Lost Levels Forums

The time now is Thu Mar 28, 2024 8:58 am

November 2003 - Elusions: Final Fantasy IV / Seiken Densetsu
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Lost Levels Forum Index -> Front Page News & Articles
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Kitsune
FURRY


Joined: 20 Nov 2003
Posts: 318
Location: Mexico

PostPosted: Sun Mar 14, 2004 8:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

KlarthAilerion wrote:
Show me a Squaresoft game that lets the player control the role and course of the character, and that also came out in the States.


Um. King's Knight? *runs*
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Linquesan



Joined: 29 Jan 2004
Posts: 20

PostPosted: Mon Mar 15, 2004 4:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

KlarthAilerion wrote:
RPG stands for role playing game. Show me a Squaresoft game that lets the player control the role and course of the character, and that also came out in the States. The closest I can see is Chrono Trigger, and as good as that game is, you're still confined to an extremely narrow role and potential paths of gameplay. And that game came out in 1995. What about the rest of the decade?


So you don't like Square's RPGs because it doesn't fit the correct definition ( :roll: ) of an RPG game? Awesome.

Whatever genre their games fit under, I find them fun. They have plots, strategy, good graphics...it's just generally fun. It doesn't seem like you've even touched the new Final Fantasy games from what you've said about "dressing up". Dresspheres is the job system...not dressing up for some fruity fun.

FFs are probably considered role playing because you assume the role...you don't control their path, you just follow it. It's still largely in a way an RPG.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
anarchy99



Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 102
Location: Austin TX

PostPosted: Mon Mar 15, 2004 8:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I, uhh, I think you guys are missing my point. :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
KlarthAilerion
Staff
Staff


Joined: 26 Aug 2003
Posts: 673
Location: New Orleans, LA

PostPosted: Mon Mar 15, 2004 9:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Linquesan wrote:
KlarthAilerion wrote:
RPG stands for role playing game. Show me a Squaresoft game that lets the player control the role and course of the character, and that also came out in the States. The closest I can see is Chrono Trigger, and as good as that game is, you're still confined to an extremely narrow role and potential paths of gameplay. And that game came out in 1995. What about the rest of the decade?


So you don't like Square's RPGs because it doesn't fit the correct definition ( :roll: ) of an RPG game? Awesome.

Whatever genre their games fit under, I find them fun. They have plots, strategy, good graphics...it's just generally fun. It doesn't seem like you've even touched the new Final Fantasy games from what you've said about "dressing up". Dresspheres is the job system...not dressing up for some fruity fun.

FFs are probably considered role playing because you assume the role...you don't control their path, you just follow it. It's still largely in a way an RPG.


Show me where I said I don't like the games. I own I through X, I don't own X-2, and I'm not ever going to buy XI because I don't support either paying for a game twice or paying for a game that won't even be playable in five years due to lack of hardware support (ie: servers). I've given Square a nice little chunk of my money, and I have the right to decide to not give them any more of my money if I think their products are lagging.

The Legend of Zelda is a fun action/adventure game, although it doesn't have the menu-driven simplicity of a Final Fantasy game. Nor does it have FMVs and flashy graphics. It does have a pretty crappy translation, though. It was also released in the US in 1986. I'm looking for something more in games now, almost 20 years later.

By the way, you assume the role of a racecar driver in Rad Racer. Is that an RPG too?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ancient Oldie



Joined: 28 Nov 2003
Posts: 60

PostPosted: Mon Mar 15, 2004 10:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Linquesan wrote:


So you don't like Square's RPGs because it doesn't fit the correct definition ( :roll: ) of an RPG game? Awesome.


I don't think he said he didn't like them, but he did make a good point about the true definition of RPG's.

Quote:
Whatever genre their games fit under, I find them fun. They have plots, strategy, good graphics...it's just generally fun. It doesn't seem like you've even touched the new Final Fantasy games from what you've said about "dressing up". Dresspheres is the job system...not dressing up for some fruity fun.

FFs are probably considered role playing because you assume the role...you don't control their path, you just follow it. It's still largely in a way an RPG.


When you take into consideration the history of RPG's, back since the days of pen and paper, you'll realize that RPG's are supposed to let you assume a certain level of control over your character and their destinies. The new FF's have limited them to the point where it feels like an interactive movie, and all you have to do is mash a couple of buttons in battle (no challenge) and move to point a, then talk to person in point b, etc,. If I was to follow your definition of the genre, then Dragon's Lair, and just about any other game for that matter, is an rpg.

