Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Final Fantasy XVFollow

#52 Jun 11 2013 at 9:46 PM Rating: Good
***
2,211 posts
Sandinmygum the Stupendous wrote:
There is a Weapon Bar down in the left, as attacks go off it moved. I don't know if the other 2 are all AI, or if you get to set them up (as Def or Off). The main guy instead of slicing did cast Fire. When that bar moved into a different weapon, one of the other 2's attack went off.

I don't even know the last new FF game that was turned based. The new Action RPG came with X-2 didn't it?


X-2 was ATB but it was super sped up, but you still had control of all 3 characters. XII was the first game to go action rpg really
____________________________
What I Play
Recently Played
#53 Jun 11 2013 at 9:50 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
15,068 posts
BeanX the Irrelevant wrote:
X-2 was ATB but it was super sped up, but you still had control of all 3 characters. XII was the first game to go action rpg really


I also remember the turn dynamic being different with X-2. Not only was it ATB, but things could and did happen simultaneously. Rikku would run up to steal and item from a dead corpse because Paine just finished smashing it a moment before. And I think I remember watching Rikku run around chasing an enemy that decided to attack another character when she was in route to attack it.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#54 Jun 11 2013 at 9:52 PM Rating: Good
***
2,211 posts
Yeah maybe I didnt play much of X2 my wife beat it. I like systems like Grandia (There's a series that needs a come back )
____________________________
What I Play
Recently Played
#55 Jun 11 2013 at 11:17 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
818 posts
BeanX the Irrelevant wrote:
It looks nice but it looks very Action Rpg, I want turn based, not hack and slash. I think FF may be down after this for me. I dont mind innovation, but Innovation for innovations sake is bad. I want a game where I control 3/4/5 characters selecting if they attack or defend or what abilities to use on each of them. Not this new, I can kind of choose for my character but the other 2 are fully AI.

From looking at this it looks very much that or Hack and slash

Edited, Jun 11th 2013 9:56pm by BeanX


I think turned based and battle transition screens are a thing if the past. What 15 year old would want to watch actions being dictated by an imaginary timer?
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#56 Jun 11 2013 at 11:27 PM Rating: Good
***
2,211 posts
So dont make it a timer, make it a turn list ala FFX, or a action bar ala Grandia. Bothof those game are "turn based" while not being active time battle (AtB) It promotes a more strategic type of game play than FF13 was I pretty much spammed the same thing til stuff died , changing "Stances" once or twice
____________________________
What I Play
Recently Played
#57 Jun 11 2013 at 11:39 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
7,476 posts
I actually hope it is like Dissidia, with the ability to pause the battle like 12 to issue chained commands for specified "urgent" items and spell use. Also if it was done in this capacity, offline multiplayer could be a possibility with people controlling individual party members.
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#58 Jun 12 2013 at 12:17 AM Rating: Good
Sage
****
5,684 posts
electromagnet83 wrote:
BeanX the Irrelevant wrote:
It looks nice but it looks very Action Rpg, I want turn based, not hack and slash. I think FF may be down after this for me. I dont mind innovation, but Innovation for innovations sake is bad. I want a game where I control 3/4/5 characters selecting if they attack or defend or what abilities to use on each of them. Not this new, I can kind of choose for my character but the other 2 are fully AI.

From looking at this it looks very much that or Hack and slash
I think turned based and battle transition screens are a thing if the past. What 15 year old would want to watch actions being dictated by an imaginary timer?
But that's not even close to being a good assumption.

Only 25% of the gaming demographic is 18 or under, so they hardly control the market.
FFXIII used an ATB combat, but it has still sold over 6 million copies even with incredibly harsh player reviews.
Lost Odyssey and Ni no Kumi (I believe) are both turn based games on current consoles and have been successful outside of Japan.
Even the Zeboyd Games RPGs have been gained some attention despite being 2D, 16-bit, indie games.

All of these games received at least favorable reviews from critics.
The market is there, so I have no clue why you think otherwise.
____________________________
Signature starts here.
#59 Jun 12 2013 at 8:15 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
**
997 posts
Thanks for the info about the X / X-2 remakes.

I like both battle systems. The one from XIII was actually very engaging IF you either battled the optional, very strong enemies beyond the normal storyline or did not overpower enemies by out'leveling' them. I still prefer the strategic system of X but as long as the rest of the game is good both would be fine for me.
____________________________
Osseric
#60 Jun 12 2013 at 9:40 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,476 posts
Since we sharing our thoughts.

