Wada Discusses the future

I think VIII had quite a few reasons to go into towns. The first is Triple Triad, which was always quite fun. Then there were numerous side-quests and little Easter Eggs hidden away. Then there is Winhill and Shumi Village which both have 2 side-quests each (if I recall properly), all of which were quite fun, as well as (especially in Shumi Village) fleshing out a lot of the characters (such as Laguna) and the Shumi people as a whole. So, don't really get your point for VIII.

X I understand a little bit more, although speaking to the people in towns and finding out how they've been affected by Sin again fleshes out some of the story. And I enjoyed playing Blitzball (I am a FIFA nuthead, so that could explain it) and needed to find players. And if you wanted other things to do, you could customise your weapons and armour and do other cool things too (sorry, I played X a long long long long time ago).

Whereas in XII, the only thing you really do, outside the main story, is hunt marks and fish. I know some people might dislike Blitzball and Triple Triad, but fishing is very lame. And hunting marks becomes very routine (and considering the optional bosses in VIII and X, not too unique to XII). Yes, the NPCs did adjust what they talked about, but really, it was nothing really special.

And the combat system in XII was relatively weak compared to X and X-2. Yes, it made for a more free-flowing game, but seriously, there was generally less thought and therefore less entertainment. There are 2 reasons why I explored XII: it is very pretty (but so is X) and I am very curious.

And as for linear games with cut-scenes, here are 3 words and a number to illustrate how good it can be: Metal Gear Solid 4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VeloZer0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

Story segments might as well end with four choices popping up:

Save
Shop
Battle random enemies
Next Cutscene

Cause at least we can really streamline this and not even have to waste our time with dungeons if thought isn't even going to be put into it. :roll2

---

Though you meant it to be satirical that reminds me a lot of FFT, which worked out rather well plot and game play wise.

---

That's true, but SRPGs by tradition rarely use dungeons and the few series I can think of that tried were not exactly great titles to begin with (stares at Arc The Lad series). Also, combat is still randomized in FFT so its more like FFX. In XIII you can choose (assuming these roads are large enough to evade them or else this will have Xenosaga II's problem) to engage enemies since you can see them on the map. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champagne supernova

I think VIII had quite a few reasons to go into towns. The first is Triple Triad, which was always quite fun. Then there were numerous side-quests and little Easter Eggs hidden away. Then there is Winhill and Shumi Village which both have 2 side-quests each (if I recall properly), all of which were quite fun, as well as (especially in Shumi Village) fleshing out a lot of the characters (such as Laguna) and the Shumi people as a whole. So, don't really get your point for VIII.

---

You actually learn more about Laguna reading his Timber Maniacs articles than actually visiting some of the places he's been (like the Shumi Viallage) also the items won from doing the Chocobo quest in Winhill and the Elder's fetch quests in Shumi Village are hardly worth the trouble. Hell, even the Chocobo Forest quest is not worth it unless you're trying to complete getting all the TT Cards. This is kinda the problem with most of the optional content in VIII, its not really immediately useful. Getting the Rare Materia in the Chocobo Breeding quest or getting access to high level gear for underleveled characters early in IX through the Chocobo Hot and Cold have immediate gratification that not only helps completionist but also scrubs who don't know better.

VIII's system is so abusive getting said items is really just to say you did than actually being practical. I don't think I even knew about a few of them until several playthroughs later and in the end all it really does is allow me to divert my attention when I get to the boring parts of the story. As for Triple Triad, you can get most of the cards just playing the students in Balamb, you only miss out on the rare cards and considering refining them is only useful if you don't know what you are doing then I once again must disagree with Triple Triad being useful beyond the initial common cards.

Granted, I do enjoy collecting all the cards, I'm just saying the lack of adequate shops makes going into towns a chore since you are only there to talk to one person so you can win the card you need. Outside of Deiling and Balamb, most towns really don't change their dialogue too much from the first time you're there.

Quote:

---

X I understand a little bit more, although speaking to the people in towns and finding out how they've been affected by Sin again fleshes out some of the story. And I enjoyed playing Blitzball (I am a FIFA nuthead, so that could explain it) and needed to find players. And if you wanted other things to do, you could customise your weapons and armour and do other cool things too (sorry, I played X a long long long long time ago).

---

Blitball gets boring once you assemble a good team since a high level Tidus = Instant win for your guys except against the cheating Al Bhed (how are they so good when they live in a smurfing desert?!)

The customizing of weapons and armor is actually a feature you get early in the game and doesn't require shops, so basically early on in the title the game makes all shops later on a moot gesture. Throw in the fact your party can one shot 90% of the normal monsters in the game without exploiting any weaknesses then even customizing becomes a moot gesture until you tackle the monster arena at the end of the game. I have a play through where I made lots of useful armor and weapons and then I have a game where my party members mostly used what they started with and I don't feel the difficulty of the game actually changed between the two.

The weapon system is an intriguing idea but its completely wasted by the games total lack of challenge. Most of X's big customization systems only become in-depth when you reach the end of the game to deal with the Monster Arena and once again I digress that this mostly exists to keep the player occupied as opposed to being useful to the overall game. The Gameplay is decidedly divorced from the story and main game seeing as how most of the features don't become practical until after you are strong enough to finish the game anyway.

Quote:

---

Whereas in XII, the only thing you really do, outside the main story, is hunt marks and fish. I know some people might dislike Blitzball and Triple Triad, but fishing is very lame. And hunting marks becomes very routine (and considering the optional bosses in VIII and X, not too unique to XII). Yes, the NPCs did adjust what they talked about, but really, it was nothing really special.

---

You forget that you are also exploring the world with some of the Mark Hunts since they exist in regions you normally wouldn't or couldn't reach until then. Several of them are also puzzles (Like Ultros only appearing if you have an all-female team), there are also several minor story quests like the Sisters on the Airship, the Viera looking for her soulmate, the moogle workers you run into, Jovy's quest to become a hero like Reks, and even the rare monster hunters. Not to mention several of the Mark Hunts actually tie up loose ends in the plot and I can say the Mark Hunts are a tad bit more involved with the overall game and story than most.

The Mark Hunts themselves offered a greater level of challenge than anything your party would be facing and handsomely rewarded you. Of course, like Chocobo Hot and Cold, its only usefulness was only good if you did them as early as possibly (usually shortly after they became available) but they also had the satisfaction of teaching you how to utilize the battle system better. Granted, I don't particulary care for Mr. "Waste My Time" Yiazmat but I'm not actually saying XII is perfect or its the ideal way to make a title. Like my above statements, I'm looking for something a little more mid-FF (SNES-PS1) life cycle that balanced both styles.

