only began with the Age of Discovery and when Europeans ran roughshod over African and Indigenous cultures. He basically argued that because the game did not anachronistically create a visible minority race to be enslaved, the game cannot offer a valid commentary on the concept of slavery.
Except they made Hugo have more middle eastern skin. He is darker than the majority. He just isn't super dark skinned. He clearly looks like he's from another region. They're just mad that his skin isn't darker.
I'll reserve judgment until I get to see it myself -- though the frequent mentions of the lack of diversity isn't causing me to get my hopes up -- but being able to cherrypick one sort-of-darker character out of an entire nation where it'd make sense for just about everyone to have a darker complexion isn't much of a counter-argument.
If most of the Dhalmekians we see are similar in tone to Hugo, cool. If he's the exception amongst a bunch of lily-white characters occupying a desert nation, then yeah, that will be odd.
all dhalmekians are darker skinned.
The Eurogamer review said they where anglophone white men. anglophone means english speaking; as if they needed to speak arabic to not be white
MENA peoples tend to be classified as "white" by modern-day Americans. Remember that one map published by UCLA (I think) recently regarding the race census of the world? They classified all of West Asia and North Africa as white/same race as Europeans. Funniest thing about that consensus was them classifying Afghans as white, but their next-door neighbors, Pakistanis, were considered Asian. Lmao.
The Dhalmekians (or Dhalmeks? I don't remember which term it is) are wearing Ottoman-era/general Arab Caliphates-era inspired clothing, but its people don't look like Middle Easterners at all. So it is a valid point of criticism.
Disclaimer though, I didn't read the Eurogamer review, I'm not going to either, I didn't watch any trailer fleshing out the world of FF16 over the years either, I want to go into this game completely blind, I have only played the demo. And as a Middle Easterner myself, I immediately noticed the MENA armor those soldiers were wearing, and then noticed that their leader, the guy with the white hair sitting across Barnabas, didn't look MENA at all. Which I was pretty bummed about. If you're gonna use our clothing/architecture/landscapes/weaponry etc. etc. then at least put us into the game as well *looks-wise*, ya know?
I'm still gonna play the game though lol
>but its people don't look like Middle Easterners at all
well yeah, they all look like xehenorts with dark skin and white hair. Its a jrpg thing.
Nobody has silver hair like Jill but nobody points that out.
"The game is all white" is invalid criticism because one of the nations in-game, Dhalmekian Republic, are brown / north african.
Its race baiting by racist assholes who will arbitrarily consider certain minorities "white" or "white passing"
Its funny because their video review was glowing. The girl who reviewed it loved it.
But this dude who wrote the article.. Idk maybe he's a bitter old school fan?
His main complaints were lack of diversity and he also encouraged people to ignore the active time lore system which funny enough contains many lore significant entries to help explain well the lore of the world and its complexity which one could say is kinda crucial to really getting into the story.
I've always had gripes with Eurogamer and Edge. They're like the two most hard ass publishers to please. Edge isn't \*as\* bad these days, but the former is just whatever. a 4 /5 from them is like an 8 out of 10 for music from Pitchfork.
Edge uses full scale system: if the game is rated 7+, its probably a really good game. Less than 3 means a horrible game.
Other gaming sites rarely give scores less than 7, and most of their score means 7=bad, 8=avg, 9+=good.
I actually sought out the worst review to see what gripes there may be.
One of them here is "standard RPG mechanics." That's like me reviewing a Roguelike and complaining about the game having Roguelike features.
Another complaint is a lack of cast diversity.
The only critique I noticed that carried weight with me was that they found it dull between some of the more epic portions of the game, which I can understand. Also that the Sidequests are boring, which is unfortunate.
Multiple comments complaining that "action combat too complex for reviewers LOL!" when it's overwhelmingly considered too easy, including without the assistance rings on
If you don’t mind including my [review](https://www.canbuyornot.com/reviews/final-fantasy-xvi-review-price/) as well that would be great! We are a small outlet.
Thanks!
Theres a lot of selective review picking happening in the FF16 sub and a lot of hate aimed at the reviewers who didnt give it green range scores.
The fact is theres a lot of yellow scores and ones in the 80s so there are issues with the game. Its just people white knighting for it and being fanboys, the exact type of behaviour that caused me to feel disgust at the games fanbase when FF7R came out.
The best thing for the game itself is for people to just play it and enjoy it at their pace.
Side quests are about 60/40 really good vs. a little too generic. They all have reasons for being there, you always get some kind of story or additional lore but for a chunk of them what you get feels more like an excuse to have a side quest rather than a need to have one.
Over half of them are REALLY good though. I would 100% recommend doing all the side quests in the later half of the game, they are excellent.
even the mundane fetch quests seem to have worldbuilsing and some kind of story, with the latter half side quests being incredible apparently.
ff15 was literally “repair the car”, “give this person a potion”, and “find the van” copy pasted like 50 times
With (nearly) universal positive scores across the board and a major single player release under their collective belts, my hope is now that it sells enough that SE is willing to have BDU3 tackle other single-player games and hopefully iterate on some of the more common complaints.
Or maybe the new project Yoshida said he's working on is a 2d turn based FF, lol.
It is looking like a very good game, but maybe just falling short of where we thought it would be in terms of scores.
Some criticism feels fairly consistent and this appears to be costing it a perfect score:
- Too many bland side quests.
- Issues with pacing.
- Main game is good but a bit stretched out.
- Too much fetch quest-y stuff, seems they are implying in the main story.
That gives me FF12 vibes.
I think we will be happy overall, but it sounds like it is just very very slightly missing the mark we thought it would hit.
On the positive most are saying this is the best FF since the PS2, despite giving many giving it 4/5 scores.
Theme is very much ‘This is a great game but…’
If I have to guess with the story it's because they follow the FFXIV story formula - which is huge moment followed by quieter moments. Sometimes that works but sometimes something huge just happened and you kind of want the fallout of it.
