Final Fantasy XV - General News Thread

Members see less ads - sign up now for free and join the community!

  • This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.
Jan 7, 2019
49
56
Nah cuz Episode Ardyn was initially gonna feed into the alternate ending too but they ditched all that when Dawn of The Future got scrapped. If Luna had been the first and most popular scheduled episode I think they likely would've rearranged things with it too in order to fit it in with the main game rather than the alternate timeline stuff. Luna has quite a bit of unseen canon story that could be shown to us while she travels across the land to forge the covenants for Noct.
Why did she get shafted in the first place? Was it because they couldn't think of anything to do with her in the beginning? I heard they had a whole bunch of scenes they didn't know what to do with so they were just thrown in in Chapter 12. That's why I wasn't shocked when I found out Episode Luna would be cancelled. They would quit before that content made it out!
 
Likes: Unoder

Jubileus

Warrior of Light
Oct 7, 2016
1,640
1,349
Why did she get shafted in the first place? Was it because they couldn't think of anything to do with her in the beginning? I heard they had a whole bunch of scenes they didn't know what to do with so they were just thrown in in Chapter 12. That's why I wasn't shocked when I found out Episode Luna would be cancelled. They would quit before that content made it out!
It may have been because Episode Luna could've potentially focused on alternative drivel, not canonical material. That's why she got shafted.

Alternative stuff should never be given a priority over canonical material.
 

ArbyWorks

Stiltzkin's Apprentice
Jun 3, 2018
3
2
Popping in as a lurker of Mognet, the "alternate grand finale" i don't believe is supposed to be an alternate universe. The main game itself has openings here and there for the Bro DLC, and Episode Ardyn itself appears to be set before the final battle with him (lining up with old datamined scripts where he drivels on about Ardyn anime, touching the crystal and something "turning black with anger"). The Luna DLC was likely going to be "alternate" in the sense it was to explain how she came to you on the train, how she provided the summons and why she is with Noct in the ending. Noctis's DLC itself probably elaborates further on what happened after he dies. This "alternate grand finale" was never supposed to replace the main ending, and with that in mind, it's highly likely it's meant to wrap up XV's story on a happier note. The normal ending still exists and is still canon, but the original DLC ending may have simply gone further into detail describing the post-death world that Ardyn, Luna and Noct, all parts of this alternate finale, are a part of. IT all seems like they removed things from the story to make the 2016 release, not sure if they'd ever get to touch upon Ardyn or Luna.

The base game was developed to provide players with a complete story for Noctis, the anime being content they couldn't put into the game for various reasons yet it ties in with the Bro DLC; Ardyn Anime was confirmed to be cut content, and we saw snippets of events that go down in the episode in old datamined scripts. It's likely Luna's role if included in the 2016 game would have been ultra minimal, so they cut it out entirely and set their sights on Royal Edition, a DLC not yet announced yet clearly features things that made the director consider the game "complete", including features like the Royal Vessel that were found in the datamine dating to 2016. With the key focus on Noct and Luna in the art, and the fact that Luna had animations and voice work done around EP Prompto's time, and datamined content reveals an equippable Sylleblossom that'd add her to your party (as a changeable character), she was aimed for the Royal Pack, that may have even been Episode Luna once upon a time but they decided to focus primarily on the Lucii and Noct (the reason those three Lucii are on the original cover of the game makes far more sense now). Given they once again felt like they'd be doing Luna a disservice by not telling her entire perspective and simply leaving her as playable with that summoning scene, they set their sights on another round of DLC and figured they could dedicate a whole episode to her.

They originally said Ardyn was plausible as a movie, and in the end tried to give him as DLC anyways; with the anime being made specifically because they weren't gonna be able to do the entire Ardyn story in Ardyn, we can deduce that EP: Luna and Noct were most likely definitely part of the actual story and tie in to the "verses". Regis saw a vision of what happened to Noct and changed it; in EP: Ignis Verse 2, he sees a vision of what happened to Noct and changed it. It's likely EP: Noct would have seen Noctis either changing his future after seeing a vision of how his journey is supposed to end. The book description implies Noct's DLC was supposed to be in the crystal, and in the datamine, info for Terrawars, EP Ardyn and a "Forest of Memories" was included, this before we officially had a Terrawars announcement and before we officially got EP Ardyn announced, and this forest of memories talked about Noctis witnessing memories of Luna and Regis; given they "didn't know what to do" with Luna's cutscenes, this Forest of Memories was likely where we were supposed to see all those cutscenes of Luna, as well as what Regis was doing in the city (perhaps even his POV of Ardyn's invasion). Adding on, Forest of Memories makes me think of Platinum Demo's forest, the world of dreams that belongs to Noctis.

