Quote:
Originally Posted by
NeoCracker
You know, the moment I actually get to BoF2 on this list, I will explain to you why it did the better job with the different character stories, but I don't want to pre-emptively go on about a game that I haven't gotten to on my list yet. :p
I look forward to explaining why you are wrong. :p
Quote:
I will still counter both Maria and Esmeralda because their stories are pretty much finished the moment they are introduced into the party. Esmaralda didn't even need to join the party for her story to be fulfilled. Fei's recalling memories happens in the game without her, so she's not even necessary for the flashback scene to the other time period.
For one thing, Maria's Arc is pretty long and encompasses the introduction to Shevat, you talk like it ended 10 minutes after her introduction when it was just as long as Rico's intro and Billy's Arc. Esmerelda's story is Kim's story which is why she has to be there, not only is she an important plot element for the bad guys, but her existence really tells the story of Zeboim Era. Esmerelda's Story is the story of the Zeboim Era and it wouldn't have worked out with just Fei's flashbacks. Esmerelda's story is split into three sections. Her intro where the party races against Bishop Stone to retrieve her which is a really touching scene if you brought Elly along, her actual intro to the party after her boss fight where we get the second major hint about Fei's reincarnation past. Finally we get her third section where we finally fill in the blanks to one of Fei's past incarnations, but also Fei finally get's to see his life's work as Kim come to fruition as Esmerelda becomes complete. It was a touching bookend to both her and Kim.
Quote:
And I'll just give you FF 2, because I'll be honest I can't remember trout about it's dungeon design. And Xenosaga can have some pretty bad design choices, but never in that game did a dungeon frustrate me, and I never really felt like I was just re-treading the same ground for the entire stretch of the dungeon.
FFII's dungeons are atrocious and this is coming from someone who actually likes FFII.
Quote:
And let's not bring Xeno 2 into this, I already admit to forgiving that entire game way more then I probably should. :p
It is as much as your sin as my enjoyment of FFII is mine. ;)
Quote:
Oddly though, I don't really have an issue with the Xeno battle system other then the fact when you have Citan in your group there is no reason to try anymore, and after a certain point the battles just become rinse and repeat the remainder of the game. (I've forgiven plenty of other games for that though. :p)
Citan is a monster and it isn't helped that the game really loves to keep him in your party. I was honestly waiting for Bolivar to jump in on that one. :p
Quote:
Most of my distaste for this game is the lack of any real pay off to what was otherwise some really well done build up.
I'll have to agree to disagree because I felt Xenogears paid off the important parts of the story. Rico and Kaiser's story, the "missing night in Shevat", and the missing Omnigears are the only major story points that bothered me. I'll agree the rushed nature of the rest of the plot is a valid criticism but I honestly felt the developers handled it well considering they were on deadline and had the budget slashed in mid-development.
Quote:
ANd yes, there is some pretty nutty cases in real life of generals and what not making some really smurfing stupid tactical choices. However, your examples still aren't as stupid as Vanderkaum, and here is why.
1) Any reference to tactics is nonsense, because the army is trained and equipped to handle situations Vanderkaum was in. It's not like they were dealing with some new breed of enemy that required tactics they'd never used before, this was trout they've dealt with in the past.
Partially untrue, the opening of the game pretty much tells you that Gear combat is relatively new to the current countries of the Ignas continent, largely thanks to Solaris hiding and controlling history. Hell, if you think about it, even though Solaris uses Gears in their military, they haven't fought a real war in 500 years, so its not like their army has real longterm battle experience against other gears.
Quote:
2) The Redcoats had the misfortune of not being trained to handle that kind of fighting. They were also at the disadvantage of not being willing to just level everything because it was still considered British property, and to do so would destroy it's own infrastructure. These are two things that in no way, shape, or form factor into Vanderkaum's arrogance and failure.
