The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Hi,
I've always been puzzled by the massive success of the Final Fantasy series. I'm just as astonished on how many people like its disjointed interaction that it calls gameplay. I mean, the battles are done on a AI level with little interaction from the player, you just press the attack button and random calculations are made based on if your character is quicker, stronger, or has special abilities that the enemy finds septuple to. You just sit back and watch the computer fighting with it self, occasionally changing its path so that it can continue to fight but in a different manner. If you think about it, your not playing the game at all, but rather the game is playing you. The computer is using you as a tool so it can continue on performing random patterns and calculations, and probably is enjoying every moment of it, too.
So I say this. Make a stand for what is right, say NO to turn-based RPGs and say yes to real-time ones. It's the way RPGs are ment to be played, and if some developer can break this awful trend that is turn-based combat, then I think we'll be back in the good old days of such classics as Zelda, Illusions Of Time and Terranigma.
I've never liked a turn-based RPG up to this day, and I've played alot of them I can tell you. Would you ever replay an RPG after all that stopping and starting, stopping and starting? I would rather put my nads in a vice.
I've always been puzzled by the massive success of the Final Fantasy series. I'm just as astonished on how many people like its disjointed interaction that it calls gameplay. I mean, the battles are done on a AI level with little interaction from the player, you just press the attack button and random calculations are made based on if your character is quicker, stronger, or has special abilities that the enemy finds septuple to. You just sit back and watch the computer fighting with it self, occasionally changing its path so that it can continue to fight but in a different manner. If you think about it, your not playing the game at all, but rather the game is playing you. The computer is using you as a tool so it can continue on performing random patterns and calculations, and probably is enjoying every moment of it, too.
So I say this. Make a stand for what is right, say NO to turn-based RPGs and say yes to real-time ones. It's the way RPGs are ment to be played, and if some developer can break this awful trend that is turn-based combat, then I think we'll be back in the good old days of such classics as Zelda, Illusions Of Time and Terranigma.
I've never liked a turn-based RPG up to this day, and I've played alot of them I can tell you. Would you ever replay an RPG after all that stopping and starting, stopping and starting? I would rather put my nads in a vice.
Page:
Hi,
I've always been puzzled by the massive success of the Final Fantasy series. I'm just as astonished on how many people like its disjointed interaction that it calls gameplay. I mean, the battles are done on a AI level with little interaction from the player, you just press the attack button and random calculations are made based on if your character is quicker, stronger, or has special abilities that the enemy finds septuple to. You just sit back and watch the computer fighting with it self, occasionally changing its path so that it can continue to fight but in a different manner. If you think about it, your not playing the game at all, but rather the game is playing you. The computer is using you as a tool so it can continue on performing random patterns and calculations, and probably is enjoying every moment of it, too.
So I say this. Make a stand for what is right, say NO to turn-based RPGs and say yes to real-time ones. It's the way RPGs are ment to be played, and if some developer can break this awful trend that is turn-based combat, then I think we'll be back in the good old days of such classics as Zelda, Illusions Of Time and Terranigma.
I've never liked a turn-based RPG up to this day, and I've played alot of them I can tell you. Would you ever replay an RPG after all that stopping and starting, stopping and starting? I would rather put my nads in a vice.
I've always been puzzled by the massive success of the Final Fantasy series. I'm just as astonished on how many people like its disjointed interaction that it calls gameplay. I mean, the battles are done on a AI level with little interaction from the player, you just press the attack button and random calculations are made based on if your character is quicker, stronger, or has special abilities that the enemy finds septuple to. You just sit back and watch the computer fighting with it self, occasionally changing its path so that it can continue to fight but in a different manner. If you think about it, your not playing the game at all, but rather the game is playing you. The computer is using you as a tool so it can continue on performing random patterns and calculations, and probably is enjoying every moment of it, too.