Luna and Noct DLC were never "alternate" and non-canon to the story, they simply changed the tone of the ending by providing us with the fantastical context of the world after death; Luna wakes up after she died with an altered body, and Ardyn is a man who cannot die who can meet Noct in the crystal when he does, and Noct spent time in this cut Forest of Memories to reflect on his journey.

What say you?
 
Likes: Lord_Ham_Mork
Jan 7, 2019
49
56
The only reason I was interested in The Dawn of the Future was because I wanted to know what happens if you DO defy fate? I mean the fact that Noctis just jumps all in without any scene saying how he had no other alternative... it's just... sigh
 
Likes: Somber

Lord_Ham_Mork

AVALANCHE Warrior
Feb 23, 2018
278
475
26
Popping in as a lurker of Mognet, the "alternate grand finale" i don't believe is supposed to be an alternate universe. The main game itself has openings here and there for the Bro DLC, and Episode Ardyn itself appears to be set before the final battle with him (lining up with old datamined scripts where he drivels on about Ardyn anime, touching the crystal and something "turning black with anger"). The Luna DLC was likely going to be "alternate" in the sense it was to explain how she came to you on the train, how she provided the summons and why she is with Noct in the ending. Noctis's DLC itself probably elaborates further on what happened after he dies. This "alternate grand finale" was never supposed to replace the main ending, and with that in mind, it's highly likely it's meant to wrap up XV's story on a happier note. The normal ending still exists and is still canon, but the original DLC ending may have simply gone further into detail describing the post-death world that Ardyn, Luna and Noct, all parts of this alternate finale, are a part of. IT all seems like they removed things from the story to make the 2016 release, not sure if they'd ever get to touch upon Ardyn or Luna.

The base game was developed to provide players with a complete story for Noctis, the anime being content they couldn't put into the game for various reasons yet it ties in with the Bro DLC; Ardyn Anime was confirmed to be cut content, and we saw snippets of events that go down in the episode in old datamined scripts. It's likely Luna's role if included in the 2016 game would have been ultra minimal, so they cut it out entirely and set their sights on Royal Edition, a DLC not yet announced yet clearly features things that made the director consider the game "complete", including features like the Royal Vessel that were found in the datamine dating to 2016. With the key focus on Noct and Luna in the art, and the fact that Luna had animations and voice work done around EP Prompto's time, and datamined content reveals an equippable Sylleblossom that'd add her to your party (as a changeable character), she was aimed for the Royal Pack, that may have even been Episode Luna once upon a time but they decided to focus primarily on the Lucii and Noct (the reason those three Lucii are on the original cover of the game makes far more sense now). Given they once again felt like they'd be doing Luna a disservice by not telling her entire perspective and simply leaving her as playable with that summoning scene, they set their sights on another round of DLC and figured they could dedicate a whole episode to her.

They originally said Ardyn was plausible as a movie, and in the end tried to give him as DLC anyways; with the anime being made specifically because they weren't gonna be able to do the entire Ardyn story in Ardyn, we can deduce that EP: Luna and Noct were most likely definitely part of the actual story and tie in to the "verses". Regis saw a vision of what happened to Noct and changed it; in EP: Ignis Verse 2, he sees a vision of what happened to Noct and changed it. It's likely EP: Noct would have seen Noctis either changing his future after seeing a vision of how his journey is supposed to end. The book description implies Noct's DLC was supposed to be in the crystal, and in the datamine, info for Terrawars, EP Ardyn and a "Forest of Memories" was included, this before we officially had a Terrawars announcement and before we officially got EP Ardyn announced, and this forest of memories talked about Noctis witnessing memories of Luna and Regis; given they "didn't know what to do" with Luna's cutscenes, this Forest of Memories was likely where we were supposed to see all those cutscenes of Luna, as well as what Regis was doing in the city (perhaps even his POV of Ardyn's invasion). Adding on, Forest of Memories makes me think of Platinum Demo's forest, the world of dreams that belongs to Noctis.

