391 réponses à ce sujet

[Gecon]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

The Dragon Age skill system is effectively a dumbed down Dungeons & Dragons/d20/whatever you want to call it system, [...]

Pffffffft.

Its classic fantasy.

One can insult each and every classic fantasy game the way you just did. Elder Scrolls, Wizardry, Diablo, Vampire, The Witcher, whatever. They are all "just D&D reloaded", in fact at least Elder Scrolls and Wizardry started exactly that way.

Besides, I would have loved if DA would actually have lended a bit more from D&D. It has a lot of things in it that dont work as good as the D&D original, like the skills, and the horrible way they implemented specializations, or the idea to sort everything into 4 step skill trees, or the idea to sort warrior and rogue skills into 4 and 2 groups of weapon style skills.

Plus of course, insulting ANYTHING to be "just dubbed down D20" is laughable in itself. D20 is in fact a skeleton rulesystem which does everything the traditional, boring way. There is definitely no "dubbed down D20" system out there - how easy would that one have to be ? Even Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines wasnt really simpler than D20.

[MerinTB]

Busomjack wrote...
Oh yes, no doubt about it.  Star Control II in particular is one of my top favorite games of all time.  I created a post explaining why I think the Mass Effect series is the spiritual successor to Star Control II. 

Someone else really liked the "no video games are RPGs" rant, which I understand the motivations behind and the reasoning within, but disagree with almost completely.

I think this statement by Busomjack, however, may be the most intelligent thing said in the whole thread (even though it is off-topic.)

[A Killing Sound]

Expectations really killed Final Fantasy XIII. If this game was released under a different title (which it could, it's not like most final fantasy games are interlinked) no one would really care, or debate about it's merits and cons for over ten pages. Now, I own FFXIII, I bought it on a friends recommendation that I would "love it". While it is decent, I wouldn't say I will play it again after beating it, if I even get that far. My problem is that the older games were executed better and were more fun to play. The fun factor at the end of the day makes any game. FFXIII simply wasn't that fun. Difficulty wasn't a problem for me, as I love Lunar 2. The game was also super linear. As pointed out, FFX was somewhat like this, but at least that game was fun (it had mini games, a better story, and better combat system). To be totally honest, I felt Lost Odyssey was the true spiritual sucessor to the Final Fantasy series (as it was made by the original creator, as opposed to Square-Enix's no talent crew). Of course, the evidence was there that FFXIII wouldn't be as good as the others. All of Squares last bunch of games stunk (See how they ruined Star Ocean, Last Remenant, Infinite Undiscovery). Unless Square cleans house and hires better talent, I think this will be the last game of theirs I play.

[Seagloom]

Gecon wrote...

Even Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines wasnt really simpler than D20.

Bloodlines is significantly simpler than D20. You do not need to understand its inner workings to realize higher numbers are almost always better and increasing points anywhere improves your character in the specified area. The brief explanation of what skills do when mousing over them is enough to easily finish the entire game. I know this from first hand experience because I never bothered to learn the mechanics underneath combat and still find the game ridiculously easy.

Contrast that with D20 w has sub systems all over the place. If it was as simple as you imply, then so many newcomers would not find NWN1&2 confusing. I have known people who played alongside me online for years without realizing how spell resistance or counterspelling worked, or that undead are harmed by healing magic. That a roll of 1 on a skill check is not an automatic failure, what defensive casting does, or simpler things like weapon specialization stacking with epic weapon specialization. To this day I read erroneous comments such as spellcaster levels affection DC.

Bloodlines by comparison is pick up and play game. Finish Jack's tutorial, read the tooltips, and you are set. D20 is even more complicated in P&P. So much so WotC has a hotline set up specifically to adjudicate questions from players and DMs, in addition to columns on their site for the same purpose. During the 3e days there were multiple page articles just trying to clarify how to adjudicate polymorphing, illusions, and sneak attacks. Maybe D20 is simpler compared to 2e D&D, but few other systems are as fixated on their mechanics.

For a skeleton rule system that does everything the traditional, boring way, it is sure complex. In fact, that is one of D20's greatest faults in my opinion. It is so mired in mechanics that it does not lend itself well to involved role-playing the way other, simpler P&P systems do.

[enormousmoonboots]

Batman90 wrote...

The thing is, though, is that the gameplay--the battle system--is incredibly polished and fun. Without a doubt one of the greatest combat systems of the series.