Quote:

---

And the combat system in XII was relatively weak compared to X and X-2. Yes, it made for a more free-flowing game, but seriously, there was generally less thought and therefore less entertainment. There are 2 reasons why I explored XII: it is very pretty (but so is X) and I am very curious.

---

I'll simply agree to disagree here as even I know this is a subjective issue cause personally I strongly disliked X's system and I never understood why people felt X-2's was so great, whereas I loved XII's. That's a debate for another day cause I seriously don't want to simply make this a X vs. XII debate or even a debate on whether X was good or not. I only brought up X cause its system is the closest to XIII within the series but in reality, XIII seems to actually be closer to Xenosaga Episode II's game design more than anything.

Quote:

---

And as for linear games with cut-scenes, here are 3 words and a number to illustrate how good it can be: Metal Gear Solid 4

---

Everyone seems to be missing my point here. I'm not completely against linear design as much as I'm against lazy linear design which is what I'm actually accusing X, XIII, and Xeno II of. Many of the old FF dungeons are fairly linear but they actually twist and turn so they don't feel linear, the dungoen design I'm calling out is when everything is a simple road. There is nothing "simple" about MGS4's level design and to be honest, if it is merely a straight path you know damn well that is the hardest part because of the nature of the game. RPGs don't offer that different style of gameplay, their only benefit from making asinine game design is to get you to the next story point faster and my question with this mentality is that if the story is so important that we have to dumb down the gameplay for it then why bother telling your story as a game? Why make the player suffer with bad design decisions if your story could just as easily be told as a movie or mini-series?

This has been my point, I'm not against linear game design just bad ones like X and Xeno II where everything is just a simple road to your next destination and there is no point to ever deviate cause there is nothing else to see or experience. Everything I've read about XIII's design gives me the impression the design team wanted to make a movie, not to create an immersive experience that combines gameplay with strong story telling. Cinematic movies were great for storytelling about two console generations ago, SE needs to learn how to combine this like other successful companies, what makes MGS4 more of a cinematic experience is that you actually get to control Snake during some of the most heart-wrenching developments and that's what makes those scenes the type of things that stay with you long after you finish playing. Despite my dislike of the game, Crisis Core's ending is far more poignant because the player actually gets to play Zack's losing battle... This is how you build immersion by combining gameplay with story telling instead of divorcing the two completely like in DoC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

I mean Level 5 is being outsourced to develop the DQ games which you would think a major IP like that would usually stay in-house. It just seems a bit weird to me.

---

Actually DQ games have always been outsourced (I think) even before the merger. Basically Horii writes the story, Toriyama does the art, Sugiyama writes the music, and it all gets programmed from there, with of course things like level design and such having their gaps filled in by whoever plays the role of director at level-5 or arte piazza.

But you're right, it is a little weird.

Yeah, I just noticed that the other day, apparently Enix never had any in-house programmers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

There is nothing "simple" about MGS4's level design and to be honest, if it is merely a straight path you know damn well that is the hardest part because of the nature of the game.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

...what makes MGS4 more of a cinematic experience is that you actually get to control Snake during some of the most heart-wrenching developments and that's what makes those scenes the type of things that stay with you long after you finish playing.

---

??? I clearly played another version of MGS. Apart from 2 scenes right at the end, I don't recall me doing anything with Snake during the heart-wrenching developments, besides pushing X to get flashbacks. And MGS level design may not be perfectly linear, but you do basically go - creep through area, have cut-scene, creep through another area, have cut-scene, fight big bad boss, etc etc (I honestly think that the 5th Act has about 1 parts of actual gameplay to 5 parts of cut-scenes). I have nothing against MGS for doing this; I think it is an awesome game and some of the gameplay elements are very cool, but it doesn't exactly re-invent the wheel.

X's combat system is regarded highly because it allowed you to plan ahead, making it more tactical and calculated than previous FFs. That's why I liked it.

I think that if XIII has streamlined the game, that is quite a good idea, because I hate level-grinding with a passion (although I'm sure you can still do it if you want to). But I cannot comment on something I haven't tried, so I'll wait to play it before I pass any judgement (good or bad on it).

I also don't understand how not being forced to go into towns to buy items and equipment is a bad thing. You shouldn't be forced to slog through loading screens and long walks to get something. If you want to go into towns in a game, it should be for random NPC conversations which fill out the game and silly side-quests. VIII had numerous - just think about Fisherman's Horizon and the cafeteria lady's son. Or the fisherman. I think X had its share of cool stuff too, but I've played VIII and X-2 and XII and most of VI and half of IV since, so my memory is a bit unclear.

So, my point is that, from what I can see, the quality of FFs has been up to scratch since Wada has taken over. There has definitely been innovation in story-telling techniques, gameplay mechanics and graphical design, and XIII looks like it will continue the trend.

And, to be honest, FFVII wasn't a huge break from previous FFs. The main area of improvement was in the graphics allowed from the PS, allowing for a more personal story to be told. But the ATB system was almost identical from VI (the actual battle system and not the mechanics behind it). The materia system was probably a backward step. Weapons and armour were fairly standard. Game progression fairly linear. Apart from the side-games, which were quite fun and entertaining, the real innovation of VII (outside of graphics) was the presentation of an epic story.

The area I think that Square-Enix is failing is their IPs outside of their main series. But, perhaps what Wada is now trying to do is to create these different types of IPs under the FF umbrella - if Versus is anything to go by. In which case, a rose by any other name smells as sweet, and you can't really complain seeing how Ivalice has come under the Final Fantasy name in 2 pure iterations and 2 somewhat watered-down (Tactics Advance - bleh).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champagne supernova

So, my point is that, from what I can see, the quality of FFs has been up to scratch since Wada has taken over. There has definitely been innovation in story-telling techniques, gameplay mechanics and graphical design, and XIII looks like it will continue the trend.

And, to be honest, FFVII wasn't a huge break from previous FFs. The main area of improvement was in the graphics allowed from the PS, allowing for a more personal story to be told. But the ATB system was almost identical from VI (the actual battle system and not the mechanics behind it). The materia system was probably a backward step. Weapons and armour were fairly standard. Game progression fairly linear. Apart from the side-games, which were quite fun and entertaining, the real innovation of VII (outside of graphics) was the presentation of an epic story.

---

I'm not here to gang up on anyone or argue about "streamlining" or design choices; I just want to chime in on a point I feel needs to be raised when talking about the differences of cinematic presentation throughout the FF series.

The key idea is presentation - it's the centerpiece of every single game ever, all the way back to Pong. Gamer perspective is possibly the most important factor in determining the player's experience. I believe that the innovation of VII (and VIII and IX) is that, while no less "linear" than X (or I-VI), it remains interesting from screen to screen. Each camera angle is painstakingly picked and offers a completely different point-A-to-point-B experience. Whether it be a winding path or a small puzzle, the carefully-directed explorable artwork of VII-IX is what carries those games as cinematic experiences and is exactly what makes them unique and interesting as "cinematic" games (whether or not the player enjoys it is a different story, however).

