Final Fantasy VII Remake:Part1. INTERmission DLC (6/10/21).

[hex]

No not terrible logic. FFVII is going to be a lengthy game, people are assuming that it's going to be 6 5 hour games in sequence. There's no proof that that's true. However, all gaming companies at this point are guilty of having a game and then adding episodic content, so let's not act like Square is committing a travesty here. There's no difference if square has one 40 hour game with a bunch of DLC following it (Witcher) and dropping a sequence of games.

Square could very well be planning to make a very large game, which I believe they are. Since FFVII, there have been many games and movies that have added to the Lore and it would make sense for Square to want to include all of it while doing the original mythos justice.

It's terrible logic because you claimed "The Witcher 3" was long because of two DLCs. The game is long as fukk without the DLCs....one of which ain't even out yet.

So I don't understanding mentioning them.

It's especially puzzling because you go on to say "all gaming companies are guilty of episodic content"....which isn't true, at all.

"The Witcher 3" is complete as a standalone product. The paid DLCs have nothing to do with the main story arc. Square is taking one game, and breaking it into 3 pieces. Which is whatever to me but the "Witcher 3" comparisons you're making are....bizarre. I don't know how else to describe them. What Square is doing with "FF7" and what CD Projekt RED did with "The Witcher 3" could not be more dissimilar.

Fred.

 

[Cladyclad]

If this true they have to do it episodic or this damn game won't come out until 2020

 

[Sonny Corinthos]

So this looks like this might quite possibly be a different game than a straight remake?

 

[Doomsday]

It's terrible logic because you claimed "The Witcher 3" was long because of two DLCs. The game is long as fukk without the DLCs....one of which ain't even out yet.

So I don't understanding mentioning them.

No you don't understand obviously. I did not claim Witcher 3 was long because of DLC. I said that Witcher also added content that doubled the length of the game, you could argue that that could have been apart of the original drop and is no different then what everyone is complaining at Square for.[/QUOTE]

It's especially puzzling because you go on to say "all gaming companies are guilty of episodic content"....which isn't true, at all.

Well, when you win 4 million in kickstarter funds for a game that only cost 250,000 to make, you don't need to add episodic content.

"The Witcher 3" is complete as a standalone product. The paid DLCs have nothing to do with the main story arc. Square is taking one game, and breaking it into 3 pieces. Which is whatever to me but the "Witcher 3" comparisons you're making are....bizarre. I don't know how else to describe them. What Square is doing with "FF7" and what CD Projekt RED did with "The Witcher 3" could not be more dissimilar.

Fred.

The last DLC does add to the main story arc. Taking a game and splitting it into three parts is no different then adding a DLC that's 20 hours in length itself.

 

[Fatboi1]

FFXV is said to be 50 hours. FFVII Remake part 1 is said to be 30 hours long. There's supposed to be three parts. Unless they charging $20 per part, that's a pretty hefty game.

 

[klientel]

If this true they have to do it episodic or this damn game won't come out until 2020

The only reason they are splitting it up is money.

 

[hex]

No you don't understand obviously. I did not claim Witcher 3 was long because of DLC. I said that Witcher also added content that doubled the length of the game, you could argue that that could have been apart of the original drop and is no different then what everyone is complaining at Square for.

Well, when you win 4 million in kickstarter funds for a game that only cost 250,000 to make, you don't need to add episodic content.

The last DLC does add to the main story arc. Taking a game and splitting it into three parts is no different then adding a DLC that's 20 hours in length itself.

No offense you have no idea what you're talking about. And you're making comparisons that don't even make sense.

The "Witcher 3" DLC didn't double the length of the game. Did you even play that game, or the DLC?

"Hearts Of Stone" was around 8 hours long. By your logic the base game was 8 hours....16 hours?

Again....what are you talking about? I think the fastest anybody beat "TW3" in the original thread was 35 hours, and they skipped everything except the main story. Which is why I said, if the core of "FF7" is 30 hours, that's fine. If it's everything the game has to offer in 30 hours, that's a problem.

And no, the last DLC doesn't add to the main story. It doesn't even take place on the same continent as the main story arc. The first DLC had nothing to do with the main arc, either.

So....what are you talking about? It seems like you didn't play any of the games you're discussing. And you're moving the goal post all over the place by stating "all games now use episodic content" and then rationalizing "D:OS" didn't need to because of Kickstarter. Most games nowadays aren't broken into episodic content, and completely optional DLC isn't the same as what Square is doing.

Fred.

 

[Doomsday]

No offense you have no idea what you're talking about. And you're making comparisons that don't even make sense.

Everything I said makes sense and I know exactly what I'm talking about. You're having comprehension issues.

The "Witcher 3" DLC didn't double the length of the game. Did you even play that game, or the DLC?

I have the special edition of the game with everything on it genius.

"Hearts Of Stone" was around 8 hours long. By your logic the base game was 8 hours....16 hours?

And "Blood and Wine" can take 20 hours to do everything. that's 28 hour DLC, from a 40 hour mainline game. That almost doubled the length of the game as I mentioned. There is no difference between three part DLC and three part series of the same narrative.

Again....what are you talking about? I think the fastest anybody beat "TW3" in the original thread was 35 hours, and they skipped everything except the main story. Which is why I said, if the core of "FF7" is 30 hours, that's fine. If it's everything the game has to offer in 30 hours, that's a problem.

I imagine each game is going to be 20-30 hours, with the last disc being open world. The first disc will probably be in Midgar. Basically they're following the same formula of the old FFVII but fleshing everything out and expanding it.

And no, the last DLC doesn't add to the main story. It doesn't even take place on the same continent as the main story arc. The first DLC had nothing to do with the main arc, either.

Yes it does.

So....what are you talking about? It seems like you didn't play any of the games you're discussing.

I don't feel like taking screenshots otherwise this would be a great opportunity to make you look stupid. I never discuss anything if I don't know what I'm talking about. You must have me confused for other posters. I have the enhanced edition of Divinity: Original Sin and Special Edition of Witcher 3 that comes with a soundtrack and all.

And you're moving the goal post all over the place by stating "all games now use episodic content" and then rationalizing "D:OS" didn't need to because of Kickstarter. Most games nowadays aren't broken into episodic content, and completely optional DLC isn't the same as what Square is doing.

Fred.

Coming out with episodic content in open-world/RPG games is the norm now. "D:OS" didn't do it because they cashed out from kickstarter-- twice.

 

[ahomeplateslugger]

FFXV is said to be 50 hours. FFVII Remake part 1 is said to be 30 hours long. There's supposed to be three parts. Unless they charging $20 per part, that's a pretty hefty game.

FF is BACK!

 

[Black Magisterialness]

FFXV is said to be 50 hours. FFVII Remake part 1 is said to be 30 hours long. There's supposed to be three parts. Unless they charging $20 per part, that's a pretty hefty game.

unless we are talking about some MGS 4 level cut scenes I have no clue how you stretch disc 1 into 30 hours

 

[King Koopa]

Why is it so hard for people to understand that all 3 discs can be around 3 hours? It's not gonna be simply a remake. You just know they're gonna add a tone of side shyt in there. Stuff that will probably even dive into the spin off games.

We haven't had any new FF7 material for YEARS. You just know they're gonna put their all into making this game. Talking new quests, characters, side storylines, etc. Of course the main storyline is gonna be there and be pretty much unchanged. That's easy and straight forward. Now are people gonna be happy with all the new content? Of course not, but I'm all for it. Things evolve. If yall are expecting the same kind of game from decades ago (same combat and all), then yall are out of your damn minds lol.

Now if what I just said has already but touched on, disregard my post and carry on. I didn't feel like reading everything through these last couple pages

 

[hex]

Everything I said makes sense and I know exactly what I'm talking about. You're having comprehension issues.



