Game aspects that really annoy you

[Sheikah]

Honestly, I think it "spoiled" a lot of gamers in a bad way and now they can't see or enjoy a story unless they spoon feed it like a baby, which is obvious when seeing people say FFXII has no story. I applaud them for taking a different route with a more political plot and a believable war and invasions going on and it's certainly my favourite 3D FF.

(not talking about just ff now, but storytelling so it's ontopic)

 

Old replying to this, I know, but I have to say that in your post you pretty much dwelled on the aspects that I disliked the game for. Like you said, you applaud them for making the plot more political and believable, but that's exactly what fantasy isn't. Fantasy isn't supposed to be like some sort of political war that handles the story through military means and battle-summary narative. Final Fantasy has made its name by creating often different games but pertaining to the realm of fantasy (except, perhaps, FFT - part of the XII series anyway).

 

I'm not saying that XII didn't have a story. I'm just saying it had a very watery story that, no matter how you look at it, was as thin as a paper bag that had been dipped in the sea and dried out. Going over old words here, but the character interaction was minimal, their development even weaker and the dungeons were sparcely broken up.

 

But hey, there must be a reason why VI-IX are positively lapped up compared to X-XII. Maybe the story is cheesey to some, but most people found them endearing and come back to them again and again.

[Noku]

Indestructibility of things. I want to shoot through doors, blast my way through walls if I don't wanna solve a puzzle, and make houses crumble with their residents still inside. No game has this, and even Crysis did not deliver on it's physics promises (blow up shanties? hurray...)

[Chris the great]

it is annoying when you have to go through and solve some stupid puzzle, when you could asily blow the door down. hell, i could kick the door down. im not some super soilder and if i could smash that door to tooth picks, why isnt capt blood bath doing the same? is there a virtual rules of engagment for doors?

[Hellfire]

Old replying to this, I know, but I have to say that in your post you pretty much dwelled on the aspects that I disliked the game for. Like you said, you applaud them for making the plot more political and believable, but that's exactly what fantasy isn't. Fantasy isn't supposed to be like some sort of political war that handles the story through military means and battle-summary narative. Final Fantasy has made its name by creating often different games but pertaining to the realm of fantasy (except, perhaps, FFT - part of the XII series anyway).

 

I'm not saying that XII didn't have a story. I'm just saying it had a very watery story that, no matter how you look at it, was as thin as a paper bag that had been dipped in the sea and dried out. Going over old words here, but the character interaction was minimal, their development even weaker and the dungeons were sparcely broken up.

 

But hey, there must be a reason why VI-IX are positively lapped up compared to X-XII. Maybe the story is cheesey to some, but most people found them endearing and come back to them again and again.

Fantasy is supposed to be whatever it wants to be, thing is, there are character interactionsand development. Some even mean more to me than FFX and even (don't hit me) some VII characters.

 

Most people find it more endearing and say it has more/less story because their definition of story clings on the usual "HEY THAT GUY IS GOING TO DESTROY THE WORLD, I LOVE YOU AHAHAHAH, MY DAD IS GOING TO KILL US ALL" and can't even understand what goes one if things aren't like this. Again, I don't think the story is thin, nor is the character development, there's lots of stuff there, in fact it has more details and inticracies than other FFs, you just need to look for them and think.

 

Ignoring politics as a story saying they're not supposed to be in a fantasy game is an incredibely long shot, not to mention all the motifs in the game, orphans, war, racism, rebellion, freedom, betrayal, etc...

 

I'm saying people can't even get the story and characters unless things are explained to them like they're idiots. I'd say that orphans going on an adventure with a knight branded traitor wrongly, a badass sky pirate, a Viera who abandoned her race and traditions to see the world, a weak princess fighting for her country (cliché, yes) and scientists and maniacs trying to control the power of ancient beings/Gods is still Final Fantasy, just because we're not bombarded with FMVs every damn time doesn't mean it's not. Also, not that the dungeons were sparcely broken up, they weren't, but still, they don't define an FF, seriously what the hell is that, what does it matter if you're in a dungeon, outdoors or in a palace? Of the 3D FFs I only played VII, X and XII and I honestly say the only one I really really enjoyed was XII. Final Fantasy doesn't need the whole damn planet to be on the verge of utter anihilation every damn time. Seriously, it's time to change, but I do understand people prefering the series to keep being more prone to more linearity, easy thrills and tearjearkers and cinmeatics, but to me, this was a fantastic way to go.

 

 

And while this is talking about FFXII, it's pertinent to the topic because the quality of storytelling and writing has been evolving at a very slow pace and it does get annoying. I don't require great stories from my games and rarely do they affect most of the enjoyment I get from them, but you'd guess things would get better.

[Aalborg]

worst contender in that field was my mum, in the middle of a boss fight in MGS4, she decides to say snake has a big bum.

 

your mum

 

let's just hope Snake didn't hear it.. he would probably refuse to come out from his cardboard box

[Sheikah]

Most people find it more endearing and say it has more/less story because their definition of story clings on the usual "HEY THAT GUY IS GOING TO DESTROY THE WORLD, I LOVE YOU AHAHAHAH, MY DAD IS GOING TO KILL US ALL" and can't even understand what goes one if things aren't like this. Again, I don't think the story is thin, nor is the character development, there's lots of stuff there, in fact it has more details and inticracies than other FFs, you just need to look for them and think.

 

I don't see how they can be credited for depth. The interaction and development really was lacking. As I've said, Penelo never even broke into a conversation with many of the other characters, and neither did some of the others. We don't even know a thing about the past of Penelo, Ashe (other than her feigned suicide) or Vaan (bar being a street urchin), and little about the others. Here's Balthier's story - "I used to be a judge once, Cid is my dad." He expanded it by just a fraction, but this was just an absolute joke of some sort of character past history. Fran was similar (we know she used to live solely in the forest, but then was expelled), and Basch was probably the best explained, but still poorly.

 

Honestly, politics is boring. You know that, I know that, and that's why most people our age don't care for it. Maybe you actually do, but most don't, I think it's fair to say. It's the reason why so many young people don't turn up to vote, or even care to. To put it in a game... something intended for entertainment purposes, isn't going to please a lot of fans. And yes, FF games usually involve your party causing the most disrupt and not the military, but that is exactly what fans want. And, coincidentally, why games that just do that are the most favoured Final Fantasy games of all time.

