PDA

View Full Version : Another go...



VeloZer0
03-24-2012, 12:15 AM
Ok, so I have decided to give FF12 a second chance. I haven't played the game since launch.

Though in my past playthrough I had issues with the gameplay and story only one of these is in my power to change. The main complaint I had about the game was that it was easy and required exceedingly little player involvement. Others have disagreed and told me it was only because I was playing it wrong.

So this is the chance for the legion of loyal FF12 fans to tell me what playstyle they think will lead to the most fun. As following my own instincts is likely to create a similar experience I hope to be able to impose some playthrough 'rules' on myself from the input in this thread.

Jinx
03-24-2012, 12:17 AM
I hate this game so much.

BUT

The first time I played it I was 15 years old. That was over 5 years ago. Lately, I've been considering giving it another go. My opinion of it could change, if I played it now.

Plus, the Rogue Tomato is totes adorable.

VeloZer0
03-24-2012, 01:29 AM
I wouldn't say I disliked it, just that I found it mediocre. Which makes it seem poor when compared to it's FF lineage.

Wolf Kanno
03-24-2012, 07:00 AM
For me, the fun way to play it is to stick to roles. If you need to, use a guide to figure out where everything you need is and build the class you want to make, I say go for it. The major area of contention is the upper board. The best way to go about this is be flexible and let everyone learn every accessory, but pick and choose your augments. This will allow your characters to actually gain a real statistical difference from each other. In my current file, I've only been giving my warrior style characters physical augments and mages magic augments and you can really see the difference when you play with classes with overlay. So for instance, I have Basch as a Paladin, but since I never bothered giving him summons and only a measly two magic type augments the difference between his White Magic and Penelo as my white mage with all the magic augments and equipment, is quite remarkable. Her magic is leaps and bound better than poor Basch, so this keeps Basch as what a Knight/Paladin should be, a decent healer but not one I can rely on for major healing. So for you, who needs a little structure, I would suggest not filling out the License Board. Only take what you need and continue on. I think too many people treat the License Board like the Sphere Grid, when you should really be looking at it more like the Materia, Junction system, or even job class system.

Experiment with all of the equipment. You would be very surprised how the right combination of gear can have some dramatic and interesting effects in this game. Seriously. my Balthier ended up becoming a cross between a FFTactics Chemist (using guns of course) and an FFTA2 Ranger (using items for devastating effect thanks to a certain accessory) and it's pretty amusing to say the least. I find the one-handed swords are simply the most basic weapon, but the other weapon types end up offering more in the long run. Staffs and rods can make or break a mage character. Also, don't bother with the Zodiac Spear. It's fine if you feel the need to pick it up for OCD sake, but honestly, there are actual better weapons in the game. The Masemune is actually a better DD weapon in the long run, so don't be fooled into thinking you need this weapon cause it is the "Ultimate weapon". The whole thing is similar to the Illumina vs. Atma Weapon debate in VI. Technically the Illumina is the better weapon overall, but the Atma Weapon is actually the better damage dealing weapon with the right set-up.

As for Gambits, once again, build gambits to the characters strengths of their "roles" not gambits for every contingency. If you were playing Tactics with your own party build, you wouldn't necessarily have every unit capable of being efficient healers with magic and item commands would you? Same goes here. Generally for me, Items are something I regulate to myself, I never let the game control that aspect of combat, so I never have HP<30% use Potion, the Gambits are here to make the game manageable and strategy based, not to be self-sufficient. no Skynet on my watch. :colbert: Gambits are ultimately tricky cause it really depends on the player. Usually you need to feel out what is comfortable for you which may mean either empowering or de-powering the A.I. or even flat out ignoring Gambits all together. This should be left up to you because the game makes Gambits completely optional, which is why I'll never understand why people hate on them.

Also, do the Mark Hunts as they come along and the optional quests. Some of it has some story relevance and others are shout outs to the FFTactics franchise. They are also the more challenging aspect of the game and as long as you do them as they appear and don't grind, you will find they are actually quite fun and require knowing the game mechanics well in order to win with little anguish. They give great loot as well. The only downside is that they make the end part of the game rather easy, so you may wish to hold off a bit once you reach Archades, if you want to make the last part of the game a bit more challenging. Though I highly recommend not fighting Yiazmat unless you are going for a completionist file. That fight is just awful...

VeloZer0
03-24-2012, 07:53 AM
If you were playing Tactics with your own party build, you wouldn't necessarily have every unit capable of being efficient healers with magic and item commands would you?
Would if I could. :p It is up to me to make the strongest party possible, it is up to the developer to make the quest to find the strongest party possible fun.