Luna and Noct DLC were never "alternate" and non-canon to the story, they simply changed the tone of the ending by providing us with the fantastical context of the world after death; Luna wakes up after she died with an altered body, and Ardyn is a man who cannot die who can meet Noct in the crystal when he does, and Noct spent time in this cut Forest of Memories to reflect on his journey.

What say you?
Yeah, I was thinking about this too.
If this is what they aimed for then they made a shitty job exposing their intention and made people anger without reason.

I'm scared to read Dawn of the Future and discover I wanted the content and that I will never have it...
 
Likes: Dorothy95

ArbyWorks

Stiltzkin's Apprentice
Jun 3, 2018
3
2
Yeah, I was thinking about this too.
If this is what they aimed for then they made a shitty job exposing their intention and made people anger without reason.

I'm scared to read Dawn of the Future and discover I wanted the content and that I will never have it...
I'm certain it's a matter of being lost in translation. Plenty of things the devs have said are interpreted one way but can easily be interpreted another, but unlike the localizers who give it fluff, try to figure out better context or make sure it's completely cohesive, it's likely they simply directly translated the meaning of their words and neglected the nuances, or at least stated things in a more unflattering way.

From the get go, saying the alternate grand finale was not supposed to replace the main game's ending, I was starting to think that they were giving us canon material and delving into dreams and death, but so many people thought "alternate canon" that I believed it for a while. But rereading datamine content, the revelation of what devs have said in the past as well as speculating on what the new DLC was like (turns out the descriptions for the DLC in the novel for Luna and Noct are right on the money for my guesses), made me come to the conclusion that we were getting an expansion on the ending scene where they get married. It definitely is a happy ending for Noct all things considered, but so many people were left confused as to why it is, what is happening, how it's happening, but ultimately just went "welp, in death they are together", which is the key message but the new DLC featured a man who could not die, a woman who did die and came back, and a man who is in the very place he will give up his mortal coil and ascend. The DLC was "alternate" in the sense the main game was all real, the finale was bitter realness, a man stepping up and doing what has to be done, whereas the "alternate" grand finale was to keep the main ending, yet expand upon the phantom wedding (the cover of the upcoming novel) and provide a grand finale to the story of everybody, whereas FFXV was simply the finale to the Chosen King.

Base XV is about Noctis, but moreso about the prophecy of the Chosen King coming to fruition. The start of the journey and conclusion are featured, whereas the Episode DLC, movie and anime are all other POVs and perspectives from other characters, covering new events and providing better context. Certainly people have a new view of Iggy, knowing all during the train ride, but not at first. With Ardyn anime, imagine playing XV now with the knowledge of what the founder king was truly like and the real reason behind Ardyn's animosity. The anime itself even provides context for why he specifically killed Luna; with all that in mind, Luna DLC was probably going to provide context as to how Luna showed up when Noct was at his most broken, at his most outnumbered, and at the end, at his ascension, their wedding also being his coronation.

Noct DLC was going to provide us with his true thoughts; those three songs by Florence come to mind and with a prior theory about three alternate endings coming up before, I believe each song was to tie into what context you witnessed the ending in. There only seems to be two options in the crystal, a "Yes/No" answer where Noct begs to be let out. Theory time; Umbra was meant for this, allowing Noctis to relive his older days, doing sidequests and ultimately remembering the people of Lucis and his adventures, leading to the poignant scene of him waking up. Instead, when they realized things would be half-hearted, they opted to cut it out and streamline it rather than leave us with many events but little content, they gave us fewer events but much content. Even the questions about "Live as a King/God/Human", if they were questions in the crystal as mentioned by Sylva, it would tie into the three Florence songs, and I was thinking earlier that it was Bahamut asking how Noctis wished to live, so he could attain that after he died, leading to his DLC wherein he reflects on his life in the Forest of Memories, the world of his dreams wherein he gets to live out each fantasy to his pleasing but ultimately, must return to reality and face his fate. And then in death, he is a god, but also a king marrying his queen as Noctis the human wanted. In the end, it seems like we got it all, and it seems like the new theme that was supposed to be composed would either replace the Florence songs since the three endings went unused, or it was going to replace Stand By Me in the intro and allow the Florence songs to actually be used as proper endings; Too Much is Never Enough was utilized in a credits sequence that, for some reason, exists; now why would it, featuring many sweeping camera shots of Eos? The original Uncovered trailer from March 2016 featured similar shots that seemed to be from a different series of sweeping shots of Eos.