Seriously? I just found it horribly, horribly tedious. Going through cutscenes to change classes, and the enemies get to keep moving during those cutscenes? Punishes you for changing classes, and since there's no versatility in role, you MUST change classes. You can't customize your party members at all, so there's none of the freedom 12 had, and no reason not to hit autobattle every time. I got through the twenty hours where the game allegedly 'opens up', but I saw it and have no motivation to go into it. My reward is...grinding? Oh boy, more things to fight in a game where the fighting system is dull as dirt. It's grind-heavy in a game where grinding is not quick or painless (in games where you can mash Attack to win, maybe a heal here or there, a grind is acceptable, though not welcomed. In a game where you have to swap classes two-three times to defeat one enemy? And change classes again to heal? It's just tedious). It's not an RPG--it's an MMO.

So instead of playing FF13 I went and put 100 hours into a handheld where there's no voice-acting and my party members don't even appear on the battle screen. It's a far superior game.

It's a cheap definition, but I've always considered RPGs games that focus on character and story development, with a bias towards stats and turn-based stuff (not to say that stats make an RPG, but there's a high correlation. And the first RPGs I played were turn-based, so I've never been able to fully shake that impression).

[spottyblanket]

I think Eastern and Western RPGs are just different is all. They are both still roleplaying games, because you are playing a role and fufilling a story, Just because you have more control in one (and some JRPGS let you have control, look at Crono Trigger, it has over 13 different endings!), doesn't make it less of an RP. If anything, bioware games mimic the tabletop RPs more than JRPGs. But so what?

[Busomjack]

I think what makes people's hatred of Final Fantasy XIII so passionate is that the game isn't just bad, it's offensively bad.
Games like Rogue Warrior, Stalin VS Martians, and crappy movie tie-ins don't make it any secret that they suck.  With movie tie-ins they know they'll make a bundle anyways because so many consumers are suckers for a good license.   Stalin VS Martians even used it's suckiness as a marketing tool.

With Final Fantasy XIII though it's different because Final Fantasy XIII thinks it's some sort of masterpiece. The game is so pretentious in it's narrative that it expects the player to be interested enough in the story to just read up on every storyline element and everyone of it's made up word rather than actually present it in it's narrative.
They think that they made such a grand masterpiece that they don't even need to bother focusing on the qualities which actually define a good game.

There is nothing wrong with a lot of flash but it can't come at the expense of the game.
Mass Effect 2 looks and sounds terrific but unlike Final Fantasy XIII, Mass Effect 2 actually plays well.

Modifié par Busomjack, 16 mai 2010 - 09:47 .

[the_one_54321]

Because real people just randomly talk about their backgrounds, and openly speak about their inner or secret emotions.



FFXIII was far more realistic in its presentation of it's characters than most other games have been. I think gamers were more frightened at this portrayal and shrunk away from the unfamiliar instead of considering how it actually made much more sense to have to read a background narrative to get everything that was going on in the characters heads. Rather than them, you know, picking random moments to spew it all out at you like all the other games do.

[Busomjack]

That just sounds like a poor excuse for a sloppy exposition. Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age both have a codex but reading it isn't actually essential for understanding the plot, rather it serves just more as a point of reference and to provide additional fun, albeit non-essential details.

In games like Dragon Age it makes sense that a lot of things are explained to you since you're new to the Grey Wardens, or in The Witcher you have amnesia.
In Mass Effect you learn about the animosity between Turians and Humans by speaking with characters who fought in the first contact war and you know about the Protheans since everyone assumes everything was built by them.
It is implemented well and nothing seems forced.  That is how you write good exposition in a story.

In Final Fantasy XIII, they just tell the plot expecting you to already know everything.  That is just a flat out poor narrative.
In Final Fantasy XIII I kept on saying "what the Hell is that?"  "What is that and why should I care?"

Nothing is ever explained.

Modifié par Busomjack, 16 mai 2010 - 10:26 .

[the_one_54321]

In this game, everyone is supposed to already understand why people are acting the way they do. They only characters you get that are "un-initiated" are Fang and Vanille, and it's in their best interest to not say anything until it becomes necessary. You don't have a vehicle for them to voice their inner monologues or expositions, and so you don't get to hear those expositions in the actual game play and that makes sense. It's not automatically bad writing just because convenient situations for exposition aren't included. Real conflict doesn't always allow room for exposition, so in a realistic story telling you won't always have convenient avenues for exposition. And in FFXIII you are given a system that initiates the player and familiarizes the player with the world without needing forced exposition. It's different from the typical. Being different doesn't make it bad.