This should be left up to you because the game makes Gambits completely optional, which is why I'll never understand why people hate on them.
I don't know about everyone else but I hated the fact that the game was so simple that you could make the gambits play it. It wasn't that the gambits themselves were at fault but that they exposed otherwise weak combat. But I will save that for the many hate threads I will make once I start playing. ;)

Wolf Kanno
03-24-2012, 11:43 AM
If you were playing Tactics with your own party build, you wouldn't necessarily have every unit capable of being efficient healers with magic and item commands would you?
Would if I could. :p It is up to me to make the strongest party possible, it is up to the developer to make the quest to find the strongest party possible fun.

You forget we live in an era where games are built for the lowest common denominator. ;) Though honestly, I would argue that the best party set-up in XII is debatable. An adequate story beating team would be simple to surmise, but an actual "best party" configuration would be a bit more difficult to determine. It would really come down to play-style and whether you feel it's better to rely on Reverse spells and Bubble spells or simply rely on the inefficiency of shields and Bubble Belts can give to a party trying to deal with stronger marks and the games end bosses. Not to mention debating about the best set-up for maximum damage. I seriously end up having to switch from a mob killing party and a boss killing party, cause neither set-up is efficient enough to do both jobs well for me.



This should be left up to you because the game makes Gambits completely optional, which is why I'll never understand why people hate on them.
I don't know about everyone else but I hated the fact that the game was so simple that you could make the gambits play it. It wasn't that the gambits themselves were at fault but that they exposed otherwise weak combat. But I will save that for the many hate threads I will make once I start playing. ;)

I would argued it simply exposed the weak game mechanics of RPGs in general. We often joke about simply needing to mash X to win, but to have an A.I. system show it to us is another thing. Personally I felt XIII was far worse about this, mostly because I am literally switching between an Offense A.I. set and a Healing A.I. set for 99% of all the battles, not to mention a huge chunk of player control was removed from that game compared to XII.

Jessweeee♪
03-25-2012, 07:59 PM
Honestly I found FFXIII to be the only one in the series that was actually challenging. Others you just deal with some really tedious grinding and then you blow through everything. FFVIII gets an honorable mention for giving you a more creative way of grinding in Triple Triad.

VeloZer0
03-25-2012, 08:15 PM
FF13 without grinding was easier than FF1 even after grinding. ;)


I would argued it simply exposed the weak game mechanics of RPGs in general. We often joke about simply needing to mash X to win, but to have an A.I. system show it to us is another thing.
I'm not going to disagree with that. I do however feel that there have been better examples of good RPG combat systems prior to FF12. Though this exposed weaknesses in the genre it doesn't help that FF12 was also a weak entry.

Slothy
03-27-2012, 03:52 AM
You forget we live in an era where games are built for the lowest common denominator. ;) Though honestly, I would argue that the best party set-up in XII is debatable. An adequate story beating team would be simple to surmise, but an actual "best party" configuration would be a bit more difficult to determine. It would really come down to play-style and whether you feel it's better to rely on Reverse spells and Bubble spells or simply rely on the inefficiency of shields and Bubble Belts can give to a party trying to deal with stronger marks and the games end bosses. Not to mention debating about the best set-up for maximum damage. I seriously end up having to switch from a mob killing party and a boss killing party, cause neither set-up is efficient enough to do both jobs well for me.

That's an awful lot of talking to try and convince people that FFXII has more depth than it actually does. Bad enough that your standard FF title just requires mashing the X Button, but XII would mash it so you didn't have to. Such a brainless self-defeating system. You'd almost swear it was your girlfriend the way you defend it. Did it do your laundry and make you a sandwich too?


I would argued it simply exposed the weak game mechanics of RPGs in general. We often joke about simply needing to mash X to win, but to have an A.I. system show it to us is another thing. Personally I felt XIII was far worse about this, mostly because I am literally switching between an Offense A.I. set and a Healing A.I. set for 99% of all the battles, not to mention a huge chunk of player control was removed from that game compared to XII.

Like hell it was worse. XIII was awesome with it's deep combat mechanics. Everything went so fast you really had to be on your game. If you didn't stay totally involved and switch Paradigms like a boss you'd be completely screwed in seconds. Honestly Wolf, I think you're losing it man. :colbert:

Raistlin
03-27-2012, 04:25 AM
I'm going to have to partly side with WK and partly with Vivi.