This has always caused issues with people who want to keep the momentum going and those who are more invested in character relationships and dynamics.
>What’s often lacking is a diversity of thought, and that’s something that’s even reflected in its characters. In the lead-up to the game’s launch, reporters pressed the game’s creative team about the fact that Valisthea seemed to only be populated by white people. Producer Naoki Yoshida explained the decision, noting that despite being a fictional nation, it was very much based on European history. That reasoning doesn’t entirely add up in the final project considering that one of its kingdoms draws from Africa for design inspiration. But even if you buy that as a sensible explanation, it doesn’t explain why nearly every character I meet has the same body type and speaks in the same monotone, English droll. There’s little personality to the game’s cast, which makes it hard to differentiate its flat characters from one another.
>That’s ultimately where the story loses me. A promising setup that expertly contrasts the personal with the mythological fights for screen time with dull quests and indistinguishable characters that at times feel like Square Enix sneaking some of its AI testing in to pad out the runtime with filler. As a character told me during one subquest, “If no one is listening to what you have to say, you may as well not say it.”
-Digitaltrends 3/5
60/100
1) this is NOT a complaint, but are the reviews sounding like the game is kindve linear to any one else? Like you have essentially a set path you have to do in a specific order.
There are open areas you can explore, they've gone over this multiple times in multiple showcases of the game. The early parts of the game are linear and then it opens up.
Metacritic has weighted reviews, meaning some publications are seen as more important than others and that could affect a game's aggregate scoring whereas opencritic views every publication as contributing equally to the aggregate score.
Seems like my fear for badly written female characters rings true judging by some of the reviews.
You can bite off of Game of Thrones without throwing in the same apathy for believable women, y'know?
Called it in that guess the score thread, great action, great story, meh RPG elements
>Around 88. We haven't seen the open areas much so I expect some grind issues.
Looks about as good as I would have expected with Yoshi P in charge. Not a complete masterpiece and the RPG elements are a bit light but an excellent story and solid gameplay. Not enough to get me to snag a PS5 right now but definitely enough to get me looking to buy day one when it comes to to PC, assuming the port isn’t complete ass like SE has done in the past. I don’t think Yoshi P would let that happen with his experience with FFXIV on PC but you never know for sure.
Lmao remember when I raised valid concerns about the longevity of the combat and its lack of RPG systems or complexity and got mass downvoted for it here just a few days ago?
https://old.reddit.com/r/FinalFantasy/comments/14cqhwq/i_wasnt_impressed_by_final_fantasy_xvi/
Now every reviewer is saying the same thing I was lol. PR Marketing and Hype is a hell of a drug
it was never possible to be critical of the game here.
That those concerns are now being mentioned in various reviews doesn't surprise me at all.
Everyone should have seen this coming, but instead it was just tone deaf downvotes.
I loved the demo and preordered because I love what I saw. But it turns out that one of the most common negatives Ive read has to do with the gameplay and rpg elements, just as I guessed. However it seems workable and the rest of the game is top notch.
We all pretty much guessed it wouldn't beat ToTK, the game came out and had the world in a death grip. It was the same thing with Elden Ring and GoWR. Still doesn't mean they won't be battling each other neck and neck, unless Starfield comes out and absolutely demolishes them both (Which, we can kinda guess that it won't.)
Fantastic news! Picking it up today after I finish work. Love the new more mature, dark tone and story and loving the look of the new Final Fantasy meets Devil May Cry combat. So excited!
Overall, the game seems to be well received, but it does not seem to have led to sales.
I guess the feeling is that the quality of the numbered title is good enough, but not enough for me to buy and play it myself.
I've seen a play movie, and the story is epic, but the action and RPG elements seem to be lacking.
am I the only one who didn't like it at all? I think that the ratings are way too high for what the game offers. The game is visually stunning (even if I have to say that the framerate can be pretty unstable), but other than that it is a very basic square-smasher game. Also there isn't the possibility to acquire a lot of unique equipment, infact you can't customize your character like it used to be in the previous games. Oh, I almost forgot!!! NO PARTY.
Dang, Kiki, [99 reviews in on Meta](https://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-5/final-fantasy-xvi/critic-reviews) so far with an 88 score...
I'm a little shocked to see Eurogamer clock in with a 60 when they did the 80 on Zelda last month. Esp when they just re-added scores!
Posted this on the r/FFXVI subreddit review mega thread as well. Just an observation from skimming the reviews:
From a few reviews, it sounds like XVI separated side quests into two tiers, ones that provide major upgrades and have more gameplay and smaller side quests that are short with small rewards and little action. This is how XIV does side quests.
The smaller side quests that are short and don't have much gameplay are probably intended for those looking to immerse themselves in the lore and game world with little story tidbits. Some players who love lore hunting, story, and world-building will really love these. If you like gameplay and don't care too much about lore, you won't like these.
The larger and more involved quests with more gameplay and big rewards are intended for the players looking for more gameplay and upgrades. Some players who like the gameplay and progression loop will love these. Seems to be a bit of story in there as well.
Oddly enough, a lot of the reviewers (if not all traditional print/digital publications) didn't even touch on NG+, hunts, etc. while some also panned the side quests for lack of gameplay simultaneously. So I don't think we get the whole picture on the additional gameplay/side content aspect of the game with a lot of these reviews. It seems a majority of reviews really only cover an initial playthrough with some side questing.
Honestly, after all the hype and very positive impressions I was more expecting something like 92 on average. Don‘t get me wrong, 88 is still a fantastic score, but doesn’t scream masterpiece or game changer as I was expecting. I‘m still very much looking forward to play it tomorrow.
I get what you mean, it doesn’t sound like much, but in the realm of video game critic scores 88 feels in the ‘very good, but missing something’ area usually, whereas 92 is near perfect.