 

Ignoring politics as a story saying they're not supposed to be in a fantasy game is an incredibely long shot, not to mention all the motifs in the game, orphans, war, racism, rebellion, freedom, betrayal, etc...

 

The examples of these themes in the game were incredibly few, short or insignificant (bar perhaps betrayal, but honestly- which RPGs aren't throwing out double-twists in them these days), which is another point I'm making. In FFXII you can't say "it didn't have one example of this", since it probably did. It probably had one or two short examples, but overall the amount of dialogue and depth of the characters was pitiful.

 

I'm saying people can't even get the story and characters unless things are explained to them like they're idiots. I'd say that orphans going on an adventure with a knight branded traitor wrongly, a badass sky pirate, a Viera who abandoned her race and traditions to see the world, a weak princess fighting for her country (cliché, yes) and scientists and maniacs trying to control the power of ancient beings/Gods is still Final Fantasy, just because we're not bombarded with FMVs every damn time doesn't mean it's not.

 

Just to point out, FFXII had plenty of FMVs. It might have been nice to know how 'badass' a sky pirate Balthier was, but unfortunately due to lack of development (see what I'm saying here) we just have to take his word for it. Basch had the best story going, and was stupidly turned down for the role of lead character in favour of Vaan - a 'choirboy' pretty boy who will no doubt star in erotic manga for years to come. Sigh.

 

Also, not that the dungeons were sparcely broken up, they weren't, but still, they don't define an FF, seriously what the hell is that, what does it matter if you're in a dungeon, outdoors or in a palace?

 

Because the lack of dungeons being broken up by dialogue just turned the game into more of a dungeon crawler with specific checkpoints - e.g. "Reach the final room of 3F", at which point you would fight a boss, view the victory scene and view a short cutscene (if you're lucky) before proceeding to the next field/dungeon. People may like that, but it's just not Final Fantasy.

 

Of the 3D FFs I only played VII, X and XII and I honestly say the only one I really really enjoyed was XII. Final Fantasy doesn't need the whole damn planet to be on the verge of utter anihilation every damn time. Seriously, it's time to change, but I do understand people prefering the series to keep being more prone to more linearity, easy thrills and tearjearkers and cinmeatics, but to me, this was a fantastic way to go.

 

In FFX there was no danger to the entire planet, as it was more or less a disaster that wiped out groups of people in the times when Sin had been reborn. They'd survived (with moderate numbers) 1,000 years up to the point that Tidus turned up, so it seemed as if it wasn't on the 'verge of utter anihilation'. FFX dwelled more on suffering and false hope, rather than any impending doom. Seymour did have an objective that could have caused trouble, but it is unlikely that he would have been any different to anyone else turned into Sin. He'd have just been used.

 

FFVII, however, did have the verge of annihilation aspect, but that was well covered as Sephiroth had a clear objective. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but the whole world was threatened by Vayne Solidor, who aims to take over the entire of Ivalice through use of manufactured nethicite. So even FFXII, it seems, uses the 'world is screwed' threat.

 

FFVII, I thought, had one of the best stories going for a video game. I agree that FFXII left you having to go over the story again, but for me this was more or less due to the fact that the names used for everything in FFXII sounded foreign and difficult to remember. In FFVII, you might read over things due to not understanding the plot first time (with regards to Cloud's made up past - surprisingly a lot of my friends, when questioned, couldn't tell me the proper story of FFVII and probably hadn't grasped it first time).

 

I really think you should go and at least play Final Fantasy IX, as it is a true masterpiece. It's like a traditional Final Fantasy with all the themes you could hope for, with characters that have meaning and development to them (except one, included pretty much for comical purposes). Final Fantasy IX includes heavy use of military factions (and boy is that important) while not detracting from the feel of Fantasy or the importance of your main party. I don't know anyone who disliked FFIX, as it really is that magical. I'd recommend it to anyone.

 

[darksnowman]

Chris the great: thats hilarious man. I can't think of any times that something similar may have happened to me, but your experience there would trump anything.

 

Sheikah and Hellfire: I'm enjoying the debate you have going on, keep it coming. : peace:

[Hellfire]

I do indeed need to play VIII and IX when I have the time, IX calls to me a lot. And I don't feel like going over XIIs story, but it's quite obvious you didn't catch on lots of stuff that were there, since you require obvious interaction between characters (read unrealistic dialogue which is more like a narration) and explanations, which is exactly my point.

 

I viewed Penelo and Ash as simply a link to the story, kind of representing the young, unexperienced player in the face of such huge events. We knew they were orphans that worked for Miguelo and that Vaan was a pickpocket and lost his brother in the coup and that was his connection to the events going around. Not exactly interesting characters, but I loved the rest of the cast except for Ashe which was pretty much a generic princess, although some of her actions that required a steel fist were pretty interesting, mainly the deal she rejected from the Ocuria. Basch is, as you said, a great character, used as a pawn and thrown away, betrayed by his twin brother (and still forgives him in the end) and still fights for what he believes instead of going the usual "I was thrown away I'm going bitter" route.

I love the way you simplify Balthier's story to make it seem simple. We're talking about a pirate, a smuggler and a bandit that's in it mostly for the money, goes against the Empire and is reckless (Han Solo anyone?) and that was once a huge figure of authority and his father is a genious that works for the Empire, I honestly don't know how that's a joke and how that doesn't show he's a badass. Not to mention his relationship with Fran, which is handled very very well, instead of making them make out in your face, everything is very subtle and plays out great in the end. Also, the bounty hunters after him, the conversations about him being a playa and whatnot and the role he ends up playing in Vaans life, like a mentor. Fran wasn't expelled, she chose to abandon the ways of her tribe, losing the ability to speak with the forest. Also, Larsa, Vayne, Gabranth, Ghis, Cid, Vossler, Ondore, Venat etc... All very interesting characters. You say other's story was toned down for Vaan but it's obvious they make the point of making Vaan just a small cog in the wheel, the opposite of what you're saying. And for the record, I really don't like Vaan either.