XIII (series) - I enjoyed them both on the single play through I have given each. However neither has compelled me enough to go back and do repeat play throughs. FF13 proper was way to linear for me, I felt that I had no ability to explore for the longest time, and when you do finally reach that point the game is nearly done, and the only shining spot to keep playing is to become powerful enough and equipped properly enough to take down the Dino's in the plains. FF13-2 almost felt the opposite, and the story seemed to become fragmented and scattered because of it. Almost as if SE made the game to free.

X12 - I didn't play any of the other stuff attached to this story. I did enjoy the game in some respect, a couple of the characters were pretty cool Balthier pops to mind, but Ashe was pretty deep as well. I actually enjoyed the Liscence and Gambit systems, I thought they were a neat take on the "job" system, and added some depth to the party system in combat as well. The Story had lots of peaks and valleys, and allowed you to have freedom to explore, without it being so much that the story would get lost.

X (series) X proper easily in the top 5 of FF games all time, and makes a strong claim to top spot. Everything from character depth to story are great. The changes from previous titles in combat mechanics was a welcome change, and the Sphere Grid was the most awesome progression element I think has been implemented in the game. I have played this game into the ground and is the only reason I still own a PS2. (I have unlocked every node on sphere grid for every character, because why not.) best part of X2 was the Spheregrid. There are some neat abilities and cool "jobs" available. I actually enjoyed X-2 and replay it here and there. It is no where near the value of X, but X-2 is decent in its own way.

IX This is one of my favorites, I love the characters, Vivi is a boss. The story was pretty decent and the gameplay was fun. Characters having "jobs" was a nice return from the openness of games like FF7 and FF8 where anyone could really be anything. The only downside I think to me is that combat seemed slow, and as a result made the game feel draggy, but other than that it was mostly enjoyable.

VIII- Hated it.

VII - Good game.

VI - My personal favorite I think this game trounces all others in terms of Character growth, story, and of course stuff to do that isn't the story. I still remember booting this up for the very first time, and I still smile when I see that opening cinematic today.

V - This games big thing is the job system. The other parts of the game are kind of meh over all, but the sheer amount of jobs and combinations of jobs you can make is pretty **** fun.

IV - I think this is probably the most under rated FF game, it has a deep story, with deep characters. The only issue I had is that the party changes so much and you are often limited in your choices of people to bring with you. But that aside this game is pretty enjoyable.

III (DS version) - I own it but have not actually beaten it. RPGs on handhelds I found aren't really that enjoyable, I think that Pokemon type games are the only way to make it work. From what I have played I can tell you it is a decent game, unfortunately I just couldn't get over playing it on the DS, and it hurt the game for me. The Job system like FFV is pretty awesome and deep though.

II - Piece of sh*t.

I - One and done....its the game that started it all, its short, and its story is kinda weak. But it is nearly a 30 year old game so I can't complain to much.

My top 5.

FFVI
FFVII
FFX
FF IV
FF V

But if you want to play the best FF game of all time. Get Final Fantasy Tactics.



Edited, Jun 12th 2013 11:43am by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#61 Jun 12 2013 at 9:54 AM Rating: Good
*****
19,953 posts
I'll just say this:

Population is more than just the number of people who might enjoy a turn-based RPG. It also has to do with the frequency at which this group will buy a turn-based RPG relative to the state of the market.

Yeah, I was interested in Ni No Kuni. When I tried it I was kinda meh, but I'm sure plenty of people enjoyed it.

Thing is, MOST RPG gamers aren't interested in playing primarily turn-based RPGs. They'll play and enjoy one once in a while, but in general most RPG gamers are interested in a variety of game systems. They want Action RPGs (as shooters, hack-n-slash, and those +menu/turn-based systems), they want Tactical RPGs, they want Sims, they want Platformers, etc.

At the end of the day, action RPGs are just one subset of RPGs. They happen to be what the current market is most interested in, but they aren't the end-all, be-all.

There's still room for big-budget turn-based games. What there isn't room for is an over-saturation of turn-based RPGs. A major company like SE isn't going to be interested in releasing a game they know might have a diminished demographic, particularly not if its one where the releases of other titles could reduce initial interest in the first place.

And as KH has, to this point, been one of the few major titles utilizing a menu-based action RPG system, and it works really well, it's not surprising that's the route they'd take.

So yes, if you're ONLY interested in turn-based, menu-based RPGs, you're not going to get many titles. But here's the thing - that's on you. You've limited your interest in the genre to one small corner. Someone who only wants Tactical RPGs has even fewer options.

Sure, if you're going to expand your interest to ANY Action RPG, you have a lot of options. But the reality is that every gamer has their preferences, and most gamers will try games from other content areas anyway.