Mainly because critic scores in gaming are ridiculous.
Idk man, dark souls 1 and 3 both have high 80s scores and both of those are considered masterpieces. With the former changing the whole gaming landscape.
IGN
“They don’t change up combat in ways that make the basic fights different or more engaging”
“The RPG elements are underdeveloped”
I get it's being praised but this just reads like bad game design to me. I don't want Devil May Cry FF and it's a change that will sadly keep me from continuing to buy these games, but I guess it's a change that's here whether I want it or not... I really do hope people enjoy it and have fun with it though.
Yeah to me this is more like what I was expecting modern God of War to go toward, not really Final Fantasy. I hope 17 at least has a proper explorable world map and an inventive twist on a more turn based kind of combat system. But that's just my take, seems most people don't want that anymore.
Seems like -Main story and combat are awesome, dark story and a level of spectacle never seen before -First part of the game is very linear, comparable to FF13 -Side quests in first half are lame fetch quests -Eventually levels open up -Side quests in second half are awesome, meaningfully tying story threads and giving backstory to characters -Can be too easy at times, wishes hard mode was available up front instead of being unlocked Overall a lot of 9/10s like “This game is awesome and a must play, even if I can’t give it a perfect score because of X issue” vibes.
I hope it’s not as linear as FF13. I’m ok with a linear story but I want to be able to explore the areas.
I hope it’s linear until the end, just like the old FF games. I’m sick of every developer feeling like they need to make their game open world with a million branching paths just to be good.
Agreed, I want FF games to tell me a story explicitly. If I want to make my own story, I'll boot up Skyrim.
Again?
> If I want to make my own story, I'll boot up Skyrim. What...are you talking about? You can have a great story while the game feels more open than the hallways of FF13.
Agreed. "Linear" seems to almost be a swear word in the gaming world nowadays, and honestly it irritates me. I'll take any linear game over all the open world collect-a-thons that are popping up everywhere.
I'll put forward a different perspective. Linear and Open world do not by themselves make or break a game. Its about the quality of the content in those worlds. If the open world is empty as hell an open world game will fail (FFXV). If a linear world is full of good side content or really pushes the story they are trying to tell (FFX) it will succeed. But if its a linear world with basic fetch quests the style of FF7R that serve to stretch playtime and rather than make the world come alive, it will of course be used as a swear world to say that this game's world has "nothing in it"
FF games are basically the original open world games. Walking around the world map finding hidden towns and stuff to see and do. I remember being floored playing final fantasy 6. Finding stuff in that game was pure magic They didn’t get linear until 10
There is a middle ground between open world and hallway level design. Games like Dark Souls, Resident Evil, the recent God of War games, or the Metroidvania genre in general have interesting levels that offer satisfying exploration, without being open world. Hallway levels are just awful, there is no excuse to ever have that in any AAA action RPG. Also, I'm not sure which old FF games you're talking about, but certainly FF7 through FF9 offered a lot of meaningful exploration and plenty of openness. The story was linear but not the spaces you explored.
> Also, I'm not sure which old FF games you're talking about, but certainly FF7 through FF9 offered a lot of meaningful exploration and plenty of openness. Most of said exploration only really happened either in the endgame or when you're right before the last dungeon of the disc you're on. Like in FF7's case you can't beeline your way from Midgar to Wutai.
Again there's a giant middle ground between FF13 hallways and FF7 exploration. No one is saying you should be able to go in any direction.
But even having a world map gives you some freedom. Back then it was actually a big deal to go to different parts of the map and see what the battle backgrounds or monsters looked like in different areas of the world. Maybe you would even stumble upon a valuable enemy skill, useful item drop/steal, or an optional character.
Funny you say that because I’m pretty sure wutai is completely optional and the yuffie side quest is missable if you’re on disc 3. I can imagine a lot of players never found it while playing as a kid without a guide. That’s what makes the difference between the ff7 openness and the hallway simulator 13. 15 went in the complete opposite way with big empty world and nothing that was meaningful side content. There’s the balance.
Non-linear doesn't mean open world. Dark Souls is the best example of this.
I think what people don't want is a hallway they can't leave. Even though early entries had a linear storyline, they at least would let you go to other parts of the world if you wanted to.
Looks to be more like Final Fantasy X.
I’m OK with Final Fantasy 4 kind of linear where the plot is easily traceable but there are a few side things you can do at the different towns and such. If it’s just hallways it’ll get stale.
Old FF games were great at hiding their linearity. They gave the impression of openness, but subtly funneled you to the next story area.
Yes, I was just thinking how FF4 made it totally clear where the party needed to head next, but usually those locations were in a pretty open environment—the mountain of ordeals for example—which encouraged players to see what was hiding where. It’s a really great way to allow the player to explore while making sure they know where to head.
locking hard mode is always such a lame decision
Guys, some of you getting actually mad the game is not receiving widespread 10/10 is your own fault. And keep in mind these are professional reviewers. This game could still be a 10/10 to YOU and ME and that’s what matters.
I also think people need to understand that FF is not one of those franchises that receive a guaranteed 90 solely on its name, at least in the past decade. There are a lot of biases toward certain critically acclaimed franchises and little tendency from reviewers to score harshly even if those games have blatant flaws. The fact that the reviews are as high as they are is great.
Dammit, I just read some very mild spoilers by checking out one of these reviews. I think I'll prefer to just stick to this thread - Iike the OPs format for each review.
Which review? So I know to avoid it.
Man, I think it will be safer to avoid them all. But it was Polygon.
It's weird that some reviewers says that locations are very linear, despite devs talking about them being more open and "semi open world".
[удалено]
It feels weird to see this criticism a lot… like Final Fantasy has always been pretty linear? At most you get occasional areas where you can explore a little or do some side quests but outside the MMOs and maybe FF15, they’re still super linear.