Not true, the Redcoats would be well aware of the fighting tactics since the Colonist and British forces faced it in the French and Indian War a decade earlier. Several of the Redcoat forces were already stationed in the New World and would know the guerrilla tactics used by the Native American confederacy's. Hell when the British retreated from Boston after Bunker Hill, they regrouped in Canada and turned it into their staging ground. The notion of the Redcoats not being aware of guerrilla tactics is often an over-exaggeration helped to simplify understanding the war. Of anything the British often made the same mistake as Vanderkaum did in the early stages of the war which was try lure the Continental Army into a more conventional warfare they were strongest at, which often failed in the early stages of the War. The southern defense was often the Colonial army starting a conventional fight against the redcoats and then breaking formation and retreating to the wood where the Redcoats would follow and be picked off by ambushes. Granted the Colonials usually lost a any encounter that was a conventional fight or suffered heavy casualties.
Quote:
3) Solaris's, on a whole, is smart. They have been doing their thing for generations, run and operated by people who have been able to adapt with the generations of different kinds of opposition. Yet somehow on this run they see it as a good Idea to trust a guy who they have seen already is a raging imbecile?
Not true as well, the whole reason Ramsus and his Gebler forces are in Aveh is because Vanderkaum is a screw up and needs to be replaced. Ramsus even foreshadows that its Vanderkaum's arrogance and use of dated military weapons and tactics is why he's a failure. If memory serves me correct, I think Ramsus even mentions he sent Vanderkaum to the front lines in the hope he would get killed. Its because of Ramsus harsh treatment and the fact Vanderkaum is going to be punished when he returns to Solaris that also lends support to why Vanderkaum made such stupid bullheaded moves because he was trying to prove his way of thinking was relevant. The game does a pretty good job of creating a human element to Vanderkaum in this regard. He's isn't just being stupid, he's also being desperate because he wants to prove the superiors they were wrong. Basically Vanderkaum is a fine example when keeping it real goes horribly wrong.
Quote:
4) Even if I drop point three, there is one more thing wrong with that scene. When a guy is an idiot, but has way more power and resources then you, you win the fight by outsmarting him. Fei's plan? Charge in guns blazing and just trust the idiocy of a man you have never met, and have only heard a small bit about, is so great he shall forgoe using the entire armada of anti-gear weaponry at his disposal in favor of the least efficient weapon in his arsenal for handling the situation. I mean yes, it did work, but it doesn't change the fact the plan was smurfing stupid.
Fei is actually told ahead of time what kind of person Vanderkaum is when Sigurd and Citan brief him about the plan, so its not like Fei went in blind. Fei's goal was only to harrass the forces and make them call for backup by making it look like a Kislev attack, he was never meant to win. Even Fei's allies remark that Fei's actions were reckless (course they are used to it thanks to Bart) and the whole team themselves are dumbfounded when they actually crush Vanderkaum's forces.
The other thing to point out is that Fei is not just "Average Joe" and Weltall is an exceptional Gear so Fei's forces did have some advantages that Vanderkaum's forces were not prepared for.
Quote:
5) I'll even drop point four for this, grant you Vanderkaum is believable, and grant you that Fei's plan wasn't smurfing stupid (Even though it was), and ask you this. Just because something is believable, does it make for a good story? What kind of threat is an enemy so stupid that with the vastly superior resources at Vanderkaum's disposal, he can go down to such an minimalistic plan? It was like at the end of Burst Angel when the Brain in a Jar was raving about how he could not be defeated, and it was to late to stop him, and the main character just shoots him through his non-bullet proof glass and the show ends.
I felt it was good story telling because we watch Fei finally grow into more of a hero than his mopey ass self from the previous 15 hours of the game, we get to watch the arrogance and desperation of a man end both his career and his life. To me the Vanderkaum sequence is an interesting tale that watches someone who is really shooting himself in the foot come to the sad revelation that he was wrong and then making a deal with the devil to try and gain redemption. Vanderkaum's story is written so you feel pitty for the man, not surprised by what happens and certainly you will yell at him as he keeps tying the noose around his neck but I find it engaging because its a lesson in hubris and human folly. I like it, I felt it was well written because the drama is about the fall of a stupid old soldier who is too stubborn to diverge from his old ways. You don't really get that kind of writing in video games, or at least ones that give the character a more human element.
Quote:
Edit: Also, I think I'm done talking on Xenogears. I've bitched enough of the topic. :p
We'll see about that. :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ultima Shadow
I can agree with cliches being used often. However... they almost always have an unusual take on these cliches one way or another, or they are simply better done than cliches of the same categories in other games. The characters in the Tales of games usually have very well-defined personalities that separate them from the more flat and overly generic counterparts you see in a whole lot of actually mediocre RPGs out there.