 

All those motifs were, I mean, how much more do you need than 2 main characters that lost their family because of war, orphans everywhere, a betrayed and murdered king, a princess on the lamb with a murdered husband mounting a rebellion, hell the whole game is about rebellion with the ominous authority figures everywhere, like the judges and the soldiers policing the cities and the dialogues ripe with clear distinctions between races, showing racism issues.

 

Why should I find politics boring. Seriously, it's not like we're talking about vote counts and boring real life political crap, we're talking about coups, invasions, war, etc... The planet threat was an hyperbole, but it's good to see a plot where the imediate threat is for a handful of countries, instead of something so outrageously huge as Sin or Jenova (nothing wrong with that, it's just good to change), even if with Nethicite, things could go to hell, the lack of melodrama and exaregation was a breath of fresh air.

 

That dungeon argument doesn't even make sense, the game was much less linear than any other FF, which highly discouraged going out of the fixed path and so, you say you leave a dungeon, fight a boss, go to a field, etc... Useful to lump field and dungeon in the same category, it's way of ignoring that they're completely different things that made the game the opposite of what you're saying: it's not dungeon oriented and you don't have to do things in the manner you speak of, much the opposite. I was always travelling all around the world going lots of places, finding stuff, hunting for rare monsters etc, I saw nothing of this dungeon crawler game you speak of.

 

I understand what you're saying and why, but I just can't agree, because I love this kind of storytelling, it's something that's purely taste driven. The story itself is nothing special, but the fact remains that I still felt a lot about the characters and understood them and they clicked for me, so if me and others found things (although the majority feels the way you do), it means that it isn't paper thin, you just need to look at it from another perspective, it just might not be what everyone likes.

 

 

[Grazza]

It's odd, I agree with Hellfire's assertion that subtle, implicit stories are best (not done better than in ICO or Shadow of the Colossus, in my opinion), but I agree with Sheikah's opinion of Final Fantasy XII in general.

 

The Gambit system was so complicated, it was like writing A.I. It would have been better if the programmers took care of that and offered simpler commands such as "Focus on Healing", "Use Magic Attacks", "Use Physical Attacks" etc, then the character would just behave appropriately and use the appropriate weapon. In reality, you had to equip a bow or magic attack every time you encountered flying enemies. I've nothing against real-time combat, but it actually made the game less smooth than turn-based.

 

Secondly, the Licence Board had too much choice, with every character being able to do the same thing. I don't think a Licence Board is needed at all.

 

Thirdly, there were too many characters. I'd have settled for Balthier and Fran (the two best), plus the main character, plus either a 4th character or the various guest characters that appear along the way. The engine could only cope with four characters at once, yet you had six to choose from (sometimes only being able to have three of your own party, due to a guest).

 

Fourthly, well, it was just a bit arduous moving about, with sparse save points, gargantuan areas etc. I think someone said it was like an MMORPG, which makes a lot of sense.

 

Fifthly, I spent three or four days in certain areas, grinding to be able to afford the latest weapons. Partly my fault, because I wasn't using "Steal", but it still took a long time. I seem to remember getting stuck in the Western desert (with all the high walkways) and the Caribbean beach for days.

 

FFXII was my first Final Fantasy. I've since played FFIII, which I enjoyed an awful lot more, and I look forward to trying FFIV.

 

 

[darksnowman]

I'll chip in:

 

I think someone said it was like an MMORPG, which makes a lot of sense.

 

Yep, XII shared alot in common with MMORPGs due to FF XI being one. They tried to take the experience they gained with FF XI and apply it to a single player FF game.

 

[Hellfire]

We weren't really talking about the gameplay now, although I also loved the gambit system and combat, it made things incredibly less boring. You could choose not to use gambits, be moderate in their use (what I did) or go overkill and have loads of gambits, I really liked it, it made everything so dynamic. Need healing, OK heal automatically, find a flying enemy? Use magic or a specific kind of weapon, etc... It was great And yeah, you should have used steal, it's very important :P Also, the things you say like "focus on physical attacks" and whatnot were there too :P

I agree that the license board takes away individuality, but it's pretty much like FFX, when you finish your character's "part" of the board, you can branch out into other parts making your party flexible, not to mention each charatcter already had base stats that made them better with their "default" weapons. I always had Vaan and Basch with swords, Balthier with guns, Fran with bows, etc...

I honestly can't see huge areas as a con in this game, much the opposite it was a huge plus for me, in a well made RPG with no random battles I want a huge places to explore and XII delivered it. Having many characters and choosing only a few is pretty normal, maybe you didn't play a lot of RPGs.

 

[Sheikah]

I do indeed need to play VIII and IX when I have the time, IX calls to me a lot. And I don't feel like going over XIIs story, but it's quite obvious you didn't catch on lots of stuff that were there, since you require obvious interaction between characters (read unrealistic dialogue which is more like a narration) and explanations, which is exactly my point.

 

I viewed Penelo and Ash as simply a link to the story, kind of representing the young, unexperienced player in the face of such huge events. We knew they were orphans that worked for Miguelo and that Vaan was a pickpocket and lost his brother in the coup and that was his connection to the events going around. Not exactly interesting characters, but I loved the rest of the cast except for Ashe which was pretty much a generic princess, although some of her actions that required a steel fist were pretty interesting, mainly the deal she rejected from the Ocuria.

 

Basch is, as you said, a great character, used as a pawn and thrown away, betrayed by his twin brother (and still forgives him in the end) and still fights for what he believes instead of going the usual "I was thrown away I'm going bitter" route.

 

Which is unfortunately a big gripe I have with the game- that they didn't make him the main character. It's just silly, really.

 

I love the way you simplify Balthier's story to make it seem simple. We're talking about a pirate, a smuggler and a bandit that's in it mostly for the money, goes against the Empire and is reckless (Han Solo anyone?)