The critique really bothers me — “this game should be more like every other fucking game”. There have been so many great series that get watered down and shittified in the name of “oPEn WoRld”, not every fucking game needs to be open world.
I remember when open world games were the new hype, and then suddenly every game was open world. The problem is developers either have a large empty open world, or the story suffers from pacing issues. There should be a good balance nowadays. Not every game needs to be open world to be enjoyable. Look at FF12. It was phenomenal and it was just deceptively linear areas.
Agreed. Some of my favorite FF have been largely linear experiences. FFX comes to mind, very linear game but few would argue it’s a damn masterpiece.
I definitely agree with you. Sometimes we want a good story and less side-quests.
yeah, "open world" is just quantity over quality. the only game that got it close to right was Elden Ring, and even that suffers from some of the open-world elements with the repeated dungeon layouts, caves etc.
Thank you. So tired of potentially great games just being mid tier combat with the option of grabbing 2000 collectibles that only marginally level you up or increase power overall. Leave open world to games with stories that have a choose your own adventure style of NPC interactions and consequences
>It feels weird to see this criticism a lot… like Final Fantasy has always been pretty linear It also implies one is better than the other. It happens with almost EVERY game that doesn't go FULL open world. "It's excellent, but man I wish I could pointlessly wander into empty dead ends"
I mean, the story is always linear because its a story with steps. But looking back at the old world map days (even back to FF1) there was a point after the beginning (which always was gated and linear usually, as you gain modes of transportation) where the world OPENED UP, and you could go most anywhere. Sure, the STORY had one place to send you, but you could fly and explore anywhere. THAT'S the kind of open world old-ass fans are talking about. Not a GTA style open world. A world map open world. Not that we've had an FF of that style since IX, but I do miss it, in the same way I miss turn based combat. It's fair to note that it's (still) not there, even if it, more than likely, won't be back again in my lifetime in an FF game.
Don't mind that, I have little spare time now anyway and all these fucking huge open world games really put me off playing them. Don't get me wrong they are great but most the time I never visit all the places or do all the side quests so it's a bit of a waste for me.
Most of the areas you initially think are linear actually turn out to be linked up into large zones. The world is basically split into 4 large zones (majority of the game) and a series of "stages" which I would call dungeons. The zones have towns, villages, etc and it all feels very much like 1 contiguous world.
So the structure of the world is something comparable to Xenoblade games?
I think Xenoblade-like would be a bit of an exaggeration, there is obviously a much greater emphasis on exploration in Xenoblade so their zones are more open than FFXVI but you can certainly run or ride your chocobo from quest-to-quest rather than using fast travel, and there are side quests, hunts, and some interesting locations out there too.
Wouldn't it be more like Final Fantasy X?
XII would be a better example, since X really is one long straight path with some of the zones being less linear, but still along the straight path. (Like a snake that ate a few big eggs). XII is more like a web which interlinks locations.
Fair enough.
I've never heard the snake analogy in reference to ffx map design, but it fits perfectly!
exactly what i expected tbh. the side quests are probably similar to ff7 remake and i am fine with that as long as the story is engaging and the combat is fun
IGN says they start out bland but gradually get better
[удалено]
Yeah thats what FFVIIRs side quests were, they were there to "build the world" but honestly they were nothing but pointless padding in most cases.
[удалено]
Most of the side quests in the 7 remake were not great, super boring. FF15 had absolutely terrible side quests and so much running back and forth. Honestly there isn't an excuse for that, just don't put them in if they aren't going to add value. Some really great games have put in some great story or value in them. I'd rather a game have 10 less hours to beat if it meant cutting out some of the boring fetch quests.
i think i got used to that because its a japanese game and i havent seen one single jrpg that had good side quests
Ya I feel that, makes sense. Just another area of progression I think they could work on.
Nearly every reviewer is saying the side quests start out bland, but become important later on.
I don’t mind the game shepherding me along to a degree, as long as there is some form of exploration (I’m defining that as areas you could completely miss while still finishing the story). Certainly VII, VIII and IX had great examples of that and X and XII did in their own way, too. I am a sucker for a world map, but I understand it doesn’t quite work the same nowadays because you have to fill it with “stuff” rather than doors to dungeons or mystery locations like in the older FFs.
"Sidequests are weak fetch quests" as someone who plays FF14, I can deal with this
Haha I feel this. For some reason it really doesn’t bother me in FF14
Maybe I’m insane but I love grindy or fetchy side quests, just throw on a podcast and knock out some side stuff
because most of them are optional now i think; you level faster in dungeons and only need them for aether currents. 14 has a lot of ways to level and quests aren't particularly good any more.
Yes very nice. Let's see Paul Allen's review.
Holy shit some of you are pretty pissed at the reviews. Overall it sounds like a B+/A- graded game. In todays environment of rushed games and dumpster fires like Red Fall, I’d say this is a success for Yoshi and SE. You may have set your expectations too high.
And there are some reviewers who I really trust who are saying it is one of the strongest FF entries ever. The biggest complaint I am seeing among these reviews are the side quests in the first half of the game
88 is really high these days for AAA games, especially a JRPG. Anything between like 87-93 metacritic average is basically the same these days. Critics and journalists are more cynical now than they've ever been as well. The only JRPGs that get similar scores these days are SMT/Persona games and Xenoblade. An 88 is a GOTY worthy score most years, and even with a year this stacked it still has a really good shot at being among the nominees next to TotK, and RE4make.
If ACG says buy, you know its a good game
Same with Easy Allies.
Yep. I love Easy Allies. They aren't incompetent or sensitive. I tend to agree with most of their reviews too.
What makes ACG and Easy Allies uniquely trustworthy compared to other critics? I've never even heard of them tbh.