To quote the Robot Devil: "Your lyrics lack subtility! You can't just have your characters announce how they feel! That makes me feel angry!"

I get really tired of reading criticisms that amount to "this is not what I'm familiar with so I don't like it."

Modifié par the_one_54321, 16 mai 2010 - 10:37 .

[Busomjack]

Then they should've thought of a way to implement such explanations in their narrative. Lots of games do it really well like the Witcher, Dragon Age, Mass Effect, etc. All it takes is good writing which Final Fantasy XIII was obviously lacking in.

How would you like it if you were watching a movie and every 5 friggin seconds the characters brought up some arcane term like "Fal'Seed" or whatever the Hell it was called and rather than have it explained, you're given a movie guide index where you have to look up the term and read a really long explanation.

Well, that is exactly what playing Final Fantasy XIII feels like.



It's not that it's not familiar, it's that it's flat out bad.

[the_one_54321]

Busomjack wrote...
It's not that it's not familiar, it's that it's flat out bad.

I loved it. It made sense. And it gave me more than an expositional summary of the world or situations. It became the kind of familiarity you get with reading a book, because their explanations don't have to make sense in  the context of a scene.

I'm going to have to ask that you drop the "it's bad" terminology. I understand you don't like it, and I'm not trying to convince you that you should like it. But there is a huge difference between not liking something and saying that it's just plain bad. There wasn't anything bad about FFXIII. There was lots about it that a lot of people didn't like but a lot of other people liked just fine. It's only a question of style, and style is entirely subjective.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 17 mai 2010 - 12:23 .

[Busomjack]

I don't doubt it's a matter of preference and I don't doubt that the people who say they enjoyed the game are being truthful.

I just think that my standards of entertainment while playing a game are not the same as when I watch a movie, or read a book.

It seems that in the Final Fantasy series that while the flash and cinematic splendor keep going up, the quality of the game play keep going down.

As a gamer who remembers the days when games could not get by on flashy cut scenes I sincerely resent Final Fantasy XIII's de-emphasis on actual gameplay.

I welcome technological enhancements, excellent graphics and all that but they should be used to add to the experience of playing a game with great gameplay, not compensating for gameplay altogether.



Mass Effect 2's excellent production values didn't come at the expense of how it plays and neither should the Final Fantasy series.



I sincerely hope Square/Enix takes these criticisms to heart and spreads their wings a bit further with FInal Fantasy XV.

[UBER GEEKZILLA]

ya know what...why shouldnt bioware slam them. jrpgs are the reason rpgs struggle to be succesful. jrpgs are the reasons shooter games are taking over.cuz when poeple hear the word rpg they think"ohh its a game where you take turns beating eachother up, and theres transexual characters". bioware has a right to slam jrpgs, sqaure enix should just go out of buisness so rpgs wont have such a bad reputation.pff jrpgs? more like...gayrpgs

[Fexelea]

UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...

ya know what...why shouldnt bioware slam them. jrpgs are the reason rpgs struggle to be succesful. jrpgs are the reasons shooter games are taking over.cuz when poeple hear the word rpg they think"ohh its a game where you take turns beating eachother up, and theres transexual characters". bioware has a right to slam jrpgs, sqaure enix should just go out of buisness so rpgs wont have such a bad reputation.pff jrpgs? more like...gayrpgs

Aha.. right. That'r probably why the most successful genre where jrpgs are made is jrpgs, and the most successful genre where wrpgs are made is shooters.

Oh, wait, that doesn't make sense!

[UBER GEEKZILLA]

um oblivion and fable and dragon age arent shooters... they sold 4 million copies too

and jrpgs WERE GOOD when they were 2d.( chrono triiger and ff4)

but ever scince 3d jrpgs have sucked

[Busomjack]

Quality is not democratic. I don't think I should even have to use any examples, if you're a gamer you should already know that.

[Fexelea]

UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...

um oblivion and fable and dragon age arent shooters... they sold 4 million copies too
and jrpgs WERE GOOD when they were 2d.( chrono triiger and ff4)
but ever scince 3d jrpgs have sucked

Selling well does not mean that they dominate. Western market is dominated by FPS and sports games. It has nothing to do with Jrpgs. Jrpgs dominate their target market which is Japan. Western rpg developers have no grounds to blame jrpgs for their lack of dominance in their own turf.