Quote:
These days the plot of FFs are deeper than ever before. I didn't consider any of the 16-bit storylines "deep" or anything - they were pretty basic yet still fun. FF7 has one of the deepest and intricate storylines of a video game ever. I think it probably is the deepest, but I could be missing some games. I'm not kidding either; Square didn't spend millions on this game for a piece of shit.


Well, to be honest, I wasn't attacking FFVII itself, just that it made RPG's mainstream. Most game companies have tried to copy its formula by creating RPG's whose gameplay is secondary to intrigue-ridden, prepubescent love stories and snazzy graphics that have permeated most of the latest FF's. Heh, you will not find such repetitious tripe anywhere else unless you turn on Univision and watch their spanish soaps... and at least those soaps have some fine women in them. Also, the reason why they were good in the 16-bit days is that their gameplay was new, fresh and unique at the time. Now, they have become stagnant and rather boring.

As for FFVII having "one of the deepest and intricate storylines of a video game ever," please.... do yourself a favor and pickup a copy of Planescape: Torment, or any of the Fallout games, or even Xenogears if you can swallow a mediocre battle engine and a shitload of fillers (by fillers, I mean the game aspect of Xenogears) just to name a few.

Quote:
Say what you want about Square and FF (personally, give me FFVIII over FFVI any day), but you can give them full credit for just about every single RPG that's been released stateside since 1998. Especially Xenogears, and Disgaea, and Arc the Lad, and the two or three Tales games that Namco's seen fit to release over here to stellar sales.


You do have a point there, but they still feel like the same kind of games that I mentioned previously. I haven't tried the first Arc the Lads game released on the PS1, but I did buy the PS2 version, and that storyline just made me turn the game off in disgust. Its plot was so cliched and corny that I couldn't bear through another iteration of said crap.

Quote:
Sure, they've gone more mainstream (I can guarantee you Kingdom Hearts would never have been considered ten years ago), but there's plenty of games that can fill your "underground" quota, that wouldn't have had a chance if it weren't for the genre's newfound popularity, established by FF.


The thing is, I don't want an "underground" RPG. I want an RPG that either has unique, refreshing gameplay and/or a good nonlinear plot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kitsune
FURRY


Joined: 20 Nov 2003
Posts: 318
Location: Mexico

PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 2:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ancient Oldie wrote:
Heh, you will not find such repetitious tripe anywhere else unless you turn on Univision and watch their spanish soaps... and at least those soaps have some fine women in them.


Square has nothing on us. We've rehashed the same basic storyline for soap operas since 1959! :P
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Linquesan



Joined: 29 Jan 2004
Posts: 20

PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 2:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

KlarthAilerion wrote:

By the way, you assume the role of a racecar driver in Rad Racer. Is that an RPG too?


You're missing my point. In FF you assume the role of characters, it's just that their path has already been determined...no matter how you'd like to define RPG, it's lightyears closer to an "actual" RPG than Rad Racer or any other random generic game where you control someone. And you know it. You just seemed to be complaining about FF's false classification as an RPG as one of your reasons why you didn't like FF.

And Torment: Planescape's plot was horrible. I'm not kidding when I say FF7 has the best plot I've seen in a game - it's akin to some classic literature like Animal Farm or Scarlet Letter. Certain events stand for something else than they seem and...well just read that link I posted earlier in the thread. I didn't think that much of FF7's plot at all until I read it. It's really amazing for a video game.

Also, if you think FF's battle system is a problem, play FFX-2. Seriously. That's something anyone can like - it's pretty involved and it's extremely quick (if set on active that is). You won't be bored at any time, it's pretty intense and can be fun.

I can't defend all of the Final Fantasies. They have their problems. I just think FF7 specifically lives up to all the hype it's ever had...not enough can be said about that game's impact on video games past 1997. I don't think any other game within the last 10 years, maybe 15 years had that kind of impact.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
treeman



Joined: 19 Sep 2003
Posts: 98

PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 3:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You give FF7 way too much credit. It's the only FF game that I actually stopped playing for months because it was boring the hell out of me. The only impact FF7 had was that it became a popular title and made Square a lot of money. All it did was take a system that already existed and added a little 3D touch to it's appearance. I think Dragon Quest 1 made much more of an impact that FF7 could ever dream of. Final Fantasy 1 just improved on it and every FF game after that improved a little more (with a few exceptions), FF7 really wasn't anything special, it was just the most popular FF game at that time. Compared to later FF games, it pales in comparison. The plot wasn't all that great, it just wasn't 100% clear as to what was really going on (which, if you think about it, actually makes FF7 look worse). Most people that started with FF7 can't see past it and they convince themselves that it's the best thing since sliced bread. It's normal, most people love the first FF game they played above all others...