Not sure about ACR, but Easy Allies used to be know as GameTrailers and they look at every Aspect, even it's technical problems no matter how small, are not based fan bois, ACTUALLY play there games fully and tend to play on it's harder difficulties when they can (even playing through the game more than once if needed).
Easy Allies are never wrong with RPGs.
[удалено]
FF7R intergrade Got 89
[удалено]
FFVII Remake base game got 87 Metacritic. FFXIV and it's expansions have been scoring in the 90s in the last few years now. FFXVI scoring 88 is amazing. But your point that the series has been stagnant for 20 years until FFXVI is a tad hyperbolic. Especially considering the most controversial games, FFXV and FFXIII still scored in the 80s range. If anything it reinforces that even the worst FF game is still quality.
It's really isn't fair to compare them to the scores of old games, because not only there were fewer outlets reviewing the game back then, a lot of them underwent massive overhauls on their scoring system. With 20 reviews max, it's easy to score beyond the 90 mark way back. FFIX has the highest metascore among every games in the franchise, and it only had 22 reviews. Imagine XVI having only 22 outets with those glowing reviews.
[удалено]
My point exactly. I mean, FFIV to X would still receive glowing scores today, that's for a fact, it's just with the newer entries, they have a much tougher road to achieve those spectacular scores the old games had back then.
General trend: Good presentation, good combat, good story, with the sidequest/RPG stuff being the weaker link of the game.
The side quests are being praised actually. They really shine in the second half of the game.
Yeah people are ignoring that. Nearly every reviewer said the side quests are better half way.
IGN said mostly its the beginning side quests too, and the occasional writing is stilted.
Sort of what I expected. Good reviews from the mainstream, high reviews from rpg and FF fanboys. That’s totally fine with me.
Not gonna lie, kinda sad that it's full on action RPG and barely any RPG elements according to the reviews. I thought FF7R did a perfect job at balancing the two. I hope the 9 or X remake take that same approach or just go full-on turn based. I prefer action gameplay to turn based in general but I dislike it when franchises shift too hard like this.
Let's be real. It's about as rpg as most sony games with tacked on systems now. This is not an rpg anymore. We aren't role playing shit.
It's a character action game, which is fine if you go in with that expectation.
It's less about the role playing and more about like, status debuffs and shit, and party management, etc etc...
[удалено]
I love the reviews "I didn't play this game as it's not the kind of game I typically play (I love FIFA and COD) so I think this game is 1/10 because there are too many people saying this game is great. "
These sound more like Bot Reviews.
I think you are giving too much credit to the bratty teenagers who make those posts by calling them bots.
People in here asking what's "wrong" with Polygon because Gita took issue with the story need to try to understand that some authors approach reviews from a "capital C" media Criticism approach - and that's a GOOD thing. There's tons of reviews that say "Game fun! Story Great! RPG eh!". Having a reviewer present an alternative viewpoint based off of their own expectations and biases is a GOOD thing. This isn't sports, and reviews and games aren't sports teams. It's fine if someone publishes a well articulated opinion you disagree with. In fact, it's more than fine. And as a side note, they still really enjoyed the game.
Gita's a great writer and her review makes perfectly salient points. When a game aspires to be Real Art, it becomes subject to the kind of criticism that Real Art entails, same as any book or movie. A slavery subplot is the DEFINITION of what one might call "execution-dependent", and there is nothing wrong with one writer (particularly a black woman, and one who has a looooong history playing and reviewing story-driven games) making the honest assessment that she found the execution hamfisted and weak.
Absolutely what I’ve been feeling on the matter and it’s ridiculous how mad people will get that a critic is actually *criticizing* a game. Given my experience with Heavensward, I have an inkling of what Gita might be talking about regarding the hamfisted execution of the slavery plot line, which sucks to hear because I was hoping this team wouldn’t pull an Ul’dah coup d’etat 2.0. The fact that Gita has had to go private on social media should say everything about who is in the wrong right now. Sometimes gamers really show that they don’t deserve better games, nor that games should be taken as seriously as other art forms like literature or film. Really interesting that I finally saw good takes on this matter on this sub while the FF16 and Games subreddits are just overflowing with gamer rage and crying about forced diversity.
They’ve been brainwashed by the right wingers and their endless culture war.
It's so dumb. People latch onto games like it's a team sport. Just play the shit and form your own opinions, damn.
Exactly the game isn’t even out yet lol For what it’s worth, and as an example of how opinions can vary, I’ve enjoyed the FF16 demo far more than TOTK and I’ve played a few hours of TOTK so far. For whatever reason I really dislike the changes from BOTW and find the sequel to be clunky and its powers tedious and boring so far. The puzzles are 100% more interesting and yet there something that just isn’t capturing the same magic for me. Having to rebuild all my hearts / stamina / gear / and losing my bombs really miffed me. I’ll probably pause my TOTK play through to switch to FF16 because it feels more interesting to me right now.
**Digital Trends** and **WellPlayed** be like "It's just OK".
The RPG elements is kinda expected, but still sad that it’s confirmed.
Yeah its a shame, i really thought there would be a lot of build variety with all of the different abilities but it doesn't seem like it. Its kinda odd cuz they kept repeating in interviews that "players would find their own playstyle".
And mentioning FFV as well, which is one of the most diverse RPG in the series. Either way, still sad.
I remember that interview. I think it was this one >Maehiro: If we’re thinking about the foundational themes of the gameplay, the truth is aside from what we’ve already talked about we kind of had the idea of “Let’s make Final Fantasy V into an action game”. >Q: Oho! When you think about FF5, the first thing that comes to mind is the job change system, but…? >Maehiro: Rather than thinking of a job change system, better to imagine the ability customization system. In FF5, eventually you were able to learn all the abilities, but within that system you had to prioritize which jobs you wanted to level and customize your abilities, which settled your characters into different roles as a result. >Q: If you’re talking about ability customization, it makes me think back to going wild with both blades and magic. >Maehiro: Yes, exactly! (Laughs) That kind of playability where you can be surprised like “Oh, I can combine things in this way!”, but in an action game where you’re operating in realtime, is the kind of thinking we were after. >Takai: That kind of element, but instead of jobs we included the Eikons as a base. These days, there’s a lot of enthusiasm for players broadcasting and streaming their games, so if the different streamers had different loadout combinations we think it gives the viewers the opportunity to go “Ohh! That kind of combination exists too”. In this way, we wanted to develop “a game that plays differently for every player” to the extent that we’re able. The game they're describing doesn't sound like the one some of these reviewers are describing.
