The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
When it comes to role playing games they don't get much bigger than Final Fantasy or Zelda, except for Pokemon but I have decided not to compare that. While Final Fantasy rules the Playstion world with it's long puzzling adventures that are spread over several disk, the Zelda series is busy dominating the Nintendo world. Final Fantasy uses things like random battles that you can't actually see coming, but if you win one you are rewarded with experience points to try and build up you characters level. Zelda on the other hand has a singel character called Link that doesn't level up he just gets more energy hearts, also link can see all of the enemys he has to fight and can use this to his advantage and choose to avoid most of them. As you will probably know in Final Fantasy you control a team of three characters where as in the Zelda series the only character you control is Link.
Both the Final Fantasy and Zelda games proved to be very popular with the fans of their respective consoles but my question to you is who is the true role playing game masters.
Would you choose Final Fantasy over Zelda?
Would you choose Cloud and the gang over Link?
Would you choose Square over Nintendo?
Remeber there is no need for argument just simply state your opinion. Well ok then if you want to argue who am I to stop you, I'm just a stick. Let the argument begin.
Both the Final Fantasy and Zelda games proved to be very popular with the fans of their respective consoles but my question to you is who is the true role playing game masters.
Would you choose Final Fantasy over Zelda?
Would you choose Cloud and the gang over Link?
Would you choose Square over Nintendo?
Remeber there is no need for argument just simply state your opinion. Well ok then if you want to argue who am I to stop you, I'm just a stick. Let the argument begin.
Page:
i thought zelda was a mix of both
Zelda definatly but one thing!
Zeldfa isn't an RPG it is an adventure game!
Zeldfa isn't an RPG it is an adventure game!
I would choose the Zelda series over Final Fantasy because the FF series for me is to slow and takes to long, not enough things to do and to boring but zelda on the other hand has puzzles, shops, mini games (fishing on zelda ocarina of time keeps me coming back for more, even if it is 10 rupees a go sheeeshh)
The lock on mode is a nice little touch but what is really great is the camera system, it is the best I have seen. Zelda a link to the past on Gameboy is some fun I can tell you I have just started a new file and am having great joy with it! If you have a Gameboy get Zelda a link to the past, or better still Tetris that’s one hell of an addiction, it’s a hell of a lot worse than crack ;)
The lock on mode is a nice little touch but what is really great is the camera system, it is the best I have seen. Zelda a link to the past on Gameboy is some fun I can tell you I have just started a new file and am having great joy with it! If you have a Gameboy get Zelda a link to the past, or better still Tetris that’s one hell of an addiction, it’s a hell of a lot worse than crack ;)
The Zelda64 system is fantastic! A much more hands on experience that makes you feel right in the thick of the battle. You get to control the characters movements; press the attack button and he'll attack, press the dodge button and see him dive out the way.
However, this wonderfully instinctive style of battle, with the revolutionary lock on system, comes with one minor flaw. It makes the battles far too easy. If you know what you're doing (and it doesn't take long to work out) you can take out any boss either of the Zelda games throw at you, pretty much without getting hit.
Final Fantasy adopts a turn based idea and within these confines, functions as well if not better than most. However, turn based fighting is definately not for everyone and does take some getteing used to. I remember when I first encountered turn based fighting in FF7 it took me a while to accept that, however good I got at the fights, I was always going to get hit.
You don't really get the same "in the thick of it" feeling with turn based fighting. But once you get used to it, it can be just as enjoyable, just not as frantic.
I personally would like to see an updated version of of the "Secret of Mana" style of battle. This falls somewhere between the Zelda and the Final Fantasy (I'm thinking, within the confines of the SNES here).
If they took the SoM style of frantic sword swinging with attacking and defensive magic, but then updated it with a Zelda 64 style lock on system and maybe a few of the PSX Final Fantasy games elements, I think that would be my ideal style of RPG fighting.
I think that the Final Fantasy battle system, tiresome though it can be, offers more of a challenge than the Zelda battle system on the N64.