So I say this. Make a stand for what is right, say NO to turn-based RPGs and say yes to real-time ones. It's the way RPGs are ment to be played, and if some developer can break this awful trend that is turn-based combat, then I think we'll be back in the good old days of such classics as Zelda, Illusions Of Time and Terranigma.
I've never liked a turn-based RPG up to this day, and I've played alot of them I can tell you. Would you ever replay an RPG after all that stopping and starting, stopping and starting? I would rather put my nads in a vice.
I think Final Fantasy is good, but it has become repetitive in some aspects. It always features a male main character, who has love interest with one or two other characters. The story, although always different, is always save the world. Why can't we try and destroy a planet for once or something? Also, they all feature:
2 male strong characters. (Barret & Vincent, Zell and Irvine, Steiner and Amarant, Kimahri and Auron)
1 male magician man (Red XIII,, Vivi, Wakka>
1 average male who leads (Cloud, Squall, Zidane, Tidus)
1 strong (ish) woman (Tifa, Quistis, Freya, Lulu)
1 very weak woman (Aeris, Rinoa & Selphie, Dagger/Garnet, Yuna)
1 summoner (, , Eiko, Yuna)
It's all quite predictable really, although characters cah aler from strong to weak or vice versa, that is through the individual player, and anyone knows Aeris sucked unless you constantly made her deal the winning blow.
2 male strong characters. (Barret & Vincent, Zell and Irvine, Steiner and Amarant, Kimahri and Auron)
1 male magician man (Red XIII,
1 average male who leads (Cloud, Squall, Zidane, Tidus)
1 strong (ish) woman (Tifa, Quistis, Freya, Lulu)
1 very weak woman (Aeris, Rinoa & Selphie, Dagger/Garnet, Yuna)
1 summoner (
It's all quite predictable really, although characters cah aler from strong to weak or vice versa, that is through the individual player, and anyone knows Aeris sucked unless you constantly made her deal the winning blow.
Garnet is also a summoner in FF9...
Well, if it was all hype, I don't think I'd own every FF released over here.
The battles aren't like that anyway. In FFX especially, when things like Haste, Slow and Poison really change a battle around. Staegic use of spells, summons, or physical attacks are needed.
And fighting Ruby Weapon for 45 minutes is blummin' exiting when you're hanging on by a few HP, and if he gets a turn in before you can use a Megaelixer, you'll die.
The battles, in this repect, are not as repetative as the other types where it is practically hack 'n' slash.
The battles aren't like that anyway. In FFX especially, when things like Haste, Slow and Poison really change a battle around. Staegic use of spells, summons, or physical attacks are needed.
And fighting Ruby Weapon for 45 minutes is blummin' exiting when you're hanging on by a few HP, and if he gets a turn in before you can use a Megaelixer, you'll die.
The battles, in this repect, are not as repetative as the other types where it is practically hack 'n' slash.
FFX was my first, and probably my last, FF game.
Final Fantasy X is good, but there definately has be changes made if I am going to buy future installments. Theres only so many repetitive random battles you can take...
Asher D wrote:
> 2 male strong characters. (Barret & Vincent, Zell and Irvine, Steiner and Amarant, Kimahri and Auron)
Vincent isn't a strong man, he uses a gun. Irvine isn't a strong man either, he's feminine and uses also uses a gun.
> 1 male magician man (Red XIII,, Vivi,
> Wakka>
Wakka isn't a magician. If 8 doesn't really count, it isn't always true, is it?
> 1 average male who leads (Cloud, Squall, Zidane, Tidus)
Zidane had a tail and was a famous actor, Tidus was a superstar Blitzball player. Average?
> 1 strong (ish) woman (Tifa, Quistis, Freya, Lulu)
Freya wasn't even a woman. Lulu is weak as hell.
> 1 very weak woman (Aeris, Rinoa & Selphie, Dagger/Garnet, Yuna)
You say one weak woman, then give two for FF8. Rinoa and Selphie are just as strong as Quistis.