A lot of these rumours have basis in truth and it's possible if you squint to see what the devs intended and what they wanted to do as well as what we were supposed to get. Ultimately, it was all canon, just an alternate perspective of the grand finale.
 
Likes: Lord_Ham_Mork

Jubileus

Warrior of Light
Oct 7, 2016
1,640
1,349
It alternative non canonical material. Everyone is alive, which we know isn't possible with the canonical storyline and lore.

final_fantasy_xv_alternate_ending_dlc_2019-580x326.jpg

Also:
  • Episode II: Lunafreya – “The Choice of Freedom”
    • The story about Luna’s fate, which not even death can free her from. Her battle to save the one she loves overturns the destiny dealt to the Lucian King.

Sounds like she finds a way to keep Noctis alive.
 

Lord_Ham_Mork

AVALANCHE Warrior
Feb 23, 2018
278
475
26
It alternative non canonical material. Everyone is alive, which we know isn't possible with the canonical storyline and lore.

View attachment 1124

Also:
  • Episode II: Lunafreya – “The Choice of Freedom”
    • The story about Luna’s fate, which not even death can free her from. Her battle to save the one she loves overturns the destiny dealt to the Lucian King.

Sounds like she finds a way to keep Noctis alive.
It could be about granting Noctis an afterlife. Which we don't know why they had.

Also, it was said the illustration was ment to represent the idea of what they want.
So technically could be about everyone resting in peace even if they're not together.
 
Last edited:
Likes: Cloud_CR
Oct 30, 2016
864
1,218
It could be about granting Noctis an afterlife. Which we don't know why they had.

Also, it was said the illustration was ment to represent the idea of what they want.
So technically could be about everyone resting in peace even if they're not together.
Does the existence of an afterlife really need an explanation? The updated Chapter 12 made it pretty clear that Noct expected to see Luna again.
 
Oct 30, 2016
864
1,218
I don't need it. But the construction of this dlc could have been about this.
Considering the way the Dawn of the Future story was described, I'm not sure what sort of explanation could have been reasonably given.

Luna returns from death transformed and decides to change Noct's fate? Then what was Noct's fate supposed to be? If the characters consider the afterlife a given, why would Luna need to change Noct's fate to get him there?

The only thing I can think of that would function within the canon is if the idea of choosing between godhood and returning to life as a normal person was brought back from the earlier draft and the canon route appeared as the consequence of the former.
 

Bazztek

Knight of Death
May 26, 2014
493
1,180
Well, that settles that. Thanks!

...who am I kidding? Now the debate is going to turn into whether "Eidolon" got changed before or after 2015, isn't it? >_>;
Saying that Astral was "the name chosen" absolutely does not mean that there was never any other term considered or used prior to it. And it's patently absurd to suggest that the fact that the localization started in 2014 implies that all of the terms used in the final game were implemented in their final form at that point.

Anyway, if you want evidence that the summons were, at least at one point, called Eidolons, consider this:

Final Fantasy XV began as a Fabula Nova Crystallis game (FF Versus XIII) and was still a FNC game as of February 2014.

All FNC games called summons "Eidolons."

Over the course of 2014 and 2015, Final Fantasy XV underwent significant changes that transformed it from a game that was considered to be part of Fabula Nova Crystallis to a game that was no longer considered to be a part of Fabula Nova Crystallis as of its PAX 2015 showing.

That the term "Eidolon" doesn't appear in datamined content is not particularly suggestive, given that using Japanese terminology would have been far safer for a term with an inconsistent localization history. And, given that some of the datamined content includes Versus XIII material (where summons would have been called Eidolons), it seems like the term Eidolon might have been intentionally removed.

As such, while my only real evidence that the term Eidolon was still used in 2015 is the Gamespot article, that's considerably more than the evidence that you have provided, which consists of nothing more than free-standing assumptions and the fallacious insistence that the absence of evidence is the same as evidence of absence. If you're going to claim that the localization starting in 2014 means that all of the major terms were determined at that point and the concepts to which said terms refer have not changed since, you're gonna need some real good evidence, especially since FFXV was still FNC in early 2014.




You appear to have completely missed my point.

If the localization team was 100% certain that they were going to use Astral in the final game and they were willing to use the term without explaining what it was for in Episode Duscae, they would have explained that the Astrals were Astrals as soon as the confusion arose.... and they certainly wouldn't have failed to tell the live translator that summons were called Astrals during a post-Episode Duscae panel! There is literally zero reason for the localization team not to have made the choice clear if the localization wasn't in flux.

This contradicts your assumption that the term was in place since the localization started, but that is all the worse for your assumption, because it's far more reasonable to drop the assumption than to hold instead that the localization team was apparently too incompetent to say, "Hey, the summons are actually called Astrals" instead of simply saying that the summons weren't called Archaeans (and allowing a live translator to call them "Eidolons").

That the kennings were already in use doesn't prove that every important localization choice regarding proper nouns had been made. There's good reason to think that they weren't!




I think you misunderstand the provenance of Gamespot's information. Their article states that "director Hajime Tabata shared more details on the game's story and major features with GameSpot, including a deeper dive into footage shown during a panel at PAX Prime today."

In other words, they didn't report the information from the PAX Prime panel -- they asked Tabata exclusive questions after the panel, which is why they're the only source for a number of the things in the article.

This is important, of course, because that means that they were dealing with a different translation than the translation at the panel. Even if the same translator was used, it's possible that interpretative differences like city-vs.-town or boat-vs.-boats could have slipped in... which means that trivial details of the sort can't be used to undercut Gamespot's reliability.

As for the last bit, you're making unsubstantiated assumptions again. Given how many alterations FFXV's story went through, you literally have no evidence that the context of the painting was the same in 2014 as it was revealed to be in 2016. Some of the connections obviously remained the same -- most notably the four heroes and the knights -- but that doesn't mean that all of them are identical. To put it more pointedly, the reapers that exist in the painting no longer have any role in the game, so there were obviously at least some changes made.




I'm not being willfully ignorant. You have proven literally nothing, given that your entire argument is based on assumptions, fallacies, and irrelevant details.




The very fact that the use of "Eidolon" was considered by Gamespot to be a confirmation of the proper name for the summons is proof that the term isn't synonymous. Not to mention, if Eidolon was truly synonymous with summon, Gamespot wouldn't have felt it necessary to explain that Eidolon is "the term for creatures you can summon in Final Fantasy XV."

In other words, Gamespot didn't consider "Eidolon" synonymous with summon, therefore they did consider the live translator's use of that term sufficient to suggest to them that Eidolon was the correct term. And Gamespot is a professional outlet that knows how the Final Fantasy series works. They're not incompetent.




No matter how many times you accuse me of "basing this on nothing," it won't stop being true that practically no one who discusses FF uses the term "Eidolon" in any instance where the original game didn't choose to use it as a proper noun. Dissidia 012 is the only counter-example, and even that can be explained as Dissidia -- an official FF game in its own right -- choosing its own proper noun to use for games that didn't use a proper noun for summons.

Show me five unique instances of people who use the term "Eidolon" as a generic for FF summons in games that don't use Eidolon as a proper noun, at least two of which are professional gaming news outlets, and I'll reconsider. If you can't do that, then admit that Eidolon is always a proper noun in the context of FF as opposed to a viable generic term for summon.




Explain the reapers, then. We know they were in the game and that they were removed. They're in the painting, but we don't even know what they were intended to be.

In other words, it's easy enough to justify the angelic figure being the Oracle in the context of the final game. But there's no way to know whether the angelic figure's role in 2014 or even 2015 was the same as the role that was in 2016 because we know for a fact that the game's lore has changed since then.

And I think it's worth considering this: literally no one in 2015 questioned that the angelic figure was a goddess, and no one could have guessed anything about the Oracle's role based on the painting. From the visual symbolism perspective, the angelic figure was clearly positioned as something more than what the Oracle ended up being.




Actually, I'd argue that the Astrals' role in the lore leaves an obvious open space for some power that exists above them. The Astrals were explained to have the power of the stars (hence the name "Astral"), and yet the soul of the planet Eos (the Star) is contained within a questionably-sentient Crystal. It is very, very easy to imagine a prior draft in which the Star was sentient and produced the Astrals before falling asleep within the Crystal... and how such a role could have been determined to be unnecessary when the team sought to streamline the game's lore.

In other words, the lore might be complete without a supreme goddess now, but there's no reason to assume that such a goddess never had a role to play in the game, especially since we know that one of the roles portrayed in the painting -- that of the reapers -- was depreciated. (Based on the Gamespot article, it also seems like the game originally planned to portray the creation of its world, which would have provided a reason why such a role would have been more necessary in earlier revisions. Furthermore, the article suggested that the primary influences in FFXV's mythos were Eastern, which does not hold in the final game, so the goddess's removal might have gone hand in hand with the game's apparent decision to focus on Judeo-Christian paralles.)

As such, trivial mistranslations alone are nowhere near enough to claim that the Gamespot article reported their exclusive interview so inaccurately that the exclusive information they included should be ignored.
This will be my last reponse on this conversation since this dragged on too long.
I'm not talking about Nomura's FNC XV, I'm talking about Tabata's Cosmogony XV, FNC was removed prior to the creation of the Genesis painting which was created when Ep Duscae was being done which was in late 2014, thus no goddess above the Astrals remained. In 2014 they were still calling Nomura the director of XV in articles about the game until September 2014 when they revealed publicly he wasn't anymore, even though he was already off of XV as director since December 2013, and it was already being transitioned away from FNC when Tabata took over, of which that 2014 article is only like 2 months after that happened. Under Nomura it was going to be FNC hence what Kitase is referring to, also that same article says there wasn't "many alterations" regarding the story which we know is false since the changes to Stella and Luna plus the preproduction of Kingsglaive started in late 2013, which also meant the invasion changed already by then too, and as far anyone knew at the time Nomura was still directing XV in Feb 2014 even though he wasn't, but once the transition to Tabata happened the changes from FNC to Cosmogony already started too.

In Versus/Nomura's XV it may very well have been Eidolon and I never once said anything about this, I was specifically only talking about Tabata's XV, and by 2015 it was already not FNC anymore anyway hence the Cosmogony lore and terminology instead. And those "reapers" in the Genesis painting are simply black cloaked figures doing the bidding of the King above, almost like in figures in black that do the bidding of the king in XV, like the Kingsglaive are, which btw started production in late 2013 during the transitional period between Nomura and Tabata, and them changing Stella to Luna was also tied to them changing FNC to Cosmogony, and we now know the Stella to Luna changed happened in late 2013 too, Tabata's XV was not FNC, we only didn't learn that it wasn't FNC anymore until mid 2015 since no one had even asked Tabata about it until then.

I posted a direct quote from the localization head saying that they established the ground work terms early on with his reasoning for why, as in for Tabata's XV's localization which did start in 2014 as the VA's confirmed this too, in Ep Duscae Ignis even directly refers to Ramuh as a god after Noctis summons him, and both Ray Chase and Amy Shiels confirmed that they started dub work in 2014, which is also known as localization, not to mention the first dub trailer was them dubbing the TGS 2014 trailer too. If things for Versus/Nomura's XV were translated and in game data that has nothing to do with what I was arguing regarding Cosmogony terminology and is besides the point.

And since you asked, here is two professional gaming publications that still called the summons in XV "Eidolons" after it was already stated and confirmed to be Astral publicly, and even an article from 2018 calling Carbuncle an Eidolon in XV.

