391 réponses à ce sujet

[the_one_54321]

Ryzaki wrote...
That said if FF13 was more linear than FFX Squareenix seriously needs to step their game up.

They've given reasons for that, as stated above. Also, there's the list of complaints people gave when they created a super open and complex world in FFXII. Consider it a form of backlash.

But expect different things in the future. FFXIII:Versus has already been confirmed to have an overworld map and an airship.

[Ryzaki]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

The only thing JRPG developers need to do is to stop cheaping it. As much as I love the Persona spinoffs they did cheap the presentation compared to Digital Devil Saga, and even in some ways Nocturne (although that had no VO and little Dialogue).

Some companies now I have little faith in though like Tri-Ace, and NIS has seem to have hit a wall.

I do not think JRPG makers need to adapt to other markets because that would lessen the charm, but what they need to do is find a way to progress into this current generation. While I like my library of DS games the offerings I have to choose from on 360 and PS3 doesn't interest me (aside from Lost Odyssey). The Wii is catching up but ehh...

True.

Tri-Ace. I'm iffy on them.

True DS has the best library hands down.

Is it just me or is this generation sparce on good games?

[Onyx Jaguar]

As someone who grew up in America playing Console Games, Arcade games and Computer games I like the current output by some Western Developers. I also like that developers have hit a groove development wise, but what I do not like is the lack of experimentation.



Also I have been iffy on Japanese developers. I still like Nintendo's output. But Capcom has been hit or miss for me and the only Konami game I have played on the three nonhandhelds I was majorly burned by.



There definately hasn't been as strong a presence by them as there was on PS2 where you have a mountain of games from those publishers (except Nintendo of course).

[MightySword]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...
The only thing JRPG developers need to do is to stop cheaping it. As much as I love the Persona spinoffs they did cheap the presentation compared to Digital Devil Saga, and even in some ways Nocturne (although that had no VO and little Dialogue).

Funny, the Persona series is probably the only JRPGs that in the past years I felt every singple penny I paid out was worth it. They came out in the last cycle when the PS2 having its last breath, and it's very obvious they're budget tittles. Still, in term of dollar for contents ration, they beat most if not all releases. And they're fun, which is something a lot of new RPG fails at. It's very Japanese esque however, like playing a 3D visual novel, and that's why I like it. In fact. I bought every single JRPG released this generation both on the PS3 and 360, do you know how many tittles remains in my pocession? ONE - Valkyria Chronicle, and for the most part other tittles were traded back ranging from disappoinment (FFXIII) to outright disgusted (Star Ocean 4). I just got and beat Resonance of Fate and I had fun, so maybe I'll having 2 current JRPG in my poccession. I bought P3 and P4 at the same time period, and I still keep them.

Some companies now I have little faith in though like Tri-Ace, and NIS has seem to have hit a wall.

I think JRPG developers are very penicular in their games and I think sometime you have to go beyond the "good and bad" question and ask yourself "is this my cup of tea?" Now I'm not saying Western developers are not unique, Bioware, Bethesa, Obsidian certainly each have their trademark, what I meant is however, you can still put most things from different WRPG developers and get a good estimate on the same scale. JRPG developers take that difference to a whole new level though, for example:


- Square: you can expect a story full of cheese, melodrama, emo characters are always a must. You can also expect super linear story with a powerful narrative delivered by probably the industrial best of CGI cutsceens both in quality and quantity. The difference from person to person here are? It can be good cheese or bad cheese. The narrative can be powerful to move some people, but might fell flat on some others. I personally LOVE Xenosaga (which people accused of being an interactive movie, and it's guilty as charged), but I hate FFXIII.


- NIS: ok, this is a NICHE company that produces NICHE games for a NICHE market geared toward a NICHE playerbase, so often time I think criticism is a moot point. If a game from them score more than 7 in meta-score I think that would be enough to celebrated. I think if you're somehow even remotely holding a negative view against JRPG or anime or Japan Pop culture in general, there is a 99.9% you will hate whatever game NIS published. It's a company that you're either a cult member, or an inquisitor.


- Tri-Ace: I often time think they're kind like the middle guy in the JRPG playground. If you put companies like Square and NIS on 2 side of a spectrum, I Tri-Ace is like right in the middle. They offen has an ok storyline, a mecrodice narrative and (for the most part) and balance and passable casts. One thing for sure though, if you ever need to counter someone who claim JRPG's combat system hasn't evolved in 20 years (which I find myself do often enough on this board) then Tri-Ace is your man ... or woman whatever float your boat. In fact, as ubsurd as it mays sound for a JRPG, I think Tri-Ace is the only company that produces a few instances when one can say "forget the story, just enjoy the gameplay".