 

You simplified the story of other Final Fantasies by saying something like "OMG THE WORLD IS DOOMED", so I kinda returned the favour. I think your simplification was somewhat worse, considering the story of FFVII is complex compared to your sentence. I really don't think I was oversimplifying too much...Balthier really did admit he was a judge in a brief sentence or two, which was pretty ridiculous. Smuggler, sky pirate and whatnot - apart from the beginning of the game where he went for the same treasure that Vaan did, we just have to take his word that he's such a badass. To be honest, he seemed like a nice guy who wanted to help Vaan out from the start and didn't seem badass at all.

 

and that was once a huge figure of authority and his father is a genious that works for the Empire, I honestly don't know how that's a joke and how that doesn't show he's a badass.

 

Because we are only told that he is a sky pirate - no seeing of past events (stupidity on their part - Final Fantasy VII and VIII did flashbacks brilliantly); we were merely communicated that a) he was once a judge, b) Cid was his father (yet, funnily enough, there is reasonably little conversation between him and his dad during fights), and c) Sky pirates go in search of treasure (shown once when he went for the treasure at the beginning). Again, lack of conversation between party members and character development (drawing on the fact this was more of an offline MMORPG, once again) led to most of the characters being particularly lacking, never mind 'badass'.

 

Not to mention his relationship with Fran, which is handled very very well, instead of making them make out in your face, everything is very subtle and plays out great in the end.

:p I love how subtle is being used as a term to describe how there was never much there. The whole game was very subtle, wasn't it? We were never really told everything, because not much was told at all!

 

Also, the bounty hunters after him, the conversations about him being a playa and whatnot and the role he ends up playing in Vaans life, like a mentor. Fran wasn't expelled, she chose to abandon the ways of her tribe, losing the ability to speak with the forest.

 

Both- once she left she was never allowed to return for good. She couldn't hear the forest anymore due to choosing to leave, I believe.

 

Also, Larsa, Vayne, Gabranth, Ghis, Cid, Vossler, Ondore, Venat etc... All very interesting characters. You say other's story was toned down for Vaan but it's obvious they make the point of making Vaan just a small cog in the wheel, the opposite of what you're saying. And for the record, I really don't like Vaan either.

 

I suppose the whole of my argument with this game just falls down to the lack of dialogue, character interaction and whatnot. Gabranth, again, could have been developed so much more. He killed off Reks at the beginning and then appeared properly much later on, for you to defeat him and for him to quickly turn sides. Cid was interesting as he was the bad guy, but again, lacked time on the screen! There were far more characters in this game with a larger division of the time to shine given to each one, combined with the fact there were less cutscenes anyway. For the record, I found Vayne to be a fairly poor character. He was just so...meh. He looked as if they'd just ripped Seymour out of FFX, too.

 

All those motifs were, I mean, how much more do you need than 2 main characters that lost their family because of war, orphans everywhere, a betrayed and murdered king, a princess on the lamb with a murdered husband mounting a rebellion, hell the whole game is about rebellion with the ominous authority figures everywhere, like the judges and the soldiers policing the cities and the dialogues ripe with clear distinctions between races, showing racism issues.

 

You make it sound like a lot, but you've just managed to summarise their background in a few lines. If I was to summarise just the background of Cloud Strife, I wouldn't be able to do that in the number of lines you've used for most of the characters there. Motifs just simply aren't good enough. Simply stating in the game that Vaan and Penelo are orphans does not mean they've put work into making a good story. It just means they stated something. For each character, it seems as if one main thing happens, yet in most FF games each character often goes through numerous things. For example, Ashe is dethroned and her newly-wed killed. Basche is betrayed. Balthier became a sky pirate after being a judge (something that was stated, not even demonstrated). Fran left the forest and joined up with Balthier (stated), Penelo had no use, Vaan had no use. To me, it seemed like a fairly weak cast. And as you say, Ashe was weak, and she was the main driving point of the story.

 

Why should I find politics boring. Seriously, it's not like we're talking about vote counts and boring real life political crap, we're talking about coups, invasions, war, etc... The planet threat was an hyperbole, but it's good to see a plot where the imediate threat is for a handful of countries, instead of something so outrageously huge as Sin or Jenova (nothing wrong with that, it's just good to change), even if with Nethicite, things could go to hell, the lack of melodrama and exaregation was a breath of fresh air.

 

The disaster your party had to stop in FFXII was the artificial production of a technology for use by a dictator to conquer or destroy the world. You're right in saying that some people don't manage to follow the story. Luckily I did, so I could see that this game used the same 'OMG the world is doomed' kind of cliché ultimatum like all the others. This game just went about it in a different, although in my opinion, worse, way.

 

I suppose you are right about the 'huge' disasters. But perhaps trying FFIX would change your mind, as the main disaster is more or less caused through cunning than any one weapon. The political argument though...heh, it felt a lot like I was watching a Star Wars film for quite a chunk of the opening. From the airship fights to the foreign-seeming political meetings between groups. I really dislike Star Wars.

 

That dungeon argument doesn't even make sense, the game was much less linear than any other FF, which highly discouraged going out of the fixed path and so, you say you leave a dungeon, fight a boss, go to a field, etc... Useful to lump field and dungeon in the same category, it's way of ignoring that they're completely different things that made the game the opposite of what you're saying: it's not dungeon oriented and you don't have to do things in the manner you speak of, much the opposite. I was always travelling all around the world going lots of places, finding stuff, hunting for rare monsters etc, I saw nothing of this dungeon crawler game you speak of.

 

I thought it made sense. The game basically involved far too much dungeon/field map after dungeon/field map. It wasn't broken up as much by dialogue and so felt as if you were generally just dungeon crawling. To add to that, the dungeons were overly large and at the end of the monotonous routine of reaching a specific room on the map and fighting said boss, you'd see a victory scene and if you're lucky some short dialogue. The game was just as linear (bar perhaps FFX) in the fact that you had places you needed to go and travelled in a path. There were some out of the way places for sidequests, but that's not so different to other games. At least we can say that the dungeon process was linear in the fashion that you went through it and fought a boss. I also must comment on treasure boxes...what were they all about? They always contained complete crap (except some of the rare weapons like the Excalibur). I liked how in games such as FFIX the treasure chest on-screen would add purpose to fully exploring areas.