I agree with WK about XII's battle system. The game gave you free reign to design the battle system how you see fit. And unless you're fighting only week creatures, for you to not have to do anything would involve a lot of planning and development of the gambits. If you want that, great; if you don't want that... then don't do it. Really, that simple. It's not about what's better or worse, but about your own preferred play style. It boggles my mind that people can complain about how they chose to play the game, or perhaps I am overestimating people.

But I do mostly side with Vivi about XIII's battle system, which I also thought was engaging, though admittedly more simplistic than XII's (in that you only had command of a certain type of action for non-leaders). It did start to get a bit old later on, but the whole game was getting old at that point due to the linearity and dismal writing of the latter half of the game. Overall, I thought XIII's battle system was a rare plus for the game.

But this thread is about XII, so WK is right, and people need to stop bitching about things when they are perfectly capable of playing a different way. :p What XII did is allow you to choose your own play style for the battle system, but that does entail actually making a choice and utilizing the gambits and leveling system to do so. If you never bother to think about it, it is less surprising when you don't have as much fun as someone who does.

Crop
03-27-2012, 09:05 PM
If it helps, when I first played XII at launch I hated it and stopped playing halfway through. However having recently played through it a few months ago I find it one of the more stronger titles.
This is mostly due to the world (probably my second favourite in the FF universe), and the total freedom given to you during the whole game in most aspects, from combat to exploration.

VeloZer0
03-27-2012, 09:18 PM
You and I have very different ideas about total freedom. :lol:

Depression Moon
03-27-2012, 11:23 PM
I agree with Kanno about the battle system. I can't comment on the rest as I haven't played those games. Damn I want to play this game and X-2 again so badly.

Roto13
04-11-2012, 10:11 PM
If difficulty is your biggest gripe, definitely do the marks. They're where the game gets challenging. It's like how Mario Galaxy is super easy to "finish" by collecting the minimum number of stars, but collecting them all is a different story.

This should be left up to you because the game makes Gambits completely optional, which is why I'll never understand why people hate on them.
I don't know about everyone else but I hated the fact that the game was so simple that you could make the gambits play it. It wasn't that the gambits themselves were at fault but that they exposed otherwise weak combat. But I will save that for the many hate threads I will make once I start playing. ;)

Final Fantasy XII is probably less winnable with gambits than most JRPGs would be. Those other games just don't have them.




You forget we live in an era where games are built for the lowest common denominator. ;) Though honestly, I would argue that the best party set-up in XII is debatable. An adequate story beating team would be simple to surmise, but an actual "best party" configuration would be a bit more difficult to determine. It would really come down to play-style and whether you feel it's better to rely on Reverse spells and Bubble spells or simply rely on the inefficiency of shields and Bubble Belts can give to a party trying to deal with stronger marks and the games end bosses. Not to mention debating about the best set-up for maximum damage. I seriously end up having to switch from a mob killing party and a boss killing party, cause neither set-up is efficient enough to do both jobs well for me.

That's an awful lot of talking to try and convince people that FFXII has more depth than it actually does. Bad enough that your standard FF title just requires mashing the X Button, but XII would mash it so you didn't have to. Such a brainless self-defeating system. You'd almost swear it was your girlfriend the way you defend it. Did it do your laundry and make you a sandwich too?
Why would you rather do obvious stupid things than not have to do them? What feeling of accomplishment do you get from hitting "Fight" over and over again or casting healing spells when your health is low? Do you think "Hooray, using Stona on my petrified party member was totally the right call! GO ME!"?

Slothy
04-13-2012, 02:01 PM
Why would you rather do obvious stupid things than not have to do them? What feeling of accomplishment do you get from hitting "Fight" over and over again or casting healing spells when your health is low? Do you think "Hooray, using Stona on my petrified party member was totally the right call! GO ME!"?

I realize you've been gone for a while so allow me to explain. My feelings on FFXII are pretty much in line with WK's 100% of the time. That post was a bit of obvious (to WK and anyone who knows my thoughts on FFXII anyway) trolling to help set up an April Fool's prank. I mean sweet zombie jesus, in the very next paragraph I say XIII was awesome when in actuality I consider it one of the worst games I've ever played, largely because it's claim to being a game at all is fairly tenuous at best given how little player involvement there is. And no, I'm not exaggerating there.

Roto13
04-13-2012, 10:22 PM
Well I can't tell because you're always wrong about basically everything anyway. :P

Slothy
04-14-2012, 12:37 AM
Whatever helps you sleep at night. :D