With all that being said, I think the problem with JRPG is having is that they don't seem to have a well rounded developers. Each studios have some aspects that they can take much much farther than I think I ever see a western developer can reach, yet at the same time though, they also have a wallop of things to be complained about. Western studio I think have more rounded experience. But then again, it depends on person, I like JRPG because of the extreme so I often willing to deal with their mishap.

I do not think JRPG makers need to adapt to other markets because that would lessen the charm

And that's ... exactly the problem JRPG having this generation. They're not adapting the JRPG formula, or the charm to the West, they're simply Westerninzing the experience which I think result they're failing at both count, being a JRPG and a WRPG.

Modifié par MightySword, 17 mai 2010 - 06:55 .

[MerinTB]

Ryzaki wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...
I do not think JRPG makers need to adapt to other markets because that would lessen the charm, but what they need to do is find a way to progress into this current generation. While I like my library of DS games the offerings I have to choose from on 360 and PS3 doesn't interest me (aside from Lost Odyssey). The Wii is catching up but ehh...

True DS has the best library hands down.
Is it just me or is this generation sparce on good games?

It's your taste in games.  I've noticed that, for me (not for others, not for the majority, just for me), there are cycles in the game industry of when good games come out and then a pile of crap.

I'll list the spurts of "good games" as far as I'm concerned:

1985 - 1988  : Yay!  Here's some highlights, there are too many to list individually - Bard's Tale series, Gold Box SSI games, Battletech Crescent Hawks games, Ultima IV, Wizard's Crown, Knights of Legend, Wasteland, Alternate Reality ---- and those are just the cRPG's!  A great time to be a cRPG fan!
1989-1990 : Not enough to note.
1991-1994: Star Control 2, Scorched Earth, Wing Commander 3, Dark Sun SSI games, Noctropolis, Shadowrun, Final Fantasy 3/6, Dune II, Warcraft, Syndicate, more SSI Gold Box (Death Knights, Dark Queen, Pools of Darkness, Gateway to the Savage Frontier, Buck Rogers sequel), Bard's Tale Construction Set, Darklands, Super Mario Kart, Spider-Man: Maximum Carnage, and many more!
1995-1996: Not enough to note.
1997-1998: Starcraft series, Final Fantasy VII, Final Fantasy Tactics, Ultima Online, Diablo series, Fallout Series, Baldur's Gate, Pax Imperia, Grim Fandango, Starship Titanic, Bladerunner, Wing Commander Prophecy (still kind of light for 2 years, but some great games so I'll count them as good years.)
1999-2001: Not enough to note.
2002-2004: TOO MANY TO LIST (like 1985-1988 all over again!) Buffy series, Beyond Good and Evil, Freedom Force, Icewind Dale II, X-Men Legends, Crimson Skies, Vampire The Masquered: Bloodlines, Fatal Frame, City of Heroes, Max Payne 2, KotOR, Shenmue II, Rise of Nations, Warhammer 40K: Dawn of War -  and many more!

And so on...

That's not to say games I really liked didn't occur in those gaps (BG2 and Icewind Dale, for example, or Bioforge, or Archon and M.U.L.E.)

But there are stretches where there are no games I'm interested in.  2009 starting with Dragon Age and going until Alpha Protocol next month was a dense time for me (about 8 great games!), but prior to DAO there was probably about ten noteworthy games between DAO and Mass Effect 1 (about 4 years.)

---

In short, for me at least, it's cyclical.

[spottyblanket]

I'm at the stage now where even I am a little tired of JRPGs, the only really good ones seem to be on handhelds these days

[Ryzaki]

MerinTB wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...
I do not think JRPG makers need to adapt to other markets because that would lessen the charm, but what they need to do is find a way to progress into this current generation. While I like my library of DS games the offerings I have to choose from on 360 and PS3 doesn't interest me (aside from Lost Odyssey). The Wii is catching up but ehh...

True DS has the best library hands down.
Is it just me or is this generation sparce on good games?

It's your taste in games.  I've noticed that, for me (not for others, not for the majority, just for me), there are cycles in the game industry of when good games come out and then a pile of crap.