It's just not a realistic complaint, IMO. It's no different than me wanting more of any refined combat style games. The lower you reduce your scope, the fewer games you'll get. That's not a problem, that's a healthy, diverse selection of games.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#62 Jun 12 2013 at 11:38 AM Rating: Excellent
***
2,211 posts
No Im not interested in ONly one kind of rpg. I Like Tales Of, Grandia, Older FF, and other types. But there not longer is any Older FF type rpgs, they are all action hybrids like Ni no kuni was. I havent seen a proper AAA menu based ATB* system in a while, and probably wont. UNforutunately SE was the company to do it the best, and they've stopped making games like that.

I miss the times when Story + Mechanics > Graphics
____________________________
What I Play
Recently Played
#63 Jun 12 2013 at 11:52 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,991 posts
rdmcandie wrote:
But if you want to play the best FF game of all time. Get Final Fantasy Tactics.
Maybe it's just me, but I felt that game could have been a whole lot better if they hadn't gifted you so many powerful characters. So much of the potential development of your team was rendered meaningless because they could never have the abilities or stats of the NPCs who later joined your group.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#64 Jun 12 2013 at 11:55 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,476 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
rdmcandie wrote:
But if you want to play the best FF game of all time. Get Final Fantasy Tactics.
Maybe it's just me, but I felt that game could have been a whole lot better if they hadn't gifted you so many powerful characters. So much of the potential development of your team was rendered meaningless because they could never have the abilities or stats of the NPCs who later joined your group.


Agreed. Still was epic. So many bad *** quotes.


Edited, Jun 12th 2013 1:56pm by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#65 Jun 12 2013 at 11:59 AM Rating: Good
***
2,211 posts
Im replaying The Remastered PSP version in my spare time atm, I only beat the game once, and yes after you get that one character half way through the game becomes cake................ delicious moist easy to digest cake, until the last few battles

Edit: I have a modded PSP and Im using the Slow Down patch to get rid of the slowdown that SE didnt program out.

Edited, Jun 12th 2013 1:00pm by BeanX
____________________________
What I Play
Recently Played
#66 Jun 12 2013 at 11:59 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,991 posts
rdmcandie wrote:
Agreed. Still was epic. So many bad *** quotes.

Definitely; between the political dramas and church conspiracies, it's one of my favorite stories.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#67 Jun 12 2013 at 12:28 PM Rating: Good
*****
19,953 posts
Quote:
I miss the times when Story + Mechanics > Graphics


No company approaches a game thinking that good graphics will be the only thing important. You think that SE didn't sink ungodly amounts of money into developing their game mechanics and story? The problem is that the concept of what constitutes good story/mechanics has changed over time.

You're looking at mechanics that were defined by the limitations of the technology available at the time. You don't think the game designers dreamed of the days where they could create games that made combat more real and immersive?

Tabletop RPGs used elements like rolls, action lists, etc. to try and allow the players to imagine the entirety of a game. You were meant to play it in your mind.

To be honest, that's not a concept that ever translated well to video games. They used the system because it's what was available. But unlike with tabletop RPGs, you don't spend the time in your head - you spend it interacting with the visual on a screen. That gave combat an extremely choppy feel that was never the intention of designers, but was rather the limitation of it. When we're dealing with the human imagination, that's fine - those delays are accompanied by player interactions, discussions, (in short: higher-order thought and play).

Video games were very, very much a dumbed-down version of that experience. And I don't say that to bash games. I've never seriously played tabletop RPGs, and have always loved RPG games. But those limitations have always been quite obvious. Combat in old-school turn-based RPGs were very much about the concept of the event. But they never allowed for the immersion they could have had.

Now, immersion is FAR superior in combat systems. Maybe you're playing FFXIII, and you need to scope the lay of the battlefield and adapt quickly. Or maybe you're more of an omnipresent controller, who issues orders to a whole group and needs to consider things tactically (a la Valkyrie Chronicles).

Either way, your experience of the combat now gets to be something more akin to the higher-order play of the original tabletop games.

I know it's something of a weird example, but look at SWTOR. They removed the auto-attack from the game, and they introduced combat animations to reflect actual combat scenarios. When not launching an attack, your lightsaber-wielders would deflect bolts, you might be hiding behind cover (to pop out and shoot), etc. The end result was combat that somehow felt more organic and real than in other MMOs. It brought you into the fight, rather than making the fight a series of CD timers on your abilities.

It's a similar concept. And they've applied it to turn-based/menu-based mechanics to make them more immersive as well.

So you're right, you probably won't be seeing FF7's combat system again (unless they remake FF7, which I feel like I've heard mentioned in this E3 coverage?).