 

I understand what you're saying and why, but I just can't agree, because I love this kind of storytelling, it's something that's purely taste driven. The story itself is nothing special, but the fact remains that I still felt a lot about the characters and understood them and they clicked for me, so if me and others found things (although the majority feels the way you do), it means that it isn't paper thin, you just need to look at it from another perspective, it just might not be what everyone likes.

 

I understand, as there are quite a few people who do defend FFXII (and similarly, Final Fantasy Tactics) and this political method of going about the story. It just wasn't for me, and I guess a lot of people (opinion polls). But that doesn't mean a thing if it was great in your eyes. One thing I will say about FFXII is that it was more grown up than the previous games, but a small part of me doesn't want these games to completely grow up. I suppose to me, a fantasy game is required to be something a fairy tale.

 

I've actually really enjoyed discussing this, as it's not often you can hold a discussion with someone before it breaks down into some ridiculous angry spamfest (from past experience).

 

[Gentleben]

Moving away from FF for a moment something that bothered me about Disaster Day of Crisis. I'II spoiler it just in case:

 

[spoiler=]"During the later part of the Volcano level then the smoke/ash is very heavy. There's a fair bit of talking with Iris and you have to move a crane to gain acess to a higher part of the level. Once I climbed up I kept passing out from too much smoke in my lungs. I had to keep replaying the level and listen to Whiny Iris talking. (at least 3/4 times)

 

 

So basically the aspect that annoys me is having to rewatch cut scenes/listen to long winded character speechs again that you can't skip/turn off.

[Hellfire]

We're just starting to repeat ourselves, but it's apparent that you want cutscenes and flashbacks to show things and stating them obviously hence always asking for dialogues, while I prefer things to be implied and not obvious, it's just much more believable. It's a matter of taste I suppose, but I still think you're still oversimplifying it.

 

Why do I need to see Balthier in a Judge suit to believe he was a Judge and why do I need to see his past pirate work when we see him in the present smuggling stuff and being hunted by bounty hunters? I don't think and I don't want every game to resort to cutscenes to tell everything, I very much like the majority of the story to be told through the characters present point of view. Gabranth was shown as a man with regrets for betraying his brother, he even abandoned his name when Basch abandoned him and their mother, he acts as an informant and Larsa's protector and he shows that despite fighting for Archadia he doesn't like Vayne. Cid's talks with Venat were very interesting and the Judge's stances regarding Vayne and Larsa also added a lot of depth to the story. I just don't feel like writing a backstory on all the characters it doesn't mean it's not there, but I'm also not implying their story is better than Cloud's.

 

On one hand you criticize characters for being stated with dialogue as one thing as being bad, on the other hand you prefer the kind of story telling where they state everything all the time, whether through exagerated dialogue or sometimes pointless cutscenes. I'm noy saying to abolish cutscenes and flashbacks, but they're not always needed to give story and characters depth. See where I'm getting at? What XII did great with their characters was that things were there to be picked up, a lot of them, even if someone understands the story, it doesn't mean they picked up on the details and I really like that.

 

I've played the game when it came out, so I don't remember every detail and cutscene, but seeing Vaan resorting to stealing (which was a very important ability that you learned early on), working for a Baanga to make a living with lots of orphans scattered throughout the city and the dialogue with the various NPCs made it feel real, the feeling that many were lost in war and many others were left alone was there. The boring tasks he had to do, the underground sections of the city, the sewers, and the imperial soliders in the cities was everywhere made the feeling of oppression strong and gave reason for Vaan to want an escape, i.e being a sky pirate. I even remember cutscenes where a simple look a character gave the others told more than a lot of words could in a much more efficient manner.

 

The world is doomed example isn't meant as a simplification of any game's story, just an example that using apocalyptic stories all the time is bad, it has nothing to do with character development.

 

Again, saying dungeon/field map is anything like a dungeon crawler doesn't make sense, because 1:it wasn't linear, 2:you had huge freedom, 3:there was no emphasis on dungeons, 4 and this is the deal sealer, the field alone makes the argument invalid, because if you go outside for a big amount of time, it imediatly stops being a dungeon crawler. And sorry, but other FFs were more linear, this one allowed you much easier to go to places you weren't supposed to go, I know this because I did it, in the other FFs (well in X you just couldn't go anywhere) there were huge restraints mostly because you couldn't avoid enemies and would immediately get wiped out. You can't say the game is like a MMORPG and say it's as linear as the other ones. The tresure chests were no doubt something that was like a MMORPG, because all your money came from selling stuff, you needed these things. I honestly don't see any problem with it.

 

I much prefer this dynamic storytelling I still stand by that the characters and story are much deeper than you're giving them credit. Just one last thing, the plot was very star wars, there's a princess leading a rebellion, an old knight, a young rebel, a pirate and a non-human companion, a villain in armor, fighting an Empire, etc... But if you don't like Star Wars... well, I feel for you :P It was indeed a nice discussion, it really is about taste but there's not much more to be said without repeating ourselves and I'm tired of talking about the game lol. ^^

 

 

This isn't really very important, but PS games that don't use X to confirm (I'm looking at you MGS), what the hell is up with that?

[Sheikah]

On one hand you criticize characters for being stated with dialogue as one thing as being bad, on the other hand you prefer the kind of story telling where they state everything all the time, whether through exagerated dialogue or sometimes pointless cutscenes. I'm noy saying to abolish cutscenes and flashbacks, but they're not always needed to give story and characters depth. See where I'm getting at? What XII did great with their characters was that things were there to be picked up, a lot of them, even if someone understands the story, it doesn't mean they picked up on the details and I really like that.

 

I never said that...I don't need the blatantly obvious being stated all the time. I just need more than simple explanations of what people are in RPGs as this gives them depth. S-E single-handedly mastered flashbacks in FFVII by showing Cloud and Zack's troubles together, which in turn paved the way for Zack starring as a lead character in Crisis Core. It's just so boring hearing that someone is a sky pirate or a judge, yet not seeing much to show for that. It's so easy to just state something yet put little effort into showing it. You might like subtelty, but I think that it's pointless to be subtle if you want to create actually endearing characters with more sense to them than a plank of wood. Imagine FFVII without Sephiroth flashbacks...people would think he was just a constant bad guy with no layers, even if someone merely explained briefly otherwise.