Final Fantasy forces you to think tactically, especially when fighting bosses.
There is of course a third style of RPG fighting which can be seen in games like; Vagrant story on the PSX or Summoner on the PS2. This style involves using "chain attacks" were if you time it right you can hack a baddy to death by tagging all of your moves together and not get hit, but if you miss time an attack then you have to take some punishment.
It could be argued that this falls somewher in between Zelda and FF, but it's not in the 'right' way if you ask me.
It's an interesting system, but not one I'm keen on, I suppose if they tweek it in certain ways it could have potential.
Time will tell.
However, this wonderfully instinctive style of battle, with the revolutionary lock on system, comes with one minor flaw. It makes the battles far too easy. If you know what you're doing (and it doesn't take long to work out) you can take out any boss either of the Zelda games throw at you, pretty much without getting hit.
Final Fantasy adopts a turn based idea and within these confines, functions as well if not better than most. However, turn based fighting is definately not for everyone and does take some getteing used to. I remember when I first encountered turn based fighting in FF7 it took me a while to accept that, however good I got at the fights, I was always going to get hit.
You don't really get the same "in the thick of it" feeling with turn based fighting. But once you get used to it, it can be just as enjoyable, just not as frantic.
I personally would like to see an updated version of of the "Secret of Mana" style of battle. This falls somewhere between the Zelda and the Final Fantasy (I'm thinking, within the confines of the SNES here).
If they took the SoM style of frantic sword swinging with attacking and defensive magic, but then updated it with a Zelda 64 style lock on system and maybe a few of the PSX Final Fantasy games elements, I think that would be my ideal style of RPG fighting.
I think that the Final Fantasy battle system, tiresome though it can be, offers more of a challenge than the Zelda battle system on the N64.
Final Fantasy forces you to think tactically, especially when fighting bosses.
There is of course a third style of RPG fighting which can be seen in games like; Vagrant story on the PSX or Summoner on the PS2. This style involves using "chain attacks" were if you time it right you can hack a baddy to death by tagging all of your moves together and not get hit, but if you miss time an attack then you have to take some punishment.
It could be argued that this falls somewher in between Zelda and FF, but it's not in the 'right' way if you ask me.
It's an interesting system, but not one I'm keen on, I suppose if they tweek it in certain ways it could have potential.
Time will tell.
http://images.reserve.co.uk /www/public/images/ icon/nothing.gif
hehehe... sorry... anyway, I like them both just the same
hehehe... sorry... anyway, I like them both just the same
I choose Bus over Simon
When it comes to role playing games they don't get much bigger than Final Fantasy or Zelda, except for Pokemon but I have decided not to compare that. While Final Fantasy rules the Playstion world with it's long puzzling adventures that are spread over several disk, the Zelda series is busy dominating the Nintendo world. Final Fantasy uses things like random battles that you can't actually see coming, but if you win one you are rewarded with experience points to try and build up you characters level. Zelda on the other hand has a singel character called Link that doesn't level up he just gets more energy hearts, also link can see all of the enemys he has to fight and can use this to his advantage and choose to avoid most of them. As you will probably know in Final Fantasy you control a team of three characters where as in the Zelda series the only character you control is Link.
Both the Final Fantasy and Zelda games proved to be very popular with the fans of their respective consoles but my question to you is who is the true role playing game masters.
Would you choose Final Fantasy over Zelda?
Would you choose Cloud and the gang over Link?
Would you choose Square over Nintendo?
Remeber there is no need for argument just simply state your opinion. Well ok then if you want to argue who am I to stop you, I'm just a stick. Let the argument begin.
Both the Final Fantasy and Zelda games proved to be very popular with the fans of their respective consoles but my question to you is who is the true role playing game masters.
Would you choose Final Fantasy over Zelda?
Would you choose Cloud and the gang over Link?
Would you choose Square over Nintendo?
Remeber there is no need for argument just simply state your opinion. Well ok then if you want to argue who am I to stop you, I'm just a stick. Let the argument begin.
Page: