One of the things we’ve observed during recent preview events is just how eager Square Enix is to underline that Final Fantasy 16 is a standalone game. While enthusiasts will already know that each mainline Final Fantasy includes its own cast of characters and storyline, it’s easy to imagine how more casual players may be put off by the prospect of purchasing the 16th instalment in a long-running series.
Speaking with GQ Magazine, producer Naoki Yoshida admitted it’s something he’s mentioned to his bosses: “Maybe it's about time we removed the numbers from the title,” he observed. “For example, you have Final Fantasy 14. You get a new player coming in and it's like, 'Wait a minute, why do I have to play Final Fantasy 14 if 16 is out?' Why don't we just call it Final Fantasy Online – just get rid of the number altogether, and that'll make it easier to understand.”
Yoshida added, however, that nothing has been decided for the future of the franchise – and it won’t be his decision to make. “Whether Final Fantasy 17 or Final Fantasy 18 should have a number or not – that's going to be on whoever has to develop that game and whoever's in charge of the branding, so that's their problem, not ours,” he laughed.
How would you feel about Final Fantasy ditching its numbers moving forwards? We do think it’d benefit Square Enix from a branding perspective, but because there are already a number of spin-offs in the franchise, it may make it more difficult to separate the mainline entries from the side projects. We’re a little torn on this: the numbers feel like they’re a part of each major Final Fantasy’s identity. But from a marketing perspective, there’s simply no doubt it’d help if they weren’t there!
[source gq-magazine.co.uk]
Comments 78
I like the Roman numerals but I can understand how it might be confusing for newcomers to the franchise who may think they need to play all the previous games.
Ah yes, stick to the incredibly simple non-numbered entries with normal names like Dirge of Cerberus, Stranger of Paradise: Final Fantasy Origin and other offenders. Roman numerals are the least of our worries.
Sounds like a recipe for confusion and endless fan debates about what 'counts' as a mainline entry.
No, this is disrupting tradition far too much. We made it to 16 mainline entires, and we need to keep going!
Plus, as mentioned elsewhere, this could cause confusion between mainline entires and side entries too.
Errmmmmm… I guess it makes sense to be fair at this point. I’d prefer not, but there are so many spin offs already and online versions that shouldn’t really be numbered they might as well just drop the numbering at this point.
I think non-numbered Final Fantasy games probably don’t get as much attention, though. So basically, they will do it when there is more to to gain financially. Which might be a while, since people get so hype about a new numbered entry.
I think Final Fantasy is one of the few series where the ever rising number for the mainline series is part of the brand. Personally, it makes me feel like I’m beholden to an extremely important legacy in gaming, foundational to its genre and still going strong. I like the anthology quality to the series as well, that each title constitutes its own world and stories, yet is still part of this incredible greater whole.
So yeah I like the numbers.
Back in the day that FF VII came out, it was the reason I decided against playing it. I thought I should play 1-6 first. I had no idea they were standalone until FF13 was released (my first FF).
Having said that, I think the average gamer is more informed nowadays
@naruball you would be surprised tbh, a few people I have spoken to even in more recent years think they have to have played the other ones.
I enjoy every FF entry looking like the Super Bowl. Would upset me if they join the trend of not numbering sequels.
@naruball Possibly, but I imagine this definitely will put off some folks.
I like traditions, but it’s an ongoing trend especially in the US due to marketing & not wanting to ‘date’ events.
For ex. Wrestlemania got rid of its numbering after 30 I believe, because Vince didn’t like dating it & making it feel old which he believed would hurt their ability to attract new customers.
Fans were mad at the time, but quickly got over it. They still call it by the number of the event even if WWE doesn’t officially acknowledge it. It just ‘WrestleMania insert city name here now’.
Would be sad to lose the numbering, but don’t think it matters.
Just imagine recommending Final Fantasy 47 to your grandchild one day…no you just tell them to get the new Final Fantasy😅.
All for it. Especially with FF, as they have had little continuity between them for years and years. The ones that did added an extra number after the number to specify it was part 2 of that number... Lol
So yah ditch them. Come up with a meaningful standalone subtitle for each game in the franchise and I think it would suit it just fine.
Good because I'm already done with Roman FF games starting from 14.
FF 13 on PS3 was the last Roman FF I played and it was the worst.
They should have done it a long time ago. If they want to do like a trilogy or a continued story then numbering them would be fine. 16 numbered games over nearly 40 years is too many especially with little to no continuation between them.
Final fantasy 14 being an MMO definitely should not have been a numbered entry.
Eventually the roman numerals are going to look ridiculous. I mean I still want to type FFXXX at least once in my lifetime but still...
It's just a name, as cool as it looks. I just hope they don't reset their name. Mortal Kombat 1, Battlefield 1, God of War, whatever the hell happened with cod modern warfare, etc. Thankfully it seems to be a western industry type thing. Do like monster hunter and just add a subtitle to it
As a newcomer to FF, I will say I had to question if it had to play the other 15 games. That was very off putting but thankfully it is a standalone story. I feel like moving away from the sometimes confusing roman numeral structure may be good for widening the fan base.
I am all against it as it would only lead to more confusion about what are the main entries. Sometimes I think they should have called 11 and 14 “online” but that’s about it! Should Rockstar drop the 6 from GTA because people think they need to play all the other games before? What about Resident Evil 7? Staying with SE, what about Dragon Quest XII?
Casual gamers can honestly …look it up.
I don’t want to remember the series as Final Fantasy: Insomnia, Final Fantasy: Opera Tragica and so on. And you know my proposals are way tamer and more reasonable than the names we would actually get.
I'd rather that they keep the numbering for their mainline games. Much easier to follow through.
I'd feel that if they discarded the numbers people would think the games are spin-offs.
Double edged sword. There have been many in-numbered Final Fantasy games and they never sell as well as the mainline numbered series. It’s not just quality, it’s perception that these numbered entries are the main line. That’s way harder to communicate to the masses without numbers, not just news site readership.
It’s also the same with Star Wars. Rogue One was arguably the best of the new Star Wars movies, but it didn’t come close to selling as much as the Episide # entries.
They really should just rename XIV, though.
@Ralizah I wholly expect entries with names like Final Fantasy: Rectangle Spoonage.
If anyone doesnt understand the numbering system for Final Fantasy after 35 years, i dont know what to tell you tbh.
With that said, to an extent I can understand the logic from Square's point of view and at some point it would look a little silly to keep going with numbered releases
But on the otherhand, the numbered games generally have always inferred quality to the consumer as you could generally trust they received the upmost care and attention. So its a big risk given many spin offs have been thrown out for quick sales
Also from my pov though 11 and 14 should never have been part of the mainline numbered series
Monster Hunter World started this trend, and with that game becoming the best selling non-Nintendo japanese game in decades, it was obviously gonna expand in the rest of the industry.
I could ditch future FF installments...
@KundaliniRising333 it would be perceived as a spin off and sell considerably less than the 10 millions (+/-) modern numbered FF are consistently selling
@SplooshDmg With a name like that, it'd better be a Team Asano production (in which case I'd deal with the stupid title; Triangle Strategy is incredible).
I think I'd be okay with that. Numbered installments bring certain expectations with the. I'm all in on Final Fantasy 16, but I get why some people are turned off by it. It's not that different than why I was let down by Samurai Warriors 5, and dropping the Number and going for a subtitle could go a long way in dealing with that.
They probably shouldn't have designated numbers to 11 and 14, they should have been their own "FF Online" subseries, like with Tactics and the Chocobo games
Would be quite fine. I'm not looking forward to Final Fantasy 21 to be honest.
Makes a lot of sense to just call it FF Online instead of 14. In regards to the single player games, not sure why they are even consecutively numbered anyway since they don’t tie together.
@Ralizah Right now we have a random game in a random genre with a random theme and tone that has nothing to do with anything else bearing the name ever called "16" and an MMO completely unrelated to anything else in format or genre or even business model to anything else bearing the name.
I honestly don't know how removing the number could make it more confusing.
"Hey are you getting the new Final Fantasy (2031) game?"
"Oh, maybe, what kind of game is it"
"I dunno, they haven't said yet."
Doesn't seem any more confusing than
"Oh are you getting FF 17?"
"Oh that's that RPG series right?"
"Oh no, this one's a flight sim but you fly around in Eidolons."
"oh..."
@ATaco This one's a spin-off but they slapped a number on it, what's the difference?
@NEStalgia
I don't believe that. I feel as though this is the direction that SE is choosing to take FF going forward.
The internet is readily available in order for people to make informed choices or are people too busy watching people doing inane things on tiktok to do a bit of research?
Keep the numbers.
Finale Fantasy: The Final Fantasy.
Mhhhhhmm check please.
