Um.. that's odd. To me, the major difference between monks and assassins is that monks are much, much more disciplined, and rely on martial arts more than deathly poisons and blades. Though I suppose an assassin could be a martial artist.
That's where the monk falls short though--there's not much incentive to use your fists and feet beyond the meager benefits from feats. Only in higher levels do you start to kick major ass. Though Stunning Fist can be annoying at lower level.
In the Unearthed Arcana book, there are 9-ish monk variants that are based on different animal diciplines (cobra, tiger, etc.). They are actually really cool and innovative, while still preserving the monk's initial flavour.
I haven't played any of the Wild Arm games. What style RPG are they?
Well, for the most part that depends on which ones you play. Wild ARMs 1-3 were traditional turn-based with some vast differences in how resources were managed in battle. The last two games, though, have featured a twist on the turn-based system which resembles old games like Treasure Hunter G or Arc the Lad. It's really addictive and a lot of fun.
FF12 sucks. The graphics are nice, the battle system is...interesting, if not the most entertaining or practical thing, but the storyline isn't nearly epic enough for me, and for the 30 hours I've played it for, 15 of them have been running back and forth from places, because they keep making up excuses for why my damn airship won't work. Bah.
I actually liked the story, much to my own surprise. Well, to be more concise I liked the characterization, for those characters who weren't utterly forgotten like Penelo. The two things that killed my enjoyment were the completely non-interactive battle system and the lack of variety or expanse to the License Board. There were a LOT of things I felt needed to be included in the board that just...weren't. And we're talking FF staples here like Dual Wield or Cover. It just struck me as odd.
But at least it was a game made without the toxic touch of Hironobu Sakaguchi. And Cid was hot. For that I can be thankful.
I'm actually pretty miffed at Square right now (which is a vast improvement over how I usually feel toward them) because of the Zodiac Job System edition of FF12. Larsa, Reddas, and Vossler are all permanent, playable characters and the license board has been pretty much doubled in size with the abilities I thought were missing in the original. And, of course, being that this is a competent Square product, we won't be seeing it in the US.
Lately, I've been becoming more and more annoyed with other gamers, particularly in regards to a particular habit many of them seem to share- gamers are very quick to damn anything they didn't enjoy while they played it.
More and more I see comments like "FFXII sucked", "P3 sucks!", "whatever the hell game just came out that you are all talking about sucks!" justified immediately with comments because "it failed at a specific criteria I have set for my interests, and therefor it did not only fail to entertain me, but it must also fail to entertain anyone."
Maybe I'm just overly forgiving, but it's my take that most games do NOT suck. Very few games are utterly lacking in functionality and appeal. Even the games I find the least entertaining (cough FFVII, LoZ, etc) are games that do appeal to someone. Games that REALLY suck are pretty rare, while games that may not appeal to everyone are commonplace.
I feel like before you can say a game is truly terrible, it needs to be either A) a game that has such poor design that it fails to accomplish the sake of its design- i.e an action RPG with such awkward and poor controls that enjoying the action becomes arbitrarily difficult for gamers of varying levels of skill, or B) a game that contains very little in terms of incentive to play on a UNIVERSAL level. I'm not talking a case where random off-the-streets gamer comes in and tries to play a Xenosaga game and gets pissed off because there is too much talking for his sensation-deprived brain, I'm talking about games in which the motivation to do anything is so incoherent it becomes impossible for anyone to enough enjoyment to justify the games cost of purchase and production. For example, what if Tetris had no score, blocks never cleared away, and it just continued on until a point at which it just stopped dropping blocks? Basically, I feel like a game may not always be my cup of tea, but that doesn't make it bad. Bad games are the games that not even the programmers gave enough of a damn about to bother giving the production the attention it deserves. Bad games are games that are just thrown together in order to turn a quick buck without any regard to quality and with no attention to the intended audience. Games like FFXII, WA4, P3, or whatever are not BAD games. They were created carefully and with much effort and thought over a long period of time with a specific idea in mind. They may not be games that everyone will like for any number of reasons, but they were hardly slapped together, burned to a DVD and thrown into a crate over a couple of weeks.
Now, I'm not so naive as to say or even imply that most professional developed games are all these labors of love, toiled over by caring and creatively inspired individuals who only want to share their craft with the world. I'm not an idiot, I know games are produced because games make a LOT of money. What I am arguing is that when a game is made by professionals, it is made professionally. For example, if I go to a restaurant, order a slice of chocolate cake, and the waitress brings it to me and I don't like it because, I dunno, they put nuts on it, that doesn't mean it's bad cake. It means I should have gone and ordered cake without nuts, instead of bawling about how the waitress was rude and the cake was badly made and how awful the restaurant is, and how bad I hate chocolate cake. Now, if the cake had been brought out, and it was all stale and moldy, and the waitress just sort of flung it at the table and never stopped by to fill my water glass, then yeah- then it would be bad. However, I just don't think most of today's games qualify as stale cake. I mean, I have played a lot of games, and in that mix have been plenty I did not enjoy- Kingdom Hearts, FFVII, FF Tactics Advance, Golden Sun, any pre-SNES LoZ game... but I think it would not only be the height of hubris, but also pretty damn silly of me to just write them off as badly made just because, for some reason or another, I didn't like it.