X, XII, and now XIII, on the other hand, places the gamer in completely different shoes. Occasionally X busted out the PS1-era explorable artwork (don't ask me for examples, because I can't remember specifics) but for the most part it was a behind-the-back experience like a lot of current 3D games. With this player perspective, everything is seen, and surroundings exist as more of a gameplay environment than carefully directed scenes (or screens). The main problem that some seem to have with X is that for everything that can be seen in these environments, not much can be done. Of course, it's not like the explorable artwork of VII-IX were huge interactive playgrounds either, but the cinematic intrigue seems to be missing from the newer entries.

What I feel separates the PS1-era and the PS2/3 era FFs is how Square has defined "cinematic" for each. Cinematic for the PS1 involved explorable artwork and careful screen direction, whereas as the PS2/3 games are "cinematic" because of the frequent story-based cutscenes, which are usually presented completely differently than the gamer-controlled bits (not so in the PS1 games). Enjoyment of either is all based on taste, of course, but I just wanted to perhaps raise a point about what makes each generation of Final Fantasy tick.

(NOTE: XII is also a completely different experience than X and seemingly XIII, but mostly because of level-design choices rather than cinematic, I feel. Enjoyment of either style, again, comes down to taste).

>>> Atleast FF still has a future..:luca:

I just hope they stop making too many FF online games..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champagne supernova

??? I clearly played another version of MGS. Apart from 2 scenes right at the end, I don't recall me doing anything with Snake during the heart-wrenching developments, besides pushing X to get flashbacks. And MGS level design may not be perfectly linear, but you do basically go - creep through area, have cut-scene, creep through another area, have cut-scene, fight big bad boss, etc etc (I honestly think that the 5th Act has about 1 parts of actual gameplay to 5 parts of cut-scenes). I have nothing against MGS for doing this; I think it is an awesome game and some of the gameplay elements are very cool, but it doesn't exactly re-invent the wheel.

---

While 4 is hardly my favorite entry I feel you've missed my point. In MGS4 you are at least doing something that actually resembles challenge and fun between the long winded cutscenes and despite your objective being quite simple, there are multiple ways to get where you need to, the fact is you still have multiple choices as a player to make with reaching said linear destination. Its linear level design meets non-linear gameplay; RPGs don't really have this luxury.

The best way for MGS4 to be translated to FFX or Xeno 2 would be to put Snake out in the open in a very linear hallway large enough for two people to stand side by side. If it was based on how they did X, the guard would be asleep in the middle of the hallway with his back turned to you and Snake would start with a Sniper Rifle. While there does still exist a bit of choice its hard to ignore the obvious one...

If it was Xeno 2, that guard would be a Gecko and you would have the rocket launcher... sure you can win but its not going to be pretty cause the Gecko can kill you faster than you.

The point here should be that the level design is a simple hallway that confines the player and keeps them simply on one path. Where MGS4 is different from FFX and Xeno II is that the areas Snake sneaks in are decently sized and offer multiple ways to reach the said destination, you only have one destination but the the player gets to choose how to reach it.

As for interactive cutscenecs, I'm thinking a great deal of the chase sequences that normally would have been relegated to a cutscene, or the times the game splits the screen frame to show mulitple characters plowing through the story (while you at least control Snake). I'm talking about RAY Vs REX which no one I've talked to expected to be a playable part of the game. The problem with cutscenes is that all the really cool stuff happens in them while the player is trapped with the boring stuff... DoC is a prime example, you spend what feels like ages wittling down the health of a boss while jumping and gliding and finally after a serious war of attrition, you get to watch Vincent in a cutscene magically take down the boss like it was nothing. How is that rewarding?

Quote:

---

X's combat system is regarded highly because it allowed you to plan ahead, making it more tactical and calculated than previous FFs. That's why I liked it.

---

I am not even going to touch this one... Must... control... inner... Troll...Blarrgh!@%$! :D

Quote:

---

I think that if XIII has streamlined the game, that is quite a good idea, because I hate level-grinding with a passion (although I'm sure you can still do it if you want to). But I cannot comment on something I haven't tried, so I'll wait to play it before I pass any judgement (good or bad on it).

---

Well actually... one review said (SPOILER)its kinda impossible to grind cause the game forces "level caps" on you so you will reach points where battles do nothing for you cause you can't learn more skills. This is suppose to keep battles difficult which I much appreciate.

Honestly, I'm not even asking for level grinding and nor do I feel that solely makes up gameplay, gameplay in an RPG is actually a little more than just random encounters with an occasional boss fight. I expect mini-games, small quests (with actual worthwhile rewards), or as you point out later in your post, stumbling upon extra story bits, as well as my personal favorite thing: exploration. There are a variety of things you can do with gameplay in RPGs that goes beyond the battle system. What I am personally advocating here is better dungeon variety. I don't mind it being linear as long as you utilize the effects that Flying Arrow pointed out and create the illusion on non-linearity, maybe give me a few long linear branches towards some worthwhile treasure. What I'm arguing against is stuff like this. Which is pretty much the norm for XIII's level design. The party might as well be riding theme park vehicle seeing how much rails are going on in a genre about exploring and seeing new worlds as different people. :roll2

Quote:

---

I also don't understand how not being forced to go into towns to buy items and equipment is a bad thing. You shouldn't be forced to slog through loading screens and long walks to get something. If you want to go into towns in a game, it should be for random NPC conversations which fill out the game and silly side-quests. VIII had numerous - just think about Fisherman's Horizon and the cafeteria lady's son. Or the fisherman. I think X had its share of cool stuff too, but I've played VIII and X-2 and XII and most of VI and half of IV since, so my memory is a bit unclear.

---

I use looking for shops as a means to actually explore the towns and see people. I'm actually doing both, meeting people and talking to them while also stocking up and gaining a small reward for making it to this point of the game. I'm a whore for customization and equipment is one of my favorite means of doing so as it usually offers the most balance since it has set guidelines. Personally I don't see how streamlining this makes it an improvement. How is removing a proper shop or town structure going to make it a better game? All you are really doing is limiting the players choices and transforming them from a proactive element in the story to a simple observer. I can't see how this is "fun". Shops can also offer possibilities for quest or help add focus to a town from a story perspective. Proper towns to me add to the world and its character, I can't even imagine them being considered tedious.

I agree you should want to talk to NPCs but SE has never proven to me they have ever gotten the hang of it, even XII, which I love has its moments where chatting up NPCs is exhausting and not worth your time. Course I'm bias cause Persona 3/4 did this perfectly but no chance in hell XIII will follow that formula. The other problem here is that from what I've heard, side-quests open up mid to late game and the pacing of the story rarely gives you the chance to "stop and smell the roses" let alone chat up the few NPCs you will see in the game.