> 1 summoner (, ,
> Eiko, Yuna)
FF7 and 8 don't have summoners, so that's another thing that doesn't always happen.
> It's all quite predictable really,
Well I think I've just proved you wrong.
> 2 male strong characters. (Barret & Vincent, Zell and Irvine, Steiner and Amarant, Kimahri and Auron)
Vincent isn't a strong man, he uses a gun. Irvine isn't a strong man either, he's feminine and uses also uses a gun.
> 1 male magician man (Red XIII,
> Wakka>
Wakka isn't a magician. If 8 doesn't really count, it isn't always true, is it?
> 1 average male who leads (Cloud, Squall, Zidane, Tidus)
Zidane had a tail and was a famous actor, Tidus was a superstar Blitzball player. Average?
> 1 strong (ish) woman (Tifa, Quistis, Freya, Lulu)
Freya wasn't even a woman. Lulu is weak as hell.
> 1 very weak woman (Aeris, Rinoa & Selphie, Dagger/Garnet, Yuna)
You say one weak woman, then give two for FF8. Rinoa and Selphie are just as strong as Quistis.
> 1 summoner (
> Eiko, Yuna)
FF7 and 8 don't have summoners, so that's another thing that doesn't always happen.
> It's all quite predictable really,
Well I think I've just proved you wrong.
What's all this rubbish about merely altering the computer's path slightly? Perhaps in the earliest stages of the game it may feel like that - all ya do is press X to attack, or sometimes use a potion or magic spell, but thats absolutely stupid to say it about later parts of the game.
When you`re near completion, the range of moves available is incredible. The choice you have, gah, I`m not even going to bother finishing this. Before you completely slate a game, try completing it properly.
When you`re near completion, the range of moves available is incredible. The choice you have, gah, I`m not even going to bother finishing this. Before you completely slate a game, try completing it properly.
xBeanx wrote:
> I would rather put my
> nads in a vice.
Fine by me. When we're all enjoying the next blockbuster hit, you'll be cluthing your testicles and shouting at us for having fun.
Also, relating to my last post, Cloud is a specialist mercenary and Squall is a SeeD. Not average, really.
> I would rather put my
> nads in a vice.
Fine by me. When we're all enjoying the next blockbuster hit, you'll be cluthing your testicles and shouting at us for having fun.
Also, relating to my last post, Cloud is a specialist mercenary and Squall is a SeeD. Not average, really.
well i personally think they went a bit soft on the bosses in FFX coz after a while ur guys a to good to lose. my thre main guys take of 99 999 each attack on most enemies and i beat braskas final summoning with three strikes, or was it two. once u beat him though u cant lose. which is pretty pointless. But i reckoon ur f***in mad to say that the game sucks. it is one of the best games been made. so are all the other FF games. i dunno why but i would buy a new ff game over vice city if i had to choose. but if i did id probly have to nick my friends vice city. if ff10 had harder bosses like in the other ones it would be much better but hey who gives a s***. Im running around at the moment trying to max my stats.
Also it takes alot of thinking and puzzle solving to do parts of final fantasy. i played zelda once and though it was crap. why would i play that when i could play FFX which has heaps good graphics, great game play. the battles do get annoying when im trying to capture a certain species and i never get to fight them but hey ill live. If A final fantasy game was like Zelda i would take away most the fun. It would have some fun but not as much. since zelda is a nintendo game if u dont like ps games buy nintendo gmes.
Also it takes alot of thinking and puzzle solving to do parts of final fantasy. i played zelda once and though it was crap. why would i play that when i could play FFX which has heaps good graphics, great game play. the battles do get annoying when im trying to capture a certain species and i never get to fight them but hey ill live. If A final fantasy game was like Zelda i would take away most the fun. It would have some fun but not as much. since zelda is a nintendo game if u dont like ps games buy nintendo gmes.
Page: