Marvel's Midnight Suns Brings 'Excellent Tactical Action' To Xbox One This Month

Love this game. I cancelled my gamepass subscription cause this is all im playing

@SplooshDmg @FatalBubbles This is timely for our discussion from the other day about FFXVI and the genres. I'm not into Marvel so I pretty much ignored everything about this game ever since I heard about it and had no idea until now this is a turn based RPG. So here's another super high profile example of about as mainstream and Western a brand as you can get in Marvel from 2K via Firaxis (the Civilization guys) of turn based RPGs being a well-represented, valid, current genre, not some forgotten relic of the past, in relation to FF chasing the biggest-possible money and just becoming an action hack and slash (without even the RPG.) Kind of bleak day when a Marvel game from 2K is a better FF game than the newest FF game.

@NEStalgia Interestingly I saw this gameplay awhile back and had zero interest in it. The strategy type games like this, similar to FF Tactics, have never done anything for me. Which is saying something since I believe I’ve played almost all of the FF entries.

I know it seems you’re really against the new FF game, but I can’t wait, think it looks incredibly fun. I think it just comes down to your definition of RPG is not being fulfilled in FF16 so you’re not into it, which is fine.

@NEStalgia Didn't this game kinda bomb, though? Not that it isn't of quality, because basically all I've heard is it's a crying shame how good it is, and it just didn't really perform well (or that's what 2K let us believe, anyway). Which goes back to my concerns from the other day that developers may eventually just stop making games like these, because the market has decided they really aren't all that interested. Which comes right back around to our constant complaining that game budgets are absolutely out of control and the AAA industry is just (slowly? Rapidly? Debatable) destroying itself because only a handful of the biggest franchises/publishers can actually sustain themselves financially.

@FatalBubbles If you haven't noticed, NES is really invested in this. Like, actively losing sleep, maybe.

This game was great fun. I only played the free trial but I really liked it. Might grab the Xbox One version if it's a little cheaper.

@SplooshDmg Haha. I just think RPG is a broad scope and we might be looking at that in different ways. It’s not a bad thing, just different opinions.

@FatalBubbles I think in ways yes and no. I do think RPG is pretty broad in scope, especially by today's standards. However, I'm really with NES that nothing about FFXVI looks any more an RPG than God of War, which isn't an RPG at all. However, I'm just not quite bent out of shape about it like he is. I've basically been living without new Final Fantasy since 2006, so odds are I'll just continue living without it. The game looks like something well assembled that the mainstream market will love, but a tee-total dud by what makes a game enjoyable to me. I'm not living under some illusion that Square Enix has to care what I think, they're in charge and can do whatever they want. I just also seem to get raked over the coals for not being thrilled about the new direction. Lol

@SplooshDmg It's the budgets. The game "bombed"....by what? TRPG standards? Marvel standards? Avengers standards? Define "bombing". That's the problem.

An RPG isn't going to sell as well as a dumbed down action slasher. Never has, never will. A period drama on 17th century debutantes won't sell as well as a Transformers movie with explosions. This surprises nobody. Yet the games industry expects every game to sell like Transformers and budgets expecting it.

When it comes to something like FF, that's the choice. At what point does Square stop saying "we want FF to be the most successful RPG series, and will do our best to make a game appropriate for the budget of the predictable success of a leading RPG game to accomplish this" and instead say "We want to having the highest grosing video game ever made, so we're going to take our old RPG series and make it instead in the image of the other highest grossing genres in the business."

At what point do companies decide instead of leading in their product category, products are either total market leaders or don't play at all. When does the film studio decide that instead of making the best 17th century period drama they can make they'll just make a movie about Transformers in corsets and aim to dominate the box office? It's an incompatible goal. Being the best type X product meant to be a type X product, vs trying to be the "industry sales leader" no matter what product has to fit that box.

@NEStalgia So, the choice between integrity and selling your soul for money? Because that's kinda what it is to me. If they wanna sell their soul for money, they can do that. That was always allowed. I'm gonna call them out on it, though. It's kinda like your favorite punk band all of a sudden decides they want to make some serious money, so they shave off their mohawk and release their first pop rock album. It's selling out in my eyes. This is the same company that's obsessed with NFTs in 2023. I have to think that every decision by SE is devoid of integrity. I get it though, we're A LOT more rigid than most people. I don't expect people to get that. I'm not going to yell at the people that love it and tell them to stop having fun, but I'll also defend my sentiment on the subject.

@SplooshDmg @Nestalgia Well, to be fair, SE goal is to make money. Their shareholders aren’t interested in them making a game for a smaller market share.