I'll list the spurts of "good games" as far as I'm concerned:

1985 - 1988  : Yay!  Here's some highlights, there are too many to list individually - Bard's Tale series, Gold Box SSI games, Battletech Crescent Hawks games, Ultima IV, Wizard's Crown, Knights of Legend, Wasteland, Alternate Reality ---- and those are just the cRPG's!  A great time to be a cRPG fan!
1989-1990 : Not enough to note.
1991-1994: Star Control 2, Scorched Earth, Wing Commander 3, Dark Sun SSI games, Noctropolis, Shadowrun, Final Fantasy 3/6, Dune II, Warcraft, Syndicate, more SSI Gold Box (Death Knights, Dark Queen, Pools of Darkness, Gateway to the Savage Frontier, Buck Rogers sequel), Bard's Tale Construction Set, Darklands, Super Mario Kart, Spider-Man: Maximum Carnage, and many more!
1995-1996: Not enough to note.
1997-1998: Starcraft series, Final Fantasy VII, Final Fantasy Tactics, Ultima Online, Diablo series, Fallout Series, Baldur's Gate, Pax Imperia, Grim Fandango, Starship Titanic, Bladerunner, Wing Commander Prophecy (still kind of light for 2 years, but some great games so I'll count them as good years.)
1999-2001: Not enough to note.
2002-2004: TOO MANY TO LIST (like 1985-1988 all over again!) Buffy series, Beyond Good and Evil, Freedom Force, Icewind Dale II, X-Men Legends, Crimson Skies, Vampire The Masquered: Bloodlines, Fatal Frame, City of Heroes, Max Payne 2, KotOR, Shenmue II, Rise of Nations, Warhammer 40K: Dawn of War -  and many more!

And so on...

That's not to say games I really liked didn't occur in those gaps (BG2 and Icewind Dale, for example, or Bioforge, or Archon and M.U.L.E.)

But there are stretches where there are no games I'm interested in.  2009 starting with Dragon Age and going until Alpha Protocol next month was a dense time for me (about 8 great games!), but prior to DAO there was probably about ten noteworthy games between DAO and Mass Effect 1 (about 4 years.)

---

In short, for me at least, it's cyclical.

Hm. True. Only games I seem to be interested in are Heavy Rain, SO4, LO, DAO, ME2 and probably FO3. Outwise I couldn't care less.

I do have an odd taste in games.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 17 mai 2010 - 09:10 .

[enormousmoonboots]

the_one_54321 wrote...

You complain about the corridor design of the game. What they learned was how to create environments that are worthy of HD graphics. It was so time consuming that they couldn't really do it in this game without delaying production even longer. On top of that, shopping in cities wouldn't have made much sense for the plot of this game. But the story was that now that they have the experience with rendering HD areas, they feel they might be able to do things like cities, and more open areas.

So actual playability and interactivity was sacrified in the name of looking pretty? That's not really a good way to make a game. I'll take SNES graphics over Pretty Corridor: The Game any day.

I just beat a game that cuts you off from Earth, and puts you into another dimension where demons are trying to kill you--or worse--every minute, and they still figured out a logical way to put shopping and sidequests into the game--and I mean actual sidequests, not glorified hunts. Saying that 'the writers were too dumb and/or lazy to do it' is not a compliment.

Ryzaki wrote...

/facepalm at people telling JRPGs to aim
for the western market.

Should we tell WRPG makers to aim for
the eastern market?

Usually its trying to please too many
different groups of people that you end up with a mess in your hands.

Actually, with a skilled enough developer, the end result is quite nice. Strange Journey was developed with localization in mind, and while I haven't been hunting down Japanese reviews or anything, I haven't heard about any backlash.

[UBER GEEKZILLA]

western rpgs are way more innovative too the reason ff13 fails is cuz it does nothing knew..it has typical sterotype characters same old boring battle sytem and a storyline that makes no sense.

but mass effect 2 is very innovative.downloading a file into a game to continue a story is totally new and makes people play a 2007 game to play a 2010 game. its truly amazing

plus bioware proved with mass effect 2 that they can make shooter games just as good as they can make rpgs

seroisly if ME2 had multyplayer gears of war would be dead

[the_one_54321]

enormousmoonboots wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
You complain about the corridor design of the game. What they learned was how to create environments that are worthy of HD graphics. It was so time consuming that they couldn't really do it in this game without delaying production even longer. On top of that, shopping in cities wouldn't have made much sense for the plot of this game. But the story was that now that they have the experience with rendering HD areas, they feel they might be able to do things like cities, and more open areas.