I will agree with you on X-2, as long as you don't take the game too serious, you'll have fun playing it (however, if you play it with the impression that it'll be another fantasic journey, then you'll be VERY disappointed - Also, the percentage system was something that FF could really have done without)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
KlarthAilerion
Staff
Staff


Joined: 26 Aug 2003
Posts: 673
Location: New Orleans, LA

PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 3:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I see the point you're trying to make, I just don't think that you're thinking with a clear (ie: unbiased) head on the issue.

In Metal Gear Solid you assume the role of Snake, and the path has already been determined. In Castlevania you assume the role of Simon Belmont, and your path has already been determined. In CVIII, even though your overall quest has been pre-determined, you get to make choices to traverse different paths and control different characters along those paths. In Adventures of Lolo, you control the character through mazes against an array of enemies with different characteristics and must carefully choose the steps you take in order to travel your pre-determined path. Are any of those games any more role playing games than Final Fantasy games, or are they any less role playing games than Final Fantasy games?

Chrono Trigger is closer to being a role playing game than any of the games in the Final Fantasy series (sans maybe Tactics). The paths you take determine the outcome of the game, moreso than just which characters you have in your party. And that was an awesome feature to have in a game. In 1995.

A role playing game doesn't necessarily need a plot to be a good role playing game. I've never played Everquest so I don't know if the game has an underlying plot or not, but that is more along the lines of a role playing game than any Final Fantasy game I've played to date (I haven't played XI, so I don't know how it measures up). I've never played Torment, either, so I don't have any comments on that game. But a role playing game isn't supposed to be completely about the story or the setting. The focus is supposed to be on making decisions that affect the character who's role you, as the player, are playing. Determining the choices the character makes and, thus, the role that the character takes during the course of the game is the primary concept of what makes a role playing game.

And I'm sorry, but I'm not going to be convinced that a different form of button mashing makes a game more of a role playing game. If I want extremely quick button mashing, I'll pull out Track & Field II. By the way, you control the destiny of the main characters (aspiring olympic athletes who have to compete in various events) in Track & Field II. You can take different routes through different events in order to reach your final pre-determined path, the gold medal. There's no FMV and very little written story, but Track & Field II is clearly a role playing game, by your own definition.

You shouldn't have to defend anything about a game, nor should you have to defend your opinions about said game. I may not necessarily think that you're "not a fanboy" and I definitely don't agree with your definition of what constitutes a role playing game, but if you like the games then play them. Just don't be surprised when other people don't fall in line with your exact line of thinking about this subject.

Also, if I didn't like the Final Fantasy games, why would I own the first twelve of them (not counting the Game Boy titles [which weren't actually Final Fantasy titles], other than Final Fantasy Tactics Advance)? And the whole thing about Final Fantasy VII being the most influential game since 1989 (or even 1994, if you want to use the short end of your statement).. rediculous. That may be your opinion, but if you truly believe that most gamers would recognized that to be fact then you need to spend a little time learning about the history of post-1983-crash video games.

I still don't think you're understanding what I'm saying with my posts, but you don't have to. I do, however, think that I get your point pretty well. I just happen to disagree with you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Linquesan



Joined: 29 Jan 2004
Posts: 20

PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 5:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

treeman wrote:
You give FF7 way too much credit. It's the only FF game that I actually stopped playing for months because it was boring the hell out of me. The only impact FF7 had was that it became a popular title and made Square a lot of money. All it did was take a system that already existed and added a little 3D touch to it's appearance. I think Dragon Quest 1 made much more of an impact that FF7 could ever dream of. Final Fantasy 1 just improved on it and every FF game after that improved a little more (with a few exceptions), FF7 really wasn't anything special, it was just the most popular FF game at that time. Compared to later FF games, it pales in comparison. The plot wasn't all that GRATE, it just wasn't 100% clear as to what was really going on (which, if you think about it, actually makes FF7 look worse). Most people that started with FF7 can't see past it and they convince themselves that it's the best thing since sliced bread. It's normal, most people love the first FF game they played above all others...)