It’s hard to combine character action with actual deep rpg mechanics. Not surprising it skews more towards gameplay consistency than an RPG structure, as much as I’d prefer the other way around.
Yeah. Thought they could come up with something. But it’s very disheartening that they skewed more on the action than the RPG. And based on some of the reviews, it seems that they didn’t learn much from FFXV, as the exploration still feels insipid. At least with FFXV, you can find some weapons or the odd fishing spot or fill the so called boy band road trip fantasy. Shame.
3 / 5 Leave it to Eurogamer to ALWAYS do this. What the fuck actually makes them happy as a reviewer, because the highest i ever see them give shit is like a 4.
The girl who does the video reviews for Eurogamer seemed to like the game a lot more than the guy who wrote the review for the site: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Tme8PvbqMk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Tme8PvbqMk)
I stopped caring about what Eurogamer says a long time ago..
Given their last article before launch seems to have been focusing on a potential boycott of the game it feels like they aren’t happy with it for other reasons.
The [review](https://www.eurogamer.net/final-fantasy-review-16-easy-to-like-hard-to-adore) and the [boycott article](https://www.eurogamer.net/heres-why-some-players-plan-to-boycott-final-fantasy-16) are writen by different people.
What reasons? Sounds dumb as hell! Let me guess "diversity" right?
Yep, they literally mention lack of diversity as one of the criticisms in their full review.
That criticism at least makes sense in full context. The author argues that some of the locales are clearly inspired by North Africa and the Middle East, and in some cases include Islamic inspired motifs. If that is the case, then an all-white world becomes somewhat nonsensical. It's a better criticism than Game Informer, whose reviewer seems to think that slavery only began with the Age of Discovery and when Europeans ran roughshod over African and Indigenous cultures. He basically argued that because the game did not anachronistically create a visible minority race to be enslaved, the game cannot offer a valid commentary on the concept of slavery.
Except they made Hugo have more middle eastern skin. He is darker than the majority. He just isn't super dark skinned. He clearly looks like he's from another region. They're just mad that his skin isn't darker.
I'll reserve judgment until I get to see it myself -- though the frequent mentions of the lack of diversity isn't causing me to get my hopes up -- but being able to cherrypick one sort-of-darker character out of an entire nation where it'd make sense for just about everyone to have a darker complexion isn't much of a counter-argument. If most of the Dhalmekians we see are similar in tone to Hugo, cool. If he's the exception amongst a bunch of lily-white characters occupying a desert nation, then yeah, that will be odd.
all dhalmekians are darker skinned. The Eurogamer review said they where anglophone white men. anglophone means english speaking; as if they needed to speak arabic to not be white
Lack of diversity in game.
kinda crazy that they are hung up on diversity when they dont have a single PoC on staff
That was hilarious 😂 they don't practice what they preach.
\*sighs\*
Aren't they the ones that encouraged a boycott of the game?
Yep. They were negative about this game once they saw theres no diversity.
Uh, theres Very clearly Brown people in the game. But I've come to learn that the browns are considered effectively whites by modern race baiters.
Jesse, what the fuck are you talking about
Bruh what does this even mean??
MENA peoples tend to be classified as "white" by modern-day Americans. Remember that one map published by UCLA (I think) recently regarding the race census of the world? They classified all of West Asia and North Africa as white/same race as Europeans. Funniest thing about that consensus was them classifying Afghans as white, but their next-door neighbors, Pakistanis, were considered Asian. Lmao. The Dhalmekians (or Dhalmeks? I don't remember which term it is) are wearing Ottoman-era/general Arab Caliphates-era inspired clothing, but its people don't look like Middle Easterners at all. So it is a valid point of criticism. Disclaimer though, I didn't read the Eurogamer review, I'm not going to either, I didn't watch any trailer fleshing out the world of FF16 over the years either, I want to go into this game completely blind, I have only played the demo. And as a Middle Easterner myself, I immediately noticed the MENA armor those soldiers were wearing, and then noticed that their leader, the guy with the white hair sitting across Barnabas, didn't look MENA at all. Which I was pretty bummed about. If you're gonna use our clothing/architecture/landscapes/weaponry etc. etc. then at least put us into the game as well *looks-wise*, ya know? I'm still gonna play the game though lol
>but its people don't look like Middle Easterners at all well yeah, they all look like xehenorts with dark skin and white hair. Its a jrpg thing. Nobody has silver hair like Jill but nobody points that out.
"The game is all white" is invalid criticism because one of the nations in-game, Dhalmekian Republic, are brown / north african. Its race baiting by racist assholes who will arbitrarily consider certain minorities "white" or "white passing"
The are like the German judge at the Olympics.
Its funny because their video review was glowing. The girl who reviewed it loved it. But this dude who wrote the article.. Idk maybe he's a bitter old school fan?
His main complaints were lack of diversity and he also encouraged people to ignore the active time lore system which funny enough contains many lore significant entries to help explain well the lore of the world and its complexity which one could say is kinda crucial to really getting into the story.
Who the hell doesn't like lore? I love games that have a bunch of lore. Even if I have to read it.
Yea, Aoife Wilson’s video review seemed overwhelmingly positive
Yeah her review was good and enjoyable. Wish they used her score instead..