 

The world is doomed example isn't meant as a simplification of any game's story, just an example that using apocalyptic stories all the time is bad, it has nothing to do with character development.

 

And yet FFXII had a 'world is screwed, got to stop that from happening' conclusion. :/

 

Again, saying dungeon/field map is anything like a dungeon crawler doesn't make sense, because 1:it wasn't linear,

 

It was. The option to go onto a different map unnecessarily (or for a particular mark) was there, but that was merely for sidequests. The game was linear in the sense that the story is laid out and you must progress in a checkpoint fashion along with the story. You couldn't change the outcome of the game whatsoever. Just about all FF games are linear, bar the MMORPG XI. An example of a far less linear RPG is Baldur's Gate.

 

2:you had huge freedom, 3:there was no emphasis on dungeons, 4 and this is the deal sealer, the field alone makes the argument invalid, because if you go outside for a big amount of time, it imediatly stops being a dungeon crawler.

 

This is merely being pedantic, as the only thing separating the field and dungeons were the fact that one had walls and a roof. There was huge emphasis on the linear dungeons, where you'd usually have to reach a certain room and fight a standard boss. And as I say, the main reason it's a dungeon crawler for me is that very little separated the dungeons unlike other FF games (IX's towns were numerous and felt much more meaningful, rather than the odd town with only a few worthwhile hotspots, and conversational scenes were much more common).

 

And sorry, but other FFs were more linear, this one allowed you much easier to go to places you weren't supposed to go, I know this because I did it, in the other FFs (well in X you just couldn't go anywhere) there were huge restraints mostly because you couldn't avoid enemies and would immediately get wiped out. You can't say the game is like a MMORPG and say it's as linear as the other ones. The tresure chests were no doubt something that was like a MMORPG, because all your money came from selling stuff, you needed these things. I honestly don't see any problem with it.

 

I never said it was the most linear FF though. I think it's pretty obvious that X was the most linear of them all as up until the end you had to travel in a set fashion. But I can say it's like an MMORPG yet still linear. Because that's exactly what it is: like an MMORPG. It's like an MMORPG in the sense of the large dungeons and empty feeling to them as well as the characters, also by the way the boss is stapled in at the end of every dungeon. The battle system is like that of the MMORPG FFXI. However, it has a linear progressing story unlike an MMORPG, but that's not a bad thing. MMORPG stories suck, anyway.

 

[Darkspine S]

Woah, quite an FF Catfight going on here. I'll add my name to the list that recommend FF9 (brilliant game, I'm playing through it right now), and also to those that dislike FF12. That game should have been a spinoff, not a mainline title; I probably wouldn't hate it as much as I do if it was (and I'm not going to get into an argument about it because I suck at them).

 

On topic; The fact that Brown, Guns and Gore seem to be the standard for videogames and creativity & imagination are the exception; should be the other way round.

[Hellfire]

Not a catfight just a friendly discussion :P

First, FFXII's main and direct threat was to a few countries with the nethicite threat later meaning there could be problems spreading to the whole world, it was never as apocalyptic as in other games.

 

Second that dungeon crawler argument doesn't make sense, I'm sorry I just can't see any sense in it, I mean, just because you need more dialogue between dungeons and field (and there is plenty of dialogue and plenty of NPCs, I think you're exaggerating), it suddenly becomes a dungeon crawler? Just because outside you don't have a roof, it's still a dungeon and I'm being pedantic? Tha's grasping at straws. There's a huge difference between exploring a multiple path, multiple level underground dungeon (which already makes them a little less linear, there were lots of multiple paths and objectives in dungeons) with corridors and simply riding freely outdoors going wherever you want and finding new cities, enemies, weapons, summons, etc. If not, every damn game of the genre is a dungeon crawler and everything is a dungeon. With so many sidequests, hunts, shops, some towns, etc, etc, if you followed the story strictly and went into dungeon after dungeon playing the game "in a hurry" (which would still have you playing in lots of places that aren't dungeons) it was your decision. Bosses at the end? How weird, I don't remember fighting a boss at the end of every single dungeon/level in other JRPGs. Oh wait, yes I do.

 

And if we follow that train of thought that you have to follow a set of directions to follow the story, then there are very little non linear games in the history of gaming and most likely none of them is a JRPG, because that's exactly what you do in games, if you want to see the story you need to follow directions. What you can do and what I did in FFXII is travel to a variety of places without following the story and do the story later, that's what makes a game non linear. And FFXII has more freedom than other FFs because you have much less imposed limits to going outside the story path.

 

I'm a little tired talking about this game, I just entered this discussion, because I always thought it a shame that people didn't like such a great advance in a very, very stale series and that require the kind of storytelling we've been having for years. And even it it's interesting and whatnot, it's way offtopic :P

 

 

[Darkspine S]

I know, hense the thing.

[Dyson]

I think we need a thread rename in here

[Sheikah]

First, FFXII's main and direct threat was to a few countries with the nethicite threat later meaning there could be problems spreading to the whole world, it was never as apocalyptic as in other games.

 

Vayne wanted to manufacture nethicite to become the new Dynasty-King and conquer the world. I double-checked this on Wiki, and the FFXII article seems particularly well-written.

 

Second that dungeon crawler argument doesn't make sense, I'm sorry I just can't see any sense in it, I mean, just because you need more dialogue between dungeons and field (and there is plenty of dialogue and plenty of NPCs, I think you're exaggerating), it suddenly becomes a dungeon crawler? Just because outside you don't have a roof, it's still a dungeon and I'm being pedantic? Tha's grasping at straws. There's a huge difference between exploring a multiple path, multiple level underground dungeon (which already makes them a little less linear, there were lots of multiple paths and objectives in dungeons) with corridors and simply riding freely outdoors going wherever you want and finding new cities, enemies, weapons, summons, etc. If not, every damn game of the genre is a dungeon crawler and everything is a dungeon. With so many sidequests, hunts, shops, some towns, etc, etc, if you followed the story strictly and went into dungeon after dungeon playing the game "in a hurry" (which would still have you playing in lots of places that aren't dungeons) it was your decision. Bosses at the end? How weird, I don't remember fighting a boss at the end of every single dungeon/level in other JRPGs. Oh wait, yes I do.