@ATaco Whether it's a spinoff, a reboot, or simply a different series they inexplicably decided to call Final Fantasy, there's still really no debate about it, it's not "Final Fantasy 16" in any form other than the marketing department leveraging the name.
You don't just take something, turn it into something totally different, and declare it the next numerical sequence of a thing that already exists. If PlayStation 6 only plays Nintendo games, it's not really PlayStation 6!
Ironically, despite all the flak I get here for saying this over and over, in the end, it appears YoshiP actually agrees with me, so there's that....
In keeping with the times here's how Squenix will name all their Final Fantasy games going forward:
Final Fantasy 1
Final Fantasy 1
Final Fantasy 1
Final Fantasy 1
Unfortunately, they train the audience to expect unnumbered Final Fantasy games to be cheap spinoffs.
better without numbers.
simply just Final Fantasy as sub name.
just like some other spin off.
example:
The Tonberry's Murder Case
-Final Fantasy-
@NEStalgia so what makes final fantasy, final fantasy?
How can people be confused when they can Google and find out in seconds that no they don't have to play the previous ones.
@ATaco He is so dug in on this you will never win. He’d rather slap his mother than admit it’s a FF game, just not the one he wants. 🤪
Hell No.
The Roman Numerals are part of the history of the franchise. They stay
All I know is that a loss of the numbers means a completely different experience. AC was never the same after they stopped using numbers, inFamous was pretty much rebooted after they stopped using numbers, battlefield and CoD did that too, Xbox rebooted themselves out of an easy win with Xbox 720, MGS uses numbers for fun, none of those games should be numbered. Skipping masterpieces like GTA and Uncharted, only games that use numbers properly suck and numbers should be banned from all games. Fin
I’ve thought for awhile that they would eventually do away with the numbered entries, especially with VII Remake throwing things off (not just including prior comments by Kitase-san about how remaking VII would be the end of the series).
The challenging thing will be making clear which games are “mainline” entries, versus which games are smaller, less essential games in the series. That said, the flip side of that is that removing pressure to always have major “mainline” releases could mean even more experimentation in the mainline series once again.
@NEStalgia There has been a steady evolution of Final Fantasy games where they have become progressively more action orientated This one seems to have just accelerated the process a bit, but it is no less a Final Fantasy than any of the rest of the mainline series. Each Final Fantasy has it's own style and battle system and they are all very different from each other, even 1-6 are quite different in their own ways. One of the main characteristics of the series is that each game is effectively a stand alone game in its own right that includes certain themes and characters etc. Sure, I'd love it if they went back to a more traditional turn based system but that doesn't mean I'm going to enjoy 16 any less with its action orientated gameplay.
They shouldn't even consider that.
The numbered title is part of the whole philosophy of the FF mainline series in how they reinvent it every time.
If you want to not number the MMO's no one will die about it, but you need to keep the numbered titles.
Also, the thing about numbered titles is that they sell backwards in time as well. If you have a new fan buying the new game and enjoy it they will be curious to check out all those others they skipped.
With things like the FF remasters going around it would be insane to stop numbering them.
Keep the numbers, I kinda feel like its part of Final Fantasy and its over-the-top identity, just feels kinda right.
@Sevenifity How to kill off your brand recognition.
@FatalBubbles They should have branched off to Final Fantasy online and numbered it separately.
Neva I like my roman numerals I been a fan for 24 years never stop ✋️ 🫸 🫷 💯
@NEStalgia If you make a spinoff then you should not number it. Then I would be smart to make a title and use a subname. But the main entries should be numbered.
@ATaco an rpg. Which this still does not appear to be. This still seems to be a linear action adventure game. Sammy's preview still hasn't really suggested otherwise. There's a difference between an action rpg and an action adventure. Unchartered is action adventure. GoT is action adventure. Skyrim is rpg. Deus ex is rpg. Big difference. Before even covering ff as the example of Japanese takes on RPGs we at least can settle into rpg at all. And @fatalbubbles take isn't a good one. He thinks gow is an rpg....
@Flaming_Kaiser I think the question is "what's Main entry" then. It isn't this. This still comes across as a linear action adventure spinoff not a mainline ff rpg deserving a number. To Yoship's credit, he seems to recognize and agree with that which makes it sound like calling this 16 was indeed the marketing departments call, not what he feels it should be.
Final Fantasy is my favourite game series of all time. That said I was hoping that 11 and 14 would not be main games since I have never played them and I will probably never play them. Sounds bizarre not having played main games from your favourite series.