I have the special edition of the game with everything on it genius.



And "Blood and Wine" can take 20 hours to do everything. that's 28 hour DLC, from a 40 hour mainline game. That almost doubled the length of the game as I mentioned. There is no difference between three part DLC and three part series of the same narrative.



I imagine each game is going to be 20-30 hours, with the last disc being open world. The first disc will probably be in Midgar. Basically they're following the same formula of the old FFVII but fleshing everything out and expanding it.



Yes it does.



I don't feel like taking screenshots otherwise this would be a great opportunity to make you look stupid. I never discuss anything if I don't know what I'm talking about. You must have me confused for other posters. I have the enhanced edition of Divinity: Original Sin and Special Edition of Witcher 3 that comes with a soundtrack and all.



Coming out with episodic content in open-world/RPG games is the norm now. "D:OS" didn't do it because they cashed out from kickstarter-- twice.

If you own these games how do you not know what you're talking about?

The vast majority of games nowadays have DLC....not episodic content. The two terms aren't interchangeable. Episodic content is "Life Is Strange". A single game broken into parts. "The Witcher 3" is one complete game, with two optional side stories.

"FF7" is one game broken up into 3 pieces. Episodic content.

"The Witcher 3" is a complete game.

"Hearts Of Stone" has nothing to do with the main story. DLC.

"Blood And Wine" has nothing to do with the main story. DLC.

From CD Projekt RED:

Witcher 3: Blood and Wine release details explained

Blood and Wine has an independent history, it's not particularly tied in closely with the main plot of Wild Hunt.

I'm at you expecting me to give you the benefit of the doubt. How could I when you don't even have simple facts straight? Ok cool you own those games....did you actually play them?

Fred.

 

[Th3G3ntleman]

Meh isn't the combat going pseudo real time? If so 30 hours is fine.

 

[Doomsday]

The vast majority of games nowadays have DLC....not episodic content. The two terms aren't interchangeable. Episodic content is "Life Is Strange". A single game broken into parts. "The Witcher 3" is one complete game, with two optional side stories.

The concept of FF7 and Witcher 3 is the same. You're the one complaining that Square is pulling a "Life Is Strange" not me. A better comparion would be Xenosaga. All three episodes in that series were complete standalone games.

"FF7" is one game broken up into 3 pieces. Episodic content.

The original was three discs, the modern one will be three discs extended to 30 hours each. No different than Witcher 3 with "Blood and Wine"

"The Witcher 3" is a complete game.

A complete, 30-40 hour campaign. Each disc of FFVII will be 30 hours. Again, I don't see what the complains are about.

"Hearts Of Stone" has nothing to do with the main story. DLC.

"Blood And Wine" has nothing to do with the main story. DLC.

Yes it does.

I'm at you expecting me to give you the benefit of the doubt. How could I when you don't even have simple facts straight? Ok cool you own those games....did you actually play them?

Fred.

Yep.

 

[hex]

The concept of FF7 and Witcher 3 is the same. You're the one complaining that Square is pulling a "Life Is Strange" not me. A better comparion would be Xenosaga. All three episodes in that series were complete standalone games.



The original was three discs, the modern one will be three discs extended to 30 hours each. No different than Witcher 3 with "Blood and Wine"



A complete, 30-40 hour campaign. Each disc of FFVII will be 30 hours. Again, I don't see what the complains are about.



Yes it does.



Yep.

When did The Arcadium get this bad?

So the developer just said it doesn't....but you know better. Like I said, you have no idea what the fukk you're talking about.

"Xenosaga" was a trilogy. "The Witcher" is a trilogy.

"FF7" was originally one game, now it's split into 3 parts.

Will someone else please explain to this guy the difference between DLC and episodic content? And the difference between a standalone game broken into 3 parts, and 3 separate parts to a trilogy? Rep awaits you.

Fred.