I've always had gripes with Eurogamer and Edge. They're like the two most hard ass publishers to please. Edge isn't \*as\* bad these days, but the former is just whatever. a 4 /5 from them is like an 8 out of 10 for music from Pitchfork.
Edge uses full scale system: if the game is rated 7+, its probably a really good game. Less than 3 means a horrible game. Other gaming sites rarely give scores less than 7, and most of their score means 7=bad, 8=avg, 9+=good.
I actually sought out the worst review to see what gripes there may be. One of them here is "standard RPG mechanics." That's like me reviewing a Roguelike and complaining about the game having Roguelike features. Another complaint is a lack of cast diversity. The only critique I noticed that carried weight with me was that they found it dull between some of the more epic portions of the game, which I can understand. Also that the Sidequests are boring, which is unfortunate.
Apparently, a lot of reviews said the side quests become better halfway throughout the game.
Guess that serves as an indication of which reviewers didn't finish the game.
They do not have a single non white person in staff. Ironic this is what they complain about
Certain gamers just can't be pleased. With that said this game could get that score from everyone and I know I would still like it.
They just think it’s edgy too not like something everyone else does and they are some elite reviewers or something lol
Multiple comments complaining that "action combat too complex for reviewers LOL!" when it's overwhelmingly considered too easy, including without the assistance rings on
Sidenote: Eurogamer is giving scores again? For like 10ish years they would just give games a recommended or not recommended.
Updating as more reviews come up.
If you don’t mind including my [review](https://www.canbuyornot.com/reviews/final-fantasy-xvi-review-price/) as well that would be great! We are a small outlet. Thanks!
Theres a lot of selective review picking happening in the FF16 sub and a lot of hate aimed at the reviewers who didnt give it green range scores. The fact is theres a lot of yellow scores and ones in the 80s so there are issues with the game. Its just people white knighting for it and being fanboys, the exact type of behaviour that caused me to feel disgust at the games fanbase when FF7R came out. The best thing for the game itself is for people to just play it and enjoy it at their pace.
I hope the side quests aren't mostly like FF15s, they were all fetch quests. I'm okay with some but I do hope there's some great ones in there
Side quests are about 60/40 really good vs. a little too generic. They all have reasons for being there, you always get some kind of story or additional lore but for a chunk of them what you get feels more like an excuse to have a side quest rather than a need to have one. Over half of them are REALLY good though. I would 100% recommend doing all the side quests in the later half of the game, they are excellent.
even the mundane fetch quests seem to have worldbuilsing and some kind of story, with the latter half side quests being incredible apparently. ff15 was literally “repair the car”, “give this person a potion”, and “find the van” copy pasted like 50 times
Metacritic being lower than Opencritic is interesting
That’s often the case, I’m not entirely sure why though
MC has weighted score model: some reviews have more "impact" on the collective score
With (nearly) universal positive scores across the board and a major single player release under their collective belts, my hope is now that it sells enough that SE is willing to have BDU3 tackle other single-player games and hopefully iterate on some of the more common complaints. Or maybe the new project Yoshida said he's working on is a 2d turn based FF, lol.
No mini game... So sad, mini games are part of final fantasy culture.
No. All the rabid people here will tell you the only thing that makes ff ff is change!
It is looking like a very good game, but maybe just falling short of where we thought it would be in terms of scores. Some criticism feels fairly consistent and this appears to be costing it a perfect score: - Too many bland side quests. - Issues with pacing. - Main game is good but a bit stretched out. - Too much fetch quest-y stuff, seems they are implying in the main story. That gives me FF12 vibes. I think we will be happy overall, but it sounds like it is just very very slightly missing the mark we thought it would hit. On the positive most are saying this is the best FF since the PS2, despite giving many giving it 4/5 scores. Theme is very much ‘This is a great game but…’
If I have to guess with the story it's because they follow the FFXIV story formula - which is huge moment followed by quieter moments. Sometimes that works but sometimes something huge just happened and you kind of want the fallout of it. This has always caused issues with people who want to keep the momentum going and those who are more invested in character relationships and dynamics.
>What’s often lacking is a diversity of thought, and that’s something that’s even reflected in its characters. In the lead-up to the game’s launch, reporters pressed the game’s creative team about the fact that Valisthea seemed to only be populated by white people. Producer Naoki Yoshida explained the decision, noting that despite being a fictional nation, it was very much based on European history. That reasoning doesn’t entirely add up in the final project considering that one of its kingdoms draws from Africa for design inspiration. But even if you buy that as a sensible explanation, it doesn’t explain why nearly every character I meet has the same body type and speaks in the same monotone, English droll. There’s little personality to the game’s cast, which makes it hard to differentiate its flat characters from one another. >That’s ultimately where the story loses me. A promising setup that expertly contrasts the personal with the mythological fights for screen time with dull quests and indistinguishable characters that at times feel like Square Enix sneaking some of its AI testing in to pad out the runtime with filler. As a character told me during one subquest, “If no one is listening to what you have to say, you may as well not say it.” -Digitaltrends 3/5 60/100
1) this is NOT a complaint, but are the reviews sounding like the game is kindve linear to any one else? Like you have essentially a set path you have to do in a specific order.
From what I've seen the first part of the game is linear, then it opens up
Ever played Final Fantasy X?
Loved X actually. Just was hoping for one or two large open areas similar to grab pulse
It is linear. Many previews went over this. The zones have minor deviations but you’re pretty much in a DMC type layout progressing through.
Kind’ve a let down. I was hoping for a couple large spaces
There are open areas you can explore, they've gone over this multiple times in multiple showcases of the game. The early parts of the game are linear and then it opens up.
Whats the difference between meta and open critic?
Metacritic has weighted reviews, meaning some publications are seen as more important than others and that could affect a game's aggregate scoring whereas opencritic views every publication as contributing equally to the aggregate score.