@NEStalgia GoW is an RPG lite. 😃
@rjejr Numbers never bothered me, just I hope they never reboot the franchise with a game called "Final Fantasy".
Keep the numbers. Can't let the Fast and Furious series catch up on them, seeing that now they are going to do Fast X-2 😂
Keep that number rolling! Just add a subtitle if you wish.
Personally I would have ditched the numbers a long time ago but we already gotten this far and ditching them now or anytime soon in the future will only cause confusion on what is or isn't 'mainline'.
And like a few others above me here, I also very much disliked it when SE gave numbers to 11 and 14. Same thing when they did this to Dragon Quest as well.
@JohntheRaptor not everyone googles things, though. On the contrary, even when people argue online, they insist on something, even though it'd take them a few seconds to realize they're wrong (something as simple as x games was released in x year).
Removed - inappropriate
Crazy big Roman numerals are a part of the Final Fantasy magic. I doubt the amount of people nowadays assuming they have to play previous entries in the series before getting the latest one is small. Social media and internet access is everywhere, people are generally more informed than not. Keep the numbers Square, don't follow the latest trend just because.
@FatalBubbles GoW is an on-rails corridor slasher. It's a modern take on a beat-em-up. People call it an action-adventure but even that's a liberal use of the term. Horizon, GoT, inFamous, R&C are action-adventures. Zelda is arguably the very first open world action adventure. GoW is a combo driven hack and slash which has closer DNA to a brawler/BUMP. Leagues away from an "RPG", many, many leagues away. Adding a superfluous "upgrade tree" doesn't change that. "New" GoW isn't that different from old GoW despite different window dressing and being very slowed down, its core is very much unchanged.
Calling GoW an RPG because it has a skill tree is like calling Harry Potter "horror" because it has ghosts.
I've pretty much checked out of the series at this point anyway, sadly so whatever. I've had 16 pre-ordered forever but I may cancel it with the recent confirmation that its absolutely filled with F-bombs, gore, and nudity. I know most don't care about all that stuff but that's just not my cup of tea and isn't the FF that made me who I am today.
@KidRyan I feel like if they were going to reboot the franchise and just call it "Final Fantasy" it would have bene on the 3DS, that seems like a very 3DS sounding name. Though I'm probably thinking of "Fantasy Life" but there were others.
Maybe they should start over and name them like Fast & Furious movies.
First Fantasy
Second Fantasy
Fantasy Drift
Rock & Roll Fantasy
Final First Fantasy Fight Prologue
OK the Kingdom Hearts naming convention may have snuck into that last one. 😂
@NEStalgia It has character building, especially in the 2018 one where you started with very little. I think it has aspects of RPGs but I won’t be troubled if someone doesn’t want to view it as such.
And…I’d say the dementors and death eaters are more horror than the ghosts!
@FatalBubbles Progressively unlocking combos isn't "character building", it's just progress-gating movesets.
You're not alone, but we've reached this point that people call literally every game including sports sims, racers, and online FPSs "RPGs" if they have any semblance of ability gating or using points to unlock things as though that's all of what an RPG ever was. And by that definition sure, XVI is an RPG, GoW is an RPG, Call of Duty is an RPG, Fortnite is an RPG, Forza is an RPG, MLB The Show is an RPG, literally everything is an RPG because "RPG" becomes a synonym for "video game" instead of an actual genre. It seems like people that don't actually play RPGs have redefined RPG to mean anything that has surface level features that line up with what they perceive RPGs must be because without actually being familiar with the genre those surface level attributes are all they assume the genre is.
Redefining literally everything to be called an "RPG" just because it includes some system that thematically or visually represents a system commonly associated with RPGs is a massive disservice to the genre. It would be like calling every game that has guns in it a "shooter", or every game that has cars in it a "racer." Or calling FFX a sports game because it has Blitzball. Or FFX-2 a hentai idol dating sim because...oh wait, nvm that one's right.
LOL, I'll give you the dementors, even if they're really just tarted up Nasgul.
@FatalBubbles Actually going further on it, I think there's a lot that gets glossed over in these conversations overall as people try to define everything with a tree of unlocks as an RPG....
One thing people seem to forget all too much is, that RPG was a very well defined game format long before video games existed! The "Computer RPG" format was a transcription of a very established tabletop game genre into a more real-time format. But like video game adaptations of mahjong, chess, monopoly, roulette, etc, there's only so far you can bend and twist it while still actually being that genre. Otherwise it just becomes a completely different game. And the genre, even in tabletop form, still has many fans.