But it's not progress for progress' sake, and it's not a dismissal of gameplay mechanics in favor of graphics. That's an absurd argument.

Just because what you happen to subjectively value with regards to story/combat differs from modern game designers doesn't mean they don't value those at all.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#68 Jun 12 2013 at 12:33 PM Rating: Good
***
2,211 posts
Digg you write to much, I would love to reply but I havent had coffee yet....
____________________________
What I Play
Recently Played
#69 Jun 12 2013 at 1:35 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
818 posts
BeanX the Irrelevant wrote:
So dont make it a timer, make it a turn list ala FFX, or a action bar ala Grandia. Bothof those game are "turn based" while not being active time battle (AtB) It promotes a more strategic type of game play than FF13 was I pretty much spammed the same thing til stuff died , changing "Stances" once or twice


What 15 year old wants to play a game where actions are limited by a que? You see my point? That is old technology. Just because it is what RPGs "were" doesn't mean it is what they need to remain. Even many MMO's out there are starting to incorporate leveling and attributes but in a real-time action environment. Sorry man, I think you're holding on to a dead past. I literally have gotten to the point even as a non-young gamer where random encounters and battle transition screens irk me to my very core. It's so outdated.
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#70 Jun 12 2013 at 1:40 PM Rating: Good
******
44,275 posts
electromagnet83 wrote:
What 15 year old wants to play a game where actions are limited by a que?
Countless browser games and phone/tablet apps disagree with your point.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#71 Jun 12 2013 at 2:09 PM Rating: Good
Sage
****
5,684 posts
electromagnet83 wrote:
What 15 year old wants to play a game where actions are limited by a queue?
It's a good thing 15 year olds are controlling video games right now otherwise the industry might be in danger from a turn based/ATB invsion.

Edited, Jun 12th 2013 3:09pm by xypin
____________________________
Signature starts here.
#72 Jun 12 2013 at 2:21 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
818 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
electromagnet83 wrote:
What 15 year old wants to play a game where actions are limited by a que?
Countless browser games and phone/tablet apps disagree with your point.



Sure if you want to argue for the sake of arguing. Turn-based RPGs are slowly going away just like 5 channel turn dial Televisions that weighed 200 pounds, First Person Shooters that didn't have "room over room" capability, and one on one direct dialing deathmatch a la Doom. It's old boring technology.
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#73 Jun 12 2013 at 2:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,991 posts
electromagnet83 wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
electromagnet83 wrote:
What 15 year old wants to play a game where actions are limited by a que?
Countless browser games and phone/tablet apps disagree with your point.



Sure if you want to argue for the sake of arguing. Turn-based RPGs are slowly going away just like 5 channel turn dial Televisions that weighed 200 pounds, First Person Shooters that didn't have "room over room" capability, and one on one direct dialing deathmatch a la Doom. It's old boring technology.
I'd wager turn-based or pseudo-turn-based games stick around in more strategy-based RPGs. The more "action-style" the combat is the more you have to dumb down the encounter complexity because people simply can't react fast enough to do everything perfectly in real time. For example, try playing DA:O without ever hitting the pause button to queue your skills.

There's still engaging game play there for the more thinking types, and turn-based games fit well with that (they also make it easier for those of us who may have small children and have to play with frequent interruptions). Besides, people still play chess right? While the turn-based mechanics may be replaced by newer styles in games where they disrupt the combat flow that the producers are hoping to create, and now have more capability to do so, I doubt they'll be completely resigned to the historical dust bin.

____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#74 Jun 12 2013 at 4:15 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
818 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
electromagnet83 wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
electromagnet83 wrote:
What 15 year old wants to play a game where actions are limited by a que?
Countless browser games and phone/tablet apps disagree with your point.



Sure if you want to argue for the sake of arguing. Turn-based RPGs are slowly going away just like 5 channel turn dial Televisions that weighed 200 pounds, First Person Shooters that didn't have "room over room" capability, and one on one direct dialing deathmatch a la Doom. It's old boring technology.
I'd wager turn-based or pseudo-turn-based games stick around in more strategy-based RPGs. The more "action-style" the combat is the more you have to dumb down the encounter complexity because people simply can't react fast enough to do everything perfectly in real time. For example, try playing DA:O without ever hitting the pause button to queue your skills.

There's still engaging game play there for the more thinking types, and turn-based games fit well with that (they also make it easier for those of us who may have small children and have to play with frequent interruptions). Besides, people still play chess right? While the turn-based mechanics may be replaced by newer styles in games where they disrupt the combat flow that the producers are hoping to create, and now have more capability to do so, I doubt they'll be completely resigned to the historical dust bin.