If you want to talk about jrpgs not being good according to your tastes, that is a completely different issue

[Busomjack]

Fexelea wrote...

UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...

um oblivion and fable and dragon age arent shooters... they sold 4 million copies too
and jrpgs WERE GOOD when they were 2d.( chrono triiger and ff4)
but ever scince 3d jrpgs have sucked

Selling well does not mean that they dominate. Western market is dominated by FPS and sports games. It has nothing to do with Jrpgs. Jrpgs dominate their target market which is Japan. Western rpg developers have no grounds to blame jrpgs for their lack of dominance in their own turf.

If you want to talk about jrpgs not being good according to your tastes, that is a completely different issue

So long as JRPGs are sold in the USA, then the USA is also a target market.  Western RPG developers don't need to blame JRPG developers for their lack of dominance.  It's JRPG developers who need to rethink their strategy as JRPGs are on a downward slope in terms of popularity in the USA.

[Fexelea]

Busomjack wrote...

So long as JRPGs are sold in the USA, then the USA is also a target market. 

No. Target Market is not the totality of your market or of your sales reach. It is your target audience, the people who you develop for. Jrpgs are not made for the US consumer, they are made for the Japanese consumer and sales from overseas are gravy. (If you wish to approach it from a global gaming market, then jrpgs are made with a focus on Segment 1 Japan, with derivated for Segment 2 Asia, prospects for Segment 3 NA and remains for Segment 4 Europe)

Busomjack wrote...
Western RPG developers don't need to blame JRPG developers for their lack of dominance.  It's JRPG developers who need to rethink their strategy as JRPGs are on a downward slope in terms of popularity in the USA.

I think it is in the interest of Japanese developers to expand their target market and capture foreign audiences. However this is not what geekzila said

[UBER GEEKZILLA]

i never said wrpgs are domonite..final fantasy series sells better...sadly

[Busomjack]

Fexelea wrote...

Busomjack wrote...

So long as JRPGs are sold in the USA, then the USA is also a target market. 

No. Target Market is not the totality of your market or of your sales reach. It is your target audience, the people who you develop for. Jrpgs are not made for the US consumer, they are made for the Japanese consumer and sales from overseas are gravy. (If you wish to approach it from a global gaming market, then jrpgs are made with a focus on Segment 1 Japan, with derivated for Segment 2 Asia, prospects for Segment 3 NA and remains for Segment 4 Europe)

Busomjack wrote...
Western RPG developers don't need to blame JRPG developers for their lack of dominance.  It's JRPG developers who need to rethink their strategy as JRPGs are on a downward slope in terms of popularity in the USA.

I think it is in the interest of Japanese developers to expand their target market and capture foreign audiences. However this is not what geekzila said

I'm not as savvy with business terminology as you but I think good business sense would require making a product appealing to a market as large as the USAs.  Final Fantasy is the biggest JRPG name in the Western market by far and even with such name recognition it could not outsell Mass Effect 2, a franchise which has only existed since 2007 as opposed to Final Fantasy which has been a huge franchise in the USA since 1997.  It's clear that crap like Final Fantasy XIII has tarnished the franchise and if Square/Enix wants to ever enjoy the success they did with Final Fantasy VII, they'll take into consideration the very legitimate criticism that consumers have made against Final Fantasy XIII.

[Onyx Jaguar]

UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...

i never said wrpgs are domonite..final fantasy series sells better...sadly

I think Final Fantasy on a region basis is not doing as well in the Western Regions as it did when Japanese developers overall dominated the Americas anyway.   Also it still has not caught up to Dragon Quest on its home turf.

[Busomjack]

I like the Dragon Quest series. Dragon Quest VII(Then known as Dragon Warrior VII) for the PS1 was one of my favorite RPGs of the time.



I'm glad to hear it's selling better than the Final Fantasy series in Japan since unlike Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest doesn't pretend to be anything more than an enjoyable RPG.

[Fexelea]

UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...

jrpgs are the reason rpgs struggle to be succesful. jrpgs are the reasons shooter games are taking over.

Jrpg target market: Japan.
Japan's dominant genre: Jrpg

Wrpg target market: NA
NA dominant genre: FPS / Sports

If Jrpgs have more awarenes in NA than Wrpgs, it is not their fault, it is the fault of the Wrpg makers that fail to understand their own target market.