 

Ok then, let's look at how dungeon crawlers work. You're basically fighting most of the time, whether it be a dungeon or not, and dungeon crawlers are renowned for having overly long dungeon sections and far less interrupting dialogue (my point here about FFXII). A good example of this is Etrian Odyssey and FFTA 1+2, although they are much more of a dungeon crawler than FFXII. I'm not saying dungeon crawlers a bad thing; only if they are a main-title FF game. I actually really like FFTA, but if that game was remade with 3D graphics and labelled FFXIII (ie. replaced the next main-title FF) I wouldn't be happy. The real reason why I call this game more of a dungeon crawler is simply the ratio of dungeon (or field, which didn't feel all that different to dungeon) to story/character interaction. In FFIX, the amount of events that took place between your standard dungeon area (the dungeons usually varying greatly in appearance) broke them up considerably, and you'd often spend a lot more time in towns. The towns had charm to them too, rather than just some place like Rabanastre, that had a few noteworthy locations marked on the map and little else.

 

Let's look at the exploration side of XII. We're excluding marks here, because they were a sidequest unlike no other FF game (FFX required you to go back to levels to hunt monsters too). FFXII had pisspoor (usually random) treasure chests scattered across the map (I was regularly finding potions, 65 Gil and phoenix downs), made even worse by the fact that opening some of them stopped you from getting one of the strongest weapons. This severely limits any purpose or even the fact that exploration was useful on field maps. Considering you needed to accept marks before hunting them, it's not like you could just hunt them out either without being broken up.

 

You see, you mention that the game has choice, but what game doesn't? Otherwise, the game would be a movie. The fact is, FFXII is linear. You're forced to go down a story path, visit places in a specific order to progress, and ultimately finish the game to see the ending that they decided you'd see. Sure, you can go down different pathways. Otherwise we'd just be walking down a straight corridor for the entire game. That said, the dungeon process was still very linear, where you'd go through 2 to 3 floors and reach a certain room, fight a boss and then that'd be the end of the dungeon. You'd view a victory scene and that'd be the end of that.

 

And if we follow that train of thought that you have to follow a set of directions to follow the story, then there are very little non linear games in the history of gaming and most likely none of them is a JRPG, because that's exactly what you do in games, if you want to see the story you need to follow directions. What you can do and what I did in FFXII is travel to a variety of places without following the story and do the story later, that's what makes a game non linear. And FFXII has more freedom than other FFs because you have much less imposed limits to going outside the story path.

 

You can go to other places, not that it does much. Generally speaking, until later in the game it usually doesn't serve much purpose to try and go somewhere else. But really, that's the same as a lot of FF games.

 

I'm a little tired talking about this game, I just entered this discussion, because I always thought it a shame that people didn't like such a great advance in a very, very stale series and that require the kind of storytelling we've been having for years. And even it it's interesting and whatnot, it's way offtopic :P

And yeah, unfortunately, most JRPGs are very linear. A good example of a JRPG that isn't as linear is Chrono Trigger since, while you are following a linear story for quite a large portion of the game, you are free to end the game how you want, from quite a number of possibilities. You can also make decisions along the way that end up in certain characters joining you or not, as well as decisions that can affect the future. Optional characters are also true for FFVII, which I thought was a nice addition, despite it not really relieving it of the fact it was a pretty linear game.

 

I'm a little tired talking about this game, I just entered this discussion, because I always thought it a shame that people didn't like such a great advance in a very, very stale series and that require the kind of storytelling we've been having for years. And even it it's interesting and whatnot, it's way offtopic :P

 

Unfortunately most fans see it as kind of the reverse...shockingly, Japan list FFX as their favourite game of all time (it really isn't), but I think it kind of puts a point forward about what most fans do like. People like their rivalry type full-blown stories found in FFVII, VIII and X.

 

 

[Hellfire]

What fans like or not is none of my business I say what I don't like and what I like. Specially with FFX being their favourite game, it just shows the japs (lack of) taste. Also, Vayne wanted to rule as Dynast King yes, he wanted to unify Ivalice under his Empire, end war and take the power away from the gods, giving it to manking.

 

And I'm kinda tired of talking about this, but just the fact that you say FFTA is a dungeon crawler (which it isn't) and excluding a great reason for exploring and saying that chests don't have great treasure is purposely ignoring things of the game to make a point is like saying "I don't like Zelda because it doesn't have bows!" "But it has bows!" "Yeah but well, I'm ignoring them". For example the only limitation in chests (which is ridiculous) are those in the beggining and you can get better weapons anyway.

 

Not wanting to sound like a douche but I can't see any merit in the dungeon crawling argument, saying that a game that has more exploration and freedom is a dungeon crawler, saying the fields, which are the biggest in a FF game yet feel like dungeons simply because you need more dialogue or chests with big rare weapons just doesn't make sense to me. At all.

I spent hours and hours in various points of the game just exploring, finding stuff to sell, fighting, seeing the sights, hunting marks, rare monsters (which you didn't need to sign up for), getting summons etc, the fact that I'm able to do that invalidates the game being restrictive, linear or a dungeon crawler. A game doesn't need big treasure chests or hours of dialogue between levels (dialogue which is usually completely unnecessary, at least to me) not to be a dungeon crawler. Not to mention, again, there is dialogue, there is story and there is character interaction. Not in the way other FFs have, yes, but there's no need to exaggerate. Not liking the story? Completly subjective. Being a dungeon crawler and having freedom? No.

What games don't have freedom? Jesus, so many games don't let you explore and even some who do, with unavoidable random battles you can't because you'll immediately die! Saying you don't like to explore, because you don't feel it's rewarding doesn't change the fact that you can do it.