Asbel from Graces, for example, fits into just as many typical "hero cliches" as... say, Edge from SO4. Yet at the same time, he is quite possibly the only main character of his kind that I actually like a lot. The game doesn't try to blow his goodie two-shoes ways out of propotions, and the other characters can see his ideals as a burden at times, rather than blindly clinging to him like he's some kind of messiah. There are even parts that makes fun of him for being a hero cliche. Yet he has more depth and better reason for ideals than pretty much all other MC's of his kind.
He uses a sword, fights for justice and stuff, wants to protect everyone and all that crap... all those things you've seen before in every RPG ever, yet he still manages to stay different from those typical RPG heroes. And perhaps even more importantly, he's set on his naive ideals to the point where he can actually come to a mutual conclusion with the villain(s) rather than "destroying the source of evil" - which is something fresh that you really don't see much in other RPGs.
And when it comes to main villains, the FF series uses far more cliches. The Tales of series uses many cliches, but they use them well.
...so I absolutely disagree with the "been there done that" feel. Especially when compared to so many half-decent RPGs. :p
I would need to know what these "half decent RPGs" were because once you drop FF and other fan favorites like BoF, Suikoden, MegaTen, and Persona, it seems to me all that is left is Tales and a few dungeon cralwers like Etrian Odyssey.
My issue is that I don't find the characters too engaging, they may use a new spin on old cliches but by this point in time after playing the genre for well over ten years, I'm just sick of the cliches themselves.
Quote:
Tales of Vesperia and Tales of Graces, while not quite as great as Symphonia and Abyss, are still really good games too. And sales are totally irrelevant to the subject. Sales does not equal quality.
...and after reading your second post with the clarification: "taking the throne" and "leading the genre to a new future" are not really relevant to the quality of the series either. A game doesn't have to be revolutionary to be great.
It doesn't but it has to bring something that really sets it apart and while the Tales games have a battle system, I prefer a complete package, especially if I'm going to elevate something to 'great" status and I just feel the Tales series doesn't have that. Beyond their combat system, I don't feel their is anything that makes them truly stand out.
[/QUOTE]So tell me, what exactly separates a fun junkfood game from a fun non-junkfood game to you? :p[/quote]
Something that actually changes how I think both in terms of game design and in dealing with characters and stroies. A game that alters how I feel falls into the "non-junk food" a game should have a lasting impact even after you shut it off and for me, Tales doesn't really have it.
Quote:
Comparing Tales of to FF, I gotta say that on a whole:
Tales of has better character design.
I disagree, while Tales of certainly has nice desings, the anime designs don't lend itself well especially in a market that is increasingly using the style. FF may have some ugly desing choices but it at least stands out. Then again, I tenbd to favor stylized designs like Amano and Tatsuya Yoshikawa
Quote:
Tales of has far superior gameplay.
Depends on your poison, while I like Tales of gameplay, I'm not a fan of Action RPGs so I would favor FF in most cases on this point.
Quote:
FF has better music.
Well the series does have a monopoly on that element, its hard to find composers on par with Nobuo Uematsu.
Quote:
FF has better storylines.
Compared to Tales of, yes I would agree.
Quote:
...and to me, the first two both outweight the later two.
While I can agree that fun gameplay is important, story tends to be my other factor over character design, I usually don't give a damn about graphics and could care less if the characters look cool or sexy. As long as I like the characters personality I can overlook sub-par design. Tales of is hindered to me by their stories and characters who can never hold my attention for long. To me apathy is the clearest sign of dislike for something. Hating a character is fine, at least the writer was able to write someone who could illicit a response from the consumer even if its not what they intented, but not giving a damn about them in the first place is a sign of failure and this is why I don't care for Tales of because they can't illicit anything from me, this is why I don't like FFVII, X, and XIII because I am largely apathetic to them and it hinders my ability to enjoy the games.
Quote:
Also, not trying to trout-talk FF. I love the FF games. But if you ask me, the Tales of main series still has better titles than the FF main series. :greenie:
I can't agree about Tales of, but I also feel their are better games than some of the FFs so its not like I'm the raging "FFis teh BAEST!!!" but I can't deny the impact the series has on both the industry and on the people who love it.