The first Final Fantasy I played was Final Fantasy 2 (IV), for one thing...a long time before FF7 came out. I think that can give you a feeling about how much I am impressed with FF7, that it's not even my first impression of the series and I like it.

The plot wasn't supposed to be clear at all (it's really supposed to be hidden) and that's why I think it's a great plot. The whole theme of the game was things do not appear what they seem to be, and they have several examples of this throughout the game. Like when Cid was blaming his wife or whatever for not being able to get into space, she in actuality saved his life...she didn't ruin anything for him. Also with Sephiroth, who wasn't really the bad guy, it was Jenova...same with Cloud, who wasn't really the good guy, it was Aeris...etc. No matter what I say, you won't be convinced it's a genius plot, so if you're in any way interested just read that link...and beside plot there really isn't anything "special" about it compared to other games.

FF7 is so influential because of it's immense popularity. Every RPG you've seen since 1997 has been in some way influenced by FF7, all the cut scenes and graphics you see have been affected by FF7, etc...it's sort of undeniable. It set a standard of quality, at least graphically. You may think it was a horrible and confusing plot, but many were impressed by it's graphics if you were around to play it in 97. You went from 16-bit to the 3D world of FF7. Most importantly though, I say it's influential because it blew Playstation up. PSX was successful...at the end of 1996, there were 9 million units. At the beginning of 1998, there was 28.2 million (http://www.absolute-playstation.com/api_faqs/faq20.htm). I blame this on FF7's sales (best selling game of the year in Japan with 3.5 million units, over half a million by December in US). It was heavily marketed though, so it's not like it came out of nowhere. Plus Tomb Raider was released that year, so it's not like FF7 made PSX what it is, but I think it certainly helped make them both a household name. Hence the whole "influential" thing.

And about the RPG genre thing. I think Final Fantasy is more of an RPG than Rad Racer or Castlevania or any other random game you can think of, simply because you have more control in Final Fantasy over your characters...more role playing. In Castlevania you're whipping bats, and Rad Racer you're driving a car. That's the extent of the role playing. In FF you assume the role of a character whose path, similar to almost ANY other video game, is already determined. But you have more control...you choose what they use to fight with, how they're used in battle, etc...I concede the plot and almost everything about a Final Fantasy game doesn't fit your definition of an RPG, but the battle system is probably what makes it considered an RPG. You have that realm of control of the character. Therefore I think it's more valid to call FF an RPG than Rad Racer an RPG. All games have elements of role playing, some more than others. Much more, like games with battle systems. You just don't have FULL control, something you obviously expect from a role playing game.

And I don't know how the 1983 crash comes into this at all. I just happen to think it made the biggest household video game name since Sonic the Hedgehog.

Influential doesn't exactly mean good either, if that's what you're thinking. That's just what it is. Everyone knows of FF7. Tons of people have played it, and worship it's characters and whatnot.

OK, you can call me a fanboy if you want. But not a Final Fantasy fanboy...maybe just FF7 (I've only played through the game completely once, and that took two years. I get bored with it too). And you can also maybe find some of the fanboy coming from Advent Children, something I definitely look forward to. Despite that I still think FF7 is a great game with all the right elements, especially plot. And the music, man that's good.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kitsune
FURRY


Joined: 20 Nov 2003
Posts: 318
Location: Mexico

PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 5:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Uh, sorry to interrupt.

I've only played FF7 for like 40 minutes and I didn't like it very much.

But, that FAQ that Linquesan posted is pretty well explained. I know bits and pieces of the story from friends, and most if not all the things written there make a lot of sense to me.

And it also explains the upcoming Advent Children movie. *shrugs*

Anyway, keep on arguing. :P
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
ArnoldRimmer83
Staff
Staff


Joined: 28 Aug 2003
Posts: 540

PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 7:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You have more control of Simon than Cloud because as Simon you can actually move him around and make him dodge the enemies, as opposed to an RPG where an enemy attacks you and the game will either choose to have the enemy miss or hit you depending on certain values. In most RPGs you can't actually make the characters dodge the enemy attacks directly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ancient Oldie



Joined: 28 Nov 2003
Posts: 60

PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 11:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
..and Torment: Planescape's plot was horrible


WHAT???