I guess I just get irked because I play a LOT of games, and have played a lot of games for years and years now- and I've played some games that were pretty damn awful. However, for each awful game I have played, I've played about 10 other ones that were at least okay, if not entirely suited for my tastes. So when I hear people *****ing about a game that they might not have enjoyed and condemning it as a game without any merit entirely due to the fact that it didn't appeal to them, I get highly annoyed. Today's gamers are spoiled enough as it is, so it blows my mind to think that they expect every disc they pop into their console not only be perfectly custom fit to their interests, but that everyone else should also share in their tastes.
I mean, come on. That would be like going down to the movie theater and expecting every movie to be a hallmark of your favorite genre.
I'm not really directing this rant at anyone, I'm just making it. Hopefully, you'll all be with the program enough by now to understand that.
Yeah...see, I completely agree, but I've always thought that saying this out loud would gather a storm or FF7 fanboys who'd jump down my throat with their papier maché buster swords.
There's never ever been an RPG that I've played where I couldn't pick out something I liked. Hell, even Beyond the Beyond has a couple of good points to me, and anyone whose touched it knows how BAD a game that is all-around.
A lot of American gamers forget the one cardinal rule of game production: no game is ever produced to appeal to everyone. There's always a specific market that a game is being made to appeal to. So yeah, there's always the chance that a casual RPGamer would pick up, say, Megaten 3 and hate it so much he could cry. That doesn't make the game bad by any stretch of the imagination, though. It's an exceptional game that wasn't made for that gamer. I mean I hate the Halo series and FPS games in general with a bloody passion, but I'm not so bold as to claim that they all suck just because I don't like them. Where's the logic in that?
Ah. Suck=relativeness. Compared to the other FF games I've played (7 & 10), and the other rpgs i've played (third age, fire emlem stuff), FF12 was a terrible game. I'm not saying that everyone will hate it (actually, I can see how many people could love it, as it has some elements that were good), but compared to everything else I've played in it's genre, it does suck.
Therefore, when I (and probably others) say something sucks, it is usually a personal opinion of the game and our reaction to the game. It doesn't mean the game should be removed from the face of the earth, by any means.
Maybe I'm just overly forgiving, but it's my take that most games do NOT suck. Very few games are utterly lacking in functionality and appeal. Even the games I find the least entertaining (cough FFVII, LoZ, etc) are games that do appeal to someone. Games that REALLY suck are pretty rare, while games that may not appeal to everyone are commonplace.
(insert more rant here)
Well said. I'd like to add to this by saying that even though you might not like a game, it doesn't mean you should ruin it for the rest of us.
To me, a game is already worth at least taking a look at if people took the time and effort to code it, make it look good, and ship it out. Think of the hours and hours and weeks and weeks people spent working on that piece-of-crap game you'll never play. Appreciate the fact that people do that kind of stuff for you at all, so you'll even have an idea of what a 'good' and a 'bad' game is (to you).
Ah. Suck=relativeness. Compared to the other FF games I've played (7 & 10), and the other rpgs i've played (third age, fire emlem stuff), FF12 was a terrible game. I'm not saying that everyone will hate it (actually, I can see how many people could love it, as it has some elements that were good), but compared to everything else I've played in it's genre, it does suck.
No, you THINK it sucks. That one little omission of a word makes a big difference. That statement conveys that you didn't care for it. Your statement puts forth that the game is inherently bad- and the clincher is that you have made this judgment based entirely on the fact that you didn't like it. I can very much assure you that the quality of a game's production is not relative in any way whatsoever.
As for everything else you've played "in the genre", we could play that game ALL day, and I guarantee I could one-up anyone else here (except perhaps LittleDragon) every time, so don't use that as a qualifier.
... Especially since you ranked FF7 as one of your better games. I could go all day on how THAT reflects on your tastes and experiences. That's really at the heart of my point, too- the games you listed that you apparently consider to be the golden ring that other games should strive towards? Yeah, I personally consider them to be among the worst games in my collection, and find them to be little more than mindless appeals to the sensory strung together by tired out and clunky gameplay- but I can also freely admit that they were by no means bad games in the sense that they were poorly made, and I can very easily see how many, many people could and do enjoy them.
Therefore, when I (and probably others) say something sucks, it is usually a personal opinion of the game and our reaction to the game. It doesn't mean the game should be removed from the face of the earth, by any means.
You need to learn to say what you mean, then. People in general tend to use words that are not actually representative of what they mean, and that is one of my biggest pet peeves. For example, when people say they love something, they very rarely "love" it. They would be better off saying they enjoy it heavily, or have a strong fondness for it, or what have you.
I'm not implying that anyone is suggesting that games they don't like shouldn't have been made, I'm saying that the very notion that a game that doesn't cater to the tastes of a single individual should be a damning quality is silly, and a poor reflection on the attitude of a lot of gamers today, who tend to go all Comic Book Guy at the drop of a hat over a game that was never produced to amuse them and them alone in the first place, too. Again, the cake analogy is apt here- if I don't like chocolate cake, it's not a reflection on the quality of any given cake that would be made, nor on the baking skills of anyone who might make it. It's a reflection on my tastes and my tastes alone. The same applies here. If someone doesn't like a game, it's most likely because they just don't like it and it has nothing to do with the overall quality of the game whatsoever.
Edit: Since you are new here, it is probably wise for me to clarify- I am not attacking you personally. I realize my style of communication can come across as hostile and derisive at times, but I'm just trying to have a conversation in which people can feel free to disagree, so please do not take anything above as a personal comment or judgment. I figured it would be best to just put that out there before this conversation goes any further.
Well said. I'd like to add to this by saying that even though you might not like a game, it doesn't mean you should ruin it for the rest of us.
To me, a game is already worth at least taking a look at if people took the time and effort to code it, make it look good, and ship it out. Think of the hours and hours and weeks and weeks people spent working on that piece-of-crap game you'll never play. Appreciate the fact that people do that kind of stuff for you at all, so you'll even have an idea of what a 'good' and a 'bad' game is (to you).
Exactly. I've gotten to the point where I have had just about enough of spoiled gamers who have to spoil the fun for everyone else because, God forbid, some game they picked up didn't happen to be the religious experience they've come to expect from their own favorite game. Again, maybe I'm too forgiving, but I just find it mindboggling how particular and fussy people are about their games. Despite popular opinions, I actually like a good 95% of all games I buy, despite the flaws, and even the ones I do not like I am willing to see that they have good qualities that others might enjoy. I know I like to pick on some of the more mainstream titles in that latter category, but I try not to ruin the fun for the fans of it, and I also try to reserve judging the games as "good" or "bad" based on my inherently objective opinions on it- as I'm not really in the position to do any better than the developers have done in the first place.
The only really "bad" games that come to mind are games of the sort that you see that are like, a new name slapped on a generic concept and sold for 10 bucks a pop in the PC Games aisle at the local Target or Walmart- the sort of games that are just thrown together to churn out a product, as opposed to the large, involved projects that are the standard fare of most new releases nowadays.
There really is a big difference between saying something outright sucks and stating that you didn't like it. The latter is just a statement of opinion, while the former seems to imply that everyone else in the world thinks the game sucks, too. That's where the subject becomes a loaded one.
For example: I really, REALLY don't like Final Fantasy 7. It's my least favorite game of all time. If I simply say that I don't like it, people are much less likely to be offended than if I ranted on about how much it sucks. Saying "I don't like FF7" simply says that I myself don't like it. Saying "FF7 sucks" implies that anyone who does enjoy it simply doesn't realize yet how much it actually blows. Big difference.
I generally enjoy all RPGs I play, with a few marked exceptions like...*shudder*...Lost Magic. I'm an RPG collector, after all, so I can appreciate things other people either find to be a weakness in a game or never even notice in the first place.
Ugh, I hated lost magic! The controls were so difficult and the game got insanely hard really quickly. I only played for 20 minutes before I was hopelessly stuck.
I am still reading this thread fyi I just don't know enough about rpgs in general to comment most of the time. (But if people start a conversation about Mass Effect when it comes out, I'm SOOOO there.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll bet you wish you had a non-unglued/unhinged card that shared your first name.
Lost MAgic made me cry. I generally have the patience to play ANY game to completion (Unlimited SaGa, hello), but Lost Magic just offended me too much >_<;;
It was a cool idea, to be sure, and it could've been fun as hell. It was just implemented in the wrong way, I think.
I liked Lost Magic, but it is certainly not for everyone. Myself included, but that has more to do with the fact that I suck at RTS style games. It has a pretty hardcore niche in the DS player community, though. Lost Magic players are as serious as skin cancer when it comes to their PvP battles.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[16:23] Alacar Leoricar: maybe if you do it'll make the porn more meaningful
More on "good" and "bad" games. Even when you use those terms, you are being subjective. I think LoZ: Ocarina of Time is one of the best 3D Adventure games of all time. But do I judge ALL LoZ games based on that standard? No. Because I know better: I tried that at first with Majora's Mask, and I was frustrated at first, until I realized that each game is nearly a different entity.
Also note that I said '3D Adventure game', not 'RPG'. The last time LoZ was anything like an RPG, it was back in 1988 with Zelda II.
As far as FF7 goes.. I admit, when I was younger, I was one of those mindless yammering Square fanboys who loved Final Fantasy 7. I loved FF so much, I hadn't even played the SNES/NES games and I thought they were great. FF7 was one of the first console RPGs I ever got to play (in actuality it was 9; I'll get to that in a second). Since my friends felt the same way, I was convinced that 7 was the best you could get. But now that I've had a chance to sit and reevaluate Final Fantasy as a whole, 7 is lacking luster. I played FF9 first, and loved it. Part of me loves 9 most of all. Then I played 7, then 8, then 10, 10-2, 12, then 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 on my DS. I've beaten 1, 2, 7, 9, and 10, and since I've gotten through a good chunk of these games, 7, in comparison, is not as golden as it looked.
What made it worse was the spin-offs. As much as I hated The Spirits Within, I admired it for taking what I knew about FF, throwing almost everything but the core elements of the games and turning it into a superb film. Advent Children almost felt like 'Final Fantasy VII-2'. It was a good film, but it did nothing to improve the original game. And neither do anything else. At this point, they're beyond beating a dead horse and dragging it through the mud. They're just embarassing themselves.
But is FF7 so bad? Nah. It's not that good to me anymore, which is what I think Photon was trying to say in the first place. Games aren't inherently good or bad. They're just what you make them.
I also would like to say that i dislike people who constantly say "Oh, don't buy that game, it sucked." So I decide to wait another day, and my friend is like "Dude, this is the best game ever! Why didn't you get it!?"
I, personally, wait for reviews on the game and base my buying decision on it. If I don't like a game, that's what I say when the topic comes to it. Not any of the "zOMG it sux0rz teh big!11!!1!"
I don't even listen to most reviews, myself. Only when my mind isn't completely made up that I want to play a game do I go looking for reviews to influence my opinion. Generally, seeing someone else's opinion tends to result in my feeling like buying the game to "rescue" it from haters anyway =)
I also would like to say that i dislike people who constantly say "Oh, don't buy that game, it sucked." So I decide to wait another day, and my friend is like "Dude, this is the best game ever! Why didn't you get it!?"
I, personally, wait for reviews on the game and base my buying decision on it. If I don't like a game, that's what I say when the topic comes to it. Not any of the "zOMG it sux0rz teh big!11!!1!"
It's sort of like the Rumor Mill. Every new card that comes out is awful, and every new set is a failure, and everything is just absolutely done wrong, and everyone knows better than everyone else, and of COURSE, whatever format you play in is the only one that should be considered when WotC releases a new set- it's that sort of inanity that drives me crazy. I'll admit, sometimes nothing is more fun than complaining about something you don't like, but there is always a limit- and when you get to the point in which you begin to expect everything released, be it a game or a new set or a movie or whatever, to be tailored to your standards every time, it gets old for everyone who has to hear about it.
Also, it's like Rumor Mill in the way that whenever something comes out, it is so bad its a travesty, but within a few months, people's tunes have changed completely.
I don't really rely on reviews much, though, since even professional review sites don't review very objectively anymore. I tend to actually research a new game through the fans of the game and through actual game information- by looking up fan communities and FAQs and game mechanics, videos, and release site info. That's how I make my choices- FAQs and mechanic guides present the meat of the game in a way that is without hype, release sites showcase the best of what the game has without other input (so you can sort of see how the game is intended to be presented), and fan communities are generally very honest with the strengths and weaknesses of a game, and tend to speak about it with a great deal more insight than say, some dude who played the demo or some guy who rented it and played it for 5 hours.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[16:23] Alacar Leoricar: maybe if you do it'll make the porn more meaningful
Well, I get GameInformer, and unless I am a die-hard fan of the series, I read their reviews and it generally reflects as accurate in terms of what i like. Mostly I do it cause I don't really have the money to pay for games, and the hassle of taking it back (or not being able to at all with some computer games) is frustrating.
Edit to respond to Photon: True. I try to not get too excited by somrthing that when it doesn't live up to my expectations I am let down. Take the movie 300 for instance. I watched it 2 days ago and before, everyone I asked was like "This movie rocks, it's so awesome!", but personally, I didn't really like it. Sure the fighting bits were kinda cool, but as a movie in general, it wasn't for me.
Edit2: We always complain in Cross-country about stuff, but you don't ever see us quit. It helps to let out stress by complaining, I have discovered.
Well, I get GameInformer, and unless I am a die-hard fan of the series, I read their reviews and it generally reflects as accurate in terms of what i like. Mostly I do it cause I don't really have the money to pay for games, and the hassle of taking it back (or not being able to at all with some computer games) is frustrating.
Edit to respond to Photon: True. I try to not get too excited by somrthing that when it doesn't live up to my expectations I am let down. Take the movie 300 for instance. I watched it 2 days ago and before, everyone I asked was like "This movie rocks, it's so awesome!", but personally, I didn't really like it. Sure the fighting bits were kinda cool, but as a movie in general, it wasn't for me.
Edit2: We always complain in Cross-country about stuff, but you don't ever see us quit. It helps to let out stress by complaining, I have discovered.
I can understand being disappointed by a game, especially if you are younger and do not necessarily have the money to be blowing 50 bucks on a new game every couple of weeks. However, anymore, with today's secondary game market, you can always return it and at least get a decent portion of your money back. However, this is why I wish people would look into a game in detail before they buy it, instead of just sort of buying whatever seems to be receiving the most hype on GameSiteX at the moment, because it would lead to a lot fewer gamers picking up games they may not enjoy and spending their money on something they might like more. This is also at the heart of my irritation with gamers that only stick with the big name franchises.
I think, too, that a lot of time people become overly negative because they wind up disappointed. At the end of the day, it doesn't really bother me if someone thinks a game I like sucks- I mean, it doesn't change how I feel or how I play it, but it is just needless negativism that can bring a conversation down, and it can dissuade people from buying something they might really love for no good reason, which is a shame- and it's something that has caused many many of my favorite games to never be brought to the US.
On average, I get a new RPG about every 2 weeks, sometimes more. Hell, this last weekend I got 4 new games, and that isn't even the worst splurge I've done on the hobby (one December I bought 9 in a 2 week period). A lot of the times I buy just to try something new, or to fill out the collection, but most of the time I do it after having spent a good deal of time poking around various places to find info on the title first- and I can admit that in the past I have made a game purchase I regretted (Lost Magic comes to mind, also Golden Sun), but most of the time I get a game knowing what to expect, so it doesn't happen very often anymore.
True, true. I can admit to sticking only with well-known franchises, but I am getting a little more 'risky' with my buying "cult" games, as I am getting a job soon and am gettting more random odd-jobs to get money from.
Though, I must say. Dynasty Warriors should just stop >.<
True, true. I can admit to sticking only with well-known franchises, but I am getting a little more 'risky' with my buying "cult" games, as I am getting a job soon and am gettting more random odd-jobs to get money from.
Though, I must say. Dynasty Warriors should just stop >.<
I'm guessing some Dynasty Warriors fans would beg to differ.
Sidenote: Anyone else in here still playing Pokemon Diamond and Pearl, and have access to Wifi? I'm looking for some active sparring partners, since the MBaG crapped out, and my household has moved on to Etrian Odyssey.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[16:23] Alacar Leoricar: maybe if you do it'll make the porn more meaningful
I have access, but play little. More of a side-hobby when I am not modding decks/studying possible metagame...I have gotten to an almost obsessive level of making my decks as competetive as possible since I really want to get in on tournaments and such this next year.
No, you THINK it sucks. That one little omission of a word makes a big difference.
Meh, same thing. Actually, I will try to change my "language" from now on. Thank you.
Quote from Photon Eater »
... Especially since you ranked FF7 as one of your better games. I could go all day on how THAT reflects on your tastes and experiences.
Could you? I'm curious. The storyline in that game was amazing, and the battle system was actually very good, as well as the game being designed well in general (except for the japanese to english mistakes).
Quote from Photon Eater »
...but I can also freely admit that they were by no means bad games in the sense that they were poorly made...
Actually, I feel FFXII was poorly made. I just feel that it did have some good elements that others might like. For me, however, the bad greatly outweighed the good.
Quote from Photon Eater »
Edit: Since you are new here, it is probably wise for me to clarify- I am not attacking you personally. I realize my style of communication can come across as hostile and derisive at times, but I'm just trying to have a conversation in which people can feel free to disagree, so please do not take anything above as a personal comment or judgment. I figured it would be best to just put that out there before this conversation goes any further.
No problem. I actually apreciate this conversation a lot. But your conversation style is slightly harsh and may be misinterpreted by someone else, who has a lesser love for arguments conversation.
Quote from Photon Eater »
I can understand being disappointed by a game, especially if you are younger and do not necessarily have the money to be blowing 50 bucks on a new game every couple of weeks.
Ugh. It is painful. Except, usually it is not the money spent on the game, it is the time spent (I get most of my games as gifts, which explains why I haven't played very many). Spending 30+ hours on a game you really don't enjoy just because you started it and feel obligated to finish it is possibly the most traumatic thing one can do to a gamer.
Anyhoo...
Seeing as I don't really have much experience with games, what are some good rpgs (or adventure games) for me to get? Storyline is of the utmost importance to me (which is why The Third Age was rather tedious, even though it was made really well). I have a PS2 and a Gamecube. And a kind-of-crappy 'pooter.
Game reviews.. ah, that brings me to X-Play. Or what was better as 'Extended Play'. I actually enjoyed Extended Play. Then it changed its name, and generally unoriginal.
That's where the monk falls short though--there's not much incentive to use your fists and feet beyond the meager benefits from feats. Only in higher levels do you start to kick major ass. Though Stunning Fist can be annoying at lower level.
Like freeform roleplaying? Try Darkness Befalls Us
Ryttare Kelasin Luna Orelinalei
Well, for the most part that depends on which ones you play. Wild ARMs 1-3 were traditional turn-based with some vast differences in how resources were managed in battle. The last two games, though, have featured a twist on the turn-based system which resembles old games like Treasure Hunter G or Arc the Lad. It's really addictive and a lot of fun.
I actually liked the story, much to my own surprise. Well, to be more concise I liked the characterization, for those characters who weren't utterly forgotten like Penelo. The two things that killed my enjoyment were the completely non-interactive battle system and the lack of variety or expanse to the License Board. There were a LOT of things I felt needed to be included in the board that just...weren't. And we're talking FF staples here like Dual Wield or Cover. It just struck me as odd.
But at least it was a game made without the toxic touch of Hironobu Sakaguchi. And Cid was hot. For that I can be thankful.
Like freeform roleplaying? Try Darkness Befalls Us
Ryttare Kelasin Luna Orelinalei
So yeah.
I'm actually pretty miffed at Square right now (which is a vast improvement over how I usually feel toward them) because of the Zodiac Job System edition of FF12. Larsa, Reddas, and Vossler are all permanent, playable characters and the license board has been pretty much doubled in size with the abilities I thought were missing in the original. And, of course, being that this is a competent Square product, we won't be seeing it in the US.
More and more I see comments like "FFXII sucked", "P3 sucks!", "whatever the hell game just came out that you are all talking about sucks!" justified immediately with comments because "it failed at a specific criteria I have set for my interests, and therefor it did not only fail to entertain me, but it must also fail to entertain anyone."
Maybe I'm just overly forgiving, but it's my take that most games do NOT suck. Very few games are utterly lacking in functionality and appeal. Even the games I find the least entertaining (cough FFVII, LoZ, etc) are games that do appeal to someone. Games that REALLY suck are pretty rare, while games that may not appeal to everyone are commonplace.
I feel like before you can say a game is truly terrible, it needs to be either A) a game that has such poor design that it fails to accomplish the sake of its design- i.e an action RPG with such awkward and poor controls that enjoying the action becomes arbitrarily difficult for gamers of varying levels of skill, or B) a game that contains very little in terms of incentive to play on a UNIVERSAL level. I'm not talking a case where random off-the-streets gamer comes in and tries to play a Xenosaga game and gets pissed off because there is too much talking for his sensation-deprived brain, I'm talking about games in which the motivation to do anything is so incoherent it becomes impossible for anyone to enough enjoyment to justify the games cost of purchase and production. For example, what if Tetris had no score, blocks never cleared away, and it just continued on until a point at which it just stopped dropping blocks? Basically, I feel like a game may not always be my cup of tea, but that doesn't make it bad. Bad games are the games that not even the programmers gave enough of a damn about to bother giving the production the attention it deserves. Bad games are games that are just thrown together in order to turn a quick buck without any regard to quality and with no attention to the intended audience. Games like FFXII, WA4, P3, or whatever are not BAD games. They were created carefully and with much effort and thought over a long period of time with a specific idea in mind. They may not be games that everyone will like for any number of reasons, but they were hardly slapped together, burned to a DVD and thrown into a crate over a couple of weeks.
Now, I'm not so naive as to say or even imply that most professional developed games are all these labors of love, toiled over by caring and creatively inspired individuals who only want to share their craft with the world. I'm not an idiot, I know games are produced because games make a LOT of money. What I am arguing is that when a game is made by professionals, it is made professionally. For example, if I go to a restaurant, order a slice of chocolate cake, and the waitress brings it to me and I don't like it because, I dunno, they put nuts on it, that doesn't mean it's bad cake. It means I should have gone and ordered cake without nuts, instead of bawling about how the waitress was rude and the cake was badly made and how awful the restaurant is, and how bad I hate chocolate cake. Now, if the cake had been brought out, and it was all stale and moldy, and the waitress just sort of flung it at the table and never stopped by to fill my water glass, then yeah- then it would be bad. However, I just don't think most of today's games qualify as stale cake. I mean, I have played a lot of games, and in that mix have been plenty I did not enjoy- Kingdom Hearts, FFVII, FF Tactics Advance, Golden Sun, any pre-SNES LoZ game... but I think it would not only be the height of hubris, but also pretty damn silly of me to just write them off as badly made just because, for some reason or another, I didn't like it.
I guess I just get irked because I play a LOT of games, and have played a lot of games for years and years now- and I've played some games that were pretty damn awful. However, for each awful game I have played, I've played about 10 other ones that were at least okay, if not entirely suited for my tastes. So when I hear people *****ing about a game that they might not have enjoyed and condemning it as a game without any merit entirely due to the fact that it didn't appeal to them, I get highly annoyed. Today's gamers are spoiled enough as it is, so it blows my mind to think that they expect every disc they pop into their console not only be perfectly custom fit to their interests, but that everyone else should also share in their tastes.
I mean, come on. That would be like going down to the movie theater and expecting every movie to be a hallmark of your favorite genre.
I'm not really directing this rant at anyone, I'm just making it. Hopefully, you'll all be with the program enough by now to understand that.
There's never ever been an RPG that I've played where I couldn't pick out something I liked. Hell, even Beyond the Beyond has a couple of good points to me, and anyone whose touched it knows how BAD a game that is all-around.
A lot of American gamers forget the one cardinal rule of game production: no game is ever produced to appeal to everyone. There's always a specific market that a game is being made to appeal to. So yeah, there's always the chance that a casual RPGamer would pick up, say, Megaten 3 and hate it so much he could cry. That doesn't make the game bad by any stretch of the imagination, though. It's an exceptional game that wasn't made for that gamer. I mean I hate the Halo series and FPS games in general with a bloody passion, but I'm not so bold as to claim that they all suck just because I don't like them. Where's the logic in that?
Therefore, when I (and probably others) say something sucks, it is usually a personal opinion of the game and our reaction to the game. It doesn't mean the game should be removed from the face of the earth, by any means.
To me, a game is already worth at least taking a look at if people took the time and effort to code it, make it look good, and ship it out. Think of the hours and hours and weeks and weeks people spent working on that piece-of-crap game you'll never play. Appreciate the fact that people do that kind of stuff for you at all, so you'll even have an idea of what a 'good' and a 'bad' game is (to you).