I agree wholeheartedly that action-oriented RPG requires dumbing down, but that is only because it is new enough to where it hasn't had time to properly develop. I'm sure someone will come along and do an action-oriented RPG replete with skills points, levels, weapon upgrades, etc that will be complex, strategic, and enjoyable. If anyone can do it, I'll wager on Square-Enix.


Edited, Jun 12th 2013 6:15pm by electromagnet83
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#75 Jun 12 2013 at 4:17 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
15,068 posts
I really enjoyed Kingdom Hearts 2's battle system. KH1 Final Mix modified it's system to be more like KH2. I have no problem with an action RPG game if it uses something like that.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#76 Jun 12 2013 at 4:29 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,991 posts
electromagnet83 wrote:
I agree wholeheartedly that action-oriented RPG requires dumbing down, but that is only because it is new enough to where it hasn't had time to properly develop.
I'm not sure it's physically possible to do that kind of multi-tasking. You can't really micromanage multiple different characters in real time the same way you can in a stop action game. Closest thing I can think of at least would require some kind of pre-programming, something like FFXII's gambit system.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#77 Jun 12 2013 at 4:32 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
15,068 posts
FFXII's gambit system. Tales's system (sometimes more like the gambit system like in Graces f) where you can tell them what to do, but also take manual control with the press of a button and do what ever you want with them.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#78 Jun 12 2013 at 4:32 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
818 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
electromagnet83 wrote:
I agree wholeheartedly that action-oriented RPG requires dumbing down, but that is only because it is new enough to where it hasn't had time to properly develop.
I'm not sure it's physically possible to do that kind of multi-tasking. You can't really micromanage multiple different characters in real time the same way you can in a stop action game. Closest thing I can think of at least would require some kind of pre-programming, something like FFXII's gambit system.


Mass Effect does it. Whenever you do actions for any characters the scene pauses while you make your selection. It'd be cool to see an action-RPG with a gambit style system but the ability to pause the action when controlling others....wait a minute FFXII already did that didn't they? Wasn't here an option to select live-action or pause-action while selecting moves for your companions?

Edited, Jun 12th 2013 6:33pm by electromagnet83
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#79 Jun 12 2013 at 4:36 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,991 posts
electromagnet83 wrote:
Mass Effect does it. Whenever you do actions for any characters the scene pauses while you make your selection. It'd be cool to see an action-RPG with a gambit style system but the ability to pause the action when controlling others....wait a minute FFXII already did that didn't they? Wasn't here an option to leave it as live-action or pause-action while selecting moves for your companions?
Okay, well maybe we're kinda talking about different things here. I'd view anything where you can pause the game and enter commands as a veiled spin on the old turn-based system. Stop-action being more or less the same thing as turn-based, expect you aren't just hitting 'x' to repeat the previous action.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#80 Jun 12 2013 at 4:42 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
818 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
electromagnet83 wrote:
Mass Effect does it. Whenever you do actions for any characters the scene pauses while you make your selection. It'd be cool to see an action-RPG with a gambit style system but the ability to pause the action when controlling others....wait a minute FFXII already did that didn't they? Wasn't here an option to leave it as live-action or pause-action while selecting moves for your companions?
Okay, well maybe we're kinda talking about different things here. I'd view anything where you can pause the game and enter commands as a veiled spin on the old turn-based system. Stop-action being more or less the same thing as turn-based, expect you aren't just hitting 'x' to repeat the previous action.


We are seeing the same I think. But "turn-based" means you can't go until it's your turn which is a highly antiquated notion. Not to mention it is extremely unrealistic, which becomes more unrealistic as games graphically become more life-like. Having a monster just sitting there idle while waiting for his turn is kinda lame. What I'm talking about is more like matrix-style bullet time which is what mass effect would be. It is, for the moment, at least an acceptable style of stop-action, action.
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#81 Jun 12 2013 at 4:47 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
15,068 posts
electromagnet83 wrote:
Not to mention it is extremely unrealistic, which becomes more unrealistic as games graphically become more life-like. Having a monster just sitting there idle while waiting for his turn is kinda lame.


I've always felt that to be an improper view of the classic turn based system. The input phase of the turn isn't real time, the enemy isn't waiting five minutes for your guy to walk around and make a decision.

Though there are turn based and tactical games where everyone chooses their actions and everything happens at once, including changed locations and targets which may die, etc.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#82 Jun 12 2013 at 6:10 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,470 posts
What a lot of it boils down to is the lack of attention span of the younger gamer, partially due to the twitch gaming era. The time it takes to think ahead a few moves is more than enough for the younger generation to lose interest. I would love to see a solid ATB/turn-based RPG come back, but it likely isn't going to happen any time soon.

As far as FF is concerned, FFXIII is kind of the last straw for me. Yes it sold well despite nobody liking it, but SE is falsely making the assumption that the sales are an indication of what people want. A lot of people, myself included, purchased FFXIII for the sole reason that it is an FF game. However FFXIII sits unfinished on my shelf, and FFXIII-2 hasn't even been played. FFXIII was such a pull from what I grew to love about FF that I have no desire to even try to finish it, and no desire to even give FFXIII-2 a chance because of it. The combat was clunky, the story was mediocre, game play didn't even try and give the impression of being open, and the characters were just plain bad. It felt a lot like playing an old action side-scroller in a 3D environment. I won't be buying FFXIII-3, and I sure as **** won't be buying FFXV.

If we're ranking them VI > IV > VIII = X > XII > IX > VII
#83 Jun 12 2013 at 6:12 PM Rating: Good
*****
19,953 posts
Raolan wrote:
What a lot of it boils down to is the lack of attention span of the younger gamer, partially due to the twitch gaming era. The time it takes to think ahead a few moves is more than enough for the younger generation to lose interest. I would love to see a solid ATB/turn-based RPG come back, but it likely isn't going to happen any time soon.

As far as FF is concerned, FFXIII is kind of the last straw for me. Yes it sold well despite nobody liking it, but SE is falsely making the assumption that the sales are an indication of what people want. A lot of people, myself included, purchased FFXIII for the sole reason that it is an FF game. However FFXIII sits unfinished on my shelf, and FFXIII-2 hasn't even been played. FFXIII was such a pull from what I grew to love about FF that I have no desire to even try to finish it, and no desire to even give FFXIII-2 a chance because of it. The combat was clunky, the story was mediocre, game play didn't even try and give the impression of being open, and the characters were just plain bad. It felt a lot like playing an old action side-scroller in a 3D environment. I won't be buying FFXIII-3, and I sure as **** won't be buying FFXV.

If we're ranking them VI > IV > VIII = X > XII > IX > VII


I'm pretty sure they're basing their numbers on the continued sales of the series and their own market testing, not the ranting and raving on forums.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#84 Jun 12 2013 at 6:14 PM Rating: Good
Sage
****
5,684 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
I'm pretty sure they're basing their numbers on the continued sales of the series and their own market testing, not the ranting and raving on forums.
There is also the official reviews, which were favorable.
____________________________
Signature starts here.
#85 Jun 12 2013 at 6:19 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,470 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:


I'm pretty sure they're basing their numbers on the continued sales of the series and their own market testing, not the ranting and raving on forums.


Then why is it that XIII-2, which is generally considered to be the better of the two, sold a fraction of what FFXIII did?
#86 Jun 12 2013 at 6:22 PM Rating: Good
***
2,211 posts
Because SE and there ****** DLC Policy for the game?
____________________________
What I Play
Recently Played
#87 Jun 12 2013 at 6:23 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,470 posts
BeanX the Irrelevant wrote:
Because SE and there sh*tty DLC Policy for the game?


I wasn't aware FFXIII-2 had DLC issues. It's literally sitting on my shelf unplayed.


Edit: Acronym fail

Edited, Jun 12th 2013 2:24pm by Raolan
#88 Jun 12 2013 at 6:26 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
818 posts
xypin wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
I'm pretty sure they're basing their numbers on the continued sales of the series and their own market testing, not the ranting and raving on forums.
There is also the official reviews, which were favorable.



Right. I'm pretty sure just because us old folks who have been playing Final Fantasy for 20 years weren't crazy about it means others weren't at as well. The game is still actually pretty unique compared to what's out there in terms of gameplay, story, and mechanics. There might be a whole slew of 15 year old teens in angst who found XIII to be exactly what I found VIII to be. Even back then people complained that VIII wasn't VII lol. Final Fantasy fans seem to want Square to recreate the same thing (their particular favorite title) over and over. But then we'd just complain that they aren't doing anything new. I'd hate to be them, can't please everyone that's for sure.

Edited, Jun 12th 2013 8:27pm by electromagnet83
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#89 Jun 12 2013 at 6:30 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,470 posts
electromagnet83 wrote:
xypin wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
I'm pretty sure they're basing their numbers on the continued sales of the series and their own market testing, not the ranting and raving on forums.
There is also the official reviews, which were favorable.



Right. I'm pretty sure just because us old folks who have been playing Final Fantasy for 20 years weren't crazy about it means others weren't at as well. The game is still actually pretty unique compared to what's out there in terms of gameplay, story, and mechanics. There might be a whole slew of 15 year old teens in angst who found XIII to be exactly what I found VIII to be. Even back then people complained that VIII wasn't VII lol. Final Fantasy fans seem to want Square to recreate the same thing (their particular favorite title) over and over. But then we'd just complain that they aren't doing anything new. I'd hate to be them, can't please everyone that's for sure.

Edited, Jun 12th 2013 8:27pm by electromagnet83


It isn't about recreating the old, it's about keeping a major franchise within it's original genre. Calling today's FF an RPG is a bit of a stretch.
#90 Jun 12 2013 at 6:30 PM Rating: Good
***
2,211 posts
Raolan wrote:
BeanX the Irrelevant wrote:
Because SE and there sh*tty DLC Policy for the game?


I wasn't aware FFXIII-2 had DLC issues. It's literally sitting on my shelf unplayed.



Sounds like my copy before I sold it, anyway you meet up with the cast of the main game during the story but SE left out whats going on with them for DLC to sell later, So while you get all of The 2 main characters stories you miss out on a ton of content if you dont get the DLC, also the DLC lets you use them(The cast from FF13) in battle.
____________________________
What I Play
Recently Played
#91 Jun 12 2013 at 6:33 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,470 posts
BeanX the Irrelevant wrote:
Raolan wrote:
BeanX the Irrelevant wrote:
Because SE and there sh*tty DLC Policy for the game?


I wasn't aware FFXIII-2 had DLC issues. It's literally sitting on my shelf unplayed.



Sounds like my copy before I sold it, anyway you meet up with the cast of the main game during the story but SE left out whats going on with them for DLC to sell later, So while you get all of The 2 main characters stories you miss out on a ton of content if you dont get the DLC, also the DLC lets you use them(The cast from FF13) in battle.


If XIII wasn't the end for me, that sure as **** would have been. It's also a shining example of my biggest gripe with DLC.
#92 Jun 12 2013 at 6:40 PM Rating: Good
***
2,211 posts
Yeah That's why I never got into it. I hate the thought of missing stuff because I cant pony up, It irks the **** out of me with every game to a point. I understand the concept of DLC But implementation is whats ******** us/it over.

Edited, Jun 12th 2013 7:40pm by BeanX
____________________________
What I Play
Recently Played
#93 Jun 12 2013 at 6:43 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,470 posts
There's a big difference between DLC and hacking a game up to bleed you dry.
#94 Jun 12 2013 at 6:45 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
818 posts
BeanX the Irrelevant wrote:
Yeah That's why I never got into it. I hate the thought of missing stuff because I cant pony up, It irks the **** out of me with every game to a point. I understand the concept of DLC But implementation is whats ******** us/it over.

Edited, Jun 12th 2013 7:40pm by BeanX


There is no point in DLC, at all. It's a way that publishers can squeeze extra money out of the same game using the pre-existing resources. It requires very little labor and effort and yields a nice little pinch of profit. I personally will not now or ever buy DLC because I know its real purpose. Put stuff in the game, or make a sequel. Once I buy a game I'm done buying that game.
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#95 Jun 12 2013 at 6:59 PM Rating: Good
Sage
****
5,684 posts
Maybe I'm the only one, but I liked FFXIII.

I just didn't think the world, battle system, or characters were interesting enough to warrant a sequel. I enjoyed the first play through, but have no intention of going back, and FFXIII-2 seemed like more of the same to me.


Not all DLC is bad. Players just need to consider what actually makes DLC. Shiny horse armor does not make good DLC. A big group party on Omega is good DLC.
____________________________
Signature starts here.
#96 Jun 12 2013 at 7:02 PM Rating: Good
***
2,211 posts
I dis agree alittle with your DLC. DLC done right can add more to a game after launch to prolong its value. The DLC for Borderlands 1 & 2 are short 4-8 hour sidequests for about 10 apiece. They have little to no effect on the main story yet flesh out the world more. That Is DLC.

But I agree cutting parts of your game out to sell later need to die in a fire, this "Pre order here gets you an extraq bonus level" needs to go
____________________________
What I Play
Recently Played
#97 Jun 12 2013 at 7:12 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
818 posts
Everything Madden should be DLC. All players should be required to buy one Madden "Start up" kit per console generation and every year beyond that should be DLC at like 1/2 the price. It's stupid that they charge full price year after year for updated rosters. And they wonder why so many people started buying their games used (and subsequently put a restriction on used game sales).
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#98 Jun 12 2013 at 7:16 PM Rating: Good
*****
19,953 posts
Raolan wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:


I'm pretty sure they're basing their numbers on the continued sales of the series and their own market testing, not the ranting and raving on forums.


Then why is it that XIII-2, which is generally considered to be the better of the two, sold a fraction of what FFXIII did?


Why is it that the sequel to FFX-2, the original of which was loved, and the sequel well-rated, sold a fraction of what FFX sold?

Because it's a direct sequel. There is literally no reason for anyone who didn't play FFXIII to want to play FFXIII-2. That caps the potential audience at around 6.6 million in the first place. ****, let's increase it to 7 million, just because someone might want it.

Now consider the fact that FFXIII didn't leave off incomplete. This direct sequel doesn't exist to answer lingering questions from the first game. This sequel wasn't set up by the first game. Even though there are now three games, it isn't really a "trilogy." It's more like the Matrix, with a complete original, then a random sequel that has its own sequel.

I really enjoyed FFXIII. I've had little interest in FFXIII-2. Why? Because I just don't need it. This isn't the expansive world of a new IP (a la DAO, where entire countries' architecture, cultures, art, music, religion, etc. have been fleshed out even if the country has yet to be seriously referenced in the games). It's not a story designed to require more titles for the real experience (Good job - you beat Saren - now the real fun begins).

It's a completely new story and adventure that happens to take place after the events of the first one, and the main protagonist was a minor character from the original. That's a VERY different kind of entity.

Most direct sequels of this sort don't sell all that well. They're more like super-expansive DLC or expansions than they are true games. While you certainly COULD jump into the game without prior knowledge of FFXIII, why would you even want to in the first place?

And that's just limiting our view to these sorts of sequels. The reality is that sequels in general don't typically sell as well as the original, if the original was a best-seller. KH sold 5.6 million copies. KH2 sold 4.

But they're cheap to make. You put so much work into the original IP that you can slash a ton of your development costs right off the bat. You're also launching with some sure sales from your most dedicated fans.

But generally, it's the less-popular IPs that actually grow their sales numbers with subsequent releases. Uncharted 1 - 2.6, Uncharted 2 - 5 million, Uncharted 3 - 3.8 on launch day (don't have updated stats)

Even if FFXIII was hailed as the most brilliant FF game of all time, it is unlikely that it would have sold sequels anywhere close to its original sales number. 2 million people buying the sequel tells me that a fair number more than that enjoyed the original game.

Raolan wrote:
electromagnet83 wrote:
xypin wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
I'm pretty sure they're basing their numbers on the continued sales of the series and their own market testing, not the ranting and raving on forums.
There is also the official reviews, which were favorable.



Right. I'm pretty sure just because us old folks who have been playing Final Fantasy for 20 years weren't crazy about it means others weren't at as well. The game is still actually pretty unique compared to what's out there in terms of gameplay, story, and mechanics. There might be a whole slew of 15 year old teens in angst who found XIII to be exactly what I found VIII to be. Even back then people complained that VIII wasn't VII lol. Final Fantasy fans seem to want Square to recreate the same thing (their particular favorite title) over and over. But then we'd just complain that they aren't doing anything new. I'd hate to be them, can't please everyone that's for sure.

Edited, Jun 12th 2013 8:27pm by electromagnet83


It isn't about recreating the old, it's about keeping a major franchise within it's original genre. Calling today's FF an RPG is a bit of a stretch.


No, it isn't. You can make an RPG with only one character. You can make an RPG with thousands of characters to talk to. And then there's plenty in between.

You're taking an extremely limited viewpoint of what constitutes an RPG, and for arbitrary reasons.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#99 Jun 12 2013 at 7:22 PM Rating: Good
Sage
****
5,684 posts
You may not like it, but I hardly think
electromagnet83 wrote:
It's stupid that they charge full price year after year for updated rosters.
They've tricked people into buying the exact same game, year after year, for full price. I would call that pretty smart, really.
____________________________
Signature starts here.
#100 Jun 12 2013 at 7:28 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
818 posts
xypin wrote:
You may not like it, but I hardly think
electromagnet83 wrote:
It's stupid that they charge full price year after year for updated rosters.
They've tricked people into buying the exact same game, year after year, for full price. I would call that pretty smart, really.


The fact that they're tricking people makes it stupid Smiley: wink
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#101 Jun 12 2013 at 7:38 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
15,068 posts
electromagnet83 wrote:
The fact that they're tricking people makes it those people stupid Smiley: wink


Fixed. Smiley: wink
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 60 All times are in CST
Laxedrane, TherealLogros, Turin, Anonymous Guests (57)