Here's some stuff I found after a quick google search.

https://www.usgamer.net/articles/what-we-think-of-final-fantasy-xv-over-one-year-later
From 2018
Noct's guardian Eidolon, Carbuncle,
From June 2016 during E3 with the Titan demo, 2 months after an interview had them state the summon term is Astral
https://www.vg247.com/2016/06/15/final-fantasy-15-hands-on-demo-is-really-clumsy/
Noctis and his band of incredibly well-dressed cohorts take on Titan, an iconic Final Fantasy Eidolon beast
And that was 2 months after this interview from the Uncovered event had them directly state the summon term in XV is Astral

And some other random posts google search showed of people calling XV summons Eidolons even after the game was out.

From 2017
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/932981-final-fantasy-xv/74794706
How do I summon other eidolon's?
From 2017
https://www.resetera.com/threads/fi...ugh-the-power-of-friendship.6232/#post-987851
I also hope we get to fight Eidolons.
Hell this dude even called Terra an Eidolon, even though she's called Esper!
https://steamcommunity.com/app/637650/discussions/0/1697167168518608072/#c1697167168518706418
Terra is an eidolon too.
tbh I can stop this whole summon name thingo

eidolon was used in some old data but doesnt apply to current game. current game data just uses summons, then gods, six, astrals.

I don't think this really needed a big thing about it.
Thanks for confirming.
 
Last edited:
Likes: NoxFleuret

Storm

Warrior of Light
Oct 26, 2013
2,945
4,958
27
every segment so far in daylight Insomnia shows 13:00 always, then 16:00 during Regis boss fight and 17:00 during Somnus fight.

I think that implies there wont be a real-time passage of time (I think it was the same in Ep Ignis), it will only change depending of story context. I think that makes sense considering both Ep Ardyn and Ignis covers a single day event, even then I wanted to enjoy Insomnia at different times of day and contexts since I waited 13 years for it lmao
 
Jan 9, 2017
853
1,010
every segment so far in daylight Insomnia shows 13:00 always, then 16:00 during Regis boss fight and 17:00 during Somnus fight.

I think that implies there wont be a real-time passage of time (I think it was the same in Ep Ignis), it will only change depending of story context. I think that makes sense considering both Ep Ardyn and Ignis covers a single day event, even then I wanted to enjoy Insomnia at different times of day and contexts since I waited 13 years for it lmao
Yeah, maybe. I wouldn't mind that as long as they don't lock up any of the city when we get to the Regis or Somnus fights, or I'll have to make a separate file before those so I could continue strolling around Insomnia. One thing about Episode Ignis other than the alternate ending was the fact that the save file was saved at the point where you make a choice between fighting Ardyn in the altar or get taken to Zegnautus Keep, locking Altissia away, and lost the grappling hook. I hope the DLC won't lock me out of the city like Ignis' DLC did with locking up Altissia, otherwise I would be irritated that I would need to make another save file, though I wouldn't mind playing as Ardyn more, there's a good thing there.
 
Last edited:
Oct 30, 2016
864
1,218
I'm not talking about Nomura's FNC XV, I'm talking about Tabata's Cosmogony XV, FNC was removed prior to the creation of the Genesis painting which was created when Ep Duscae was being done which was in late 2014, thus no goddess above the Astrals remained.
You need to stop using circular reasoning.

The crux of the disagreement is about whether there could have been -- as the Gamespot article stated -- a supreme goddess in Tabata's mythos as it was originally conceived, who was later removed from the mythos before the game released.

The removal of FNC is not a defense against that claim; it's actually a prerequisite for it. As such, it is a fallacy to imply that the removal of FNC before the creation of the Genesis painting means that the Genesis painting can't be portraying a supreme goddess -- you're assuming that which you're obligated to prove.

In 2014 they were still calling Nomura the director of XV in articles about the game until September 2014 when they revealed publicly he wasn't anymore, even though he was already off of XV as director since December 2013, and it was already being transitioned away from FNC when Tabata took over, of which that 2014 article is only like 2 months after that happened. Under Nomura it was going to be FNC hence what Kitase is referring to, also that same article says there wasn't "many alterations" regarding the story which we know is false since the changes to Stella and Luna plus the preproduction of Kingsglaive started in late 2013, which also meant the invasion changed already by then too, and as far anyone knew at the time Nomura was still directing XV in Feb 2014 even though he wasn't, but once the transition to Tabata happened the changes from FNC to Cosmogony already started too.
Are you implying that the interview from the article is all bad information that can't be used?

