Well no, I can't really say any game quite got the same feel as Doom did. Not even the sequels. However FF8/9/10 all had the same style and game play as FF7. Had the only made one sequel and then change styles maybe.

But Doom, sure some games looked like it. But they never quite made the same Magic. Unfortunately we don't get enough Doom clones these days.
It was different for anything on sale in the UK at the time. I had never even seen a JRPG up until that point. Later I found out it was pretty ordinary mind you but until then, our game stores never ever sold them.

That's exactly how I feel about doom, you know. I've seen games that looked as FF7, but nothing that "quite made the same magic". While I feel Shadow warrior and the like do exactly the same thing doom did.

I adore Shadow Warrior but it really didn't. Slight difference here is that there were quite a lot of JRPG's before FF7, how many were before Doom? Not many at all and the shooters there was didn't live up to much (exception Wolfenstein).

FF7 followed several great games, was surpassed by many more great games. It just sort of sits there really. FF8 would of been a better choice for a remake. It tried to be different.

Again? Wasn't there already a FF7 remake some years ago? Or is this a remake of a remake, a reremake?

http://store.steampowered.com/app/39140/

You can't say that FF7 was different at the time and then say it followed several great games. It's one or the other, Spuddy.

To me, all shooters look the same. You point at stuff, click and stuff dies. And it's fun, for a while, but I'm not a huge fan of the genre. If I was, maybe I would care more about the level design, or about how regenerating health or reload times can affect the gameplay. To me, all shooters "have the same style and gameplay" as doom, be it prey, serious sam, shadow warrior or any other shooter. I might care if it goes far enough from the genre, like Far cry or of course Deus Ex, but a shooter is a shooter. I do realize genre enthusiasts will acknowledge the difference, and there will be this one game that did things "just right" for them.

Simlarly, FF7 did things "just right" within the jRPG genre, IMO. I can go into a bit more detail about how FF8/9/10 did not, in fact, have the same style and gameplay as FF7. For all my complaints about the FF series, the one thing I respect from them is that they keep trying new things and every game I've played will feature new mechanics, which I then may or may not like. Could it not be that maybe you just don't care enough to notice the differences, just like how it happens to me in Doom?
That's a re-release of the old game. This is a remake.

I already explained my point but I'll do it again. At the time it was released every game store withing 60 miles of my city did not sell any JRPGs, no RPGS of any sort. So when this game was released it was completely new to us, however the older we got the more we saw and the more our opinion changed.

Don't focus on one post. I did explain it before hand.

Yes, you did explain. It was new for me, as there are very few jRPGs on PC and I generally don't do console. You still used it being "new" as an argument, which is a valid argument; and then went to point out how it followed great games, which makes no sense to me after the "new". How could it follow great games, when those games weren't there? It might have, but if the games aren't available at all, they might as well not exist. All I did was point out that you can't play the different card and then the it's all the same card right afterwards. It doesn't work.

And either way, that was a side comment. My actual argument was the two paragraphs right below it, which you appear to ignore. Maybe you shouldn't focus on one line.

Final fantasy 1-6 for example were officially released but they never got released in the UK til I think it was when FF9 came out. So we only realised it was a fairly normal rpg well after it was released.

I didn't play FF 1-3, but from what I heard they were fairly standard dungeon crawlers with little to no story. The first's main character didn't even have a name!

I played FF 4, the story looked nice, but the mechanics are so absurdly simple (jump to win with Kain, all the time) that I got bored and abandoned it.

I played FF 5, the job changing mechanic was interesting, but the story was so bland (go to each tower to get a crystal or something?) that I got bored and abandoned it.

I played FF 6, and that one was pretty nice. The story was interesting, and the mechanics were good enough. Lots of characters, fun stuff. Maybe if I had played that one first, I'd rate it even higher, but I didn't.

IMO, FF 7 was better than all of those. The characters and locations were a lot more memorable, the story was great, and the mechanics were fun with little grinding required. I fail to see how having played the 6 that came before you would suddenly thing FF7 was not interesting anymore.


I could go on, but my real point still stands: jRPGs are as different within the genre as FPS.

Because those games weren't at the helm of the begginings of the PS's life cycle? and being the first 3D Modeled JRPG at the time? besides fighting over the market status with Nintendo 64 which was mostly kids or teenagers? can I also say that people that played that game have said it was their first JRPG?

I mean there are many things that lead to the comercial sucess of FF 7, and they just took advantage of what they had to be now put in a pedestal together with the PS.
To bad you think that of FF5 specially when the standard of an RPG was simplicity within it's mechanics and wide world to go around and kill shit with your gear, in fact this game together with FF 9 make for the most serious RPGs that are just trying to be games that achieve what they strive for, being videogames and only adding Drama as if it were a Soap Opera when effective.

May I point out I don't do console? I played FF7 on PC, I know nothing of PS pedestals, its lifecycle or N64 market status.

It being the first one is an argument, yes. That does not mean that it wasn't good, and it sure as hell isn't an argument for "they are all the same anyway"
I care about story. Going around killing stuff for no reason like in an MMO is incredibly boring to me.

You should have been there, it was like Judas Priest making a concert in an arcade cabinet as if it was standard fare in the 80's; Fucking insane, besides it was a baby first RPG in the literal sense, I can see people comparing the popularity it once had with current rat kid youtubers and how the JRPG has come down to.

Caring about story? yeah sure, but if the game is being a bitch about it, it's bad game design (specially if there is a lack of it), look at pretentious FP games to set up the example.

So don't play Breath of Fire or you might actually know what an JRPG was in the first place if you are comparing it to a fucking MMO, specially when it seems you didn't read the part "insert if necessary" or "soap opera" when that is actual story progression in FF 7 dude :P

Oh and you don't do console? emulate, at the end of the day is like rubbing one out, because no one gives a fuck.

I don't understand anything of the first paragraph. Judas is a thief, not a priest. I was born in the 80's, I don't remember how insane it was. I don't know what a "rat kid youtuber" is or what a "baby first RPG" means. I kid you not, I really can't make any sense of the whole paragraph.

Second paragraph, I don't know what FP games are. First person? Doesn't quite fit. Either way, of course badly executed anything is bad; I do mean that when playing RPGs I care about the story first and the rest later. A game with no story where you go around "killing shit with your gear" without any motivating storyline, such as dungeon crawlers, diablo clones and MMOs, is not something I enjoy. I know others do, and that is fine.

I actually played a breath of fire... IV, I think. The one on PC. The story was OK, and the mechanics were nice too. I liked that the people not in the active party were still participating in the battle, sometimes healing from behind and recovering MP, and you could switch them anytime. The silent protagonist was really annoying though, and most of the characters were rather forgettable. Is that what a jRPG was in the first place? Not sure. And I don't know what exactly you mean in the last part, but there was quite a bit of story progression onf FF7 I think.

So you're basically saying that it's a good thing they're remaking it.

I don't much [random encounter] like JRPGs, but I gave [random encounter] Final Fantasy VII a shot, just to see [random encounter] what all the fuss was about. It was fine [random encounter] but after playing for what seemed like eternity [random encounter] I got really tired and rather bored of it [random encounter] for some reason, and I didn't even get to Aeris' death [random encounter]. So no, not even if I had PS 4 would I be interested.