The big thing about FF7 was that it came out during a critical transition period for the industry, and Squaresoft put the highest budget of any video game to date into making sure FF's jump to 3D graphics was as explosive as possible. The game was heavily marketed on its technical merits, boasting about how everything this game does could only be possible on PS1. It's full of setpiece moments that are literally just Squaresoft trying to show off their VFX budget (this is why summon cutscenes are so absurdly long). And it blew audiences away because no one had never seen anything like it before. FF7 was a revolution.
Trails certainly has good reason to be beloved by its niche fanbase, but by 2004, it really wasn't doing anything super unique compared to its contemporaries from the same time period. It's a polished game, but I can't describe it as anything more than an evolution.
Just because something is big and difficult, doesn’t mean it’s good or fun. I still need to play it to see if I like it, but the reasoning used here is flawed.
atomicpoet@lemmy.world 1 day ago
The big thing about FFVII when it came out was the huge—for the time—fully realized world.
It felt like stepping into a movie. There was nuance. And there were story curveballs.
Same deal with Trails in the Sky. Fully realized world—immense. And the narrative ambition is not just huge, Nihon Falcom actually pulled it off.
missingno@fedia.io 1 day ago
The big thing about FF7 was that it came out during a critical transition period for the industry, and Squaresoft put the highest budget of any video game to date into making sure FF's jump to 3D graphics was as explosive as possible. The game was heavily marketed on its technical merits, boasting about how everything this game does could only be possible on PS1. It's full of setpiece moments that are literally just Squaresoft trying to show off their VFX budget (this is why summon cutscenes are so absurdly long). And it blew audiences away because no one had never seen anything like it before. FF7 was a revolution.
Trails certainly has good reason to be beloved by its niche fanbase, but by 2004, it really wasn't doing anything super unique compared to its contemporaries from the same time period. It's a polished game, but I can't describe it as anything more than an evolution.
ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
Not to mention it was amid a crashout with Nintendo where Square struck a deal with Sony making the Playstation a sudden major contender.
atomicpoet@lemmy.world 1 day ago
But we’re not talking about technical merits but artistic.
There is no RPG series as big and immense as Trails.
This is Nihon Falcon’s crowning achievement. In terms of sheer craftsmanship, only one other JRPG compares.
missingno@fedia.io 1 day ago
The technical merits were why FF7 was so impactful as a cultural landmark of video game history.
Is Trails a good game? Sure.
Is FF7 the right comparison to invoke? Not even close.
JigglySackles@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
Just because something is big and difficult, doesn’t mean it’s good or fun. I still need to play it to see if I like it, but the reasoning used here is flawed.