So actual playability and interactivity was sacrified in the name of looking pretty? That's not really a good way to make a game. I'll take SNES graphics over Pretty Corridor: The Game any day.

I just beat a game that cuts you off from Earth, and puts you into another dimension where demons are trying to kill you--or worse--every minute, and they still figured out a logical way to put shopping and sidequests into the game--and I mean actual sidequests, not glorified hunts. Saying that 'the writers were too dumb and/or lazy to do it' is not a compliment.

I love the way people around here like to put words in your mouth to make it sound like they have a point and you dont. By which, of course I mean that such a tactic is complete BS.

You don't games that look as amazing as FFXIII until you try. You don't get the experience rending areas like that (which will help you to do even bigger stuff in the future) until you go out and do it. This is the same story with FFX and FFXII. FFX was the first FF on the PS2 and it did things no other game had done before, but it had to limit it's scope to be able to pull that off. FFXII did all those same things and made it all exponentially bigger. FFXIII was the first game on the PS3 to be as visually amazing as it was. Sacrfices have to be made to make these advances. Instead of accepting it for what it is, you're grasping at straws to make any claim you can that they did a bad job.

Shopping. I cannot believe that people are complaining about shopping. (and shopping is in FFXIII btw, just not in the way people are typically used to it)

[the_one_54321]

UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...

western rpgs are way more innovative too the reason ff13 fails is cuz it does nothing knew..it has typical sterotype characters same old boring battle sytem and a storyline that makes no sense.
but mass effect 2 is very innovative.downloading a file into a game to continue a story is totally new and makes people play a 2007 game to play a 2010 game. its truly amazing
plus bioware proved with mass effect 2 that they can make shooter games just as good as they can make rpgs
seroisly if ME2 had multyplayer gears of war would be dead

75%-90% of what you just said is completely bogus. It's bass ackwards that I'm not even sure I should bother seriously responding to it.

[enormousmoonboots]

the_one_54321 wrote...

I love the way people around here like to put words in your mouth to make it sound like they have a point and you dont. By which, of course I mean that such a tactic is complete BS.

You don't games that look as amazing as FFXIII until you try. You don't get the experience rending areas like that (which will help you to do even bigger stuff in the future) until you go out and do it. This is the same story with FFX and FFXII. FFX was the first FF on the PS2 and it did things no other game had done before, but it had to limit it's scope to be able to pull that off. FFXII did all those same things and made it all exponentially bigger. FFXIII was the first game on the PS3 to be as visually amazing as it was. Sacrfices have to be made to make these advances. Instead of accepting it for what it is, you're grasping at straws to make any claim you can that they did a bad job.

Shopping. I cannot believe that people are complaining about shopping. (and shopping is in FFXIII btw, just not in the way people are typically used to it)

Shopping, towns, NPCs, and sidequests are all pieces that help build an immersive game world. I have played FF13, and it's empty. Corridors full of monsters with cutscenes at either end. Sure, it's possible to build an immersive, fleshed-out game world without any of the above. But it's really goddamn difficult, and FF13 just can't pull it off.

You keep saying that sacrifices have to be made, but everything else that made the Final Fantasy series fun, enjoyable games was thrown out the window. It looks pretty at the cost of everything else.

[UBER GEEKZILLA]

actully im totally right.oblivion brought graphics and open world gameplay to a new level, mass effect 1 brought in game cinematic dialogue to a new level, the fallout series was the first rpg to be set in apocolyptic wastes,and mass effect 2 character transfer is a totally new feature....all those are good invoations these wrpgs did
JRPGS...ok so when they were 2D they did a lot of new things, the 2D final fantasies were great as was legend of zelda..they were the rpgs that started it..but scince 3d technology jrpgs jave sucked
they all have transexual emo boys and cliche storylines and boring turn based battle systems
blue dragon....did nothin new but had a gay story and typical characters. last remenant had the typical storyline of saving the princess(plus the game pretty much played itself) and the ff series has just plain sucked scince it went 3d

Modifié par UBER GEEKZILLA, 18 mai 2010 - 01:07 .

[Busomjack]

Final Fantasy XIII isn't even worthy enough to be placed in the trash cans at Bioware's office building.

[UBER GEEKZILLA]

oh and by the way anyone who judges a agme by its graphics has problems...dragon age has crap graphics but its still a good game

oh and another thing..ff12 had FRIGGIN BUNNY PEOPLE seroisly thats another reason i hate ffseries they cant make up their mind wether their campy,stupid,intense, or seroius

in ff13 you will be killin all these vicious creatures and watching emo characters being sad...and then out of the blue YOUR RIDING A GIANT CHICKEN AND FIGHTING DANCING CACTUSUS oh and the characters in ff13 are mentally retarded theres the typical jrpgs girl character who has no mind and has pink hair, ya got the 13 year old emo boy, the "badass" biker boy who just talks about himslef and dont even get me started on the guy with the chicken in his afro(IF ANYONE CORRECTS ME AND SAYS ITS A CHOCOBO I WILL FREAK ON U...ITS A CHICKEN OK)

plus ff games drag on FREVER..like i can play mass effects slow 3 hour start to get to the good stuff...but 13 hours?13 HOURS!!!!! you can beat splinter cell conviction and prototype in that amount of time HECK you can beat morrowinds main plot AND oblivions main plot in that amount of time..even then the first 13 hours arent worth it cuz like i said..ff13 is 1.uninnovative 2.repetitive .3 slow

4.unoriginal 5.retarted

[Batman90]

UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...

actully im totally right.oblivion graphics and open world gameplay to a new level, mass effect 1 brought in game cinematic dialogue to a new level, the fallout series was the fitsy rpg to be set in apocolyptic wastes,and mass effect 2 character transfer is a totally new feature....all those are good invoations these wrpgs did

Bethesda RPGs "innovate" only if you consider "upping the quantity" innovation. Sure, there's quite a bit of things to do in Oblivion, but how much of Oblivion or Fallout 3's content is varied? Or of high quality?

Not much.

Bethesda RPGs are, by and large, quantity-over-quality "all you can eat buffet" experiences. There's alot to do, but little of it feels special in the end.

JRPGS...ok so when they were 2D they did a lot of new things, the 2D final fantasies were great as was legend of zelda..they were the rpgs that started it..but scince 3d technology jrpgs jave sucked

The Legend of Zelda isn't an RPG, it's an action-adventure. And you're stupid if you think Zelda has sucked ever since it went 3D; Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, and even The Wind Waker are all classics in their own ways.

And no, Final Fantasy did not begin to suck once it went 3D. Final Fantasy VII's plot is easily one of the most well-written and sophisticated in the series, and its ATB system was fast and fine-toned. The materia system added multiple dimensions of freedom to character role system, as well (If only more videogames would go for "true freedom" in build customization, as it is infinitely more enjoyable and more rewarding than traditional class systems).

Final Fantasy IX was, in many ways, an incarnation of what made the classic Final Fantasy titles great. It mixed the best of the old and the best of the new, Final Fantasy X brought new emotional depth to videogame storytelling, etc.

they all have transexual emo boys and cliche storylines

 
You're not making yourself look very intelligent by throwing around stereotypes that don't really apply to the vast majority of JRPGs.

It may apply to some, sure. But certainly not the main series FF titles. Sure, they made Cloud look like a massive wimp in Advent Children (And he sure did act like it), but you would have to be blind (Or just denying it in a futile attempt to prove your "point") to think that the original FFVII Cloud was similar to the AC Cloud (He was more of a cold, somewhat psychotic badass in that game).

And the moment you bring up "cliche storylines" is the moment you begin to look like a hypocrite. A monkey could figure out that the vast majority of WRPGs consist of cliche, Tolkienesque "orcs n' elves" fantasy worlds, instead of, you know, new and imaginative settings and storylines.

and boring turn based battle systems

Subjective. Quite a few people enjoy turn-based battle systems for the level of strategic depth they can potentially provide.

Someone who enjoys turn-based battle systems can just as easily call out WRPG-esque battle systems for being "dumb hack n' slash games with no tactical appeal."

blue dragong....did nothin new but had a gay story and typical characters.

 
You're picking the worst of the worst to fuel your debate.

No one's going to take you seriously if you do that.

last gaurdian had the typical storyline of saving the princess(plus the game pretty much played itself)

Are you talking about Team Ico's "The Last Guardian?"

Because that game hasn't even come out yet, and it isn't even an RPG. Of course, you could be talking about something else, but I don't know of any other major game with the name "Last Guardian."

and the ffseries has just plain sucked scince it went 3d

No it hasn't.

Final Fantasy XIII isn't even worthy enough to be placed in the trash cans at Bioware's office building.

At the very least, the vast majority of people think it's a "decent" game.

It is not an objectively bad game.

Modifié par Batman90, 18 mai 2010 - 01:02 .

[UBER GEEKZILLA]

zelda was good in 3d FOR A WHILE..but twilight princess sucked..however i consider it an rpg because of the open world,sidequests,shoping collectiong ect..

[UBER GEEKZILLA]

OMG sorry did i say last gaurdian..i ment THE LAST REMENANT

[Batman90]

UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...

zelda was good in 3d FOR A WHILE..but twilight princess sucked..however i consider it an rpg because of the open world,sidequests,shoping collectiong ect..

Twilight Princess was a good game. Not the best, but there's really no valid argument for it being a bad game, either.

Zelda isn't an RPG; of course, going by the true definition of "RPG," no videogames are RPGs, but going by the videogame definition, it isn't an RPG, either. RPGs feature experience gain/leveling up and strong narratives.

Zelda has neither, and focuses primarily on exploration and its core gameplay. It's an action-adventure game.

[Batman90]

UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...

OMG sorry did i say last gaurdian..i ment THE LAST REMENANT

As for the Last Remnant, I'll agree with you.

However, Lost Odyssey, the Persona Series, Demon's Souls, Valkyria Chronicles, and multiple other examples prove that Japan still knows how to churn out good "RPGs."

[UBER GEEKZILLA]

i dunno i still consider zelda an rpg...oh and ocarina of time was great its my 4th fav game

oh and yes i know that dragon age has the typical fantasy setting but it does it well and has creative characters. mass effect however is VERY original for sci fi its got a sci fi universe so complex it makes star wars look pathetic

[UBER GEEKZILLA]

i have yet to try demon souls..it looked interesting as did valrcry chronicles but that looked more like a shooter

[Batman90]

UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...

i have yet to try demon souls..it looked interesting as did valrcry chronicles but that looked more like a shooter

The core gameplay of Demon's Souls is similar to Zelda, but ultimately, it feels very much like a WRPG.

Valkyria Chronicles is a tactical/strategic RPG, similar to Final Fantasy Tactics, Fire Emblem, Disgaea and others.

[MerinTB]

UBER GEEKZILLA wrote...
actully im totally right.oblivion brought graphics and open world gameplay to a new level

Open world to a new level?  Really?  Have you ever played any 80's cRPG's?  Knights of Legend?  Alternate Reality?  The Ultimas?  The Bard's Tales?
This is what bugs me to no end about when GTA (or even Spider-Man 2) were getting all this praise about this "new game feature" of the "open sandbox."  Daggerfall had done it MUCH LARGER before GTA ever did - and Daggerfall wasn't even the first (try Wizard's Crown, too.)

mass effect 1 brought in game cinematic dialogue to a new level

Cinematic, MAYBE.  Dialog - uhm, VTM: Bloodlines had a better and deeper and more replayable dialog system.  All ME1 did (and yes, it did it very well) was improve on the camera angles and animations that BioWare had started trying in KotOR, and give the MC a voice (not the first to do that by a long shot, either.)
There were dialog trees with story consequences long before BioWare was a company.
Better put some major emphasis on CINEMATIC there.
And hold TIGHT to the "I mean in RPG's", as Wing Commanders 3,4, and Prophecy might want to talk to you about cinematic dialog.

the fallout series was the first rpg to be set in apocolyptic wastes

*cough* Wasteland. *cough* Land of Devastation *cough* Bad Blood.

and mass effect 2 character transfer is a totally new feature

*kerBLINK*

Character transfer is a "totally new feature?"

Every SSI game series had it (Pools, Krynn, Buck Rogers.)  The Bard's Tales had it.  Might and Magic.  Phantasie.
You know what?  You could transfer characters from Bard's Tale, Might and Magic, Wizardry, Ultima and Phantasie across those games with certain versions (and, yes, each of those games is from a different game developer.)  Bard's Tale 1, for example, could take your characters from Wizardry or Ultima III.   It's been awhile, and I could be wrong about ALL of those working, but I know it was a common thing in the 80's.

....all those are good invoations these wrpgs did

True - and MOST of that was before there WERE JRPGs. <_<


The sheer "my side is awesome, your side sucks" stupidity gets old really fast, children.
And yes, I said children.  If you are past your teen years it's time you started acting you age.  Adults don't need to gleefully bash things they don't like just to somehow support the things they do.

Modifié par MerinTB, 18 mai 2010 - 01:20 .

[UBER GEEKZILLA]

my side is awsome but your side can be good at times ..2d ff games chrono trigger and zelda series