Can we drop it, this is way offtopic and I'm tired of this discussion :P

 

Sorry for being offtopic guys

[Sheikah]

 

And I'm kinda tired of talking about this, but just the fact that you say FFTA is a dungeon crawler (which it isn't) and excluding a great reason for exploring and saying that chests don't have great treasure is purposely ignoring things of the game to make a point is like saying "I don't like Zelda because it doesn't have bows!" "But it has bows!" "Yeah but well, I'm ignoring them". For example the only limitation in chests (which is ridiculous) are those in the beggining and you can get better weapons anyway.

 

1. FFTA takes place entirely via battles, so I'd call it a dungeon crawler. Yeah, I know that dungeon crawler can be applied to games that do take place completely in dungeons (e.g. Etrian Odyssey), but I think it's fair to apply the term to a game that mirrors the abundance of battles in proportion to story/dialogue, and lacks something quite trivial (walls and roof). You don't get to move around in any way other than in the battles in FFTA.

 

2. All I am saying is that there is little to no reason to explore in FFXII given that you'd just be wasting your time, probably. Marks have to be accepted first, treasure chests are worthless (or hindering), and usually trying to go somewhere else first will result in a) your party being overwhelmed or b) arriving at a place where an event is unable until later in the game. Until later on when sidequests open up, anyways. Because the game can be so stupid, most people resort to a guide for sidequests anyway (kind of necessary given that the weapons required items, that, in themselves required items to be sold) pretty much demolishing the act of exploration.

 

And really, do people explore the map for the 'scenery'? When FFXII came out, it was a bit dated graphics-wise and rarely did exploring the map yield anything worthwhile. You were mainly just 'exploring' the map en route to your story destination, until the end of the game when you were sidequesting. I think it's unfair to say that I am ignoring something that you can gain from exploring, as I really don't see anything. For instance, I veered off the rails and went to this other map (some sort of undead cavern, IIRC) and was absolutely slaughtered by the enemies there. If anything, exploring outside of the target destination was just a hindrance.

 

Not wanting to sound like a douche but I can't see any merit in the dungeon crawling argument, saying that a game that has more exploration and freedom is a dungeon crawler, saying the fields, which are the biggest in a FF game yet feel like dungeons simply because you need more dialogue or chests with big rare weapons just doesn't make sense to me. At all.

 

The fields that you speak of were mostly rather mundane repeated segments with....enemies! Remember the sand place with the high up repeats of circular sections? This is why I'm comparing it to the dungeons. You basically walk from A to Z with your gambits slapped on while defeating enemies. The fact that the field and dungeons were intergrated into the same visual style only added to the feel that you were just long-term dungeon crawling, with the occasional cutscene...but that really was occasional.

 

 

I spent hours and hours in various points of the game just exploring, finding stuff to sell, fighting, seeing the sights, hunting marks, rare monsters (which you didn't need to sign up for), getting summons etc, the fact that I'm able to do that invalidates the game being restrictive, linear or a dungeon crawler. A game doesn't need big treasure chests or hours of dialogue between levels (dialogue which is usually completely unnecessary, at least to me) not to be a dungeon crawler. Not to mention, again, there is dialogue, there is story and there is character interaction. Not in the way other FFs have, yes, but there's no need to exaggerate. Not liking the story? Completly subjective. Being a dungeon crawler and having freedom? No.

 

I'm not exaggerating in saying that the story and dialogue was lacking. I'd reckon you could tot up the number of lines of dialogue in this game and that in, say, FFX, and you'd see a big difference. Not that more necessarily means better, but you at least need a reasonable amount for there to be much of a FF-style story.

 

As for treasure chests, this is completely your opinion, but I found that being rewarded for exploring areas in FFIX made the game marvellous, whereas going to one end of the map simply to 'see the sights' (on a PS2 machine) and then leave empty handed to me is laughable. Especially when you consider that you'd have fought a load of enemies on the way, only to find nothing. After all, most explorers of the past have explored in hope of finding something. Some people found land itself, and I guess that's what you're hinting at is your goal.

 

Also I already touched on sidequests, as they are separate from the linearity of the game. Sidequests are an addition to any game and do not mean that the game is not linear, as it still is. Every FF has sidequests, even the horrendously linear FFX, but the fact remains that the games can still be linear, as is the outcome of the sidequests usually too (bar some exceptions (characters joining the party, etc., although none that I can note in FFXII).

 

 

What games don't have freedom? Jesus, so many games don't let you explore and even some who do, with unavoidable random battles you can't because you'll immediately die! Saying you don't like to explore, because you don't feel it's rewarding doesn't change the fact that you can do it.

 

 

All I am saying is that being able to explore some of the maps does not mean that the RPG is not linear. The story and events, as well as completion of dungeons, play out exactly as they want them to. If you think about it, you could argue that FFX isn't linear, because there are tons of sidequests to do and those that include exploring new maps. If you want a non-linear RPG, go play Baldur's Gate.

 

 

 

 

Can we drop it, this is way offtopic and I'm tired of this discussion :P

Sorry for being offtopic guys

 

Hmm well I'm not forcing anyone to reply.

[Jonnas]

Your discussion lead me to say 2 things:

 

1-(offtopic) FF Tactics Advance is not a dungeon crawler. Please.

 

2-(ontopic) Games that don't have side-quests, but look like they have, annoy me. Starfox Adventures and Swordcraft Story being the main perpetrators.

[darksnowman]

Yeah Starfox Adventures failed to deliver on the sidequests- it was a Zelda-clone in other ways, but lacked that extra depth. I'm still one of the people that like the game though (I'm a graphics whore?)- the combat might have been pretty underwhelming once you got used to it, but I always liked getting Fox to do the roundhouse type kick because it reminded me of Jago's windkick.

[nekunando]

Yeah Starfox Adventures failed to deliver on the sidequests- it was a Zelda-clone in other ways, but lacked that extra depth. I'm still one of the people that like the game though (I'm a graphics whore?)- the combat might have been pretty underwhelming once you got used to it, but I always liked getting Fox to do the roundhouse type kick because it reminded me of Jago's windkick.

 

I really enjoyed Starfox Adventures (and I thought the graphics were awesome at the time.. and still do )

 

To be honest, I was never really bothered by doing sidequests in The Legend of Zelda (and probably a lot more games for that matter..) so the fact that Starfox Adventures was lacking in this area was fine with me

 

I really fancy playing through that again