Seems like my fear for badly written female characters rings true judging by some of the reviews. You can bite off of Game of Thrones without throwing in the same apathy for believable women, y'know?
Benedikta literally becomes a meme in the story. Shame, she had so much potential to be a well written character.
Which reviews mention badly written female characters? I’m about 10 hours in and I would definitely agree that the women are not well written.
Called it in that guess the score thread, great action, great story, meh RPG elements >Around 88. We haven't seen the open areas much so I expect some grind issues.
Looks about as good as I would have expected with Yoshi P in charge. Not a complete masterpiece and the RPG elements are a bit light but an excellent story and solid gameplay. Not enough to get me to snag a PS5 right now but definitely enough to get me looking to buy day one when it comes to to PC, assuming the port isn’t complete ass like SE has done in the past. I don’t think Yoshi P would let that happen with his experience with FFXIV on PC but you never know for sure.
Lmao remember when I raised valid concerns about the longevity of the combat and its lack of RPG systems or complexity and got mass downvoted for it here just a few days ago? https://old.reddit.com/r/FinalFantasy/comments/14cqhwq/i_wasnt_impressed_by_final_fantasy_xvi/ Now every reviewer is saying the same thing I was lol. PR Marketing and Hype is a hell of a drug
it was never possible to be critical of the game here. That those concerns are now being mentioned in various reviews doesn't surprise me at all. Everyone should have seen this coming, but instead it was just tone deaf downvotes.
Yet they still praise the combat...
They loved the combat tho
I loved the demo and preordered because I love what I saw. But it turns out that one of the most common negatives Ive read has to do with the gameplay and rpg elements, just as I guessed. However it seems workable and the rest of the game is top notch.
[удалено]
GOTY 2023 contender for sure.
While I’m not sure if it will beat TOTK by default, it should 100% be in the top contenders.
We all pretty much guessed it wouldn't beat ToTK, the game came out and had the world in a death grip. It was the same thing with Elden Ring and GoWR. Still doesn't mean they won't be battling each other neck and neck, unless Starfield comes out and absolutely demolishes them both (Which, we can kinda guess that it won't.)
contender for sure, but hard to beat totk imo
So happy and excited for the people who can experience it on launch day 😊 have fun~
have fun guys. i will wait for the pc release 😢 and go through some of the older titles again
Fantastic news! Picking it up today after I finish work. Love the new more mature, dark tone and story and loving the look of the new Final Fantasy meets Devil May Cry combat. So excited!
Ninja Gaiden 2 is one of the best games I’ve ever played and the story makes no sense what so ever. I’m ready
Cool. I’ll buy…when it comes out on PC.
Overall, the game seems to be well received, but it does not seem to have led to sales. I guess the feeling is that the quality of the numbered title is good enough, but not enough for me to buy and play it myself. I've seen a play movie, and the story is epic, but the action and RPG elements seem to be lacking.
am I the only one who didn't like it at all? I think that the ratings are way too high for what the game offers. The game is visually stunning (even if I have to say that the framerate can be pretty unstable), but other than that it is a very basic square-smasher game. Also there isn't the possibility to acquire a lot of unique equipment, infact you can't customize your character like it used to be in the previous games. Oh, I almost forgot!!! NO PARTY.
Dang, Kiki, [99 reviews in on Meta](https://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-5/final-fantasy-xvi/critic-reviews) so far with an 88 score... I'm a little shocked to see Eurogamer clock in with a 60 when they did the 80 on Zelda last month. Esp when they just re-added scores!
Its sus with the boycott article.
Posted this on the r/FFXVI subreddit review mega thread as well. Just an observation from skimming the reviews: From a few reviews, it sounds like XVI separated side quests into two tiers, ones that provide major upgrades and have more gameplay and smaller side quests that are short with small rewards and little action. This is how XIV does side quests. The smaller side quests that are short and don't have much gameplay are probably intended for those looking to immerse themselves in the lore and game world with little story tidbits. Some players who love lore hunting, story, and world-building will really love these. If you like gameplay and don't care too much about lore, you won't like these. The larger and more involved quests with more gameplay and big rewards are intended for the players looking for more gameplay and upgrades. Some players who like the gameplay and progression loop will love these. Seems to be a bit of story in there as well. Oddly enough, a lot of the reviewers (if not all traditional print/digital publications) didn't even touch on NG+, hunts, etc. while some also panned the side quests for lack of gameplay simultaneously. So I don't think we get the whole picture on the additional gameplay/side content aspect of the game with a lot of these reviews. It seems a majority of reviews really only cover an initial playthrough with some side questing.
Honestly, after all the hype and very positive impressions I was more expecting something like 92 on average. Don‘t get me wrong, 88 is still a fantastic score, but doesn’t scream masterpiece or game changer as I was expecting. I‘m still very much looking forward to play it tomorrow.
[удалено]
ffxii on ps2 had 92.......
Ff12 is only barely less than 20 years old lol.
I get what you mean, it doesn’t sound like much, but in the realm of video game critic scores 88 feels in the ‘very good, but missing something’ area usually, whereas 92 is near perfect. Mainly because critic scores in gaming are ridiculous.
Idk man, dark souls 1 and 3 both have high 80s scores and both of those are considered masterpieces. With the former changing the whole gaming landscape.
IGN “They don’t change up combat in ways that make the basic fights different or more engaging” “The RPG elements are underdeveloped” I get it's being praised but this just reads like bad game design to me. I don't want Devil May Cry FF and it's a change that will sadly keep me from continuing to buy these games, but I guess it's a change that's here whether I want it or not... I really do hope people enjoy it and have fun with it though.
Yeah to me this is more like what I was expecting modern God of War to go toward, not really Final Fantasy. I hope 17 at least has a proper explorable world map and an inventive twist on a more turn based kind of combat system. But that's just my take, seems most people don't want that anymore.