The other problem here in concerns of the purpose of NPCs in an RPG, is that your only real incentive to talk to these people is to either gain some story insight (rare nowadays) or stumble upon a quest to help you which once again slogs you back to gameplay (which I don't oppose) rarely are NPCs ever written to be interesting or be fleshed out. The problem with many RPGs is that there is rarely any real reason to ever talk to NPCs after the first meeting.Throw in the fact that a lot of the quests from what I'm heard are given to you through terminals or magic/tencho artifacts than I would say XIII's NPCs are mostly a moot gesture.

Looking at the nature of XIII's story I can jokeningly assume you will only receive four types of conversations when you actually talk to them:

Cocoon Citizen A: The Holy Government is good, the Fa'Cie are bad! The Holy Government protects us from the Fa'Cie so they are good.

Cocoon Citizen B: The Holy Government is up to no good but I won't say anything cause I don't want to be exiled.

Pulse Citizen 1: OMG!!!! THIS PLACE IS A MAD HOUSE!!! THE HOLY GOVERNMENT SUCKS CAUSE THEY WRONGFULLY ACCUSED ME AND EXILED ME!!!! I'M INNOCENT!!!!

Pulse Citizen 2: Its not really the hell hole the Holy Government said it was, its actually a nice place. Tea?

Quote:

---

So, my point is that, from what I can see, the quality of FFs has been up to scratch since Wada has taken over. There has definitely been innovation in story-telling techniques, gameplay mechanics and graphical design, and XIII looks like it will continue the trend.

---

I will just agree to disagree with you cause I feel the latest entries have been mixed and match and I feel some have been steps back. Not just in the FF mainline games but in SE titles in general. To each their own.

Quote:

---

The area I think that Square-Enix is failing is their IPs outside of their main series. But, perhaps what Wada is now trying to do is to create these different types of IPs under the FF umbrella - if Versus is anything to go by. In which case, a rose by any other name smells as sweet, and you can't really complain seeing how Ivalice has come under the Final Fantasy name in 2 pure iterations and 2 somewhat watered-down (Tactics Advance - bleh).

---

I'm not exactly happy with the Ivalice titles. I love Tactics and I enjoyed XII but the latest offerings from the Ivalice team have been sub par and completely imbalanced. I'm almost afraid to say Ivalice is as good as dead without Matsuno but perhaps they can surprise me. Still, TA2 was disappointing as a story and it hardly addressed my complaints with TA1 and RW has been a truly painful experience (the real kicker here for me is that XIII's writer and directer made this game) thanks to its really lackluster storyline and its bastardization of the XII cast. These sub-par and dreadful offerings have all but made me feel that the Ivalice Alliance should end with the Compilation of VII...


Flying Arrow: I'll get to your post later but right now I'm exhausted :eep:

Oh, I missed your point about the shops. You're saying there is no need to use them because of the dropped items - which is a fair point (I thought you were referring to the Call-Shop junction in VIII). And again, I agree with you that Square-Enix's NPCs aren't the most fleshed out in the world. And I see your point with MGS4, although I don't think that the 'interactive' cut-scenes were exactly the most heart-wrenching and pertinent parts of the story to be told (the only really heart-wrenching bit of the game when I was playing was right at the end when he's crawling down the tunnel - the others set the scene and added excitement).

And I see your point that X's game world at times felt very constrained and linear. But there is a lot of extra stuff to do in Spira if you look for it, including the battle arena in the Calm Lands. But then again, you hate the combat system, so that is a bit of a problem.

To be honest, I think your major qualm about the PS2 Final Fantasy is that they are too easy - judging by how you place X's battle in the MGS world. I kind of agree with you there and think it'd be nice if Square followed what most other developers do and include a DIFFICULTY button, even if it is adjustable in-game. But the inherent problem that Square have, even with said button, is that people who level grind can make all their battles easy, thereby making any thought in the boss battles unimportant. I found that one of my more enjoyable battles was against Seymoure outside Bevelle, as I used all elements of the new combat system (both seeing the order of turns and swapping characters in/out to fill certain roles). And if XIII does introduce level caps, I think this is a great idea.

And I understand that the areas in X seemed, narrower, I guess is the word. But this was Square Enix's first time rendering all aspects of the game in real-time, so cut them some slack. And, although the game world is definitely the smallest, it is definitely beautiful, and there are very few areas that feel rushed or as if the developers did not care about. And the world was more detailed than XII's, if smaller (remember, XII has a lot of grass and a lot of sand - I really hate the Sandsea - whereas X's areas are quite a lot more compact). So, I understand your point but I also understand the constraints that Square were under.

And X-2 was not linear. It allowed you to play the game in the order you wanted. You could even just relax, play the silly game of Blitzball manager or Sphere Break, which I managed to win when I needed to in the game, but am yet to understand how it works. And of course, all FFs are more open than MGS. It's not like in MGS you can go back to the desert again, or go chill in a town. It's action, action, action. Albeit very entertaining action.

And as for a very linear RPG which had no stores or towns, and which areas were probably smaller than X's and less detailed (albeit due to technical constraints), go download Vagrant Story on your PS3. It's in the store. Oh, Vagrant Story also has one of the most broken and clumsy menu systems ever designed (and you have to use the menu quite a lot). Yet, despite all these faults and the fact that 10 years and 2 consoles of technological progress has occurred, I am playing it now and enjoying it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying Arrow

What I feel separates the PS1-era and the PS2/3 era FFs is how Square has defined "cinematic" for each. Cinematic for the PS1 involved explorable artwork and careful screen direction, whereas as the PS2/3 games are "cinematic" because of the frequent story-based cutscenes, which are usually presented completely differently than the gamer-controlled bits (not so in the PS1 games). Enjoyment of either is all based on taste, of course, but I just wanted to perhaps raise a point about what makes each generation of Final Fantasy tick.

(NOTE: XII is also a completely different experience than X and seemingly XIII, but mostly because of level-design choices rather than cinematic, I feel. Enjoyment of either style, again, comes down to taste).

---

I agree on most points but I feel there is a lack of credit due to the PS1 era entries as their dungeon designs had more thought. Its not just the visual presentation there is actually a real sense of interaction with them even if many of them are simply just flip switch puzzles but I digress that this comes back to the real point of where I feel both X and XII went wrong in a way. X's design are so simple and linear that they not only hinder and choice for the player but sorta break the fourth wall as you quickly realize that the most intriguing parts of Spira are "fenced off" from the player. You are trapped in a guided tour. XII for the most part broke away from this and created a huge open ended world which many fans feel is perhaps too "open". Though I feel XII gives more choice than X's design, it gets lost very quickly in the scale of the whole thing. What's the point in having fun min-quests or secrets when the player can't even find it. Acceptance of these designs comes down to personal taste and I'll happily admit I'd rather take large environments over a simply narrow road but I feel for the series to truly progress they need to better incorporate both types of designs.

I think part of the reason I could accept narrow design more from the PS1 generation is because they offered a world map that presented a open world design. The major story dungeons were linear (though hidden from excellent presentation as you pointed out and even then they still offered more choice) but actually reaching said dungeons would usually require one to wander the map to discover hidden secrets. At this point, SE is trying to move away from Overworld Map design to create more cohesive worlds and in order to make both camps happy, I feel SE needs to create a more balanced structure that offers a a bit of both and spread throughout the title.

One of XIII's major criticisms is that the majority of the level design is a linear road with only one open area (Pulse) that opens up fairly late in the game which is very similar to X's structure concerning the Calm Lands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champagne supernova

Oh, I missed your point about the shops. You're saying there is no need to use them because of the dropped items - which is a fair point (I thought you were referring to the Call-Shop junction in VIII). And again, I agree with you that Square-Enix's NPCs aren't the most fleshed out in the world. And I see your point with MGS4, although I don't think that the 'interactive' cut-scenes were exactly the most heart-wrenching and pertinent parts of the story to be told (the only really heart-wrenching bit of the game when I was playing was right at the end when he's crawling down the tunnel - the others set the scene and added excitement).

---

I feel MGS3 did a much better job than MGS4 but even then it comes down to more personal taste and perspective, so I can't really argue if you didn't walk away with the same experience as I do.

Quote:

---

And I see your point that X's game world at times felt very constrained and linear. But there is a lot of extra stuff to do in Spira if you look for it, including the battle arena in the Calm Lands. But then again, you hate the combat system, so that is a bit of a problem.

---

My main problem is that most of this extra stuff appears late in the game and even the few you can do before hand don't offer anything worthwhile until you pass a certain point, which is the end of the game. You spend the majority of the first 4/5ths of the game just plowing through the simple world design and story with Blitzball as your only diversion which as I said earlier becomes less fun once you gain some levels and a competent team seeing as how Tidus can Sphere Shot your way to victory once he gains a few levels.

As for combat, its not that I don't like the idea behind CTB its just that I feel they made some design choices that destroy the experience. I like the idea of switching out party members to deal with situations but when your party can simply one hit kill their designated enemy the majority of combat becomes nothing but shuffling party members in to kill the enemies which I find to be more tedious than just mashing X until my party kills everything like in previous games. The lack of difficulty makes switching out party members an exercise in tedium. Also, if you try to level up all your characters, it becomes even more tedious as you then have to shuffle worthless party members in just so they can get XP (also I learned that cycling in party members does not affect the amount of XP your party gets) so I feel they made random encounters even more annoying than in previous installments.

Boss fight are crippled due to many of them either having a command special that gives your party a very overwhelming advantage or the game screams at you about the enemies weakness (Boss at Kilika anyone?). So I never really felt the game utilized the turn order system as effective as it should cause it literally holds your hand through many of the boss fights and the majority of random encounters are so easy its not worth your time. The battle system/customization system doesn't come into its own until the very end of the game when it starts using exclusive "Big Monsters" and the game stops helping you with boss fight and personally I just don't feel its good game design to have to slog through 30+ hours of a game before I get to the fun part.

That's my real problem, the game doesn't throw anything at you that is worthy of the battle system until its almost over and then I have to ask myself why I should care? Even then there is a lot of imbalance (Quick Hit/Aeons) in the game so to be perfectly fair the only real challenge in the game is presented in the Monster Arena which is completely optional and doesn't really help make the game feel like a cohesive experience.

Quote:

---

To be honest, I think your major qualm about the PS2 Final Fantasy is that they are too easy - judging by how you place X's battle in the MGS world. I kind of agree with you there and think it'd be nice if Square followed what most other developers do and include a DIFFICULTY button, even if it is adjustable in-game. But the inherent problem that Square have, even with said button, is that people who level grind can make all their battles easy, thereby making any thought in the boss battles unimportant. I found that one of my more enjoyable battles was against Seymoure outside Bevelle, as I used all elements of the new combat system (both seeing the order of turns and swapping characters in/out to fill certain roles). And if XIII does introduce level caps, I think this is a great idea.

---

Diffiulty in RPGs is hard to come by but this is one of the few things I am looking forward to in XIII cause I feel the level caps are a great idea, (SPOILER)I'm not to fond of them taking the annoying SMT design of making it an auto game over if the player controlled character dies cause frankly I feel that is a huge step back even from X which gave you at least the courtesy of only giving out a game over if your active party dies.

The odd thing is that difficulty in RPGs has been waning since the late SNES days. For FF, I feel difficulty really began to take a dive starting with VI as it was the first game to introduce a large amount of abusive elements in gameplay and its only gotten steadily worst, accumulating in my eyes within the main series with X and more recently with Crisis Core. Ironically, I feel the PS2 generation has actually been slowly bringing difficulty back, XI is not easy by any terms and I feel X-2 and XII both offered steady challenge that was at least reminiscent of the early PS1 days.

This of course is an ongoing problem with all RPGs not just SE. I feel only SMT has reached a perfect level of challenging difficulty. The games are easy if you use good strategy but the game is challenging enough where you will see the Game Over screen more often than not. I don't think I even remember what the Game Over screen even looks like in VI, VII, VIII, and X but I could probably flawlessly recite the words Igor tells you when you die in Persona 3.

I think in terms of challenge, XIII is moving in the right direction at least. The only problem I ever had with SE's version of Difficulty is that it usually involves cheap tactics like overwhelming stat differences. Crisis Core for instance is stupidly easy on normal mode and an act of totla frustration in hard mode cause the huge stat differences turns the game into "Zack Must Die Mode" unless you maxed out everything in the pathetically easy Normal Mode. Once again I feel there is a huge discrepancy between the story and the actual game. I feel we've reached a point now where we can say most people have tried an RPG so we should stop catering to newbie scrubs and make something balanced so the people who buy the games regularly don't have to feel cheated with watered down difficulty.

Quote:

---

And I understand that the areas in X seemed, narrower, I guess is the word. But this was Square Enix's first time rendering all aspects of the game in real-time, so cut them some slack. And, although the game world is definitely the smallest, it is definitely beautiful, and there are very few areas that feel rushed or as if the developers did not care about. And the world was more detailed than XII's, if smaller (remember, XII has a lot of grass and a lot of sand - I really hate the Sandsea - whereas X's areas are quite a lot more compact). So, I understand your point but I also understand the constraints that Square were under.

