chairdriver Posted March 7, 2010 Posted March 7, 2010 But surely in a video game - that is meant to be fun, after all - there is a significant difference between Storyline is the main reason I play RPGs though. They're like interactive novels. FF X is my favourite Final Fantasy, because the story stunned the most (and the battle system is the best). Star Ocean III is my favourite game, because the world feels so fleshed out. The dictionary was the best thing. And choosing what to say in conversations is my favourite thing. And when it actually has an effect on things, it stuns.
Dan_Dare Posted March 7, 2010 Posted March 7, 2010 The irony of FF games are, of course, that any notion of 'role play' is superficial at best. There's no ability to influence character choice, motivation, actions or even direction in any of the games in the series. They're actually as much RPGs as, say, Gears of War. They just take longer.
flameboy Posted March 7, 2010 Posted March 7, 2010 Out of curiosity, did you read the review? They mention it takes a good twenty five hours to get good, and even then the story is underwhelming. sounds perfectly justified to me. Yes! I've read the review and if you read what they written (which I'm sure 90% of people across the internet moaning about it actually haven't) its hard to argue with what they say and then by that rationale and using the arguements for and against its hard to argue with their score. Too many reviews pick the shit out of a so called AAA title then just slap a 7 on it...
Nolan Posted March 7, 2010 Posted March 7, 2010 Just about everything I've seen/read on the game indicates the story is pretty poor and the real reason to play is the battle system. From watching the battle system, it seems to me that FF has become nothing more than a crappy action game that takes far too long to become "good". Also for lols Last night, I got a xboxlive card at gamestop, and as usual the employee pushes pre-orders. He askes about FFXIII and I promptly tell him it will be terrible, his response Famitsu gave it 39/40 and they're some of the toughest reviewers out there. He said it with a straight face even, there were other customers so I left it that.
Ramar Posted March 7, 2010 Posted March 7, 2010 The irony of FF games are, of course, that any notion of 'role play' is superficial at best. There's no ability to influence character choice, motivation, actions or even direction in any of the games in the series. They're actually as much RPGs as, say, Gears of War. They just take longer. I'd agree with that, but I actually dig that shit for some reason. I would also add thats typically one of the major differences between JRPG and a Western RPG.
Sheikah Posted March 7, 2010 Posted March 7, 2010 Out of curiosity, did you read the review? They mention it takes a good twenty five hours to get good, and even then the story is underwhelming. sounds perfectly justified to me. Well forgive me for being sceptical about this review, for a few reasons: - No main title Final Fantasy has ever really been unanimously considered anything below a 7-8; even if things were missing (character development in XII), every title has been, at least technically and gameplay-wise, absolutely brilliant - There's a basic formula to Final Fantasy games, and given that they all include this, it seems bizarre to consider that this game will be any different - No Final Fantasy game ever released, in my opinion, could ever be worse than XII. XII was rated 40/40 by Famitsu, and often maximum marks by a lot of other reviewers And of course, many titles such as GTA and Halo follow their respective formulas and continually sweeping up full/high marks. So yeah, forgive me for being sceptical. I'm actually happy to hear that a game I'm paying over £30 for will last me over 25 hours. The irony of FF games are, of course, that any notion of 'role play' is superficial at best. There's no ability to influence character choice, motivation, actions or even direction in any of the games in the series. They're actually as much RPGs as, say, Gears of War. They just take longer. And yet the true, joyous irony is that the Japanese RPGs that you detest repeatedly bitch slap sandbox RPGs into the planes of oblivion in terms of popularity (even after 10 years), and sales. :p I can't possibly see how anyone would still remember the story to FFVII or VIII were you able to influence every choice, arrive at any number of endings or create your own generic main character. People love and remember those games for what they were, not what they could have made them. I love a good Western RPG, but the ability to influence the story so much undoubtedly results in a weakened plot and far less memorable gaming experiences.
Nolan Posted March 7, 2010 Posted March 7, 2010 but the ability to influence the story so much undoubtedly results in a weakened plot and far less memorable gaming experiences. Utter bullshit. Of the western RPGs I can think of off the top of my head, Two Worlds is the only one with a weak plot and ultimately unmemorable experience besides bad, I'll give you Bethesda's games as well for plot, although the story elements are quite vast. When it comes to WRPGs like Fallout (excluding 3 and the non RPGs) Planescape Torment, and Baldurs Gate they're just as memorable as any JRPG can be. I understand taste will factor in somewhere, but it's a fallacy to say a RPG with choice will be weaker in story than one without.
Dan_Dare Posted March 7, 2010 Posted March 7, 2010 Well forgive me for being sceptical about this review, for a few reasons: - No main title Final Fantasy has ever really been unanimously considered anything below a 7-8; even if things were missing (character development in XII), every title has been, at least technically and gameplay-wise, absolutely brilliant - There's a basic formula to Final Fantasy games, and given that they all include this, it seems bizarre to consider that this game will be any different - No Final Fantasy game ever released, in my opinion, could ever be worse than XII. XII was rated 40/40 by Famitsu, and often maximum marks by a lot of other reviewers You didn't actually answer my question. but the ability to influence the story so much undoubtedly results in a weakened plot and far less memorable gaming experiences. also: hey.
Sooj Posted March 7, 2010 Posted March 7, 2010 (edited) I've enjoyed previous FF games, 3, 4; 7, 8, 9 and 12 - 10 not so much - and the only real criticism that I believe to be valid is the quality of the storyline in 13. Everything else from linearity, lack of overworld, lack of towns/people to explore/speak with isn't really that big of a deal. Not when you think back where a massive city like linblum was only about 7 screens big with a handful of people in each screen with not much to say. Even rabanastre was only a handful of screens. Its been said before but, to a certain extent, every FF game has been linear; the only worthy side quest were to create/find celestial weapons (even then the long journey just wasn't worth it) or extra gfs (again some were just crap). Every FF card game, with the exception of 8, were not worth it. I think the criticisms FF13 is facing is just criticisms against japanese rpgs in general. I enjoy both western and japanese rpgs but when it comes to reviewing the games, they really shouldn't be compared as there are massive diffrerences. Either way I can't wait until I get my hand of 13, should be good :p Edited March 7, 2010 by Sooj
Sheikah Posted March 7, 2010 Posted March 7, 2010 (edited) Utter bullshit. Of the western RPGs I can think of off the top of my head, Two Worlds is the only one with a weak plot and ultimately unmemorable experience besides bad, I'll give you Bethesda's games as well for plot, although the story elements are quite vast. When it comes to WRPGs like Fallout (excluding 3 and the non RPGs) Planescape Torment, and Baldurs Gate they're just as memorable as any JRPG can be. You're mixing up good story with cream of the crop. For me, no WRPG so far has had anything that came close to the plots from FFVI-IX, IMO. Bethesda games? Well I can tell you for one, Oblivion's story is a crock of shit, but that's not why I loved the game. Same for other games like Dragon Age. And while BG 1 and 2 (PC) had nice stories, they were yet again another fun passage from the somewhat cliched medieval fantasy tale; and yet again, it's not the reason why I loved those games. And if you think I am wrong, then you are one of a very small minority. I'm not saying you're right or wrong, but this is now basically a popularity contest. Look at the most popular RPGs of all time; the ones that have fans still to this day arguing with every ounce of passion they can muster. And one, in particular, that has had numerous sequels, prequels, and even a film made after it. The games you listed had good plots, particularly Fallout 3, but let's be honest- why don't fans fight over these games like they do with PS FFs? There has to be a reason. I believe it's because they have a certain charm, great characters and an epic story, on a scale that hasn't been matched so far in a WRPG. But hey, that's just me. I understand taste will factor in somewhere, but it's a fallacy to say a RPG with choice will be weaker in story than one without. Well, not really. With multiple outcomes, there is no finality, no 'definite answer'; no truth the the matter. Which is cannon? Fuck knows. Just picture this for a moment: FFVII: You have the option to save Aeris, the ability to create your own character, including their personality trait (thus Cloud's character does not exist, since an evil aligned character would not share Cloud's dialogue or follow in his good footsteps), the ability to end the story in numerous ways. Do you think Aeris would have been nearly as popualr if she hadn't been killed? Or if she had been killed, but there was an option to avoid having her killed, don't you think that the scenario where she dies would be considered a 'wrong choice by the player'? Then take into account the resources required to fully integrate scripts, cutscenes, characters and events for every conceivable variable; it's no surprise that the story would suffer as a consequence. I like the fact that I played Final Fantasy VII, witnessing a story that unfolded exactly the way that it was designed, and was absolutely brilliant. If I had the option to fuck around with the story, and the characters' personalities and outcomes, I've no doubt that I'd have been left with something far less memorable this many years on. WRPGs do choice well, because people like to play games where they can shape every attritbute of their character. While I think the gameplay for many WRPGs is top notch, I've yet to encounter anything that rivals the plot or charm of certain JRPGs of the past. You didn't actually answer my question. I read it, of course, otherwise I wouldn't have responded. I don't recall you commenting on the fact that JRPGs slap WRPGs around with a large tuna in terms of popularity, either! Funny how we forget to respond to these things. :p also: hey. We all know it's not being rated that for having a plot comparable to, say, FFVII, and that times have certainly changed regarding the reviewing process. Many of the games above 96% on Metacritic from the last 5 years or so don't feature at the top of several-vote top 10 popularity contests, so it really isn't the best place to look in trying to win this argument. If you must know, it's pretty much always OoT, followed by FFVII, or vice versa, occupying the top two spots. Also: Hay. Truth be told, reviewers are a bunch of flakey sods who will slate a game despite heavy reuse of the same formula from a game that scored insanely well, then practically rim a game for doing the exact same. Edited March 8, 2010 by Sheikah
Nolan Posted March 8, 2010 Posted March 8, 2010 You're mixing up good story with cream of the crop. No WRPG so far has had anything that came close to the plots from FFVI-IX, IMO. Right, in your opinion, I'd say that's the taste thing I mentioned. Bethesda games? Well I can tell you for one, Oblivion's story is a crock of shit, but that's not why I loved it. Reading comprehension fail. I'm in agreement that beth's stories are poor but I won't deny the amount of detail in the game worlds history. And while BG 1 and 2 (PC) had nice stories, they were yet again another fun passage from the somewhat cliched medieval fantasy tale; and yet again, it's not the reason why I loved those games. Somewhat cliched? Yes. Well written stories with excellent character development despite that? Also yes. Not as good as a JRPG story? Opinion. And if you think I am wrong, then you are one of a very small minority. Look at the most popular RPGs of all time; the ones that have fans still to this day arguing with every ounce of passion they can muster. And one, in particular, that has had numerous sequels, prequels, and even a film made after it. I'm not trying to debate the difference in popularity, you simply said that any game with so much user influence on the story will undoubtedly weaken the plot. That's all well and good, but essentially false. Well, not really. With multiple outcomes, there is no finality, no 'definite answer'; no truth the the matter. Which is cannon? Fuck knows. Just picture this for a moment: FFVII: You have the option to save Aeris, the ability to create your own character, including their personality trait (thus Cloud's character does not exist, since an evil aligned character would not share Cloud's dialogue or follow in his good footsteps), the ability to end the story in numerous ways. Do you think Aeris would have been nearly as popualr if she hadn't been killed? Or if she had been killed, but there was an option to avoid having her killed, don't you think that the scenario where she dies would be considered a 'wrong choice by the player'? Then take into account the resources required to fully integrate scripts, cutscenes, characters and events for every conceivable variable; it's no surprise that the story would suffer as a consequence. I like the fact that I played Final Fantasy VII, witnessing a story that unfolded exactly the way that it was designed, and was absolutely brilliant. If I had the option to fuck around with the story, and the characters' personalities and outcomes, I've no doubt that I'd have been left with something far less memorable this many years on. Canon is what the developers decide to be canon. Technically, Yuffie and Vincent are extra characters, I think one version of the ending didn't even show them. Yet canonically they're in the spin-offs and movie. Alright, that's a nitpicky example I'll admit. However, Looking from FO1-FO2 and BG1-BG2 you know what is canon. Generally it's in the sequel where you find out. To venture out of RPGs and just say something, Legacy of Kain Blood Omen has two endings, one good and one bad. The good one Kain sacrifices himself restores the pillar of balance and the world is saved and purged of Vampires. The bad ending is Kain doesn't kill himself, cue Soul Reaver where the Bad Ending is canon, by god more games need canon bad endings. That's mainly where I was going with this paragraph. WRPGs do choice well, because people like to play games where they can shape every attritbute of their character. While I think the gameplay for many WRPGs is top notch, I've yet to encounter anything that rivals the plot or charm of certain JRPGs of the past. Well, we'll just have to agree that the other guy is wrong then.
Sheikah Posted March 8, 2010 Posted March 8, 2010 Right, in your opinion, I'd say that's the taste thing I mentioned. Reading comprehension fail. I'm in agreement that beth's stories are poor but I won't deny the amount of detail in the game worlds history. Sorry, but I found it strange to call utter bullshit and then agree with me on a few grounds. Somewhat cliched? Yes. Well written stories with excellent character development despite that? Also yes. Not as good as a JRPG story? Opinion. Of course, opinion. This really all is. I'm not trying to debate the difference in popularity, you simply said that any game with so much user influence on the story will undoubtedly weaken the plot. That's all well and good, but essentially false. Well, I disagree. And the RPGs that are the most popular games of all time (by a longshot) follow linear storylines, just as I said. Therefore, logically following on from this, the plots to games that people like the most are exactly as I described; not open-ended sandbox type RPGs, but ones with a set story. I'm not saying you can't be right, but what I'm saying is that my view of epic, linear plots being far more engrossing is backed up by an overwhelming support for these games from others as opposed to the support for sandbox RPGs. Canon is what the developers decide to be canon. Technically, Yuffie and Vincent are extra characters, I think one version of the ending didn't even show them. Yet canonically they're in the spin-offs and movie. What do you mean, technically were extra characters? They were extra characters. It never had the option for multiple endings, so the game would have ended the same regardless. The player could have ignored them, but that would have been the 'wrong choice'. But at the end of the day, it was no huge dent to the main story. Alright, that's a nitpicky example I'll admit. However, Looking from FO1-FO2 and BG1-BG2 you know what is canon. Generally it's in the sequel where you find out. BG2 didn't have a sequel, leaving that wide open. And why wait for a sequel to deny what already feels real? Imagine that - waiting for FFVII-2 to find out whether Aeris really was supposed to die or not. Silly, and utterly ruins any chance of stirring real emotion for the death scene.
Nolan Posted March 8, 2010 Posted March 8, 2010 Sorry, but I found it strange to call utter bullshit and then agree with me on a few grounds. I was calling utter bullshit on the claims that a user influenced story will be weaker than a story without such influence. I'm leaving this at that to stop from going in circles as I'm sure we'd end up doing.
killer kirby Posted March 8, 2010 Posted March 8, 2010 Well tomorrow it's out in Australia, I'll be hiring out the game since I am in need of a comedy flick. Why buy something worth $120 when I can hire it for $10 and spend the other $110 on something liiiiiiiiike Blazblue
Mundi Posted March 8, 2010 Posted March 8, 2010 After reading them reviews, the only thing going for it for me is the combat system that most reviews praise it for. I dunno, I will look forward to seeing it dirt cheap somewhere. Not like it could be worse then FFX.
killer kirby Posted March 8, 2010 Posted March 8, 2010 Not like it could be worse then FFX. You could be wrong. I thought nothing could be worst then FFVIII and then FFX came out.
S.C.G Posted March 8, 2010 Posted March 8, 2010 So it's average... *shrugs* did people honestly expect anything more than that from a post-VII FF game?
chairdriver Posted March 8, 2010 Posted March 8, 2010 I really don't get the FFVIII/FFX hate. Both strapped me to my chair, in their own ways. FFVIII's storyline felt so stunning, because it made no sense, but in a lovely way. Come on Esthar, you're great! Also, I loved how in the first 2 playthroughs I didn't realise how to exploit the junction system (I was like 9 at the time of playing), so it felt senses-shatteringly hard, adding an extra dimension to the game. It took me a week to beat Fujin and Rajin. And I remember crying when I finally managed to get to the cockpit of the Ragnarok (with my level 16 Rinoa), having finally realised how to defeat the propagators, then when the "Sorceress" music came on, I thought I'd have to fight Adel/Edea/Rinoa, so I was throwing my controller about. Genuinely tense moment. FFX is in my top 5 PS2 games of all time. It's just so big. I have 400+ hours clocked on one of my saves. Come on Yuna, your strength value is the highest of all the team. I love the artwork of the Fayths too. Added so much. Genuinely intrigued as to which Aeon I'd get next, and what they're Fayth stone thing would look like.
Domstercool Posted March 8, 2010 Posted March 8, 2010 Yeah, both were really good RPGs, dunno why people hate them as much, great games. Then again I don't get why people would put FF9 above them too. It was a good game sure, but it wasn't as good as other FF RPGs in my opinion. The battle system was raped by having trance that would activiate at the end of battle. Also what was the deal with only 2 people summoning, never used them and so only saw the summons once to see what they looked like. Some of the characters were poor too, but that's just my take. Yeah sure it was going back to the roots so to speak, but it really felt like a downgrade after playing 7 and 8 since you couldn't fit the characters with what you wanted them to have. Well 13 tomorrow, looking forward to that ^_^ not bothered if it's linear or not, I don't see how getting 8 or higher is average either. Good battle systems help RPGs and if the story is interesting I'll be finishing this to the end.
Sheikah Posted March 8, 2010 Posted March 8, 2010 Just got my copy of XIII in the post a minute ago, time to play it for a bit before I head out.
Shorty Posted March 8, 2010 Posted March 8, 2010 When will people learn that some people simply have different tastes... it doesn't matter if I rank FFIX above FFVIII and you don't. Or if I still think FFVII is the best FF ever. Or if I am deluded into thinking FFX was actually a playable game. As long as you alone enjoy playing it that's what matters. The thing that matters the least, is what Edge magazine thinks.
Domstercool Posted March 8, 2010 Posted March 8, 2010 But then no one would be able to give opinions and the thread would be just..........dead lol It's the joys of explaining how you feel, as long as there's no "YOU FUCKING SUCK FOR LIKING THAT, blah blah" then all is good. There's plenty of games I've liked and people haven't and having discussions why is great. Anyway, ON TO THE GAME! *waits till tomorrow ¬_¬*
Tales Posted March 8, 2010 Posted March 8, 2010 GAME didn't have any CEs left so now I have to wait till Wednesday I ordered it online expecting I would get it today. Stupid Tuesday release >_> Even more annoying I got a test on Thursday that is going to decide wether or not I qualify for exam. I like it when the games are linear. Too much space makes me worried if I'm going to miss something. In FFXII I constantly explored one side of the map untill I reached the middle, turned back and chose a different direction, turned back and continued on the first direction, just slightly bit further, turned back and so on. As for cities there is no need for them if there isn't anything to do there. Too many rpgs have large cities with tons of insignificant people to talk to. I played White Knight Chronicles last week. Big pretty cities with only two-three easy chests with worthless items and that's it. No quest or anything. Since no one has mentioned lack of quests I assume there is at least some good ones later in the game? (no need to elaborate)
killer kirby Posted March 8, 2010 Posted March 8, 2010 . As for cities there is no need for them if there isn't anything to do there. Too many rpgs have large cities with tons of insignificant people to talk to. I played White Knight Chronicles last week. Big pretty cities with only two-three easy chests with worthless items and that's it. No quest or anything. The last game I had FUN and loved in terms of Linear RPG's is Baten Kaitos Origins, I swear the only linear game with a good and well thought out story with easily the best protagonist and the best cast of characters in it, as well as good side-quests and one of the best worlds, Why can't Team Kitase be able to make games as touching as monoliths games? (While I am at it Matsuno games as well, to date Final Fantasy Tactics has the best story ever told in a Final Fantasy game...IMO)
Recommended Posts