I guess I’ve always considered GoW reboots an action light RPG, which seems to differ with you guys. But at the end of the day, I just want good, fun games. I loved GoW so if FF16 is down that road I imagine I will lobe this too.

I do feel bad that a series you guys clearly are invested in is diverging from what you want it to be though.

@FatalBubbles Right, I mean, I'm an accountant. Money is what I do. However, that being said, I'm extremely critical of what things like public trading has done to things like entertainment and art. I don't care about the shareholders, because I'm not one and I'm not getting dividends. The two things just don't necessarily co-exist well imo.

Most games these days feature light RPG elements. Heck, CoD features light RPG elements. They're basically just a norm now and shoehorned into basically every existing genre somehow. But I think God of War is just going to fall into the pretty standard action adventure genre. I respect God of War a lot, I've played them all and they are masterfully crafted. But they just aren't something I personally love.

Eh, nothing to feel bad about. I've been mad at Square Enix for two decades now. Nothing has changed. Lol

@FatalBubbles "Their shareholders aren’t interested in them making a game for a smaller market share."

See this is the part I have an issue with. If they're just looking to be the industry #1 seller why were they ever making RPGs to begin with? Why weren't they making fighting games and platformers in the 90's? Why does FF even exist at all? Usually you choose your niche in a market and try to rise to the top of that niche. Square was the top of the RPG niche. They're synonymous with it. FF and DQ are two of the biggest icons of that market. Is that market as big as online military shooters? No. Was it ever the biggest market in gaming? No. But it was their market, they served it with excellence and they were rewarded as being one of the best in that market. Usually that's enough to continue doing that. And if they wanted to participate in another market that's larger, they surely had the headroom to branch out and expand into that market as well (which they tried and failed with their Western studios they sold), without cannibalizing their niche they lead in and replacing it with chasing a different market. Honestly fans celebrate that but I just see that as another Square fail. even if it's a financial success, they could have had that same success making this a new series/spinoff and making an actual FF game on a more practical budget for FF fans, of which there are a great many, served two markets rather than trying to merge two markets, and made more money.....but it's Square and they're allergic to sensible business decisions so they did this.

The idea of "oh we're just changing our highly regarded iconic product into something else more popular because after 35 years of business we figured out the market we served isn't in fact the biggest one in our industry" is just....bizarre. It would be like KFC deciding to start selling burgers and fries instead of chicken and calling it the "2 piece chicken bucket" because they finally figured out burgers and fries are a much bigger market than fried chicken. And then people celebrating that it doesn't really matter if it's beef and potatoes or battered chicken because tastes change, and it still says it's a chicken bucket, and as long as it beats McDonalds in sales it's all for the best.

And yeah, GoW is nowhere even remotely on the road to being an RPG, adding XP and a skill tree doesn't just make something an RPG (and if it does, CoD is an RPG too)...but....while I'm not at all a fan of the GoW reboots which took a fun, fast, over the top action slasher and turned it into.....a slow, lumbering action slasher, one thing I will credit to it is it really didn't change genres. It arguably changed too little other than just slowing the whole thing down like it's stepping on glue. At it's core, GoW2018 is very much still the same core experience as the PS2 GoW games, a linear, corridor-locked combo slasher/brawler. Just with all the, y'know, fun removed, and replaced with sad dad drama because today's emo kids only understand darkness and despair. But yeah, GoW, despite getting a reskin and new tone, the core gameplay and genre is very much the same as it's always been. I really can't think of any games that totally changed genres, with the exception of Fallout and Prey which, Fallout didn't really change with genres, they changed themes/tones but that was after the IPs were sold from a dead company to a different company.

@SplooshDmg Basically, though I think "integrity" is too polite. Shamelessness? At this point I see the gaming industry having about as much tact as a carnie/circus/casino. They don't even bother with smoke and mirrors and plausibility anymore, and their customers will just look where they're told to look and applaud.

But the whole scenario is uniquely Squeenix/FF. I mean as debased as the whole gaming industry is, I really can't think of any other example of any other company doing that to a core franchise, and I can't think of any other customer base other than FF that would tolerate it. There's a "special" factor when it comes to FF that's just weird, and people are willing to go through all sorts of mental gymnastics regarding FF to justify almost anything that I don't think any other series could get away with.