---

I will disagree on two points. I know its Squares first FF on a new system (though the Bouncer should have given them some ideas how the system would work) but it still doesn't really excuse the fact they chose visual aesthetics over competent game design. X may be visually superior to the PS1 entries but it feels like a serious step down from the amount of options and gameplay mechanics offered in IX and even VII and VIII. They at least offer more choices and creativity within the linear framework whereas X offered a tour bus ride of Spira. I got to see Gaia but I was able to experience Gaia.

Also, I disagree about XII not being better graphically than X. Too many people get stuck on the Estersand and Sandsea but forget how awesome the Feywood, Steppes, Henne Mines, and all the cities look. The amount of detail in all these designs are staggering. You also forget that X has its fair share of boring areas. The Moonflow, Calm Lands, Mushroom Rock, and the Mi'Hen Highroad are pretty bland to me. The difference between XII and X is that you spend more time in the XII areas so they lose their original sparkle after awhile.

When you look back from the transition between VI and VII, the gameplay and world design was not sacrificed for the graphical upgrade (for the time). The transition between IX and X is similar to the one between III and IV. III offered a lot of choice within its framework whereas IV sacrificed a lot of it for a an engaging linear storyline. My only problem with making the story the major player as the driving force of the game is that it really depends on how much the player likes the plot. I liked IVs bizarre plot which is why I do still like the game but I strongly disliked X's which is what makes the game even more difficult to play through since it lacks strong gameplay to fall back on. This is the main problem I feel XIII has set itself up with.

Bringing this back to XIII though, I feel the game has no real excuse for following back to X's design, in fact it sounds pretty intentional considering the stuff I've heard about the games pacing but the title will live and die by its story. My problem is that I feel I'm being cheated out of a game and basically going to spend my money on a very expensive movie ticket. Even if combat proves to be exceptional, I feel XIII will still bother me for removing too many gameplay elements that I personally enjoy.

Quote:

---

And X-2 was not linear. It allowed you to play the game in the order you wanted. You could even just relax, play the silly game of Blitzball manager or Sphere Break, which I managed to win when I needed to in the game, but am yet to understand how it works. And of course, all FFs are more open than MGS. It's not like in MGS you can go back to the desert again, or go chill in a town. It's action, action, action. Albeit very entertaining action.

---

I don't think I even said X-2 was bad linear :confused: Of anything I think I only said that X-2 offered better level design than XIII was giving and that I don't understand why people think X-2's combat system is so godly. Of anything X-2 was pretty non-linear, my only beef with the title was its plot, cast, and that it kinda ruined the few elements I liked about X's story.

Quote:

---

And as for a very linear RPG which had no stores or towns, and which areas were probably smaller than X's and less detailed (albeit due to technical constraints), go download Vagrant Story on your PS3. It's in the store. Oh, Vagrant Story also has one of the most broken and clumsy menu systems ever designed (and you have to use the menu quite a lot). Yet, despite all these faults and the fact that 10 years and 2 consoles of technological progress has occurred, I am playing it now and enjoying it.

---

Well a couple of points I'd like to make regarding my beloved Vagrant Story.

A) It's not a tradition JRPG, more like an Action RPG Dungeon Crawler which means it doesn't really have to stick to RPG gaming conventions cause no one expects it.

B)The areas are actually fairly big but what makes them special is that they are all interconnected. You will actually be doing some backtracking in this game. The level design was created to make a cohesive fallen city world and it does it beautifully. The fact is though, the game eventually begins to get bigger and offer more choices cause you are in effect playing this title Metroidvania style with the "world" gradually getting bigger as you progress. You can return to places you've been to (and you will) and there are multiple ways to reach your destinations in the game. So I can't say the game is truly linear the way I feel X is. The player is still granted a lot of freedom whereas X doesn't really offer much. The bottome line is that the world is not one big road but rather a huge labyrith of twisting corridors. It has an unpredictable element.

C) It doesn't have shops but it has the abandoned blacksmith shops which you use to build customizable weapons that are actually worth your time to make cause this game does not like giving you good drops from enemies and even treasure chests only yield stuff that might be good enough to keep you alive as opposed to actually giving you something worthwhile. Seriously, take a look at the Gamefaqs entry on the weapon building for this game learn just how "deep the white rabbit hole is..." Its not a traditional shop but it actually offers the elements I look for from equipment gaining in shops. Its a great alternative, the problem is that X's wasn't as good imo, and XIII does not appear to be offering such an alternative. :p

X wasn't enormosly challenging, but at least it kept me occupied thinking about how I would swap in all 7 characters to get exp, while getting over kills on all the enemies, while taking as few hits as possible. Had I not carred about overkills or damage mitigation (didn't really mater, but I'm old school and budget all MP zealously), I probaby would have found the battles a fairly standard borring grind.

What interests me is that you described XII as a step up in difficulty. I found XII to be mind numbingly easy. I just spent a few minutes setting up gambits at the beginning and then watched by characters beat the game themselves for 60 hours. You talk about games being essentially movies, well in XII all I ever did was navigate my characters through dungeons and rapidly press x during cutsceens out of habit.

As for side quests during the game, after reading the last few pages of discussion back and forth I think we are so far off we just have to chalk it up to difference of opinion. I personally feel side quests during the middle of the game are a detractor from the games central story line, so I'm guessing FFXIII's 'fast-paced' (whatever the heck that means) story will probably appeal to me.
---------------------------------------

On the topic of cinematic experiences, I have to ask myself, is it really as relevant anymore? In the PS1 FFs the difference between what they can do in game and in FMV is massive, and FMVs are an essential part of the game experience. However, in FFXII (which despite my overall dissatisfaction of the game I am extremely impressed by the technical [graphics, sound, voice acting] aspects of) whenever there was a FMV it usualy took me a while to clue in that it was even happening. In game was so close to FMV that I could barely notice, and even to people more perceptive than I the difference would be negligible.

With the current (a.k.a. 'next') generation systems I don't even see the need for FMV in the game at all. Compound that with the fact the according to another thread I'm not going to look up, something like 30/38 GB of game data is FMV. I can't help but imagine if they had done the majority of this in game we would be seeing this game a lot sooner. And imho, the would make more money if they released two FF FMV-lite titles in the same span of time they released the current FMV bloated product.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VeloZer0

X wasn't enormosly challenging, but at least it kept me occupied thinking about how I would swap in all 7 characters to get exp, while getting over kills on all the enemies, while taking as few hits as possible. Had I not carred about overkills or damage mitigation (didn't really mater, but I'm old school and budget all MP zealously), I probaby would have found the battles a fairly standard borring grind.

---

See, switching them all in was just horribly tedious and did make every battle feel like a grindfest for me as I would drop in someone like Yuna and Kimarhi who were totally worthless half the time. I really found leveling in this game to be boring.