In Versus/Nomura's XV it may very well have been Eidolon and I never once said anything about this, I was specifically only talking about Tabata's XV, and by 2015 it was already not FNC anymore anyway hence the Cosmogony lore and terminology instead.
It doesn't matter whether you were talking about Nomura XV or Tabata XV. My point was that if summons were called Eidolons earlier in development under either director, that could explain the translator's use of the term.

And those "reapers" in the Genesis painting are simply black cloaked figures doing the bidding of the King above, almost like in figures in black that do the bidding of the king in XV, like the Kingsglaive are, which btw started production in late 2013 during the transitional period between Nomura and Tabata, and them changing Stella to Luna was also tied to them changing FNC to Cosmogony, and we now know the Stella to Luna changed happened in late 2013 too, Tabata's XV was not FNC, we only didn't learn that it wasn't FNC anymore until mid 2015 since no one had even asked Tabata about it until then.
Are you seriously suggesting that the reapers in the painting were meant to represent the Kingsglaive back in 2014?

It's worth pointing out that they don't just show up in that one painting. One appears in another concept art from Episode Duscae:



And several others appear in another concept art that was shown in an FFXV artbook:



The obvious inference to make based on the three concept artworks is that the reapers were intended to serve in the role of the Old Wall, but the Old Wall was redesigned to take the form of armored kings (probably because of China's hangups with death).

I posted a direct quote from the localization head saying that they established the ground work terms early on with his reasoning for why, as in for Tabata's XV's localization which did start in 2014 as the VA's confirmed this too, in Ep Duscae Ignis even directly refers to Ramuh as a god after Noctis summons him, and both Ray Chase and Amy Shiels confirmed that they started dub work in 2014, which is also known as localization, not to mention the first dub trailer was them dubbing the TGS 2014 trailer too. If things for Versus/Nomura's XV were translated and in game data that has nothing to do with what I was arguing regarding Cosmogony terminology and is besides the point.
Establishing the ground work isn't the same as having everything set in stone. I'm not arguing that the localization choices weren't mostly in place in 2014. I'm saying that it's not implausible that some changes were made after that initial ground work was completed, especially since the shift away from FNC appears to have been bit-by-bit rather than all at once in other ways (see again: the reapers).

And since you asked, here is two professional gaming publications that still called the summons in XV "Eidolons" after it was already stated and confirmed to be Astral publicly, and even an article from 2018 calling Carbuncle an Eidolon in XV.


Here's some stuff I found after a quick google search.


https://www.usgamer.net/articles/what-we-think-of-final-fantasy-xv-over-one-year-later


From 2018


From June 2016 during E3 with the Titan demo, 2 months after an interview had them state the summon term is Astral


https://www.vg247.com/2016/06/15/final-fantasy-15-hands-on-demo-is-really-clumsy/


And that was 2 months after this interview from the Uncovered event had them directly state the summon term in XV is Astral


Now here's the million dollar question: would that have happened if a professional translator didn't call the Astrals Eidolons before their real name was revealed?

I wonder whether you could find an instance of GFs or Aeons being called Eidolons by professional outlets... or, on the flip side, an instance of non-Esper summons being called Espers.

And some other random posts google search showed of people calling XV summons Eidolons even after the game was out.


From 2017


https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/932981-final-fantasy-xv/74794706


From 2017


https://www.resetera.com/threads/fi...ugh-the-power-of-friendship.6232/#post-987851


Hell this dude even called Terra an Eidolon, even though she's called Esper!


https://steamcommunity.com/app/637650/discussions/0/1697167168518608072/#c1697167168518706418
The last one is a perfect example of random internet posters literally not caring what they say, not a proper example of Eidolon being used generically. XD

Anyway, I'll accept that Eidolon is currently being used as a practical generic by some fans, the way that some people will go to Burger King and order a Big Mac. I seriously doubt that a professional outlet would make that same mistake in the absence of confounding factors (like an official translator using the term).

Thanks for confirming.
Confirming exactly what you said you needed to believe that Astrals were once called Eidolons, you mean? ;)
 
Likes: Vallen