If we go back before video games existed, back to the world of only tabletop games, 1960s and before, an RPG is easily distinguishable from Monopoly, Mouse Trap, Hungry Hippos, Yahtzee, backgammon, chess, and Mahjong. It has a very specific format of gameplay vs all the others. Turn based video game RPGs certainly borrowed structures from, say, Chess or Mahjong and applied them to the RPG format in battle. Even in early computer gaming, games like Zork (the original text adventure) was just that, an adventure game, not an RPG. It was missing the myriad distinct elements that make even a pen and paper RPG an RPG. But the fundamentals under the hood are very much math based systems in a standard RPG. Even, say, Fallout, people talk about the jank of shooting. that's because it's not actually a shooter. Under the hood there's a set of RNG "dice roll" simulations playing out. Your character build is driving the results much more than your mouse aim.
Taking physical games anaolgy further, calling anything an "RPG" just because it has XP and gated unlocks would be like saying darts and roulette are basically the same thing because they both have circles divided into elongated segments across it's radius in alternating black and red patterns, assigned numeric values.
But fundamentally, video game RPGs are recognizable by the hybrid of a sense of living as part of a living, breathing world (role playing), along with the underlying math systems that make an RPG game genre. God of War......is not math based. At all. I don't think a meeting between Kratos and Pythagoras would end well. But the first part is where things like Bravely Default miss the mark, too. It's surely math-based, but it forgets to put you as part of a living, breathing world, and instead railroads you from encounter to encounter.
Without the math, hidden or overt, it's not an RPG at all. Without the living breathing world you're a cog in, it's not a video game RPG as most video game RPG players know it to be.
@NEStalgia Again, I said it has aspects of it. It’s in no way a full blown RPG. Lots of games have aspects of RPGs so they get called RPGs. Are they “traditional” RPGs, no. They have some of the DNA that goes into RPGs and thus get lumped in.
Based on previous conversations it feels like you’re a purist when it comes to this kind of thing so if it’s not checking all the boxes then it’s not a RPG. Which is fine, I just think there is more nuance to it. I don’t think FF7 on PS1 is living or breathing at all, no more than Horizon or GoW. 🤷🏼♂️
As long as we don't see ***** like "Final Fantasy: Ascension" or any other cliché subtitle that every game franchise uses at some point.
@FatalBubbles IDK that there's really a room for "purism". A thing is either a representation of a genre or it isn't. Something can't be "kind of sci fi", it either is or it isn't. A game can't be "kind of an online shooter", it either is or it isn't. Same for RPGs. It's either an RPG or it isn't.
These days it just seems like it's popular to take generic action-adventure games, throw in a few RPG-ish elements into it and suddenly everyone calls it a new RPG. Which is bad enough if you're a fan of a genre that keeps getting battered into non-existence by this, but it's even worse when the game doing it claims to be the latest entry of a series that used to actually be an RPG.
@NEStalgia I feel like you just continued to portray the purist RPG take.
Games can have aspects of multiple genres, surely we can agree on that? That’s all I’m saying when it comes things like GoW and Horizon, they have RPG aspects, they are not RPG games.
Nope, sacriledge. Might as well stop calling it Final Fantasy if we're dropping the roman numerals.
A Final Fantasy announcement with a number on it holds a lot more weight than when anything else FF related is announced. Don't wanna lose that.
@Ralizah Well said.
@FatalBubbles Sure that last paragraph I can agree with. And GoW can have that paper thin veneer of a useless skill tree that some may think makes it look like an RPG even though it's just a veneer of a skill tree
TBH, I've always thought that GoW18 would be better if they stripped out that rediculous skill tree anyway. It's pointless, it's useless, and it detracts from what the game is by trying to shoehorn focus tested checklisting of "people like xp and skill trees so lets put that in." It's the same combo action it always was but now with 100% more needless character building that serves the same function as gradual crescendo of ability gates except with the imaginary presentation of "choice"
Yes very smart Square Enix, Kill what little you still have to differentiate the spin-off titles with the main line series...
Wow they really need new leadership, it's just one stupid decision after another.
@rjejr Only time shall tell haha, neither of us are psychic.
@KidRyan I'm not psychic and I'm forgetfull, so even if I guessed it I'd forget. 😂
Tap here to load 78 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...