Quote:

---

What interests me is that you described XII as a step up in difficulty. I found XII to be mind numbingly easy. I just spent a few minutes setting up gambits at the beginning and then watched by characters beat the game themselves for 60 hours. You talk about games being essentially movies, well in XII all I ever did was navigate my characters through dungeons and rapidly press x during cutsceens out of habit.

---

This really all depends on how you approach the game and play it. I never allowed Gambits to take over my whole party (I am a control freak) so I would usually control my leader character and set up my parties gambits for tedious tasks like casting buff/debuff spells until later in the game when I opened enough of the License Board to start building makeshift job classes, at which point I built proper Gambit set-ups for said "classes" at this point I found myself needing to actually switch between party members regularly to keep myself from getting killed since I never bothered to let all my character be healers or fighters so occasionally I needed to switch up to use items or use an ability the situation needs cause the Gambits can't cover everything. So I can't exactly say I understand when people say "the game played itself" cause I would simply ask you "why did you let it?" ;)

As for difficulty, there are tough bosses in XII, you cannot tell me you waltzed over Zodiark, Ultima, Gilgamesh, or the Elder Wyrm. Unless you grind like hell and then use a guide to secure ultimate equipment early its actually difficult to get through a majority of the boss fights and Mark Hunts. Hell just taking on the Mark Hunts as they became available proved to be challenge and I died enough times with a few of them to finally say screw it and came back to them later with better equips and levels. Many of them require strategies I wouldn't have bothered to use normally but felt incredibly rewarding none the less.

Quote:

---

On the topic of cinematic experiences, I have to ask myself, is it really as relevant anymore? In the PS1 FFs the difference between what they can do in game and in FMV is massive, and FMVs are an essential part of the game experience. However, in FFXII (which despite my overall dissatisfaction of the game I am extremely impressed by the technical [graphics, sound, voice acting] aspects of) whenever there was a FMV it usualy took me a while to clue in that it was even happening. In game was so close to FMV that I could barely notice, and even to people more perceptive than I the difference would be negligible.

With the current (a.k.a. 'next') generation systems I don't even see the need for FMV in the game at all. Compound that with the fact the according to another thread I'm not going to look up, something like 30/38 GB of game data is FMV. I can't help but imagine if they had done the majority of this in game we would be seeing this game a lot sooner. And imho, the would make more money if they released two FF FMV-lite titles in the same span of time they released the current FMV bloated product.

---

I can pretty much agree with your sentiments here. I actually disliked most of the High quality FMVs cause the characters looked so radically different from their perfectly good in game models. This was another issue I didn't care about really any of the PS2 games, X's was weird cause everyone suddenly became Asian during the high quality scene and whiter than white Tidus became beach tanned, it was hilarious.

In XII, I always felt like the characters looked like Barbie Dolls cause the get so cleaned up from the awesome "dirty" models featured in game. Even XI has a few that bug me (don't get me started on Kingdom Hearts or Crisis Core) and I feel we should stick to using in-game models instead of this high quality stuff cause they are simply gorgeous at this point and Full FMVs no longer carry the purpose they once had.

I think we are once again just going to have to toss FFX into one of those agree to disagree piles.

-----------------------

I think the 'well why didn't you just not use gambits' arguments to be extremely shallow. All I did was set my gambits up to buff my characters, and attack enemies, and heal when needed. These are the most repetitive actions, and sure automating them might have been a good idea. My problem is that after automating the redundant actions, there was nothing else left. So what, I turn my gambits off and start doing the mundane tasks myself? I am a control freak also, and for the first 10 hour of the game I didn't use them at all. I only put them in to alleviate the drudgery of the system. Turns out a boring system (if you get down to it it really is an ATB game with 'wait' turned off)

But I digress, this is something for the FFXII forum, which incidentally I don't visit because I don't see the point in dwelling on games I don't like. :)

(For the record, I've done all the mark hunts except whatever the last pre-yazmat one is, and they were all cake. Only difference is I had to manually select when to use cure instead of having the computer do it. I think part of what makes the game so difficult is people insisting in making classes. Immediately after starting the game I saw that having 3x sword+shield with heals was by far the most powerful combo. My friends tried to use magic/other setups, ect and it was much more difficult for them. Once again, not my fault if the game is unbalanced.)

------------------

Now to scan back through the thread to find something else to respond to so this isn't an exclusively FFXII bashing post...

Variable difficulty was mentioned earlier, and the way the industry is now it is a little difficult to implement. When I see a game ask me for difficulty, there are usually three options. I'll be damed if I chose easy (any really, who choses easy right of the back), and hard is just about always tunned to be impossible for someone who hasn't played the game (FPS games excluded). So such an easily implementable model isn't really practical.

One easy way to do it was level grinding. In old school games it is automatically hard mode unless you chose to spend time lowering the difficulty. From a game balance perspective this is a fascinating idea (I doubt many of us have looked at it this way before), however we all know how much fans appreciate level grinding in practice.

I have more kicking around in my head, but I think this topic could deserve its own thread in the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VeloZer0

I think we are once again just going to have to toss FFX into one of those agree to disagree piles.

---

That's how most of my FFX debates usually end. ;)

Quote:

---

I think the 'well why didn't you just not use gambits' arguments to be extremely shallow. All I did was set my gambits up to buff my characters, and attack enemies, and heal when needed. These are the most repetitive actions, and sure automating them might have been a good idea. My problem is that after automating the redundant actions, there was nothing else left. So what, I turn my gambits off and start doing the mundane tasks myself? I am a control freak also, and for the first 10 hour of the game I didn't use them at all. I only put them in to alleviate the drudgery of the system. Turns out a boring system (if you get down to it it really is an ATB game with 'wait' turned off)

---

You didn't understand my meaning here, I didn't say why didn't you turn off the Gambits, I asked you why would build a set-up that could play itself. Its kinda one of those hindsight questions where you should realize it wouldn't be fun watching the A.I. do everything. I made sure that A.I. couldn't do everything and I set it up so I was fairly regularly switching between characters to do certain actions I didn't set up. Towards the end I think I only had one dedicated healer and most of my party had several Gambits that I used for short amounts of time, would switch off, and then manually start playing through to utilize actions like attacking and healing (which are useful commands not redundant imo). I think I only had the attack Gambits on when I was revisiting old areas and didn't want to deal with combat since I generally find random encounters to be annoying after awhile. This way I could keep focus on what I wanted to do, so that is about the only time I ever let the game kinda play itself.

It is ATB, I don't think anyone has ever argued it wasn't. Its actually X-2's ATB system to be exact. XII's just allows you to move around while you fight which is more useful for casters and ranged characters than melee.

Quote:

---

But I digress, this is something for the FFXII forum, which incidentally I don't visit because I don't see the point in dwelling on games I don't like. :)

---

I appreciate you don't come in cause I do get annoyed when every other thread is "this game sucks". This is why I never go into the X forum cause I have nothing good to say about the game and choose to troll it from General FF as opposed to bothering the actual fans in their forum. :D

Quote:

---

(For the record, I've done all the mark hunts except whatever the last pre-yazmat one is, and they were all cake. Only difference is I had to manually select when to use cure instead of having the computer do it. I think part of what makes the game so difficult is people insisting in making classes. Immediately after starting the game I saw that having 3x sword+shield with heals was by far the most powerful combo. My friends tried to use magic/other setups, ect and it was much more difficult for them. Once again, not my fault if the game is unbalanced.)

---

I guess my first question is when did you actually start doing the Mark Hunts? I know you don't like side quests in the middle of the game so I find it hard to believe you would have done them as they came.

As for the difficulty, I guess I would like to just point out that although XII is unbalanced it can be fun you just chose a bad way to play the game. You made a party of clones and didn't have fun, I made a diverse party and had a hell of a time, who here really made the better decision. Most games have exploitable elements. I mean if I wanted to I could easily bust my way through FFT by building a party of Knights with duel wield cause their is very little in the game that could match up against that, especially in the main story but I choose not to cause I have the option for variety and the system tells me there are other ways to play them. The most effective way is not always the fun way to play a game. I would never enjoy VI if I simply stuck to spamming special abilites or Ultima nor would I enjoy VII and VIII by using nothing but summons and Limit Breaks. Seriously, name me one RPG that is fun by building all your characters the same?

XII is unbalanced (what game isn't?) but I feel more often than not its always the players fault for having a bad experience cause you chose to play the game in a way that wouldn't be fun for you and unlike some titles it actually gives you the option to do so and then some. This is why I feel the game gives back as much as you are willing to put in. I recognized that XII could build a party of clones and that is why I strayed from it cause I've never had an enjoyable experience building such set-ups. I made XII into a fun game and all it really required of me was a little self control to avoid the obvious easy way out.

Quote:

---

Now to scan back through the thread to find something else to respond to so this isn't an exclusively FFXII bashing post...

Variable difficulty was mentioned earlier, and the way the industry is now it is a little difficult to implement. When I see a game ask me for difficulty, there are usually three options. I'll be damed if I chose easy (any really, who choses easy right of the back), and hard is just about always tunned to be impossible for someone who hasn't played the game (FPS games excluded). So such an easily implementable model isn't really practical.

One easy way to do it was level grinding. In old school games it is automatically hard mode unless you chose to spend time lowering the difficulty. From a game balance perspective this is a fascinating idea (I doubt many of us have looked at it this way before), however we all know how much fans appreciate level grinding in practice.

I have more kicking around in my head, but I think this topic could deserve its own thread in the future.

---

The problem with grinding is that many people find it boring. Yes it makes the game easier but it doesn't change the fact the game is made more tedious because of it. Besides level caps, I feel FF should take a chapter out of DQ and make grinding beyond level 50 pointless by removing all stat upgrades as well.

Personally, I feel the major problem with difficulty in RPGs is that the game don't build in enough weaknesses into your party. This is something I kinda noticed while playing SMT and early non-FF RPGs. They only stick to the tried and true stuff like Mages have little HP and no defense or Warriors have a weakness to magic but usually equipment augments all this up and its so easy to cover for these short falls its almost redundant to even use them anymore. Characters should have real elemental weaknesses or ability weaknesses that can only sorta be dealt with but never completely removed.

Bosses should also be utilizing similar ideas, with more emphasis on using strategy over just building a perfect defense set-up or perfect offense set-up. I just want RPG difficulty to move away from "let's jack up their stats!" cause it doesn't make the games harder as much as it makes them more annoying cause all you need to do is grind more to win. :roll2

This is one of the reasons why I am very intrigued by XIII's battle system cause its suppose to require more strategy than most FFs.

#!@$%^@#% I typed the whole thing up and then accidentally hit a hotkey erasing everything with no hope of recovery. Here I go again.

In regards to the ‘ATB-ness’ of FFXII, it wasn’t in regards to any specific comments in this thread, just the general attitude that FFXIIs system is a departure from traditional FF mechanics. If we take away gambits, (which aren’t really mechanics so much as bots on top of the existing mechanics) it really reminds me of a SNES era system more than a PS1 era system.

---

As for setting up gambits, I simply automated all the tasks in the game I found repetitive and thoughtless, and I wasn’t left with anything else. I could have taken some control away from the gambits but I wouldn’t have enjoyed doing it manually myself any more. (Think if you had a computer controlling FFX for you and you were told that you would enjoy it more if you controlled it yourself.)

---

FFXII was the last straw in me deciding I didn’t like side quests mid game. I wasn’t high on them to begin with, but with Mark Hunts (and FFXII in general) being a great new paradigm in game development I decided to give it an honest go. As you can see it did not end amicably.

---

For me one of the most enjoyable parts of any video game is trying to min/max my party to the best of my ability. So when I make something at the start of the game and feel no need to change it as I play though, you can understand how I am a little disappointed. In a game, such as FFT, the first time I play through I am constantly trying to make my party as powerful as possible, and am constantly having to adapt and think of new things as new enemies/abilities are introduced, not to mention my knowledge of the game increasing as I go along. FFXII never had that for me in the least.

In regards to handicapping, if you have to handicap yourself on your first play through to make it enjoyable it is a broken game. Subsequent play throughs it is a given, but the first time is inexcusable. Even in FFT when I handicap myself to try out new classes and strategies I lay the ground rules at the start of the play through and then try and tweak and max out my party as much as I can within those rules.

As you can probably guess I’m not a fan of sandboxy titles in general. :)

---

One problem with the weaknesses of party members (I agree with it as a game mechanic whole heartedly) is that you are then forced to chose between play style and favorite characters. I generally try and build my party of my favorite characters first and foremost (this is the one constraint that overrides the min/maxing I mentioned above), mainly because I know if I pick a party of people I don’t like as characters I will probably lose interest in the title and stop playing. And generally I don’t fell like having a good section of a games characters in my party (I’m a fairly misanthropic person). Now, in some games where there is virtually no difference game play wise I am free to do what I want. In others this can lead me to into a choice between choosing characters I won’t enjoy playing as, or a play style I won’t enjoy. Something like FFXII where anyone can be anything isn’t a bad design paradigm, but the fact everyone can be everything kind of smurfs it up. (I prefer the FFT idea where you can learn everything but still have to be highly selective as to what you can actually be.)
Of course this has been marginalized by the proliferation (Is it a good or bad day when I have to stop myself from using paradigm too many times in an argument?) of cutscenes and voice acting, forcing every character to be in every plot scene.