First off, the name is spelled the other way around and, not sound like a fanboy, but how can you say that, on one hand, FFVII had a the best plot ever and then turn around and say that PS:T had a terrible plot. FFVII isn't even in the same league, as stated by several others who said the game wasn't even all that great. Now I know that all tastes are subjective, but were you playing the same game that I'm talking about?? Hell, go to Gamefaqs and the lowest review the game received was by one person who gave it a 7. What exactly didn't you like about the plot?

Also, after reading Kitsune's post, I clicked that link you posted earlier and that last section where the guy goes of on a tangent with the Kabbalah and then tries to link it to FFVII is eerily similar to some of those sites that are run by borderline schizos that try and link 'W' Bush's involvement in the 9/11 bombings with a Masonic conspiracy which controls the mind of the general population via kosher products. Maybe the game had a few vague references to the kabbala, but seriously, what is up with the fucking numerology? You can tie just about anything together with numbers. Just listen to Wu-Tang. Quite frankly, I think you were bamboozled by that guys bullshit.

As for your comment on FFVII's impact, To a certain extent, I agree with you, but, as I stated earlier, it wasn't a positive impact at all IMO. RPG's have been, on average, rather shitty since FFVII, because they're now trying to cater to gamers who value graphics, cinematics (two things that don't have a lasting appeal, as can be seen how ugly most late 90's, 3D games appear), and over the top storylines, rather than gameplay and character control & development. The genre has strayed so far from it roots that it is nearly unrecognizable from its earlier form as a pen & paper affair that primarily consisted of some die, a DM, and some good ole fashion creativity. Klarth made an excellent point when he said that FF is just an action adventure game. Only tie that it still has to RPG's is that it still uses stat system-driven battle engines, which is something that rad racer, Zelda, and to a lesser extent, Castlevania, lack.


Last edited by Ancient Oldie on Tue Mar 16, 2004 12:25 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richter Belmont



Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 285
Location: Murfreesboro, TN

PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 11:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wowza. There's no way I can reply to everything, I'll just attempt to keep this as concise as I can.

1.) Thanks, Ancient Oldie. :)

2.) FF7 is neither entirely good nor bad. It is largely responsible for the current surge in console RPG popularity, as it proved that RPGs can be widely successful beyond a niche market. It also did push forward the cinematic ABILITIES of video games. Now, personally, I think Square really overdoes it... unnecessary cinemas, too much emphasis on megabucks CGI, and I'd always use the game engine graphics unless RAM limitations proved too difficult. But a lot of people drool over that stuff. I thought FF7 had an interesting story, well-designed characters, and a creative (Materia) system, but conversely, it also cut simultaneous characters down to three, went hog-wild with fmv and mini-games, and began a trend of integrating "mature" and sci-fi elements. Basically, it was a transition point. I really like 7, but I also think it's to blame for a lot of the problems we have in the FF of today.
On a side note, FF8 was a total betrayal of the name Final Fantasy, it isn't FF-like at all. Worst game of the series. I think that's why they backpedaled so much with FF9. Not only that, but the GF/Draw system is more broken than Zero Wing's english translation.
The most simple way I can put it is this: Square seems to have lost their focus, and their games lack soul nowadays.

3.) RPG is a very open-ended term. In the literal sense, an RPG is indeed any game where you are not playing yourself. In the traditional sense, I think this would sum up a console RPG:
Fundamentally, it is a game where you (A.)journey to achieve a main goal that involves expulging evil, with secondary goals such as rescuing, avenging, and investigating (B.) in a fantasy/sci-fi setting where you (C.) improve your character by means of level gaining and acquiring weapon, skill, and/or magic upgrades for battling monsters.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ancient Oldie



Joined: 28 Nov 2003
Posts: 60

PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 12:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richter Belmont wrote:

In the traditional sense, I think this would sum up a console RPG:
Fundamentally, it is a game where you (A.)journey to achieve a main goal that involves expulging evil, with secondary goals such as rescuing, avenging, and investigating (B.) in a fantasy/sci-fi setting where you (C.) improve your character by means of level gaining and acquiring weapon, skill, and/or magic upgrades for battling monsters.


... (D.) and in which the combat is primarily stat driven.