Like freeform roleplaying? Try Darkness Befalls Us
Ryttare Kelasin Luna Orelinalei
No, you THINK it sucks. That one little omission of a word makes a big difference. That statement conveys that you didn't care for it. Your statement puts forth that the game is inherently bad- and the clincher is that you have made this judgment based entirely on the fact that you didn't like it. I can very much assure you that the quality of a game's production is not relative in any way whatsoever.
As for everything else you've played "in the genre", we could play that game ALL day, and I guarantee I could one-up anyone else here (except perhaps LittleDragon) every time, so don't use that as a qualifier.
... Especially since you ranked FF7 as one of your better games. I could go all day on how THAT reflects on your tastes and experiences.
You need to learn to say what you mean, then. People in general tend to use words that are not actually representative of what they mean, and that is one of my biggest pet peeves. For example, when people say they love something, they very rarely "love" it. They would be better off saying they enjoy it heavily, or have a strong fondness for it, or what have you.
I'm not implying that anyone is suggesting that games they don't like shouldn't have been made, I'm saying that the very notion that a game that doesn't cater to the tastes of a single individual should be a damning quality is silly, and a poor reflection on the attitude of a lot of gamers today, who tend to go all Comic Book Guy at the drop of a hat over a game that was never produced to amuse them and them alone in the first place, too. Again, the cake analogy is apt here- if I don't like chocolate cake, it's not a reflection on the quality of any given cake that would be made, nor on the baking skills of anyone who might make it. It's a reflection on my tastes and my tastes alone. The same applies here. If someone doesn't like a game, it's most likely because they just don't like it and it has nothing to do with the overall quality of the game whatsoever.
Edit: Since you are new here, it is probably wise for me to clarify- I am not attacking you personally. I realize my style of communication can come across as hostile and derisive at times, but I'm just trying to have a conversation in which people can feel free to disagree, so please do not take anything above as a personal comment or judgment. I figured it would be best to just put that out there before this conversation goes any further.
Exactly. I've gotten to the point where I have had just about enough of spoiled gamers who have to spoil the fun for everyone else because, God forbid, some game they picked up didn't happen to be the religious experience they've come to expect from their own favorite game. Again, maybe I'm too forgiving, but I just find it mindboggling how particular and fussy people are about their games. Despite popular opinions, I actually like a good 95% of all games I buy, despite the flaws, and even the ones I do not like I am willing to see that they have good qualities that others might enjoy. I know I like to pick on some of the more mainstream titles in that latter category, but I try not to ruin the fun for the fans of it, and I also try to reserve judging the games as "good" or "bad" based on my inherently objective opinions on it- as I'm not really in the position to do any better than the developers have done in the first place.
The only really "bad" games that come to mind are games of the sort that you see that are like, a new name slapped on a generic concept and sold for 10 bucks a pop in the PC Games aisle at the local Target or Walmart- the sort of games that are just thrown together to churn out a product, as opposed to the large, involved projects that are the standard fare of most new releases nowadays.
For example: I really, REALLY don't like Final Fantasy 7. It's my least favorite game of all time. If I simply say that I don't like it, people are much less likely to be offended than if I ranted on about how much it sucks. Saying "I don't like FF7" simply says that I myself don't like it. Saying "FF7 sucks" implies that anyone who does enjoy it simply doesn't realize yet how much it actually blows. Big difference.
I generally enjoy all RPGs I play, with a few marked exceptions like...*shudder*...Lost Magic. I'm an RPG collector, after all, so I can appreciate things other people either find to be a weakness in a game or never even notice in the first place.
I am still reading this thread fyi
It was a cool idea, to be sure, and it could've been fun as hell. It was just implemented in the wrong way, I think.
Also note that I said '3D Adventure game', not 'RPG'. The last time LoZ was anything like an RPG, it was back in 1988 with Zelda II.
As far as FF7 goes.. I admit, when I was younger, I was one of those mindless yammering Square fanboys who loved Final Fantasy 7. I loved FF so much, I hadn't even played the SNES/NES games and I thought they were great. FF7 was one of the first console RPGs I ever got to play (in actuality it was 9; I'll get to that in a second). Since my friends felt the same way, I was convinced that 7 was the best you could get. But now that I've had a chance to sit and reevaluate Final Fantasy as a whole, 7 is lacking luster. I played FF9 first, and loved it. Part of me loves 9 most of all. Then I played 7, then 8, then 10, 10-2, 12, then 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 on my DS. I've beaten 1, 2, 7, 9, and 10, and since I've gotten through a good chunk of these games, 7, in comparison, is not as golden as it looked.
What made it worse was the spin-offs. As much as I hated The Spirits Within, I admired it for taking what I knew about FF, throwing almost everything but the core elements of the games and turning it into a superb film. Advent Children almost felt like 'Final Fantasy VII-2'. It was a good film, but it did nothing to improve the original game. And neither do anything else. At this point, they're beyond beating a dead horse and dragging it through the mud. They're just embarassing themselves.
But is FF7 so bad? Nah. It's not that good to me anymore, which is what I think Photon was trying to say in the first place. Games aren't inherently good or bad. They're just what you make them.
[/soapbox]
Like freeform roleplaying? Try Darkness Befalls Us
Ryttare Kelasin Luna Orelinalei
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Clan RepresentativeI, personally, wait for reviews on the game and base my buying decision on it. If I don't like a game, that's what I say when the topic comes to it. Not any of the "zOMG it sux0rz teh big!11!!1!"
It's sort of like the Rumor Mill. Every new card that comes out is awful, and every new set is a failure, and everything is just absolutely done wrong, and everyone knows better than everyone else, and of COURSE, whatever format you play in is the only one that should be considered when WotC releases a new set- it's that sort of inanity that drives me crazy. I'll admit, sometimes nothing is more fun than complaining about something you don't like, but there is always a limit- and when you get to the point in which you begin to expect everything released, be it a game or a new set or a movie or whatever, to be tailored to your standards every time, it gets old for everyone who has to hear about it.
Also, it's like Rumor Mill in the way that whenever something comes out, it is so bad its a travesty, but within a few months, people's tunes have changed completely.
I don't really rely on reviews much, though, since even professional review sites don't review very objectively anymore. I tend to actually research a new game through the fans of the game and through actual game information- by looking up fan communities and FAQs and game mechanics, videos, and release site info. That's how I make my choices- FAQs and mechanic guides present the meat of the game in a way that is without hype, release sites showcase the best of what the game has without other input (so you can sort of see how the game is intended to be presented), and fan communities are generally very honest with the strengths and weaknesses of a game, and tend to speak about it with a great deal more insight than say, some dude who played the demo or some guy who rented it and played it for 5 hours.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Clan RepresentativeEdit to respond to Photon: True. I try to not get too excited by somrthing that when it doesn't live up to my expectations I am let down. Take the movie 300 for instance. I watched it 2 days ago and before, everyone I asked was like "This movie rocks, it's so awesome!", but personally, I didn't really like it. Sure the fighting bits were kinda cool, but as a movie in general, it wasn't for me.
Edit2: We always complain in Cross-country about stuff, but you don't ever see us quit. It helps to let out stress by complaining, I have discovered.
I can understand being disappointed by a game, especially if you are younger and do not necessarily have the money to be blowing 50 bucks on a new game every couple of weeks. However, anymore, with today's secondary game market, you can always return it and at least get a decent portion of your money back. However, this is why I wish people would look into a game in detail before they buy it, instead of just sort of buying whatever seems to be receiving the most hype on GameSiteX at the moment, because it would lead to a lot fewer gamers picking up games they may not enjoy and spending their money on something they might like more. This is also at the heart of my irritation with gamers that only stick with the big name franchises.
I think, too, that a lot of time people become overly negative because they wind up disappointed. At the end of the day, it doesn't really bother me if someone thinks a game I like sucks- I mean, it doesn't change how I feel or how I play it, but it is just needless negativism that can bring a conversation down, and it can dissuade people from buying something they might really love for no good reason, which is a shame- and it's something that has caused many many of my favorite games to never be brought to the US.
On average, I get a new RPG about every 2 weeks, sometimes more. Hell, this last weekend I got 4 new games, and that isn't even the worst splurge I've done on the hobby (one December I bought 9 in a 2 week period). A lot of the times I buy just to try something new, or to fill out the collection, but most of the time I do it after having spent a good deal of time poking around various places to find info on the title first- and I can admit that in the past I have made a game purchase I regretted (Lost Magic comes to mind, also Golden Sun), but most of the time I get a game knowing what to expect, so it doesn't happen very often anymore.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Clan RepresentativeThough, I must say. Dynasty Warriors should just stop >.<
I'm guessing some Dynasty Warriors fans would beg to differ.
Sidenote: Anyone else in here still playing Pokemon Diamond and Pearl, and have access to Wifi? I'm looking for some active sparring partners, since the MBaG crapped out, and my household has moved on to Etrian Odyssey.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Clan RepresentativeMeh, same thing.
Could you? I'm curious. The storyline in that game was amazing, and the battle system was actually very good, as well as the game being designed well in general (except for the japanese to english mistakes).
Actually, I feel FFXII was poorly made. I just feel that it did have some good elements that others might like. For me, however, the bad greatly outweighed the good.
No problem. I actually apreciate this conversation a lot. But your conversation style is slightly harsh and may be misinterpreted by someone else, who has a lesser love for
argumentsconversation.Ugh. It is painful. Except, usually it is not the money spent on the game, it is the time spent (I get most of my games as gifts, which explains why I haven't played very many). Spending 30+ hours on a game you really don't enjoy just because you started it and feel obligated to finish it is possibly the most traumatic thing one can do to a gamer.
Anyhoo...
Seeing as I don't really have much experience with games, what are some good rpgs (or adventure games) for me to get? Storyline is of the utmost importance to me (which is why The Third Age was rather tedious, even though it was made really well). I have a PS2 and a Gamecube. And a kind-of-crappy 'pooter.
Like freeform roleplaying? Try Darkness Befalls Us
Ryttare Kelasin Luna Orelinalei