Imagine if Deus Ex became a hack and slash? Imagine if Fire Emblem did? Imagine if God of War became a stealth crouch/cover game? If Mario became a dungeon crawler. If Metroid became a 4 player co-op shooter....oh wait.....that happened and did not go down well at all, and that was just a spinoff not a main entry..... Ok how about if Saint's Row became a sandbox shooter....wait it already was. How about if Saint's Row changed from being an irreverent sexploitation game with phallic melee weapons and OTT meathead characters and became a game about a bunch of college hipsters in hoodies whining about debt? Oh...wait....that also happened... and also did not go down well to the point the legendary studio was basically shuttered on launch.

I mean it's not just going from turn based to action battle systems, it's just leaving RPG behind totally. But even if it were about leaving turn based (which it already did) people act like Pokemon, y'know the #1 selling game franchise in the history of game franchises with a new annual entry that makes CoD look anemic every holiday, isn't a turn based RPG that's literally designed as an SMT knock-off raising every new generation of kids on turn based RPGs as a staple genre..... The whole dialogue is just weird.

That's why I'm so hard on the FF scenario. It's a uniquely bizarre scenario that's sustained by a uniquely fanatical base of stans. People act like series switching genres is a normal occurrence.

I'm not against Square making a new game in a popular genre to make lots of money. I'm against taking random games and calling them part of a series they're obviously not even the same type of game as. If Elder Scrolls 6 is a coop looter shooter set in space.......I would not expect anyone to be fine with that. If the next main CoD game were not an online military shooter I'm pretty sure fans wouldn't be excited about that. If the next John Wick movie was a rom-com, I'm pretty sure fans would not be excited about that. That's the whole point of a series brand. It kind of tells you the genre.

But again, the main points of discussion around that game (aside from some like Fatal that just like the look of the game as a stand-alone and not it's role in the larger series) seems to be one of "I hate FF but this looks like a good game" (which is the POINT!) and "I just want FF to be on the top regardless of what the game is as long as it's the best selling" which.......that gets into the real heart of the problem. What's driving a lot of support for that game being an FF game is simply excitement over sales potential of the FF name being a chart topper. There's something about the FF audience that more than anything, more than even caring what game they're playing, just seeks validation of the FF brand being popular (or is it about a Sony exclusive being popular? Does it have nothing to do with FF and is just about console wars?) I can't even tell anymore.

@NEStalgia Take a deep breath. It will be fine. I promise. You will be playing TOTK in less than two weeks.

@SplooshDmg Just to cause you guys more angst, I thought BoTW was awful and quit after about 8 hours. 😬

@FatalBubbles Honestly, I'm genuinely not a big fan of Zelda. I've played them all, probably more because of peer pressure than anything. I was so sick of BOTW by the time the credits rolled, that I scaled the big rock behind Hyrule Castle and just flew into the backside so I could skip the last dungeon almost entirely and just finish the game. I'm half tempted to buy TOTK just to see if they can change my mind, but I'm still undecided. Lol

@SplooshDmg Honestly NMS VR is making it all better. I got a freaking capital ship of my own finally. Big space dogfight battle, beam cannons off the bow in high orbit over a decayed planet, dipping into the atmosphere and out. Thing is just absolutely absurdly massive. 9 landing pads, orbital prefab base drops and on-site mech suit drops. All from a little indie studio for $60 or less on sale. I knew freighters existed and I wasn't there yet but it's like a whole new world unlocked in there. Square wants me to pay $70 to have some emo dudes with bed head use a menu to navigate between locations and mash triangle to win. But the particle effects are purrdy.

@FatalBubbles Haha, fortunately BotW is also not an RPG....technically....it's an action adventure.....like GoW. _{And just as slow}

I generally liked BotW because it was something different at the time, had this zen-like presentation, it absolutely was a new take on the open world formula, particularly being systems/physics driven, and kind of returned the series to it's original roots vs the more anime-puzzle driven format it had been veering, but I also have a little bit of concern if that formula is really going to hold up well a second time in a sequel. It's freshness was it's selling point, I think. It depends how much they can freshen it up this time.

But it also depends how much you like self-guided gameplay vs a more guided approach. It was very heavily influenced by Bethesda games, Skyrim in particular which are all about 100% player autonomy in finding what you want to do wherever at any time.

@NEStalgia BoTW certainly not RPG, I was just bringing that up because Sploosh said you’d be into it. 😀

@NEStalgia Are you really using a turn based tactical x-com game with card based elements as reason that FF should be turn based? Talk about a bit of a stretch.

@AverageGamer No, I'm not even arguing that ff needs to be turn based specifically, but it plugged into a conversation the 3 of us had yesterday about turn based games being an outdated relic vs action when they're absolutely not and this is another high profile example of that