- 0 Posts
- 124 Comments
Earlier this year, I was in a similar predicament. I actually told Triss that I loved her. However, that only works if you take advantage of her while she’s drunk at the party. (She falls down while drunk and after you catch her, you can randomly kiss her.) I didn’t and locked myself out of romancing her early.
I would have lost many hours of progress by going back and frankly, I didn’t want to go for that choice. I cut my losses and went with Yen. Since then, I finished the whole game, DLCs included, and I don’t regret my choice. She gets a lot better later on and I came to appreciate her. Her quests are good. I just think the game does a poor job introducing her. I don’t care for either the books or the show and I’ve only played Witcher 2 once on release. With my first playthrough of Witcher 3 only starting last year, I knew literally nothing going in. Up until I could romance Triss, Yen was annoying and arrogant.
It’s been so long since Odyssey and we’ve just had Totk, I’d guess another 3D Mario is likely their S2 ‘killer app’. Could be Legends Z-A or Metroid Prime 4 too, both of which would be cross generation. However, I’m not exactly dying to get my hands on any of these either way, especially not Pokemon.
No, I don’t think so. They are just different and people don’t like change. For context, I’m a massive JRPG fan and I’ve played: 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 12 and 15. And of course tons of spin-offs. Planning on playing 7, 8 and 13 - don’t care for MMOs and 16.
Out of these, I love of course the obvious early ones: 4 and 6.
However, 10 is my favorite overall. It has the most solid gameplay (fuck ATB tbh) and a great story, even though we sideline Sin way too much for Seymore who I don’t care for. It’s biggest problem are the minigames though, I hate Blitzball and especially the Cloister of Trials.
9 could be better, but the steam version crashes so much I didn’t get to finish it.
Now, after 10 we got a lot more experimental:
12 was fun but had massive problems. It’s biggest was the autobattle mechanic alongside the speed up in modern releases. You basically don’t play the game and you don’t even strategize. It’s always faster to sprint a few minutes around the map and get back with more levels which ultimately killed any interest I had in the battle system. But I dislike programmable party members in every game, so your milage may vary. The world building on the other hand was awesome.
15 was a great game. I think it’s reception isn’t wrong necessarily because of how much it differs from trailers and such. However, I played it years after release and without having seen a single trailer. I had a blast throughout. The writting is among FF’s best, not because it’s such a great story, but because the relationships between the main party are so strong. I even liked the battle system - it’s different and has a lot of potential, I think. It’s biggest failure is that you need to watch a series, a movie and read lots of other material to grasp the story - a lot of it isn’t in the game.
16, I can’t say much about. I’m honestly not very interested in basic medieval fantasy settings, they’ve stripped out the RPGs mechanics and quite frankly I just don’t own a system I could play it on. Maybe I’d like it after all, I don’t know.
My vote goes to Dragon Quest. Early gaming was dominated by JRPGs like DQ, Final Fantasy or Chrono Trigger. Pretty much every modern game has RPG elements. While there are earlier RPGs, DQ popularized them and invented the JRPG.
Of course, literally speaking, the first game ever is the most influential - therefore Tennis for Two.
I don’t think I can stomach the plain YuGiOh simulators from back then. It’s quite boring, especially after having played the modern game. I do think it’s worth getting at a dicount for the weirder ones though.
However, I’d buy a collection of all their weird 3D games in heartbeat. Forgotten Memories, Kingdom of Illusion, Duelists of the Roses and so on.
I don’t think the mainline games will change anytime soon, just like they didn’t adopt the battle styles of the last Legends game.
Like, don’t get me wrong, I think the idea they are going for is good. But I also think it does look really clunky and would kill the PvP scene.
Personally, I’d go for a turn based and position based approach like Like a Dragon or Dragon Quest are experimenting with.
I love almost everything about this, apparently 100h+ in Infinite Wealth was not enough for me. Although, having discovered Like a Dragon only because of their switch to turn-based combat, I’m not sure the brawling is a good fit for me.
I’ll probably pick it up eventually, assuming a new main game doesn’t drop till then.
Not entirely, however, I feel as though proper resource management got less common over time. While the ideas are still present in modern games, they tend to be easy enough that most resources can just be horded. Most people don’t even use consumables nowadays. Games are seemingly balanced around ignoring entire systems.