Just thought I'd throw that in to separate it from the zelda games. :P

EDIT: although that would eliminate several widely considered RPG's (like some of the Ys games) from the definition also...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AndrewT



Joined: 26 Nov 2003
Posts: 8
Location: Erie, PA

PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 6:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree totally with Belmont. Although I don't think any of those definitions would exclude the Ys games (except maybe 3), although I've always considered those more adventure / rpg hybrids anyways. (the combination of how you approach enemies and what your stats are determines whether you hit enemies or they hit you)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
nixon
Staff
Staff


Joined: 25 Aug 2003
Posts: 446
Location: Northfield, MN

PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 6:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anyone else played the new Ys 1 and 2 Eternal Complete remakes? I've been playing Ys 1 again and the music and the visuals are like I remember them, but better and prettier, with a little more depth and a few side stories now. I'm getting back into the Ys thing, and want to go through them all again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Ancient Oldie



Joined: 28 Nov 2003
Posts: 60

PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 8:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AndrewT wrote:
I agree totally with Belmont. Although I don't think any of those definitions would exclude the Ys games (except maybe 3), although I've always considered those more adventure / rpg hybrids anyways. (the combination of how you approach enemies and what your stats are determines whether you hit enemies or they hit you)


Well, for the Ys games, the way that you make contact with your enemy is more important to making a succesful hit than what your stats are, and as for Ys III, that was just a straight up sidescroller similar to Castlevania.

Although I would be tempted to exclude Secret of Mana itself, the stats that you possess are still more important to making a succesful hit than the way that you hit the monster. Anyways, console RPG's have always been a grey area when it comes to classifying them, so Belmont's descriptions are probably more appropriate by themselves, although that would also make games like Castlevania and Zelda RPG's also.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AndrewT



Joined: 26 Nov 2003
Posts: 8
Location: Erie, PA

PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 9:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Well, for the Ys games, the way that you make contact with your enemy is more important to making a succesful hit than what your stats are, and as for Ys III, that was just a straight up sidescroller similar to Castlevania.


True, but the stats in Ys also determine how much damage (if any) you do, as well as how much you take, unlike Zelda or Castlevania

Anyways, getting closer to being back on subject, I don't think plot plays all that much in determining how good a game is. While it's nice to not be chock full of cliches and make you think sometimes, I think having a literature-quality plot is secondary to having a really fun game. FFX has a really good plot, but with the lack of an overworld map and much in depth game development, it's just not as fun (for me) as the SNES FFs. In classics like FF4, the plot was corny / predictable (not all the time, but it certainly wasn't that fresh), but the depth of the world they created and the freedom it gives the player to explore make it much more enjoyable. Having a good reason to adventure is one thing, but it's another thing when there's nothing but the reason and the adventure is secondary.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Linquesan



Joined: 29 Jan 2004
Posts: 20

PostPosted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 10:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ancient Oldie wrote:
Also, after reading Kitsune's post, I clicked that link you posted earlier and that last section where the guy goes of on a tangent with the Kabbalah and then tries to link it to FFVII is eerily similar to some of those sites that are run by borderline schizos that try and link 'W' Bush's involvement in the 9/11 bombings with a Masonic conspiracy which controls the mind of the general population via kosher products. Maybe the game had a few vague references to the kabbala, but seriously, what is up with the fucking numerology? You can tie just about anything together with numbers. Just listen to Wu-Tang. Quite frankly, I think you were bamboozled by that guys bullshit.


Quite frankly, I wasn't bamboozled by anything. I really didn't follow the last part because I don't care about the Kaballah or whatever, it's the first 3 parts that makes the plot clear and concise. I didn't regard that numerology shit that important, but the last part is good to read cause he just wraps it up and provides some more evidence. The evidence he provides gives me no doubt that THIS is what the plot of FF7 is. I don't see how you can degrade the whole theme analysis because of that numerology shit. I didn't have the patience to read through that part either but the rest of it is still clear.

And I think I made the point clear that FF7 was influential. I even said that if this influence is good or bad is up to you, but it's no doubt influential. At the very least it's made "RPGs" an extremely popular genre in America now, and not just Japan. I actually consider it a bad thing, but that's just cause of cosplay and dorks in general. I still like FF7 on it's own, and that's all that counts to me.

And Final Fantasy really just is a movie now, the only video game part that remains are the battles. The rest of it is moving around and reading and watching. It's a lot less exploring these days. I just differ from you guys in thinking that's not necessarily a bad thing. It can still be entertaining, and it is. The battle part is solely what makes it an RPG, console or whatever. It also has the fantasy elements RPGs are known for, whether it be pen-and-paper or Playstation 2.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Lost Levels Forum Index -> Front Page News & Articles All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 4 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

RSS


Powered by phpBB 2.0.23 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group