From my point of view, you’ve got it wrong, but so do many developers. A good JRPG is all about resource management. Your HP, MP, items, money and the balance between these and your EXP and equipment. Combat is simply a drain on your resources up until the final boss, which should require more strategy. This needs something akin to a dungeon without constant healing and money being a thight resource. Once you’re in a dungeon, you should either be prepped or doomed.
You mostly see this done in dungeon crawlers, think any Etrian Odyssey game for example. Persona 5 goes for the same thing, as do most Shin Megami Tensei games.
Most modern games, however, are overly lenient with either money or healing. Often times, combat is easy enough to not even drain your resources. That’s when endless grinding becomes an option. Once you’ve destroyed this balance, you need something else to keep attention and that’s where I think your observation comes in.
Level scaling is never fun and never will be, I think. There is no progression if your fights with early enemies are just as hard as they were 50h ago.
You could probably design around that by providing in-depth build options such that optimized builds outscale other entities of the same level. Later game enemies themselves would be optimized better and better. But that’s really hard and I’ve never seen it done. Why even provide a dynamic build for each enemy with each level if you could just have a normal non-scaling progression?
These systems often lead to me avoiding combat altogether. While not exactly a crpg, Oblivion was more fun to me without ever leveling up (which was optional, but made fights kinda pointless).
As for me, it used to be 50/50 back when I studied. However, ever since I’ve entered the workforce I mostly stopped watching videos.
I need to constantly learn new things, tackle new problems and optimize stuff. I usually go for the highest difficulties too. In theory, my job provides these tasks for me, however, I get a lot of satisfaction from trying and failing things over and over until I’ve figured them out myself. I can’t usually do this professionally, as most problems have already been solved and I’m just learning how others did it. The same as playing with a guide or watching a video on a game. It just doesn’t scratch the itch.
Yeah, I somewhat agree. Collecting full sets in the game is kinda fun, just because opening card packs is inherently fun. But I play the game precisely because this isn’t worth any money to me.
Having cards that are only obtainable with money ruins this. It’s kinda killing my interest in anything else they do since I can’t complete the promo set anyway.
The worst part is, they would make millions without it. People already pay for regular packs, just to collect their digital cards faster. Heck, the increased attention to the actual card game alone probably already offset the developing costs.
Do you mean quick time events (QTEs)? The game has at least one cutscene I remember where you’re prompted to activate an ability to change the outcome, however, I think that’s it. The games usually doesn’t have them.
Although, it does commit an entirely different sin in terms of unskippable cutscenes: There are several ‘immersive’ cutscenes with you suddenly walking at a snail’s pace or climbing slowly around while the cutscene plays out.
I went into detail here. In short, nothing was actually engaging. Combat, puzzles and traversal all felt shallow.
Some games I replay a lot, but always on a fresh save. I think I’ve finished Dark Souls about 10 times without ever touching NG+.
Notable exceptions are:
- Nier Automata, although you kind of have to if you want the whole game and it still brought down the experience for me.
- Chrono Trigger, for the quick kill on Lavos. I did not play much of the NG+.
It’s a pet peeve of mine, I hate stealth sections. Waiting around just isn’t fun and most stealth sections are just that.
However, that was years ago. I haven’t encountered one in a long time since I mostly stopped playing AAA games - by now these games are an amalgamation of so many worse design decisions, I almost miss the time stealth sections were my biggest issue.
It’s quite easy, actually. I usually play everything years after release, however, if I’m really into a certain series, I’ll buy it right away. If I don’t care for the wait, I probably don’t care enough about whether or not a sequel is being made.
Of course that only works if you don’t get hyped easily. I play a lot of games, but usually only 1-2 per year are released within said year.
I’ve not yet touched it. But since you mentioned it: How does leveling now work? And more importantly, how does enemy scaling work?
If I remember correctly, in the original, I felt strongest when I got Umbra at Lv 1 and just never levelled up.
Furthermore, how are the character animations? I saw the Emperor in the Remake and while the model was quite nice, in combination with his facial animations, I actually preferred the original. What I assume to be the original animations paird with updated models seemed too uncanny. However, that problem could be specific to him.